The pufferfish, the second most poisonous vertebrate in the world, inflates its spiny body by puffing up to appear larger than it is. 

The California oil industry, one of the most poisonous industries in the world, inflates its impact through nostalgia, public relations/advertising and cherry-picking facts to appear larger than it is.

Oil drilling was indeed a major California industry from the late the 1800s through the early 1900s. In its peak of 1923, California oil accounted for 39 percent of the nation’s supply. Today, California oil accounts for about 3.5% of U.S. production. It ranks 7th, behind Texas, North Dakota, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Alaska and Colorado. California oil represents a tiny fraction of national production.

Today oil drilling represents only 3% of the overall California economy, and a new study shows that California has five times as many clean energy jobs as oil and gas jobs.

Here in Santa Barbara County it's even less.

Oil accounts for just 1% of total employment and 1% of county taxes.

So why does oil seem so powerful, so big, so puffed up?

Because California oil companies backed by out-of-state investors and multinational corporations have developed a formula for convincing the public, the media and even the government officials who regulate them that they are bigger than they really are.

Step 1: Hammer the history

California oil history is gripping, and the industry milks it for all it’s worth. The discovery of oil was one of a number of events that built California’s economy at the turn of the 20th century. We see the evidence in Los Angeles neighborhoods, where oil wells still crank away in the most unexpected places, often next to families that can't afford to move. We see it in the City of Bakersfield, once just a tiny dot on a map before oil transformed the area. We see its evidence in the tanks, pipes and enormous gas flare on the scenic coastal drive from Ventura to Santa Barbara. We see it in the infrastructure on and offshore along the Gaviota Coast.

Oil's in the place names too. Santa Maria's Allan Hancock College was named after the La Brea oil barron. The City of Orcutt is named after Geologist and Unocal Vice President William Orcutt.

Oil seems looming, even though industries like aerospace, agriculture, and health care have equally storied pasts and far greater economic impact.

Oil companies purposely want to make Californians nostalgic for a time that's long gone. No speech by an oil representative omits, “this is a 100 year old industry.” County and state government regulators also start off with that statement, even though it has no bearing on the proceeding. It’s in oil companies' brochures, press statements and ads. It's soon repeated by media. As if those magic words will bring back the economy of the 1920s.

Step 2: Get into your brain.

Big oil companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars to affect how you think. They do this through TV ads, social media ads and through PR. The most obvious examples of this are TV ads during presidential debates and on Sunday political shows. The ads are typically redirecting you to the industry's supposed efforts to solve climate change even though their business is to extract the fossil fuels that cause climate change. The industry also spends big money on local ads and PR. Consider recent amendments designed to ban fracking in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara. The industry poured millions into television ads featuring people from all walks of life who all wanted one thing -- fracking. The ads ran hourly, until they had saturated voters’ brains.

The industry also spends a great deal of effort to work with reporters and editors to frame stories so the industry is perceived as environmentally-friendly and the purveyor of economic well-being. The most recent example of Exxon's PR featured the stories of  workers who have had to travel far distances to maintain employment within the company and only want to “come home.” The theme "Bring them Home" was not only planted in the media but also printed on hand fans waved by employees at hearings and the spoken in industry representatives' speeches.

Step 3: Spread cash strategically

Oil companies know that they are a tiny percentage of the California economy so they strategically put their money in places to create an illusion that they are bigger than they are. It’s the ultimate pufferfishery.

The first order of business is infiltrate business organizations. Chambers of Commerces are thought by many to be representative of an area’s businesses. Some are, but Chambers need to pay the bills too and the way they do that is through sponsors. The more money a company gives to the chamber, the more they get. Aera (owned by Exxon and Shell) and Exxon, itself, are perfect examples. Their logos can be seen prominently on local Chambers' websites as major sponsors. They seem bigger than they really are. Last month, several Chambers produced a report showing oil trucking would be a great boon to the economy, but it's hard to believe the Chambers would advocate for such a small industry (oil is only one percent of employment & tax base in SB county) if the oil companies weren't sponsors.

Oil companies also fund seemingly independent associations like the “Santa Barbara Taxpayers Association” and “Coalition for Labor, Agriculture and Business (COLAB)." These groups are closely coordinated, sharing some of the same board members and function primarily as reliable mouthpieces for the oil industry.

Oil does this with schools too. Oil contributions to the region’s overall public schools are miniscule. In the nearby Goleta Union School District, oil, gas and mineral tax revenues contributed just 1.5 percent over over 20 years. In order to seem bigger, oil companies point to its property taxes contributing to a particular rural school district, which is often just one school close to the oil operations. Kids, who are typically bused in from more populous areas, are often at disproportionate risk from the health impacts of heavy air pollution generated by the oil industry. For their
funding, the oil companies can often count on the school leaders to support their expansion plans.

The oil industry also likes to invest money into particular not-for-profit organizations. No doubt those organizations do good work, but it's a conflict of interest. The non-profit organization will speak on behalf of the oil company during public hearings even when health and safety is at risk.The oil company touts funding of the non-profit in its publications, speeches, PR and ads. The oil company is likewise acknowledged in the non-profit’s materials. It’s more than corporate philanthropy though, it’s a strategic initiative to gain public support for polluting activities. One time, a non-profit even said it would use oil driling expansion money to promote climate change education for kids.

The decline of California oil is a result of a variety of factors: a global market, increased production in other states, choking smog in the Los Angeles area, offshore oil disasters and statewide commitment to tackle climate change. But the biggest reason is this: California oil is too heavy and thick to easily extract and produce. The juice is no longer worth the squeeze.

Only a pufferfish could make you believe otherwise.

-- Jonathan Ullman, Los Padres Sierra Club Director