In the heart of Kern County, California, the rhythmic hum of pumpjacks at Poso Creek oil fields once symbolized prosperity. In 2019, this region produced 119 million barrels of oil and 129 billion cubic feet of natural gas, accounting for 71% of California’s oil output. But today, the industry faces a crisis. New oil drilling permits have plummeted from 2,676 in 2019 to just 73 in 2024, a decline driven by stringent state policies and environmental regulations. This sharp drop has sparked a heated debate: is California sacrificing its economy and energy security for environmental ideals, or is it wisely transitioning away from fossil fuels?
The Decline of Domestic Oil Production
Kern County, a powerhouse in U.S. oil production, has seen its industry throttled by state regulations. According to the California Department of Conservation, new drilling permits fell from 1,788 in 2018 to a mere 86 in 2024. The California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM), responsible for approving permits, has been criticized for delaying applications. State Senator Shannon Grove alleges that CalGEM acknowledges permit applications but often fails to respond, effectively stalling thousands of projects. This bottleneck, critics argue, is deliberate—a tactic to curb domestic oil production.
Local leaders like Kern County Supervisor Phillip Peters lament the shift. “We’re importing from countries like Ecuador, where they’re clearcutting rainforests to drill for oil,” Peters said, “instead of letting us do it here where it’s produced safely.” He and others argue that California’s strict environmental standards make its oil fields among the cleanest globally, with real-time air monitoring at sites like Poso Creek showing negligible emissions. Yet, state policies seem to favor foreign oil, which often comes from nations with lax environmental oversight.
The consequences are tangible. California, the second-largest petroleum consumer in the U.S., now relies heavily on imports from countries like Iraq and Ecuador. Assemblyman Stan Ellis warns that this dependency not only harms the environment but also drives up costs. In March 2025, Californians paid $4.79 per gallon for gas—$1.60 above the national average—due to high state taxes and regulations. Mike Umbro, CEO of Californians for Energy and Science, notes that these policies jeopardize tens of thousands of jobs and burden residents with the nation’s highest utility rates.
Environmental Pushback and Regulatory Loopholes
Environmental groups, however, celebrate the decline in permits as a victory for public health and the planet. Organizations like the Center for Biological Diversity and Sierra Club have long argued that Kern County’s oil operations threaten air and water quality. Court rulings in 2020 and 2024 sided with these groups, finding that the county violated the California Environmental Quality Act by issuing permits too easily. Hollin Kretzmann, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, praised the rulings, stating they prevent “an end run around the state’s fundamental public protections.”
Yet, the transition away from oil drilling has raised new concerns. Consumer Watchdog and FracTracker Alliance highlight a critical issue: inadequate bonding for well cleanup. When California Resources Corp. (CRC) acquired Aera Energy in 2024, regulators allowed a single $30 million bond to cover 38,000 wells, despite estimated plugging costs starting at $1.1 billion. Critics like Liza Tucker call this a “ridiculous loophole,” noting that 14,000 idle wells, many leaking methane, pose significant environmental risks. In contrast, states like Alaska enforce stricter bonding, requiring $30 million per operator in similar deals.
A Clash of Visions
Governor Gavin Newsom’s policies underscore California’s ambition to lead in climate action. His 2020 executive order aims to halt new gas-powered vehicle sales by 2035, pushing for electric vehicles (EVs) and carbon neutrality by 2045. “This is the most impactful step our state can take to fight climate change,” Newsom declared. However, critics argue that the state’s infrastructure—generating only 54% of its electricity from renewables in 2023—cannot yet support this transition. Ellis warns that without a robust grid, California’s push for EVs is premature, leaving residents reliant on costly, imported oil.
Catherine Reheis-Boyd, CEO of the Western States Petroleum Association, advocates for a balanced approach. “We have nothing against EVs or renewables,” she says, “but you cannot pick one winner.” She points out that oil companies earn mere pennies per gallon, while state taxes add $1.08 per gallon to fuel costs. This financial strain, coupled with job losses, fuels resentment among those who see California’s policies as ideologically driven.
The Road Ahead
California stands at a crossroads. On one hand, environmentalists urge a swift exit from fossil fuels to combat climate change, citing the dangers of methane leaks and pollution. On the other, industry advocates warn that stifling domestic production increases global emissions, raises costs, and threatens economic stability. The state’s reliance on foreign oil—transported by polluting tankers—undermines its green goals, while inadequate bonding risks leaving taxpayers to foot the bill for well cleanup.
As the debate rages, Kern County’s oil fields remain a battleground for competing visions of California’s future. Can the state balance its environmental ambitions with economic realities? Or will its policies continue to “export carbon guilt,” as Grove puts it, while burdening residents with high costs? The answer will shape not just California, but the nation’s energy landscape, for years to come.