More reports this morning that Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar, a Democrat, is likely to be Secretary of Interior in an Obama Administration. The Washington Post’s Juliet Eilperin highlights his bipartisan, moderate, reaching-out, working-with-everyone credentials. And the independent oil producers say good things:

Marc W. Smith, executive director for the Independent Petroleum Association of Mountain States, noted that Salazar has backed offshore drilling for oil and gas and supported the use of natural gas as a backstop for renewable energy supplies because it burns cleaner than petroleum.

“More often than not, we agree on the goal, but as expected, we aren’t always going to agree on the approach,” Smith said in an interview. “He certainly understands that natural gas is a central element of a long-term national energy supply.”

Senator Salazar’s NAM “Key Vote” percentage in the 109th Congress was 37 percent, and in the 110th Congress it was 23 percent. You can see those key votes here.

We also broke out his “Key Votes” on energy and environmental-related legislation (since Lieberman-Warner cap-and-trade would have been especially damaging to the energy sector). Combining both the 109th and 110th Congress, Senator Salazar voted with the NAM’s preferred position four times and against the preferred position 10 times, which is a 29 percent support record. You can see those votes here. You can also see his press statements on energy and land-use policy on his website here.

Judging an Interior Secretary on the basis of energy alone is too narrow, of course, since the agency has many other policy portfolios. In any case, it appears energy policy will be run out of the White House in conjunction with environmental policy.

News reports are telling us that President-elect Obama’s choice as the next Secretary of Interior is Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO). From the AP:

Salazar is expected to balance the protection of natural resources while tapping the nation’s energy potential – an approach that Obama has said he wants.

He co-sponsored a bill in Congress to create a new land conservation system under the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management for permanently protecting 26 million acres of national monuments, wilderness areas and wild and scenic rivers.

The legislation died during the lame duck session of Congress after the November election.

Salazar, 53, opposed drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge and objected to the Bush administration’s efforts to lease Western lands for oil shale development. It will be up to the Obama administration whether or not to go ahead with leasing.

Hmmm. Is “balance” the right word to describe “permanently protecting” — read, put off limits — 26 million acres to energy development? By itself, no, but Salazar was also a sponsor of the bipartisan “Gang of 10 16″ energy plan, a serious attempt earlier this year that featured positive steps for energy development.

You can read Salazar’s statements and news releases on energy and conservation at his Senate website here.

Meanwhile, let’s complete the citation of API’s release on the importance of domestic energy resources now off-limits, “Off-limits US oil, gas worth $1.7 trillion to government: study,” summarizing a new study from  ICF International:

This study underscores how the oil and natural gas industry can enhance America’s energy security and help solve our economic problems by increasing production of our nation’s vast oil and natural gas resources,” said API President and CEO Jack N. Gerard. “The U.S. oil and natural gas industry supports more than six million jobs, and more drilling for oil and natural gas will mean more energy for America, more well-paying jobs, and trillions of dollars of much-needed revenues that will help federal, state and local governments pay for critical services.”

According to the ICF study, U.S. crude oil production would rise by 36% by 2030 if development is permitted in the studied areas of the Outer Continental Shelf, ANWR and the Rockies and domestic natural gas production would rise by 10%. By 2030, this activity would create 160,000 jobs.

Finally, an observation from a knowledgeable observer of intramural, bureaucratic fights: The Secretary of Agriculture and Secretary of Interior usually have immense influence over energy policy, making the jobs more significant than they would be otherwise. But with Carol Browner coordinating the White House environment and energy efforts, the agencies’ authority will be less. They’re still important, no doubt, but USDA and Interior will be less attractive posts for those interested in energy policy under an Obama Administration.

From the AP, “Industry groups file lawsuit over polar bear rule“:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Five industry groups have sued the Interior Department over a rule to protect the polar bear that they say unfairly singles out business operations in Alaska for their contribution to global warming.

Groups representing the oil and gas, mining, and manufacturing industries asked a federal judge Wednesday to ensure that laws designed to protect the bear, which was recently designated a threatened species, are not used to block projects that release heat-trapping gases in the state.

The American Petroleum Institute was joined by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Mining Association, the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Iron and Steel Institute in the lawsuit, which explicitly challenges three words — except in Alaska — that appear in a 62-page rule issued in May.

A copy of the suit, American Petroleum Institute v. Kempthorne, is available here.

API’s statement is here, and it’s a very useful pre-corrective:

The oil and natural gas industry is committed to the conservation of the polar bear and other marine mammals. Companies active in Arctic region energy exploration implement polar bear mitigation and avoidance programs, and they provide funding and logistical support for important polar bear studies carried out in the United States and in Canada. API filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia yesterday because it believes the U.S. Interior Department’s determination that the Endangered Species Act is “not the right tool to set U.S. climate policy‟ makes sense, and that the interim final rule issued by the Department needs to be expanded to include Alaska as the Act is implemented. API member companies are not challenging the listing of the polar bear as a threatened species.