Gulf Oil Spill [Archive] - Professional Soldiers ®

echoes

04-29-2010, 14:11

Looks like this spill from BP's rig is going to get worse once it hits land tomorrow. This is not a good thing for Our economy, hands down. Especially is you are invested in BP....:(

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100429/ap_on_bi_ge/us_oil_spill_military_2

Navy sends equipment to help with Gulf oil spill

By ANNE FLAHERTY and ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writers Anne Flaherty And Anne Gearan, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 10 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The Navy sent equipment to help with cleanup of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and the Pentagon said Thursday it stands ready to expand its response to the disaster.

Navy spokesman Lt. Myers Vasquez said Thursday that 66,000 feet of inflatable boom and seven skimming systems were on their way to the Navy base in Gulfport, Miss. The help is being provided under an existing pollution cleanup agreement between the Navy and Coast Guard.

The Pensacola Naval Air Station in Florida is in use as a staging area for more booms, recovery barges, tractor trailers, pumps and other related equipment used by Coast Guard contractors, Vasquez said.
He was unaware of any military personnel who might be sent to help with the cleanup.

The White House has asked the Defense Department to discuss possible additional requests. Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said the military is assessing how it might help and what resources could be deployed. He did not say how long that might take.

"There is a full-blown effort within this department to try to find the kinds of things that could be helpful," Morrell said.
He said the federal response is far wider than the Pentagon and should involve a close partnership with the energy industry. For example, he said, industrial research on submersible vehicles that can operate at great depth outpaces the military's.

Morrell said the focus of military efforts now is on helping to contain the spill at sea, but that the Pentagon would be ready to offer other kinds of help should the spill reach shore. He would not speculate on what that additional assistance might include, but one possibility would be an influx of U.S. troops to help with shoreline cleanup.

Holly:munchin

incarcerated

04-29-2010, 15:53

There is a new dimension to this story:
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=328027&postcount=12

and:
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/04/obama-well-use-every-single-available-resource-to-contain-oil-slick/1

....Here are Obama's full comments, which came before a ceremony honoring the National Teacher of the Year:

Welcome to the Rose Garden. This is an extraordinary occasion, a beautiful day -- appropriately so. So I hate to intrude on it, but before we begin I do want to speak briefly to the American people about the recent BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

I've been receiving frequent briefings from members of my Cabinet and White House staff, including an update last night on the additional breach and another update this morning. And while BP is ultimately responsible for funding the cost of response and cleanup operations, my administration will continue to use every single available resource at our disposal, including potentially the Department of Defense, to address the incident.

Earlier today, DHS Secretary Napolitano announced that this incident is of national significance and the Department of Interior has announced that they will be sending SWAT teams to the Gulf to inspect all platforms and rigs. And I have ordered the Secretaries of Interior and Homeland Security as well as Administrator Lisa Jackson of the Environmental Protection Agency to visit the site on Friday to ensure that BP and the entire U.S. government is doing everything possible, not just to respond to this incident, but also to determine its cause. And I've been in contact with all the governors of the states that may be affected by this accident.

Now, earlier this week, Secretaries Napolitano and Salazar laid out the next steps for a thorough investigation into what precipitated this event. I am sure there may be a few science teachers here who have been following this issue closely with their classes, and if you guys have any suggestions, please let us know.

See also:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-rose-garden

Paslode

04-30-2010, 19:53

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/9055973/print

Second drilling rig overturns in Louisiana

* Reuters, Friday April 30 2010

HOUSTON, April 30 (Reuters) - The U.S. Coast Guard said Friday it was responding to another oil drilling rig accident near Morgan City, Louisiana.
A "mobile inland drilling unit" overturned in the Charenton navigational channel south of U.S. Highway 90 near Morgan City, the Coast Guard said in a statement.
There were no reports of injuries, the Coast Guard said. The floating shallow-water rig was not immediately identified and the importance of the channel was not clear.
The vessel has a 20,000-gallon diesel fuel capacity, but the Coast Guard, citing officials on the scene, said there was no fuel leaking.
As a precaution, 500 feet of oil spill containment boom was deployed around the rig and an additional 500 feet were being brought in, the Coast Guard said in its statement. (Reporting by Bruce Nichols)

* guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010

This keeps up and $10 a gallon won't be far away :munchin

Paslode

04-30-2010, 20:03

So is there some speculation that this is not an accident but sabatage?

DOI SWAT Teams inspecting rigs........weird.

From the Huff Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/30/louisiana-drilling-rig-ov_n_559221.html

MORGAN CITY, La. (AP / Huffington Post)— Officials say an oil drilling rig on its way to a scrap yard has overturned in Louisiana.

No injuries have been reported. The overturned rig is unrelated to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that threatens the coast's fragile ecosystem.

The Coast Guard said Friday that the rig, called a mobile inland drilling unit, overturned about 80 miles west-southwest of New Orleans.

It can carry about 20,000 gallons of diesel fuel, but Coast Guard officials did not know how much fuel was on board. Coast Guard investigators say no fuel leaks have been found.

About 500 feet of boom has been set up around the rig to contain any fuel that might leak as a precaution.

Tina Moore, the owner of T. Moore Services, which owned the rig, says it was being transported to a demolition and scrap yard. She says the rig was mounted on a barge.

The Coast Guard has put out the following press release on the incident.

MORGAN CITY, La. -- The Coast Guard is responding Friday to an overturned mobile inland drilling unit (MIDU) in the Charenton navigational canal south of Highway 90.

The Reaper

04-30-2010, 20:17

So is there some speculation that this is not an accident but sabatage?

I had exactly the same question.

Interesting timing, is it not?

TR

akv

04-30-2010, 21:50

If sabotage is suspected, no disrespect to DOI SWAT teams, but why send them to oil rigs/maritime operations over Navy or Coast Guard elements?

incarcerated

04-30-2010, 22:33

So is there some speculation that this is not an accident but sabatage?

Of course not. These things probably blow up all the time. It’s a dangerous occupation. Didn’t you see John Wayne in “The Hellfighters”?

:rolleyes::D

PSM

04-30-2010, 23:06

no disrespect to DOI SWAT teams

Dept. of Interior has SWAT? Why? Authorized where?

Sigaba

04-30-2010, 23:34

And then he said:I am sure there may be a few science teachers here who have been following this issue closely with their classes, and if you guys have any suggestions, please let us know.Amateur hour continues.

akv

05-01-2010, 00:32

This might be a misnomer I went to the DOI site, they do have SWOT (Strength Weaknesses Opportunities and Threats) analysis teams, but contrary to some of the right wing blogs I don't yet believe this is Obama trying to nationalize oil...

Paslode

05-01-2010, 01:58

I have no idea what the Euro Times is, possibly Infowars Euro Style.....but it is out there. I'll at least give it an A+ for imagination.

http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/us-orders-blackout-over-north-korean-torpedoing-of-gulf-of-mexico-oil-rig/print/

US Orders Blackout Over North Korean Torpedoing Of Gulf Of Mexico Oil Rig

A grim report circulating in the Kremlin today written by Russia’s Northern Fleet is reporting that the United States has ordered a complete media blackout over North Korea’s torpedoing of the giant Deepwater Horizon oil platform owned by the World’s largest offshore drilling contractor Transocean that was built and financed by South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd., that has caused great loss of life, untold billions in economic damage to the South Korean economy, and an environmental catastrophe to the United States.

Most important to understand about this latest attack by North Korea against its South Korean enemy is that under the existing “laws of war” it was a permissible action as they remain in a state of war against each other due to South Korea’s refusal to sign the 1953 Armistice ending the Korean War.

To the attack itself, these reports continue, the North Korean “cargo vessel” Dai Hong Dan believed to be staffed by 17th Sniper Corps “suicide” troops left Cuba’s Empresa Terminales Mambisas de La Habana (Port of Havana) on April 18th whereupon it “severely deviated” from its intended course for Venezuela’s Puerto Cabello bringing it to within 209 kilometers (130 miles) of the Deepwater Horizon oil platform which was located 80 kilometers (50 miles) off the coast of the US State of Louisiana where it launched an SSC Sang-o Class Mini Submarine (Yugo class) estimated to have an operational range of 321 kilometers (200 miles).

On the night of April 20th the North Korean Mini Submarine manned by these “suicidal” 17th Sniper Corps soldiers attacked the Deepwater Horizon with what are believed to be 2 incendiary torpedoes causing a massive explosion and resulting in 11 workers on this giant oil rig being killed outright. Barely 48 hours later, on April 22nd , this North Korean Mini Submarine committed its final atrocity by exploding itself directly beneath the Deepwater Horizon causing this $1 Billion oil rig to sink beneath the seas and marking 2010’s celebration of Earth Day with one of the largest environmental catastrophes our World has ever seen.

