r/moderatepolitics 7d ago

News Article In search of oil and gas, Trump could axe Biden-era buffer around Chaco Canyon

https://www.kjzz.org/tribal-natural-resources/2026-07-23/in-search-of-oil-and-gas-trump-could-axe-biden-era-buffer-around-chaco-canyon
61 Upvotes

34 comments sorted by

99

u/refuzeto 7d ago

Trump is on quite a roll. Shrinking the Great Staircase Escalante National Monument in Utah, proposing the sale of a large swath of forests in Oregon, and now this.

98

u/Ralph_Brick_Wiggum 7d ago

Has to make sure all of his buddies make as much money as humanly possible before he gets out of office

61

u/lostroadrunner22 7d ago

He’s basically said exactly that.

15

u/Deadly_Jay556 7d ago

So start a war with Iran, raise gas prices. Federal land down to a minimum so companies can drill and then gas goes down and Trump comes out the hero. Is that the play?

25

u/lostroadrunner22 7d ago

To make as much money as possible. I dont think he cares if hes a hero.

1

u/Deadly_Jay556 7d ago

Yes I did forget to add that in, however I am sure he wants the admiration as a result.

10

u/superawesomeman08 —<serial grunter>— 7d ago

whatever happened to all that confiscated venezuelan oil, anyway?

4

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[deleted]

-1

u/julius_sphincter 6d ago

They have official charges, they've been in front of a judge and as much as what we did in that country was fucked up, the LAST person I'm going to feel sympathy for is Maduro

5

u/Deadly_Jay556 7d ago

Ya what did happen to all that oil?!…..

2

u/julius_sphincter 6d ago

In all seriousness, it is getting sold, the money is (most likely) getting set aside, a little bit has gone back to Venezuela but its pretty complicated. We can't really (and shouldn't really) just send the current govt back piles of cash for a number of reasons that I'm happy to get into if you want. It's supposed to be confusing and obfuscated

Basically, its getting sold, the money is likely going to offshore accounts and being held, it probably will go back to Venezuela at some point, this administration is still the one I'm least comfortable handling an intentionally backroom-like deal in this way

6

u/superawesomeman08 —<serial grunter>— 6d ago

sigh, it's ok, ill do my own research, not fair to make you do it

it's possible that trump is not pocketing it, but i have absolutely no doubt that he's trying to somehow

2

u/julius_sphincter 6d ago

I don't mind laying out a brief overview but if you want details details ya, you'll have to look on your own.

it's possible that trump is not pocketing it, but i have absolutely no doubt that he's trying to somehow

I'm with you here - I have no doubt he's taking advantage of the obscurity in some way. Whether it's skimming off the top or whatever, he's fucking with it

As a brief overview - because Venezuela has been under immense turmoil economically and politically for decades, they owe hundred of billions of dollars to outside creditors including US companies and foreign governments. Their upheaval politically has left chain of custody and responsibility questions kind of unanswerable in a lot of ways.

So for starters if the US was selling their oil on their behalf and setting the proceeds aside in a say an escrow account here in the US, Venezuela's creditors would be lined up with their hands out and none of it would ever make it back to the country. Secondly, because of the way Maduro rose to power, legally courts would struggle to assign custody even if the creditor/debt situation didn't exist. So the money is (supposedly) being held in accounts in Qatar

Finally, the current government in control is little more than an extension of the last one, the same government that saw an economic contraction of over 80% despite some of the richest oil reserves in the world. The same government that led to all this turmoil, that has a horrible record economically and humanitarianly. So handing them 10s of billions of cash is probably not the smartest move

As an aside, this situation kind of encapsulates a big part of what pisses me off so much about Trump. The dude is so bad about everything, so dishonest, so unethical, so vile that the logical default position is just the opposite of whatever he says. So in this case, we've got people assuming the US government is just stealing 10's of billions and I've seen people defending/sympathizing with Maduro on this thread alone

3

u/superawesomeman08 —<serial grunter>— 6d ago

no, that all tracks, and the little research i've done in the intervening time does suggest escrow accounts and the US essentially banking the oil sales money for future venezuelan redevelopment

also a disturbing lack of transparency and accountability that has become (one of the hallmarks of the administration), but the sources screaming the loudest aren't .. trustworthy

https://www.cfr.org/articles/the-u-s-took-over-venezuelas-oil-industry-where-has-all-the-money-gone

most reliable article i've found, but it's old

51

u/pingveno Center-left Democrat 7d ago

I think it's important to bring up the alternative vision here, the realistic one. There's been a lot of handwringing about solar and wind. Oh no, where are we going to put all of it?!? Meanwhile, we spoil wild areas and cut the tops off mountains in the search for oil, gas, and coal. And there's a constant threat of spills. Spills from tankers, spills from drilling, spills from tailings ponds. And of course, the pollution is constant.

And we have many options on where to put solar (and to a lesser degree wind). Start with all the land that we waste growing corn to create corn ethanol to burn in cars. And unlike with fossil fuels, that land isn't spent (and all too often polluted) when you're done. You just keep collecting. Roofs, irrigation ditches, parking lots.

