New Offshore Energy Bill Mandates Global Comparison and Forces Justification for Protecting Marine Sanctuaries

The Comprehensive Offshore Resource Enhancement Act of 2025 (CORE Act) is less about drilling today and more about mapping out where we might drill tomorrow. This bill mandates a massive data collection and reporting effort by the government, focusing heavily on what offshore resources—oil, gas, and even critical minerals—are out there, and how developing them would impact the U.S. economy.

The Global Energy GPS

Within 18 months, the Secretaries of Interior, Energy, and State must deliver a comprehensive report to Congress on all shared oil and gas resources, particularly those that cross into neighboring countries’ waters. Think of this as an international energy inventory. They have to analyze existing treaties, assess how other countries (like Mexico, Cuba, and Canada) are drilling near our borders, and even suggest diplomatic or international court options to settle tricky maritime boundary disputes—specifically mentioning unresolved issues with Canada over potential shared oil and gas fields (SEC. 2).

This isn't just about finding more oil; it's about strategic planning. The bill requires the use of advanced tech—AI, quantum computing, and advanced modeling—to estimate resource volumes, helping policymakers understand how U.S. offshore production affects global competition and energy security. For anyone working in the energy sector, this report will be the new playbook, offering detailed estimates of undiscovered resources across the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, and Alaska (SEC. 2).

The Fine Print on Leasing Restrictions

Here’s where the analysis gets pointed. The CORE Act updates the existing federal inventory of offshore resources, requiring an update at least every five years. But the new rules demand a detailed economic analysis that cuts both ways. The report must estimate the jobs (direct, indirect, and induced) created by developing these resources across the supply chain, from exploration to refining.

Crucially, the bill mandates an assessment of how restricting leasing in certain areas—like National Marine Sanctuaries or areas withdrawn for conservation—affects oil and gas production, national security, domestic jobs, and the revenue coastal states receive. In plain English, the government is being forced to put a price tag on conservation. If you live in a coastal community that relies on Gulf of Mexico energy revenue, this analysis will show exactly what your state is potentially missing out on by protecting certain areas (SEC. 2).

Critical Minerals and Industry Influence

Beyond oil and gas, the bill requires the assessment to identify and locate non-energy mineral resources offshore, such as sand, gravel, and critical minerals—the stuff needed for batteries and high-tech manufacturing. This is a clear signal that the U.S. is looking to expand its resource extraction efforts beyond hydrocarbons (SEC. 2).

Another provision requires the Secretary of the Interior to periodically check the accuracy of the resource estimation models. If industry groups, like the National Petroleum Council, recommend changes to those models, the Secretary must either adopt the changes or publish a detailed report explaining why they didn't. This provision essentially gives industry groups a direct line to influence the government’s resource estimates and forces the Interior Department to publicly justify any decision to ignore industry recommendations (SEC. 2).

Finally, the bill requires a comparative analysis every ten years, contrasting U.S. offshore production practices (like how often we hold lease sales and the financial terms of those leases) against every other major offshore producing country. This means the U.S. will be constantly measuring its regulatory framework against global competitors, potentially creating pressure to lower U.S. standards to match other nations (SEC. 3).