To the reason for North Korea attacking the Deepwater Horizon, these reports say, was to present US President Obama with an “impossible dilemma” prior to the opening of the United Nations Review Conference of the Parties to the Treat on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) set to begin May 3rd in New York.

This “impossible dilemma” facing Obama is indeed real as the decision he is faced with is either to allow the continuation of this massive oil leak catastrophe to continue for months, or immediately stop it by the only known and proven means possible, the detonation of a thermonuclear device.

Russian Navy atomic experts in these reports state that should Obama choose the “nuclear option” the most viable weapon at his disposal is the United States B83 (Mk-83) strategic thermonuclear bomb having a variable yield (Low Kiloton Range to 1,200 Kilotons) which with its 12 foot length and 18 inch diameter, and weighing just over 2,400 pounds, is readily able to be deployed and detonated by a remote controlled mini-sub.

Should Obama choose the “nuclear option” it appears that he would be supported by the International Court of Justice who on July 8, 1996 issued an advisory opinion on the use of nuclear weapons stating that they could not conclude definitively on these weapons use in “extreme circumstances” or “self defense”.

On the other hand, if Obama chooses the “nuclear option” it would leave the UN’s nuclear conference in shambles with every Nation in the World having oil rigs off their coasts demanding an equal right to atomic weapons to protect their environment from catastrophes too, including Iran.

To whatever decision Obama makes it remains a fact that with each passing hour this environmental catastrophe grows worse. And even though Obama has ordered military SWAT teams to protect other oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico from any further attack, and further ordered that all drilling in the Gulf of Mexico be immediately stopped, this massive oil spill has already reached the shores of America and with high waves and more bad weather forecast the likelihood of it being stopped from destroying thousands of miles of US coastland and wildlife appears unstoppable.

And not just to the environmental catastrophe that is unfolding the only devastation to be wrecked upon the United States and South Korea by this North Korean attack as the economic liabilities associated with this disaster are estimated by these Russian reports to be between $500 Billion to $1.5 Trillion, and which only a declaration of this disaster being an “act of war” would free some the World’s largest corporations from bankruptcy.

Important to note too in all of these events was that this was the second attack by North Korea on its South Korean enemy, and US ally, in a month as we had reported on in our March 28th report titled “Obama Orders ‘Immediate Stand-down’ After Deadly North Korean Attack” and which to date neither the Americans or South Korea have retaliated for and giving one senior North Korean party leader the courage to openly state that the North Korean military took “gratifying revenge” on South Korea.

And for those believing that things couldn’t get worse, they couldn’t be more mistaken as new reports coming from Japanese military sources are stating that North Korea is preparing for new launches of its 1,300 kilometer (807 miles) intermediate range ballistic “Rodong” missile which Russian Space Forces experts state is able to “deploy and detonate” an atomic electromagnetic pulse (EMP) device, and which if detonated high in the atmosphere could effectively destroy the American economy for years, if not decades, to come.

JumpinJoe1010

05-01-2010, 08:01

So is there some speculation that this is not an accident but sabatage?

The thing that strikes me odd about this situation. One, the spark on an oil rig is very carefully controlled. Smoking is only allowed in places which will not ignite gas if present, and it is always assumed there will be gas. Welding would only be allowed if the well was closed off. Two, the blow out preventer was not activated. On land wells, most are hydraulic, but, with these being in the ocean, there should of been an automatic switch for closing off the output.

It is very curious because oil companies have been taking these measures to prevent this occasion, but, I may be wearing a tinfoil hat?:munchin

dr. mabuse

05-01-2010, 08:34

Ambush Master

05-01-2010, 08:48

JumpinJoe1010, correct if they're doing it right on the rig.

Interesting info for the pot bangers on oil leaks.

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=10388

Between their estimates and NOAA, 47 to 60 millions barrels of oil seep from the ocean floor naturally. 85% of human oil pollution in the ocean if from land runoff (~ 29 mil/year).

"...exploration and extraction are responsible for only 3 percent of the petroleum that enters the sea..." ( National Academy of Sciences, see link above ).

So in summary, if my rough calculations are o.k., if the high estimate of 5,000 gallons a day leakage is accurate, the Deepwater Horizon rig would have to leak nonstop for 9400 days or 25.75 years to equal 1 year of natural seepage from the earth.

Still a seriously huge mess.

Don't think it's "Gallons"!!! It's 5K BARRELS per day!! Which equals 210,000 Gallons!!!

Dad

05-01-2010, 09:29

LarryW

05-01-2010, 09:40

Considering IR, RU, and Chavez introduces a thought as to what happened to the oil rig. Such an incident would be hard to prove, would freeze US development of off shore oil drilling, and would allow the other suspects to capitalize on their own development plans.

15348

:eek:

Utah Bob

05-01-2010, 10:01

Thank God Napolitano is in charge. I so much better.:rolleyes:

JumpinJoe1010

05-01-2010, 10:08

BP does NOT have a good record for safety or compliance with regulations. Article from the Houston Chronicle today. Interesting fact, about 3500 working rigs in the gulf and I think around 70 more being drilled.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/deepwaterhorizon/6984598.html

This article is another attempt to cultivate the "Big Oil" propaganda.

"Although the cause of the explosion was under investigation, many of the more than two dozen lawsuits filed in the wake of the explosion claim it was caused when workers for oil services contractor Halliburton Inc. improperly capped the well -- a process known as cementing. Halliburton denied it."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/apr/30/document-bp-didnt-plan-major-accident/?page=2

Cementing is a process where the pump the solution down the pipe, then when it hits bottom, turns up to surround the casing set in the ground. Of all the practices in the industry, this service is fairly benign in relation to safety. Then the mentioning of caping a producing well is to close off the well with cement. With the well producing the huge oil slick, it is doubtful they were "capping" the well since this is generally done on wells that are dry. ;)

Dad

05-01-2010, 13:37

The Houston Chronicle certainly does not try to vilify "Big Oil" It will investigate companies like BP who can, through their irresponsible acts, bring retribution to all the responsible refiners and drillers. Nobody knows yet what caused it, but it is important to keep in mind BP's record. The NYT reported today that in 15 years this is the first spill of over a 1000 gallons in the Gulf. A WHOLE lot of people in the oil business find it not surprising that BP was involved.

echoes

05-01-2010, 13:46

BP does NOT have a good record for safety or compliance with regulations

sir,

May I ask, how many sources have led you to this conclusion? May I also inquire how many months and years you have personally tracked the environment related issues BP has had? May I also ask how long you have been interested/slash/ advocated issues of oil companies, and their effect on Our enviroment, economy, and world trade?

Am honestly curious sir.

Holly:munchin

Richard

05-01-2010, 13:51

May I ask, how many sources have led you to this conclusion?

BP is well known for its behavior here in Tejas...but let me help those who don't get any Texas newspapers...

http://www.hazards.org/bp/

Richard

echoes

05-01-2010, 15:05

BP is well known for its behavior here in Tejas...but let me help those who don't get any Texas newspapers...

http://www.hazards.org/bp/

Richard

Thank you Sir, for the link to "hazards." After checking out their website, the following information was made available to me from their main page:
(Very informative Sir.:))

http://www.hazards.org/abouthazards/index.htm

"About Hazards
36-40 pages quarterly. ISSN 0267 7296

Hazards is the only independent, union-friendly magazine to win major international awards. Workplace unions are your best hope for better, safer work - and Hazards provides the information and resources to make the union job easier. Hazards looks behind the company safety hype, and gives union answers to workplace problems. Using a global network of union safety correspondents, Hazards makes sure you have the best information available anywhere."
"Contact Hazards

Address Hazards, PO Box 4042, Sheffield, S8 2DG, England
Telephone 0114 201 4265 (UK) +44 114 201 4265 (world)
Subscription Jawad Qasrawi sub@hazards.org
Editorial Rory O'Neill editor@hazards.org
Web www.hazards.org"

"India States to ensure safety of plantation workers
Australia Everyday heroes pay the ultimate price when the siren stops
Australia Push for smoke ban at Crown Casino after worker gets cancer
Australia Union: NBN rollout is putting lives at risk
Global BWI and its affiliates mobilise in Geneva to say no to still more deaths on building sites
Turkey Union petition against new aviation regulations in Turkey
Australia Workplace bullying case 'worst ever seen'
Australia Union view of OHS harmonisation and data on the social cost of workplace safety
Australia Prominent unionist renews pledge on asbestos
Australia New Mesothelioma Registry and government answers asbestos questions
USA Roof Fall Traps Two Kentucky Coal Miners
USA Labor College Dedicates National Workers Memorial
Canada Pausing to remember the dead
Australia Canada exporting asbestos to third world, says union
USA Injured Pfizer Molecular Biologist Becky McClain's Workers Memorial Day speech4-28-10 In New Britain CT"

dr. mabuse

05-01-2010, 21:19

Dad

05-02-2010, 06:46

sir,

May I ask, how many sources have led you to this conclusion? May I also inquire how many months and years you have personally tracked the environment related issues BP has had? May I also ask how long you have been interested/slash/ advocated issues of oil companies, and their effect on Our enviroment, economy, and world trade?

