Huasna Valley Association

PROPOSED OIL PROJECT ~~ PRESS ~~ TAKE ACTION ~~ CONTACT ~~ PROJECT BACKGROUND

July 13, 2011 - Australian Oil Company Sells Their Partial Share in Porter Ranch

Mineral Rights to Another Oil Company

NEW TIMES - SAN LUIS OBISPO

July 21, 2011 - We'll Get Back To You...

New Times San Luis Obispo - Shredder June 30. 2011

June 23, 2011 - EIR released for Huasna Oil Project

January 7, 2010 - Drill Baby Drill -- Again

August 6. 2009 - New Huasna Oil Plan Calls for 12 Wells, Instead of Four

July 2. 2009 - Huasna Oil Clean Up in the Works?

April 2. 2009 - Victory for Huasna Residents?

April 2. 2009 - Temporary Victory in Huasna

March 26. 2009 - Huasna Residents Finding New Twist to Old Saga

March 12. 2009 - Drilling Opponent's Worries Deepen, New Part Owner (Excelaron) Describes

Far Bigger Project in Huasna Valley then Described in Application

March 5. 2009 - Excelaron Agrees to a Higher Level Review

February 25. 2009 - Huasna Valley Association Files Appeal

February 11. 2009 - Huasna oil project opponents want appeal on

environmental review decision

November 13. 2008 - Cover Story

Sept 25, 2008 - Huasna Oil - tale of two stories

August 7, 2008 - Commentary - What's The Rush?

August 7, 2008 - Concerns sharpen over Huasna Valley drilling proposal

May, 2008 - Oil exploration in Huasna Valley; will there be blood?

July 11, 2011 Lack of Trust in the Huasna Valley Drilling Project

June 22, 2011 - To Drill or NOT to Drill

Comments:

Wow! Excelaron still can't do math. They have been telling everyone that their project will generate $100,000 in tax revenue each year (which pales in comparison to annual property taxes collected from Huasna Valley residents). Well if the life of the project is 20 years and Excelaron pays $100,000 per year in taxes, that's $2,000,000 over the life of the project, not $20,000,000! Imagine that, Excelaron is off by an order of magnitude, again!!!

And by the way Carol Florence, a Class 1 impact (there are several identified in the draft EIR) is defined as an impact that cannot be mitigated to an insignificant level, so according to the draft EIR Excelaron can't mitigate away noise, air pollution, damage to the visual landscape, and damage to the biology and groundwater in the event of an oil spill.

United Hunter and Oil (Canada) recently acquired leases on the Porter Ranch totaling 9,051 acres and told investors of their plans to drill up to three wells. They currently own a 65% interest in the Excelaron project. Three years ago Excelaron told us "just 4 wells" and then bumped it to "up to 12 wells" and also have said "just a 2 acre footprint" and "no natural gas" and "we'll shut down the facility when Twitchell Reservoir floods the haul route road" and "we won't use hydraulic fracking", are now they are planning to drill "three more wells" on some of their oil leases that are contiguous with the Mankins Ranch, which are now in excess of 11,000 acres (previous to the Porter Ranch leases Excelaron claimed to hold leases on over 2,000 acres of mineral rights).

Excelaron's project will turn the pristine Huasna Valley into another Price canyon so they can turn a profit for their foreign investors and export small quantities of tar-grade oil outside of San Luis Obispo County. For what...$100,000 a year and a few jobs (yes the DEIR says the project will create few jobs and not contribute significantly to the economy).

It ain't worth it!!!

Price Canyon started out as a small project, too.
Are they going to use fracking?

This is an unbelievably bad plan. There are abandoned wells littering this area. The "new" technology could destroy the ground water that is relied on by the ranchers/residents. Especially if they use Fracking to breakup the sub-strata. For road tar. Any profits go OUT of the country to an Australian company. Remember Avila Beach, Guadalupe dunes??? Yeah, there were deep pockets to fix those disasters. This is an LLC which will leave the County and State HIGH and DRY with the disaster that they will leave behind. I'm all for REAL domestic energy, oil in Alaska, Coal in Montana...not "tar from Huasna". Bad, bad plan. Oh...and the route they want to use to "haul out the tar" is flooded and impassable for up to 9 months out of the year. Think they will shut down during that period??? No...they'll just pay the fines and haul the oil through Old Town Arroyo Grande to the freeway.

Really, given all the opportunity to find clean energy - the people of this county need to understand this is a stunning valley in which hundreds of family live. This is bad business and not in keeping with our general plan for SLO County!

Quotes directly from the Draft EIR say: NO Real Employment Opportunity for the County Residents & NO Real Economic Growth (Meaning no Real TAX Benefit), and for this we DO get Irreversible Damage to a Coastal Valley....

“…the potential remains for irreversible damage as a result of an upset associated with the operation of the proposed project.” (Excelaron Project EIR §6.1)

“Employment…would be limited to increased labor for construction, drilling, and operations; most of which is short-tem temporary labor. Minimal new operational employment would be associated with future development at the oil field.” (Excelaron Project EIR §6.2.2)

“…the economic growth associated with future development at the proposed project site would not be significant.” (Excelaron Project EIR §6.2.2)

March 25, 2009 - Excelaron Withdraws Huasna Valley Project

Sept 15, 2008 - Locals weigh in on proposed oil production (story)

July 31, 2008 - Quest for black gold sparks concern (story and video)