cricketdiane ocean at night painting that I created then modified on my computer - 2008 / 2009 - I don't remember the title
***
11-29-06 cricketdiane "Baby Crickets" pocket art painting - ocean sonata - cdcp07 acrylic-bristol - then modified on the computer to soften the image
***
cricketdiane, 2008 Baby Crickets pocket art painting of the ocean at the change of the day
***
My Note -
I was listening to the music on Larry King tonight just a little while ago and remembering what it was like when I walked in the oil covered coast of Santa Barbara – it isn’t explainable – there aren’t words to say it until someone sees it and smells it and knows the death that is there. The Gulf of Mexico gone for our lifetimes – for what?
And, every one of the mocking, snide, snickering comments for years about anyone or anything that said the environment is important . . .
what did they think we meant?
- cricketdiane
***
That turtle they are showing right now is saying, “okay, let me down now – lemme down.” He was flapping about and done with this interview.
2-14-08 cricketdiane - Wading Surf - cdcp08 acrylic painting - pocket art Ocean Baby Crickets from 2008
***
2-15-07 cricketdiane - romance of the ocean - cdcp08 acrylic painting Baby Crickets Ocean series - This is my favorite - I painted it in 2008
***
My Note -
A few days ago, there was a beautiful 11 year old girl who decided to make her art for the birds and animals of the Gulf of Mexico. She was on CNN and her name is Olivia. She is making donations of the money that her paintings and drawings bring. Amazing. And, her art is so bright and joyous. I think it was on CNN – now wait, maybe it was Good Morning America. Oh, durn – I’m going to have to look it up. Go girl, Olivia.
- cricketdiane
***
2-22-08 cricketdiane - Gentleness - cdcp08 acrylic-mat - Baby Crickets - my painting - another one that's my favorite - so pretty
I know – its green sand, but its so pretty.
I like it.
- cricketdiane
And, on the Larry King Live show just now – the announced that Target has given $50,000 to the efforts for the Gulf of Mexico in this amazing telethon fund raising for the people and animals. Wowsa. Thankyou Target stores. You are our company, a friend of our national interests and our people. thankyou.
***
2-17-08 cricketdiane Ocean painting - synergy - cdcp08 acrylic - Baby Crickets Ocean painting from the images in my mind - 2008
***
My Note -
Over the course of this day, I was typing a list over from the internet which has over a hundred of the largest shareholders of BP – they ought to be calling Larry King right now and give some of the multitude of profits they’ve been making investing on BP and other oil industry companies over all these years. The time has come to join the human race.
Now, see – I didn’t even call them jackasses, wasn’t that nice . . .
- cricketdiane
***
2-17-08 aceo - Cricket's Sea - cdcp08 acrylic - another Baby Cricket from my mind's images of the ocean
***
Wowsa – they just showed Olivia painting her beautiful bird paintings and animals on CNN just now – wowsa.
3-16-08 - art card painting Baby Crickets pocket art by cricketdiane 2008 - Titled - ocean currents - cdcp08 acrylic-mat -1
***
My Note -
It is great to see a member of the surfing community manning the phones tonight to help the people and animals of the Gulf of Mexico. There have been volunteers from the surfing community that have been joining to help in the cleanup and other efforts to raise money and lend a hand in the communities affected by the oil spill. Very nifty.
- cricketdiane
***
I swear, I’m going to list the shareholders of BP stock if they don’t get up and help. And, if BP had any good sense, Bozo Tony Hayward would be calling in a large donation.
- And, there’s Olivia – she is so much nicer than I am about this.
cricketdiane Baby Crickets Ocean painting with green sky. Titled - change in the weather - cdcp 07 - acrylic painting with art pencils and pastels added
***
There are some comments coming in on the phones, said someone just now – I’m sorry I didn’t catch who said it – but the comments are “how does this affect me?”
With the Gulf of Mexico covered in oil and dead wildlife, let’s see – what planet are these people calling from?
- cd
***
You know it might be time to raise money for globes instead of computers to be placed in schools throughout America at every age and grade level including colleges.
0-cricketdiane08 - Journey To Another World - An art "painting" that I did in 1999 or 2000 (sometime thereabouts) - made with artist pastels - (Nupastel hard pastels with intense pigment) - 18 x 24 - sold a long time ago
***
cricketdiane08 - Serenity - 2008 - 1991 - original arting done by my own hand - with pastels from my mind's eye
The ocean is supposed to look like that, not covered with oil and oil covered birds and oil covered fish and turtles and dolphins and sharks and whales drinking oil, breathing crude oil, filling their eyes and gills and the only places where they can live.
- cricketdiane
***
2-15-08 cricketdiane - mantle of the sea - cdcp08 acrylic-mat -2
***
That reminds me of a storm with the oil all stored in the ocean being stirred up – I painted it before this happened, but it reminds me of that now.
The one below is in the original colors I used when I painted it and I like it – Its my favorite, too. Yeah, about like a puppy I had once who grew into a real big dog that found everything was his favorite kind of food, no matter what it was. I liked that dog.
This is one of my favorites, nonetheless, probably my most favorite . . .
From AC 360 – Anderson Cooper just now was talking to a man whose ships service the oil rigs and he said this moratorium is likely to go 24 – 36 months and will destroy him. He also said that if the MMS (whose name was changed today to Ocean energy something or nother) wants second blowout preventers put on the sea floor which would be too heavy or too cluttered or something else that didn’t work in his estimation – etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum. However, that sure is jumping the gun quite a bit, considering -
it’s only been two months of the moratorium, maybe not even quite that, because the moratorium wasn’t done the same day as the explosion and oil spill. And, what does he mean, the sea floor couldn’t handle a secondary blowout preventer – what all do they have down there?
- cricketdiane
Maybe we’d better start finding out what he knows that the rest of us don’t know about all this.
***
3-1-08 cricketdiane - gentle waves on the sand - cdcp08 acrylic ocean painting Baby Crickets pocket-art -2a
***
My Note -
The phone number for the Larry King show on CNN that is raising money for the wildlife and people of the Gulf of Mexico – is
There are so many things to be fixed, but most of all it mostly needed fixing anytime before now. That makes it more difficult than it seems it would have been otherwise. And, that includes the oil spewing into the Gulf of Mexico.
- cricketdiane
***
3-2-08 - cricketdiane art card - spirit of the sky - cdcp08 acrylic-mat -1
I suppose that’s way beyond BP and Tony Hayward and the oil industry to understand in the measure of things that are important.
- cricketdiane
***
We want our ocean in the Gulf of Mexico back the way it was, but that probably can’t be done unless we do some things far beyond what they’ve been doing to fix it. I’m glad that so many people donated to the three charitable funds hosted by CNN tonight on Larry King. It is amazing.
I’m very sad that so many people don’t understand why it is important and how this will affect them. That kind of thinking needs some negativity to wake up and smell the coffee that is brewing right under their nose. And, that is a real shame – that even now, they just don’t get it.
Jun 18, 2010 … At least one UK institutional investor likely to be named as plaintiff, as British institutions attempt to share in payout.
www.guardian.co.uk/business/…/bp-class-action-oil-spill-damages
***
British shareholders are to join a US class action lawsuit pursuing BP for alleged securities fraud over the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster, the Guardian has learned.
American lawyers have already filed more than 180 lawsuits related to the spill, mostly against the company over the environmental and economic damage caused across the region.
BP shareholders – the majority of them based outside the more litigious US – have been slower to table their own claims.
But Robert Schachter, partner at Zwerling, Schachter & Zwerling, said that several British institutional investors had contacted him about joining the class action his New York-based firm recently filed. He said he was confident that at least one British investor would be named as a plaintiff next month in order to make it more likely that British institutions would share in any payout.
However, BP could challenge the right of British and other non-US investors to recover damages through the US courts.
Lawyers will allege that BP’s management, led by its chief executive, Tony Hayward, misrepresented the company’s true safety record, thereby artificially inflating its share price. When Hayward took over in 2007, he promised to focus “like a laser” on safety after the 2005 explosion at BP’s Texas City refinery, which killed 15 workers, and the oil spill from a BP-owned Alaska pipeline in 2006.
But US politicians have been hearing evidence that BP engineers did not follow correct drilling procedures before the Gulf of Mexico explosion on 20 April. Hayward admitted last month that the company did not have a proper plan in place to deal with such an accident.
Camilo Salas, a New Orleans-based attorney, said that the faulty well, which was drilled for exploration purposes, should now be classified as a production well and BP stripped of its licence to operate the lease. This could lead to a further legal battle over the ownership of what is likely to be a huge oil find.
BP has beefed up its in-house legal department by hiring the Chicago-based Kirkland & Ellis, one of the largest corporate law firms in the US.
(from)
BP’s British shareholders to join US class actions over oil spill
CALSTART President and CEO, John Boesel, chaired a round table discussion at Challenge Bibendum in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. This video features the Challenge Bibendum Rio 2010 Rally: Advanced technology vehicles proving their road worthiness in real world driving conditions.
I want all those vehicles in the video posted above in use and available to buy at a reasonable price in the US and traveling our roads instead of nothing but petroleum burning choices. And, we could put them in place now.
The other thing that is needed is some reasonable conversion packages for the SUVs that people already have but at the very least – they could get a tune up on them so they burn fuel in the most complete manner. How hard would that be?
- cricketdiane
***
MINI E ASSESSMENT WRAPS UP
CALSTART’s Mini E assessment project is wrapping up this month. Check out the staff’s adventures on the project blog. We’ll share some hard data about performance, range and more in the days to come.
BMW leased four of its new all-electric Mini Es to CALSTART as a part of its field trial program in Southern California. The CALSTART team tested the vehicles for one year, capturing some technical data as well as the experience in driving this advanced electric vehicle.
Facing oil spills, lingering recession and new fuel economy
regulations, the nation more than ever needs new solutions to
reduce petroleum use, increase efficiency and create jobs.
In that context, the 2010 HTUF National Conference – set for
September 28-30 in Dearborn, MI – brings a clear message: the first of these solutions are here now and ready for fleet use.
For ten years, the HTUF program has steadily moved hybrid
technology from concept to commercialization and 2010 marks a
significant milestone in that work: the 10th HTUF conference. Since its
launch HTUF has had a central role in speeding the market for hybrid
(continued on page 12 of their pdf newsletter thingy.)
Hybrid Incentive Vouchers a
Huge Success, Model for Others
Proves High Demand for Hybrids
Truck fleets and manufacturers have given a
huge vote of approval to California’s innovative
incentive program for hybrids, the Hybrid Truck
and Bus Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP).
Since HVIP opened for voucher requests in
February 2010, more than 90 percent of the
original $20 million in funds have been requested in
just four months of operation. More than 600
commercial hybrid trucks and buses have been
ordered to date because of HVIP – a 30 percent
increase in national hybrid volumes from just
one state’s action.
HVIP is funded by the California Air
Resources Board (ARB) and operated by
CALSTART, HTUF’s parent organization. It is a
unique and streamlined program to help speed the
early market introduction of clean, low-carbon
hybrid trucks.
North County’s Aptera Motors Wednesday unveiled the latest version of its three-wheel electric vehicle and said it will build it as soon as it gets enough money.
As oil continues gushing into the Gulf of Mexico, a federal judge will hear arguments today from companies seeking to end a six-month ban on deepwater drilling. FULL STORY
A couple of years ago, we told you about an eco-friendly resort in the U.S. that was planning on using solar-diesel hybrid houseboats designed by Solarsailor. The boats would feature large, moving photovoltaic “wings” that would not only track the sun to gather energy, but also serve as rigid sails – so the boats could move via solar, diesel or wind power….
Unknown. Expect more info during the next six months, as the Karma’s slated to launch in September 2010. As with the Tesla Roadster, Karma drivers tempted by the model’s sports car aspects may sacrifice some electric range for sportier performance.
BMW Mini E
35 kWh lithium ion. Air cooled.
Range: 156 miles (ideal conditions), 109 miles (normal city driving), 96 miles (normal highway driving). Charge time: 26 hours at 110V/12 amp outlet. 4.5 hours at 240V/32 amp. 3 hours at 240V/48 amp.
Drivers in BMW’s demo fleet have gotten closer to 100-110 miles per charge. In below-freezing temperatures, range has dropped in some cases to 55-80 miles.
My wife is a RAV4-EV driver. (It was my car until she fought me for it; I bought another EV).
She usually drives 20 miles or less per day. We’ve only taken it more than 50 miles a few times, so it’s hard to say exactly what the full range is. But it looks like we could get 100 miles out of it, even though it’s over 7 years old now.
The last 20 miles would be in the yellow and red zone, and we’d rather keep it out of that. So we consider it an 80-mile car. If it’s raining and you have to push water out of the way and run HVAC to keep the windscreen clear, you lose about 20%.
Our other EV has more range, so we take that on longer trips.
So what is wrong with everyone driving one of these? It has been around for many years – Why don’t we have that in America today as oil covers the Gulf of Mexico with death and destruction – this is ridiculous.
- cricketdiane
***
The RAV4 EV was an all-electric version of the popular RAV4SUV produced by Toyota. It was sold from 1997 to 2003.
The first fleet version of the RAV4 EV became available on a limited basis in 1997. In 2001 it was possible for businesses, cities or utilities to lease one or two of these cars. Toyota then actually sold or leased 328 RAV4 EVs to the general public in 2003, at which time the program was terminated despite waiting lists of prospective customers.
As of May 2006, charging an RAV4 EV from full-dead to full-charge, at a rate of USD 0.09 per kilowatt-hour, costs around USD 2.70.
As of May 2008, based on a gasoline price-per-gallon cost of USD 3.80 and up and the non-EV 2003 RAV4 2-wheel-drive gasoline fuel efficiency of 27 mpg-US (8.7 L/100 km; 32 mpg-imp), the RAV4 EV costs approximately 25% as much to fully charge,
and makes mileage in the RAV4 EV the cost equivalent to a 111.1 mpg-US(2.117 L/100 km; 133.4 mpg-imp) small SUV.
***
The MSRP was USD 42,000; but in California, ZIP-grant rebates of USD 9,000, decreasing in 2003 to USD 5,000, and a USD 4,000 credit from the Internal Revenue Service brought the price down to a more palatable USD 29,000 (USD 33,000 for some 2003 deliveries), including the home charger.[2]
By November 2002, the 328 RAV4-EV’s Toyota had committed to were sold, yet demand was continuing to build. Toyota was caught off-guard by the extent of the demand because the vehicle’s retail buyers had outsold the projections far faster than the vehicles could be supplied to market – despite very little advertising, and very little public awareness of the product.
There was certainly a market for these vehicles, because many GM EV1, Ford Ranger EV and Honda EV Plus drivers had been reluctantly forced to surrender their cars – in some cases to the crusher – and had become disillusioned with the carmakers. Potential buyers were encouraged by the perception that Toyota was finally playing fair.
As it turned out, there were more RAV4-EVs sold than there were cars available. It is noteworthy that Toyota did, in fact, play fair and filled every last order despite the fact that the last few dozen vehicles had to be painstakingly assembled from spare parts due to a shortfall of production components. This unexpected development caused deliveries to trickle on into September 2003. It also caused variations in the vehicles such as heated seats, retractable antennae, mats, etc.
Once the last of the 328 EVs was sold in November 2002, the website disappeared and the EV program was unceremoniously scrapped. No additional cars could be bought because Toyota didn’t have anything to sell. The RAV4-EV was based on the 1996-2000 gasoline powered RAV4, which had become obsolete. Production of additional vehicles would only be possible under one of two different scenarios. The first would be if the RAV4-EV was redesigned to fit the 2003 RAV4, and the second would be if production of the 1996 version was resumed. Toyota claimed that tens of thousands of orders would have been necessary for them to resume or continue production, and development time would have been a major obstacle.
Whether or not Toyota wanted to continue production, it was unlikely to be able to do so because the EV-95 battery was no longer available. Chevron had inherited control of the worldwide patent rights for the NiMH EV-95 battery when it merged with Texaco, which had purchased them from General Motors.
Chevron’s unit won a USD 30,000,000 settlement from Toyota and Panasonic, and the production line for the large NiMH batteries was closed down and dismantled. This case was settled in the ICC International Court of Arbitration, and not publicised due to a gag order placed on all parties involved.[3][4] Only smaller NiMH batteries, incapable of powering an electric vehicle or plugging in, are currently allowed by Chevron-Texaco.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV
Like other manufacturers, Toyota began destroying RAV4 EVs as they came off lease, after lease continuances were denied to owners. In 2005 an agreement was struck between Toyota and DontCrush.com (now PlugInAmerica.com) to stop the destruction and facilitate the continued operation of owned and leased vehicles. While no longer sold, the vehicle is still supported by selected Toyota service centers (mainly in California) and a strong owner community.
The RAV4 EV is driven daily by hundreds of owners, now across the United States. These owners have built up an online community and have worked out ways to add options to the RAV4 EV never offered by Toyota, with the most popular being keyless door entry and cruise control.
According to Ovshinsky, the auto industry falsely suggested that NiMH technology was not yet ready for widespread use in road cars.[5] Members of the USABC, including General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler, threatened to take legal action against Ovshinsky if he continued to promote NiMH’s potential for use in BEVs, and if he continued to lend test batteries to Solectria, a start-up electric vehicle maker that was not part of the USABC. The Big Three car companies argued that his behavior violated their exclusive rights to the battery technology, because they had matched a federal government grant given to Ovonics to develop NiMH technology. Critics argue that the Big Three were more interested in convincing CARB members that electric vehicles were not technologically and commercially viable.[4]
In 1994, General Motors acquired a controlling interest in Ovonics‘s battery development and manufacture, including patents controlling the manufacture of large NiMH batteries. The original intent of the equity alliance was to develop NiMH batteries for GM’s EV1 BEV. Sales of GM-Ovonics batteries were later taken over by GM manager and critic of CARB John Williams, leading Ovshinsky to wonder whether his decision to sell to GM had been naive.[4] The EV1 program was shut down by GM before the new NiMH battery could be commercialized, despite field tests that indicated the Ovonics battery extended the EV1′s range to over 150 miles.[4]
By 2001, the Ovonics technology was owned by the oil company Chevron.
In 2001, oil company Texaco purchased General Motors’ share in GM Ovonics. Texaco was itself acquired by rival Chevron several months later. The same year, Ovonics filed a patent infringement suit against Toyota‘s battery supplier, Panasonic, that ultimately succeeded in restricting the use of its large format NiMH batteries to certain transportation uses.[6] In 2003, Texaco Ovonics Battery Systems was restructured into Cobasys, a 50/50 joint venture between ChevronTexaco and Ovonics, now known as Energy Conversion Devices (ECD) Ovonics.[7] Chevron’s influence over Cobasys extends beyond a strict 50/50 joint venture. Chevron held a 19.99% interest in ECD Ovonics as of a public filing made January 15, 2003.[8] In a later filing on May 17, 2005,[9] Energy Conversion Devices announced that they had exercised an option to purchase back 4,376,633 shares of stock from a Chevron subsidiary, and would cancel and return them to authorized-unissued status. This is the exact number of shares that was listed as owned by ChevronTexaco in the January 15, 2003 filing.
ChevronTexaco also maintained veto power over any sale or licensing of NiMH technology.[10] In addition, ChevronTexaco maintained the right to seize all of Cobasys’ intellectual property rights in the event that ECD Ovonics did not fulfill its contractual obligations.[10] On September 10, 2007, ChevronTexaco (now known as simply “Chevron”) filed a legal claim that ECD Ovonics had not fulfilled its obligations. ECD Ovonics disputed this claim.[11] The arbitration hearing was repeatedly suspended while the parties negotiated with General Motors over the sale of Cobasys back to GM. As of March 2008, no agreement had been reached with GM.[12]
Cobasys contracts demonstrated that the company was willing to sell smaller NiMH batteries (less than 10 amp-hours) for use with hybrid electric vehicles (HEV). For instance, in March 2007, GM announced that it would use Cobasys NiMH batteries in the model year 2008 Chevrolet Malibu hybrid.[13] Toyota uses NiMH batteries in all of its HEV models. However, Cobasys’ sales policies raised questions about its willingness to sell larger format batteries for use in EVs and PHEVs.
Boschert concludes that, “it’s possible that Cobasys (Chevron) is squelching all access to large NiMH batteries through its control of patent licenses in order to remove a competitor to gasoline. Or it’s possible that Cobasys simply wants the market for itself and is waiting for a major automaker to start producing plug-in hybrids or electric vehicles.”[1] In an interview with The Economist, Ovshinsky subscribed to the former view. “I think we at ECD made a mistake of having a joint venture with an oil company, frankly speaking. And I think it’s not a good idea to go into business with somebody whose strategies would put you out of business, rather than building the business.”[14]
Cobasys’ problems with other potential customers also raised questions about the company’s sales policies. In October 2007, International Acquisitions Services, Inc. and Innovative Transportation Systems AG filed suit against Cobasys and its parents for refusing to fill a large, previously agreed-upon order for large-format NiMH batteries to be used in the Innovan electric vehicle.[12] In August 2008, Mercedes-Benz sued Cobasys for again refusing to fill a large, previously agreed-upon order for NiMH batteries.[16]
On July 28, 2009, Automotive News reported that Cobasys would be bought from Chevron and Energy Conversion Devices by battery maker SB LiMotive, a joint venture of Bosch and Samsung.[21] At the time of the 2009 Cobasys sale, control of NiMH battery technology transferred back to ECD Ovonics.[22] In October 2009, ECD Ovonics announced that their next-generation NiMH batteries will provide specific energy and power that are comparable to those of lithium ion batteries at a cost that is significantly lower than the cost of lithium ion batteries.[23] It is unclear whether ECD Ovonics will continue to adhere to Cobasys’ prohibitive minimum order sales policy.
Mary Wilkerson, owner of Gulfside Resorts in Indian Rocks Beach, Florida, attends a Capitol Hill news conference on Wednesday, June 16, in Washington. The jars in front of her hold water mixed with oil that was collected from the Gulf Coast waters of Louisiana and Alabama. - CNN
E. M. Pio Roda / CNN A fresh patch of emulsified oil sits on the beach at Bon Secour National Wildlife Refuge in Gulf Shores, Alabama, on Sunday, June 13. - CNN
Honda began operation of a next generation solar hydrogen station prototype at the Los Angeles Center of Honda R&D Americas, Inc., intended for ultimate use as a home refueling appliance capable of an overnight refill of fuel cell electric vehicles.
E. M. PIO RODA/CNN The sun sets behind two offshore oil platform rigs under construction Monday, June 15 in Port Fourchon, Louisiana. - CNN
Why should our world look like this – and this is only part of it. The pictures of the refineries in Texas and around the world are just nothing but nasty.
- cricketdiane, my note
***
Honda begins operation of new solar powered hydrogen station in US - electric hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles for the USA - Honda
How about now?
This stuff isn’t twenty years away – we can have it right now throughout the US – it doesn’t have to be petroleum or nothing – those people are lying.
Haven’t they done enough damage already? Isn’t over a hundred years of pollution and nasty crap enough from the petroleum oil industry already?
A car in harmony with man and his environment.
Honda’s smart solution for the coming century – the FCX.
A car in harmony with man and his environment.
Honda’s smart solution for the coming century – the FCX.
Carmakers need to address important environmental issues, but they should also make their cars fun to drive. Honda’s “smart” solution is the FCX, a next-generation 4-door sedan powered by a new type of drive unit that may one day replace gasoline engines. Unique in design, performance and styling,the FCX provides a foretaste of the 21st century.
^ abcde Shnayerson, Michael (1996-08-27). The Car That Could: The Inside Story of GM’s Revolutionary Electric Vehicle. Random House. pp. 194–207. ISBN 978-0679421054.
^ Hicks, Robert Eldridge (1973) Politics of land: Ralph Nader’s study group report on land use in California, pp. 410–412, 488. Compiled by Robert C. Fellmeth, Center for Study of Responsive Law. Grossman Publishers.
Critics also argue that historical evidence demonstrates the willingness of the oil industry to engage in such anti-competitive behavior. In 1949, the U.S. Supreme Court found Chevron (then known as Standard Oil of California) guilty of conspiring to buy and dismantle the Los Angeles electric street car system, in what became known as the Great American streetcar scandal.[15] In an effort to prevent the passage of California’s zero emission mandates in late 1993 and early 1994, oil companies also funded a series of ads that questioned the viability of electric vehicles.[4]
***
My Note -
So, not only do we have the filth of these companies in the oil industries and their shippers, their storage, their terminals, their destruction of the oceans and particularly the waters and communities and ecosystem of the Gulf of Mexico, Spain, Australia, Alaska, and Nigeria, Azerbaijan – among other places – and the filth of the refineries, the explosions, the poisons in the air and rivers and streams and dirt almost everywhere petroleum based vehicles have operated – we also have their overall contempt for life, their contempt for living, their contempt for ecosystems and their contempt for the progress of American economic potential and contempt for progressing beyond the discovery that “making fire go boom” and move something.
It is an obscenity that history will view as far more horrendous than short-sighted power mongering. It has resulted in the destruction of opportunities, the destruction of permanent generations of ecosystem inhabitants both wildlife and people that have survived countless natural disasters over the history of our world, and the destruction of America’s safety and economy.
That is a lot to pay for the petroleum industries to hold power.
- cricketdiane
And, it doesn’t have to be that way.
***
A brown pelican stained by oil stands on oil-soaked rocks at the pelican rookery next to Queen Bess Island in Barataria Bay, near Grand Isle, Louisiana, on Sunday. - CNN
What happened with that little table device for changing water into hydrogen for the batteries and fuel cells charged by hydrogen? Couldn’t that be incorporated into these cars? It is a simple electrolysis system which is based on science and technology that is well known and reliable – the knowledge for it has been around for over a hundred years – probably, in fact more like three hundred years – I don’t know, that may be exaggerated, but I doubt it.
The refining process releases numerous different chemicals into the atmosphere; consequently, there are substantial air pollution emissions[7] and a notable odor normally accompanies the presence of a refinery. Aside from air pollution impacts there are also wastewater concerns,[3] risks of industrial accidents such as fire and explosion, and noise health effects due to industrial noise.
The public has demanded that many governments place restrictions on contaminants that refineries release, and most refineries have installed the equipment needed to comply with the requirements of the pertinent environmental protection regulatory agencies. In the United States, there is strong pressure to prevent the development of new refineries, and no major refinery has been built in the country since Marathon’sGaryville, Louisiana facility in 1976. However, many existing refineries have been expanded during that time. Environmental restrictions and pressure to prevent construction of new refineries may have also contributed to rising fuel prices in the United States.[8] Additionally, many refineries (over 100 since the 1980s) have closed due to obsolescence and/or merger activity within the industry itself. This activity has been reported to Congress and in specialized studies not widely publicised.
Environmental and safety concerns mean that oil refineries are sometimes located some distance away from major urban areas. Nevertheless, there are many instances where refinery operations are close to populated areas and pose health risks such as in the Campo de Gibraltar, a CEPSA refinery near the towns of Gibraltar, Algeciras, La Linea, San Roque and Los Barrios with a combined population of over 300,000 residents within a 5-mile (8.0 km) radius and the CEPSA refinery in Santa Cruz on the island of Tenerife, Spain[9] which is sited in a densely-populated city center and next to the only two major evacuation routes in and out of the city. In California‘s Contra Costa County and Solano County, a shoreline necklace of refineries and associated chemical plants are adjacent to urban areas in Richmond, Martinez, Pacheco, Concord, Pittsburg, Vallejo and Benicia, with occasional accidental events that require “shelter in place” orders to the adjacent populations.
An outpouring of dust layered with man-made sulfates, smog, industrial fumes, carbon grit, and nitrates is crossing the Pacific Ocean on prevailing winds from booming Asian economies in plumes so vast they alter the climate. Almost a third of the air over Los Angeles and San Francisco can be traced directly to Asia. With it comes up to three-quarters of the black carbon particulate pollution that reaches the West Coast.[49]
Where does it end – when does it change? How about now – isn’t that enough damage now?
- cricketdiane
***
Buzz builds around electric cars as Nissan plans debut
06-21-2010 by AFP
TOKYO, June 20, 2010 (AFP) – As the Gulf of Mexico disaster casts an ugly spotlight on the pitfalls of global oil dependency, Japan’s auto giants are moving into high gear in a drive to mass-market electric cars. Nissan, Honda and Toyota are among car-makers now gambling that electric vehicles (EVs) with their zero tailpipe emissions will catch on and, some time in the future, start to drive traditional gas-guzzlers off the road.
If their bet pays off, green car proponents say, it could ring in a revolution that changes the very idea of what an automobile is, turning cars into electric appliances that drive smoothly, cleanly and silently. US President Barack Obama called last Tuesday for a “national mission” to develop clean energy, speaking from the White House as gushing crude oil kept fuelling his country’s worst environmental catastrophe. “The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now,” he said in a sombre prime-time telecast.
Battery-powered cars will be a crucial part of that future, manufacturers promise, even as critics point to tough hurdles — including higher sticker prices and ‘range anxiety’ — to gaining wide consumer acceptance. An EV’s energy consumption and carbon footprint are determined by the way its battery is charged — meaning it can effectively be powered by anything
from fossil fuel or nuclear plants to hydro, wind or solar energy. A critical question will be whether sufficiently large networks of electric re-charging stations are built — a chicken-and-egg question that has long held back the development of EVs, analysts say.
Cars that can be charged like a cellphone by plugging them into a wall socket, preferably during overnight off-peak hours, promise to shield consumers from volatile petrol prices and be cheaper in the long run. Another benefit is that they emit none of the tailpipe pollutants that have covered the skies over cities from Los Angeles to Mumbai in smog. Their efficiency is boosted because they are lighter, have motors that directly power wheels, preserving energy otherwise lost in transmission, and because the battery charge is topped up by regenerative braking.
Bullish Nissan, part-owned by Renault of France, will in December roll out its Leaf — short for Leading Environmentally Friendly, Affordable Family car — as the world’s first mass-produced electric car. The five-seater hatchback has a top speed above 140 kilometres (90 miles) per hour, a range of 160 kilometres (100 miles) and can be recharged in eight hours, or rapid-charged to 80 percent of capacity in 30 minutes. “We do believe this car is a game-changer in terms of this technology, and it will play a role in the future,” Simon Thomas, Nissan’s senior vice president of sales and marketing, said in London last month.
Nissan plans to sell 50,000 EVs in the United States, Japan and Europe per year in 2011 and 2012 and then 500,000 units in 2013. It predicts that by 2020 electric cars will account for 10 percent of the global auto market.
Japan enthusiasts drive electric car 1,000 kilometres
Although experts foresee revolutionary change, they disagree on the pace. “This could be a new industrial revolution,” said Mamoru Kato, analyst at Tokai Tokyo Research Center. “With EVs, you will no longer need traditional auto parts makers. Carmakers will essentially become electronics makers.”
At home Nissan will go head-to-head with Mitsubishi Motors which launched its all electric “i-MiEV” compact a year ago. Toyota, which has for more than a decade sold petrol-electric hybrids such as the Prius, has promised to launch its own electric car by 2012. Last month it bought a 50-million-dollar stake in Tesla Motors, a Palo Alto, California start-up that in 2004 began developing its Roadster, a boutique, “highway-ready” electric sports car with a range of about 245 miles. The Silicon Valley firm this year also bought the former NUMMI factory in Fremont, California which until recently made Toyota’s Corolla and Tacoma vehicles, to build its Model S sedan and future Tesla vehicles.
Some industry players may leapfrog to EVs, PriceWaterhouseCooper said in a recent report, pointing to the “changing geography of the automotive industry”. “Chinese automakers, for example, understand it will behoove them to focus on developing electric vehicles rather than committing major resources to catching up on internal combustion engine standards,” it said. In many countries, electric charging networks are now being built.
The company Better Place has built up EV infrastructure in Denmark and Israel where drivers can either recharge or swap batteries, focusing on customers such as government agencies and taxi fleets. Nissan says it has partnered with 50 groups and communities around the world, from Australia’s capital Canberra to parts of England, to introduce EVs with subsidies and benefits such as dedicated highway lanes. California is shaping up as the US test-bed for EVs, with the government offering rebates and backing a network of more than 5,000 charging stations, set to be up and running by 2012.
E. M. Pio Roda / CNN Jaden Kifer, left, and Ricardo Fernandez prepare to treat a brown pelican on Saturday at the Grand Isle Wildlife Triage Center in Grand Isle, Louisiana. - CNN
Over the weekend when I watched a little of FoxNews and earlier today in one of the CNN stories – I noticed they discussed the release of 38 pelicans that had been rescued and cleaned of oil – they were flown out to Texas and released. However, in both coverage – there were statements that some 693 birds have been rescued with 42 released, and neither broadcast mentioned that 934 birds were “rescued” dead.
That and the other numbers -
Which are far from complete.
- cricketdiane
***
From the Deepwater Horizon Incident Response site – under the tab on the top bar for Current Ops – the second entry is game and wildlife reports -
Total Collected – Mammals (Dolphins) – 50 (cleaned and released – 1)
Not including in these numbers the one young adult sperm whale collected dead a few days ago and multitudes of the other marine animals dead, dying or covered with oil and affected by the toxic poisons of the dispersants.
And the fact that shrimp beds, oyster beds and similar fishing grounds are now dead and covered with oil, in Louisiana and throughout the Gulf of Mexico where the oil spill has impacted them.
is the state-owned oil and natural gas corporation in Azerbaijan. It produces oil and natural gas, operates two oil refineries and the running of oil and gas pipelines through out the country. After going through several reorganizations and re-namings during the Soviet period, the national oil companies merge in just one new company in 1992: SOCAR.”]
The State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic [SOCAR
The State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic [SOCAR] is the state-owned oil and natural gas corporation in Azerbaijan. It produces oil and natural gas, operates two oil refineries and the running of oil and gas pipelines through out the country. After going through several reorganizations and re-namings during the Soviet period, the national oil companies merge in just one new company in 1992: SOCAR.
Oil Refinery Azerbaijan - SOCAR Baku - Petroleum Industry Destruction of Everywhere it touches
This is a list of oil refineries. The Oil and Gas Journal[1] also publishes a worldwide list of refineries annually in a country-by-country tabulation that includes for each refinery: location, crude oil daily processing capacity, and the size of each process unit in the refinery. For the U.S., the refinery list is further categorized state-by-state. The list usually appears in one of their December issues. It is about 45 pages in length and is updated each year with additions, deletions, name changes, capacity changes, etc.
1. The Reliance I & Reliance II are adjacent to each other and is the world’s largest refinery at a single site. Consisting of 1.2 m capacity.
2. Prior to the damage sustained in the Iran-Iraq War (1980-88) the refinery has a capacity of 628,000 bbl/d (99,800 m3/d).
3. Some of Petróleos Mexicanos’ six facilities have begun to operate at unpredictable fractions of a larger rated capacity. This is the public information current to pemex.com (Spanish version) in summer 2010.
4. Motiva has completed three out of a five year development cycle that will expand the refinery by 325,000 bpd to a net capacity of at least 600,000 bpd. Motiva is a JV of Saudi and Royal Dutch Shell divisions.
5. This combined the Sunoco nee Sunray DX operation with the Sinclair refineries separate up to 2009.
The region of southeast Houston and southeast Texas is home to hundreds of chemical plants and dozens of refineries, with 89 percent handling hazardous waste. - Oil Refineries and Oil Platforms for Southeast Texas
BP has dismissed accusations of reckless behaviour by Anadarko Petroleum, a company that owns a quarter of the wrecked Deepwater Horizon oil well. Also, BP’s chairman told Sky News his firm did not put costs ahead of safety. Sky’s Greg Milam reports.
***
My Note -
I couldn’t hear the sound in the video (above) from SkyNews – but it did have some interesting pictures including a bird covered in oil with the surf drowning it on the Gulf of Mexico coast and it looked like a very interesting story – but I’m not sure what perspective it has.
- cricketdiane
***
WRAPUP 4-U.S. Gulf Coast residents battle to clean up oil spill
BURAS, La., June 19 (Reuters) – Residents of the U.S. Gulf Coast battled to save their beaches on Saturday as oil washed ashore at Florida’s Panama City, the latest casualty of BP Plc’s (BP.L) (BP.N) ruptured deep-sea well.
Special Report: Amid the Gulf crisis, Wall St touted BP stock -
1 day ago
And Wall Street is also prone to herd-like tendencies. But some experts say the unanimity of error around the BP blow-up also has exposed — yet again …
Reuters (press release)
***
Special Report: Amid the Gulf crisis, Wall St touted BP stock
After closing above $60 before the April 20 disaster, the energy giant’s shares plunged almost 20 percent in New York, to below $50, in just two weeks.
It is not hard to understand why. Even then, the out-of-control oil spill in the midst of rich fishing grounds and nearby resort beaches raised the specter of horrific damages and untold potential liabilities.
Yet, nearly to a person, the dozens of securities analysts who followed the British oil giant were unfazed. As BP (BP.N) (BP.L) shares continued to drop, most were screaming the same message: buy, baby, buy.
Credit Suisse, which had a “buy” rating on the stock at the time, did not even mention the accident in an April 28 report. The firm upgraded earnings estimates after BP reported strong quarterly results the day before.
A day later, with BP’s shares then down 11 percent, Citigroup’s Mark Fletcher weighed in. He argued that the decline was “disproportionate to the likely costs to the company, even assuming damages can be claimed.” In the same report, he estimated BP’s total share of the cleanup at just $450 million — today, conservative guesses put the figure at $10 billion to $20 billion.