Am honestly curious sir.

Holly:munchin

I live in Houston. Houston is the oil capital of the Western Hemisphere. How long have I tracked BP? There have been articles for at least the last 15 years. How many people do I know in the oil business? Probably 25-30 friends and acquaintances. My next door neighbor works off shore. I was with a Shell employee Fri night who has worked all over the world and currently has responsibilities in the Gulf. I have a friend who is VP of operations for a small independent E and P company. I have a friend who is an engineer with Chevron. Halliburton, Wild Well Control, Enbridge,the list goes on. Over the years conversations occur when BP kills someone. The comments are ALWAYS negative about BP's safety record. My opinions come from listening to educated people within the industry whom I respect over a period of 20 plus years plus the many article concerning BP which have appeared in the Chronicle. Houston lives on oil. The Chronicle supports that industry.

Richard

05-02-2010, 07:01

Houston lives on oil. The Chronicle supports that industry.

And so does Dallas (Exxon-Mobil, Hunt, etc) and the Dallas Morning News. ;)

Richard

nmap

05-02-2010, 07:34

Some rumors to add fuel to the fire (pun intended)

LINK (http://blog.al.com/live/2010/04/deepwater_horizon_secret_memo.html)

Leaked report: Government fears Deepwater Horizon well could become unchecked gusher

'The following is not public' document states

"The following is not public," reads the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Emergency Response document dated April 28. "Two additional release points were found today in the tangled riser. If the riser pipe deteriorates further, the flow could become unchecked resulting in a release volume an order of magnitude higher than previously thought."

Asked Friday to comment on the document, NOAA spokesman Scott Smullen said that the additional leaks described were reported to the public late Wednesday night. Regarding the possibility of the spill becoming an order of magnitude larger, Smullen said, "I'm letting the document you have speak for itself."

In scientific circles, an order of magnitude means something is 10 times larger. In this case, an order of magnitude higher would mean the volume of oil coming from the well could be 10 times higher than the 5,000 barrels a day coming out now. That would mean 50,000 barrels a day, or 2.1 million gallons a day. It appears the new leaks mentioned in the Wednesday release are the leaks reported to the public late Wednesday night.

"There is no official change in the volume released but the USCG is no longer stating that the release rate is 1,000 barrels a day," continues the document, referred to as report No. 12. "Instead they are saying that they are preparing for a worst-case release and bringing all assets to bear."

The emergency document also states that the spill has grown in size so quickly that only 1 to 2 percent of it has been sprayed with dispersants.

The Press-Register obtained the emergency report from a government official. The White House, NOAA, the Coast Guard and BP Plc did not immediately return calls for comment made early this morning.

The worst-case scenario for the broken and leaking well pouring oil into the Gulf of Mexico would be the loss of the wellhead and kinked piping currently restricting the flow to 5,000 barrels -- or 210,000 gallons -- per day.

If the wellhead is lost, oil could leave the well at a much greater rate.

"Typically, a very good well in the Gulf can produce 30,000 barrels a day, but that's under control. I have no idea what an uncontrolled release could be," said Stephen Sears, chairman of the petroleum engineering department at Louisiana State University.

On Thursday, federal officials said they were preparing for the worst-case scenario but didn't elaborate.

Kinks in the piping created as the rig sank to the seafloor may be all that is preventing the Deepwater Horizon well from releasing its maximum flow. BP is now drilling a relief well as the ultimate fix. The company said Thursday that process would take up to 3 months.

"I'm not sure what's happening down there right now. I have heard there is a kink in what's called the riser. The riser is a long pipe that connects the wellhead to the rig. I really don't know if that kink is a big restriction. Is that really a big restriction? There could be another restriction further down," said LSU's Sears.

"An analogy would be if you have a kink in a garden hose. You suspect that kink is restricting the flow, but there could be another restriction or kink somewhere else closer to the faucet.

BP Plc executive Doug Suttles said Thursday the company was worried about "erosion" of the pipe at the wellhead.

Sand is an integral part of the formations that hold oil under the Gulf. That sand, carried in the oil as it shoots through the piping, is blamed for the ongoing erosion described by BP.

"The pipe could disintegrate. You've got sand getting into the pipe, it's eroding the pipe all the time, like a sandblaster," said Ron Gouget, a former oil spill response coordinator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

"When the oil is removed normally, it comes out at a controlled rate. You can still have abrasive particles in that. Well, now, at this well, its coming out at fairly high velocity," Gouget continued. "Any erosive grains are abrading the inside of the pipe and all the steel that comes in contact with the liquid. It's essentially sanding away the pipe."

Gouget said the loss of a wellhead is totally unprecedented.

"How bad it could get from that, you will have a tremendous volume of oil that is going to be offgassing on the coast. Depending on how much wind is there, and how those gases build up, that's a significant health concern," he said.

The formation that was being drilled by Deepwater Horizon when it exploded and sank last week is reported to have tens of millions of barrels of oil. A barrel contains 42 gallons.

Smullen described the NOAA document as a regular daily briefing. "Your report makes it sound pretty dire. It's a scenario," he said, "It's a regular daily briefing sheet that considered different scenarios much like any first responder would."

Buffalobob

05-02-2010, 07:40

With oil companies and large amounts of oil, everything is always fine and dandy until reality sets in. The public is always assured that the containment and prevention measures are more than adequate until the facts determine that they were not. Then you see truck loads of high priced lawyers.

This is one of the largest spills I ever had to deal with.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ENR
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1997 (202) 514-2008
TDD (202) 514-1888

COLONIAL PIPELINE COMPANY AGREES TO UP TO $4 MILLION SETTLEMENT
FOR 1993 OIL SPILL THAT DESPOILED SUGARLAND RUN
AND THE POTOMAC RIVER

Washington, D.C. - Colonial Pipeline Company today agreed to
pay a $1.5 million fine and spend up to 2.5$ million to restore
natural resources in and around Sugarland Run and the Potomac
River, which were damaged by a massive 1993 oil spill from the
company's pipeline in Reston, Virginia.

The proposed settlement was lodged today by the Justice
Department in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, on behalf of the
U.S. Department of the Interior, the Environmental Protection
Agency, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.

The spill, which occurred in March 1993, released about
407,000 gallons of diesel fuel into Sugarland Run. Despite
emergency efforts to contain the spill, about 48 square miles of
surface water, shorelines, islands and wetlands were contaminated.
The entire length of Sugarland Run was severely contaminated,
threatening water supplies in Virginia, Maryland and the District
of Columbia. The oil flowed down Sugarland Run and into the
Potomac River, creating oil slicks on the river.

"The Colonial pipeline spill was a tragedy, but today's
settlement will heal the environmental damage that was inflicted
upon the waters of the Potomac," said Lois Schiffer, Assistant
Attorney General in charge of the Justice Department's Environment
and Natural Resources Division. "The environmental restoration and
enhancement projects that Colonial will perform will help protect
the natural integrity of the waters in and around our nation's
capital."

"The fine is a reminder to Colonial and others that polluters
will pay a price over and above just restoring what they have
damaged," said Steve Herman, EPA's Assistant Administrator for
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. "The environmental
improvement projects that Colonial must perform will be good news
to the citizens of Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia who use
the Potomac River and its adjacent lands for boating, hiking and
other forms of recreation."

"Pollution freely crosses state boundaries, and has no regard
for bureaucratic structures," said EPA Regional Administrator W.
Michael McCabe. "Today's settlement shows the benefits of federal
and state cooperation in enforcing our nation's environmental
laws."

The spill, which occurred during the height of the white perch
spawning run in these waters, killed or injured fish, birds,
reptiles, and mammals. Wildlife also were injured by the damage
the spill inflicted upon their environment and food sources. Some
federal park areas had to be closed to the public because of the
spill.

Under the proposed settlement, Colonial will pay a $1.5
million civil penalty, to be split evenly between the federal
government and Virginia, and reimburse the federal government,
Virginia and the District of Columbia for the costs of assessing
damages to natural resources. Also, Colonial will pay $253,314 to
help fund the construction of a fish passage over Little Falls Dam
on the Potomac River that will be built by the District of
Columbia, Maryland, and the Army Corps of Engineers.

