Trump Proposes Leaving Decommissioned Oil Platforms as Artificial Reefs Off California Coast

Twenty-three aging metal structures sit in federal waters off the California coast, and a quiet White House directive could leave them on the seafloor permanently.

President Trump directed the Department of the Interior through a September executive order to establish a federal reef-in-place program for decommissioned offshore oil and gas platforms.

The policy shift aims to transform retired drilling rigs into artificial reefs rather than requiring complete removal.

Eight platforms are currently in various stages of decommissioning, while four others operate within state waters. Full removal of the largest offshore platforms can cost upward of $200 million, according to federal estimates reported by the Los Angeles Times.

Rulemaking Plans Target 2027 Implementation

The Interior Department plans to publish a rulemaking in 2027 that would make toppling in place the default decommissioning method if approved. This approach involves knocking platforms onto their sides to rest on the sea bottom. While common in the Gulf of Mexico, crews have never used the technique in Pacific waters off California, where companies have previously removed all decommissioned platforms.

Critics argue the plan benefits fossil fuel companies by sparing them massive expenses.

Robert Collier, an oil industry consultant who first flagged the plan on his Substack publication Offshore California, outlined the financial impact to the Los Angeles Times.

“Decommissioning via topple in place would be a huge windfall for oil companies in comparison to full removal, allowing them to avoid hundreds of millions of dollars in expenses as well as complex engineering and contracting problems,” Collier told the Los Angeles Times.

The policy change excludes offshore wind platforms. Alongside the reefing push, the administration seeks to reopen Pacific waters to new oil leasing for the first time in more than 40 years.

Marine Life Benefits Draw Scientific Debate

Marine researchers point out that decades of operation have allowed fish, mussels, and anemones to colonize the steel structures. “I just don’t think that’s right,” Love told the Los Angeles Times, pointing to the invertebrate life destroyed during full removal and use of underwater explosives. Environmental groups strongly oppose the reefing concept. Richard Charter, director of the Local Government Outer Continental Shelf Coordination Program, criticized the initiative in the Los Angeles Times.

“What they’re asking for now isn’t even partial decommissioning — it appears to be ocean dumping,” Charter told the Los Angeles Text. Meanwhile, a bipartisan bill, designated HR 5745, would facilitate platform conversions by transferring long-term liability to states in exchange for financial compensation.

Erik Milito, president of the National Ocean Industries Association, defended the infrastructure preservation in an official statement noted by the Los Angeles Times.

“Offshore energy infrastructure becomes valuable marine habitat, supporting an abundance of fish and other marine life,” Milito said. California established its own rigs-to-reefs program in 2010 under legislation signed by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, though no platforms have yet been converted under it.

Linda Krop, chief counsel with the Environmental Defense Center, raised concerns about heavy metal contamination and invasive species to the Los Angeles Times.

“We’re very concerned about leaving this legacy pollution in the ocean,” Krop told the Los Angeles Times. “If it was onshore, you know no one would allow it.”

More on this story: North Sea Oil Platform Decommissioning to Cost Taxpayers Billions

More on California: California Regulators Approve Construction of Sites Reservoir · Texas and California See Calm After Midterm Election Results · Southern California Faces Unseasonable Heat Before Possible Weekend Rain