Russ Zimmer

@RussZimmer

BP's oil spill in the Gulf, shown in the video above, was one of the worst disasters in U.S. history

President Trump is set to try and reverse rules that prevented offshore drilling in the Atlantic.

How should New Jerseyans feel about that? Let's look at the pros and cons.

President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order Friday that will open up the Atlantic and Arctic oceans for offshore oil and gas drilling.

The controversial move, coming on Day 99 of Trump's term, is intended to reverse a pair of Obama administration decisions that restricted oil and gas exploration. For environmentalists, the action reopens old wounds, while business interests see dollar signs.

Seven years after the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore drilling remains a lightning rod for controversy. It simultaneously serves as a means to quench America's thirst for oil while also carrying the potential to strangle coastal ecosystems and wreck neighboring economic sectors, including fishing and tourism.

Trump would undo two Obama-driven measures: First, his Interior Department last year opted not to lease in the Atlantic Oceans for the 2017-2022 window; then, in the closing days of his presidency, Obama took executive action to indefinitely ban offshore oil and gas drilling from the Chesapeake Bay to New England.

Let's break down the case for and against offshore drilling:

Pro: Money, money, money

Selling the rights to deep sea oil can be lucrative for the government and provide some measure of relief to taxpayers.

Leasing and royalties brought in $4.4 billion in revenue for federal and state governments during the 2015 federal fiscal year, according to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), the agency that leases marine territory and monitors energy development on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.

Just to give a sense of how much money that is, $4.4 billion is about what it costs to run the entire U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2015.

TAX PLAN: How's Trump's tax reform will affect you

Con: Existential threat to key sectors of the Shore's economy

On April 10, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded, killing 11 workers and setting off the worst offshore oil spill in American history.

Four million barrels of crude spewed out into the Gulf of Mexico, causing severe environmental damage. The spill also hobbled businesses reliant on the oceans and beaches for their well-being.

A half-million Shore jobs are supported by tourism and another 50,000 by fishing.

"For our Shore communities the risks are high and the rewards are low," U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez, D- N.J., said during a news conference Thursday afternoon, announcing his intention to try again for a permanent ban.

ENVIRONMENT: 4 ways to preserve what you love about the Shore

The Gulf's seafood industry took as much as a $1.6 billion hit from the oil spill, according to a report by the BOEM. Tourism spending in Louisiana declined by nearly a quarter-billion dollars in the months after the spill. An estimated $175 million more in vacationer spending would be missed over the next two years, a study prepared for the state of Louisiana found.

"Where we drill we spill," said Franz Matzner, who directs the Natural Resource Defense Council’s Beyond Oil Initiative. "People focus on the giant, devastating oil spills because they are real and frightening, but there are spills that happen all the time from existing production that is just a part and parcel of the dirty business of oil drilling.”

Pro: Jobs

Between 2017 and 2035, expanded offshore production could create nearly 840,000 new American jobs, according to the American Petroleum Institute, a trade association that lobbies for the oil and natural gas industry. That jobs figure includes not only the jobs created by expected additional demand, but also the jobs generated by the wider economic impact of those newly-created oil jobs.

There is essentially no oil and gas extraction industry in New Jersey right now, according to U.S. Department of Labor Statistics.

Nonetheless, New Jersey could still prosper, said Nicholas Loris, an economist at the Heritage Foundation, which advocates for fewer business regulations. The Gulf Coast provides an example.

"Seafood, tourism, and oil are all very integral parts of their economy," he said.

Con: Jobs

Opponents fear that expanding drilling opportunities could harm the clean energy economy by cementing fossil fuels as the cheaper alternative.

A study by ReThink Energy NJ and Environmental Entrepreneurs found that 41,000 New Jerseyans have jobs in solar, wind or energy efficiency.

In addition to the danger offshore drilling carries, opponents say it ignores the ongoing transformation of energy production.

"These unleased areas need to be managed for the public interest. They belong to all Americans." Matzner said. "But these executive orders fly directly in the face of that principle. The country, the world is in the midst of a rapid evolution toward clean energy, and (offshore oil exploration) are dangerous, high-risk projects.”

POLLUTION: The air we breathe gets a failing grade for smog

There's a built-in advantage for offshore drillers: A law limits how much oil companies have to pay in the event of a disaster.

Currently, companies are only liable up to $134 million in damages from oil spills, not including the cost of removing the spilled oil and penalties. The rest is on the taxpayer.

"That amounts to a subsidy for oil companies," Loris said. "Not only would taxpayers not have to bail them out, but private insurance would push them to create more robust safety standards."

Another wrinkle: The U.S. government settled with BP for $20.8 billion, but the company was allowed to deduct all but $5.5 billion from its taxes.

Pro: Lessen dependence on foreign oil

The U.S. consumed an average of 20 million barrels of oil per day in 2016, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Half of that demand was met by importing oil.

President Trump speaks often of reducing America's reliance on imported oil, calling his executive order to fast-track the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline "a historic moment for North American and energy independence."

About 1 in every 6 barrels of oil produced in America comes from an offshore rig — none has ever operated in the Atlantic Ocean. That ratio could be even higher if the U.S. did not forbid drilling in most of its waters, although little is known about what, if any, oil reserves are under the Atlantic.

"If there is a commercial interest to explore for natural resources off the coast of the Atlantic — that doesn't have to be oil, it could be geothermal or wind, whatever it might be me — and it can be done in an environmentally sensitive way and with the input of the states, then who is Washington to say no?" Loris asked.

In at least a few ways, more production of oil and natural gas — the latter of which is powering a growing number of power plants — could be welcome news for U.S. households.

“When you have lower prices at the pump or lower utility bills that’s putting more money in the wallets of American citizens,” Loris said.

Con: It could be years or decades until the oil flows

It seems likely that whatever the text of the president's order, the basic leasing process — established in a 1953 law — will remain intact, barring action from Congress.

That means that the BOEM will need to restart the painstaking affair of gathering information, taking public comment and proposing ocean areas for leasing. In short, that could take months.

TRUMP: 5 reasons environmentalists fear the new president

Add another wild card on top of that: There is no existing infrastructure for offshore drilling on the East Coast and it's unclear if the oil industry has any appetite for building it out right now.

Oil prices have tumbled below $49 per barrel, making it difficult for companies to justify spending money just to pump more crude into an already oversupplied market.

“Maybe in the short term while oil prices are low — possibly not," Loris said of whether companies would want to invest in Atlantic drilling operations, "but folks have always a difficult time knowing where the oil prices are going.”

Why take the chance of a spill when it's possible we won't even be oil consumers that far into the future, Matzner said.

“If 30 years from now we need this oil, that assumes that this revolutionary expansion of clean energy is just going to stop,” he said.

DEAD WHALE: Ship strike most likely culprit

DAVID DAO: United Airlines reaches settlement with passenger violently dragged off flight

Russ Zimmer: 732-557-5748, razimmer@app.com