The proposed settlement also requires Colonial to restore or
rehabilitate natural resources in and around Sugarland Run and the
Potomac River that were damaged by the spill, and pay the
monitoring and oversight costs of these projects. These projects
include restoring wetlands, aquatic habitats and enhancing forests.
They are designed to compensate the public for depriving it of the
use and enjoyment of parklands affected by the spill. Other
projects the company will perform include constructing a bike path
near Herndon linking the Washington and Old Dominion Trail to the
Fairfax County Sugarland Run trail, a wildlife observation area at
Dyke Marsh Wildlife Preserve near Belle Haven Marina in the George
Washington Memorial Parkway, and storm water management controls in
the Sugarland Run area.

The settlement is the result of more than four years of
studies and negotiations among representatives of Colonial, the
Interior Department, the Environmental Protection Agency, Virginia,
and the District of Columbia.

The settlement will be published in the Federal Register and
is subject to a thirty day public comment period.
###

You will notice that what I negotiated for DC was the fish ladder at Little Falls Dam. Much like the Gulf spill which occured during the most sensitive time of the year, this one occurred at the peak of the white perch spawning run.

Pete

05-02-2010, 07:49

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/view.php?id=43862

echoes

05-02-2010, 09:04

I live in Houston. Houston is the oil capital of the Western Hemisphere. How long have I tracked BP? There have been articles for at least the last 15 years. How many people do I know in the oil business? Probably 25-30 friends and acquaintances. My next door neighbor works off shore. I was with a Shell employee Fri night who has worked all over the world and currently has responsibilities in the Gulf. I have a friend who is VP of operations for a small independent E and P company. I have a friend who is an engineer with Chevron. Halliburton, Wild Well Control, Enbridge,the list goes on. Over the years conversations occur when BP kills someone. The comments are ALWAYS negative about BP's safety record. My opinions come from listening to educated people within the industry whom I respect over a period of 20 plus years plus the many article concerning BP which have appeared in the Chronicle. Houston lives on oil. The Chronicle supports that industry.

Sir,

Thank you for responding to my inquiry, as I am always trying to learn, and did not intend to come across as antagonistic. My Dad worked for BP/ Amaco oil for thirty years, before retiring. This company has been a part of my life since I can remember, and this spill is causing some rumbling around my AO.

Am hopeful that all oil companies learn from this catastrophe, and strive for tighter controls of their horses in the future, for the safety of everyone on this planet.

Holly:munchin

bandycpa

05-03-2010, 10:06

Interesting to see who is offering help.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/DAH336324.htm

Iran offers help in fighting Gulf of Mexico oil leak
03 May 2010 10:56:04 GMT
Source: Reuters
TEHRAN, May 3 (Reuters) - An Iranian state company offered on Monday to help in preventing a vast oil slick that is moving towards the coast of the United States, the Islamic Republic's old foe, from causing an "ecological disaster".

Haidar Bahmani, managing director of the National Iranian Drilling Company, said his firm was ready to provide assistance in fighting the spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the Oil Ministry's website SHANA reported.

Since the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and sank last month, claiming 11 lives, hundreds of thousands of gallons of crude have been gushing into the Gulf, threatening wildlife and beaches.

"Our oil industry experts can curb the rig leakage in the Gulf of Mexico and prevent an ecological disaster in that part of the world," Bahmani said, without giving further details.

Iran, the world's fifth-largest crude exporter, is under U.S. and U.N. sanctions for nuclear work the West suspects is aimed at making bombs. Tehran rejects the charge. (Reporting by Hossein Jaseb and Ramin Mostafavi; Writing by Fredrik Dahl; Editing by Samia Nakhoul)

Richard

05-03-2010, 10:34

Iran offers help in fighting Gulf of Mexico oil leak

Might be fun to publicly call their bluff...;)

Richard's $.02 :munchin

bandycpa

05-03-2010, 12:43

Might be fun to publicly call their bluff...;)

Richard's $.02 :munchin

I agree.

I also can see the current administration using this as an opportunity to try to create relationship with Iran.

greenberetTFS

05-03-2010, 13:30

They are predicting the worst case situation here on the gulf coast and its pretty scary........It will not only knock out the sea life business for this year but also several years to come........ The wild life animals will take such a hit that their afraid they to won't come back for several years........ The tourist business will also suffer,no one wants to come to look at miles of white sandy beaches covered in black smelling oil.......This to a region that was just starting to recover for the devastation of Katrina.......Are these people really worried and afraid,you bet they are.......Jobs which were starting to pick up after these past few years will once again disappear......:(:(:(

Big Teddy :munchin

The Reaper

05-03-2010, 14:33

Utah Bob

05-03-2010, 14:38

Iran offers help in fighting Gulf of Mexico oil leak

Good idea. Stuff the hole full of Revolutionary Guards.

ZonieDiver

05-03-2010, 14:42

Looks as if the Feds might "fund" 6,000 National Guard troops to "patrol the borders" of LA, AL, MS, and FL for "illegal immigrant oil" - yet, Napolitano won't even consider funding 50 NG for the AZ border.

I guess clams count more than Arizona citizens!

bandycpa

05-03-2010, 14:43

What I said about our administration using this as a springboard for relationship with Iran? Never mind. Thankfully I was wrong.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N03207374.htm

Iran: US should be punished for nuclear "threats"
03 May 2010 16:36:47 GMT
Source: Reuters
UNITED NATIONS, May 3 (Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday called for states that threaten to use atomic weapons to be punished, a clear reference to a new U.S. nuclear strategy released last month.

Speaking at a meeting of the 189 signatories of the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), he urged "considering any threat to use nuclear weapons or attack against peaceful nuclear facilities as a breach of international peace and security."

The delegations of the United States, Britain and France all walked out of the U.N. General Assembly chamber during the Iranian president's speech. (Reporting by Louis Charbonneau; Editing by Patrick Worsnip

echoes

05-03-2010, 16:47

Teddy:

Consider the source of these reports.

IIRC, Prince William Sound is in pretty good shape these days.

TR

Agree, however, most are not as forward thinking...hence, BP stock, after decades of holding, was all sold today.

Here we go.:confused::(

Holly

Sigaba

05-03-2010, 17:05

From the Christian Science Monitor on-line edition <<LINK (http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/content/view/print/298781)>>.Obama administration pulls no punches on BP oil spill, N.Y.C. bomb plot

The Obama administration is carefully choosing its words about the BP oil spill and failed N.Y.C. bomb plot, as it tries to calibrate its public posture on events.

By Linda Feldmann, Staff writer
posted May 3, 2010 at 5:57 pm EDT
Washington —

The Obama administration ratcheted up its rhetoric Monday on the unfolding environmental and economic disaster in the Gulf of Mexico as well as the failed N.Y.C. bomb plot.

On the massive BP oil spill, triggered by an oil-rig explosion nearly two weeks ago, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs endorsed the language of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who had used graphic tough-guy imagery in talk-show appearances Sunday. “Our job basically is to keep the boot on the neck of British Petroleum,” Secretary Salazar said, citing the company that leased the rig.

President Obama also dramatically ramped up his rhetoric and personal oversight on the disaster Sunday, with a hastily arranged visit to the Gulf Coast and language aimed at showing he “gets it” about the magnitude of the crisis. Mr. Obama called the spill “a massive and potentially unprecedented disaster.”

On Monday, Mr. Gibbs also described the foiled attack Saturday in Times Square as terrorism – after other administration officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, had declined to make that assertion. By Monday afternoon, news reports cited unnamed administration officials as saying that it increasingly appears that the failed bombing was a multiperson plot with international ties.

At his briefing, Gibbs did not equivocate. “I would say that that was intended to terrorize, absolutely,” he said. “Whoever did that would be categorized as a terrorist.”

The careful parsing of language and deploying of key words reflect an administration trying to calibrate its public posture on events – or, in the Goldilocks analogy, not too hot, not too cold, but just right. Whether they have succeeded on the public-relations front remains to be seen, as major polls have yet to show public perceptions of these two events.

Some news media promoted a hurricane Katrina analogy on the Gulf oil disaster, suggesting that the Obama administration was underreacting. The administration vehemently objects to that suggestion, saying they’ve had “all hands on deck” from Day 1. Obama’s trip to Louisiana on Sunday appeared aimed in part to put any image of disengagement to rest.

Indeed, Obama did not just fly over the affected area, as President Bush did in the Gulf region several days after Katrina struck in 2005. Obama landed in Louisiana, got a firsthand look at the response, and was briefed on the ground by officials addressing the disaster. The image of Obama delivering a statement in the driving rain – no umbrella-toting aides in sight – added to the sense that he was engaged in his environment and unprotected from adversity.