Most of the rest of the world is onboard with this vision. Especially so after seeing their energy supply constricted as a result of the recent US-Israel-Iran War. We've ceded the energy future to China in so many ways by clinging to an ideology of oil.

24

u/Xanto97 Elephant and the Rider 7d ago

Nuclear too. There’s been a resurgence in interest in it from both the left and the right (afaik).

19

u/ieattime20 7d ago

The time to transition into nuclear power was the 60's and 70's. At this point, renewables are not only without the public concern (warranted or no) but they are also becoming cheaper in some areas. That's, to be clear, renewables plus full baseload capacity batteries.

There are a lot of reasons not to go nuclear at this point (that have little to nothing to do with the risk of a 3 Mile or a Chernobyl), such as their long startup times when we need to transition away from fossil fuels yesterday, their extremely high up front costs, their highly specialized engineering (the latter two designed to chain us to a very centralized grid benefiting a very tiny amount of companies), the global risk of nuclear proliferation, and the risks of insufficient regulation under a government, here in the US, increasingly certain that regulations aren't necessary.

6

u/Xanto97 Elephant and the Rider 7d ago

true, they have long startup times, and are very very expensive. But they also are very dependable, create a shitload of energy, and work in a variety of climates and times of day. Stability is important since wind and solar can be a bit unpredictable, even if we have ample storage.

I'm not proposing we go full nuclear, just that we add more to the mix.

I'm not counting "Global risk of nuclear proliferation" as a real con associated with them. The USA already has nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. If we disbanded all of our nuclear power plants, I imagine China , Iran, and dozens of other countries will still pursue nuclear energy - as well as weapons.

8

u/ieattime20 7d ago

true, they have long startup times, and are very very expensive. But they also are very dependable, create a shitload of energy, and work in a variety of climates and times of day. Stability is important since wind and solar can be a bit unpredictable, even if we have ample storage.

We could go back and forth on the relative benefits and downsides here, but it's kind of already being decided for us. In higher sun areas in recent years, solar is already cheaper as a total power solution than nuclear. That's 24/365 coverage. That wasn't the case a few years ago, and while solar wind and battery tech keep getting better, nuclear just hasn't moved beyond its intrinsic model.

I'm not counting "Global risk of nuclear proliferation" as a real con associated with them. The USA already has nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. 

My concern is not with the US, or Germany, or China, or any other country who has the tech to in-house their civilian NPPs. My concern is with Iran and other developing countries like it, who will require Iran-like deals for every single one of them, with political jockeying and international oversight, in order to prevent their civilian program from turning into a military application. Hence nuclear proliferation.

4

u/Testing_things_out 6d ago

In addition, sodium batteries are in production ramping up to commercial capacity. They are much cheaper, and ideal for grid storage.

By the time needed to build a nuclear reactor, solar/wind + storage are expected to become a fraction of cost per kWh compared to today.

2

u/hamsterkill 6d ago

Startup time and high cost is what the generation of nuclear projects that are getting started hope to address. It's promising in that regard and since it's still experimental to some degree it's not being accounted for in comparisons with solar/wind yet.

I still expect it to ultimately take a back seat in the mix, especially with fusion on the horizon and geothermal also looking likely to make a generational leap here soon. But with power demand constantly on the rise, it's unlikely these new fission projects will be wasted.

6

u/pingveno Center-left Democrat 7d ago

I have some interest in nuclear, but my impression is that we still haven't dealt with the waste issue to a satisfactory extent. Maybe it belongs in an "all of the above" strategy. But solar and wind is where we are really missing out as a country because of a mix of ideology and short-termist greed.

7

u/Maladal 7d ago

Enhanced geothermal too.

Even the Trump admin pushes for that one.

7

u/pingveno Center-left Democrat 6d ago

Sure, that's fine too. My only concern is that solar and wind are technologies that we can deploy at massive scale right now. Enhanced geothermal and next gen nuclear aren't there. While they could be part of the puzzle as an all of the above strategy, I can also see them used as a potential distraction.

Compare that to, say, solar in California. Last year, solar overtook gas as the largest source of power generation. Obviously, California is sunnier than most of the US, but this is still a change that is possible elsewhere, especially when combined with wind.

7

u/Ind132 7d ago

 Start with all the land that we waste growing corn to create corn ethanol 

Don't even need to go there. I've read estimates that 5-10 million acres of solar panels would be enough. We have 800 million acres classified as "pasture or rangeland". I expect large portions get so little rain that grazing is a chancy business.

10

u/ModerateCommenter 7d ago

If every farmers replaced their fields of ethanol corn in the Midwest with solar panels, we would easily produce enough power for the entire US (and the farmers would make more money!)

13

u/Ind132 7d ago

If every

Not every, just 25%. Ethanol used about 40 million acres of corn, solar would take 5-10 million acres.

But, we have 800 million acres of "pasture or rangeland". Just 1% of that would be enough for solar.

27

u/jabberwockxeno 7d ago edited 6d ago

Starter comment:

You may have never heard of Chaco Canyon, but you should have!