Around that time, Morgan Stanley was among the chorus citing the strong rebound of Exxon (XOM.N) shares after the 1989 Valdez tanker spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska, as a reason to be bullish. “We think the sell-off presents an attractive buying opportunity for investors with medium-term investment horizons,” the firm wrote.
All told, 27 of 34 analysts tracked by Thomson Reuters rated the stock “buy” or “outperform” as recently as May 11. The other seven rated the shares “hold.” There was not a single rating of “sell” or “underperform” among those tracked.
Word of the latest problem in controlling the leak came after Anadarko Petroleum Corp (APC.N), part owner of the well, accused BP of “reckless” conduct leading up to the accident. [ID:nN18176715]
Sixty-one days after a BP offshore oil rig exploded and sank in the Gulf of Mexico, the encroaching oil spill is threatening the coastal economies of four U.S. states including Louisiana, whose fragile wetlands have been hardest hit.
In Florida, the Bay County Emergency Operations Center confirmed that tar balls had washed onto the beach at Panama City, a popular tourist destination.
“There appears to be gross negligence or willful misconduct,” Houston-based Anadarko Chairman and CEO Jim Hackett said in an interview that helped to drive his company’s shares up 2.2 percent in after-hours trading on hopes it could avoid multibillion-dollar liabilities.
BP is seeking up to $7 billion in loans from seven banks, banking sources told Reuters. The sources said BP may offer up to $10 billion in debt as early as next week.
Its debt is now trading at junk levels, and Moody’s has cut its rating three notches on concerns about spill liabilities.
After falling 6.8 percent in a volatile week driven by Washington politics, BP’s shares are down 26 percent so far in June, their worst month since the October 1987 market crash. BP deploys Costner’s oil machine in Gulf cleanupJun 18, 2010
Ambassadors and officials regard Sechin, a former Soviet military interpreter, as the informal leader of the “siloviki” clan of nationalist, ex-military and security service officers fighting to maintain a big state role in the Russian economy.
Gatekeeper for Vladimir Putin during his 2000-2008 presidency, Sechin is now a deputy prime minister overseeing Russia‘s vast energy and metals sectors, the world’s biggest.
Oligarchs snap to attention in his presence and Forbes magazine ranks Sechin among the world’s top 50 most powerful people, one notch above Kremlin chief Dmitry Medvedev, widely regarded as junior to Putin.
The role has brought unaccustomed public attention to a man more comfortable with life in the shadows and Sechin, 49, used a rare interview with Reuters during the St Petersburg Economic Forum to try to soften his intimidating reputation.
BURAS, Louisiana (Reuters) – Residents of the Gulf Coast braced for more oil from a ruptured BP Plc well to hit their beaches on Sunday as oil washed ashore at Panama City, a popular Florida tourist destination. | Video
Editor’s note: This account of the night the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded is based on exclusive interviews with five survivors and three of their wives conducted by CNN’s Anderson Cooper and the CNN Special Investigations Unit.
BP wants a judge who has major financial ties to the oil industry to supervise oil disaster lawsuits. Houston, Texas (CNN) — The judge that BP wants to hear an estimated 200 …
***
Welcome to the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Region of the Minerals Management Service (MMS). MMS is a bureau of the Department of the Interior. Our mission is to manage the mineral resources of the Outer Continental Shelf in an environmentally sound and safe manner. Please read the Regional Director’s Page for a brief overview of activities in the Gulf of Mexico.
WASHINGTON, D.C.–Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today announced that Bureau of Land Management Director Bob Abbey will serve as acting director of the Minerals Management Service (MMS).
(05/28/2010)
Cancels Western Gulf and Virginia Lease Sales, Suspends Proposed Arctic Drilling
WASHINGTON – To improve the safety of oil and gas development in federal waters, provide greater environmental protection and substantially reduce the risk of catastrophic events such as the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today called for aggressive new operating standards and requirements for offshore energy companies and ordered a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling.
(05/27/2010)
WASHINGTON, DC – As part of an ongoing agenda to change the way the Department of the Interior does business, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today announced a set of reforms that will provide federal inspectors more tools, more resources, more independence, and greater authority to enforce laws and regulations that apply to oil and gas companies operating on the Outer Continental Shelf.
(05/11/2010)
Yesterday, I watched as CNN spent most of the day repeating stories to stop the boycotts of BP, BP stations and BP products. After one of the first BP station owners admitted the day before during an interview that of course they are required to purchase their petroleum / gasoline and diesel products from BP and that is what they sell at BP gas stations, they simply stopped running that clip and posted others on every hour’s broadcasts throughout the day. I finally was so disgusted with them – I just stopped watching it.
However, the BP station owners and petroleum distributors need to sue BP for destroying the brand and for breach of contract in the franchise terms for destroying the business they had enjoyed and are paying franchise fees to BP “for” – obviously, when BP Global and BP America destroyed the brand of their franchise – they broke the contract terms by which those franchise fees are collected.
Those station owners can choose to sell and brand their stations under a different oil corporation – that is part of doing business in that industry and it is the fault of BP that their stations’ business is being destroyed – it is not fair to use the media to persuade people to keep buying products to profit BP.
They have the resources to pay for the cleanup and they aren’t going to actually do that anyway – they will use insurance, credit default swaps, junk bonds, junk loans and play with their assets around the world to cover their asses and assets. It will be a textbook lesson in corporate money manipulation to the degree of Maximus Nauseum Infinitum, or more properly – Nauseum Infinitum Maximus, or even Nauseum Maximus Infinitus. Just wait and see. It will make a good study for Harvard and Columbia business schools.
Believe this, just as BP believes they are the real people of measure and value and everyone else is expendable and part of the “small people,” so will their decisions be guided forward in the same ways. That is a great measure of why the disaster was allowed to increase, was treated as a non-event, was caused in the first place and was caused to expand exponentially by their mis-handling of it and by their misplaced BP priorities of corporate pr first and attorneys running every choice.
- cricketdiane
I was also wondering about the surge wall / barrier that was being built by the Corps of Engineers for New Orleans over the last couple years and how the oil spill has affected it, where it is at this point in their operation and what is being affected in the overall eco-system restoration plans for the Mississippi River, New Orleans, the replacement and restoration of the marshes, etc.
After having my computer buggared by going to the Corps of Engineers site trying to find information about it at the “New Orleans Team” website page of theirs – I decided to not put that here. And went this direction to find it instead -
From -
Dredging Today -
New Orleans: $1.1 billion surge barrier construction works half way
The date of the Deepwater Horizon disaster that started spewing over 60,000 barrels of oil every single day into the Gulf of Mexico was April 20, 2010. After the oil had already inundated coastal marshes and estuaries – and well over five weeks after Louisiana had demanded the job needed to be done – as the articles below indicate – the actual work to build the sand berms started after the damage had already been done – despite quite a lot of the work being scheduled and funded to occur already as part of a coastal eco-system renewal plan.
- cricketdiane
And, I meant to look this up again about the Corps of Engineers – who, at the time of the Hurricane Katrina debacle had very few actual “engineers” on their staff of professionals. I don’t know what it is today, but their focus has not been on engineering science and engineering standards of thought for a long, long time – It might have changed.
The Shaw Group Inc. today announced it has been awarded a contract by the state of Louisiana’s Office of Coastal Protection and Restoration for overall project management and construction of sand berms in response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
Shaw will assist the state with permit compliance and monitoring activities in addition to providing personnel, [...]
The Shaw Group Inc. is working to pry loose and draw in a large portion of the nation’s dredging fleet―potentially seven cutterheads, five large hoppers and a dozen scows―for the emergency delivery of roughly 45 miles of permitted projects (of 128 miles sought) of barrier berm on the Louisiana coast… that state officials hope will [...]
NOLA- Construction could begin this weekend on the first of six sand berms that state officials hope will capture oil from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico before it reaches natural barrier islands or interior wetlands, according to an official with lead contractor Shaw Industries. The state already has received the [...]
The White House on Wednesday approved the construction of five sand berms that BP Plc will build to shield the Louisiana coast from damage from a giant oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana’s governor said.
“We have just received word from the White House that they are going to require BP to fund the [...]
Fareed Zakaria had advertised their show on CNN earlier about how they were approaching this “demonizing oil companies” theme in the show this weekend. Mr. Zakaria states that there is nothing that can replace oil for the next twenty years. That lie is so old that it certainly predates his career as an adult engaged in the activities of influence he holds.
The alternatives to petroleum use aren’t being started today – they were started over thirty years ago. So, to continue hearing the opinion that we should be nice to the oil companies and not say anything to hurt their feelings and accept the idea that we are beholden to serve them for the next thirty years is not only bullshit – it is insulting to any level of intelligence.
When he and others (especially those in the Republican Party and business leadership) continue to give facility to the concept and spread the ill-founded lies and propaganda of serving the oil companies and that we must not have any other choice for our transportation over the next twenty or thirty years than to pay our profits, private resources, public moneys and tax dollars to the oil companies to serve us petroleum and be grateful for it – these media opinion makers are doing nothing to serve the greater good. They are participating in the same lies and programmed propaganda that have put us in this place and kept us here for all this time with the final result that other competitive choices for our transportation fuels and energy needs are still kept away from the marketplace in any level playing field. It has left us in a polluted bed called America, it has left us energy dependent on nations and companies without mercy nor conscience, and it has left us with an economy that forever teeters on the edge of disaster.
Why would the people at Fareed Zakaria’s show and his little group of friends want to keep doing that? Whose side are they serving – because it certainly isn’t ours, nor is it America’s best interests, as evidence by the proof we are experiencing every single day across the United States.
We are not twenty years away from using other energy sources and fuels for our planes and trucks and trains and cars and homes and every other need we have – it has been over thirty years already of getting those things together. Now it is only a matter of making a level playing field, subsidizing those as we did the petroleum industry and gasoline combustion engines and diesel industry uses and taking the unfair subsidies the oil companies and gas guzzling auto industries have been utilizing to serve their own profits while preventing any other energy or fuel resource to compete with them.
It isn’t enough to say, here is four thousand dollars toward an electric car that cost over $100,000 to buy – taken off the tax bill a year later maybe, if all the papers are filled out correctly. The oil industry, gasoline, petroleum, diesel, and vehicle industries that use them weren’t subsidized that way – not at any point were their subsidizing facilities from our tax dollars that supported them ever so far removed from reality.
- cricketdiane
***
Taking a Plunge
Port of L.A. pushes into alternative fuel while some truckers still struggling with LNG rigs.
Feeling the heat of the state’s controversial greenhouse gas law, the Port of Los Angeles is aggressively pursuing a program that could replace diesel rigs with exotic fuel cell trucks.
This month, the Board of Harbor Commissioners approved spending $280,000 to buy an experimental big rig – the very first sale for Vision Industries Corp., a tiny publicly traded startup in Pacific Palisades.
Equipped with a hydrogen fuel cell that recharges its electric battery, the truck is designed to carry a 40-ton load up to 200 miles before refueling. That makes it viable for midrange runs to warehouses as far away as Riverside.
The board took the action even as some port truckers are still struggling with converting from diesel to liquefied natural gas rigs, as required under the port’s separate Clean Air Program targeting diesel emissions. What’s more, some two dozen all-electric trucks purchased from another company have yet to be tested on the road.
(etc.)
In the meantime, negotiations are under way with several state and federal agencies – including the California Energy Commission and the federal Department of Energy – for funding to buy 20 more of the rigs, which would be leased cost free to companies working in the port for testing. It’s not certain how large the port market will be for Vision, given that many trucking firms recently purchased new trucks because of the Clean Air Program.
Still, the port’s decision was a coup for Vision, founded in Florida six years ago as Cheetah Consulting Inc. The company changed its name and relocated to California in late 2008 after acquiring licensing for its electric drive system and hydrogen fuel cell technology from Ice Conversions Inc., a Malibu firm.
Vision Chief Executive Martin Schuermann acknowledged the port was taking a chance on what he termed “radically new technologies.”
“It’s a leap of faith for the port,” he said, “These trucks aren’t even commercially available yet. This is a breakthrough for our company.”
Vision is one of several new companies in Los Angeles County’s growing alternative-fuel and electric vehicle industry. Among them are Balqon Corp., a Harbor City startup manufacturing all-electric trucks for the port. Other companies include Tesla Motors, a Palo Alto maker of luxury electric cars that has a local design studio.
John Bousel, chief executive of Calstart, a Pasadena non-profit consortium that promotes the alternative-fueled vehicle industry, said he had not heard of Vision until the company joined Calstart earlier this year.
But he noted the company has partnered with Capacity of Texas of Longview, Texas, one of the leading manufacturers of “terminal tractors,” which are used to transport cargo containers and other equipment around port terminals.
( . . . )
Terminal authorities encouraged trucking companies operating drayage operations – short-haul cargo container trips within the port – to switch as many vehicles as possible to liquefied natural gas, a technology designed to dramatically reduce diesel emissions.
To date, about 575 of the L.A. port’s fleet of 10,000 short-haul trucks have been switched to LNG, and many others have adopted new cleaner-running diesel engines. As a result, the port is expected to reach the 80 percent level this year, well ahead of the 2012 deadline.
CALSTART/UCS STUDY SHOWS ECONOMIC BENEFITS FROM ADVANCED TRUCKS
Boosting the fuel economy of new medium- and heavy-duty vehicles could create more than 120,000 new jobs nationwide by 2030, curb U.S. oil dependence, and save truckers thousands of dollars annually at the gas pump, according to a report released recently by CALSTART and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). “Delivering Jobs: The Economic Costs and Benefits of Improving Heavy Duty Vehicle Fuel Economy” found that strengthening the fuel economy of medium- and heavy-duty trucks could create as many as 124,000 jobs nationwide by 2030, with all 50 states experiencing net job growth. Efficiency improvements could save class 8 “big rig” fleet truck owners more than $120,000 per tractor-trailer over eight years and owner-operators more than $80,000 per tractor over 10 to 15 years, assuming an average $3.50 per gallon fuel price. Read the press release. Read the supporting technical reports on fleet savings, economy-wide job growth, and nationwide energy and climate security benefits.
Panelists at CALSTART/NTEA’s Green Truck Summit also noted that as natural gas and hybrid systems mature, a logical next development and demonstration step would be to combine the systems, greatly multiplying carbon and emissions reductions and operational savings…
The market “footprint” of natural gas as a transportation fuel for medium- and heavy-duty trucks is expanding, according to a panel of industry experts convened at the CALSTART/NTEA Green Truck Summit in St. Louis. Andy Douglas, National Sales Manager for Kenworth‘s specialty markets, said Kenworth is committed to its natural gas products and that the market is now more than just California and the West Coast, but encompasses Texas, the East Coast and elsewhere.
All major truck makers have now added natural gas options, and are focused on heavy vocational and heavy regional haul applications. Patric Ouellette, Chief Technology Officer of Westport Innovations, noted a distinct upswing in natural gas engine demand since 2005, driven by energy security and climate concerns and greatly improved incentives. Bill Zobel, Vice President of Business Development for infrastructure provider Trillium USA said that the addition of gas producers to the natural gas vehicle coalition had strengthened policy efforts, and that having consistent public policy in energy was crucial. Panelists also noted that as natural gas and hybrid systems mature, a logical next development and demonstration step would be to combine the systems, greatly multiplying carbon and emissions reductions and operational savings.
California HVIP Update: Vouchers Moving Fast, New Vehicle Added
California Hybrid Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project voucher funds are diminishing rapidly as word circulates to fleets throughout California. Recent large orders have brought the total funds available down to $1.6 million. The fund started in February at nearly $19.5 million.
In late May, a new vehicle was added to the eligible vehicles list (2011 MY Azure Dynamics Balance Hybrid E-450 with Ford 5.4L Gasoline Engine), bringing the total number of eligible vehicles to 63.
Read a brief status update on California’s groundbreaking Air Resources Board project, the Hybrid Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP), which is managed by CALSTART and sponsored by the California Air Resources Board. Read the press release. Visit the California HVIP web site.
The Coastal Response Research Center is focused on developing new approaches to spill response and restoration in marine and estuarine environments through research and synthesis of information.
University of New Hampshire
Deepwater Horizon Blowout
Deepwater Horizon Dispersant Use Meeting Report here>>
Deepwater Horizon Blowout Facts are available here>>
Features
The Deepwater Horizon Dispersant Use meeting report is now available here>>
For more information on the meeting see here>>
The 2009 Research & Development Priorities: Oil Spill Workshop report is now available here>>
UNH Coastal Response Research Center, NOAA, EPA and Coast Guard Convene Science Meeting to Study Dispersant Use and Ecosystem Impacts of Dispersed Oil in the Gulf of Mexico More>> UNH Media Release, May 28, 2010
How Do Oil Dispersants Work? More>> PoliSci Website (Katie Peek) May 28, 2010
Testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (May 19th 2010) by Dr. Nancy E. Kinner, Co-Director Coastal Response Research CenterVideo, Part 3>> Written Testimony>>
Nashville Public Radio – Blake Farmer – 2 days ago
Many were spewing raw sewage into waterways such as the Cumberland River. There were also thousands of so-called “orphaned containers” floating around …
***
Tennessee Flooding –
Opryland Hotel officials to press Army Corps of Engineers for answers
By BONNA JOHNSON • The Tennessean • June 15, 2010
Officials with Gaylord Opryland Hotel plan to hold talks with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on Wednesday to press for answers about dam releases that swelled the Cumberland River during the May floods, as well as who will pay to increase the size of the levee that protects the Opryland property.
“We have big-time questions for the Army Corps and government agencies that regulate the water,” Gaylord CEO Colin Reed told investors and analysts this morning. Had hotel officials been given accurate information earlier on May 2, they could have saved more vehicles and memorabilia, especially at the Grand Ole Opry, he said.
The Corps’ Nashville commander, Lt. Col. Anthony Mitchell, will listen to Gaylord’s concerns and talk about the Corps’ role during the flood, said Bill Peoples, spokesman for the Corps’ Nashville district.
(etc.)
It would take an act of Congress for federal dollars to be spent.
Contact Bonna Johnson at 615-726-5990 or bjohnson@tennessean.com.
Tennessee Cumberland River – Nashville Flooding – May 2010 -
Old, Incorrect Data Used In Flood Crest Predictions
Channel 4 I-Team Finds Hours Passed Without Forecasters Getting Current Data
Reported By Jeremy Finley
POSTED: 3:52 pm CDT May 25, 2010
UPDATED: 7:11 pm CDT May 25, 2010
NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Three weeks after the floods, a Channel 4 I-Team investigation reveals how data used to warn the public were not only outdated, but in some cases, wrong. The investigation uncovered problems in the information that the National Weather Service was given to predict the the crest of the Cumberland River.
On May 2, 2010, the National Weather Service was in a race against time. Homes and businesses along the Cumberland were in danger, and forecasters needed all the information they could get.
And they needed information from the Army Corps of Engineers about how much water was being released from the Old Hickory Dam.
“We’re taking that latest information from the Corps, factoring it into our models,” said National Weather Service Meteorologist Larry Vannozzi at a news conference last week.
The National Weather Service had constant access to rain and river gauges. But the I-Team discovered it didn’t even have hourly updates on the dam even as the information on water releases kept changing.
The I-Team learned the Corps lost e-mail services on May 2 for 11 hours, between 9 a.m. and 8 p.m. The Corps and the National Weather Service had to rely on phone calls. Records show only four phone calls were exchanged that day between the two federal agencies, along with one e-mail early Sunday morning.
But on that day, the amount of water released from the dam changed 22 times. The Corps continually let more water out, trying to keep the water from over-topping the dam.
An I-Team analysis shows at 1:30 p.m. on May 2, the National Weather Service called the Corps to get the latest data on how much water was being released in order to make its next crest prediction.
But after that call ended, the Corps increased the amount of water being released nine additional times, including opening the gates to their maximum level.
In the meantime, the National Weather Service kept making predictions, unaware of the increased water releases, until it spoke with the Corps again by phone at 7 that night, 5 1/2 hours after the last call.
“If we had information that was, you know, several hours old, or something, that’s the information we were working off. We work off the latest information provided by the Army Corps of Engineers,” said National Weather Service Hydrologist Jim Nole at last week’s joint news conference between the Corps and the National Weather Service.
A National Weather Service spokeswoman told the I-Team that during the 7 p.m. call, the Corps told the National Weather Service that the dam would be releasing water at 150,000 cubic feet per second.
But the Corps’ own records show at that time, it was actually releasing much more water: 211,730 cubic feet per second.
The National Weather Service spokeswoman told the I-Team that it gave the best prediction it could, given the information it was given at the time.
Despite the lack of timely information and the incorrect data, Corps officials praised the sharing of information at last week’s news conference.
“Across the board, I think the agencies worked well together, in terms of relaying communications and being as responsible as we possibly could,” said Lt. Col. Anthony Mitchell.
Jim Cooper blasts Corps for lack of flood report
Congressman wants ‘real facts’ on disaster
By Anne Paine • THE TENNESSEAN • June 19, 2010
It would be “completely unacceptable” for the Army Corps of Engineers to fail to do a detailed study of the May floods in Nashville and Tennessee, U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper says.
Cooper, D-Nashville, said he has been told that the Corps’ Washington leadership has decided not to do a report on the flood because of budget considerations.
“I am stunned the Corps doesn’t feel it is necessary to investigate their response to a multi-billion-dollar disaster,” he said in a statement issued Friday.
Bill Peoples, spokesman for the Nashville District Corps office, said a lessons-learned study will be finished in 30-60 days, and that some work has been carried out on a larger report, such as the one that Cooper is referring to.
High-water marks have been recorded, which is the first step in the more extensive study, Peoples said.
“We’ve requested funding for a post-flood report,” he said.
The request was made to the Corps headquarters in Washington, D.C.
That office, which The Tennessean could not reach Friday night, determines what funding to ask Congress to appropriate.
Cooper said the report would dig deeper into details on key data that could provide information helpful to protect local communities in the future. He would back funding for such a study, the congressman said.
“We have to have the real facts about what happened,” he said Friday night.
U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., also said last night that he would back a detailed report.
“If further funding is required for a more technical engineering report, I will work to help secure that funding,” he said in an e-mailed statement.
Alexander announced last month that he would hold a Senate hearing at a later date to assess the Corps’ actions during the flood.
Storms dumped more than 18 inches of rain in parts of Middle Tennessee over the first two days in May, causing widespread damage and 24 deaths statewide. Ten of those were in Nashville where one man remains missing.
Anne Paine can be contacted at 615-259-8071 or apaine@tennessean.com.
TDEC Returns to Normal Water Monitoring After May Flooding
Wednesday, June 16th, 2010, by Blake Farmer
State regulators have returned to normal water quality testing of Tennessee’s lakes and rivers after heightened monitoring since the flood. Most bodies of water have returned to pre-flood conditions.
May’s flooding caused 200 sewage pumping stations to malfunction, along with 70 waste water treatment plants. Many were spewing raw sewage into waterways such as the Cumberland River. There were also thousands of so-called “orphaned containers” floating around – including large propane tanks, oil drums and thousand of smaller gas cans.
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation second-in-command Paul Sloan says the same water that caused all the damage also helped water down the contaminates.
“Dilution is never the solution, but in a catastrophe like this, you did have an enormous body of water receiving those discharges, and that makes a big difference.”
TDEC is reporting normal conditions in all areas except downstream on the Cumberland River from Clarksville. There’s a sewage treatment plant that is still not fully functional and won’t be for several more weeks.
Despite the thousands of fuel containers floating in the floodwater, TDEC did not find much in the way of organic compounds in the Cumberland River. After the initial testing for petroleum products turned up no problems, TDEC discontinued the sampling.
Published: Saturday, June 19, 2010 12:18 AM CDT
The Army Corps of Engineers will hold a meeting Tuesday to collect recommendations, suggestions and comments to help define the scope of studies that will be conducted for the Missouri River Authorized Purposes Study.
The evening will include an open house from 5 to 7 p.m., followed by an hour for public comments at the Mid-America Center, 1 Arena Way. Participants may attend at their convenience.
The public meeting will include:
- Program booklet and comment form
- Continuous overview presentations so participants can watch at their convenience
I- Individual, manned stations focused on each of the authorized purposes
- One-on-one conversations with Corps experts to ask questions and gain information on the study
- Materials on the study
*
- Comment forms and a court reporter to record comments at each site
“We encourage the people planning to participate in these scoping meetings to come prepared to talk about what’s important to them and the problems and opportunities that should be addressed by the study,” said Mark Harberg, study co-manager.
Congress directed the Corps to conduct a study of the Missouri River projects within the basin to review the original project purposes based on the 1944 Flood Control Act to determine if changes to these purposes are warranted.
The eight purposes are flood control, hydropower, water supply, irrigation, navigation, recreation, water quality and fish and wildlife. Infrastructure operated by both the Corps and Bureau of Reclamation is included in the study.
Individuals that require assistance under the Americans with Disabilities Act to participate in these meetings can contact lois@djcase.com at least three days prior to a specific meeting. Those who use a telecommunications service for the deaf may call the Federal Information Relay Service anytime at (800) 877-8339 to relay this same information.
Comments will be accepted through Sept. 20. They can be e-mailed to: mraps@usace.army.mil or sent to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Missouri River Authorized Purposes Study, Attn: CENWO-PM-AA, 1616 Capitol Ave., Suite 9000, Omaha, NE 68102-4901. For more information about the Missouri River Authorized Purposes Study, visit: www.mraps.org.
Arcadia Lake remains closed; water not being released
Water is everywhere after Monday’s flash flood that forced Arcadia Lake to close. Army Corps of Engineers is not opening the dam, preferring to keep the water in lake because of flooding downstream.
BY DIANA BALDWIN Oklahoman Comment on this article 0
Published: June 19, 2010
EDMOND — A squirrel jumped on a concrete barrier Wednesday and looked toward a picnic table almost submerged in rising water at Arcadia Lake.
Multimedia
Photoview all photos
Arcadia Lake remains closed; water not being released
More Info
ONLINE
Check out the latest hourly water level at Arcadia Lake.
www.swt-wc.usace.army.mil/webdata/gagedata/ACDO2.current.html
Arcadia Lake 9000 E 2nd Street
Arcadia, OK
Arcadia Lake lies completely within the limits of Oklahoma City and Edmond in northeast Oklahoma County. The natural environment around the lake has been…
The animal looked the other direction before taking off, only to run into more water — this time covering the road.
Water is everywhere after Monday’s flash flood that forced officials to close Arcadia Lake.
A pavilion was under 3 feet of water, and all the boat ramps were submerged. The lake was up 16½ feet by midafternoon Wednesday. Officials estimate the lake could crest earlier than their original projection of Sunday.
Officials estimate about one-third of the 700-acre park is underwater.
Leon Mixer, lake supervisor, said the Army Corps of Engineers can’t let the water out of the lake because downstream along the Deep Fork River also is flooded. Once the water downstream subsides, Mixer said, the Corps will begin letting water out of the lake.
The downstream water levels are expected to crest Sunday.
“This is a lot of water,” Mixer said. “It will be a slow process.”
Water from Arcadia Lake will eventually make its way to Lake Eufaula.
“I have never seen so much rain in such a short period,” Mixer said. “This all occurred in a 12-hour period.”
Mixer advised that people stay away from the lake.
“It is for their safety,” Mixer said. “I can’t stress enough that the main reason we closed was for public safety.”
It is unknown how long the lake will be closed.
“People wonder why we closed,” Mixer said. “No one can get there. They can’t get their boats in the water.”
The last time the park flooded was in 2007. The lake was closed for 28 days.
Mixer, who has lived in the area all of his life, said the water was only higher one other time in the mid-1990s.
“The staff has taken thousands of calls of people who live in the metro where they didn’t get any rain and want to come,” Mixer said. “We just don’t know how long we will be closed.”
… an epic project that aims to reroute the Trinity, provide flood control … with the Army Corps of Engineers and federal sources filling in the rest. …
Flood-soaked communities across the state are bracing for another wave of stormy … On Friday, the US Corps of Engineers sent 400000 sandbags to Ogallal, …
***
Nebraska Flooding – Missouri River Flooding –
Forecasts Raise Concern In Flooded Areas
Rain Expected Along Elkhorn River
POSTED: 7:22 pm CDT June 18, 2010
UPDATED: 7:51 pm CDT June 18, 2010
LINCOLN, Neb. –
Flood-soaked communities across the state are bracing for another wave of stormy weather that could make high water levels climb higher.
On Friday, the U.S. Corps of Engineers sent 400,000 sandbags to Ogallal, 50,000 to Norfolk and more to areas along the Missouri River. Emergency management officials said people living along the Elkhorn River need to be especially watchful.
“We could be seeing another significant risk over flood stage on the Elkhorn River,” said Nebraska Emergency Management Agency Assistant Director Al Berndt.
The warning comes as water was receding in Norfolk.
“I’m proud to say Norfolk is again open for business,” said Nebraska state Sen. Mike Flood.
He said his community is working on recovery and bracing for more water.
“Any time there’s more water, given the situation we just had and saturation, it’s a real concern,” said Flood. “We really don’t need any more rain.”
State officials said they’re also concerned about flooding along the Platte River near Big Springs and Ogallala. They said storms are forecast for that area and additional water is being released from Wyoming dams.
Published: Saturday, June 19, 2010 12:18 AM CDT
The Army Corps of Engineers will hold a meeting Tuesday to collect recommendations, suggestions and comments to help define the scope of studies that will be conducted for the Missouri River Authorized Purposes Study.
The evening will include an open house from 5 to 7 p.m., followed by an hour for public comments at the Mid-America Center, 1 Arena Way. Participants may attend at their convenience.
The public meeting will include:
- Program booklet and comment form
- Continuous overview presentations so participants can watch at their convenience
I- Individual, manned stations focused on each of the authorized purposes
- One-on-one conversations with Corps experts to ask questions and gain information on the study
- Materials on the study
*
- Comment forms and a court reporter to record comments at each site
“We encourage the people planning to participate in these scoping meetings to come prepared to talk about what’s important to them and the problems and opportunities that should be addressed by the study,” said Mark Harberg, study co-manager.
Congress directed the Corps to conduct a study of the Missouri River projects within the basin to review the original project purposes based on the 1944 Flood Control Act to determine if changes to these purposes are warranted.
The eight purposes are flood control, hydropower, water supply, irrigation, navigation, recreation, water quality and fish and wildlife. Infrastructure operated by both the Corps and Bureau of Reclamation is included in the study.
Individuals that require assistance under the Americans with Disabilities Act to participate in these meetings can contact lois@djcase.com at least three days prior to a specific meeting. Those who use a telecommunications service for the deaf may call the Federal Information Relay Service anytime at (800) 877-8339 to relay this same information.
Comments will be accepted through Sept. 20. They can be e-mailed to: mraps@usace.army.mil or sent to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Missouri River Authorized Purposes Study, Attn: CENWO-PM-AA, 1616 Capitol Ave., Suite 9000, Omaha, NE 68102-4901. For more information about the Missouri River Authorized Purposes Study, visit: www.mraps.org.
And with it somewhere upstream was a warehouse that flooded and deposited all the internal stuff,” said Mark Thien, a member of the Cumberland River Compact …
***
From Last Year’s (2009) Flooding in Atlanta, GA – Sweetwater Creek – September 2009 ( and in 2005, twice in 1990) –
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
February 28, 2010 Sunday
First Replate Edition
NEWS; Pg. 1A
3175 words Austell reflects rising danger;
Warnings on development risks ignored in Cobb city at juncture of 5 creeks.
Margaret Newkirk, John Perry, Heather Vogell; Staff
Part 4 of 5
When the floodwaters finally receded in Austell, city leaders, the federal government and a giant rail yard in the crook of two creeks all took the heat from angry victims.
The small city’s mayor had answers.
“We had 20 inches of rain, and there’s nothing you can do about it,” said Mayor Joe Jerkins, adding that government had done all it could and the rail yard “had absolutely nothing to do with the rain that we had.”
The words will sound familiar to Austell residents who squeezed into civic meetings last fall, seeking an explanation for September’s epic floods.
But they were spoken more than four years ago. Austell’s creeks have made a mockery of flood prevention policy for decades.
One of September’s hardest-hit cities, Austell sits at the juncture of five creeks and in the bull’s-eye of a suburban building boom. Rainwater that once soaked into fields or forests now washes off parking lots and roofs, then heads — it seems — to Austell.
An Atlanta Journal-Constitution analysis published Feb. 21 found a dramatic link between the increase in man-made, nonabsorbent, “impervious” surfaces in the metro region and the size and speed of floods. Regional shortcomings in storm water planning aggravated the problem, the AJC found. Those flaws included splintered, jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction planning that ignored downstream impact and federal flood maps that didn’t keep up with that development.
Austell, with 6,300 residents, plans for flood prevention as well as, or better than, most communities in the region.
But it suffers from the region’s shortcomings, too. Combined with its natural vulnerability to floods, those flaws have made Austell the New Orleans of the region, said attorney Don Stack, who has represented hundreds of homeowners with development-related flooding problems.
“You’ve got the natural features of the river, a rail yard that changed the hydrology, development that shouldn’t have been developed.”
The region’s piecemeal flood planning, for instance, gives Austell no say in upstream development.
The already flood-prone city sits on the low end of a suburban drainage basin where the kind of hard surfaces that make creeks rise higher and faster increased by more than 50 percent over a decade, the AJC found.
Inside Austell’s borders, the city also allowed, or was forced to accept, development that appeared to defy common sense.
Private property rights and litigation, or the threat of it, helped put development in areas that conventional wisdom said would flood.
The 8-year-old, 450-acre Norfolk Southern Intermodal rail yard is one example, with its acres of pavement nestled in the flood-friendly juncture of the Powder Springs and Sweetwater creeks.
Another is Mulberry Creek, a 2003 subdivision downstream from the intermodal.
Problem known since 1964
Austell’s tendency to flood has been recognized since at least 1964, the first year the city asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for help.
Between 1964 and 1995, the corps studied Austell four times. Its conclusion: The city is built in a bad place.
Austell has been described as the catch basin for Paulding, Cobb and Cherokee counties.
The biggest of its five creeks, the Sweetwater, flows in from Paulding, one of the nation’s fastest-growing counties.
The other four creeks bunch into the Sweetwater from the north just as it flattens out and winds through Austell. In a big rain, water can get into Austell but it can’t get out.
The corps’ studies offered four potential solutions, but deemed none worth the cost. Even the cheapest — dredging and cleaning out the creek — failed the dollar-to-dollar cost-benefit test then needed to get federal help, said corps spokesman Patrick Robbins.
1990 back-to-back floods
The final corps studies followed two back-to-back floods in 1990, both of a size hydrology experts consider rare.
A 100-year flood is so big that hydrologists give it one chance in 100 of happening any given year. It’s the benchmark for national flood policy.
The Sweetwater almost reached the 100-year mark in February 1990, then hit it the next month, said Mayor Jerkins, who called in the corps in response. “I have lived here all my life, and in 1990 was the highest I have ever seen the water rise,” he would tell residents 15 years later, after an even bigger flood.
That was in 2005, when the Sweetwater rose “3 foot and 2 inches higher than in 1990,” Jerkins said. He called it a 500-year flood, although the U.S. Geological Survey says it didn’t quite hit that. The 500-year flood has a 0.2 percent annual chance.
While Jerkins blamed rain, other city officials wondered.
“The 500-year floods have caught us all by surprise,” city Councilwoman Beverly Boyd said. “It could be growth. But it’s not just ours. If it was just ours, we wouldn’t have much of a problem because we haven’t grown that much.”
Four years later, the Sweetwater outdid itself again. The USGS couldn’t rate September’s flood, except to say it was much bigger than a 500-year event.
Building boom upstream
A lot changed in the Sweetwater’s drainage basin during the years when its floods got worse.
Since the last corps study, areas upstream of Austell issued 175,000 new home permits, according to a federal database.
Homes and the roads, driveways and shopping centers that serve them mean more rain-repelling surfaces on ground that once soaked up rain.
Planners required drainage systems, but only recently began taking cumulative downstream effects into account.
In some creek basins, such as Powder Springs Creek upstream of Austell, man-made surface area grew by 50 percent or more in the past decade. Streams through such areas are “flashier” — peaking faster and higher after rains — than in the past, the AJC analysis shows.
The analysis found a tipping point: Once hard surfaces cover 30 percent of a creek basin, each addition of pavement has an increasingly bigger impact on streams.
Austell sits in the pincers of two problematic creek basins. In addition to the jump in hard surfaces in the Powder Springs Creek area, the Olley Creek basin has passed the 30 percent tipping point.
As development continued upstream, Austell grew, too — although modestly. The city issued 1,050 residential building permits between the corps studies in 1995 and 2008, the federal database said.
Austell also added developments — like the Norfolk Southern Intermodal in 2001 and Mulberry Creek subdivision in 2003 — in areas residents said would flood.
Outcries unheeded
The intermodal is where the railroad transfers cargo containers between trains and trucks.
Austell, Powder Springs, Lithia Springs, East Point, Cobb County, the Cobb Chamber of Commerce, the Atlanta Regional Commission, the state Senate and, for a time, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency all tried to stop it.
The railroad prevailed. Its federal lawsuit against Austell brought a landmark decision exempting such facilities from local zoning.
The 450-acre intermodal stretches southeast along Powder Springs Creek to its juncture with the Sweetwater. The area had flooded before, as a local environmentalist wrote the corps in 1997.