Still, if the Gulf of Mexico oil slick does rise to the level of catastrophe, the history books may not be kind to Obama. On Saturday, he opted to continue with his planned schedule – a trip to Ann Arbor, Mich., to deliver the commencement address at the University of Michigan, followed by his speech to the ultimate inside-the-Beltway schmoozathon, the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner.

The White House spent Friday insisting that Obama was planning a quiet Sunday in Washington, then changed gears Saturday morning and announced the Gulf trip for Sunday. By then, it would have been too late to plan a presidential trip that day, with all the logistical and security issues involved.

As for the failed terror attack in Times Square, a big consolation for Obama is that the SUV bomb did not fully detonate, and no one was injured. The impact on the administration’s image in the public eye is likely to be minimal. The situation in the Gulf of Mexico, and along the coastline, however, appears to be worsening by the day. The coast’s ecology and seafood industry are on the line. Even if the oil-rig explosion and massive leak are not the administration’s fault, any catastrophe takes a toll on the administration in office.

For Obama, “it’s a no-win situation,” says Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, speaking of the Gulf oil slick. Obama doesn’t want to look like Chicken Little, racing to the scene of every brewing potential disaster, he says. But “if he goes late, even if for a good reason, he winds up getting criticized.”I hope that the president understands that public posturing is not a sustainable substitute for leadership.

greenberetTFS

05-03-2010, 19:54

Teddy:

Consider the source of these reports.

IIRC, Prince William Sound is in pretty good shape these days.

TR

I get your point TR,but the info I was quoting from is sundays (Biloxi-Gulfport) Sun Herald regarding the sea and animal situation......... Lets hope their wrong!

Big Teddy:munchin

incarcerated

05-04-2010, 01:47

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/03/MN1Q1D8SRP.DTL

Schwarzenegger drops offshore drilling project

Marisa Lagos, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
(05-03) 16:39 PDT Sacramento -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday withdrew his support for a plan he championed to allow new offshore oil drilling off Santa Barbara County, citing the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Schwarzenegger, whose administration as recently as Friday defended the proposed Tranquillon Ridge offshore drilling project, said images of the spill in the gulf changed his mind.

"All of you have seen, when you turn on the television, the devastation in the gulf, and I'm sure that they also were assured that it was safe to drill," he said at a news conference Monday. "I see on TV the birds drenched in oil, the fishermen out of work, the massive oil spill and oil slick destroying our precious ecosystem. That will not happen here in California, and this is why I am withdrawing my support for the T-Ridge project."

His new stance all but guarantees the demise of the proposal by a Texas oil company to allow the first new drilling in state waters in 40 years....

Buffalobob

05-04-2010, 19:00

Exxon Valdez and Prince William Sound

Every once in a while the scientist go back in and survey the place. Its still a mess and seeping oil. The fishery has never recovered.

21 Years Later, Exxon Valdez Scars Still Healing Oil Spill Devastated Alaskan Fishing Community as Remaining Oil Still Impacting Wildlife By Ben Tracy
o As the clean-up efforts of the massive British Petroleum oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico continue, CBS News' Ben Tracy returns to the site of another infamous man-made disaster in Alaska.
(CBS) Not even the stunning beauty of Alaska's Prince William Sound can hide the deep and lasting scar just beneath the surface.

"There are some folks I cannot get to talk to anybody about the spill because it brings back nightmares," said Patience Andersen Faulkner, a Cordova resident.

"The Spill" began at 12:04 a.m. on March 24, 1989 when the Exxon Valdez ran aground on Bligh Reef, reports CBS News correspondent Ben Tracy.

"Evidently leaking some oil and we're going be here for awhile," Exxon Valdez Captain Joseph Hazelwood said during the spill.

Over the course of 56 days, the black cloud spread damaging 1,300 miles of shoreline. Ten thousand people helped clean it up. It took more than four summers and cost Exxon $2.1 billion.

Faulkner lives in Cordova, the largest fishing town on the sound. Twenty-one years later, things look pretty normal.

"Well it does look nice and normal but we don't have any herring," Faulkner said.

That's why Mark King's boat is parked in a warehouse. The former herring fisherman used to pull in up to $150,000 per year. Now he makes about $50,000 fishing salmon. Herring basically disappeared within three years of the spill.

King's hope was to pass on his business to his kids.

"They're gone," King said. "They aren't involved in fishing. They didn't have the opportunities I had growing up here."

While herring populations are still devastated, other species such as salmon and bald eagles have recovered. But perhaps the most remarkable is what never went away - and you can find it just a short plane ride from Cordova. On the shoreline, all you have to do is move a couple of rocks and you strike oil - Exxon Valdez oil - 21 years later.

In fact, over 21,000 gallons of oil are left from the spill. It is naturally decreasing at a rate of 0 to 4 percent per year. So it could take decades - or even centuries - before it's all gone.

Researcher David Janka said that two decades later, the oil is still a threat.

"There are salmon streams nearby, there are birds that utilize these beaches," Janka said.

Along with the oil, a bitterness remains. A jury awarded fisherman and other residents along the sound $5 billion, but Exxon appealed and only had to pay $507 million, while the community has paid a heavy price.

"We've had tons of divorces, tons of domestic violence, alcohol abuse, and suicides," Faulkner said.
So prevention is now the focus. From the air you can see barges stationed on the water with equipment to handle a spill and oil spill drills are held regularly.

"If there was another spill like here like the one that we had, it would be devastating," said Mike Collins, a local pilot. "And there is that constant fear around people that live here."

For the infamous tanker, by law it can never enter these Alaskan waters ever again.

Richard

05-04-2010, 20:14

For the infamous tanker, by law it can never enter these Alaskan waters ever again.

By law - I thought it wasn't supposed to be there in the first place. ;)

And so it goes...

Richard's jaded $.02 :munchin

Buffalobob

05-05-2010, 05:03

Given the depth of the water where the spill is and the technology available to study harmful effects at those depths and the gaps in scientific knowledge, it is doubtful that the true extent of the damage will ever be known. Once you couple in the existing effects of nutrient enrichment from the uncontrolled farm runoff in the Mississippi River basin which creates a large area of hypoxia to the west of the spill, you will have an impossible task of determining which source of pollution is causing what effects over the next couple of decades.

Here is a short fact sheet on the existing hypoxia problem.

http://www.csc.noaa.gov/products/gulfmex/html/rabalais.htm

and another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_zone_%28ecology%29

When I first began working, I was with the Mobile District Corps of Engineers and our jurisdiction ran from the Pearl River over to the Aplachicola.

Defender968

05-05-2010, 06:30

I get your point TR,but the info I was quoting from is sundays (Biloxi-Gulfport) Sun Herald regarding the sea and animal situation......... Lets hope their wrong!

Big Teddy:munchin

GreenberetTFS, for what it's worth my wife is a marine biologist and is tracking this disaster very closely, and her assessment was consistent with what you're hearing/reading. We were talking about this last night and there are serious and very long term implications to this spill (especially considering it may end up being much worse in terms of amount of oil than the Valdez), and it's already effecting the price of seafood. (the chef's she works will have already seen a 30% increase in the price of many products) She thinks the price increases are because of speculation currently, but that in the long term there will likely be significant population issues for gulf species, particularly because o the time of year it is. Right now is a critical time in the reproductive cycle of many species.

Buffalobob

05-05-2010, 09:15

for what it's worth my wife is a marine biologist

My sympathies if she works for SC DNR at Hamilton Ridge WMA. :D

DJ Urbanovsky

05-05-2010, 11:02

Sigh... This is what happens when people listen to actors over scientists.

A study, out of University of California, SANTA BARBARA no less!

http://www.instadv.ucsb.edu/pa/display.aspx?pkey=412

Again, actors over scientists. Me, I'll stick with the scientists.

In the Gulf of Mexico alone, it's been estimated that there's about 500,000 barrels worth of seepage a year occurring naturally. That doesn't include any of the associated gasses, which seep at a much greater rate.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/03/MN1Q1D8SRP.DTL

Schwarzenegger drops offshore drilling project

Marisa Lagos, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
(05-03) 16:39 PDT Sacramento -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday withdrew his support for a plan he championed to allow new offshore oil drilling off Santa Barbara County, citing the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Schwarzenegger, whose administration as recently as Friday defended the proposed Tranquillon Ridge offshore drilling project, said images of the spill in the gulf changed his mind.

"All of you have seen, when you turn on the television, the devastation in the gulf, and I'm sure that they also were assured that it was safe to drill," he said at a news conference Monday. "I see on TV the birds drenched in oil, the fishermen out of work, the massive oil spill and oil slick destroying our precious ecosystem. That will not happen here in California, and this is why I am withdrawing my support for the T-Ridge project."

His new stance all but guarantees the demise of the proposal by a Texas oil company to allow the first new drilling in state waters in 40 years....