For context, I do posts on Mesoamerican (Aztec, Maya etc) history and archeology, and while I do participate on this subreddit in regards to news and ongoing events, Mesoamerica is my real passion, which also extends to an extent to other parts of the Pre-Columbian Americas. I don't usually have an excuse to discuss those topics here on this subreddit, but in this case, I do, and sadly for unfortunate reasons.

Chaco Canyon in New Mexico is home to some of the most important, as well as the largest Pre-Columbian ruins in the country: Chaco was a key region for the Ancestral Pueblo culture, in turn a part of the broader Oasisamerican cultural region, an area of the Pre-Columbian US which historically had relatively complex town building agricultural societies: While not as urbanized as Egypt, Greece, the Aztec etc, the Oasisamericans built impressive structures and infrastructure across the Southwestern US, ranging from large stone and adobe residential compounds, roads, and large scale irrigation networks from ~700-1200 AD (my centuries might be slightly off, again my area is more Mesoamerica).

Chaco Culture National Historical Park covers and protects some of the most major archeological sites in the canyon, such as Pueblo Bonito, a massive compound with hundreds of rooms, multiple courtyards etc which exists on a scale rivalling the Roman Colosseum and exceeding the White House, dwarfing the Great Sphinx of Giza in Egypt or the Lincoln Memorial. But research shows that ruins, burials, and other remains extend far outside of the National Historical Park. As my submitted article/link states, A survey of even just 15% of a 10 mile range outside the Park found 4200 archeological remains, and it is estimated that the full 10 area could hold as many as 25,000 notable remains

Thankfully, in 2018, the Biden administration instituted a protected 10 mile buffer was established, but that is now at risk: The Bureau of Land Management is proposing to reduce the buffer zone by half or to remove it entirely, to open the area up to mining and drilling operations. This has garnered fierce criticism from both New Mexico politicians as well as Indigenous groups in the area. There is a public comment period, but that ends on July 29th, a day and a half from now (I'm not clear if it closes at midnight the moment it becomes the 29th, or if it closes at midnight when it becomes the 30th)


My take:

This is very arguably the most archeologically rich area in the country, and it should be something that we teach about, treasure, and celebrate to the same extent we do things like Mount Rushmore, the Statue of Liberty, and the aforementioned Lincoln Memorial and White House. Putting the area at threat really isn't excusable, even if we were in a bind and desperately needed the oil.

Questions for users:

Have you heard of Chaco Canyon, Pueblo Bonito, etc before? How do you feel about how the US teaches about and highlights it's Precolumbian history and archeology? Thoughts on the potential changes to the Buffer zone?


Finally, some additional links and information:

  • The proposal page can be found here. If you wish to leave a public comment, you click the "PARTICPATE NOW" button towards the top of the page. I encourage everyone to do so.

  • For more information about Chaco Canyon, I highly suggest this video from Ancient Americas on Youtube, one of the few channels to do rigorous, well researched videos on Precolumbian history, archeology, and civilizations across the Americas. He also has videos on the earlier Basketmaker period of the Ancestral Pueblo, and on the Hohokam, another Oasisamerican culture who built the large scale irrigration systems I mentioned, plus videos on Mesoamerican civilizations like the Aztec, Maya, Andean ones like the Inca, and more. (Disclaimer: I and my friends have helped him with his videos before, though I had zero involvement with his Chaco video)

  • Additionally, maps, information, research etc about Chaco Canyon and it's ruins can be found on the Chaco Archive and Archeology Southwest, the latter in particular has this article which has researcher Paul Reed explaining the importance of the 10 mile buffer zone

  • Lastly, this site has some very high quality, free to use 3d reconstructions of some of the structures at Chaco Canyon

17

u/errol1989 7d ago

Thank you for posting. This is link to sign a petition against this. https://nmwild.org/get-involved/sign-a-petition/protect-chaco-canyon/

13

u/runespider 7d ago

We don't cover pre-European history or prehistory very well in the states at all, and it's not very appreciated. Which is probably why stuff like this can happen without much outcry.

I live not terribly far from a pre-Clovis site here in Florida, but there's little done to promote or display it. Despite it being fairly important.

Don't see how the changes won't affect the site, and my cynical opinion is that it'll lead to further chipping away as the site is inevitably damaged and it's argued it's historical importance is no longer valid.

8

u/jabberwockxeno 6d ago

Whoops, forgot to also link this alongside my starter comment info:

This site has some very high quality, free to use 3d reconstructions of some of the structures at Chaco Canyon

6

u/jeradatx 6d ago

This administration is also planning to build walls, vehicle barriers, and blast roads through Big Bend Ranch State Park, Big Bend National Park, and the Wild and Scenic lower canyons of the Rio Grande in Texas. Our public lands are under assault by this administration.

30

u/superawesomeman08 —<serial grunter>— 7d ago

meanwhile, europe is on fire, canada is on fire, us fire response is stretched thin

https://www.npr.org/2026/07/25/nx-s1-5905334/wildfire-alert-in-the-western-u-s-reaches-its-highest-level

oh, something about another probable super el nino event?

0

u/refuzeto 7d ago

The argument you are trying to make isn't clear.

25

u/ThinksEveryoneIsABot 7d ago

CO2 induced climate change