“Someone, somewhere, in the halls of officialdom at the railroad mistakenly thinks that trucks and trains are capable of floating,” wrote the late Pamela Blockey-O’Brien. The facility is “at the lower end of the 245 square mile drainage basin of Sweetwater Creek and the area floods.”
“Massively.”
The railroad built four huge ponds and new wetlands to control runoff. The system exceeded local and state standards, didn’t change the 100-year flood plain and let water into creeks more slowly than undeveloped land, company studies said.
The state-of-the-art-plus system is typical of Norfolk Southern projects, said spokeswoman Susan Terpay.
But Stack, the lawyer, said the intermodal likely changed creek behavior in ways public policy doesn’t grasp. Storm water policy addresses the rate of runoff, but not total volume.
The intermodal increased total runoff and that matters, he said: “If I’m going down the highway at 80 miles per hour, it makes a difference whether I do that for two minutes or two hours, in terms of how much ground I cover.”
The intermodal also meant that “water that used to move in sheets, in a widespread area, ended up being focused into four discharge points. What should have been spreading out was concentrated,” he said.
No one knows what the intermodal or building upstream did to the Sweetwater. A comprehensive study hasn’t been done in years. City public works director Randy Bowen said a new one is needed. “We are actively trying to get a restudy of Sweetwater Creek,” he said.
The Cobb County Commission agreed last week to do that study.
Extreme, yet typifying
Austell’s situation may be extreme, but it exemplifies problems that face storm water planners across the region.
Development has outpaced the tools, such as flood maps, used to measure the impact of lots of rain. Local control means communities can’t affect or even understand what upstream building does to their creeks.
And property owners have rights.
That’s what led to Austell’s 2002 approval of the Mulberry Creek subdivision, which sits on an old horse farm partially inside Sweetwater Creek’s 100-year flood plain line.
Neighbors and city officials warned of flooding. Councilman and subdivision opponent Bo Traylor said water had been as high as a man’s head there: “It was common knowledge that the area floods,” he said last fall.
City officials say they OK’d the 25-house subdivision because they believed the property owner could sue and win. “If they met our development standards, then they have a right to develop,” said Community Service Director Jim Graham.
Development laws try to balance public safety and private property rights. Austell does that by allowing building in the 100-year flood plain only if lots are raised up out of it. The lowest floor must be 3 feet above the line.
It’s a common standard, although not endorsed by everyone, since built-up flood plain moves water elsewhere. Douglas County bans building in the flood plain. The region’s water district encourages other options, too.
The standard requires reliable flood plain data, which is in short supply.
Even the newest Federal Emergency Management Agency flood risk maps, released in December 2008, are based partly on Sweetwater Creek hydrology studies that are 24 years old.
Mulberry Creek flooded in 2005 and again last fall, when 19 of 25 houses were damaged.
Both floods far exceeded the official 100-year mark.
A train wreck
The Sept. 21 flood was a hydrological train wreck for Austell.
According to USGS, 18 inches to 22 inches of rain fell on Paulding, west Cobb and Douglas counties Sept. 18 to Sept. 22. The soaked ground repelled rain into creeks almost like pavement.
A Norfolk Southern gauge recorded 9 inches in four days. A monitor just upstream saw 11 inches in 24 hours. Typical Atlanta rainfall is 50 inches in a year.
Flooding near the intermodal was dramatic. At an intersection near its tip, water reached a stoplight. Workers at a neighboring recycled paper company, Caraustar Industries, saw water on intermodal tracks rise to an overhead bridge.
The water swamped Caraustar from an unusual direction, Chief Financial Officer Ron Domanico said. The Sweetwater skipped a bend and charged across Caraustar’s property instead, pushing over a power pole, hurling 17 tractor trailers into a park and jamming another five under a bridge.
The water, it seemed, “was coming from the intermodal,” Domanico said.
Data from Norfolk Southern’s monitors, obtained under the state Open Records Act, tell a more confusing story.
As the rain fell, the intermodal’s four detention ponds slowed the rain’s path to the creeks as designed. They nevertheless sent lots of water — 2.9 million cubic feet on Saturday and 9.3 million cubic feet on Sunday — into the creek the weekend before the flood.
The Sweetwater’s flow past the rail yard on a dry day last fall was about 71 cubic feet per second — or 6.2 million cubic feet a day.
On the Monday of the flood, the creek’s flow was 9,785 cubic feet per second, which translates to a daily flow of 800 million cubic feet. As Jerkins later put it, the intermodal “wouldn’t even have raised the water to the thickness of paper. The problem here was the rain.”
But, what the rail yard added to the creek that day is a mystery. Two monitors were underwater and reporting nothing. Two others reported releases of 6 million cubic feet, although Norfolk Southern says it cut power to them that day: The reading may not be complete. By 1 p.m. that day, the creek was so high that it flowed backward into a rail yard retention pond.
In this series
AJC special investigation The coming flood
Last Sunday: Explosive growth, poor planning and neglected infrastructure have helped turn even unremarkable rainstorms into property-wrecking events in metro Atlanta.
Last Monday: Homeowners often bear the cost of runoff management.
Last Tuesday: While local governments take a tougher stance on controlling runoff, the state and federal government are pushing back.
Today: Sitting at the juncture of five creeks, Austell has suffered from the metro region’s flood-planning shortfalls for years.
Monday: A closer look at solutions. Some local governments across the country have taken a more aggressive approach to handling storm water.
On ajc.com/metro: Catch up on the series and find an in-depth metro map highlighting areas most susceptible to flash flooding.
Misery waiting to happen
Austell sits at the base of two problematic creek basins and is circled by three other creeks. Man-made “impervious” hard surfaces have increased dramatically in the Powder Springs Creek area and, in the Olley Creek basin, have passed the 30 percent tipping point that makes streams “flashier” — peaking faster and higher after rains, making the areas more susceptible to flash flooding, according to the AJC analysis.
Powder Springs Creek basin: Man-made surface area has grown by more than 50 percent in the past decade, including the 450-acre Norfolk Southern Intermodal that sits along Powder Springs Creek to its juncture with Sweetwater.
Olley Creek basin: Impervious surface has passed 30 percent. The Mulberry Creek subdivision flooded in 2005 and again last fall, when 19 of 25 houses were damaged.
Growing . . . growing . . . groan
As development continued upstream, Austell grew, too — the city issued 1,050 residential building permits between 1995 and 2008. Austell also added developments — chiefly the Norfolk Southern Intermodal in 2001 and Mulberry Creek subdivision in 2003 — in areas residents warned would flood.
100-year flood plain
500-year flood plain
It rains, it pours
September’s flood on Sweetwater Creek was significantly larger than a 500-year flood event — a flood so big that it’s given only a 0.2 percent chance of happening in any year. A 100-year flood has a 1 percent chance of happening in any year.
The National Weather Service defines North Georgia rainfall severity as follows for a 24-hour period:
100-year flood
(1 percent chance) 7.2 inches
500-year
(0.2 percent chance) 8.2 inches
1,000-year
(0.01 percent chance) 8.7 inches
Austell’s soggy history
The Cobb County city has experienced at least a 100-year flood several times since 1990.
1964: First U.S. Army Corps of Engineers study of Austell flood problems
1978: Second corps study of Austell floods
February 1990: Austell floods to just below the 100-year mark
March 1990: Austell floods again, reaching the 100-year flood mark
May 1990: Austell Mayor Joe Jerkins asks the corps to come back
1991: Third corps study of Austell floods
1992: Federal Emergency Management Agency develops flood map used until 2008
1995: Fourth corps study of Austell floods
July 2005: Austell floods to just below the 500-year flood mark
December 2008: FEMA maps partially updated from 1992
September 2009: Austell floods; water is so high the U.S. Geological Survey says it was worse than a 500-year flood
Source: National Weather Service
AJC special investigation The coming flood
What could help Austell
A new pathway
Dredging might help control Sweetwater Creek for a while.
But Austell Mayor Joe Jerkins thinks the city needs a long-term fix — a water escape valve. He wants a pipeline built near the point where the Sweetwater makes a final turn toward the south. The pipe could divert water from a flood-prone portion of the creek to a point downstream where the creek is moving faster: “It would take it down to where there’s more fall,” Jerkins said. The pipe would take in water only when the creek got high.
New maps
New laws passed across the region give cities and counties a legal tool for flood prevention — future flood plain maps. The new maps could supplement often outdated federal maps with more up-to-date information, helping officials plan new development and more accurately assist those in older developments assess flood risks. Austell also wants a new multi-county study of Sweetwater Creek.
New laws
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency are helping Austell determine whether it needs to change its laws related to flooding .
Sources: AJC research, city of Austell
**
How we got the story
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution took a closer look at Sweetwater Creek in Austell because of the magnitude of the flooding there Sept. 21 and because the area had also flooded four years earlier.
To assess the state of storm water policy, the AJC interviewed more than 60 homeowners, local officials, engineers, environmental officials and policy experts and reviewed state storm water permits and annual reports filed by 15 metro area cities and counties.
The AJC analyzed the effect of development on metro Atlanta streams using monitoring data provided by the U.S. Geological Survey. The analysis looked at the effect of impervious surface — such as pavement or roofs — on stream “flashiness,” the speed and height of peak stream flows during rains. The AJC estimated impervious surface from Atlanta Regional Commission land use maps using a model that set an average impervious surface percent for different land uses.
To measure stream flashiness, the AJC used the Richards-Baker flashiness index, computed by dividing the sum of differences between daily median stream flow by the sum of daily averages for each year, 1999 through 2009. The analysis used daily stream flow data from 19 Geological Survey stream gauges in the metro area. The analysis found that differences in impervious surface explain more than 70 percent of differences in stream flashiness.
The AJC interviewed residents and city and county officials and examined City Council minutes, ARC minutes, railroad documents, court records and state and federal regulatory files. The AJC filed an open records request with the state Environmental Protection Division for data about the Norfolk Southern rail yard and Sweetwater Creek during September’s flood.
February 28, 2010
The standard requires reliable flood plain data, which is in short supply.
Even the newest Federal Emergency Management Agency flood risk maps, released in December 2008, are based partly on Sweetwater Creek hydrology studies that are 24 years old.
(from above story)
***
Flood Categories (in feet)
Major Flood Stage:
17
Moderate Flood Stage:
13
Flood Stage:
10
Action Stage:
8
Historical Crests
(1) 30.80 ft on 09/22/2009
(2) 21.81 ft on 07/12/2005
(3) 20.00 ft on 07/08/1916
(4) 19.90 ft on 02/04/1982
(5) 19.30 ft on 03/18/1990 Show More Historical Crests
Low Water Records
(1) -0.90 ft on 10/09/1954
(2) -0.20 ft on 07/21/1989
(3) -0.15 ft on 10/21/2007 Show More Low Water Records
Oct 1, 2009 …Corps of Engineers It has not been a good few years for the Corps of Engineers… the Corps continued to release water from Lake Lanier, potentially adding …Lake Lanier Water Wars Governors Meet Next Week < Previous …
www.lakelanier.com/…/corps-of-engineers-on-lake-lanier-fights-criticism/ -
Corps to release more water from Lake Lanier – (during a drought when it was supposed to protect the water resources in the lake, my note)
From staff reports
// <![CDATA[// POSTED April 23, 2009 11 p.m.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will release additional water down the Chattahoochee River, as a rainy winter has raised Lake Lanier to its highest level since August 2007.
Lanier was at a level of 1,063.59 feet above sea level as of 7:15 p.m., according to the U.S. Geological Survey’s Web site. That puts Lanier about 7.5 feet below full pool of 1,071 feet.
The frequent rains the area has received during the past two months have raised Lanier nearly 7 feet since Feb. 22 and more than 10 feet since Jan. 1. In early December, Lanier came perilously close to breaking its all-time record low of 1,050.79 feet above sea level.
Gainesville has received above-normal rainfall so far this year, according to AccuWeather Inc.
Though normal annual rainfall through April 22 is 20.36 inches, Gainesville got 21.23 inches in that time period. April has been wetter than normal, too, with 4.85 inches recorded through Wednesday. The normal monthly rainfall through April 22 is 3.17 inches.
Last month, Georgia’s Environmental Protection Division eased water restrictions as drought conditions lessened. The EPD instituted an outdoor watering ban in fall 2007. Lanier’s level at that time was about what it is now and drought conditions gripped much of the state.
Since December, the severity of the drought in the Lake Lanier basin has improved from "exceptional," the worst category, to "moderate." The lowest category of drought is "abnormally dry," and state Climatologist David Stooksbury said at the end of March that several more weeks of rain could improve the Lanier basin to that level. The Lanier basin remained in the "moderate" drought range as of Tuesday, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor.
The National Weather Service’s three-month drought forecast predicts further easing of drought conditions in Northeast Georgia through July.
Though rainfall has resulted in an easing of the outdoor watering ban, restrictions remain in place.
"We’re happy it’s raining, don’t misunderstand," said Kevin Chambers, spokesman for the Georgia Environmental Protection Division, said in late March. "But we need four consecutive months of improvement to convene the state drought response committee (to consider changing the rules)."
According to the corps’ boat ramp elevation calculator, 1,068 is the point at which all existing boat ramps on Lanier are usable; most are accessible at 1,065.
The lake supplies much of the Atlanta area’s drinking water.
Florida and Alabama opposed the corps’ decision last year to reduce releases from November through April 30.
EPD Director Carol Couch, who previously requested the reduced releases, did not make such a request this time. She said sending less water down the river in May as the weather gets warmer could harm the trout population.
River alert! Water releases from Lake Lanier are less predictable
Chattahoochee can surge 11 feet higher and current will boom in minutes
6/6/2010
In the last week of May, Johns Creek rescue units were dispatched three times to stranded waders and frolickers in Chattahoochee River. Swift response and good luck averted a tragedy, but people who play in the river need to be alert and take precautions, especially now that releases from Lake Lanier are less predictable.
This year, there have been six to 10 rescue calls on the river from Buford Dam to Morgan Falls. Two were fatalities.
"The Chattahoochee is a powerful river and it needs to be treated with respect," said Johns Creek Fire Chief Joseph Daniels. "Focus on safety. If you don't, you'll pay the price."
With Lake Lanier at full pool and rain falling regularly again, the U.S. Corps of Engineers is releasing water on an as-needed basis rather than on a set schedule as before. That can catch people unawares.
"A lot of people go to the river a couple of times when we're not releasing and they think it's a serene river, but when we release, it can go from serene to whitewater in a few minutes," said Park Ranger Pamela Shelton.
The Corps does try to give some notice before releasing water downstream from the lake. People can find out about releases by calling 770-945-1466 or by listening to 1610 AM on their radio. The announcements may precede releases by a few hours or even minutes. Four warning sirens have been placed between Buford Dam and State Road 20. The water release will occur within minutes after the sirens stop.
During a release, the water level in the Chattahoochee River can surge 11 feet higher in a matter of minutes. Not only that, the current will boom as well. For the unwary, a playful situation can turn dangerous very quickly.
"Just about everyone I've dealt with was taken by surprise," said Daniels. "They're out there, and the water level came up and they didn't know what to do. Do I stay or do I swim? If you see an increase in flow or water level, it's time to get out."
And, he said, they were cold. The water is 47 degrees out of the lake.
"Water and hypothermia are a problem," said Johns Creek Firefighter Greg Rock, a certified Swift Water Rescue instructor. "Cold is one of the biggest factors. People aren't ready for it. They struggle for a while and then hypothermia overtakes them and they can't swim to shore or keep their heads above water."
Under the tutelage of Rock and Firefighter Clinton Crites, the City Fire Department is training 20 of its firefighters in swift water rescue. They are training firefighters from Sandy Springs and Roswell as well.
Some tips for surviving the river:
Call ahead of time to see when the Corps of Engineers plans to release water, or better yet, call just before entering the river - Be aware of the time and head for the shore when the release is scheduled. Even though it may take a while for the water to get to you, don't wait.
When you're in the water, wear a floatation device – at least then you probably won't drown, although you could be seriously banged up from hitting rocks, trees and other obstacles as you're carried downstream.
Keep an eye on the water level – note the water level on a solid fixture, such as a bridge support. Later, if the water level is higher on the fixture, don't assume it's a fluke. The water is rising and it's time to get out!
Just because you're in a boat, don't assume you're safe. At least one drowning occurred when a boat struck rocks broadside and flipped.
Make sure someone knows where you are. Then, if you're stranded or clinging to a rock with rushing water tugging at you, someone can find you and alert authorities.
Pay attention to where you are – there are mile-markers along the river. That way if you do have to make an emergency call, you can tell authorities where to find you.
This is the page I was using for the Chattahoochee River in Georgia / Metro Atlanta – however, there are more rivers and US Rivers information listed by links on the sidebar. And a search function for 401 lakes in the US.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is preparing to tighten the spigot at the Atlanta region’s main source of drinking water based on a federal judge’s stinging ruling in the tri-state water dispute.
Corps officials say they will rewrite their operating manuals for the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin to prohibit certain water withdrawals and releases from Lake Lanier after July 2012. Only Buford and Gainesville would be allowed to continue pulling drinking water from the lake under the Corps’ plans.
However, if Georgia, Alabama and Florida reach a compromise and Congress approves withdrawals from the lake, the Corps said it would update its manuals accordingly.
The public will have 45 days to comment on the Corps’ plans starting Thursday.
U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson ruled in July that Congress never authorized Lake Lanier to be used for the Atlanta region’s drinking water when the lake was created with federal funds in the 1950s. Atlanta has been illegally tapping the lake for decades, taking water from the Chattahoochee River that should have flowed to Alabama and Florida, the judge ruled. Magnuson ordered that Atlanta’s allocation of water from the lake revert to 1970s levels if Congress doesn’t approve a solution within three years.
“We will operate according to what the judge has ruled if nothing changes between now and” July 2012, said E. Patrick Robbins, a spokesman for the Corps Mobile District.
A spokesman for Gov. Sonny Perdue called the Corps’ decision disappointing. He said Perdue is preparing to meet soon with his counterparts in Florida and Alabama to work out a compromise. Meanwhile, Georgia is appealing Judge Magnuson’s ruling.
“I don’t think anybody… believes the [judge’s] ruling will go into effect in 2012,” Perdue spokesman Bert Brantley said. “We think that we will have some resolution by then. So any resource that went into updating [the Corps manuals] based on that ruling won’t be helpful any more.”
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) issued a statement about the Corps decision Wednesday.
“For too long, the Corps of Engineers ignored the law and the needs of those downstream to protect unrestricted, unauthorized, and unplanned growth in Atlanta,” the statement said. “The Corps is now choosing the appropriate course in updating the water manuals consistent with Judge Magnuson’s ruling that the Corps’ judgment does not override the intent of Congress. Alabama and Florida cannot be expected to bear the brunt of Georgia’s poor lack of planning for Atlanta’s expanding drinking water use.”
Power is the business in the 13-story structure on the banks of the Cumberland River, and megawatts are the commodity. TVA’s Cumberland Fossil Plant brings …
At the end of the plant’s tailpipe is wet limestone scrubbers that reduce sulfur dioxide from burning coal by 95 percent.Sulfur dioxide contributes to acid rain, and overall, TVA has reduces emissions by 91 percent since 1977, and harmful nitrogen oxides have been cut by 89 percent since 1995.
“There is currently no measurable government standard for acid rain,” Scott Brooks, TVA spokesman, said in an e-mail. “TVA, like other power producers, can only measure what comes out of our stacks.”
In 2004, Cumberland Fossil Plant was upgraded with a selective catalytic reduction system to lower nitrogen oxides by about 90 percent, reducing the compound to nitrogen and water.
And the clean-up has not been cheap. TVA has spent $5.3 billion to control emissions from its 11 coal-fired plants, which in 2009 produced 46 percent of the system’s electricity.
Nuclear power produced 32 percent of the electricity, 13 percent was purchased from other utilities and 7 percent was generated by water. Another 2 percent was derived from natural gas, diesel fuel and renewable sources like solar and wind power.
The Cumberland plant has two units that produce electricity, each independent of the other.
Low-sulfur coal from southeastern Illinois and northern Kentucky is off-loaded from barges on the Cumberland River and covered conveyor belts transfer it to giant hoppers that hold enough coal to supply the furnace for 16 hours.
Some coal is stored on the 1,425-acre site; a 40-day reserve.
The coal is pulverized into a fine powder and blown into the furnace, where it creates an eight-story fireball with temperatures between 1,000 and 2,500 degrees. The heat converts treated water into steam inside a boiler that lines the inside of the upper portion of the furnace.
Mullinax said the furnace is actually suspended from the top of the 13-story structure so it can expand downward from the heat it produces.
The steam is under great pressure and is used to spin a huge turbine at 3,600 RPMs, which turns a generator that produces electricity.
Meanwhile, the steam is directed over cooling condensers filled with river water, and the vapor is converted back to liquid, which is recycled back through the boiler system. The cooling water is returned to the river at a slightly higher temperature.
Smoke from the burning process is diverted to the scrubbers, which sprays a pulverized limestone and water slurry to remove the sulfur dioxide.
The emissions are released via twin 600-feet-tall smoke stacks. The two taller stacks are no longer used.
A by-product of the process is high-quality gypsum that is stored on a 100-acre site. Most is sold to Temple Inland, one of the largest wall board manufacturers in the nation, which is located adjacent to the site.
Also, fly ash that remains from burning the coal is sold as a byproduct. It’s used in asphalt shingles and road construction.
Combined, TVA sold more than 750,000 tons of the byproducts in 2009, Scott said.
Mullinax said the fly ash is stored dry in large silos onsite. The method is different than wet storage at the coal-fired plant in Kingston, which last year had a failure of its retention dykes, causing the mud-like waste to flood homes and businesses near the plant.
The Cumberland plant’s ability to dependably produce plenty of electricity at a relatively low cost with substantially less pollutants released into atmosphere is good business for industry.
A prime example is Hemlock Semiconductor LLC, which is building a $1.2 billion plant in Clarksville to produce components for solar energy production. It will be a direct TVA customer and Hemlock officials have said a major reason for selecting a site here was availability of enough electricity to power its operations.
Minerals Management Service – call for proposals page -
The one entry closed on May 14, 2010 (my note)
Technology Assessment & Research (TA&R) Program
On April 9, 2010, MMS Technology Assessment and Research (TA&R) Program announced a call for proposals addressing 2011 safety renewable energy research. Please follow the instructions in the request. This announcement closes on May 14, 2010. The announcement gives the prospective clients instructions on how to respond and send in their proposals to MMS for review. Search for announcement number M10PS00204 at
http://www.FedBizOpps.gov/
MMS has suggested guidelines that you may follow if your white paper results in a future request for a full proposal. The purpose is to provide consistency in proposals to expedite the review process.
(20 KB PDF)
The MMS has completed an assessment of the undiscovered technically recoverable resources (UTRR) underlying offshore waters on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). This assessment was based on information available as of January 1, 2003, including information obtained from new exploration activities in the Gulf of Mexico and in the Scotian Basin Offshore Canada.
The MMS estimates that the quantity of undiscovered technically recoverable resources ranges from 66.6 to 115.3 billion barrels of oil and 326.4 to 565.9 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The mean or average estimate is 85.9 billion barrels of oil and 419.9 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. These volumes of UTRR for the OCS represent about 60 percent of the total oil and 40 percent of the total natural gas estimated to be contained in undiscovered fields in the United States. The mean estimates for both oil and gas increased about 15 percent compared to the 2001 assessment. For the oil resources, the vast majority of this increase occurred in the deepwater areas of the Gulf of Mexico, while for gas resources the majority of the increase was in deep gas plays located beneath the shallow water shelf of the Gulf of Mexico.
The MMS estimates that the quantity of undiscovered technically recoverable resources ranges from 66.6 to 115.3 billion barrels of oil and 326.4 to 565.9 trillion cubic feet of natural gas - Jan. 2003 assessment - 2006 document
These estimates represent the potential quantities of undiscovered hydrocarbons that can be conventionally produced using existing or reasonably foreseeable technology, without any consideration of economic feasibility. Current technology includes drilling in water in excess of 3000 meters (10,000 feet) deep and to subsea depths in excess of 9600 meters (31,700 feet).
MMS periodically conducts comprehensive assessments of the undiscovered oil and gas resources on the OCS. The last comprehensive inventory was completed in 2001, with an interim update in 2003 to reflect significant changes in natural gas potential in the Gulf of Mexico. The resource assessments also include production and reserve estimates for the OCS as well as estimates of undiscovered economically recoverable resources. Undiscovered economically recoverable resources (UERR), presented in the form of price-supply curves, represent the portion of the undiscovered technically recoverable hydrocarbons that can be explored, developed and commercially produced at given costs and price considerations.
The results of this assessment, published as a brochure entitled Assessment of Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources of the Nation’s Outer Continental Shelf, 2006 is available in electronic form below or in printed form free of charge, as long as supplies last, from the MMS Resource Evaluation Division, 381 Elden Street, Mail Stop 4070, Herndon, VA 20170.
Chief, Resource Evaluation Division
381 Elden Street
Mail Stop 4070
Herndon, VA 20170
(703) 787-1628
Ecosystem Indicator Partnership (ESIP)
Interactive map showing the locations of monitoring programs for aquatic habitat, climate change, coastal development, contaminants, eutrophication, and fisheries and aquaculture.
Regional Habitat Monitoring Data System Web-based system that enables sharing, integration, and use of coastal habitat monitoring data. As a proof of concept, the system has been developed initially with data from a limited number of monitoring sites in salt marshes and seagrass beds.
Gulf of Maine KnowledgeBase Bibliographic database of scientific papers, technical reports, workshop proceedings, fact sheets, and other information related to ocean and coastal management in the Gulf of Maine and its watershed.
Habitat Restoration Web Portal Resources for planning and implementing habitat restoration projects in the Gulf of Maine and its watershed. Mapping tools. Restoration project summaries.
Habitat restoration grants RFP is released. The period for submitting online full proposals is March 1st – April 2nd 2010. Click here for more information.
Restoration Inventory 484 potential sites for habitat restoration in 4 Gulf of Maine watersheds: Kennebec River, Royal River, Presumpscot River, and Spruce Creek. Interactive map and search tool. Sites categorized by town, waterbody, habitat, source of degradation, area of habitat affected, type of restoration needed, and cost rank.
Gulfwatch Measuring contaminants in blue mussels to assess the types and concentration of contaminants in coastal waters of the Gulf of Maine. Interactive map. Downloadable data.
About the Gulf of Maine Introductory information, maps, and photographs. The Gulf of Maine is bordered by Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia. It covers 93,000 square kilometers (36,000 square miles) of ocean and has 12,000 kilometers (7,500 miles) of coastline.
Houston, Texas (CNN) — The judge that BP wants to hear an estimated 200 lawsuits over the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster gets tens of thousands of dollars a …
The basin contains a volume of roughly 660 quadrillion gallons (2.5 × 1015 m3).
The Gulf of Mexico’s eastern, north, and northwestern shores lie along the US states of Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. The US portion of the Gulf coastline spans 1,680 miles (2,700 km), receiving water from thirty-three major rivers that drain 31 states.[6]
The outer margins of the wide continental shelves of Yucatán and Florida receive cooler, nutrient-enriched waters from the deep by a process known as upwelling, which stimulates plankton growth in the euphotic zone. This attracts fish, shrimp, and squid.[7]
Map of northern part of Gulf of Mexico – from wikipedia entry
Other important industries along the coast include shipping, petrochemical processing and storage, military use, paper manufacture, and tourism.
(and)
The gulf’s warm water temperature can feed powerful Atlantic hurricanes causing extensive human death and other destruction as happened with Hurricane Katrina in 2005. In the Atlantic, a hurricane will draw up cool water from the depths and making it less likely that further hurricanes will follow in its wake (warm water being one of the preconditions necessary for their formation). However, the Gulf is shallower and its entire water column is warm. When a hurricane passes over, although the water temperature may drop it soon rebounds and becomes capable of supporting another tropical storm.[8]
The Gulf is considered aseismic: however, mild tremors have been recorded throughout history (usually 5.0 or less on the Richter scale).
A 6.0 tremor was recorded on September 10, 2006, 250 miles (400 km) off the coast of Florida which caused no damage, but could be felt throughout the Southeastern United States.
Various biota include chemosynthetic communities near cold seeps and nonchemosynthetic communities such as bacteria and other microbenthos, meiofauna, macrofauna, and megafauna(larger organisms such as crabs, sea pens, crinoids, and demersal fish and cetaceans including endangered ones) are living in the Gulf of Mexico.[11]
(and from another entry)
The Gulf Coast is a highly productive economic region with many industries relating to fishing, aerospace, agriculture, biomedical research, and tourism. The region is anchored by the cities of Houston, New Orleans, Mobile, and Tampa, all the centers of their respective metropolitan areas and containing large ports.
These landforms protect numerous bays and inlets providing as a barrier to oncoming waves. The central part of the Gulf Coast, from eastern Texas through Louisiana, consists primarily of marshland. The western part of the Gulf Coast, predominantly Florida, is dotted with many bays and inlets.
The Gulf Coast is a major center of economic activity. The marshlands along the Louisiana and Texas coasts provide breeding grounds and nurseries for ocean life that drive the fishing and shrimping industries. The Port of South Louisiana (between New Orleans and Baton Rouge in Laplace) and the Port of Houston are two of the ten busiest ports in the world by cargo volume.[1] As of 2004, seven of the top ten busiest ports in the U.S. are on the Gulf Coast.[2]
The discovery of oil and gas deposits along the coast and offshore, combined with easy access to shipping, have made the Gulf Coast the heart of the U.S. petrochemical industry. The coast contains nearly 4,000 oil platforms.
Besides the above, the region features other important industries including aerospace and biomedical research, as well as older industries such as agriculture and — especially since the development of the Gulf Coast beginning in the 1920s and the increase in wealth throughout the United States — tourism.
The petrochemical industry, launched with the major discoveries of oil in Texas and spurred on by further discoveries in the Gulf waters, has been a vehicle for development in the central and western Gulf which has spawned development on a variety of fronts in these regions.
Texas in particular has benefited tremendously from this industry over the course of the 20th century and economic diversification has made the state a magnet for population and home to more Fortune 500 companies than any other U.S. state.
Florida has grown as well, driven to a great extent by its long established tourism industry but also by its position as a gateway to the Caribbean and Latin America.
As of 2006, these two states are the second and fourth most populous states in the nation, respectively (see this article).
Other areas of the Gulf Coast have benefited less, though economic development fueled by tourism has greatly increased property values along the coast, and is now a severe danger to the valuable but fragile ecosystems of the Gulf Coast.
The Division of Environmental Geology (DEG) offers AAPG members an opportunity to increase their knowledge about the environment and the petroleum industry. DEG approaches basic environmental issues from a geological standpoint, so the profession’s understanding of geological, geochemical, geophysical and hydrogeological principles and methodologies can be applied to environmental problems.
Houston, Texas (CNN) — The judge that BP wants to hear an estimated 200 lawsuits over the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster gets tens of thousands of dollars a …
More on the investigation into the judge BP wants to oversee lawsuits resulting from the Deepwater Horizon explosion on tonight’s AC360 at 10 p.m. ET
Houston, Texas (CNN) — The judge that BP wants to hear an estimated 200 lawsuits over the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster gets tens of thousands of dollars a year in oil royalties and is paid travel expenses to industry conferences, financial disclosure forms show.
Hughes also travels widely and speaks to meetings held by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, including one held in early June in the Canadian city of Calgary and an earlier conference in Cape Town, South Africa.
He’s the association’s distinguished lecturer on ethics, having delivered 10 speeches to the trade group in the past three years.
The association doesn’t pay him a fee but does supply his travel, accommodation and expenses, said Larry Nation, a spokesman for the trade group.
Congressman Barton has taken $1.4 million in campaign contributions from the Oil industry since 1989, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The Congressman is the Ranking Minority Member on the Energy & Commerce Committee and during the June 17, 2010 hearings on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, apologized to BP for what he termed the the $20 billion “shakedown” of BP by the White House.[4]
Legislative work
Former Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee,[5][6] primary House author of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and chairman of the House-Senate energy conference committee
A list of all bills that Representative Barton has introduced is available at Sponsored Bills and amendments at Amendments.
Barton has been the lead representative in forcing the switch from analog to digital TV and auctioning off the public airwaves to private companies.
Rep. Barton has been regarded as a global warming skeptic[5] and his opposition to addressing global warming has been consistent and long-term[citation needed]. Barton is considered an oil industry apologist, most notably for his rebuffing and apologizing for[9] the White House asking for an escrow account from BP in response to the Gulf Oil Spill disaster.
As a chairman with primary responsibility over the energy sector, Barton has consistently acted over the years to prevent congressional action on global warming.[10] In 2001, Barton declared, “as long as I am chairman, [regulating global warming pollution] is off the table indefinitely. I don’t want there to be any uncertainty about that.”[11] Barton led opposition to amendments that would have recognized global warming during consideration of the Energy Advancement and Conservation Act in 2001, opposing an amendment to require the President to develop and implement a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels as called for by the non-binding United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to which the U.S. is a party.[dead link][12] In 2003, Barton again opposed amendments that would have recognized global warming during consideration of the National Energy Policy Act of 2003, opposing a nonbinding amendment that would have put Congress on record as saying that the U.S. should “demonstrate international leadership and responsibility in reducing the health, environmental, and economic risks posed by climate change.”[dead link][13] In July 2003, Barton offered an amendment to the Foreign Relations Authorization Act to remove language that both recognized global warming and called on President Bush to reengage with the international community to find solutions.[dead link][14] In addition, Barton has consistently opposed proposals to reduce the nation’s dependence on oil.[15][16][17]
In 2005, prompted by a February 2005 Wall Street Journal article,[18] Rep. Barton has launched an investigation into two climate change studies from 1998 and 1999.[5] In his letters to the authors of the studies, he requested not just details on the studies themselves but significant information about their entire lives and previous studies.
Both initiated and eliminated “safe harbor” provision for MTBE (in Energy Policy Act of 2005).[7][8]
In addition, Barton has consistently opposed proposals to reduce the nation’s dependence on oil.[15][16][17]
Barton used his committee chairmanship to block the Combating Autism Act of 2006, despite overwhelming bipartisan support. Barton claimed the money steered toward environmental causes of autism were not the reason he blocked passage of the bill,[28] However, he voted for passage of the bill once the environmental language was removed.
During his political career, the industries that have been Barton’s largest contributors were oil and gas ($1.4 million donated), electric utilities ($1.3 million) and health professionals ($1.1 million)[33] He is ranked first among members of the House of Representatives for the most contributions received from the oil and gas industry, and number five among all members of Congress.[34] His largest corporate contributor, Anadarko Petroleum, owns a 25 percent share in the Macondo Prospect, the site of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.[35]
Congressman Barton voted against the Affordable Health Care for America Act.[41] FEC data shows that in his career, Barton has received almost $2.2 million from the Healthcare industry, $1.5 million of that coming from PACs. This is second only to the amount of money Barton has raised from the Energy sector.[42]
almost a million dollars a year just for his staff which doesn’t include the bonuses and numerous other staff salaries for serving his committee offices and other functions.
Rep. Joe Barton (-Texas, 6th) In Office – Staff Salary Data
To see staff salaries for aides in the personal office of Rep. Joe Barton, select a time period below.
Note that the salary index for a given time period does not necessarily reflect exactly who is on staff at the present time. Also, aides for any relevant committees, leadership offices, campaign committees and leadership PACs will not be included here, nor do we have data for unpaid staff such as interns or people who are “detailed” from the GAO, executive branch or private sector.
* Earmarks requested by the president are not included in the member and state rankings to better reflect political power. This follows the methodology used by Taxpayers for Common Sense.
Earmarks with this alert are not included in member tallies // <![CDATA[//
* Earmarks requested by the president are not included in the member and state rankings to better reflect political power. This follows the methodology used by Taxpayers for Common Sense.
Earmarks with this alert are not included in member tallies // <![CDATA[//
* Earmarks requested by the president are not included in the member and state rankings to better reflect political power. This follows the methodology used by Taxpayers for Common Sense.
Earmarks with this alert are not included in member tallies // <![CDATA[//
* Earmarks requested by the president are not included in the member and state rankings to better reflect political power. This follows the methodology used by Taxpayers for Common Sense.
Earmarks with this alert are not included in member tallies //
Ennis Independent School District, for the Alternative Learning Center, including curriculum development and purchase of equipment
(Labor-HHS-Education)
Arlington Chamber of Commerce for commercialization of technology, especially bio- and nano-technology at University of Texas Arlington
(Transportation and Housing & Urban Development)
Representative Joe Barton has reported a total of 547 contributions ($200 or more) totaling $429,660 in the current cycle. To search these itemized contributions for this member, click here.
This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2009 – 2010 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization’s PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.
Amendment sought to strike the provision that permits financing entities to use funds repaid by participants to provide assistance to additional participants.
To ensure health care consumer and provider access to certain health benefits plan information and to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to provide transparency in hospital price and quality information.
Disapproving a rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to the endangerment finding and the cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.
Declaring that it shall continue to be the policy of the United States, consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act, to make available to Taiwan such defense articles and services as may be necessary for Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.
Amendment sought to place provisions in the bill allowing the new Federal chemical facility regulations enacted by this bill to preempt state and local laws that “hinder, pose obstacles to, or frustrate the purpose of the federal program”.