6.8SPC_DUMP

05-06-2010, 17:37

A $10 billion limit for liabilities on BP looks like a deal they will love.

NASA Satellite Pictures of Gulf Oil Spill's Evolution (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/photogalleries/100504-gulf-of-mexico-oil-spill-environment-nation-pictures/#gulf-oil-spill-satellite-picture-timeline-april-21_19871_600x450.jpg)

Sorry I missed Pete's NASA picture link and it's better:Link (http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/event.php?id=43733)

Richard

05-11-2010, 08:17

A focal shift to a tragic situation...as the real disaster continues to spread unabated... :mad:

And so it goes...;)

Richard's $.02 :munchin

GT Kevin

05-12-2010, 11:29

greenberetTFS

05-12-2010, 11:54

A focal shift to a tragic situation...as the real disaster continues to spread unabated...

And so it goes...;)

Richard's $.02 :munchin

Richard,

I believe you know that I live 49 miles due north of New Orleans and right now all the sea food restaurants within a 50 mile radius of where I live have priced their food 50% higher............:(

Big Teddy :munchin

Dad

05-12-2010, 16:24

Big Teddy
I am in the Covington area about once a month. So my expenses are going up? One of the great experiences in South La/Ms is the seafood. What a shame

Utah Bob

05-12-2010, 23:14

Richard,

I believe you know that I live 49 miles due north of New Orleans and right now all the sea food restaurants within a 50 mile radius of where I live have priced their food 50% higher............:(

Big Teddy :munchin

At least they still have seafood.
So far.

Guy

05-12-2010, 23:39

This link was sent to me earlier today by my father. It shows an easy straight forward solution to the clean up problem. This may also belong under the Redneck/SF Engineering thread but as it is topic specific I will post it here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5SxX2EntEo

This causes me to ask why this hasn’t been done yet.

My father offered the answer, it doesn't cost enough, it's too simple, and it would solve the problem too quickly.They're NOT going to use it yet because, some fucker with a BA, MA, and/or PHD did NOT process it thru his or her critical thinking matrix.

Through in that, know one has a grasp of "profit" margin because a "cost" analysis has NOT been studied and submitted through the various government committees (bureaucracy's) too be approved.

God forbid IF you common sense too solve a major problem; that's like wearing an American flag on Cinco de Mayo.:D

Stay safe.

Last hard class

05-13-2010, 21:23

BP lied about the "seepage". Who would have guessed?

At least 50,000 barrels per day

BP scientist's claimed 5,000 barrels per day.

Shit, shinola. Don't trust whitey.

Paslode

05-13-2010, 21:48

BP lied about the "seepage". Who would have guessed?

At least 50,000 barrels per day

BP scientist's claimed 5,000 barrels per day.

Maybe, whatever it is someone will use it to serve their agenda.

Defender968

05-14-2010, 11:23

BP lied about the "seepage". Who would have guessed?

At least 50,000 barrels per day

BP scientist's claimed 5,000 barrels per day.

Shit, shinola. Don't trust whitey.

I'm not siding with BP by any stretch, but as it was explained to me by my better half....a large part of the issue here is they (whoever is in charge of the clean up) are using dispersants at the well head a mile underwater, these chemicals do exactly what the name implies they disperses the oil flow to allow for better dilution, the down side of doing that is that the currents underwater are vastly different than those on the surface making it very hard to track. On top of the currents at depth you also have to remember that this was not a producing well, so no one really has any idea as to what the actual flow rate is, thus making it difficult if not impossible to accurately gauge how much oil is flowing out....In the circle my wife runs in they believe this may very well already be much, much bigger than the Exon Valdez...but currently it's just not possible to accurately judge. And of course a company will release info....or error on the side that paints them in the best light possible when ever possible.

Just the wife’s and my .04

greenberetTFS

05-14-2010, 13:08

Dumb ass Lieutenant Governor of Mississippi yesterday said it's not the smell of the oil spill you're smelling but people using their lawn mowers!..... :rolleyes: Today he corrected himself saying that he meant it wasn't gasoline they were smelling........:eek:

Big Teddy :munchin

Last hard class

05-15-2010, 20:41

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37171468/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times

Not Looking good

I hope the tube works!

Utah Bob

05-15-2010, 21:19

This is going to very bad for a long time.

greenberetTFS

05-16-2010, 15:02

Heard they PLUGED the hole and are now pumping it up to the ship they've set up.......:confused:

Big Teddy :munchin

incarcerated

06-12-2010, 12:54

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gWex3tV4QpJTdP2ea1byEXbTTQrQD9G9SO501

Obama tells Britain no hard feelings over spill

By JILL LAWLESS (AP) – 48 minutes ago
LONDON — President Barack Obama reassured Prime Minister David Cameron Saturday that his frustration over the mammoth oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is not an attack on Britain, Cameron's office said, as the two leaders tried to soothe trans-Atlantic tensions over the disaster....

greenberetTFS

06-12-2010, 15:48

Big O's problem is really with the BP's stockholders..........:rolleyes: They're pissed because their stock in down almost 50% and that's their retirement money.......:eek:
It's sad but there is little we can do about it,BP's got to bite the bullet..........:(

Big Teddy :munchin

Surf n Turf

06-12-2010, 15:48

A focal shift to a tragic situation...as the real disaster continues to spread unabated... :mad:

And so it goes...;)

Richard's $.02 :munchin

Richard,
Your chart was extremely incisive.
While I know the Oil in the gulf is a generational disaster, I also notice that he has again had the opportunity to “change the subject”.
Not a conspiracy nut --- just sayin :munchin
SnT

Buffalobob

06-13-2010, 05:22

I mentioned it before but it bears repeating being as it is now confirmed by several universities that you have underwater plumes of oil in several locations. These plumes are not gooey gummy oil but are low concentrations spread over wide areas in the water column. The ability of scientist to determine sub-lethal effects from these plums is going to be very poor. And so far BP is denying their existence by carefully phrased statements. Thus they do not have to expend more resources to document the effects of these plumes and then have to pay damages for them. The government is not forcing that issue because they are trying to focus the efforts of BP on the areas that the public can see such as the marshes and beaches.

The oil companies will always try to delay confirming additional damage with the thought that maybe it will disappear or go away so that tests will be negative and then it becomes a legal word game for lawyers and is "negotiated".

6.8SPC_DUMP

06-19-2010, 19:04

The 1st relief well was started May 2nd and is drilled to 16K ft. The second was started May 16th and is 10K ft down. The planned intercept depth is 18Kft.

BP intends to drill two wells designed to intersect the original wellbore above the oil reservoir. This will allow heavy fluid to be pumped into the well which will stop the flow of oil from the reservoir. Cement will then be pumped down to permanently seal the well.
BP relief well graphic and video: Link (http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9033657&contentId=7061734)

BP press release updates: Link (http://www.bp.com/extendedsectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=40&contentId=7061813)

Looks like great news. With 24 hour MSM coverage on the spill has anyone seen this reported on?

Paslode

06-19-2010, 19:11

That is the first I have heard of it and it sounds promising.

Dad

06-20-2010, 07:03

The 1st relief well was started May 2nd and is drilled to 16K ft. The second was started May 16th and is 10K ft down. The planned intercept depth is 18Kft.

BP relief well graphic and video: Link (http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9033657&contentId=7061734)

BP press release updates: Link (http://www.bp.com/extendedsectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=40&contentId=7061813)

Looks like great news. With 24 hour MSM coverage on the spill has anyone seen this reported on?

This is discussed pretty regularly here. The wells are ahead of schedule(now) but it is still, as of a couple of days ago, an end of July completion date. Interesting article a couple of weeks ago in the Houston Chronicle. In X time period, "willful safety violations:
Exxon 1
Chevron, Shell 7
BP 460
(These numbers are from memory so BP's number may be off a small number) Ran into my neighbor a few nights ago. His rig was 20 mile from the leak. It was shut down and moved to Mexico. His description of BP: "Everyone in the oil business knows BP is a slime ball operation. But nobody ever did a God Damn thing about it" His words. He is doubly pissed.

Utah Bob

06-21-2010, 22:16

Well.... maybe it'll be another 30 years or so before there's another one.:eek:
http://www.wimp.com/oilspills

incarcerated

06-27-2010, 03:18

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-25/bp-bankruptcy-in-u-k-is-obama-s-worst-nightmare-caroline-baum.html

BP Bankruptcy in U.K. Is Obama’s Worst Nightmare: Caroline Baum

By Caroline Baum - Jun 24, 2010
Bloomberg Opinion
It would be a “horror,” a “disaster,” according to lawyer Kenneth Feinberg, who was appointed by President Barack Obama to administer BP Plc’s $20 billion compensation fund for victims of the Gulf oil spill. “That is not an option.”

