Trump Greenlit BP to Drill Deeper Than Deepwater Horizon and Ordered a Criminal Pipeline Restarted in California. Two Orders. One Week. Follow the Money.

Key Takeaways

• Trump approved BP's Kaskida deepwater project.
• Kaskida could spill up to 4.5 million barrels.
• Santa Ynez pipeline restart invoked Defense Production Act.
• Pipeline previously ruptured, causing massive coastal damage.
• Fossil fuel donations funded Trump’s campaign and policy.

Summary

In March 2024 the Trump administration approved two controversial oil projects within 24 hours: BP’s Kaskida deepwater field in the Gulf of Mexico and the restart of the Santa Ynez offshore pipeline in California using the Defense Production Act. Kaskida, the first new Gulf project since Deepwater Horizon, targets ultra‑deep water and could spill up to 4.5 million barrels, while the pipeline was previously shut after a 2015 rupture that devastated the coastline. Both approvals bypassed state court orders and extensive public opposition, highlighting a federal push to prioritize fossil‑fuel profits over environmental safeguards.

Pulse Analysis

The Trump administration’s back‑to‑back approvals in March 2024 illustrate a stark shift toward using federal authority to accelerate fossil‑fuel projects, even when those projects carry heightened environmental risk. By green‑lighting BP’s Kaskida deepwater field—its first new Gulf venture since the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster—and invoking the Defense Production Act to restart the Santa Ynez offshore pipeline, the White House signaled that energy security arguments can outweigh longstanding safety concerns. Both moves bypassed extensive public comment periods and state court orders, raising questions about the balance of power between federal agencies and state regulators.

The technical profile of the Kaskida project amplifies the danger. Planned drilling at depths exceeding 6,000 feet is statistically six times more likely to experience a loss‑of‑well‑control event than conventional offshore wells, and BP’s own worst‑case scenario projects a spill of up to 4.5 million barrels—larger than the Deepwater Horizon release. Similarly, the Santa Ynez pipeline, shut after a 2015 rupture that polluted seven miles of coastline, has a documented history of corrosion and criminal charges. Restarting it without addressing these deficiencies could repeat past ecological catastrophes and trigger costly litigation.

Beyond the environmental calculus, the approvals reflect a financial calculus tied to campaign contributions and industry lobbying. Fossil‑fuel firms poured more than $200 million into the 2024 election cycle, with key donors occupying senior energy posts that now steer policy decisions. The resulting cash flow surge—estimated at billions of dollars in daily revenue for U.S. producers—does not translate into lower gasoline prices for consumers, but rather inflates corporate balance sheets. As the administration simultaneously dismantles clean‑energy incentives, the policy trajectory threatens to lock the United States into a higher‑emissions, higher‑cost energy future.