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the conditions for the United States becoming a signatory to or negotiating any international agreement on greenhouse gas emissions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
12/03/09
H.RES.1289 Expressing the sense of the House that Democratic Members of the House should join Republican Members of the House in a total ban on earmarks for one year, that total discretionary spending should be reduced by the amount saved by earmark moratoriums, and that a bipartisan, bicameral committee should be created to review and overhaul the budgetary, spending, and earmark processes. 04/22/10
H.RES.867 Calling on the President and the Secretary of State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration of the “Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict” in multilateral fora. 10/23/09
H.RES.713 Recognizing the significant contributions of United States automobile dealerships, and expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that in the interest of equity, automobile dealers whose franchises have been terminated through no fault of their own be given an opportunity of first consideration once the auto market rebounds and stabilizes. 07/31/09
(so much for Republicans ideas of free market economy and open competition, my note)
H.J.RES.50 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage. 05/07/09
H.CON.RES.116 Expressing the sense of Congress for the immediate withdrawal of the Department of Labor”s notice of proposed rulemaking seeking to rescind the Form LM-2. 04/30/09
H.R.871 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that the taxable income limit on the allowance for depletion shall not apply in 2008 to domestic marginal oil or gas wells. 02/04/09
H.R.866 Law Enforcement Protection Act 02/04/09
H.R.391 To amend the Clean Air Act to provide that greenhouse gases are not subject to the Act, and for other purposes. 01/09/09
Report oiled shoreline or request volunteer information: (866)-448-5816
Submit alternative response technology, services or products: (281) 366-5511
Submit your vessel for the Vessel of Opportunity Program: (281) 366-5511
Submit a claim for damages: (800) 440-0858
Report oiled wildlife: (866) 557-1401
Key contact numbers
Report oiled shoreline or request volunteer information: (866) 448-5816
Submit alternative response technology, services or products: (281) 366-5511
Submit your vessel for the Vessel of Opportunity Program: (281) 366-5511
Submit a claim for damages: (800) 440-0858
Report oiled wildlife: (866) 557-1401
Deepwater Horizon Incident
Joint Information Center
Phone: (713) 323-1670
(713) 323-1671
UNIFIED COMMAND URGES CITIZENS TO HELP PROTECT LOUISIANA’S COAST
BY NOT TAMPERING WITH BOOM
HOUMA, La. – The Unified Command today released a public service announcement (PSA) regarding boom vandalism currently taking place on Louisiana waters.
The PSA urges citizens to help protect Louisiana’s shoreline and marshes by not cutting, tampering or moving boom currently in place. Boom is an essential part of the ongoing response efforts and by damaging boom, the effort to protect Louisiana’s coastline and natural inhabitants is jeopardized.
Citizens are encouraged to report any boom vandalism to local law enforcement, the U.S. Coast Guard or by calling (866) 448-5816.
The Unified Command has been established to manage response operations to the April 20, 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. A Unified Command links the organizations responding to an incident and provides a process for those organizations to make consensus decisions. The Houma Unified Command is responsible for all operations in Louisiana.
Deepwater Horizon Response The vacuum barges in Louisiana have been deemed safe to re-join the fight against the oil spill in the Gulf. The vacuum barges were temporarily removed from service after safety concerns occurred including stability and the lack of lifesaving and firefighting equipment. All concerns have been addressed and the vessels …are safe for all crewmembers aboard. Read more: http://ht.ly/20189
I received a comment on my post which I will put here about a test that anyone can do (non-invasive) for benzene exposure. It costs 36 pounds and can be purchased online. However, I’ve only briefly looked into it and what I want to do is find the other tests available for the specific chemicals that are in the crude oil and dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico air and water such that people can take those samples themselves and test what is there.
We have a lot of boats going out into those areas and if many are taking samples where the fumes are assaulting them – maybe a better idea of the overall health risks can be developed and proven in ways that the EPA and health agencies cannot ignore. As much as they know it is dangerous, they continue to say it doesn’t require respirators or eye protection for those being exposed to the crude oil and dispersant and crude oil burnoff vapors concentrated in the area and coming ashore.
This is the one of those tests. This one is for exposure to benzene. It doesn’t say how quickly after exposure that the test has to be made for it to be correct. And, there are other tests available to get information about what is in the air and water including some handheld devices used for sampling that tech teams, scientists, some environmental groups, miners and industries use. I will look for them.
This one is from the company BIOMARK. This is the comment I received -
Those involved with the oil spill clean-up and those living and working close to the affected shoreline will be exposed to benzene. With airborne monitoring it is not possible to say exactly how much benzene an individual has been exposed to. Biomonitoring, the measurment of a chemical or a breakdown product from that chemical in the body of an individual allows a much more accurate measurment of a persons exposure to that harmful chemical. For example the measurement of a specific urinary metabolite of benzene called S-PMA allows a persons exposure to benzene to be determined. Biomark Limited have recently launched a simple to use and cost-effective benzene biomonitoing test. This test allows large numbers of sample to be taken and quickly measured. Details of this test can be found at http://www.biomark.co.uk. The test is available on-line to individuals, environmental organisations, companies and governments. This test could be a very powerful tool for determining benzene exposure and assessing the long-term inpact of this environmental disaster.
CONTACT DETAILS -
Biomark Limited
14 Camelot Way
Thornhill
Cardiff
CF14 9AN
Biomark Limited
Registered in England and Wales Company No. 6034383
Biomark’s test measures the urinary biomarker S-phenylmercapturic acid (S-PMA). S-PMA is specific to benzene and presence of this metabolite in urine confirms inhalation, ingestion or absorption of this harmful chemical.
On Tuesday, June 15, the NOAA Ship Pisces reported a dead sperm whale floating 77 miles due south of the Deepwater Horizon spill site. NOAA is currently in the process of conducting thorough testing to determine the circumstances surrounding the mammal’s death, as well as collect information about its life. This is the first dead whale reported since BP’s rig exploded on April 20 It was not found in oiled waters; however, its location of death is unknown.
As soon as the whale was sighted, Pisces Field Party Chief Paul Felts called the marine mammal hotline to report the finding to the Wildlife Branch of the Unified Command and NOAA’s marine mammal experts.
Based on the estimated size of the whale, scientists believe it is a sub-adult. Its condition suggests it may have been dead for between several days to more than a week. Although it was not found in oiled water, NOAA marine mammal experts are using hindcasting analysis to look into the location from which the whale carcass may have drifted.
While it is impossible to confirm whether exposure to oil was the cause of death, NOAA is reviewing whether factors such as ship strikes and entanglement can be eliminated. Samples collected from this carcass will be stored under proper protocols and handed off when the Pisces comes to port on July 2, or possibly if another boat is sent to meet the Pisces. Full analysis of the samples will take several weeks.
In accordance with the Wildlife Branch protocols, NOAA’s Southeast Regional Marine Mammal Stranding Coordinator Blair Mase requested that the NOAA field crew take photographs of the approximately 25-foot whale, collect skin swab for oil analysis, collect blubber and skin samples for analysis, and measure its height in the water. Although the whale is very decomposed, the photographs and samples will help scientists better understand how long it has been dead. The blubber and skin samples will be used for genetic analysis and to determine the sex of the animal. Measurements of the whale floating in the water will be used to determine how far and how fast it might have floated from where it died. The carcass has been marked so that aerial reconnaissance teams will be able to identify the individual and will not report it as a new mortality.
NOAA and the Unified Command Wildlife Branch have had numerous reports of sperm whales seen swimming in the oil, but this is the first confirmed report of a dead whale since the BP oil spill began. NOAA remains concerned about sperm whales, which are the only endangered resident cetaceans in the upper Gulf of Mexico. Sperm whales spend most of their time in the upper Gulf offshore area, live at depth in areas where subsurface dispersants and oil are present, and feed on deepwater squid, which may also be impacted by the oil and dispersants.
The NOAA Ship Gordon Gunter sailed yesterday for a multi-week cruise to do photo identification, assessments, tagging, biopsies, and prey-density studies for sperm whales and Bryde’s whales. Nearshore and offshore response efforts are continuing, and include investigations to determine cause of death or illness for dolphins that have stranded and aerial surveys for cetaceans throughout the area. The information gained from these efforts will help assess the impacts of this event on cetaceans in the Gulf of Mexico.
Two of the things I’ve noticed in the last few days about the oil spill -
1. That the five biggest oil companies are paying ZERO royalties for the 141 wells they are operating in the Gulf of Mexico. (said by a Representative in the Hearings earlier this week. I looked it up and apparently that is true.)
2. That the ideas, products, inventions, and solutions being put into the email to the Senators, Representatives, the Department of Energy and elsewhere including on the BP website form page are going to a team of six people somewhere in the Unified Command and they’ve received 100,000 plus – maybe because they are all shipping them over to the same place when people and companies are sending the ideas to them.
And, although Tony Hayward yesterday in hearings said that they are incorporating some of those ideas into the oil spill recovery and oil spill containment and well containment – there is no evidence of that, except where local leaders are putting them to use in a few cases on their own. But, they are not using the ideas being submitted to BP or the Unified Command because those are not being made available to them.
- cricketdiane
***
Finally, CNN is showing a few pictures where people working in the spill areas do have a few respirators. David Michaels, Assistant Secretary of Labor at OSHA is speaking now about the respirators and suggesting that now they are saying that some workers are being told to wear respirators. But apparently that is not being required in the areas of the marshes and many other places.
One thing he just noted – (on CNN) is that to include requirements for respirators is to require a fit test and another test to make sure they are being used correctly so as not to be damaging to the heart and in the heat – these respirators are apparently very difficult on the body as well. Hmmmm……
So, he is excusing the fact that OSHA is not requiring those standing in oil in the marshes or on boats being subjected to the oil or leaning over the oil in the marshes to clean it up with absorbent towels from the grasses who are being exposed to benzene and other chemical hazards found in crude oil.
Hmmm……..
Testing the air, testing the water – finding too little chemicals to be of concern but meanwhile – people are being overcome by the fumes and made sick by them. What is wrong with this picture? Why does it continue to be wrong? And is this the best we can offer these workers, respirators that are worse than what they would be breathing even when it is known to be extremely hazardous chemicals? That mentality of how much trouble it would be to fit test everyone who might need to be using a respirator.
***
By the way -
I’m very glad that the $20 Billion dollars was put into an escrow account by BP and I’m very proud of our President and our team in the White House for their tough negotiations with BP’s Chairman and executives to accomplish it.
However, I’ve noticed that there are already statements made by Tony Hayward yesterday about these funds being expected to cover virtually everything for the next ten years and I don’t think that is realistic. What is realistic is that having this money set aside into escrow will protect it in the event that BP, its subsidiaries involved in this event or by separation of the oil spill event into a separate company – that any of them go into bankruptcy. That is important as is that the money is protected in the event of a merger or the numerous ways that corporate structures can be manipulated to sidestep continuing financial liabilities.
And, the other thing I noticed is how much Mr. Barton of Texas spoke directly for the views of the Republican Party yesterday in the hearings as he apologized to BP for the “shakedown”. When he was speaking, he mentioned that he found it distasteful that a business or an individual legitimately at fault could be required to set aside some measure of assets in this way (my paraphrase – what he said was even better).
The thing is that he and his Republican counterparts decided during the Reagan years forward, that any business, corporation or individual who was found accused (long before being found guilty in any court of law or mounting any sufficient defense,) of violating any number of US laws would immediately find their homes, businesses, vehicles, properties, assets, bank accounts, belongings and every other thing confiscated by the law enforcement agencies of the US. If that is not a shakedown – I don’t know what is.
And long before any of the cases could go to court, all that property was confiscated and often, auctioned off before it was ever ascertained that the action had been appropriate in the first place. So, get off it – The Republican Party policy makers had determined to do that and to push for sovereignty laws across the US and to push lower and lower what standards could be used to facilitate taking property through eminent domain laws, including to use them for the mineral rights under our national public lands, national parks, and federal lands.
Mr. BP representative Barton (R) Texas didn’t mind when all that has been going on and the Republican Party were the ones who decided on it being that way. So, what is their problem when one of their favorite friends have to put up a bit of money for what they’ve done. In fact, based on the laws of the United States as the Republicans have remade them, all of BP’s assets could be frozen right now and literally confiscated – all of it.
And, on CNN yesterday – although I’ve noted it on earlier posts and elsewhere online it can be found through the US Treasury Department, the State Department and through International Petroleum websites – BP owns and operates facilities in conjunction with Iran and for Iran and together serves the needs of Iran. CNN noted that one massive investor with 24 million shares of BP stock was found to be Iran’s own – but I don’t know that it can be substantiated by the public. The laws of the United States and the European Union, along with the UN facilitators and other agencies within the US departments do know however, as does the UK government oversight members. So, that will get fixed before it is all over.
What struck me most yesterday watching the two hearings yesterday – the subcommittee with BP and the other one with the Minerals Management Service – was to watch the sidestepping of the Republicans in the MMS hearings of the subcommittee on natural resources.
Instead of using the time to ask pertinent and appropriate questions to investigate the situation and others that may be accidents waiting to happen, at least two of the Republican representatives used that time to push, push, push Republican Party policy position paper statements about the oil drilling moratorium on the 33 wells in deepwater of the Gulf of Mexico.
I wish they would use the time properly or just shut up and let somebody else do it. What a waste of time, effort and opportunity when Republicans are doing it that way when in this once in a lifetime hearing event when decisions and investigations are occurring – they use it as a chance to further intentionally instigate and promote oil industry interests in a continuing stream of read and re-read statements straight out of the Republican party conservative thinktanks and Wall Street backers consumed with the Oil play.
How could they do that? And, I was proud to see some of the Republican Representatives in the hearings with Tony Hayward of BP finally getting into the real deal of trying to understand what has happened, why it happened, how it might happen again even yet, and how the recovery efforts are being done. At first their statements were the same old stuff and then they started getting angry with the bullshit too.
BP doesn’t seem much like an oil company and I can see now why the other oil executives from the large oil companies in hearings earlier started distancing themselves away from BP. It seems that the executives in BP have acted more like Wall Street members than oil industry members. Maybe their only job is to maneuver deals, manage mergers and sustain the corporate hierarchy to cut costs, deliver layoffs, drop overhead and increase profits as a result.
Maybe they have no abilities to fund and implement reasonable safety measures and safe operations in that business and corporate model as it is now. To them (given that structure) – safety measures and R&D into better, safer ways would simply look like a column on a balance sheet to cheat out of the needed resources in order to boost profits on a continually short term basis but always immediately out in front of them. They could literally say that safety was their first priority even as severe financial and resource cuts were made to each and every safety system and safety based measure in use.
Of the 461 turtles verified from April 30 to June 16, a total of 355 stranded turtles were found dead, 34 stranded alive. Four of those subsequently died. Four live stranded turtles were released, and 26 live stranded turtles are being cared for at rehabilitation centers. Turtle strandings during this time period have been much higher in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and the Florida Panhandle than in previous years for this same time period. This may be due in part to increased detection and reporting, but this does not fully account for the increase.
The above note from June 16, 2010 – NOAA website -
And as noted elsewhere – from NOAA ships – there are thousands of sea cucumbers dead in the waters that have been observed and photographs taken of their numbers floating dead in the waters along with man of war, jellyfish, and other similar animals floating dead in the Gulf of Mexico waters.
I haven’t found the condition of the coral reefs at the pinnacles however, there was a mention on CNN by some members of local governments that the bottom of Barataria Bay is covered in oil and oil mixed with dispersants, tar balls and thick gooey oil product.
(my note)
***
There were also nests destroyed and pelican chicks and eggs along the coastal marshes that were reported in the last couple days where they had either been stepped on by cleanup workers or bags of petroleum crude oil had been thrown over on top of them awaiting collection of those bags. It doesn’t make sense – do you know there are UV protective clothing with specially made fabrics to be cool that are used in Death Valley and Sahara races and neck bandanas made in Australia that cool the body. There have to be the better designed respiration equipment somewhere and yet, everywhere I look, the Coast Guard, the National Guard, and workers hired to cleanup or place boom are not required to wear respirators and none of these things listed above are available to them even though the heat index in some areas is around 110.
Its as if I am watching a cleanup and recovery operation designed in the 1960 time period predating the computer access to all these things across the world and prior to the time when these products and their companion technologies existed. It is also as if none of the things that have been known for the last one hundred years, especially throughout the last fifty years have been added to the mix of what is available to bring to bear on a situation from knowledge and information to products, inventions, discoveries and options.
It is maddening. And, I still think that the contractors are getting more of the decision making about who and what and where assets are placed along with how they are used and which contractors or subcontractors are allowed to do them. That is the most insanely irresponsible manner to operate this approach that has ever existed ever. It is almost been worse than doing nothing at all in many cases and it ties up resources and assets which could be used to put them into permanently idling on the docks or out of the action which costs immeasurably every single minute it is happening.
That has to be changed immediately or it will go on this same way over the next six months of this operation and continue making it worse on a daily basis as reasonable courses of action are withheld.
- cricketdiane
***
Oh yeah and yesterday, Mr. Hayward said that the find at Macondo Prospect where the Deepwater Horizon was drilling was expected to yield 100 million barrels but there were items I posted on earlier posts which indicated that BP was expecting it to be a find much larger than that of around a billion barrels. He had to know that and one thing I noticed is that he did know about that argument on the Deepwater Horizon which had been reported by a number of employees had been “repudiated” under oath at another investigative hearing. So, isn’t that interesting considering that vast array of things he either didn’t know or didn’t testify to in a correct manner such as him saying that everyone on the Deepwater Horizon rig agreed to go forward on the operation despite a great deal of evidence to the contrary of what he said.
Apparently, he didn’t mind saying that however, knowing damn full well it wasn’t true when he said it – not only once, but twice during these hearings.
- cricketdiane
***
And why is it that oil rigs and semi-permanent drilling rigs and semisubmersible rigs or whatever oil drilling platforms can be used in the Gulf of Mexico and our national waters that register in the Marshall Islands and elsewhere but skimming boats and other types of recovery vessels can’t come help us that are registered in other nations? Does that make any sense at all? Are they just making up this stuff as they go along or is it that rules are applied just however it suits depending on whose benefit they want to serve?
I still don’t understand why the Coast Guard stopped those boats from getting the oil out of the marshes and sent them back to port – why couldn’t they just hand them some lifejackets and a fire extinguisher temporarily with an inspection for those things to be added appropriately once the boats were taken back to port after getting up the oil for the day? Some of this stuff just absolutely defies any good sense whatsoever.
Now, they’ve made it harder to get the NOAA forecast for the oil spill. I went to the NOAA incident page and then where it used to be easy to get the current map, now it is a separate page which my computer browser insisted in through an untrusted site, then it leads to a pdf that is incomplete. And, maybe the onshore trajectory has been divided up from the offshore trajectory maps. Also – as if it isn’t bad enough that their information typically runs a full day behind – now its harder to get it, slow and difficult to share. Thanks a lot for denouncing every concept of transparency. Do they have nothing better to do than try to botch up the only three things that were actually working correctly or close at least?
Whose goals are causing these aberrations from the Incident Response Team?
In fact the map that it sent me to see – is from 06-04-10. God, I hate them.
Another work of Jane Lubchenco, no doubt. She is such a piece of work. Wasn’t she the one saying that there was no chance this oil would come ashore and that it wouldn’t get into the loop current and that the amount of release was only 5,000 barrels a day long after it was known that was a lie?
I don’t doubt she and the Commerce Department is manipulating things to serve the interests of the tourism industry or who the hell ever this time that is lobbying them to make things appear better than they are and to thwart the truth being made available to the American people and the international communities. I think she isn’t a member of the scientific community at all. She acts more like an administrator (and one with specific interests benefiting business and industry) than anyone with concerns for the biological species in the Gulf of Mexico. Nor does her emphasis seem to be transparency and availability of information easily accessible to the American people. I’ve had it with the whole bunch of them. They are going to keep mucking up things until finally they do find themselves brought up to tar and feathering – and I don’t mean in the nice chambers of the House Congressional hearings either.
It is just a matter of time.
- cricketdiane
Here is the nearshore trajectory map for the oil spill from today – only available now as a pdf unless I go to the Chinese websites, European websites and Persian websites that will allow me to get it as an html doc or jpg image – what kind of bullshit is that?
I tried printing the trajectory map for today and I was going to scan it so I could post it and although the document properties says it will print – it isn’t printing. Not only did it buggar my computer waiting to see the thing after sending me to the one for 06-03/04-10 first off the bat – then it won’t print.
They aren’t trying to make this all better – they are trying to avoid, evade, make things far more difficult than they already are, deny people the protective gear that would maintain their health and well-being, stop the use of any other things to fight the spill than those things on the “original plans” which used techniques, products and methods that didn’t work even in 1969 when they were also used without change from then to now and they are doing everything possible to thwart any full public disclosure of the facts from any and all sources. That isn’t American. That isn’t freedom of the speech. That isn’t their job. That isn’t effectively fighting this spill and recovery of the ocean and coasts from this oil spill nightmare. That isn’t fixing the spill nor the containment of the well. Who the hell are they serving?
NOAA Deepwater Horizon BP oil spill nearshore and onshore trajectory map for 06-18-10
There is another map which shows the offshore trajectory – and apparently – the expansiveness of it is part of why they are making it harder to post around the internet. Gee, do they really think that nobody on this planet can see what is going on in the Gulf of Mexico or is it simply to make it harder so people will stop making it available?
What a waste of resources the indecent incident command group has become – they aren’t trying to deal with this – they are doing something to keep the information about how many animals are killed out of the public eye and to keep these documents from being readily available at every turn, including those from the Minerals Management Service which were submitted in the first place about this operation and those about the Spill Response Plans which have to be accessed in person at the federal depositories with an id check and “shakedown” to make sure somebody isn’t coming in there to do something foul . . .
That was put into place by the Bush administration but this was not – this is the current incident command groups doing this shit including preventing our media from taking pictures of animals and birds covered with oil or speaking to workers and using the funds intended to get Gulf Coast towns and coastal areas prepared to keep the oil off the beaches and out of the estuaries which is being diverted to cover toys for the state police and other goodies they want like studying whether cows (who don’t reside at the Gulf Coast nor drink sea water) are getting crude oil or its constituents in their drinking water from the Gulf Coast oil spill. It is horrendous.
This isn’t America. I don’t know if it is the nation of fealty to whom but it isn’t the United States of America. But, then it probably hasn’t been for my entire adult lifetime and I just didn’t know what to do about it. As I have watched police brutality across this country for the least and most petty offenses like jaywalking or refusing to sign a citation – while the greatest of thieves and murderers like Goldman Sachs and BP go free – there are no words to describe the what the historical evidence suggests as the yield of such things. It is not going to work, to put it mildly and our leaders having filled our streets with cameras, and surveillance online and unwarranted search and seizure laws, unwarranted phone and electronic surveillance laws and similar heavy handed coverage of armies of police in multiple layers of police and 16 layers of national security agencies – I would say they have been expecting it wouldn’t work for a long, long time.
But, this is different. Just wait and see.
- cricketdiane
And do you know this is one of the largest oil field finds in North America – United States in a hundred years – and they are burning off our much needed petroleum resources from this find that belong to our Nation?
Subsea operational update:
•
For the last 12 hours on June 17th (noon to midnight), approximately 8,020 barrels of oil were collected and approximately 4,770 barrels of oil and 24.5 million cubic feet of natural gas were flared.
•
Optimization of the dual recovery system continues; on June 17th, total oil recovered was aprox. 25,290 barrels.
approximately 16,020 barrels of oil were collected,
approximately 9,270 barrels of oil were flared,
and approximately 50.3 million cubic feet of natural gas were flared.
•
Total oil recovered from both the LMRP Cap and Q4000 systems since they were implemented is approximately 204,200 barrels.
•
The free standing riser installation is progressing for the long term containment option.
•
The next update will be provided at 6:00pm CDT on June 18, 2010.
Updated June 18 at 9:00am CDT / 3:00pm BST
***
From the CNN coverage – right now - The American people want Republicans like Cheri Jacobus, Representative Barton and Michelle Bachman along with their other Republican cronies of all varieties to shut the fuck up – that is enough. They caused this problem and as usual – somebody else has to fix it and the American people have to pay for it. The entire Republican Party including that bitch are not worth the space between their ears that apparently is taken up by recorded materials input by the oil industry, Wall Street and the Republican Party. They can all go to hell.
And as usual – they want it to be twenty or thirty years from now when the “little people” and “small people” get anything to make up for lost families, lost communities, lost health and lost incomes from some disaster that was directly caused by the Republican Party policies of the last thirty years.
Who spawned these demonic Republican and Corporate entities that have spread sickness, disease, murder, death and suffering across such wide swaths of time and measure? The permanent and irrevocable damages they have caused by direct intervention of de-regulation, big business favored laws and self-regulation of their activities has cost our entire economy, our future and our communities irretrievably. They caused the biggest bailouts necessary in the history of our world, the biggest disasters economic and ecological in the history of our world, the biggest unemployment in the history of our world and at the same time, made it more difficult for small businesses and start up businesses with such a host of trite and petty regulations and fees as to be no more than an intentional stumbling block and hindrance to anyone interested in starting or having a business in America.
That is only the tip of the iceberg in the real lives they have destroyed, the real deaths they have caused and the real suffering that continues unabated to this day – I would hope they would all be given a bath in the Gulf of Mexico as it is today at their re-imaging of America. And, in fact – they ought to have to be placed in that crude oil killing everything out there in the Gulf of Mexico. It would be the first of several things that would be appropriate to what they’ve done. But, no – they get air time, kudos and money in a never ending stream along with every respect and fealty from vast arenas. The fires of hell are awaiting them for doing this to people and to our nation – yet they still worship that brass bull on the street of New York and they still are given the honor of seats of power and money even as their damages continue to be experienced and will be for multiple generations.
If it wasn’t for the Republicans in power all these years, we already would be far from dependent on foreign oil because we would be driving our cars and trucks powered by many other things. Our air would be clean and it would have cost nearly nothing in comparison to the damages that have been done which must be cleaned up now in every nation on the earth from their horrendous shoddy business practices. And, it could’ve been profits plus safety throughout the entire time – it never had to be this way. It is what they wanted. And, our nation would’ve been seeing an entirely different event today in the Gulf of Mexico from the pride of having resourced the largest find in the last hundred years to successfully and safely harvesting it for our nation’s petroleum needs as well as being able to buy virtually every other possible source of fuels for transportation and types of vehicles.
But no – Representative Barton and his Republican cronies didn’t want that.
They wanted to fill the Gulf of Mexico with a crude oil petroleum toxic dispersant swamp that gives no value to the American people but to watch our national resources being burned off into the air and watch the full and complete destruction of every last wildlife resource that we’ve had for centuries. Goddamn every one of those bastards. There isn’t anything strong enough to say about them. They were the decision makers and then to have the audacity to send Michelle Bachman onto a CNN show to explain how the Obama administration was responsible for bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when the Bush administration Republicans did that and accuse the administration of causing this disaster when their use of the Minerals Management Service, the Department of Energy, the Department of Interior and the Bureau of Land Management to steal every last national resource and give it damn near for free to the corporations they have been serving – no. Damn hell – no.
and Ms. Palin and Republican Stevens who decided to create cutouts in the national wildlife preserves of Alaska to make it possible to drill for oil there, strip mine for minerals there and destroy the last remaining wildlife preservation areas – need to be treated to prison cells for absolute treason and violations of every treaty and law we’ve ever signed about it. And, they did do it with intention – absolute intention. Yeah – using our USGS to define the shale oil and minerals so that your friends in industries, mining and oil companies can destroy the last of the lands and mineral resources in our nation to line their own pockets – no, just don’t even get me started. It is and has been treachery of the highest order serving interests that do not serve our nation at all but certainly serve those foreign corporations and nations that came to harvest and profit from these activities while robbing the American people and the American Treasury blind and bankrupting every state along the way along with many generations to come.
Who decided to remake the Highways Safety and Transportation board into an industry representative and agent working for the auto industry?
The Republican Party did that.
Who decided to remake the Consumer Product Safety Board into an agency representing the corporations they were supposed to be regulating and enforcing regulations upon?
The Republican Party did that too.
Who decided to remake the Department of Agriculture into a place that didn’t enforce regulations and inspections of our food supply to favor large corporations involved in food processing and food distribution?
The Republican Party did that one.
Who decided to remake the Minerals Management Service, the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of Interior into a giveaway program for our national resources, oil, natural gas, and minerals along with serving the interests of the oil and mining industries instead of America?
Hmmm? The Republican Party did that.
Who decided to remake our national economic foundation into a parlor game of casino gambling with financial instruments that destroyed our national economy, destroyed many of the world’s economies and decimated every state economy in our nation?
Yes, The Republican Party did that.
Who decided to serve up every agency in our federal and state governments to act as agents and representatives serving the interests of those industries they were missioned to regulate and supervise and make safe?
Republicans did that also.
And – Who decided that the FAA should serve the interests of airlines and air transportation companies instead of the public’s safety?
Well, gee – let’s see. Oh yeah, the Republicans did that too.
And who did they steal from and who is paying for what they did when they were doing it and are paying for it today?
I am.
And the American people across the board are paying for it – not the corporations, not the banks, not the bankers, not the CEOs, not the politicians, not the foreign interests stealing our national resources, not the old officials that made the decisions, and not the Republican Party.
Nope, I am paying for it.
My children are paying for it and have been paying for it their entire lives.
My family is paying for it.
My grandparents paid for it and my uncles and my aunts and my cousins and my friends have all paid for it.
The Republican Party and their conservative right-wing jackoffs took over our churches, bankrupted our American businesses of our last hundred and fifty years along with small businesses at the rate of 40,000 bankruptcies a month even today, foreclosed on houses that our families had paid on for many years, destroyed all the jobs that might possibly be available and made it possible for someone from Bahrain in Bahrain to get a business grant made to them from our small business administration while our businesses were denied any access to money and nothing but a sea of stupid, petty, trite and unwieldy state and federal legislated regulations and taxes and fees and can’t do’s and don’t do’s and won’t work’s and nonsense. It has been a nightmare of factual and exact proportions that has reached into every arena of life from walking through our neighborhoods destroyed and destitute to fighting for the few beds in homeless shelters to having no other recourse than to accept never having a home, an income or a life of any value.
There is no way to say how it is in the fullness of evil, horrific and decimations of life that have been done by these things at the hands of the Republicans who have run this country into the ground on top of us. And, I mean nearly everyone who are all paying for it while the people at the top thrive and smile and vacation and go to spas and play and fuck everything that isn’t nailed down regardless of its age or sex or sexual orientation.
Who remade the IRS into a bully that would beat small businesses out of the marketplace?
The Republicans did that.
Who remade the Small Business Administration into a clearinghouse for bankers to get loan candidates so the loans could be resold and profits made by a select few with no investment or risk whatsoever?
Republicans did that too.
Who remade the federal government into a whipping boy for state projects to blame while taking every last dime they could get to do with in whatever way they pleased including those things in violation of the Constitution and Federal laws?
Hmmm – let’s see – yes, that was the Republican Party that did that in every state they’ve run and in every government office they held, were appointed to or elected to and from every seat they used to serve their own agendas in the highest offices and Congressional and Senate seats in our nation.
The Truth – Republican ideas that have been in use these last thirty years are not from the Republican Party as it was originally created and mandated and are not in the manner of the principles which is its foundation and claim.
- cricketdiane
***
Now, I’ve paid for this shit the Republicans have done and so have my children and my children’s children as have my parents and my grandparents, my friends, my fellow citizens of America, my relations, my community, my state, and my family. There is nothing that our President today can do that will not be stopped by these same Republicans and their cronies behind the scenes and from their continuing positions of power in our churches, in our media, in our Congress and in our states. They want it the way they remade it and will not today nor every do anything to help fix it, to make the damages less severe, nor to correct the damages that have been done, nor to help solve the problems they’ve created. They like it this way. They want to keep it this way.
The Republicans and the Republican Party policies and interests do not serve the American people. They are serving something else and my guess is that whatever the Republican Party has been serving and is continuing to serve today is not user-friendly to humanity nor to continued life in America nor even to life on our planet in general. That is devoid of conjecture. Every evidence of fact points exactly to that in every case and every arena.
Don’t believe me? – look at the Gulf of Mexico and see if any living thing survives what they’ve done there. And at every turn, the Republican Party continues to work with every resource at their command to thwart fixing anything or correcting any of it or recovering from any of it or restoring any of it to something that supports life, families, individuals, communities and living into a future of decency and safe, thriving lifetimes.
Oh but wait – there’s more . . .
Who took the best and the brightest of our American people – young and strong to be killed, permanently maimed and their precious irreplaceable lives destroyed to fight in the deserts of hell to serve the industries’ interests of the Republican Party?
Hmmmm —-
Gee, let me think?
Who would’ve done that? And then gone to them and paid back their lives with nothing but an endless hole to sink our national tax dollars to rebuild while our own country and their lives has nothing?
Who did that?
Republicans and their idea of economic policy did that. Economics by the stimulation of that economy through war did that and those lives meant absolutely nothing to them in pursuit of Republican Party interests and thieving their own profits from it.
Who made these people that have been calling themselves Republicans because surely it was not anything of goodness, mercy, kindness, love nor nature nor God. Or is it just what they did with it that was somewhere twisted away from anything of good?
And Republicans and their idea of international interdependency as foreign policy has left our nation a big dead rock in the middle of two oceans, without any means to take care of our own national needs for survival and progress.
But, since they have enough money to live anywhere on the planet, why would that matter to any Republican Party policy maker, politician or big business interest backing them? Maybe they will live in France – no wait, there are bizarre floods there. Maybe they can live in Australia – no wait, the desertification is increasing exponentially there with wildfires and flooding consuming cities and territories in short periods of time. Maybe they can live in Saudi Arabia or Dubai – no wait, there are floods happening there, too where it has rarely been recorded in their entire history and the sandstorms are tremendous and far too common. Maybe they can live in Mexico and any number or other nations around the world – no, wait there are wars of discontent and economics there from the vast poverty they’ve created and sustained, along with the most vile pollution ever seen by mankind.
They still don’t get the reasonable interpretation of what has been found on other planets – there is no Kroger and limo service, no restaurants to cook their food and if they want to leave to come back as it suits them, that would be a problem – and yet, they didn’t mind destroying this planet as they went in order to have today what they could’ve never spent throughout the rest of history even if they started spending it twenty years ago.
There is no good in it. And yet, the Republican Party made the SEC into a porn feeding site as if it had nothing better it could be doing and funding it the whole way to serve the needs and interests of Wall Street instead of fairness and decency and financial responsibility for the American people’s interests as well as the interests of the international communities where it plays.
And the Republican Party continues to host great dinners at $10,000 a plate where President Bush and Vice President Cheney’s words are treated like a gospel from the right hand of God and where Rush Limbaugh and his cohorts are treated like prophets and saints even as the lies they spew forth resemble the very worst of disinformation campaigns and propaganda.
No wonder the rest of the world has surpassed us in damn near everything from science to technology to new discoveries to health to well-being to strong middle classes to greater distribution of higher education across greater populations of their people to magnificent creations, inventions, cities and buildings, to massive new technological advances in energy and fuels and electronics and engineering and architecture and physics and health and just about every damn thing else. And this – while our nations’ states are being forced to cut education resources to our people and our adults and to our children and to our university students and even to our business people.
It is insane. And, don’t tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about because every last bit of this can be found almost anywhere, online – in books, in libraries around the world, in archives, in databanks, in government resources of nations around the world, in facts, in evidence, in scientific and social data, and in academic studies made to the highest scrutiny. This isn’t a matter of opinion. The facts are available to anyone.
What I don’t understand is why anyone would not be willing to look at it for themselves and decide.
- cricketdiane
***
And one more, then I’m going to go take a bath and wash the filth of this off of me -
Who took our peace officers intent on serving the community good and made them over into a psychotic anti-social abusive cruel and sadistic gang of thugs under the name of police?
The Republicans did that at every level and every state they’ve run.
Who took our national resources and polluted them, gave them away to industries and served nothing in return to the American people except the costs of cleaning it up and repairing the damages they caused?
The Republican Party did that.
Who took our valued information resources and data and changed it to result in a poor reflection of reality to serve their own purposes including the structuring of data about unemployment and our GDP to look better than the facts actually show?
The Republicans did that too.
And, who took the USGS and used it to serve the interests of mining companies owned by foreign nationals and to serve the interests of oil companies also owned by foreign entities – so they could rape, pillage and plunder our natural and national resources without returning much for it besides death, destruction and permanent damages to our nation?
Hmmmm…….
Republicans wanted it that way so they did it that way.
And one last one -
Who was it that decided to keep Americans poor, to prevent Americans from starting small business or establishing thriving businesses, to destroy educational resources and the opportunities to higher education to most Americans and to exclude over 60% of our population from participating in jobs, communities and opportunities in America including populations born and raised in America?
Republicans idea of a good time.
They can all go to hell. That is where they belong.
And, obviously there is not one moment that the Republican Party or its members and policy makers and pundits and politicians are ever going to help fix one single thing they have so utterly re-made into a destructive force on life and on mankind and on America’s people.
- cricketdiane
***
I didn’t tell them to do it that way.
(***(
From wikipedia -
The Gulf of Mexico (Spanish: Golfo de México) is the ninth largest[1]body of water in the world.
The basin contains a volume of roughly 660 quadrillion gallons (2.5 × 1015 m3).
The Gulf of Mexico’s eastern, north, and northwestern shores lie along the US states of Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. The US portion of the Gulf coastline spans 1,680 miles (2,700 km), receiving water from thirty-three major rivers that drain 31 states.[6]
The outer margins of the wide continental shelves of Yucatán and Florida receive cooler, nutrient-enriched waters from the deep by a process known as upwelling, which stimulates plankton growth in the euphotic zone. This attracts fish, shrimp, and squid.[7]
Map of northern part of Gulf of Mexico - from wikipedia entry
Other important industries along the coast include shipping, petrochemical processing and storage, military use, paper manufacture, and tourism.