Feinberg was talking about a bankruptcy filing by BP in a Fox News interview.

“Bankruptcy absolutely is an option, and the U.S. needs to recognize that,” said Peter Kaufman, president and head of restructuring and distressed M&A at the Gordian Group, an investment bank in New York.

Which is it?

No company has the ability to pay unlimited claims, even one that earned $16.6 billion last year and more than $20 billion annually in the prior four years. At the same time, no one has any idea how big BP’s damages will be. That hasn’t stopped Wall Street analysts from churning out estimates that move up in lockstep with the number of barrels thought to be leaking from the collapsed well each day.

How many companies are willing to face unlimited civil claims, the prospect of criminal prosecution and daily excoriation by the U.S. government before going on the offensive?

That’s Kaufman’s argument for why BP should consider filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. (And the U.S. should consider the implications of such an outcome.) In the U.S., unlike in most countries, “you can file for bankruptcy even if you are perfectly solvent,” said Jay Westbrook, professor of law and a bankruptcy specialist at the University of Texas, Austin.

Bigger Boot

Don’t try pulling a fast one to avoid paying the bills. The courts have developed a “doctrine of good faith,” Westbrook said. “If you are abusing the bankruptcy code, they will throw it out.”

If BP’s damages, or even “reasonably probable damages,” exceed the value of the company, or if it faces a liquidity crisis, bankruptcy would be a way to organize the claims into a “sensible, orderly, fair process,” he said.

U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar may think keeping the “boot on the neck” of BP is a good strategy, but he should understand that BP has a stiff boot of its own. What if the company were to utilize its considerable financial and legal resources and the insolvency laws of the U.S. or Great Britain “to make it extremely difficult and time consuming for legitimate claimants to get succor?” Kaufman said. (It wouldn’t be a first for an oil company.)

‘Egregious Willful’

BP is already the most reviled company in America. Two of its refineries accounted for 97 percent of the violations (a total of 862, of which 760 were “egregious willful”) in the refining industry over the last three years, according to the Center for Public Integrity. It holds the record for the largest fine ($87 million) ever levied by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Its public relations couldn’t be worse if it disbanded its PR department.

In the court of public opinion, BP is already about as low as it can go. So why shouldn’t it try, as a matter of business, to limit its liability?

The government isn’t the only one with leverage. If BP were to file for bankruptcy, who would compensate Gulf residents whose livelihood and sole means of support were destroyed by the spill?

The U.S. taxpayer. To avoid being seen as someone who bailed out Wall Street and abandoned Main Street, Obama would probably ask Congress for money to compensate victims and line up to be paid with other creditors.

No Exit

What if BP chose to file for bankruptcy in the U.K., something that’s well within its rights? No doubt London courts would deliver an outcome more favorable to BP. And they’re apt to be less generous when it comes to paying damages to folks three times removed from directly affected claimants.

No wonder Congress wants to shut down that option. House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, Democrat of Michigan, introduced a bill that would, among other things, prevent BP from seeking bankruptcy protection in the U.K.

If the goal is to get relief as quickly as possible to the legitimate victims of the oil spill, then using BP as a pinata isn’t a great idea, Kaufman said. (Nor was sending Attorney General Eric Holder to New Orleans to threaten BP with criminal prosecution a way to foster an environment of cooperation on the clean-up.)

No one knows whether BP agreed in writing to the $20 billion escrow fund or to Feinberg’s power of attorney. Jon Pack, a London-based BP spokesman, couldn’t comment.

Tilting at Windmills

BP has huge assets and tremendous earning capability, at least until we figure out how to power our cars with wind. While Kaufman is right in theory that BP should consider the bankruptcy option, in practice it would make life hard for the company.

Why? Energy is already a highly regulated industry -- at least that’s what everyone says. And it’s bound to become more highly regulated following the BP spill.

The next time BP applied for a drilling permit, it might find that regulators had found religion. While a company can’t be denied a permit solely on account of bankruptcy, according to Westbrook, I bet regulators could find enough “egregious willful” violations to prevent BP from expanding its U.S. business.

(Caroline Baum, author of “Just What I Said,” is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.)

Dad

06-27-2010, 07:34

A customer from Metairie sent me this. Whether or not one agrees with everything she says, there are some valid issues. She is living it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkYJDI8pK9Y&feature=player_embedded

Richard

06-28-2010, 07:26

And so it goes...:(

Richard :munchin

Boat captain, despondent over spill, commits suicide
LATimes, 23 June 2010

William Allen Kruse, 55, a charter boat captain recently hired by BP as a vessel of opportunity out of Gulf Shores, Ala., died Wednesday morning before 7:30 a.m. of a gunshot to the head, likely self-inflicted, authorities said.

"He had been quite despondent about the oil crisis," said Stan Vinson, coroner for Baldwin County, which includes Gulf Shores.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/06/gulf-oil-spill-boat-captain-despondent-over-spill-commits-suicide.html

Richard

06-29-2010, 10:47

And so it goes...

Spill Reaching Mississippi Shore...and 'bubble machine' technology...

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bp-oil-spill-mississippi-coast-polluted-gov-haley/story?id=11037777

Richard :munchin

wch84

06-29-2010, 11:12

Buffalobob

06-29-2010, 13:18

Tropical Storm Alex has gained strength and is expected to become Hurricane Alex today as it heads toward the U.S./Mexico boarder, hampering cleanup efforts in the Gulf Coast.

Mixed bag and part of the problem is nobody exactly knows what will happen except the booms will be blown to hell and gone. The faux barrier islands will probably be washed away. Oil may get mixed around a lot and dispersed somewhat but that will hamper skimming. Oil may be driven deep into the marshes and never cleaned up but the process will be hurried along. BP believes they can keep drilling the relief wells which will help.

These are my opinions and a lot depends upon how the storm develops.

olhamada

06-29-2010, 15:19

What do you gentlemen think about Clinton's suggestion today that the USN torpedo/place charges on the well and then cover it with tons of rock?

Also re help - It wasn't just Iran that supposedly offered to help. Abu Dhabi and Dubai offered to send a team of 30 a couple of days after the explosion. We declined. It seems that they may have actually been able to help. They certainly couldn't have done any worse than we have thus far.

Richard

06-29-2010, 22:23

And so it goes...

Richard :munchin

Land-Based Spills Add Up, Too
USAToday, 29 June 2010

Human-caused spills send more than 300 million gallons of oil into North American waters every decade, an amount roughly double the highest estimate of the BP spill, according to studies by the world's top scientists.

Worldwide, the numbers are even starker, according to Oil in the Sea III, a 2003 report from the National Academy of Sciences that several top scientists say remains the best estimate of oil's impact on oceans. The estimated 4 billion gallons leaking into oceans each decade from all sources is more than 25 times the highest estimates of what has spewed into the Gulf.

(cont'd) http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-06-29-land-spills_N.htm?csp=YahooModule_News

Buffalobob

06-30-2010, 05:06

Why people become journalists instead of rocket scientists.

If we translate every thing into the same time and space units we will then be comparing apples to tadpoles

For the journalists in the crowd- a decade is ten years and a year has 365 days plus a couple of do overs every four years. This then leads to about 3,652 or 3,653 days and some pocket change.

So we divide the journalist's goofy gobbler number of 300 million gallons by 3652 days and we find that the number of gallons per day is only 82,000 gallons. Now then wimpy wonder noodle head used a figure for all North American water which is an obscure number of unknown etiology. We can roughly estimable that the spill occupies an area that is about 2-5% of the water surface area of north American waters. So we then can normalize by area everything to the point we are comparing fruit to fruit even though it is still not apples to apples. So the dividing 82,000 gallons a day by 30 just for simplicity sake, we get 2,700 gallons per day compared to the BP spill rate of more than 1,000,000 gallons per day.

We now find out why the journalist is unlikely to win the Noble prize for Physics

Richard

06-30-2010, 05:55

Being neither a rocket scientist nor a reporter, I took the gist of the article to merely be that:

oil products are toxic
spillage and seepage is on-going and probably greater than we realize because we don't track it
the BP spillage is a roughly equivalent concentration of just under a half a year's worth of estimated global oceanic spillage as reported by the NAS.

Beyond that, it might be worthwhile to read the NAS report and see what the etimology of their numbers are.

And so it goes...

Richard's $.02 :munchin

Buffalobob

06-30-2010, 06:41

It was merely a humorous mis-use of numbers that got me to making fun of the article.

The weird thing is that the one bar graph actually was prepared and released by the Unified Command. The context is unknown but in isolation it appears to be minimizing the current magnitude of the spill. I find it to be of questionable ethics, but I do not know the original context.

Saturation

06-30-2010, 18:41

A personal picture of one level of intervention.

