California is a National Security Risk, Funding the Ukrainian/Russian War, and Closing Refineries in California
Clark Savage
Harmony platform; Source: Sable Offshore
California, often seen as a leader in environmental policy, is facing a paradox that could have far-reaching implications for national security, economic stability, and international relations. The state’s energy policies, driven by a push for lower carbon emissions, have inadvertently positioned California as a funder of the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia and a contributor to its own energy vulnerabilities.
This article examines the intricate web of California’s oil and gas imports, the decline in drilling permits, the closure of refineries, and the troubling revelations from a recent discussion by Steve Hilton on the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, now known as X.
California’s reliance on imported oil and gas has grown significantly over the years, undermining its energy independence. According to the California Energy Commission, in 2020, the state imported approximately 1.2 million barrels of crude oil daily, with a substantial portion coming from foreign sources. Major suppliers include Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Ecuador; however, troublingly, there are indications that refined gasoline from Russia, via intermediaries such as India, is also entering the market. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that California produces only about 40% of the crude oil it consumes, with the remainder imported from abroad. The import of refined gasoline from India, which in turn purchases oil from Russia, circumvents U.S. sanctions and indirectly supports the Russian economy. This scenario was highlighted in a post by Steve Hilton on X, where he discussed the absurdity of California importing Russian gasoline while local refineries face closure. The post underscores a critical national security risk, as California’s policies not only fund Putin’s war machine but also increase carbon emissions through the use of highly polluting bunker fuel in super tankers.
Decline in Drilling Permits
The number of drilling permits issued in California has plummeted, reflecting a broader trend of regulatory hostility towards the oil and gas industry. In 2019, the state issued around 1,200 permits, but by 2024, this number had dropped to just over 300. This decline is largely due to stringent environmental regulations, including the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and Cap-and-Trade programs, which have made it economically unviable for many operators to continue drilling. The reduction in permits not only stifles local production but also increases dependence on imported oil, further complicating the state’s energy security.
Refinery Closures
The closure of oil refineries in California is another critical aspect of this energy crisis. Recently, Phillips 66 announced the closure of its Carson refinery in Southern California by October 2025, and Valero Energy Corporation is also set to shut down its Wilmington refinery. These closures represent a loss of nearly 20% of California’s refining capacity within the next year. The impact is profound: not only does it drive up gas prices due to reduced supply, but it also threatens the state’s ability to meet its own fuel demands, pushing California to rely even more heavily on imported refined products.
Steve Hilton’s post on X reveals the dire consequences of these closures. He notes that California is now importing finished gasoline from countries like India, which refines Russian oil. This not only undermines U.S. sanctions against Russia but also highlights the inefficiency and environmental hypocrisy of California’s policies. The state’s push for lower carbon emissions has led to increased carbon emissions globally, as oil is shipped halfway around the world in super tankers burning bunker fuel, the sludge of the oil industry.
Steve Hilton’s Insights on Gas and Diesel Problems. In. In his X post, Steve Hilton, a prominent commentator and former advisor, engages with George Harmer, a board member of Californians for Energy and Science, to dissect California’s gas and diesel woes. Hilton points out that the high gas prices in California, often exceeding $4.60 per gallon, are not just a result of global oil prices but are exacerbated by state-specific regulations. These include the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Cap-and-Trade, and refinery regulations that make it more expensive to produce fuel locally.
🚨 KERN COUNTY:
Gavin Newsom and the Democrats are now importing refined gasoline from Russia instead of producing it here.
Higher gas prices, increased CO2 emissions, crushing California energy communities, funding Putin‘s war machine. Could there be a more stupid policy? pic.twitter.com/VrxuLYVeJH
Hilton’s conversation with Harmer reveals a startling fact: California is importing gasoline that was originally Russian oil, refined in India, to meet its demands. This not only funds Russia’s war efforts but also increases the carbon footprint due to the long-distance transportation. Hilton argues that this policy is not only economically nonsensical but also a national security threat, as it makes California an “energy island” vulnerable to global supply disruptions.
Mike Umbro also works with Californians for Energy. In our interview with Mike and Ronald, we covered much of what Steve Hilton was discussing, including the military bases’ dependency on the refineries that are about to close.
National Security Implications
The combination of importing Russian gasoline, closing local refineries, and reducing drilling permits poses a significant national security risk. California’s military bases, which depend on locally produced fuel, are particularly vulnerable. The loss of 20% of refining capacity could disrupt fuel supplies not just for civilians but also for critical defense operations. Moreover, the state’s policies inadvertently support Russia’s economy, which is crucial for funding its military actions in Ukraine.
Conclusion
California’s energy policies, intended to combat climate change, have instead created a perfect storm of economic, environmental, and security challenges. The state’s reliance on imported oil and gas, the decline in drilling permits, and the closure of refineries have made it a funder of the Ukrainian/Russian war and a national security risk. Steve Hilton’s discussion on X and the analysis in Energy News Beat, “California to Examine Amazon Oil Ties Following Pleas from Ecuador’s Indigenous Leaders: A Closer Look at Newsom’s Energy Choices,” underscores the urgency of reevaluating these policies. Common sense dictates that California should utilize its resources rather than importing oil from authoritarian regimes halfway around the world. The path forward requires a balanced approach that prioritizes energy independence, national security, and environmental stewardship.
I have reached out to Steve Hilton to see if we can match up his schedule for an interview on the podcast.
Energy News Beat remains committed to providing in-depth analysis and fostering informed dialogue on critical energy issues.