(and)
The gulf’s warm water temperature can feed powerful Atlantic hurricanes causing extensive human death and other destruction as happened with Hurricane Katrina in 2005. In the Atlantic, a hurricane will draw up cool water from the depths and making it less likely that further hurricanes will follow in its wake (warm water being one of the preconditions necessary for their formation). However, the Gulf is shallower and its entire water column is warm. When a hurricane passes over, although the water temperature may drop it soon rebounds and becomes capable of supporting another tropical storm.[8]
The Gulf is considered aseismic: however, mild tremors have been recorded throughout history (usually 5.0 or less on the Richter scale).
A 6.0 tremor was recorded on September 10, 2006, 250 miles (400 km) off the coast of Florida which caused no damage, but could be felt throughout the Southeastern United States.
Various biota include chemosynthetic communities near cold seeps and nonchemosynthetic communities such as bacteria and other microbenthos, meiofauna, macrofauna, and megafauna(larger organisms such as crabs, sea pens, crinoids, and demersal fish and cetaceans including endangered ones) are living in the Gulf of Mexico.[11]
(and from another entry)
The Gulf Coast is a highly productive economic region with many industries relating to fishing, aerospace, agriculture, biomedical research, and tourism. The region is anchored by the cities of Houston, New Orleans, Mobile, and Tampa, all the centers of their respective metropolitan areas and containing large ports.
These landforms protect numerous bays and inlets providing as a barrier to oncoming waves. The central part of the Gulf Coast, from eastern Texas through Louisiana, consists primarily of marshland. The western part of the Gulf Coast, predominantly Florida, is dotted with many bays and inlets.
The Gulf Coast is a major center of economic activity. The marshlands along the Louisiana and Texas coasts provide breeding grounds and nurseries for ocean life that drive the fishing and shrimping industries. The Port of South Louisiana (between New Orleans and Baton Rouge in Laplace) and the Port of Houston are two of the ten busiest ports in the world by cargo volume.[1] As of 2004, seven of the top ten busiest ports in the U.S. are on the Gulf Coast.[2]
The discovery of oil and gas deposits along the coast and offshore, combined with easy access to shipping, have made the Gulf Coast the heart of the U.S. petrochemical industry. The coast contains nearly 4,000 oil platforms.
Besides the above, the region features other important industries including aerospace and biomedical research, as well as older industries such as agriculture and — especially since the development of the Gulf Coast beginning in the 1920s and the increase in wealth throughout the United States — tourism.
The petrochemical industry, launched with the major discoveries of oil in Texas and spurred on by further discoveries in the Gulf waters, has been a vehicle for development in the central and western Gulf which has spawned development on a variety of fronts in these regions.
Texas in particular has benefited tremendously from this industry over the course of the 20th century and economic diversification has made the state a magnet for population and home to more Fortune 500 companies than any other U.S. state.
Florida has grown as well, driven to a great extent by its long established tourism industry but also by its position as a gateway to the Caribbean and Latin America.
As of 2006, these two states are the second and fourth most populous states in the nation, respectively (see this article).
Other areas of the Gulf Coast have benefited less, though economic development fueled by tourism has greatly increased property values along the coast, and is now a severe danger to the valuable but fragile ecosystems of the Gulf Coast.
The Division of Environmental Geology (DEG) offers AAPG members an opportunity to increase their knowledge about the environment and the petroleum industry. DEG approaches basic environmental issues from a geological standpoint, so the profession’s understanding of geological, geochemical, geophysical and hydrogeological principles and methodologies can be applied to environmental problems.
According to the ETA, 2010′s top 10 most polluting cars are:
1. Lamborgini Murcielago 2. Ferrari 612 Scaglietti 3. Bentley Motors Brooklands 4. Bentley Motors Arnage 5. Bentley Motors Azure 6. Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano 7. Aston martin V12 Vantage 8. Cadillac Escalade 9. Bentley Motors Continental 10. Aston Martin DBS
The ETA’s top 10 least polluting cars are:
1. Toyota iQ 2. Honda Insight 3. Volkswagen New Polo 4. Toyota Yaris 5. Toyota Prius 6. Nissan Pixo 7. Suzuki Alto 8. Honda Civic Hybrid 9. Ford Fiesta 10. Mazda 2
Lean and green: The Toyota iQ can do 72.4 miles per gallon of fuel
The group (ETA) looked at 5,000 models, ranking them on power, emissions, fuel efficiency and noise creation, in order to help consumers choose the greenest vehicles.
The Environmental Transport Association (ETA) lobbies for sustainable travel and ethical motoring, in an attempt to increase environmental awareness and reduce carbon emissions.
A couple days ago, Mr. T. Boone Pickens was on a CNN show – probably Larry King, and stated that the best time to plant a tree is twenty years ago and the second best time to plant that tree is today (paraphrased – but close). I want to say -
We planted a tree thirty years ago and now we have “trees” of green technologies, alternative fuels and alternative energy systems, new battery technologies, electric cars and various other solar, wind, geothermal and clean coal systems that did not exist in enough study and capacity before that. We have these things. We have better hydropower generating turbines, systems for ocean wave and tidal generating power systems, for geothermal systems and for transportation choices where the work has already been done to design, to study, to create manufacturing systems for them, to alter them to fit specific situations and extremes – and on and on . . .
So, those trees have been planted long ago. Most of them are mature now in forests of many trees also planted throughout these years. What we don’t have is the need for them as evidenced by the fact that they are not adopted, not funded, not pushed forward, not accepted and not wholly put into use.
I don’t know how to fix that. There are multiple choices which simply could be on the menu both for leaders when deciding and for individuals although most of those new technologies are not handily available for individuals to pursue – and for whatever reason, when decision-making occurs – these are not on the menu of choices (especially for leaders at any level of funding and decision-making.)
That is a continuing problem which brings me back to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the filthy air from our transporting ourselves one by one with cars and encouraging developing economies to do the same, polluted lands and air and water such that many days in a multitude of places where walking outside is dangerous and eating fish from those waters is damaging to health and playing in the dirt is a nightmare whether gardening or digging to China with a spoon. We have mines exploding, oil rigs sinking, bizarre sudden flash flooding in places where it had never been, horrendous fires and drought that shouldn’t be occurring, deep and violent snows and blizzards, melting ice in glaciers that would’ve been in place for another 100 million years before changing, and tremendous loss of life in every preventable arena.
Still, here we are – same choices, same menu. What I see with some clarity is that there are two really big problems that must have immediate attention. One of those problems is how we organize ourselves and our resources to approach quickly and efficiently to challenge disasters successfully. And, second – that everything possible, everything known, everything that could be and everything from throughout the world and throughout history along with everything that is just now be created – needs to be on the list of options available to use in the situations in front of us – whatever those situations might be and however dire (or far-reaching.)
If we could fix those two things, we could probably fix the rest of them. We would have the tools to move forward and solve the problems and crisis that are occurring, in a much more proficient and successful (and timely) manner. We could incorporate decisions to include things that are available into the mix which right now are being expected for some other time, some other place, some other event, some other situation somewhere in the future. But, they are available and could be used right now.
I don’t care how used to the same old answers our systems and leaders may be – without embracing these new things (some of which are twenty or thirty years old) as part of the available assets to bring to bear upon these things creating crisis around us – we are sure to continue sustaining the incredible, disheartening and expensive losses that we’ve been seeing throughout this time.
That is, after all – why the new ways to do things and new concepts and new ideas and new solutions were created in the first place. They were an answer to the known difficulties and failures and problems and crisis parameters where we failed at times before this. They are the innovations and solutions created to solve it.
And, it was my understanding that President Obama was going to address the people of the United Kingdom also and I haven’t found it yet. It would’ve been after the address to America and before meeting with the BP executives and chairman of the board. I don’t know – maybe he didn’t – I’ll keep looking.
However, there is this -(in about four places) -on SkyNews
Here is one of the things I was wondering today – what are the states doing with the money they were given to prepare and protect the coast before the oil came this close – and did they spend it or use it for budget deficits – or spend it on advertisements trying to con people that everything is fine?
Also – each state has emergency funds of their own in their budgets and access to other funds for emergencies – and about eight times now, at least – President Obama has said for the states to bring forward their national guard and they aren’t doing it – Why? And, then they complain about not having the people to tackle this – why aren’t they bringing the resources to bear upon this that are available to them at the state and local levels?
Every two towns could share a tractor to get the oil up off the beach like the one in several news stories being used on one beach. That definitely is within their means to do. Any of the towns, counties and parishes could be buying the tiger dams or NOAQ type protective booms / containment type systems and place them – any of these cities, towns and counties could be purchasing the types of equipment that are needed and placing them along with bringing up their National Guard which takes a bit of time to call up, stage and place.
It is ridiculous.
So, I found this -
- cricketdiane
***
State reports details of spending on Gulf oil spill response
Published: Wednesday, June 16, 2010, 12:32 PM Updated: Wednesday, June 16, 2010, 12:33 PM
BATON ROUGE — Gov. Bobby Jindal‘s office has released information about how state agencies are spending BP and federal disaster money in response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
BP gave the state a $25 million grant to address short-term expenses. The items below refer to how the state has spent or intends to spend that money. About $2.5 million of the BP money spent by agencies in the early stages of the response is not included below.
The state also has Pollution Removal Fund Authorizations to spend $16.7 million from the federal Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, a federal program overseen by the National Pollution Funds Center under the Coast Guard.
(etc.)
Here is a breakdown of how state agencies are spending these BP and federal trust fund resources as of June 15.
Department of Wildlife & Fisheries Trust Fund: $5,769,078 for preventing and minimizing negative impacts of fisheries and wildlife, public safety protection, maritime security and crime prevention and detection. Assist with identification of fisheries and wildlife impact areas. BP grant: $3.1 million for enforcement and situational awareness including patrol vessels. $1.6 million for fisheries including motors, trailers, trucks, landing craft; ATVs and a bioremediation contract. $1.2 million for Wildlife division including a crew boat, quarter barge, airboats, bay boat and outboard motors.
Attorney General Buddy Caldwell BP grant: $5 million for state legal costs.
Department of Public Safety & Corrections Trust Fund: $1.5 million for State Police for designated primary responders, command staff related to event, financial liaison with federal and responsible party funds. $349,290 for corrections division for wildlife preservation in the cleaning of contaminated birds and wildlife. BP grant: $960,595 for State Police for equipment and supplies including emergency response and patrol vehicles and inflatable flotation device, 20 kilowatt trailer-mounted generator, thermal imaging equipment and atmospheric monitoring equipment. $1,580,000 in IT support including wireless communication that expands capacity and coverage for first responders in coastal areas, point-to-point wireless links, computer hardware and software, credentialing system and wireless monitoring system. $340,000 for the Office of State Fire Marshall which includes emergency response vehicles, office equipment and a variety of safety equipment (chemical gloves, boots, level b suits) and GPS devices.
Department of Health & Hospitals Trust Fund: $3,179,985 to monitor seafood safety to protect health of consumers and viability of the seafood industry. Guarantee safety of drinking water. Monitor beaches.
Department of Social Services BP grant: $3.1 million to implement a comprehensive technical support plan for businesses and workers and fund coastal organizations with capacity to provide education, financial analysis and support for claims assistance.
Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness Trust Fund: $1,250,000 for state emergency Operations Center support, parish coordination support, communications support, state’s Mobile Command Post.
BP grant: $985,000 for mobile command center. $1.5 million for water and MREs. $400,000 for transportation for hurricane assisted evacuation. $15,000 for high resolution imagery.
Louisiana National Guard and Department of Military Affairs Trust fund: $394,178 to support removal activities of National Guard, staging areas for Guard units, support of local civil authorities and support of emergency response mission. BP grant: $2 million in supplies and equipment.
Department of Environmental Quality Trust Fund: $1,802,310 to identify oiled resources, map oiled shorelines, identify sensitive areas and resources and monitor status of cleanup. BP grant: $529,200 to outfit ground teams and aerial assessment teams with specific air monitoring devices equipped to detect hydrocarbons (oil), select inorganic compounds, and radiation sources.
Office of Coastal Protection and Restoration Trust fund: $1,807,200 to formulate defense strategies for coastal areas, evaluate response options for oil spill removal in wetlands and on barrier islands and support other agency responses.
Department of Natural Resources Trust fund: $541,822 to assist in direct planning and coordination of response activities, GIS mapping tools, proper disposal of recovered oil and related waste, discharge oil analysis.
Department of Transportation and Development Trust fund: $97,058 for support of first responders related to truck permit issuance, structural capacity analysis concerning heavy equipment needs and for operating equipment as needed.
Department of Economic Development BP grant: $220,000 for increased public services.
Department of Agriculture Trust fund: $34,967 to monitor drinking water for cattle and potential impact to agriculture in affected areas.
BP Announces Second Block Grant of $25 Million to the State of Mississippi
Release date: 10 June 2010
Today BP announced it is providing the State of Mississippi with an additional $25 million grant to continue implementation of the State’s Area Contingency Plan.
This $25 million grant is in addition to a previous $25 million block grant that BP announced on May 5 to help accelerate the implementation of the State’s Area Contingency Plan, and a $15 million tourism grant announced on May 17.
“Working in partnership with the State is important to an effective spill response. So we are pleased to make these additional funds available per the Governor’s request,” said Doug Suttles, BP’s Chief Operating Officer, Exploration and Production.
“This money will be used to ensure we’re aggressive in attacking any part of the spill that comes our way and to provide additional protection for our most environmentally sensitive areas along our coastline,” said Governor Haley Barbour. “This also prevents us from tapping into state money to fight the spill, and I appreciate BP’s timely response to our request.”
This additional grant is another example of BP’s commitment to help mitigate the impact of the oil and gas spill from the MC252 well on the State of Mississippi.
Aiding coastal parishes fight Gulf oil spill the focus of Senate panel
Published: Tuesday, June 15, 2010, 8:19 AM Updated: Tuesday, June 15, 2010, 8:22 AM
BATON ROUGE — A Senate committee is weighing whether to side with the Gov. Bobby Jindal and strip Gulf oil spill response money in a state budget bill for coastal parishes in favor of seeking direct payment from BP.
The $24.9 million provision for the parishes is likely to be changed when the panel passes the budget legislation today, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Michot said.
Gov. Bobby Jindal said that the parishes should get their response money directly from BP rather than trying to tap the state’s $25 million grant from the company. The state has spent some of the BP money, and the Governor’s Office released details Monday of what state agencies want to buy with the remainder.
Even if such plans were made, the timing of when money would trickle down to the parishes, and whether it would arrive in time for the parishes to use it during the defense phase of the oil spill, is unclear.
BP in May gave five southeastern coastal parishes $1 million each and also granted $500,000 each to Orleans and St. Tammany parishes, but local officials say that money will run out soon, if it hasn’t already. Personnel overtime, fuel costs and emergency operations center costs are among the financial drains. Rather than giving new grants, BP started a program to assess the details of the needs of each parish on a monthly basis.
Parish officials recently reported a lack of money to pay for hazmat suits, skimmers, suctions, extra spotting vessels, water current or oil-impact analyses, boom and vessel repairs and other items.
The resource shortage complicates their problems, because they need to act fast when materials become available. Some parishes are considering hiring materials brokers that would bear the financial responsibility up front with the expectation of parish payment later, if BP makes a reimbursement.
The state is getting federal financial backing for extensive National Guard operations with about 1,100 personnel to spot oil sheens and build land bridges, special dams and sand barriers.
Mississippi and Alabama have used their BP grants to give money directly to their coastal counties.
Jindal’s office on Monday released a list of items that Louisiana agencies plan to purchase using the state’s $25 million BP grant. For example, the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries will spend $3.1 million for “enforcement and situational awareness” including patrol vessels; $1.6 million for motors, trailers, trucks, landing craft and a bio-remediation contract; and $1.2 million for a crew boat, barge, airboats, bay boats and outboard motors.
The Department of Social Services will spend $3.1 million to “implement a comprehensive technical support plan for businesses and workers” and assist coastal organizations in relief efforts. The Department of Public Safety needs about $1 million for emergency response equipment such as patrol vehicles, generators and atmospheric monitoring devices and $1.6 million for wireless communication and information technology support.
Louisiana state agencies also have been provided $11 million through the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, a program run by the National Pollution Funds Center under the Oil Pollution Act. The fund can be tapped to provide upfront money to national, state and local agencies while the federal authority pursues compensation from the companies responsible for the spill.
The fund has been a primary source of public and private compensation for about 11,000 oil spills since 1990, but its has been a mostly ancillary tool for financing the Deepwater Horizon response in favor of direct appeals to BP. Congress is working on legislation to make the federal oil spill fund larger and easier to tap.
Louisiana House members two weeks ago added an amendment to the state supplemental budget bill for the current year that authorizes $24.9 million divided among the coastal parishes from the state’s Oil Spill Contingency Fund, which is a depository for the state’s BP grant, federal aid and potentially other sources of pollution control financing.
So, I guess the list above this article in the more recent article from the same source is essentially what they’ve decided to do. Where are cattle drinking from the oil polluted water (sea water) of the Gulf of Mexico? They are insane and it is no wonder there is oil in the marshes. They knew to protect it – they had the money to do it. They had the boats and local fishermen and volunteers that would help do it. What they hell are they doing?
- cricketdiane
***
and, the Federal government is covering the costs of the National Guard but the states aren’t calling them up all this time – even when they’ve been told to do it? Are they considering why the state police need an array of toys like that list above when the same money could’ve kept the crude oil from the marshes, bays, beaches, coves and ports in Louisiana?
These state and local politics, agency politics and systems of misadjustment to the current situation are costing more damage than BP has already – which is certainly hard to fathom but nevertheless the truth.
What started as a small, horrendous but possibly manageable situation is made worse at every level by the ways in which it is being accepted and handled or not handled effectively at all. The states had the money to work with throughout this process and they know what else can be done to access money for handling it. Why would they misdirect the funds and resources in the midst of something as long-reaching in consequences and as disastrous in immediate consequences as this?
I think their priorities are askew.
***
So, we have oil industries and spill response contractors that did have a huge array of options available to them and simply didn’t incorporate any of them into the plans or logistics or put them on standby where something might happen. We have states that are choosing to pretend that this money is available to do something else rather than fight the oil spill including the use of it to study things that have absolutely nothing to do with the problems at hand and to buy toys for agencies and police / security forces in their state that won’t be required for this since most of it is redundant with material assets already on the ground through the Coast Guard, NOAA and others.
And, we have political parties getting into the mix for their own agendas that resemble little or no good sense about the dangers of the situation that is unfolding and what might be needed for it in an immediate and timely manner who are using the situation and the funding for the situation to pursue their own goals rather than the public good.
And, we have a botched up command and resource system that is hindering the proper, appropriate and timely placement of needed equipment where it is needed with what seems like mostly a very close-minded and inept system incapable of effectively interacting with the event nor with participants and feedback of what is needed, what is working and where it is required.
Hmmmm…………
- cricketdiane
***
Let’s see what else I can find -
BP gives $75M to 3 Gulf states for spill efforts
(AP) – 6 days ago
NEW ORLEANS — BP PLC will give $75 million in grants to Alabama, Florida and Mississippi as they respond to the nation’s worst oil spill.
BP COO Doug Suttles said in a statement Thursday that the energy giant was making the funds available at the request of the governors in each of the three Gulf states.
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour says the grant will fund additional protection for the most environmentally sensitive stretches of his state’s coastline. It will also prevent Mississippi from using its own money to fight the oil spill.
The leak began April 20 after an oil rig exploded off the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 workers. The government has estimated 600,000 to 1.2 million gallons are leaking per day, although those estimates could soon be revised.
Wonder what it will take to get the state legislators and leadership to do that.
- cricketdiane
***
Steel pipe boom for Perdido Pass ahead of schedule, says firm
Published: Tuesday, June 15, 2010, 5:00 AM Updated: Monday, June 14, 2010, 8:06 PM
A $4.6 million project to erect a sturdy boom of steel pipe at Perdido Pass is ahead of schedule and could be finished in another week, said John Baker, president of Thompson Engineering, the firm designing the system.
Meanwhile, work to fill a mile-wide breach on Dauphin Island created by Hurricane Katrina was described Monday by a BP spokesman as imminent.
BP PLC owns the Deepwater Horizon well, which has been spewing oil into the Gulf of Mexico since April 20.
Little oil washed ashore Monday along the coasts of Mobile and Baldwin counties, with only a few tar balls reported on Dauphin Island and Gulf Shores.
The Perdido Pass project calls for extending a barrier of large pipes filled with foam for more than half a mile to prevent oil from pushing into wetlands and waterways to the north.
The water current and wave action in the pass are too strong for conventional boom to be effective.
Crews are working from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., Baker said. “It is a fairly dangerous operation in that type of environment to work at night.”
The floating pipes will be suspended from chains attached to two rows of pilings driven into the bottom of the pass, Baker said.
“We’re working 24/7 on pipe manufacturing and fabrication,” said Tony Smith, construction manager for Thompson Engineering.
Smith said he tried out a section of the boom Monday afternoon: “It floated just exactly like we predicted. So far, so good.”
The Baldwin County Commission identified more areas that need protection from oil and accepted another $3 million grant from the state to help do that.
The commission also voted to send a letter to Gov. Bob Riley, suggesting mechanized cleaning of all area beaches by BP contractors.
In May, BP gave states affected by the spill $25 million. Of that, Baldwin County got $3 million and used about $2 million of the money to buy protective boom and hire a contractor to place it in environmentally sensitive areas.
“The Mobile County Commission voted Monday to send a letter to BP asking it to hire more local boat owners to help with cleanup efforts. The commission will also send a letter requesting an additional $3 million to promote tourism in the county.”
(from the above article)
my note
(***(
Although this doesn’t have to do with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico – it is an interesting oversight of the vagaries occurring in the politics of the current situation – using funds intended to help with things -
This one is about the use of Federal Stimulus Money intended to help make green buildings and energy saving buildings and building systems -
Look how they are using it – (Napa Valley, Calif.)
Builders whose projects consume 15 percent less energy than the state standard will be getting a 25 percent reduction in the cost of their building permit, officials said.
The city is setting aside $100,000 from its $700,000 federal economic stimulus grant to reduce building fees. The biggest slice of the federal grant, $250,000, will pay for the hiring of a sustainability coordinator for two years.
At the same time, the city will impose a new fee that is 25 percent of the regular building permit fee to cover city costs for plan review and construction monitoring.
Napa has jettisoned the word “green,” preferring to label the new rules as promoting “high-performance buildings.”
By KEVIN COURTNEY, Register Staff Writer | Posted: Thursday, June 17, 2010 12:00 am
***
My Note -
What a pathetic joke. They are spending more for one person’s income than for the entire program.
Figures.
And assessing a new fee for the same amount as the one they are using $100,000 to defray not charging. It is bullshit. Somebody needs to arrest those jackasses for embezzling and mismanagement of Federal Stimulus funds. It is not the purpose for which they were intended and it is not a fair use of those funds in the ways they are approaching it. These are not for hiring one friend of the council at $250,000 a year to manage a theme.
- cricketdiane
***
The hearings with BP executive Tony Hayward just started. They are really questioning the wrong person. Some people from BP were on that rig who made the decisions which directly caused that explosion. They need to be there answering those questions or put in jail or both.
Those are the executives who literally killed those eleven men, injured seventeen others, destroyed the rig, and destroyed the entire coastal waters of the United States of America. There hasn’t been a terrorist aside from those involved in the 9/11 event who have done as severe a job on such a wide swath with as far-reaching damages. They need to be prosecuted – or is it only jay-walking and misdemeanors committed by the “small people” and the “little people” that are against the law in America?
- cricketdiane
***
Mr. Barton was so cavalier yesterday and today, that despite this horrendous despicable damage – continues to support using the courts for the payouts to people harmed by the oil disaster. It wouldn’t be just his opinion as he stated, considering that Michelle Bachman (R) Minnesota was on John King USA, on CNN last night repeating exactly the same thing. He needs to use an opinion that actually was thought through by him and not given to him by the party to whom he owes his life and allegiance rather than to the United States of America and the people of the United States.
Of course they (at the Republican Party) want the previous course of action through courts for which they want tort reform to reduce the amounts that can be given even when corporations are found guilty and at fault. The results of the twenty years of court cases in the Exxon Valdez spill, have only recently been completed with reductions in the payouts which left families completely devastated by this event to less than $8,000 each despite having lost everything including twenty plus years of their lives, their livelihoods, their health, their well-being and their opportunities to live as they had for many generations.
And that is what the Republican Party policy makers and conservative thinktanks want for this situation. In the meantime, the oil companies would continue as usual with the same nothing but devastation going to the families, communities and individuals affected by this for the next twenty or thirty years as their lives are decimated.
I don’t know how the Republican Party moved so far away from the principles and guidelines upon which it was founded. Something twisted that thinking to believe as they do now which serves no one but corporate entities without conscience in pursuit of their profits at any cost to human lives, to our nation, to our way of life, to our freedoms, in destruction of our personal rights and liberties, to the detriment of our health and well-being and to the destruction of our families and communities.
I was surprised to hear Mr. Barton claim an opinion that was so thoroughly the same as that propaganda which came from Ms. Bachman last night. Does he have two brain cells that can work together or is he waiting for the Republican Party to tell him how to wipe his own ass, as well? And to tell him what it means, and to tell him how to do it and to tell him what he knows about why to do it and when to do it and what to use to do it and what he thinks about it? When does it stop?
Maybe it is time to replace people like Mr. Barton and Ms. Bachman with a simple machine that can repeat the Republican Party talking points – we could use one of those automatons the Japanese have been creating and give their seat to someone that can actually do the job instead of furthering their desire to serve a political party rather than the people of the United States and our national interests.
It was never in our national interest to exclude all other types of energy sources and transportation fuels for predominantly one exclusively.
- cricketdiane, 06-17-10
***
Shutup Mr. Gingrey
If you and your Republican friends had ever been concerned about foreign oil – we would all be driving cars using either electricity made at home, solar power made at home, hydrogen power made at home, steam power made at home, or natural gas made at home. You asshole.
***
Negative-Emissions Vehicle Concept From China’s SAIC: A Plant On Wheels!
SAIC YeZ Concept - Negative-Emissions Vehicle Concept From China's SAIC: A Plant On Wheels!
By nature, plants absorb carbon dioxide from the atomsphere, and release oxygen. This is good. This is how the ecosystem is supposed to work. Plants like this. Human bodies like this. In contrast, petroleum burning vehicles consume oxygen during combustion and emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Now if you’re thinking, “wait, that’s great–everything will balance out right?”, you’re partially correct (Rremember, humans consume oxygen and emit carbon dioxide too). The problem is, too much of a good thing is not such a good thing in this case. Specifically, automotive carbon emissions are at a level determined to be unhealty for the environment in general.
For this reason, automakers and government organizations have been focusing heavily on reducing the amount of carbon dioxide emissions produced by motor vehicles. So far, the best examples of green cars have managed to eliminate emissions. Hydrogen fuel cell and plug-in electric vehicles boast zero emissions. These technologies are becoming a reality right now, but the Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) of China has gone a step further with a concept that acually consumes C02, rather than emitting it.
Here’s how the YeZ works. A photoelectric converter is incorprated into the car’s leaf-shaped canopy, and collects energy from the Sun. This energy is converted to electricity, which powers a fully electric drivetrain. Wind power is even harvested from small windmills on all four wheels.
The vehicle’s body is constructed with metal-organic framework materials which absorb water and carbon dioxide (yes, this is the negative emissions bit). The YeZ then does three really cool things with the two naturally occurring resources. It generates electricity, air conditioning refrigerant, and… oxygen! The oxygen is diffused back into the air, where it should be. This process makes it the most plant-like car concept yet.
So, since the technology does exist, and it is available – why don’t we just harvest this technology and put it into use on our streets and highways along with what we already know from other designed alternative energy concepts? Why does America have to be last on the list or not show up to the party at all when it comes to making things better? Why are we last to innovate, last to create technological advances and last to adopt them? What happened to the culture of being the best, the first, the greatest? Why are we coming in dead last and often, not getting into gear at all?
It isn’t as if these things don’t exist as every single Republican whose opportunity for airtime has been at least partially used to tell us that nothing is ready to go and won’t be for years along with their executive friends in oil industries – who also surpass the Republican Party members in using their airtime to express how hopelessly stuck with them that we are for some time to come – according to their views of it. And, each of them fill pages of talk online, written materials, talking points, policy position papers and fill hours of committee time, legislators’ time and media airtime explaining how nothing can possibly be changed for many, many years to come – certainly not in the next twenty years or thirty years or fifty years. But that may not have even been true thirty years ago when they first started saying the same things – it certainly isn’t true now.
- cricketdiane, 06-17-10
***
Every technology available to us from around the world could be created in any plant facility in America and made available to everyone in the public for a reasonable price including cars that run on electricity, battery systems based on the new designs, solar cells for home electricity systems, cars made to take the carbon dioxide out of the air and remove it while traveling and using it for part of the energy / fuel needs, systems for sequestering and harvesting all of the many pollutants including methane from landfills to use for our county energy needs and reclaiming chemicals from industries rather than polluting with them, along with making natural gas tractor trailer trucks and buses converting them away from the diesel fuels that are making our planet and our nation uninhabitable.
All of it can be done. Hydrogen vehicles have already been designed, hydrogen power systems for homes have already been created, non-turbine wind driven power systems have been invented that take wind power and convert it to electricity, solar flexible films and roofing materials have already been made and tested, wave and tidal systems have already been innovated in a variety of ways to harness that power for electricity and there are numerous geothermal and solar designs and wind turbine designs and a variety of transportation mega-moving engine designs that don’t require one drop of petroleum. Why the hell can’t we stop using the same old choices as if they are the only ones – when they haven’t been the only choices for at least a hundred years and certainly are not the only choices now?
Relying on only petroleum has made our nation vulnerable and weakened. No terrorist could have done as efficient a job of bringing our nation to its knees as have the financial corruption, bankers, Wall Street firms and Republicans with their oil companies supporting them.
Having any one source or one thing that is necessary for our survival and growth as a nation leaves us at the mercy of that industry or supplier. Our leaders have always known that and it never mattered before today or we would be doing something else now.
***
During the Mercury missions of our space program, battery systems were designed which we could’ve been using in our cars every day since then. But, no – our business leaders, politicians and elected members of the United States didn’t want to do that.
2.1.2.1.1 PM10 LevelsThe current NAAQS for PM10 were established in 1987. The primary (health-based) and secondary (public welfare based) standards for PM10 include both short- and long-term NAAQS.The short-term (24-hour) standard of 150 :g/m3 is not to be exceeded more than once per yearon average over three years. The long-term standard specifies an expected annual arithmeticmean not to exceed 50 :g/m3 averaged over three years.
Currently, 29.3 million people live in PM10 nonattainment areas, including moderate and serious areas. There are presently 56 moderate PM10 nonattainment areas with a total population
of 6.6 million.[90]
There are 8 serious PM10 nonattainment areas with a total affected population of 22.7 million.
According to the Act, serious PM10 nonattainment areas must attain the standards no later than 10 years after designation. The initial serious PM10 nonattainment areas were designated January 18, 1994 and had an attainment date set by the Act of December 31, 2001. The Act provides that
EPA may grant extensions of the serious area attainment dates of up to 5 years, provided that the area requesting the extension meets the requirements of Section 188(e) of the Act.
Five serious PM10 nonattainment areas (Phoenix, Arizona; Clark County (Las Vegas), NV; Coachella Valley, South Coast (Los Angeles), and Owens Valley, California) have received extensions of the December 31, 2001 attainment date and thus have new attainment dates of December 31, 2006.
Many PM10 nonattainment areas continue to experience exceedances. Of the 29.3 million people living in designated PM10 nonattainment areas, approximately 24.5 million people are living in nonattainment areas with measured air quality violating the PM10 NAAQS in 2000-2002. Among these are 8 serious areas listed in Table 1.2-1 and 6 moderate areas: Nogales, AZ,
Imperial Valley, CA, Mono Basin, CA, Coso Junction, CA,B Ft. Hall, ID, and El Paso, TX.
Current PM2.5 monitored values for 2000-2002 indicate that 120 counties in which almost 65 million people live have annual design values that violate the PM2.5 NAAQS. In total, this represents 23 percent of the counties and 37 percent of the population with levels above the NAAQS in the areas with monitors that met completeness criteria. An additional 32 million people live in 91 counties that have air quality measurements within 10 percent of the level of the standard. These areas, though not currently violating the standard, will also benefit from the additional reductions from this rule in order to ensure long-term maintenance. There are another 204 counties where 21 million people live that had incomplete data.
Figure 2.1.2-1 is a map of currently available PM2.5 monitoring data, highlighting monitor locations near or above the annual PM2.5 NAAQS. As can be seen from this figure, high ambient levels are widespread throughout the East and California.
Acid deposition, or acid rain as it is commonly known, occurs when SO2 and NOx react in the atmosphere with water, oxygen, and oxidants to form various acidic compounds that later fall to earth in the form of precipitation or dry deposition of acidic particles.120 It contributes to damage of trees at high elevations and in extreme cases may cause lakes and streams to become
so acidic that they cannot support aquatic life.
In addition, acid deposition accelerates the decay of building materials and paints, including irreplaceable buildings, statues, and sculptures that are part of our nation’s cultural heritage. To reduce damage to automotive paint caused by acid rain and acidic dry deposition, some manufacturers use acid-resistant paints, at an average cost of $5 per vehicle—a total of near $80 million per year when applied to all new cars and trucks sold in the United States each year.
Acid deposition primarily affects bodies of water that rest atop soil with a limited ability to neutralize acidic compounds. The National Surface Water Survey (NSWS) investigated the effects of acidic deposition in over 1,000 lakes larger than 10 acres and in thousands of miles of streams. It found that acid deposition was the primary cause of acidity in 75 percent of the acidic lakes and about 50 percent of the acidic streams, and that the areas most sensitive to acid rain were the Adirondacks, the mid-Appalachian highlands, the upper Midwest and the high elevation West. The NSWS found that approximately 580 streams in the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain are acidic primarily due to acidic deposition.
Hundreds of the lakes in the Adirondacks surveyed in the NSWS have acidity levels incompatible with the survival of sensitive fish species. Many of the over 1,350 acidic streams in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands (mid-Appalachia)
region have already experienced trout losses due to increased stream acidity. Emissions from U.S. sources contribute to acidic deposition in Eastern Canada, where the Canadian government has estimated that 14,000 lakes are acidic. Acid deposition also has been implicated in contributing to degradation of high-elevation spruce forests that populate the ridges of the
Appalachian Mountains from Maine to Georgia. This area includes national parks such as the Shenandoah and Great Smoky Mountain National Parks.
EPA released its final “Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust” (the EPA Diesel HAD), referenced earlier. There, diesel exhaust was classified as likely to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation at environmental exposures, in accordance with the revised draft 1996/1999 EPA cancer guidelines.[134]
In accordance with earlier EPA guidelines, diesel exhaust would be similarly classified as a probable human carcinogen (Group B1).[135], [136]. A number of other agencies (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the World Health Organization, California EPA, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) have made similar classifications.[137],[138],[139],[140],[141]
The Health Effects Institute has also made numerous studies and report on the potential carcinogenicity of diesel exhaust.[142], [143], [144] Numerous animal and bioassay/genotoxic tests have been done on diesel exhaust.[145], [146]. Also, case-control and cohort studies have been conducted on railroad engine exposures [147],[148],[149] in addition to studies on truck workers.[150], [151],[152]. Also, there are numerous other epidemiologic studies including some studying mine workers and fire fighters.153, 154
For the EPA Diesel HAD, EPA reviewed 22 epidemiologic studies in detail, finding increased lung cancer risk in 8 out of 10 cohort studies and 10 out of 12 case-control studies. Relative risk for lung cancer associated with exposure range from 1.2 to 2.6. In addition, two meta-analyses of occupational studies of diesel exhaust and lung cancer have estimated the smoking-adjusted relative risk of 1.35 and 1.47, examining 23 and 30 studies, respectively.[157],[158]
That is, these two studies show an overall increase in lung cancer for the exposed groups of 35 percent and 47 percent compared with the groups not exposed to diesel exhaust. In the EPA Diesel HAD, EPA selected 1.4 as a reasonable estimate of occupational relative risk for further
analysis.
As described in the Diesel HAD, these studies include some of the same health effects reported for ambient PM, such as respiratory symptoms (cough, labored breathing, chest tightness, wheezing), and chronic respiratory disease (cough, phlegm, chronic bronchitis and suggestive evidence for decreases in pulmonary function). Symptoms of immunological effects such as wheezing and increased allergenicity are also seen. Studies in rodents, especially rats, show the potential for human inflammatory effects in the lung and consequential lung tissue damage from chronic diesel exhaust inhalation exposure.(my note – this document has some other information which includes known studies on humans which indicated these same symptoms.)
The Diesel HAD notes that acute or short-term exposure to diesel exhaust can cause acute irritation (e.g., eye, throat, bronchial), neurophysiological symptoms (e.g., lightheadedness, nausea), and respiratory symptoms (cough, phlegm). There is also evidence for an immunologic effect such as the exacerbation of allergenic responses to known allergens and asthma-like symptoms.164,165,166,167 The Diesel HAD lists numerous other studies as well. Also, as discussed in more detail previously, in addition to its
contribution to ambient PM inventories, diesel PM is of special concern because it has been associated with an increased risk of lung cancer.