BlackHills

07-01-2010, 16:16

The synopsis of the NAS report is here (http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=10388); there's also a link to the full report but you have to pay for it.

The relevant parts.....Nearly 85 percent of the 29 million gallons of petroleum that enter North American ocean waters each year as a result of human activities comes from land-based runoff, polluted rivers, airplanes, and small boats and jet skis, while less than 8 percent comes from tanker or pipeline spills, says a new report from the National Academies' National Research Council. Oil exploration and extraction are responsible for only 3 percent of the petroleum that enters the sea. Another 47 million gallons seep into the ocean naturally from the seafloor.

More than one-half of the land-based oil contamination along the North American coastline occurs between Maine and Virginia, where there are dense seaside populations, many cities, several refineries, and high energy use, the report says. About 20 percent of the land-based petroleum entering North American coastal waters ends up in the Gulf of Mexico. The gulf also receives most of the oil and gas that is emitted by recreational boats and jet skis.

Worldwide, about 210 million gallons of petroleum enter the sea each year from the extraction, transportation, and consumption of crude oil and the products refined from it, with an additional 180 million gallons coming from natural seepage, the report says.

Richard

07-01-2010, 17:03

To put the size of the BP oil spill into perspective, these guys have created a program to let you measure it against the land mass surrounding your home town.

Click on the link, then enter your town and state in the location box at the top of page. When I opened the website, my home town loaded automatically.

http://www.ifitwasmyhome.com/

And so it goes...

Richard :munchin

Buffalobob

07-01-2010, 17:37

The synopsis of the NAS report is here; there's also a link to the full report

One of the authors is

JOEL BAKER
Professor
Chesapeake Biological Laboratory
University of Maryland
Solomons

I have worked with him a number of times.

What we did in DC was to require all new storm sewer catch basins to be multiple chambers with baffles such that petroleum products are captured before discharge. All basins are required to be cleaned annually. I can put up a diagram if you are intrigued by storm sewer catch basin design.

I personally prepared the first TMDL in the nation on urban oil in a river. It established a national precedence that is still used by EPA.

http://www.epa.gov/nps/success/state/dc.htm

917 Hog

07-02-2010, 09:51

An interesting article on how an Acoustic Trigger could have activated the blowout valve in the event of an emergency. Unfortunatley the triggers aren't required by US regulations although they are in use by Norway (1993) and Brazil (2007). $500,000 seems like a pretty good deal for more insurance that this kind of disaster could be prevented. These triggers are not required in the UK although BP does use them there.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html

Buffalobob

07-13-2010, 16:37

Saturation

07-13-2010, 17:01

I can tell you the word is already circulating down that they will be reducing the size of the air delivered dispersant systems.... sending a unit back to London plus another contractor (I can't remember where that one is from).

We'll see if that means it's good news with the new cap or something else entirely.

Dad

07-13-2010, 17:02

Bob
What is your opinion of the use of dispersants?

Defender968

07-13-2010, 17:07

The wait is on. If pressure rises to 8,000 or 9,000 PSI at the new cap then they will have regained control of the well. If the cap blows off then they are surely in bad trouble. Nobody knows what shape the well is in at depths.

Unfortunately the cap blowing off would be better than if the pressure drops. My understanding is that if the pressure drops that means there are leaks/damage deep inside the well bore beneath the sea floor, if that's the case then the oil will leach out into the sea floor and would be nearly impossible to gather....and if the damage is below the relief wells it would mean no stopping the spill until the oil is completely drained. I've got my fingers crossed and have said a prayer or two.

echoes

07-13-2010, 17:34

With oil companies and large amounts of oil, everything is always fine and dandy until reality sets in. The public is always assured that the containment and prevention measures are more than adequate until the facts determine that they were not.

Very well said Sir.

You know, when this thread was started, me and my camp were of one opinion about BP, their track record about safety, and so forth.

Now, and this is really huge, we have learned a lot that we did not know about BP, it's track record for safety, and what other global firms are saying, both internally and externally.

For instance, a close family member of mine that works in this feild said that reports are going to surface about the lack of oversight by BP on its safety and integrity issues...surrounding It's off-shore platforms, wells, and drilling practices.

Suffice to say, glad we sold.:munchin

Hmmmm....:eek:

Holly

Buffalobob

07-13-2010, 19:37

Bob
What is your opinion of the use of dispersants?

The problem is that several of the dispersant being used had not been tested for toxicity and sublethal effects and /or no one would relaease any data.

We had a company come into DC on a medium sized spill with a new dispersant that they wanted to use and we refused to approve it. The spill was under Fed control (USCG) and they approved it for use over our objections. We then threatened the manufacturer with jail and the costs of any biological damages and he withdrew the product before use. I am normally a believer in the medical ethic - first do no harm. I was in an Agent Orange area in RVN and am not a big lover of spraying chemicals around.

Lots of start up companies operating on a shoe string think if they can get into a high profile spill/event then they can manipulate the press to their advantage as did Kevin Costner. Often these companies have no R&D budget and and just giving you a line of BS on performance and biological effects. Working in DC we were constantly deluged with wonder devices and products that would solve all manner of problems.

Buffalobob

07-16-2010, 18:25

Like I said, big events draw in Looney Tunes like flies. Totally no R&D just big claims and bogus results. The "A Whale" super skimmer is a good example.

A Taiwanese-owned "super skimmer" ship sent to help clean up the Gulf of Mexico oil spill has collected virtually no oil in two weeks of tests, a U.S. Coast Guard official said Friday.

"All we found in the tanks was water, so it was very ineffective," Coast Guard Rear Admiral Paul Zunkunft, federal on-scene coordinator, told a news briefing.

And, perhaps Defender968 called it right - well pressure is stalled in No Man's Land at about 6,700 PSI. Pipe may be leaking subsurface or may be filled with slushy hydrates or some thing else may be happening.

Pete

07-27-2010, 05:09

BP Oil Spill: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bp-oil-spill-crude-mother-nature-breaks-slick/story?id=11254252

"...........The numbers don't lie: two weeks ago, skimmers picked up about 25,000 barrels of oily water. Last Thursday, they gathered just 200 barrels.

Still, it doesn't mean that all the oil that gushed for weeks is gone. Thousands of small oil patches remain below the surface, but experts say an astonishing amount has disappeared, reabsorbed into the environment.

"[It's] mother nature doing her job," said Ed Overton, a professor of environmental studies at Louisiana State University. ..............."

Dozer523

07-27-2010, 05:19

"[It's] mother nature doing her job," said Ed Overton, a professor of environmental studies at Louisiana State University. ..............." Good 'ol Mom. Kiss the boo-boo and it goes away. I feel better already.

Buffalobob

08-02-2010, 15:48

Where did all of the missing oil go? Go back and see post #45 on this thread.

Oil/methane is a carbon based compound and bacteria eat carbon compounds and uptake oxygen to burn the carbon as food just as we humans do.

(AP) It is an overlooked danger in oil spill crisis: The crude gushing from the well contains vast amounts of natural gas that could pose a serious threat to the Gulf of Mexico's fragile ecosystem.

The oil emanating from the seafloor contains about 40 percent methane, compared with about 5 percent found in typical oil deposits, said John Kessler, a Texas A&M University oceanographer who is studying the impact of methane from the spill.

That means huge quantities of methane have entered the Gulf, scientists say, potentially suffocating marine life and creating "dead zones" where oxygen is so depleted that nothing lives.

"This is the most vigorous methane eruption in modern human history," Kessler said.

Today's news

(AP) Scientists say this year that the "dead zone" area that forms every summer in the Gulf of Mexico is one of the largest ever measured.

The large area of low oxygen that chokes marine life comes in addition to the massive BP oil spill.

Microbes that eat the oil can deplete oxygen in the water. But the researchers who measure the dead zone couldn't say there is a connection between the spill and the dead zone's size.

They say the dead zone is at least 7,722 square miles. The largest ever measured was just over 8,000 square miles in 2001.

The dead zone forms every year when bacteria feeds on algae blooms and uses up oxygen. The blooms are caused by the nutrient-rich waters from rivers that carry farm and urban runoff into the Gulf.

I doubt that the total truth of the impacts of the spill will be known for at least five years or so. That is about the amount of time to gather and synthesize data and to see what the intermediate term effects are on the standing stocks of the living creatures. My estimates are based upon similar work I have done in the Chesapeake Bay which is a simpler ecosystem with a better initial database.

The problem of identifying the impacts is made worse by BP hiring a lot of the Gulf Coast scientists and having them sign confidentiality statements. Thus a large fraction of he scientific pool will be muzzled and responsive to only BP. When the natural resources damage assessment is conducted the government is going to be at a disadvantage.