The Diesel HAD also briefly summarizes health effects associated with ambient PM and the EPA’s annual NAAQS of 15 :g/m3. There is a much more extensive body of human data showing a wide spectrum of adverse health effects associated with exposure to ambient PM, of which diesel exhaust is an important component.
As indicated earlier, a number of recent studies have associated living near roadways with adverse health effects. Two of the studies cited earlier will be mentioned again here as examples of the type of work that has been done. A Dutch study (discussed earlier by G. Hoek et al., 2002) of a population of people 55-69 years old found that there was an elevated risk of heart and lung related mortality among populations living near high traffic roads.
Diesel particulate exposures have been measured for a number of occupational groups over various years but generally for more recent years (1980s and later) rather than earlier years.
Occupational exposures had a wide range varying from 2 to 1,280 :g/m3 for a variety of occupational groups including miners, railroad workers, firefighters, air port crew, public transit workers, truck mechanics, utility linemen, utility winch truck operators, fork lift operators, construction workers, truck dock workers, short-haul truck drivers, and long-haul truck drivers. These individual studies are discussed in the Diesel HAD.
The highest exposure to diesel PM is for workers in coal mines and noncoal mines, which are as high a 1,280 :g/m3, as discussed in the Diesel HAD. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has estimated a total of 1,400,000 workers are occupationally exposed to diesel exhaust from on-road and nonroad equipment.
Many measured or estimated occupational exposures are for on-road diesel engines and some are for school buses.[185], [186], [187], [188].
Mobile sources as a whole account for 78 percent of the total benzene emissions in the nation.
Benzene is an aromatic hydrocarbon that is present as a gas in both exhaust and evaporative emissions from mobile sources. Benzene accounts for one to two percent of the exhaust hydrocarbons, expressed as a percentage of total organic gases (TOG), in diesel engines.[198], [199]
For gasoline-powered highway vehicles, the benzene fraction of TOG varies depending on control technology (e.g., type of catalyst) and the levels of benzene and other aromatics in the fuel, but is generally higher than for diesel engines, about three to five percent.
Nonroad sources as a whole account for an average of about 17 percent of ambient benzene in urban areas and about 9 percent of ambient benzene in
rural areas across the U.S, in the 1996 NATA assessment.
The EPA’s IRIS database lists benzene as a known human carcinogen (causing leukemia) by all routes of exposure.201 It is associated with additional health effects including chromosomal changes in human and animal cells and increased proliferation of bone marrow cells in mice.[202], [203]
A number of adverse noncancer health effects including blood disorders, such as preleukemia and aplastic anemia, have also been associated with long-term occupational exposure to benzene.
Inhalation is the major source of human exposure to benzene in the occupational and nonoccupational setting.
At least half of this exposure is attributable to gasoline vapors and automotive emissions. Long-term inhalation occupational exposure to benzene has been shown to cause cancer of the hematopoetic (blood cell) system. Among these are acute nonlymphocytic leukemia,I chronic lymphocytic leukemia and possibly multiple myeloma
(primary malignant tumors in the bone marrow), although the evidence for the latter has decreased with more recent studies.204,205 Leukemias, lymphomas, and other tumor types have been observed in experimental animals exposed to benzene by inhalation or oral administration.
Exposure to benzene and/or its metabolites has also been linked with chromosomal changes in humans and animals206 and increased proliferation of mouse bone marrow cells.207
***
My Note -
When the recent hearings occurred on the health risks to workers and coastal populations in communities along the Gulf of Mexico of the crude oil in the Gulf of Mexico to those populations – the members of the various agencies acted as though they aren’t very sure that there are any studies of such things and that respirators are not required. Then what is the information above – which is only one piece and there are certainly others that are even more recent as well – but the studies’ results didn’t change because the oil companies decided it should be something else.
There is more information on this document and others that suggest the agency representatives of that hearing earlier this week – were either lying or misinformed or intentionally misleading the public and legislators. As far as I can tell, there is no way that the people on Grande Isle, for instance – could be sitting in anything closely resembling clean air. Is it possible with crude oil and oil mixed with dispersants and increased soot and increased diesel exhaust and increased particulate matter in the air all the way around them?
What do they think people will do if they know the truth? Wouldn’t it be possible to simply help people make the necessary actions to be protected – from using hepa filters on the air conditioners to using respirators outside?
Or better yet, getting up out of the way of the health risks of staying in the fumes that are known to be dangerous, sickening and carcin0genic?
- cricketdiane
***
What is genuinely bizarre to me is the idea that Republicans are admitting that they have known all this time that relying on foreign oil was making our nation vulnerable and yet they never diversified to support other forms of energy and fuel>
What is also genuinely bizarre to me is that the people in authority who should know better and who would otherwise be getting people out of harm’s way are pretending the harm not only doesn’t exist, but then pretending that others should come into the area for their vacations too. There are pictures on CNN – have they not seen them? Do they get cable?
I kind of wish they could all get their boats and come up to Georgia to fish but really I don’t think we can eat any of the fish from our rivers, lakes, streams and some of our coastal areas here already so it wouldn’t do them much good. Its been that way a long time and the air in Atlanta as well as many of our outlying rural areas make 1969 Los Angeles air look clean in comparison so I’m not sure they would be trading up. I think I heard there are fish in Minnesota that can still be eaten but I’d look it up first before believing it.
Apparently Wall Street Harvard-trained guys and gals have been teaching the physics about controlled burns to the EPA and Coast Guard – what goes up, just stays up and keeps going up. And, the health agencies must have been taught by the oil industry that it all just disappears magically after awhile with no harm to anyone and where something dies with oil in its mouth doesn’t mean that oil contributed to that deadness.
Somebody needs to tell those folks that the shrimp, the oysters, the clams and the other sea animals are dead and the beds where they lived are poisoned now. They are going to be dead for a long, long time and if any are alive in any measure, they will be poisoned for a long, long, long, long time. It would be kinder than letting them believe the pretense that it will all be fixed within a few years. It won’t. I wouldn’t eat any of it and I wouldn’t let anyone I know eat any of it – not even five years from now. I’d stay away from anything that has come from that area of the Gulf of Mexico ocean waters because it has been poisoned with crude oil petroleum, petroleum mixed with dispersants and diesel / petroleum soot and chemicals. I wouldn’t eat fish or shrimp or crab that had been boiled in gasoline either.
I’m sorry it is that way but they decided to host an oil industry that could destroy it and it destroyed it. They knew that was a possible event and that is what has happened. The dead birds can’t be told to get up and live. The dead sea turtles can’t be brought back. And, the oyster beds, shrimping areas and other ocean life zones which used to house and nurture that wildlife are now poisoned right now today and forever beyond this day.
As far as I know, the oil industry and the Republican Party included, have yet to make one dolphin in the world, and have yet to create one shark, whale, oyster, shrimp or sea cucumber for that matter and not one jellyfish, octopus or squid or seahorse or starfish or reef coral has been made, designed, breathed into life or re-made by them either.
Personally, I think that states along the Gulf Coast are not ready for what is coming. There are nine ways to Sunday that this is a disaster and an increasing disaster expanding by the hour and by the day. None of the things being used are even in the neighborhood of being close to fixing any of it. The only thing that is assured and is an absolutely known quantity, is that it will affect the health of people who live in those areas and those who are working in boats standing six feet above the spill where the fumes are concentrated. There is no where to go for safety to get clean air. They aren’t protected with respirators and other breathing equipment and eye protection. They will be hurt by it for many years and they aren’t leaving the area. So, that is a given.
Long before the storms come, things could be done – but they aren’t doing them. State legislators are sitting up in there mahogany covered offices with their nice desks and air conditioning while making decisions to maneuver money away from where it is needed most to do something else with it and for some reason screaming about getting more money. They could bring the best of their minds and resources to bear upon the situation and implement those things that would work – but they aren’t doing that any more than the marine spill response contractors are doing it. Their intentions are something else.
And, a day will come – whether it is two years from now, or two months from now or five years from today – when they will know what was made worse by doing it that way. At that point, these contractors and legislators and lobbyists and public relations specialists and political policy makers will be enjoying some Caribbean cruise or Mediterranean vacation – not uprooted by this disaster at all. But they will know and it will haunt them. I sure wish they would do something different right now – but that seems far removed from the reality they enjoy.
Crews cleaning up the oil in one Louisiana parish have trampled the nests and eggs of birds, Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser said Wednesday. Among them was the brown pelican, which came off the endangered species list last year.
Nungesser said the parish doesn’t want to turn away contractors, but he called for more care when crews work in the sensitive wetlands.
He said officials recently found broken eggs and crushed chicks on Queen Bess Island, near Grand Isle.
“The people BP sent out to clean up oil trampled the nesting grounds of brown pelicans and other birds,” he said. “Pelicans just came off the endangered species list in November of last year. They already have the oil affecting their population during their reproduction time, now we have the so-called clean up crews stomping eggs.
“The lack of urgency and general disregard for Louisiana’s wetlands and wildlife is enough to make you sick,” he said.
Washington (CNN) — President Obama sat down with top BP executives at the White House on Wednesday in a highly anticipated meeting that follows repeated administration insistences the company must pick up the tab for the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.
The meeting between Obama and BP Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg was also attended by Vice President Joe Biden, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Attorney General Eric Holder, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, among others, according to an administration official.
Also representing BP: company CEO Tony Hayward and Managing Director Bob Dudley, along with BP America CEO Lamar McKay.
The meeting was expected to last roughly two hours, according to a senior administration official.
“Piper Alpha was a turning point,” the 35-year industry veteran said, with many questioning whether production from the North Sea should continue. A commission, investigating the accident, eventually recommended 106 safety “best practices”, all of which were adopted by the industry.
(etc.)
Both Smith and Beitler said they believe the government may start to require mandatory relief wells in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico, as Canada and Norway have done off their coasts.
Beitler also predicted that another outcome of Macondo will be more standardization of well design requirements worldwide, with the U.S. adopting regulations such as requiring acoustic activators for blowout preventers.
Sponsored by Platts, a leading global energy and metals information provider, Platts Energy Podium provides an ongoing forum for prominent newsmakers and the press to address important energy and environmental issues.
About Platts: Platts, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies (NYSE: MHP), is a leading global provider of energy and commodities information. With a century of business experience, Platts serves customers across more than 150 countries. An independent provider, Platts serves the oil,natural gas, electricity, emissions, nuclear power, coal, petrochemical, shipping, and metals markets from 17 offices worldwide. Platts’ real-time news, pricing, analytical services and conferences help markets operate with transparency and efficiency. Traders, risk managers, analysts, and industry leaders depend upon Platts to help them make better trading and investment decisions. Additional information is available at http://www.platts.com.
About The McGraw-Hill Companies: Founded in 1888, The McGraw-Hill Companies (NYSE: MHP) is a global information and education company providing knowledge, insights and analysis in the financial, education and business information sectors through leading brands including Standard & Poor’s, McGraw-Hill Education, Platts, and J.D. Power and Associates. The Corporation has more than 280 offices in 40 countries. Sales in 2009 were $5.95 billion. Additional information is available at http://www.mcgraw-hill.com.
Jan 11, 2010 … The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, is an independent agency that regulates the interstate transmission of natural gas, oil, …
www.ferc.gov/about/about.asp
Employment experts say they believe companies are increasingly interested only in applicants who already have a job.
Some job postings include restrictions such as “unemployed candidates will not be considered” or “must be currently employed.” Those explicit limitations have occasionally been removed from listings when an employer or recruiter is questioned by the media though.
That’s what happened with numerous listings for grocery store managers throughout the Southeast posted by a South Carolina recruiter, Latro Consulting.
After CNNMoney called seeking comments on the listings last week, the restriction against unemployed candidates being considered came down. Latro Consulting refused to comment when contacted.
Sony Ericsson, a global phone manufacturer that was hiring for a new Georgia facility, also removed a similar restriction after local reporters wrote about it. According to reports, a Sony Ericsson spokesperson said that a mistake had been made.
“Most executive recruiters won’t look at a candidate unless they have a job, even if they don’t like to admit to it,” said Lisa Chenofsky Singer, a human resources consultant from Millburn, NJ, specializing in media and publishing jobs.
She said when she proposes candidates for openings, the first question she is often asked by a recruiter is if they currently have a job. If the answer is no, she’s typically told the unemployed candidate won’t be interviewed.
BP Ready for Spill 10 Times Gulf Disaster, Plan Says
Bloomberg News, San Francisco Chronicle, May 31, 2010
May 31 (Bloomberg) — BP Plc said in permit applications for drilling in the Gulf of Mexico that it was prepared to handle an oil spill more than ten times larger than the one now spewing crude into the waters off the southern United States.
“Proper execution of the procedures detailed in this manual will help to limit environmental and ecological damage to sensitive areas as well as minimizing loss or damage to BP facilities in the event of a petroleum release,” the company said in its oil-spill response plan, filed with the U.S. Minerals Management Service in 2008.
The company listed as its worst-case scenario a blowout in an exploratory well 57 miles west of the disaster, in a valley on the seafloor known as Mississippi Canyon. It’s about 33 miles off the coast of Louisiana. Such a blowout could have spewed 250,000 barrels a day, according to the 582-page plan.
The representations show that BP overestimated its ability to control an oil spill in waters where it’s the biggest player in a Gulf energy extraction industry worth $52 billion a year, said Bob Deans, a spokesman with the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington.
“BP has obviously overpromised and underdelivered,” Deans said. “They told us they had a plan that could deal with the consequences of a worst-case scenario. They don’t.”
The plan was posted on the Minerals Management Service website and was incorporated by reference into BP’s application with the agency for a permit to drill the Macondo well. The company said in that application that a worst-case blowout from that well could spew at most 162,000 barrels a day.
Frederick T. Kolb
BP America Inc.
501 Westlake Park Blvd.
Houston, Texas 77079
Telephone: 281-366-5009
Fax: 281-336-5901
Email: kolbft@bp.com
Mark Stulz
Vice President, Policy & U.S. Regulatory Affairs
BP Energy Company
501 Westlake Park Blvd., Rm. 4.554A
Houston, TX 77079
Telephone: 281-366-1301
Fax: 281-366-5090
Email: mark.stultz@bp.com
BP Canada Energy Marketing Corp.
Frederick T. Kolb
BP America Inc.
501 Westlake Park Blvd.
Houston, Texas 77079
Telephone: 281-366-5009
Fax: 281-336-5901
Email: kolbft@bp.com
Mark Stulz
Vice President, Policy & U.S. Regulatory Affairs
BP Energy Company
501 Westlake Park Blvd., Rm. 4.554A
Houston, TX 77079
Telephone: 281-366-1301
Fax: 281-366-5090
Email: mark.stultz@bp.com
BP Energy Company
Frederick T. Kolb
BP America Inc.
501 Westlake Park Blvd.
Houston, Texas 77079
Telephone: 281-366-5009
Fax: 281-336-5901
Email: kolbft@bp.com
Mark Stulz
Vice President, Policy & U.S. Regulatory Affairs
BP Energy Company
501 Westlake Park Blvd., Rm. 4.554A
Houston, TX 77079
Telephone: 281-366-1301
Fax: 281-366-5090
Email: mark.stultz@bp.com
Mr. Hayward needs to have company in jail subjected to one another’s company for a long- long- long- long time, including the old executives at BP that caused these things, the new executives comprehensively that caused these things and the whoever from BP that day who was the executive that insisted on doing things the way they were done which resulted in the explosion, loss of lives, loss of the rig and loss of the Gulf of Mexico and its wildlife massively and ongoing for generations.
- cricketdiane
***
Jail time for BP CEO?
But Goldman is among those legal experts that think its quite likely some mid-level employees at BP will go to jail.
The BP officials in charge of the drilling process aboard the Deepwater Horizon rig when it exploded, Robert Kaluza and Donald Vidrine, could be among the mid-level employees where blame is placed.
Reports from congressional committees and in the press have indicated BP (BP) chose cheaper, riskier drilling tactics in the lead-up to the disaster.
(etc.)
During a recent Coast Guard hearing, Kaluza refused to testify, pleading the fifth, and Vidrine called in sick.
But the company or individual employees could be found to be grossly negligent, she said, if they acted outside what others in the industry were doing and consider safe.
Another angle the government may be exploring is whether BP lied or misled regulators in their plans for the oil well, said John Hueston, a partner at the law firm Irell and Manella and one of the government’s prosecutors during the Enron case.
If regulators signed off on everything BP was doing, then the company may be off the hook in that department, said Hueston. (my note – but not if they were bribed or paid off to do it.)
But if BP withheld some information about the well or altered some information so they would receive permission from the Minerals Management Service to drill the well using the faster techniques, then BP employees could go to jail.
Each instance of falsifying documents would carry a sentence of up to five years, said Hueston. “If there were multiple false statements, a person could be looking at decades.”
Unless, of course, BP was found to have fostered a culture of putting profits over safety – a charge sometimes leveled against the company in the wake of the 2006 Alaska pipeline spill and the deadly 2005 Texas refinery explosion, and one BP always denies.
A third route the government will undoubtedly pursue will be violations of environmental law.
It’s illegal to release oil into the water, whether on purpose or by accident. Same is true for killing certain bird species. These are the criminal violations Exxon ultimately pleaded to after the Valdez spill.
The maximum penalty for violating the Clean Water Act is three years in jail for each count, said Scott West, a former top regional field investigator for the Environmental Protection Agency who handled the government case against BP for the 2006 Alaska pipeline spill.
So, that means that if you or I found an eagle’s feather without having done anything to the bird and put it in our pocket, we could spend the next fifty years in jail. But, BP and other oil producing industries can poison the wildlife, marine life and birds cruelly and sadistically causing horrific and unnatural suffering to them as they die from the polluting chemical toxins from crude oil and dispersants – but never go to jail at all. And, they can kill eleven people this time and fifteen people, the last time in Texas City and pollute miles, upon miles upon thousands of miles – without consequence or jail time. No way that is right.
- cricketdiane
***
Amoco Capline Pipeline Company
Mitchell Jones
Compliance Officer
BP Pipelines (North America) Inc. (Owner Amoco Capline)
28100 Torch Parkway
Suite 600N
Warrenville, IL 60555
Telephone: 630-836-3446
Fax: 630-836-3580
Email: Mitch.Jones2@bp.com
Amoco High Island Pipeline Company
Bernadette Zabransky
Director, Pipeline Tariff and Regulatory Affairs
Amoco High Island Pipeline Company
801 Warrenville Road, Room 7036
Lisle, IL 60532
Telephone: 630-343-2680
Fax: 630-493-3707
Email: zabranbj@bp.com
Amoco Pipeline Company
Bernadette Zabransky
Director – Pipeline Tariff & Regulatory Affairs
Amoco Pipeline Company
28100 Torch Parkway, Suite 800
Warrenville, IL 60555-4015
Telephone: 630-836-5124
Fax: 630-836-5185
Email: zabranbj@bp.com
Mitchell Jones
Compliance Officer
BP Pipelines (North America) Inc. (Owner Amoco Capline)
28100 Torch Parkway
Suite 600N
Warrenville, IL 60555
Telephone: 630-836-3446
Fax: 630-836-3580
Email: Mitch.Jones2@bp.com
BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc.
Charles J. Coulson
President
BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc
900 East Benson Blvd.
P.O. Box 190848
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0848
Telephone: 907-564-5553
Fax: 907-564-5588
Email: coulsocj@bp.com
James D. Decker
Corporate Secretary
BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc
900 East Benson Blvd.
P.O. Box 190848
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0848
Telephone: 907-564-5535
Email: james.decker@bp.com
BP Transportation ( Alaska ) Inc.
Charles J. Coulson
President
BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc
900 East Benson Blvd.
P.O. Box 190848
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0848
Telephone: 907-564-5553
Fax: 907-564-5588
Email: coulsocj@bp.com
James D. Decker
Corporate Secretary
BP Transportation ( Alaska ) Inc.
900 East Benson Blvd.
P.O. Box 190848
Anchorage , Alaska 99519-0848
Telephone: 907-564-5535
Fax: Not given
Email: james.decker@bp.com
Commission approves two settlements for $7.3 Million; civil penalties resolve capacity release, shipper-must-have-title violations
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) today assessed civil penalties totaling $7.3 million in approving settlements of two separate enforcement matters involving BP Energy Company (BP) and MGTC, Inc. (MGTC).
Both settlements involve self-reported violations of FERC’s capacity release policies. Different facts and circumstances, however, resulted in BP agreeing to settle with a payment of $7 million and MGTC settling for $300,000.
“FERC’s capacity release program is a core element of our natural gas regulatory program, and violation of the regulations and requirements governing capacity release warrants significant penalties,” Chairman Joseph T. Kelliher said. The Chairman also noted that “each company could have faced substantially higher penalties had it not self-reported its violations, and had it not also demonstrated exemplary cooperation with FERC’s Enforcement staff during the investigation. What should be clear to the industry is that FERC places a high value on a company’s commitment to rectifying inappropriate conduct by self-reporting its violations and cooperating with staff’s investigation.”
With these two settlements, FERC since January 2007 has approved 12 settlements with natural gas and electric entities and assessed civil penalties totaling $39.8 million.
BP Energy Company
BP will pay a civil penalty of $7 million and implement a compliance monitoring plan to resolve multiple self-reported violations of regulations for posting and bidding of released capacity, the shipper-must-have-title requirement, and the prohibition on buy-sell transactions. The violations involved thousands of individual transactions in 2005 and 2006 stemming from BP’s management of customers’ capacity rights on interstate natural gas pipeline and storage facilities.
The most serious of BP’s violations involves a practice known as “flipping,” which evidences a deliberate strategy for evading FERC regulations that require posting and competitive bidding for discounted long-term releases of capacity.
BP avoided the posting and bidding requirements by improperly arranging for serial short-term releases of discounted capacity to two BP-affiliated replacement shippers on an alternating monthly basis, an arrangement that continued for 22 months in one instance. FERC found that BP transported 24.9 billion cubic feet (Bcf) of natural gas on capacity it acquired improperly through flipping transactions. The Commission noted that this practice is “particularly serious in nature” and “warrants a substantial civil penalty.”
In addition to the flipping violations, BP had a large number of shipper-must-have-title violations and engaged in two prohibited buy-sell arrangements. In total, BP’s violations involved 49.3 Bcf of gas and occurred on 14 major pipeline systems, the Commission said. The Commission also noted that BP’s actions “directly affected the transparency of the secondary market for natural gas transportation” and “impaired the effectiveness of the Commission’s pipeline open-access policies.”
In addition to the civil penalty, BP will implement a compliance monitoring plan for at least one year under the Enforcement staff’s supervision.
MGTC, Inc.
MGTC, a recently acquired subsidiary of Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (Anadarko), will pay a civil penalty of $300,000 and submit a compliance report to resolve its self-reported violations of the Commission’s shipper-must-have-title requirement regarding a contract for interruptible transportation on its affiliated interstate pipeline, MIGC, Inc. (MIGC).
FERC found that MGTC violated the shipper-must-have-title requirement and MIGC’s tariff, under which the title requirement applies to interruptible as well as firm transportation. MGTC transported approximately 17.2 Bcf of natural gas since 1998 in violation of the shipper-must-have-title requirement.
The Commission noted that, in addition to occurring on an interruptible contract, MGTC’s violation did not result in unjust profits, and that there was no demonstrable harm to third parties caused by MGTC’s violations.
In addition to the civil penalty, MGTC will submit a compliance report verifying the steps it has taken with respect to all related aspects of the transportation transaction(s) to correct the violation.
“Clearly we do have an oil-spill response plan in place, it was an integral part of our permitting with the MMS and it was specifically agreed with and approved by the MMS,” BP spokesman David Nicholas said in an e-mailed statement. “It sets out the actions, considerations, plans and steps that will be used in the case of an oil spill, and it is this plan that has been in action in response.”
Every well that a company drills has to be covered by a response plan that includes a worst-case scenario, said Kendra Barkoff, a spokeswoman with the Minerals Management Service.
‘Fundamental Questions’
“The BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, however, raises several fundamental questions about safety and about industry’s ability to respond to spills,” she said in an e-mailed statement. ” We have launched a full investigation of the oil spill and are in the process of implementing new safety requirements to ensure this doesn’t happen again.”
BP’s plan says it has contracts with the Marine Spill Response Corp. of Herndon, Virginia, and the National Response Corp. of Great River, New York, to contain and clean up any spills through the use of dispersant chemicals sprayed from airplanes and skimming vessels that would suck up oil-filled water.
The company would also use containment booms to control the spread of oil in the Gulf and work with local environmental groups to clean affected wildlife, according to the plan.
Documents Sought
The House Energy and Commerce Committee, investigating the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, is seeking documents from the clean-up consultants. Chairman Henry Waxman, a California Democrat, and oversight subcommittee Chairman Bart Stupak, a Michigan Democrat, sent letters on May 28 to National Response, a unit of Seacor Holdings Inc., Marine Spill Response, and O’Brien’s Response Management Inc. of Spring, Texas.
Waxman’s committee has reviewed 105,000 documents provided by companies connected with the rig.
BP’s plan says that those companies have enough oil- skimming vessels to remove about 492,000 barrels of oil a day from the water. The companies have the capacity to store 299,000 barrels a day, according to the plan.
BP spokesman John Curry said yesterday that so far, the company, through its contractors, has deployed 91 skimming vessels that have picked up a total of 312,952 barrels of oily water mixture from the spill that has gushed for almost six weeks. “That’s not all oil, it’s oily water,” he said.
A Prolonged Spill
He said the company had spread more than 3 million feet of containment boom, a floating plastic barrier designed to contain the spread of oil and direct it to skimming vessels. The boom was enough to cover about 350 miles of coastline, he said.
BP’s plan foresaw the possibility of a prolonged spill.
“If the spill went unabated, shoreline impact would depend upon existing environmental conditions,” according to the plan.
The chance of oil reaching the shoreline within 30 days was estimated at 3 percent or less for most coastal areas, except Louisiana’s Plaquemines Parish, which the company said had a 21 percent chance of seeing oil onshore within 30 days.
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal said on May 19 that oil was washing ashore in the Plaquemines wetlands.
I found something but I don’t know what it means and I don’t know why all the numbers in the last column are negative – but I know what I think it might mean – somebody who knows something should look at this -
- [ Translate this page ]Jun 10, 2010 – Gallows humor for the BP Macondo well-weary: Which species may first become … 地理信息系统数据, 全球快讯, 全球电力导报, 能源内参, FERC 内参, NRC 内参 …
china.platts.com/InsightandAnalysisHome.aspx?Commodity
***
Latest Form 133 filed on Macondo
Here is a link to the latest Form 133 (Well Activity Report) filed on the hole TO Deepwater Horizon was drilling
Editor’s Note: A team of researchers led by John Kessler, Texas A&M College of Geosciences chief scientist and assistant oceanography professor, has traveled to the Deepwater Horizon disaster site to study the methane leaking into the Gulf of Mexico (along with tens thousands of barrels of crude oil) daily at the site of the damaged Macondo 252 well. Kessler, along with David Valentine (an assistant professor of marine sediment geochemistry, biogeochemistry and geomicrobiology at the University of California, Santa Barbara) and the rest of his colleagues are hoping to come away with a rough estimate of the spill’s size by the time his team returns home on June 20, followed by more accurate estimates as they complete their analysis of the information collected. Other objectives of the expedition onboard the RV Cape Hatteras include trying to determine how the methane might be removed from the water (whether eaten by waterborne microorganisms or released into the atmosphere) and how methane concentrations will change over time. Rainer Amon, a Texas A&M associate professor of marine sciences and oceanography, filed the following dispatch. It’s the team’s second blog post for Scientific American. Monday, June 14, 2010
This is our second day at sea in the general area of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. So far we have kept about seven miles [11 kilometers] away from the epicenter of the spill. My role during this cruise is to trace the subsurface plume of oil and gas using a sensor that measures fluorescence bouncing back from certain dissolved molecules with polyaromathic hydrocarbons being one of them. Using this sensor along with other measurements like dissolved oxygen and light transmission we readily located a subsurface plume to the southwest of the spill.
The dimension of the plume, which is located at a depth of 1,100 meters, is about seven kilometers wide and about 50 meters tall. We don’t know yet what the concentration of hydrocarbons is in this plume is, but my colleagues will certainly put a number on this feature soon. The next few days we will continue to use the sensors to follow the plume and look for other plumes to the south and east of ground zero. Starting yesterday night we have been seeing a large number of dead sea cucumbers floating on the surface. These animals live on the bottom of the ocean where they feed on sediment and suspended organic matter. I would estimate the number of dead sea cucumbers to be in the thousands and their cause of death is obviously related to the oil spill. Possible causes include direct contact with oil, the dispersant or oxygen depletion as a result of the spill. A detailed study of the benthic environment is necessary to get a detailed picture of the damage done to this environment and how it affects the ecological condition of the Gulf of Mexico.
Image of dead sea cucumbers on the surface of the Gulf of Mexico near the Deepwater site courtesy of Rainer Amon
Editor's Note: A team of researchers led by John Kessler, Texas A&M College of Geosciences chief scientist and assistant oceanography professor, has traveled to the Deepwater Horizon disaster site to study the methane leaking into the Gulf of Mexico (along with tens thousands of barrels of crude oil) daily at the site of the damaged Macondo 252 well. Kessler, along with David Valentine (an assistant professor of marine sediment geochemistry, biogeochemistry and geomicrobiology at the University of California, Santa Barbara) and the rest of his colleagues are hoping to come away with a rough estimate of the spill's size by the time his team returns home on June 20, followed by more accurate estimates as they complete their analysis of the information collected. Other objectives of the expedition onboard the RV Cape Hatteras include trying to determine how the methane might be removed from the water (whether eaten by waterborne microorganisms or released into the atmosphere) and how methane concentrations will change over time. This is his first blog post for Scientific American.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
After a busy three weeks of preparations, we sailed from Gulfport, Miss., at 4 p.m. Central Time. The objective of our cruise is to study the natural gas component of the oil spill, estimated by BP scientists to be 40 percent by weight of the material escaping the broken riser pipe. Natural gas in this instance is predominately methane, a potent greenhouse gas and a possible contributor to the loss of dissolved oxygen from the Gulf waters. Our measurement campaign began immediately as we left the dock. Using a continuous technique involving seawater pumps, gas chromatographs and cavity-ring down spectrometers, we measured the dissolved methane and carbon dioxide concentrations and natural stable isotopes in surface waters while the boat was underway. The natural stable isotopes are used to quantify sources, sinks and fluxes of the gases from the surface waters, and these measurements can ultimately determine gas fluxes across the air-sea interface.
Outside of only a few miles from the port, the smell of oil was abundant even though oil was not visible on the sea surface. While most oceanographic research at sea involves long hours, tight living quarters and significant manual labor, the payoff beyond the thrill of scientific discovery is the opportunity to visit beautiful, peaceful and often exotic locations on this planet. This project will most likely not involve those benefits. Nonetheless, the results of this project will contribute to our understanding of not only this spill, but also our planet in general, of which I look forward with great anticipation.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
We arrived at the spill around 3 a.m. local time. I awoke to begin our sampling and measurement campaign. In the distance (where we are not permitted to sail), one can easily see the activity of the attempts to cap the well. This includes the drill ships for the relief wells, gas flaring from the oil recovery efforts, and multiple support and supply ships. In addition to surface water sampling, which began the previous day, we began profiling the chemical and biological properties of dissolved gas in the water column. Large quantities of natural gas appear to be in subsurface water layers, but more measurements are required to characterize this feature.
Daylight revealed a near continuous sheen of oil on the sea surface and intermittent patches of thick cake batter-like oil. Quickly, this spill site is becoming familiar. By sunset, the sight of the containment efforts no longer seems foreign. Our team of scientists is working eagerly and earnestly together. The crew of the boat is remarkably efficient and helpful. We cannot collect the data fast enough to satisfy our curiosity.
Images courtesy of Texas A&M College of Geosciences/John Kessler
THEODORE, Ala./HOUSTON (Reuters) - Lawmakers accused BP Plc on Monday of taking risky shortcuts on its blown-out Gulf of Mexico oil well, while President Barack Obama kept up pressure on the energy giant to swiftly compensate victims of the worst spill in U.S. history.
Setting the stage for a showdown with BP executives at congressional hearings this week, two Democratic lawmakers said the British company chose faster and cheaper drilling options in the Gulf of Mexico that "increased the danger of a catastrophic well failure."
Millions of gallons (liters) of oil have gushed into the Gulf since an April 20 explosion on an offshore rig killed 11 workers and ruptured BP's well. The spill has soiled 120 miles of U.S. coastline, imperiled a multibillion-dollar fishing industry and killed birds, sea turtles and dolphins.
Under intense pressure from the Obama administration, BP unveiled a new plan on Monday to vastly boost the amount of oil it is siphoning off from its ruptured well. But the leak will not be permanently sealed until BP finishes two relief wells that are due to be completed in August.
BP said it planned to send more vessels to the spill site to increase its capacity to capture oil from 15,000 barrels a day now to 40,000-53,000 barrels by the end of this month and 60,000-80,000 by mid-July.
Ahead of congressional hearings on Tuesday and Thursday, lawmakers Henry Waxman and Bart Stupak released a letter to BP Chief Executive Tony Hayward that laid out a potentially damning account of the events leading up to the rig explosion.
"It appears that BP repeatedly chose risky procedures in order to reduce costs and save time and made minimal efforts to contain the added risk," their letter said.
For several years we have advocated the arguments for "Resiliency" for the corporate operational risk paradigm and now it seems that Homeland Security is making it's way towards the migration away from "Protection." And for good reason:
For example, resilience is listed as one of the five homeland security missions in the recently published Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, which defines it as “fostering individual, community, and system robustness, adaptability, and capacity for rapid recovery.”
Typically, the response to resilience is focused on critical infrastructure and the protection of these assets, such as our electrical, information technology and telecommunications sectors. At some point in the asymmetric warfare being waged daily online you realize that the the only strategy has to be that of resilience as the barriers of protection continue to fail. If you think about any system that has so many moving parts, complexity and shear breadth of vulnerabilities you realize that spending all of your efforts and resources on protection is fruitless.
Now if we apply the thoughts of resilience to the physical aspects of drilling for oil offshore and defending the borders that are thousands of miles long, what comes to mind? Remember, there is no possible way to eliminate the vulnerabilities completely to an unprotected mile of the border or a blowout on the drilling platform.
You see, as you come at the problem from a point of view that has to do with "Resilience" not just protection, you begin to think of new ideas that certainly should be considered going forward.
Notably, Dr. James Carafano of the Heritage Foundation spoke to this issue at a congressional hearing on resilience in the homeland in 2008. He said, “The current paradigm of ‘protecting’ infrastructure is unrealistic. We should shift our focus to that of resiliency. Resiliency is the capacity to maintain continuity of activities even in the face of threats, disaster, and adversity.”
So what would be some of the activities that we must have the capacity to maintain as we defend our U.S. borders? And what activities would we deploy, to keep oil from reaching the magnitude it has so far in the DeepWater Horizon breach in the Gulf? If you are one of these companies your Operational Risk teams are billing overtime:
Transocean Ltd (RIGN.S) (RIG.N) - The Zug, Switzerland-based company owned and operated the Deepwater Horizon Rig. The rig went into service in 2001 and was drilling the Macondo prospect about 40 miles off the coast of Louisiana.
BP Plc (BP.L) (BP.N) - BP hired Transocean's rig at a rate of about $500,000 per day to drill the well. BP is the project's operator and has a 65 percent working interest in the well.
Anadarko Petroleum Corp (APC.N) - The Houston company owns a 25 percent nonoperating interest in the well.
Cameron International Corp (CAM.N) - The Houston company supplied a piece of equipment known as a blowout preventer. Blowout preventers are put in place to stop an uncontrolled flow of oil or gas. The Deepwater Horizon's blowout preventer failed to operate and seal the well.
Halliburton Co (HAL.N) - The oilfield services company, which has headquarters in Dubai and Houston, provided a number of services on the Deepwater Horizon. The company was providing cementing on the well to stabilize its walls, according to Transocean's website. (Reporting by Anna Driver in Houston; Editing by Lisa Von Ahn)
In each case these are wake up calls to the work that is still to be done and the ideas yet conceived to address the key issues. One item of certainty will be the increased focus on compliance and regulatory oversight. The government is already mandating the inspection of all the Gulf oil rigs for the types of safety and security measures that may be mandated for these types of incidents.
NOIA Applauds New Offshore Wind Consortium & Office
06/15/2010
The National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA) strongly supports the responsible development of all offshore energy sources and applauds the announcement by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar of the establishment of both the Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy Consortium and the new Atlantic Offshore Renewable Energy Office in Virginia.
“All forms of energy are important to our economic and energy security,” said NOIA President Randall Luthi. “Future energy development on the Outer Continental Shelf, whether it be wind, wave, ocean current, solar, or conventional oil and natural gas will further diversify the nation's energy sources while generating new jobs for Americans, and reducing our dependence on foreign energy sources.”
The NOIA membership includes Cape Wind, which on April 28, 2010 received the first ever DOI approval for an offshore wind farm. Other NOIA member companies include those who are positioned to provide essential services to future offshore energy projects.
NOIA Urges DOI to Issue Drilling Moratorium Guidance
06/15/2010
The National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA) sent a letter to Acting Director of the Minerals Management Service Bob Abbey urging issuance of guidance in the wake of the agency’s recent rescissions of Applications for Permit to Drill (APDs). The rescission of the APDs in water depths less than 500 feet appears to signal a moratorium on drilling in shallow water in addition to deep water, causing extensive confusion among the offshore industry.
NOIA urges swift issuance of the guidance, possibly in the form of a Notice to Lessees (NTL), and recommends it further detail the additional safety measures referenced by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar in a May 27 report to be taken in order to proceed with the approval of APDs or exploration plans. NOIA also urges that the guidance be timely, measurable and achievable.
Should the agency decide to pursue a formal rulemaking, NOIA recommends it should also provide immediate interim guidance that would allow exploration and production during the course of the rulemaking process.
NOIA also welcomes Department of the Interior participation in an Industry Response Team it is forming with other energy trade associations, energy experts, and academia. The team will review and examine the ongoing oil spill response and make recommendations for enhancements to subsea and surface oil spill response protocols.
NOIA cautions that a lengthy shutdown of drilling will only multiply the economic and emotional stress and loss of jobs that has already devastated the region.
NOIA is the only national trade association representing all segments of the offshore industry with an interest in the exploration and production of both traditional and renewable energy resources on the nation’s outer continental shelf. The NOIA membership comprises more than 250 companies engaged in business activities ranging from producing to drilling, engineering to marine and air transport, offshore construction to equipment manufacture and supply, telecommunications to finance and insurance.
NOIA’s mission is to secure reliable access and a fair regulatory and economic environment for the companies that develop the nation’s valuable offshore energy resources in an environmentally responsible manner. NOIA members include producers of oil and natural gas, renewable energy, contractors, marine engineers, service and supply companies and others with an interest in producing energy from the nation's outer continental shelf.
| About Us | Contact Us | Site Map |
National Ocean Industries Association
1120 G Street, NW • Suite 900 • Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202.347.6900| Fax: 202.347.8650
***
For Immediate Release: Contact: Nicolette Nye
Thursday, May 6, 2010 (202) 347-6900
NOIA Member Companies Engaged in Cohesive Deepwater Horizon Response
Washington – As BP, the National Response Team, and an army of volunteers work feverishly to respond to the Deepwater Horizon incident in the Gulf of Mexico, NOIA member companies are lending their resources in an unprecedented cooperative effort to stop the flow of oil and prevent further damage to the environment.
These resources include land-based and offshore facilities, aircraft, marine vessels, remotely operated vehicles (ROVs), a containment dome, subsea tooling, subsea video, dispersant, personnel, and technical expertise on suction systems, blowout preventers, dispersant injection, well construction, containment options, subsea wells, environmental science, emergency response, spill assistance, well intervention, and drilling and well competence.
“We are all working together to stop the uncontrolled release of oil in the Gulf of Mexico, as we mourn the tragic loss of 11 men and pray their families find comfort,” said Randall Luthi, President of the National Ocean Industries Association. “We also thank all those who have worked, and continue to work 24 hours a day in rescue and response efforts, as well as in environmental impacts mitigation and oil spill cleanup.”
“Our member companies want answers as much as anyone as to the cause of this event, and we understand the offshore industry will be closely examined by the authorities at the state and national level,” Luthi continued. “The members stand ready to cooperate and assist as aggressively as we are in the response and clean-up efforts.”
“Everyone deserves to work in a safe environment, and while there are risks associated with every industry, that risk can be significantly reduced and managed through careful consideration and evaluation,” said Luthi. “Our industry operates using incredible technology that rivals the space program. This technology and the unprecedented cooperation from NOIA member companies will be key to developing a solution that stops this accidental flow of oil into the Gulf, and helps to restore the faith of the American public in the offshore industry.”
To date, the NOIA companies below have offered and/or are providing the following assets to the response effort:
ExxonMobil
ExxonMobil has offered the use of a drilling rig as a staging base, two supply vessels, an underwater vehicle and support vessel and has provided experts to respond to BP’s request for technical advice on blowout preventers, dispersant injection, well construction and containment options. The company also continues to support the work of Tier 3 spill response and cleanup cooperatives, such as MSRC, Clean Gulf, and Oil Spill Response Ltd., to provide personnel and equipment, such as dispersants, fire boom and radios. ExxonMobil is also identifying, procuring and manufacturing additional supplies of dispersant for potential use.
Shell Oil
6 OSRVs – initially for fire fighting and search & rescue
A dynamically positioned vessel with ROV
EC135 helicopter
ROV hot-stab panel
Dispersant
Containment Dome
Technical experts in the areas of subsea wells, Environmental Science, and Emergency Response
Robert Training and Conference Center (RTCC) in Robert, LA in full support of Unified Command including accommodations and press conferencing space.
ConocoPhillips
Responded favorably to a request by BP to potentially access an adjacent ConocoPhillips’ lease for a relief well.
Nominated two technical experts to participate in API's proposed joint industry government task forces
Reviewed BP's current plans, offered ideas and technical assistance to BP
ConocoPhillips Crisis Management Emergency Response Center is in continual communication with BP's Incident Command Center to identify potential resources needed from the ConocoPhillips Incident Management Assistant Team (IMAT).
As a member of both the Marine Preservation Association and the Norwegian Clean Seas Association for Operating Companies, ConocoPhillips is helping fund the availability of cleanup equipment and dispersants.
Made available the use of spill response equipment, chartered helicopters, marine vessels and a pair of shore bases in Louisiana.
Established a system for employees worldwide to make charitable contributions to non-profit agencies involved in the cleanup. Contributions will be matched by ConocoPhillips.
Directing employees who are interested in volunteering to the central volunteer information site.
It should be noted that COP does not have any Gulf of Mexico drilling operations at this time; therefore has limited availability to boats or other equipment to offer BP to assist in the incident.
Diamond Offshore Drilling
1 each 7000’ hydraulic pod hose and pod reel
1 each BOP mandrel
1 each DWHC BOP connector
Marine Spill Response Corporation (MSRC)
Coordinating 4 C-130 aircraft (1 MSRC, 1 Commercial, 2 Air Force) spraying dispersants, along with six smaller planes that act as spotters
8 Oil Spill Response Vessels (OSRVs) – each 210’ long – on site and working actively
2 additional OSRVs en route from Maine and New York.
3 ocean-barges on site to capture and store oil that is skimmed up by the OSRVs
6 Fast Response Vehicles – each 47’ long – on site and working the scene
200 MSRC staff and field personnel, along with supervising over 1000 contractors
Numerous shall water barges that hold pontoons used for skimming and can be deployed in shallow water situations to protect the shoreline
Over 700,000 feet of boom deployed/staged under MSRC coordination
Several fire boom systems
Anadarko
Anadarko has 4 employees inside BP assisting their technical teams.
Statoil
StatOil has offered both spill assistance and drilling and well competence.
Tidewater
BP is using the Tidewater M/V Pat Tillman to bring dispersant chemical, tanks and assorted tools for the proposed injection plan that BP has come up with to alleviate the current spill. The vessel was dispatched directly to the location where the support vessel Skandi Neptune is standing by with coil tubing lowered to the well head to inject the dispersant directly into the leak stream. In addition, BP has chartered the Tidewater M/V War Admiral which will be outfitted with equipment used to monitor current patterns in the GOM.
Oceaneering
Oceaneering is supporting BP with people--round the clock--to work on all manner of subsea ideas. One vessel is on location with 2 ROVs and there are 2 additional ROVs on a third party vessel that BP has hired to be on location. In addition, Oceaneering has ROVs on both of the two other drilling rigs that BP/Transocean is bringing to the location. Oceaneering equipment is providing the video feed from the ocean floor.
Stone Energy
Stone Energy sent its M/V “Wisconsin” to the site the first night. It was released from service the next morning. Stone has also offered the use of its MC109 Amberjack platform as needed and stands ready to assist at any time.
Heerema
Heerema has offered to mobilize the heavy lift vessel “Balder” from Trinidad to help in any way possible.
CalDive
Cal Dive has one 100 foot utility boat offshore, with 7 men aboard assisting in the offshore spill response; they are working directly for BP. CalDive has submitted to BP and the USCG and the National Response Corporation a schedule of its entire 28 ship/barge fleet and 2000 person workforce in the Gulf of Mexico available to assist in the cleanup efforts.
Davis-Lynch Inc.
Davis-Lynch is working with BP to supply the necessary equipment for the relief well being drilled.
Taylor Energy
On Tues May 4th, Taylor Energy attended a Review of Preliminary Plans for Well Intersection and Dynamic Kill Operations on MC 252 #3 at BP’s office to provide assistance as a peer Operator. Taylor Energy has recently drilled five successful intervention wells nearby at MC20 within the last sixteen months, with a sixth intervention well currently in progress.
Teledyne RD Instruments
Teledyne RD Instruments is providing Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ADCPs) to measure the speed and direction of the currents for the entire water column around the accident area.
Teledyne is also working with Horizon Marine to do vessel surveys to measure the size of the plume and help model where and when the oil slick will go.
Kiewit Offshore Services
Kiewit Offshore Services regularly makes its services available in the event of a disaster or emergency, and has done so in this case, offering to assist BP and Transocean in any way they require.
Plains Exploration & Production Company
Plains made any and all of its equipment and expertise available to BP and Transocean as it responds to the Deepwater Horizon incident.
Delmar Systems
Delmar, as a leading provider of mooring-related services, is consulting with BP regarding anchor/mooring solutions to be used in whatever solutions are finalized in a solution to contain the well flow leak and diverting oil and gas to the surface for further containment. Discussions are ongoing and Delmar is offering its full support of engineering, technical, planning and operational capability in addition to various specialty mooring equipment and hardware on a priority basis.
Bee Mar LLC
Bee Mar’s newbuild DP-2 platform supply vessel, the M/V Bee Sting, promptly answered the distress signal of the Deepwater Horizon on April 20th and joined several other vessels in performing a survivor search and rescue effort and attempting to contain the fire on the rig using its offship firefighting equipment. Bee Mar has also offered the use of its DP-2, ABS-classed Platform Supply Vessels and conventional Offshore Supply Vessels to assist in containing the oil spill. Additionally, Bee Mar is coordinating with environmental response companies and other vessel providers to develop new approaches to containing and cleaning up the spilled hydrocarbons.
Newfield Exploration
Newfield sent one of its support vessels, the Odyssea Diamond, to assist during the rig fire on April 20, 2010. The vessel was subsequently utilized to tow two damaged lifeboats to Fourchon, Louisiana. Additionally, Newfield released the Helix Q4000 semisubmersible intervention vessel to BP on April 30, requiring an early suspension of subsea well intervention operations at MC 506. The Q4000 remains on contract with BP at this time.
NOIA is the only national trade association representing all segments of the offshore industry with an interest in the exploration and production of both traditional and renewable energy resources on the nation’s outer continental shelf. The NOIA membership comprises more than 250 companies engaged in business activities ranging from producing to drilling, engineering to marine and air transport, offshore construction to equipment manufacture and supply, telecommunications to finance and insurance.
The National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA), founded in 1972 with 35 members, represents all facets of the domestic offshore energy and related industries. Today, our more than 250 member companies are dedicated to the development of offshore energy for the continued growth and security of the United States. Our membership also includes companies involved in or branching out to pursue offshore renewable and alternative energy opportunities.
NOIA members are engaged in many business activities, in addition to those listed below, including environmental safeguards, equipment supply, gas transmission, navigation, research and technology, shipping and shipyards.
Companies provide communications, ocean sensing and navigation and positioning services that are essential tools for offshore operations.
CONSTRUCTION & MANUFACTURING
Companies are involved in all phases of design, management, manufacture of components for and construction of drilling rigs, production platforms and related facilities.
GEOPHYSICAL
Geophysical surveys produce "maps" of rock structures beneath the sea floor likely to hold oil and natural gas.
ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING
A wide range of marine engineering and consulting services includes control system design, simulation and modeling, pollution control and structure design.
TRANSPORTATION
Marine and air transportation's role in the industry continues to grow as the offshore industry moves into deeper waters.
OIL & NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION
Oil and gas producers range from independent companies to the largest international oil companies, and are involved in the full range of petroleum operations.
OFFSHORE RENEWABLE AND ALTERNATIVE ENERGY
Both established oil and gas producers and new energy companies are working
toward harnessing the power of offshore wind, waves, currents and tides.
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Professional institutions involved in marine-related services include banks, investment firms, law firms and insurance underwriters.
OFFSHORE DRILLING
Expanding technology allows safe drilling operations to move into deeper and more environmentally hostile regions.
DIVING
Operations include diving for salvage, safety inspection, photography, pipe, cable installation and more.
The National Energy Policy Development Group was a group, created by Executive Order on January 29, 2001, that was chaired by Vice President Richard Cheney. The group, commonly referred to as the "Cheney Energy Task Force," produced a National Energy Policy report in May 2001. [1] In a cover note to George W. Bush, Cheney wrote that “we have developed a national energy policy designed to help bring together business, government, local communities and citizens to promote dependable, affordable and environmentally sound energy for the future.” [2] (pdf) The composition of the task force, according to the report, was confined to government officials.
However, according to media reports at the time, energy industry executives participated in the Task Force. In particular, those identified as having been involved included then-Enron President and Chairman Kenneth Lay and lobbyists Haley Barbour and Marc Racicot.
In April 2001, the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group, sought to obtain the records of the task force meetings. [3] In July 2001 Judicial Watch filed suit on the grounds that the administration was not “in compliance with the Federal Advisory Commission Act (FACA), which mandates that certain documents, task force members, meetings, and decision-making activities be open to the public.” [4] Judicial Watch argued that the acting as energy lobbyists — “regularly attended and fully participated” in the group’s meetings held behind closed doors, and were in fact members of the group. The Sierra Club also filed suit. (The two actions were later merged.) “At issue is whether Cheney allowed private energy lobbyists and big-name campaign contributors to participate in the work of the group, and if so, whether that information should be made public,” UPI reported. [5]
The organizations claim the documents will show the extent to which the task force staff met secretly with industry executives to craft the Bush administration‘s energy policies, such as drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and weakening power plant pollution regulations.
Participants
Between late January and April 4, 2001, when “representatives of 13 environmental groups were brought into the Old Executive Office Building for a long-anticipated meeting” with Cheney, a “confidential list prepared by the Bush administration shows that Cheney and his aides had already held at least 40 meetings with interest groups, most of them from energy-producing industries. By the time of the [April 2001] meeting with environmental groups, according to a former White House official who provided the list to The Washington Post, the initial draft of the task force was substantially complete and President Bush had been briefed on its progress.”[1] “In all, about 300 groups and individuals met with staff members of the energy task force, including a handful who saw Cheney himself, according to the list, which was compiled in the summer of 2001.”
An earlier document obtained by the Washington Post in 2005 “was based on records kept by the Secret Service of people admitted to the White House complex.”[2] “This person said most meetings were with Andrew Lundquist, the task force’s executive director, and Cheney aide Karen Y. Knutson.”[3]
James J. Rouse, former Exxon vice president. In 2005 Rouse “denied the meeting took place.”[15] In 2007, Rouse was revealed to be “One of the first visitors, on Feb. 14, [2001] … then vice president of Exxon Mobil and a major donor to the Bush inauguration”.[16]
J. Robinson West, “chairman of the Washington-based consulting firm PFC Energy and an old friend of Cheney’s” met with Cheney.[17]
According to the Washington Post, “Jack N. Gerard, then with the National Mining Association, had a meeting with Lundquist and other staffers in February. He urged the administration to give the Energy Department responsibility for promoting technology for easing global warming and to keep the issue away from the Environmental Protection Agency, which could issue regulations on greenhouse gas emissions. The administration adopted that position.”[21]
Legal Challenges
Initially, the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, tried to make the records of the policy group public. When its legal action failed, the GAO dropped the attempt.
However, a Washington-based legal advocacy group, Judicial Watch, continued its own suit in federal court against the policy group, its members and several private individuals, alleging that the defendants had failed to comply with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
FACA compels the public disclosure of all advisory committee reports, records and documents, but does not apply to those groups composed solely of “federal officials.”
Documents online at Judicial Watch for JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. v. NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY DEVELOPMENT GROUP Complaint filed against NEPDG, Office of the Vice President, for compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2 (“FACA”), and the Freedom of Information Act.
1 April 2004: U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman rejected arguments by Bush administration lawyers that employees from the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Energy can claim special confidentiality privileges for the period when they worked for the task force, which held private meetings with energy industry representatives as it crafted a national energy policy. [9]
1 April 2004: “The government must release more documents related to the White House task force that Vice President Dick Cheney convened in private to develop a national energy policy, a federal judge says. … The order Wednesday from U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman covers material that the Energy Department, Interior Department and other federal agencies had refused to produce since a similar federal court ruling two years ago. … Some documents released so far show energy executives met with high-level Energy Department officials, but the records Friedman ordered released now ‘could be the most telling,’ said Sharon Buccino, a lawyer for the Natural Resources Defense Council. ‘It’s kind of the top of the food chain.’” [10]
24 June 2004: “The Supreme Court today rejected the Bush Administration’s argument that it has a constitutional right to keep the workings of the Cheney Energy Task Force secret. The Court refused to rule on whether Vice President Cheney must produce documents in Sierra Club’s suit and sent the case back to the Court of Appeals.” [11], [12]
The order Wednesday from U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman covers material that the Energy Department, Interior Department and other federal agencies had refused to produce since a similar federal court ruling two years ago.
The latest order could cover some material that is the subject of a separate lawsuit now before the Supreme Court. That case also involves documents about the inner workings of the energy task force headed by Vice President Dick Cheney and housed in his office.
“As Linda Greenhouse recently pointed out in The New York Times, the legal arguments the administration is making for the secrecy of the energy task force are ‘strikingly similar’ to those it makes for its right to detain, without trial, anyone it deems an enemy combatant. In both cases, as Ms. Greenhouse puts it, the administration has put forward ‘a vision of presidential power . . . as far-reaching as any the court has seen.’
“That same vision is apparent in many other actions. Just to mention one: we learn from Bob Woodward that the administration diverted funds earmarked for Afghanistan to preparations for an invasion of Iraq without asking or even notifying Congress.
“What Mr. Cheney is defending, in other words, is a doctrine that makes the United States a sort of elected dictatorship: a system in which the president, once in office, can do whatever he likes, and isn’t obliged to consult or inform either Congress or the public.“
“Today’s case is a study in the evils of premature litigation. It’s a lesson in why the cheerleader who doesn’t make the squad throws everything off when she appeals to the gym teacher, then the principal, and then the secretary of education, instead of just sucking it up and joining the band. Vice President Cheney was sued by two watchdog groups–Sierra Club[13] and Judicial Watch[14]–for information about the outsiders who served on his energy policy task force in 2001. The watchdogs contend that ‘task force’ was just a series of cozy get-togethers in which energy executives and lobbyists, including Kenneth L. Lay, took turns sitting on Cheney’s lap, licking his ear, and requesting special favors. The final report issued by the commission sort of reads that way. When Cheney was ordered to produce the rosters and minutes of these meetings as part of pretrial discovery, he appealed that order all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
“So, how do you get to the Supreme Court? Mandamus, mandamus, mandamus. The government leapfrogged over the usual procedures and filed for extraordinary relief–in the form of a writ of mandamus–in the appeals court. And when the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied that writ, noting that the case needed to be fully decided in the lower court first, Cheney took the up elevator to the Supreme Court instead of the down elevator back to the trial court.
“This becomes one of the key issues in Cheney v. U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. (That’s right, he’s named the lower court as his opponent.) It’s a bedrock legal principle that courts of appeals don’t decide issues over which they have no jurisdiction, and that courts of appeals don’t decide cases when there has been no final decision from a lower court, unless there’s a pretty good reason.”
Cheney Energy Task Force Documents Feature Map of Iraqi Oilfields. Commerce & State Department Reports to Task Force Detail Oilfield & Gas Projects, Contracts & Exploration. Saudi Arabian & UAE Oil Facilities Profiled As Well, Judicial Watch/judicialwatch.org, July 17, 2003.
“Washington: Appeal Sought On Energy Documents,”New York Times, September 17, 2003: “The Bush administration told a federal appeals court that it would ask the Supreme Court to review a decision that requires Vice President Dick Cheney to give the Sierra Club documents from his task force on energy. Last week, the full United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit let stand a panel’s decision that the government had no basis to ask the appeals court to block a lower court’s ruling that called for disclosure of information. Mr. Cheney has invoked executive privilege in keeping the documents secret.”
The Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth (AEEG) describes itself as “a broad-based coalition whose members develop, deliver, or consume energy from all sources.” [1] The U.S. Chamber of Commerce states in its 2005 annual report that it “co-founded and manages the day-to-day operations of the Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth, a broad-based coalition whose members develop, deliver, and consume energy from all sources. The coalition represents consumers; energy companies involved in all phases of energy exploration, production, and transmission; agricultural groups; and business and labor organizations — all united in support of a comprehensive national energy plan.”[2]
The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) was a founding member of AEEG. "As a member of the Alliance, we will encourage investment in energy technologies that improve efficiency, increase output and protect the environment," stated NEI's Joe F. Colvin in a May 2001 press release. [3]
NEI’s financial report for 2006 lists AEEG as both an expense and a source of income. Under “program expenses,” NEI lists “Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth,” with the cost being $2,918,120. Under “income-producing activities,” NEI again lists AEEG, as bringing in $3,012,173 in revenues. NEI’s 2006 financial report describes AEEG as “educate the public and policymakers about the need for a comprehensive energy strategy.” [4]
But NEI’s 2007 financial report filed with the IRS no longer lists AEEG as an expense or a source of revenue, which may indicate that NEI is no longer a financial contributor to AEEG. [5]
According to the DeSmogBlog, “AEEG’s voice mail directs you call Rob Dubrow at the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) for questions regarding billing.” [6]
In 2002, Geraldine Ferraro (then with the Golin Harris firm) registered to lobby on behalf of AEEG on the “Yucca Mountain initiative,” referring to the proposed nuclear waste repository site in Nevada. Later disclosure forms said the lobbying contract was terminated in November 2002, with some $100,000 having been spent ($60,000 in the first half of 2002 and $40,000 in the second half).
Also in 2002, JHS Associates registered to lobby behalf of AEEG, on “energy / nuclear policy issues related to Public Law No 97425.” The lobbyist identified on the contract was John H. Sununu. This contract was terminated in December 2002, with less than $10,000 spent in each half of the calendar year.
Members
AEEG’s website says it has “more than 1,200 members” and represents “consumers; energy companies involved in all phases of energy exploration, production and transmission; agricultural groups; and business and labor organizations.” [8] It does not list its members on its website.
While “general membership in the Alliance is free … there is a fee for participation on the Alliance Steering Committee,” states AEEG’s website. [9] A brochure on the AEEG website lists the following Steering Committee members, as of March 29, 2005: [10]
↑ Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth, “Members of the management committee”, Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth website, accessed February 2009.
The American Petroleum Institute (API), based in Washington, D.C., is a “major research institute .. committed to using the best available scientific, economic and legal analysis to guide and support” its policy positions. The Institute’s work is member-driven and it offers “companies large and small the opportunity to participate in shaping API programs and policy priorities.” API represents more than 400 members involved in all aspects of the oil natural gas industry. The API has offices in 27 state capitals. [1]
Template fliers for the “Energy Citizens” rallies warned, “Climate change legislation being considered in Washington will cause huge economic pain and produce little environmental gain.” The fliers also claimed that the Waxman-Markey Climate Bill, which passed the House of Representatives in June, would “cost 2 million American jobs, raise gasoline and diesel prices up to $4,” hurt U.S. businesses and energy security. In contrast, the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the bill would cost U.S. households “about a postage stamp a day,” while the Energy Information Administration projects that annual “energy bill costs could rise between $26 per household to to $362 by 2020.” [1]
In April 2009, API sent a letter to members of Congress, in Gerard’s name, that slammed the Obama administration. It stated: “The US oil and natural gas industry has the expertise and technology to produce the energy we need to fuel economic growth, create jobs, generate significant revenues for local, state and federal governments, and bolster our national security. However, our companies cannot do so if held back by harmful, counter-productive taxes and are restricted from access to domestic oil and natural gas resources that the country urgently needs. … If imposed, these taxes and fees could have a debilitating effect on our economy, when our nation can least afford it. They would reduce investment in new energy supplies, meaning less energy produced for American consumers. We cannot tax our way out of our energy problems.” [4]
The same month, API protested the Environmental Protection Agency‘s finding that greenhouse gas emissions endangered public health and could be regulated under the Clean Air Act. “The Clean Air Act was created to address local and regional air pollution, not the emission of carbon dioxide and other global greenhouse gases,” said API’s Jack Gerard. [5]
2008 elections
In response to the November 2008 election of Democrats Barack Obama as President and Joe Biden as Vice-president, API released a statement in the name of their CEO, Jack Gerard, saying: “The American people have spoken loud and clear that they want politicians to put aside partisan bickering. …The oil and natural gas industry stands ready to help put America’s vast energy resources to good use, strengthening our nation’s economy and energy security, and providing good jobs for Americans across the country.” [6]
Earlier, Gerard had criticized Obama’s platform, saying “Obama’s plan to impose a windfall-profits tax on oil companies would harm one of the few industries that are thriving” in the economic crisis. [7]
History
“For 76 years, API has been the petroleum industry’s U.S. national trade association. API released its first standard in 1923, intended to promote the interchangeability of oil field equipment throughout the industry.” [2]
“Today, over 900 API standards serve as the basis for API quality programs covering production material and lubricants, and certification programs for storage tanks, pressure vessels, and piping inspectors. They also publish recommended practices, research reports, and specifications on pipelines, valves, offshore structures, oil-spill response procedures, environmental protection, exploration, facility management and much more.” [3]
Questioning global warming
An API “Communications Action Plan” from 1998 stated: “Victory will be achieved when … citizens ‘understand’ uncertainties in climate science … [and] recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the ‘conventional wisdom.’” [8]
Concerns about API-funded research
In April 2005, it was reported that API was overseeing a $27 million study on the health effects of benzene, funded by the major oil companies BP, Chevron Texaco, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil and Shell Chemical. The study was launched in 2001, in response to a National Cancer Institute study that found “workers exposed to average levels of benzene had a risk of developing non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma more than four times greater than the general population.” A follow-up NCI study, published in 2005, found that “benzene had toxic effects on blood cells at 1 part per million – the level workers in the United States are allowed to be exposed to over an eight-hour workday.” Benzene is a component of gasoline, so oil companies were concerned that tighter benzene regulations would affect their operations. [4]
Although the API research wouldn’t be complete until 2007, information from “depositions, proposals to oil companies and other documents collected by a Houston law firm in unrelated lawsuits” suggests that “the results of the study already have been predicted.” The Houston Chronicle reported, “The conclusions are expected to contradict earlier research linking low- and mid-levels of benzene to cancers and other blood diseases – findings that could spawn tighter regulations.” [5]
One research proposal from a Mobil Oil toxicologist said the study would “respond to allegations from a nationwide study of benzene exposed workers.” The research proposal submitted to Marathon Oil stated that “the benzene research was expected to provide scientific support for the lack of a leukemia risk to the general population, evidence that current occupational exposure limits do not create a significant risk to workers and proof that non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma could not be caused by benzene exposure.” [6]
A Powerpoint presentation on the proposed research shown to potential oil company funders “included a section describing ‘the significant issues of concern to global petroleum industry that the research would affect.’ Those issues included possible changes to the way gasoline is made, additional emissions controls and litigation.” [7]
In response to the April 2005 media reports on the benzene study, API manager of health sciences Lorraine Twerdok stated that the study “is being conducted to gain a better understanding of the relationship between benzene exposure and potential cancer risk to protect industry workers and customers.” [8]
Petroleum is “cool”
The API is the producer of a 16-minute video titled ‘Fuel-less: you can’t be cool without fuel’, which was distributed through the National Science Teachers Association. The film starts with the line “you’re not going to believe this, but everything everything I have that’s really cool comes from oil!” [9].
The API funds a website called ‘classroom energy’ [10], which aims to provide teachers and students with materials on ‘the vital role of oil and natural gas in modern life.’
An API memo leaked to the media in 1998 shed some light on the motivation for targeting schools: “Informing teachers/students about uncertainties in climate science will begin to erect barriers against further efforts to impose Kyoto-like measures in the future.” [11]
Public relations
Super Bowl 2008
At the January 2008 Super Bowl U.S. football championship game, API sponsored “Kickoff to Rebuild,” highlighting its work with Rebuilding Together, a nonprofit organization that promotes homeownership. API and Rebuilding Together are launching an “Energy Efficient Homes Initiative,” which aims “to incorporate energy-efficiency measures in the more than 9,000 homes revitalized each year by Rebuilding Together.” [9]
Blogger outreach
API has been battling the oil industry‘s negative public image for years, including by doing increased media outreach. In November 2007, Reuters reported that API, along with Chevron and Royal Dutch Shell “have reached out to a conservative band of bloggers.” API “paid for seven bloggers” to take two trips in November, one to Houston and Corpus Christi, Texas, and one offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. API required the bloggers to disclose that the industry group had funded the trips, but otherwise “placed no restrictions” on them. API’s “new media advisor,” Jane Van Ryan, admitted that the bloggers chosen — for the Texas trip, Ed Morrissey, Bruce McQuain, Brian Westenhaus and the National Association of Manufacturers‘s Carter Wood — “have not been particularly critical of the industry.” While API’s blogger “outreach effort” is new, “reporters who cover the energy industry are often invited by companies to visit offshore drilling rigs or production platforms,” notes Reuters. API plans similar junkets for 2008. [10]
In May 2007, PR Week reported that API was ramping up media outreach, including bloggers for the first time. “We felt we should become more involved” in the blogosphere, explained API’s Jane Van Ryan, “because there are a lot of policies and news-related items being discussed.” The industry group held three blogger teleconferences, “on subjects including energy and environment and, most recently on May 16, gasoline prices,” reported PR Week. “Blogs the API has reached out to include The Oil Drum, Energy Outlook, and the Daily Reckoning.” API’s “team of seven media relations people” continues traditional media outreach, fielding “a ‘huge amount of calls’ from the networks, major dailies, trade press, small newspapers in ‘virtually every state,’ and consumers,” after the latest price hike. [11]
The blogger “Devil’s Advocate” wrote about an API-organized bloggers conference call on biofuels, held on February 20, 2008. “I had a very interesting blogger conference call with the American Petroleum Institute yesterday,” s/he wrote. “This time, however, I did not agree with much of their agenda. … If a product cannot stand on its own two feet making a profit, government should not be involved producing it.” Call participants were listed as Devil’s Advocate of Copious Dissent, Nate Hagens of The Oil Drum, Bruce McQuain of The QandO Blog, Robert Rapier of The Oil Drum and R-Squared, Geoff Styles of Energy Outlook, Gail Tverberg of The Oil Drum, and Brian Westenhaus of New Energy and Fuel. [12]
API’s October 30, 2008, blogger conference call included a discussion of “the issue of ethanol subsidies and the cost incurred by taxpayers particularly now since gasoline prices have plummeted quite a bit,” according to the blogger Vulcan’s Hammer. Speakers included API’s Jane Van Ryan, Rayola Dougher and Ron Planting, along with Lou Pugliaresi of the Energy Policy Research Foundation. [18]
API held a blogger conference call on May 15, 2009, featuring Robert Ryan, the Vice President of Global Exploration at Chevron; with Justin Higgs, Chevron’s News Media Advisor; Mark Kibbe, API’s Federal Relations Director; and John Felmy, API’s Chief Economist. [19][20]
Public talks
West Virginia
API’s traditional and online media outreach has been coupled with local speaking events across the country, by API staffers and oil company executives. In February 2008, API’s Denise McCourt addressed a Rotary Club meeting in Charleston, West Virginia. “The oil and natural gas industry hasn’t done a very good job telling people about energy issues,” McCourt told the group. So the industry has taken “a little bit of abuse by the people running for office,” she added. McCourt told the audience that higher gas prices don’t necessarily mean “atrocious profits” for oil companies. She compared what she said were 2007 profit rates of 7.6 cents per dollar of sales for the oil industry with 9.2 cents per dollar of sales for all manufacturing, except automobiles.[21]
On April 29, 2008, API’s Denise McCourt talked to the Rotary Club in Wheeling, West Virginia. “Contrary to popular belief and what some politicians might say, America’s oil companies aren’t owned just by a small group of insiders,” she told the Rotarians. “Only 1.5 percent of industry shares are owned by company executives. The rest is owned by tens of millions of Americans, many of them middle class.” [22] She also addressed gas prices: “When you talk about what you pay for the price of gasoline at the pump, you have to remember that 72 percent of it right now is actually the price of crude oil. … About 47 cents [per gallon] on average is actually state and local taxes. … Those are what help pay for roads and bridges around the country.” [23]
Delaware
On May 7, 2008, Shell Oil CEO John Hofmeister, an API adviser, will give a public talk in Newark, Delaware, as part of the University of Delaware’s spring 2008 lecture series called “Boiling Point: International Politics of Climate Change.” [24]
California
On May 29, 2008, API co-sponsored an event at Stanford University in California, titled, “Energy’s Future is in Technology: Innovation in Energy Supply, Energy Efficiency and Alternative/Renewable Energy.” Newsweek was the other event sponsor. [25]
Kentucky
In June 2008, API’s Denise McCourt talked to the Kentucky state legislature’s Special Subcommittee on Energy. “85 percent of the places in the ocean where we think we can find resources are under moratorium and we can not go there,” said McCort. “When you look at that kind of number people say wait a minute, 85 percent? Let’s say you think some areas are more particularly sensitive than others, but 85 percent of the places where we think we have oil and gas we can’t go.” [26]
Idaho
In August 2008, API Chief Economist John C. Felmy spoke “to the Rotary Club of Boise about oil prices,” and also gave an interview to the Idaho Statesman newspaper. “There is little evidence that retailers are making a lot of money,” Felmy told the paper. “And it’s not the refiners, some of whom are losing money. … Right now the Department of Energy estimates that 74 percent of the cost of gas is attributable to the cost of oil.” [27]
Lobbying
In February 2009, API hired HBW Resources. The firm’s Andrew Browning, “a former special assistant at the Energy Department’s office of fossil energy,” is lobbying on behalf of API on “the development of domestic oil shale reserves.” [28]
In September 2008, API “hired Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti to lobby on energy drilling proposals, tax issues and chemical security legislation,” reported The Hill. “The lobbying team includes Jamie Brown, a former special assistant for legislative affairs to President Bush; Kelly Bingel, former chief of staff to Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.); and David Castagnetti, former chief of staff to Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.).” [29]
“The American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry’s main trade group, paid Timmons & Co. $200,000 to lobby the federal government in the first half of 2007,” reported AP in August 2007. “The firm lobbied on various pieces of legislation dealing with homeland security appropriations, energy policy, taxes, price gouging and other issues. … Daniel Shapiro, former deputy chief of staff for Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., is among those registered to lobby on behalf of the institute.” [12]
API spent $4 million to lobby the federal government in 2007, according to lobbying disclosure forms. “The trade group lobbied on various appropriations bills, and on oil taxes and fees, chemical plant security, price gouging, international investment and more,” reported Associated Press. “Besides Congress, the American Petroleum Institute lobbied the departments of Defense and State, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Internal Revenue Service.” [30]
The National Petroleum Council (NPC), according to its website, is a federally chartered and privately funded advisory committee that was established by the Secretary of the Interior in 1946 at the request of President Harry S. Truman and which functions now under the Department of Energy as a Oil and Natural Gas Advisory Committee to the Secretary of Energy.
The NPC is currently chartered by the Secretary of Energy, under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 and states that it’s sole purpose is, “to represent the views of the oil and natural gas industries in advising, informing, and making recommendations to the Secretary of Energy with respect to any matter relating to oil and natural gas, or to the oil and gas industries submitted to it or approved by the Secretary.”
During the energy crisis years 1974 to 1977, the National Petroleum Council produced a considerable amount of information for the Ford Foundation‘s [Energy Policy Project]. [1]
It’s membership consists primarily of companies in the oil, natural gas and electrical energy business and their associated support companies.
National Petroleum Council
1625 K Street, NW
Suite 600
Washington, D.C. 20006
Telephone: (202) 393-6100
Fax: (202) 331-8539
Email: info AT npc.org
Website: http://www.npc.org/
J. Robinson West “is the chairman of PFC Energy Team, a leading consulting firm on the international energy industry, which he founded in 1984. Before founding PFC, he served in the Reagan administration as assistant secretary of the interior for policy, budget, and administration, with responsibility for U.S. offshore oil policy. He was a first vice president of Blyth, Eastman, Dillon & Co., an investment banking firm, from 1977 to 1980. Before that, he served in the Ford administration as deputy assistant secretary of defense for international economic affairs and on the White House staff. He is a member of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, the National Petroleum Council, and the Council on Foreign Relations, and is president of the Wyeth Endowment for American Art. He received a B.A. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a J.D. from Temple University.“ [1]also see
“Before founding PFC Energy in 1984, Robin served in the Reagan Administration as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Policy, Budget and Administration (1981-83), with responsibility for US offshore oil policy…
“Robin was nominated by the President to be a director of the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) and the nomination was approved by the Senate. In 2004 he was elected Chairman of the USIP Board. He is also a member of the National Petroleum Council and the Council on Foreign Relations. Robin is President of the Wyeth Foundation for American Art. He also serves as a Trustee of the German Marshall Fund of the U.S. and the Nixon Center. Robin is a member of the Board of Directors of Key Energy Services, Inc (KEG) and Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG) He has served as a trustee of the $3 billion Trans-Alaska Pipeline Liability Fund, as a member of the Chief of Naval Operations Executive Panel, the Industry Policy Advisory Committee on Multilateral Trade Negotiations of the US Trade Representative, and on the National Advisory Committee on Handicapped Children.” [1]
This article is part of the Center for Media & Democracy's spotlight on front groups and corporate spin.
The Environmental Issues Council (EIC) was established in 1993 by a number of leading U.S. industry trade associations to serve as a "new ally against ill-conceived environmental regulation." On its website it stated that it was "promoting sound environmental policies".
A 2001 version of its website stated that EIC was formed by groups "who saw the need to explore common sense solutions to widely-debated environmental problems. EIC members depend on the land for economic survival. As faithful stewards of the land, we have long recognized the need to balance environmental protection with economic considerations ... EIC members are concerned, however, that efforts to provide for a safe and healthful environment have fallen prey to potent political constituencies who have chosen "The Environment" as their battleground. The political impasse which prevents the improvement of most major environmental statutes and the on-going battle over policy must be replaced with a positive, common sense agenda for improving environmental protection in America. The EIC is seeking to: establish balanced environmental policies based on credible science and prudent economics; develop strategies on federal policies that affect the nation's health, environment and economic well-being; and communicate positive solutions to the private and public sectors."[1]
The group appears to be defunct as its website is no longer active and was last indexed by the Internet Archive in April 2003.[2]
…ghissi also serves as a member of the board of directors of the [[American Council on Science and Health]]. …tive Tomorrow]], the [[Advancement of Sound Science Coalition]], and the [[National Wilderness Institute]], a “wise use” anti-environmental organization that …
…on imported energy sources”. “Oil exploration and production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge’s (ANWR) coastal plain is an important component,” it stat… …y front group established to promote oil and gas exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
This article is part of the Center for Media & Democracy’s spotlight on front groups and corporate spin.
The Global Climate Coalition (GCC) was one of the most outspoken and confrontational industry groups in the United States battling reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Prior to its disbanding in early 2002, it collaborated extensively with a network that included industry trade associations, “property rights” groups affiliated with the anti-environmental Wise Use movement, and fringe groups such as Sovereignty International, which believes that global warming is a plot to enslave the world under a United Nations-led “world government.”
In 1989, the United Nations created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The members of the IPCC are governments. At approximately five-year intervals, the IPCC assembles a group of some 2,500 climate scientists from throughout the world to evaluate the evidence linking anthropogenic greenhouse gas and other emissions (such as particulates) to global climate change. The Global Climate Coalition was created in 1989, shortly after the IPCC's first meeting.
For PR and lobbying, the GCC has employed "Junkman" Steven Milloy's former employer, the EOP Group, as well as the E. Bruce Harrison Company, a subsidiary of the giant Ruder Finn PR firm. Within the public relations industry, Harrison is an almost legendary figure who is ironically considered "the founder of green PR" because of his work for the pesticide industry in the 1960s, when he helped lead the attack on author Rachel Carson and her environmental classic, Silent Spring.
GCC activities have included publication of glossy reports, aggressive lobbying at international climate negotiation meetings, and raising concern about unemployment that it claims would result from emissions regulations. It distributed a video to hundreds of journalists claiming that increased levels of carbon dioxide will increase crop production and help feed the hungry people of the world. In the lead up to the Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro in 1992, the GCC and other industry interests successfully lobbied the US government to avoid mandatory emissions controls.
In 1997, the GCC responded to international global warming treaty negotiations in Kyoto, Japan by launching an advertising campaign in the US against any agreement aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions internationally. This was run through an organization called the Global Climate Information Project (GCIP), which was sponsored by the GCC and the American Association of Automobile Manufacturers, among others. The GCIP was represented by Richard Pollock, a former director of Ralph Nader's group, Critical Mass, who switched sides to become a senior vice president for Shandwick Public Affairs, the second-largest PR firm in the United States. (Recent Shandwick clients include Browning-Ferris Industries, Central Maine Power, Georgia-Pacific Corp., Monsanto Chemical Co., New York State Electric and Gas Co., Ciba-Geigy, Ford Motor Company, Hydro-Quebec, Pfizer, and Procter & Gamble.)
GCIP's ads were produced by Goddard*Claussen/First Tuesday, a California-based PR firm whose clients include the Chlorine Chemistry Council, the Chemical Manufacturers Association, DuPont Merck Pharmaceuticals, and the Vinyl Siding Institute. Goddard*Claussen is notorious for its "Harry and Louise" advertisement that helped derail President Clinton's 1993 health reform proposal. Its anti-Kyoto advertisements falsely claimed, "It's Not Global and It Won't Work." They also claimed that "Americans will pay the price. . . 50 cents more for every gallon of gasoline." Actually, there was no treaty at that point, and no government proposals, then or now, have suggested a "50 cent" gallon gas tax.
By 1997, the growing scientific and public consensus regarding global warming forced a number of GCC supporters to reconsider the negative PR implications of their involvement in a group that was increasingly recognized as a self-serving anti-environmental front group. BP/Amoco withdrew from GCC after BP's chairman admitted that "the time to consider the policy dimensions of climate change is not when the link between greenhouse gases and climate change is conclusively proven, but when the possibility cannot be discounted and is taken seriously by the society of which we are part. We in BP have reached that point." Other prominent companies that have publicly abandoned GCC include American Electric Power, Dow, Dupont, Royal Dutch Shell, Ford, Daimler Chrysler, Southern Company, Texaco and General Motors.
In March 2000, GCC announced a "strategic restructuring" designed to "bring the focus of the climate debate back to the real issues." Under the restructuring, individual companies were no longer asked to join the GCC. Instead, membership would be limited to "only trade associations" and "other like-minded organizations." By seeking support from trade associations instead of individual companies, GCC hoped to create a layer of deniability so that affected industries could continue to support its campaign of global warming denial while avoiding boycotts and other public campaigns against individual companies.
The GCC disbanded in early 2002, explaining that it "has served its purpose by contributing to a new national approach to global warming. The Bush administration will soon announce a climate policy that is expected to rely on the development of new technologies to reduce greenhouse emissions, a concept strongly supported by the GCC." After years spent denying that greenhouse emissions were a serious environmental problem, the organization's parting shot at history combined a tacit admission that it had been wrong all along, along with an endorsement of the George W. Bush administration's proposal for ineffective "voluntary" industry measures to address the problem.
Excerpts from the GCC web site
The Global Climate Coalition has been deactivated. The industry voice on climate change has served its purpose by contributing to a new national approach to global warming.
The Bush administration will soon announce a climate policy that is expected to rely on the development of new technologies to reduce greenhouse emissions, a concept strongly supported by the GCC.
The coalition also opposed Senate ratification of the Kyoto Protocol that would assign such stringent targets for lowering greenhouse gas emissions that economic growth in the U. S. would be severely hampered and energy prices for consumers would skyrocket. The GCC also opposed the treaty because it does not require the largest developing countries to make cuts in their emissions.
At this point, both Congress and the Administration agree that the U.S. should not accept the mandatory cuts in emissions required by the protocol.
What is the GCC?
The Global Climate Coalition is an organization of trade associations established in 1989 to coordinate business participation in the international policy debate on the issue of global climate change and global warming.
Currently, GCC members collectively represent more than 6 million businesses, companies and corporations in virtually every sector of U.S. business, agriculture and forestry, including electric utilities, railroads, transportation, manufacturing, small businesses, mining, oil, and coal.
As a leading voice for business and industry, both domestically and internationally, GCC volunteers and staff attend all international climate change negotiations. They also closely monitor the activities of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and contributes to the IPCC's scientific assessment documents.
Domestically, the GCC represents the views of its members to legislative bodies and policymakers. And it reviews and provides comments on proposed legislation and government programs.
Businesses and industries that make up the GCC's member trade associations are active participants in voluntary programs for reducing greenhouse gas emissions that are part of the federal government's U.S. Climate Action Plan.
Funding
The GCC website was decorated with numerous photos of happy children playing in idyllic farm fields, but it did not provide any information about its budget or where its money comes from. GCC was not registered as a nonprofit organization and was not required to make public disclosures of its IRS tax filings, so it is difficult to obtain even basic information about its finances. However, the information that is publicly available shows that the GCC has spent tens of millions of dollars on the global warming issue.
According to the Los Angeles Times (December 7, 1997) the GCC spent $13 million on its 1997 anti-Kyoto ad campaign, an amount roughly equivalent to Greenpeace’s entire annual budget.
Common Cause has documented more than $63 million in contributions to politicians from members of the Global Climate Coalition from 1989-1999.[1]
GCC’s efforts were coordinated with separate campaigns by many of its members, such as the National Coal Association, which spent more than $700,000 on the global climate issue in 1992 and 1993, and the American Petroleum Institute, which paid the Burson-Marsteller PR firm $1.8 million in 1993 for a successful computer-driven “grassroots” letter and phone-in campaign to stop a proposed tax on fossil fuels.
GCC’s members and supporters included the following companies and trade associations:
In a speech to Greenpeace, Ford Motor Company CEO William Clay Ford, Jr. explains why his company left the Global Climate Coalition: “The present risk is clear. The climate appears to be changing, the changes appear to be outside natural variation, and the likely consequences will be serious. From a business planning point of view, that issue is settled. Anyone who disagrees is, in my view, still in denial.”
“The Rhetoric of Uncertainty.” This essay examines the two-pronged strategy used by opponents of regulating carbon emissions: an assault on the scientific foundations of climate change theory, and a rhetorical campaign to discredit its proponents and their proposed mechanisms to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
BP (formerly known as “British Petroleum”) is a global oil, gas and chemical company headquartered in Britain and responsible for the largest environmental disaster ever in the United States, the April 20, 2010, blow out of its Deep Horizon oil well in the Gulf of Mexico (discussed in more detail below). The company owns numerous refineries and chemical manufacturing plants around the world. [1] BP is the United Kingdom’s largest corporation. Its global headquartered are in London, and its U.S. hq is Houston, Texas. Its major brands include BP, AmPm, Arco, and Castrol.
BP’s actions involving the safety of this dangerous drilling operation and the efforts to contain the spill or clean it up have caused tremendous controversy. [1]For example, its use of hazardous chemicals to “disperse” to oil is leading to other significant problems and does not actually “clean up” the oil, as discussed below.[2]
Use of toxic “dispersants”
BP has used the chemical called Corexit as part of what it calls an effort to “disperse” the oil.[3] Dispersants are chemical products used to clean and control oil spills, often misleadingly analogized to dish soap because it works in a similar way; dispersants, like dishwashing liquid, bonds to the oil molecules, which is then diluted in the water.[4] However, dispersants are not anywhere near harmless as dish soap; there is little knowledge of the side-effects of using dispersants.[5] Dispersants have also never been used to the extent used by BP in the Gulf of Mexico, reaching record levels that has resulted in over 700,000 gallons of the chemical dumped into the water.[6]
Oil dispersal means the oil is neither eliminated nor reduced in toxicity. [7] Dispersing the oil renders it impossible to trap, vacuum, or soak up along the shoreline, meaning both the oil and the chemical dispersant will spread into the ocean. [8] Spreading the oil via use of dispersant masks the extent of damage created by the oil spill by allowing the oil to flow into the ocean unnoticed where it will continue damaging marine life, rather than collecting on the shore. Id.[9]
Clean-up efforts already resulting in human illness
Stories of illness are already emerging from oil spill workers. Seven workers were hospitalized Wednesday, May 26th, 2010, complaining of nausea, dizziness, and headaches.[10] Some of the first responders who have been tasked to help clean up the oil are reporting symptoms of disorientation, shortness of breath, coughing, a feeling of being drugged, and fatigue.[11] For example, one reported feeling as though he was going to die and has been “coughing up stuff because your lungs fill up.” Id.[12] Marine toxicologist Riki Ott has said the chemicals used by BP can “wreck havoc” on a person’s body and even lead to death. Id.[13] Senior policy analyst of the EPA, Hugh Kaufman likens the situation to previous toxic waste disasters, such as the World Trade Center and the Exxon Valdez clean-up: “There’s no way you can be working in that toxic soup with getting exposures.” Id.[14] Riki Ott also finds the situation reminiscent of the Exxon Valdez disaster, where the clean-up response resulted in thousands of sick workers. OSHA requires BP to provide fitted respirators[15], but these regulations go unenforced and workers in the Gulf are cleaning up the oil without even the protection of basic gloves.[16] The vice-president of the Louisiana Shrimper’s Association is demanding respirators for all fishermen, stating the dispersant is poisoning the clean-up workers.[17]
Riki Ott is calling the current situation a disaster; fishermen are falling ill but not asking for necessary protection in fear of jeopardizing their jobs.[18] Gary Burris, a fisherman who is part of the clean-up force, stated many fishermen are working sick, afraid to speak out because it could cost them their job with BP, the only income they have now because of the oil spill.[19]
On June 9th, 2010, Congressman Nadler called out BP for ignoring these growing health concerns.
BP is ignoring health concerns
Other BP spills and disasters
BP has a history of incidents, having over 8,000 other spills (of oil, dangerous chemicals, gases, etc.) since 1990, both minor and major. [1] Between 2,205 and 2,629 incidents occurred in Texas and Louisiana each and there are over two dozen other states that all have suffered a number of oil or chemical spills.[2] There were 550 previous incidents in the Mississippi Canyon near the area where the current Deepwater Horizon disaster is unfolding.[3]
Two major incidents in the recent past are the Texas City Refinery explosion and the Prudhoe Bay spill. In 2005, in a refinery located in Texas City, Texas, a unit that manufactures jet fuel exploded, leading to 15 deaths and 170 injuries.[4] Investigation showed that the accident was due in part by placing temporary trailers near very volatile units, which the BP management did to cut maintenance and capital spending costs.[5] Other factors that contributed to the accident were corroded pipes about to burst, antiquated equipment, and broken safety alarms; the poor status of the facility was both easily fixable and known by the management.[6]
In 2006, a BP pipeline in Alaska burst and 267,000 gallons of crude oil was spilled into the North Slope of Alaska’s tundra.[7] Again the cause of the accident was easily preventable: BP virtually abandoned the process of cleaning and inspecting pipes for corrosion to save on costs.[8]
BP was also accused of manipulating gas and propane prices earlier this decade.[9] Regulators alleged that BP artificially increased prices of crude oil and gasoline by buying up stocks and controlling the market; they drove up the prices by 50% by keeping supplies off the market.[10] BP eventuallly settled in 2007 and agreed to pay $303 million dollars to end the charges against them.[11]
Annual Financials for BP Plc
All amounts from December of their respective year; further information at source. Operating Revenue
2009 – $239,272,000,000
2008 – $361,143,000,000
2007 – $284,365,000,000
2006 – $265,906,000,000
Income Before Tax (EBT)
2009 – $25,124,000,000
2008 – $34,283,000,000
2007 – $31,611,000,000
2006 – $35,142,000,000
Total Net Income
2009 – $16,578,000,000
2008 – $21,157,000,000
2007 – $20,845,000,000
2006 – $22,315,000,000
The BP political action committee (PAC) gave $219,500 to federal candidates in the 05/06 election cycle – 34% to Democrats, 65% to Republicans. [13] A summary of the BP PAC data is below, from Open Secrets:
2010
Total Spent – $173,781
Contributions to Federal Candidates – $75,550 (42% to Democrats, 58% to Republicans)
2008
Total Spent – $619,255
Contributions to Federal Candidates – $198,500 (41% to Democrats, 59% to Republicans)
2006
Total Spent – $601,696
Contributions to Federal Candidates – $219,500 (34% to Democrats, 65% to Republicans)
2004
Total Spent – $678,337
Contributions to Federal Candidates – $220,499 (38% to Democrats, 62% to Republicans)
BP is one of the largest energy company contributors to both Republican and Democratic candidates for Congress. These contributions total $122,300 to the 110th US Congress (as of the third quarter), the largest of which has been to Rep. Mary Landrieu (D-LA). Rep. Landrieu, for her part, has been supportive of the oil industry on energy, war and climate bills.[2] (Add information from more recent reports)
The company spent $3,650,000 for lobbying in 2006. BP used several lobbying firms but most lobbying was done with its in-house lobbyists. [14]
BP’s lobbying focuses on tax incentives for oil and gas production and opposes mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions and following U.S. trade relations and policy in the Middle East. Through membership in a trade association known as the Organization for International Investment, BP has lobbied to gain exemptions from U.S. corporate law reforms. BP has withdrawn from a coalition advocating for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but continues to seek access to the area.[15]
BP has several powerful lobbying connections.[16] They are currently working with the Brunswick Group in response to the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Brunswick’s Washington D.C. office includes Hilary Rosen, former Democratic congressional aide; Anthony Coley and David Sutphen, both former aides to the late Senator Edward Kennedy; and Michele Davis, former Treasury department officer under former president George W. Bush and GOP congressional aide.[17]
BP also employs the Podesta Group, led by Anthony Podesta.[18] Podesta’s brother is John Podesta, former president Bill Clinton’s Chief of Staff. Id.[19]
Other major lobbyists include Jim Turner, former House Democrat of Texas, now with the Arnold & Porter firm[20]; Ken Duberstein, former White House Chief of Staff under former president Reagan[21]; republican Michelle Laxalt; and Michel Berman, president of the Duberstein firm[22].
Personnel
Board of Directors From the company’s website: [3]
Tony Hayward, CEO
Tony Hayward began his career with BP in 1982. He’s played technical and commercial roles in BP Exploration in the U.K., France, and China and Colombia, and, in September 1995, became President of BP Venezuela. In August 1997, he returned to London as Director of BP Exploration. Hayward became Group Vice President of BP Amoco Exploration and Production as well as a member of the group’s Upstream Executive Committee in 1999. He was appointed Group Treasurer in 2000. He became Chief Executive, Exploration and Production, in January 2003. Hayward is also a nonexecutive director at Corus Group and a member of the Citibank Advisory Board. In 2005, he was appointed a Companion of the Chartered Management Inst. in the U.K. for his achievements in leadership in the energy industry.
Carl-Henric Svanberg, Chairman
Carl-Henric Svanberg was appointed Chairman of BP on January 1st, 2010, succeeding Peter Sutherland. Before coming to BP, Svanberg was chief executive officer of Ericsson and chairman of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB. Svanberg continues to be a non-executive director of Ericsson, and is also on the boards of the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise, Melker Schörling AB and the University of Uppsala. He is a member of the Steering Committee of the Global Alliance for Information and Communication Technologies and Development and of the external advisory board of the Earth Institute at Columbia University.
Iain Conn, Chief Executive Director of Refining and Marketing
Iain Conn is the chief executive of the BP Group’s refining and marketing business and also holds regional responsibility for Europe, Southern Africa and Asia Pacific. He joined BP oil international in 1986, working in a variety of roles in commercial refining and oil trading and in corporate headquarters before moving to BP exploration in Colombia in 1996. At the end of 1997, he became senior vice president of BP oil in the US, responsible for retail and commercial marketing operations, refining and supply. On the merger between BP and Amoco, in January 1999 he moved to become vice president of BP Amoco exploration’s mid-continent business unit. At the end of 2000, he returned to London as group vice president and a member of the refining and marketing segment’s executive committee, with responsibility for BP’s marketing business in Asia, Russia, Africa and Latin America. In 2001, he took over responsibility for BP’s marketing operations in Europe and for the integration of Veba Oel. From 2002 until 2004, he was chief executive of BP petrochemicals.
Robert Dudley, Managing Director
Robert (Bob) Dudley is a member of the BP board of directors and a member of the BP executive management team. He will assume responsibility for broad oversight of the group’s activities in the Americas and Asia. Bob joined Amoco Corporation in 1979, for whom he worked until its merger with BP in 1998. In his early career he held a variety of engineering and commercial posts in the US and UK. From 1987 he worked on the negotiation and development of projects in the South China Sea, following which he was involved in the restructuring of oil and gas research and development activities in the US. Between 1994 and 1997 he was based in Moscow working on corporate development for both upstream and downstream businesses in Russia. In 1997 he became general manager for strategy for Amoco and following the Amoco merger was appointed to a similar role in BP in 1999. From 1999 – 2000 he was appointed executive assistant to the group chief executive officer, following which he was group vice president for BP’s renewables and alternative energy activities, with responsibilities for BP’s global solar business and wind and hydrogen activities. He then took up the role of group vice president responsible for BP’s upstream businesses in Russia, the Caspian Region, Angola, Algeria and Egypt. In 2003, following the formation of TNK-BP – a joint venture between BP and Russian partners – Bob assumed the role of president and chief executive officer until December 2008. Bob was appointed an executive director of the BP board on 6 April 2009 and is an executive vice president and a member of the executive management team.
Byron Grote, Chief Financial Officer
Dr. Grote is a member of the BP board of directors and a member of the BP executive management team. Dr. Grote joined The Standard Oil Company of Ohio in 1979 and in 1985 became director of planning for The Standard Oil Company’s mining subsidiary, Kennecott. In 1986, he was appointed vice president, retail marketing. In 1988, Dr. Grote became commercial vice president for BP’s Alaskan North Slope production activities. In 1989, he was appointed commercial general manager of BP exploration, based in London. He became group treasurer and chief executive officer of BP finance in 1992, directing the global finance operations of the BP group. In 1994, he took up the position of regional chief executive in Latin America. He returned to London in 1995 to take up his appointment as deputy chief executive officer of BP exploration. He became group chief of staff in 1997, with responsibility for a number of corporate areas, including strategy, technology, IT, investor relations and solar. Following the merger of BP and Amoco, in 1999 he was appointed executive vice president, exploration and production. Between 1999 and 2000, he was responsible for directing the acquisition of ARCO and managing the integration of its operations into BP. Prior to his current position, he was Chief Executive of BP Chemicals from 2000 to 2002.
Andy Inglis, Chief Executive of Exploration and Production
Andy is a member of the BP board of directors and a member of the BP executive management team. Andy joined BP Exploration in 1980, working on various North Sea projects. Following a series of commercial roles in exploration, he became chief of staff for BP Exploration in 1997. Later that year, he led BP’s activities in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico and in 1999 became vice president of the US western gas business. In 2004, Andy was appointed an executive vice president and deputy chief executive of exploration and production. Andy succeeded Tony Hayward as chief executive of BP’s exploration and production business on 1 February 2007, and also became an executive director of the BP group.
Paul Anderson, Non-Executive Director
Paul Anderson was appointed a non-executive director of BP on 1 February 2010. He is a member of the chairman’s and the safety, ethics and environment assurance committees. He is a non-executive director of BAE Systems PLC and of Spectra Energy Corp. He was formerly chief executive at BHP Billiton and Duke Energy where he also served as a nonexecutive director. Having previously been chief executive officer and managing director of BHP Limited and then BHP Billiton Limited and BHP Billiton Plc, he rejoined these latter boards in 2006 as a non-executive director, retiring on 31 January 2010.
Anthony Burgmans, Non-Executive Director
Antony Burgmans was appointed a non-executive director of BP in 2004. He is a member of the chairman’s, the remuneration and the safety, ethics and environment assurance committees. He joined Unilever in 1972, holding a succession of marketing and sales posts including, from 1988 until 1991, the chairmanship of PT Unilever Indonesia. In 1991, he was appointed to the board of Unilever, becoming business group president, ice cream and frozen foods, Europe, in 1994, and chairman of Unilever’s Europe committee, co-ordinating its European activities. In 1998, he became vice chairman of Unilever NV and in 1999, chairman of Unilever NV and vice chairman of Unilever PLC. In 2005, he became non-executive chairman of Unilever NV and Unilever PLC until his retirement in 2007. Mr Burgmans is a member of the supervisory boards of Akzo Nobel NV, AEGON NV and SHV Holdings NV.
Cynthia Caroll, Non-Executive Director
Cynthia Carroll was appointed a non-executive director of BP in 2007. She is a member of the chairman’s and the safety, ethics and environment assurance committees. Mrs Carroll started her career with Amoco as a petroleum geologist in oil exploration. In 1989, she joined Alcan, and in 1991 became vice president/general manager of Alcan foil products. In 1996, she was appointed managing director of Aughinish Alumina Limited, a subsidiary of Alcan Aluminium Limited, in Ireland. In 1998, she became president of bauxite, alumina and specialty chemicals and in 2002 was appointed president and chief executive officer of Alcan’s primary metals group and an officer of Alcan, Inc. in Montreal, Canada. Mrs Carroll was appointed as chief executive of Anglo American plc, the global mining group, in 2007. She is a director of Anglo Platinum Limited and De Beers s.a.
Sir William Castell, Non-Executive Director
Sir William Castell was appointed a non-executive director of BP in 2006. He is the senior independent director and is a member of the chairman’s and the nomination committees and chairman of the safety, ethics and environment assurance committee. Sir William spent his early career with the Wellcome Foundation, holding various positions. In 1989, he joined Amersham plc as chief executive. Following Amersham’s acquisition by General Electric in 2004, Sir William became president and chief executive officer of GE Healthcare, and a vice chairman and a director of the General Electric Company. He retired from GE Healthcare in 2006. Sir William remains a director of the General Electric Company. He was appointed as a member of the board of governors of the Wellcome Trust in 2006, subsequently becoming its chairman. Sir William was knighted in 2000. In 2004, he received the honour Lieutenant of the Royal Victorian Order.
George David, Non-Executive Director
George David was appointed as a non-executive director of BP on 11 February 2008. Mr David began his career in The Boston Consulting Group before joining the Otis Elevator Company in 1975. He held various roles in Otis and later in United Technologies Corporation (UTC), following Otis’s merger with UTC in 1977. Mr David is vice-chairman of the Peterson Institute for International Economics and was previously a non-executive director of Citigroup.
Ian Davis, Non-Executive Director
Ian Davis joined the board as a non-executive director of BP on 2 April 2010. He is a member of the chairman’s, the remuneration and the audit committees. Mr Davis spent his early career at Bowater, moving to McKinsey & Company in 1979. He was managing partner of McKinsey’s practice in the UK and Ireland from 1996 to 2003. In 2003, he was appointed as chairman and worldwide managing director of McKinsey serving in this capacity until 2009. During his career with McKinsey, Mr Davis has served as a consultant on a range of global organizations across the private, public and not-for-profit sectors. He will be retiring as senior partner of McKinsey & Company in July 2010. He is a member of the Mayor of Beijing International Business Leaders’ Advisory Council, and is an advisory director of the King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Centre.
Douglas J Flint, Non-Executive Director
Douglas Flint is Group Finance Director of HSBC Holdings plc and a Director of HSBC Bank Malaysia Berhad. He is a non executive director of BP plc. In June 2006 he was honoured with a CBE (Commander Of The British Empire) by Her Majesty the Queen in recognition of his services to the finance industry. Mr Flint was Chairman of the Financial Reporting Council’s review of the Turnbull Guidance on Internal Control between 2004-2005 and served on the Accounting Standards Board and the Advisory Council of the International Accounting Standards Board from 2001-2004.
Dr. DeAnne Julius, Non-Executive Director
DeAnne Julius began her career as a project economist with the World Bank in Washington. From 1986 until 1997, she held a succession of posts, including chief economist at British Airways and Royal Dutch Shell Group. From 1997 to 2001, she was an independent member of the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England. She is chairman of the Royal Institute of International Affairs and a non-executive director of Lloyds TSB Group PLC, Roche Holdings SA and Serco Group plc.
Other Key PR Personnel
Linda Bartman is BP’s marketing communications director, with responsibility for “for 360 communications plans directed to consumers, in addition to b-to-b [business-to-business] and b-to-c [business-to-consumer] strategy for promoting the BP brand to 10,500 retail sites.” Bartman launched BP’s first lifestyle campaign, “Younger for Longer,” in 2008. The campaign used “older” athletes to promote BP’s “Invigorate” gas additive. “It’s about creating relevance for the consumer,” Bartman explained. “More than that, it’s about explaining the [product] experience, when consumers already incorporate it into a routine and [later] don’t think about it.” [23]
David Jackson was appointed company secretary in 2003. A solicitor, he is a director of BP Pension Trustees Limited, and a member of the Listing Authorities Advisory Committee.
Former Board and Staff
Peter D. Sutherland, former Chairman
Peter D. Sutherland served as chairman from 1997-2009, and was succeeded by Carl-Henric Svanberg on January 1, 2010. Mr. Sutherland KCMG serves as Managing Director of Goldman Sachs International. Mr. Sutherland served as Director General of GATT and Group Secretary and General Counsel of World Trade Organization from 1993 to 1995. He is a former Attorney General of Ireland and also served as European Commissioner from 1985 to 1989, responsible for competition policy. He serves as Chairman of British Petroleum, BP Amoco PLC and United Kingdom. He has also been a Independent Non Executive Director of National Westminster Bank PLC and its subsidiary, Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC, since January 2001. He serves as a Non-Executive Director of Foundation of the World Economic Forum. He serves as a Director of Goldman Sachs International and Member of International Advisory Board and Joint Advisory Council of Allianz AG. He served as a Director of LM Ericsson Telephone Co (formerly, Ericsson LM Telephone Co.) since 1996, Ericsson SPA since 1996 and Investor AB since 1995. He served as a Member of International Advisory Board of CNOOC Ltd. since March 20, 2003.
Erroll B. Davis, Jr, former Director
Erroll B. Davis is Chancellor of the University System of Georgia. Davis, who took office on February 6, 2006, had served as chairman of the board of Alliant Energy Corporation — an energy holding company with $8.3 billion in total assets and annual operating revenues of $3 billion — since 2000. Davis retired from his dual roles as president and CEO in July 2005, and retained the chairman’s post until his move to the University System.
Sir Tom McKillop, former Director
Sir Tom McKillop was appointed a non-executive director of BP in 2004. Following the demerger of Zeneca Group PLC from ICI PLC, in 1994 he became chief executive officer of Zeneca Pharmaceuticals and, in 1996, he was appointed to the board of Zeneca Group PLC as an executive director. Sir Tom was chief executive of AstraZeneca PLC from the merger of Astra AB and Zeneca Group PLC in 1999 until 2005. Sir Tom is chairman of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc and was a non-executive director of Lloyds TSB Group PLC until 2004. Sir Tom was knighted in 2002.
Major Litigation
May 2008: Oil Firms to Pay $423 million to settle water lawsuit.
BP, along with other oil companies, is going to pay to settle lawsuit brought by hundreds of public water suppliers. [24]
2006: Alaska Prudhoe Bay Oil Spill cases The U.S. Department of Justice sued BP on behalf of the EPA on March 31, 2009, seeking millions of dollars in fines for alleged water and air pollution violations and failure to meet deadlines in a corrective action order from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.[25] BP also currently faces a civil suit brought on by the state of Alaska. Id.[26] The criminal charges against BP for the Prudhoe oil spill was settled by a plea deal in late 2007; BP was sentenced to three years probation and ordered to pay $20 million in penalties. Id.[27]
2005: Texas Refinery Explosion Lawsuits The explosion at the Texas Refinery plant in Texas City led to hundreds of lawsuits and over a thousand settlements.[28] BP set aside at least $2 billion in compensation payouts, repairs, and lost profits. Id.[29] One of the must public cases was the lawsuit brought by the daughter of two plant workers who both died in the Texas Refinery explosion; Eva Rowe’s suit was settled for an undisclosed amount and $32 million dollars in donations for health care, training, and safety regulation.[30]
1993-1995: Hazardous Substance Crime BP Exploration (Alaska), one of BP’s U.S. subsidiaries, pleaded guilty to dumping hazardous waste on Alaska’s North Slope on September 23, 1999.[31] BP agreed to pay $22 million dollars to resolve the criminal case as well as related civil claims. Id.[32]
BP’s Greenwashing and Recent Rebranding
Edmund John Philip Browne became group chief executive in 1995. The following year, to the surprise of many environmentalists and oil industry analysts, BP resigned from the Global Climate Coalition, which ridiculed the science pointing to human induced climate change and sought to undermine the Kyoto treaty negotiations. BP hired Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide to handle a massive $200 million public relations and advertising campaign. This campaign introduced a new logo and slogan as well as a new attitude. The re-branding – undertaken in the wake of major controversies in Europe over Shell’s role in Nigeria and its ill-fated attempt to dump the disused Brent Spar oil platform in the ocean – was aimed at differentiating BP from its rivals. BP also sought to cultivate ‘moderate’ environmental groups in a series of ‘partnerships’ with groups like the National Wildlife Federation. [4] (See the BP and the National Wildlife Federation case study). Despite their corporate rebranding, BP failed to change many of their underlying activities. An clear example of this was when a Californian air quality regulatory agency sued BP for $319 million over what it alleged were thousands of violations of emissions standards at its Carson oil refinery in the port of Los Angeles in March 2003. [5] For more, see BP and Greenwashing
BP’s Campaign to Exploit Protected Areas
Despite BP’s new campaign projecting their new environmentally conscious attitude, they backed the Bush administration’s move to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil drilling. BP, also continues to explore for oil in environmentally sensitive areas such as the Atlantic Frontier, the foothills of the Andes and Alaska. [6]. For more, see BP’s Campaign to Exploit Protected Areas.
BP’s Labor Policies
March 2005: “Pumping Poverty- Britain’s Department for International Development and the Oil Industry”
The author discusses the problems with BP’s Ocensa pipeline, especially the fact that is protected by a designated army that is financed through a $1 per barrel “war tax”. [7]
April 2004: Looking at the Principles Behind the Practices: BP Operations in Casanare Department, Colombia
This report synthesizes recurring observations into five thematic principles of operation: 1. being part of the community is fundamental to successful operation in conflict contexts; 2. political and economic leverage should go beyond mitigating negative impacts; 3. “win-win” options is key for both the company and the local communities; 4. sustainable living conditions for when the company leaves, must be created early in operations; 5. stakeholder focused management systems are the key to the business’ success. [8]
BP p.l.c.
1 St James’s Square
London
SW1Y 4PD
Tel +44 (0)20 7496 4000
Fax +44 (0)20 7496 4630 http://www.bp.com/home.do
BP Exploration Company (Colombia) Ltd.
Carrera 9A No. 99 – 02, 9th Floor
Bogotá, Colombia
Tel: +571-628-4000 or +571-618-2777
Fax: +571-611-1127 or +571-628-4077 http://colombia.bp.com/go/site/1660/
“BP Colombia: The cheque’s in the pipeline”, Private Eye, July 18, 2006. (Not available online)
Loren Steffy, “Another BP question surfaces“, Houston Chronicle, August 5, 2006. (This story reports on a lawsuit by Koch Industries over damaged underground pipes at a plant it bought from BP).
Michael Harrison and Andrew Buncombe, “BP: Big problems for oil giant – BP says the initials stand for ‘Beyond Petroleum’. But as its environmental and regulatory troubles pile up, critics are starting to ask whether the company is suffering a deeper-seated malaise,” The Independent (UK), August 30, 2006.
Jim Carlton, “BP Hires Former Judge To Be U.S. Ombudsman,” Wall Street Journal (sub req’d), September 5, 2006. “BP PLC has retained former U.S. District Judge Stanley Sporkin as its ombudsman to hear worker complaints from Alaska and elsewhere in the U.S., in a move to stem the tide of criticism over the British oil titan’s operations.”
Robert Campbell, “BP Faulty in Alaska’s Biggest Oil Spill – Gov’t: Oil major BP’s failure to maintain pipelines properly at its giant Prudhoe Bay field was a major factor behind Alaska’s worst-ever onshore crude spill last year, a senior federal official said,” Reuters, March 7, 2007.
Terry Macalister, “BP: The Browne years: Pressure had been building after a series of PR disasters damaged the reputations of both Browne and BP,” Guardian Unlimited (UK), May 1, 2007.
… significant environmental concerns that have been raised about the method of extracting the gas from the shale, “[[hydrofracking]],” which is discussed… …hrough a pipe drilled into the shale at extremely high pressure. A variety of chemicals are added to the water to keep the fractures in the shale open a…
52 KB (7212 words) – 18:26, 15 June 2010
***
Bureau of Land Management – Department of the Interior
January 27, 2010
![The State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic [SOCAR] is the state-owned oil and natural gas corporation in Azerbaijan. It produces oil and natural gas, operates two oil refineries and the running of oil and gas pipelines through out the country. After going through several reorganizations and re-namings during the Soviet period, the national oil companies merge in just one new company in 1992: SOCAR.](http://dprbcn.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/baku-azerbaijan-2006-03.jpg?w=480&h=478&h=382 "The State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic [SOCAR] is the state-owned oil and natural gas corporation in Azerbaijan. It produces oil and natural gas, operates two oil refineries and the running of oil and gas pipelines through out the country. After going through several reorganizations and re-namings during the Soviet period, the national oil companies merge in just one new company in 1992: SOCAR.")
Oil refinery in Texas
BP Rejects Claims Of Recklessness 
In the last week of May, Johns Creek rescue units were dispatched three times to stranded waders and frolickers in Chattahoochee River. Swift response and good luck averted a tragedy, but people who play in the river need to be alert and take precautions, especially now that releases from Lake Lanier are less predictable.
-Texas, 6th) In Office – Privately Financed Travel
Google Map 
Trips history
Earmarks with this alert are not included in member tallies 
-TX)
NOAA Ship Pisces.
007′s Aston Goes Under The Hammer 
Monday, June 14, 2010
Editor's Note: A team of researchers led by 
(16USC 824v)
BP p.l.c.
