Gulf Oil Disaster - Political Implications

"Price increases"... there have been but with the recalls, seems to be people are walking off the lots right now with incredible deals.
I suppose the oil future market will rise if it has not already... and we will all pay in the end through our wallets and environment.

 

I've been reading to learn details about this. The political implications may not be severe. It will take a long time to actually implement the administration's approval of offshore drilling, so there is time to figure this out.

Meanwhile, I think investigators will discover that one safety shutoff on the rig did not work correctly, and another (remote shutoff operable via underwater signal or by a robot sub) was not installed on this rig. The upshot should be that the former shutoff needs to be frequently maintained and tested, and the latter needs to be required on all rigs (also tested and maintained).

BP has come forward to say they will cover any private or government costs for fix, cleanup, or damages. They have been wide open with state and federal governments. Likewise, the feds have been all over this since the beginning. Today the Secretary of Defense approved Louisiana's request for 3 months of many national guard troops to help with cleanup.

This is not to say that the bottom line won't dwarf the Exxon Valdez spill, with huge damages and costs--BP is on the hook.

 

This is now required by law.

Tom

 

It's as simple as adding yet another shutoff switch or valve, there, problem addressed, isn't it ?

 

Yeah. What IS it with the politics? I don't get it. We're looking at what could become the worst environmental disaster ever. Yet the worry is...the political ramifications? And the price of gas? :tsk:

 

Both Exxon Valdez and Deepwater Horizon were Preventable. !@#$%

Arguably, neither the Exxon Valdez nor the [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon]Deepwater Horizon[/ame]

disasters had to happen. Both these disasters share a common element.
In both cases the responsible federal oversight agency asked Exxon and
British Petroleum (BP), to install some optional equipment that would have
minimized, if not prevented the ecological disaster that did, and may very
well follow.

In the case of the Exxon Valdez, long before the ~10 million gallon spill,
the responsible Federal regulatory oversight agency, the Coast Guard,
asked Exxon to install what amounted to a small area GPS system in
Prince William Sound. The Exxon tankers carrying oil out of Valdez would
have receivers and equipment that tracked the Exxon tankers as they
transited Prince William Sound (PWS). Should the vessels stray from
pre-established track lines, there would would be loud, persistent audio
warnings sounded on the bridge as a warning that would have to be
actively acknowledged by the bridge personnel. A signal may also
have been sent to the Valdez Coast Guard.

But Exxon said not only no, but Hell No! There had been hundreds of
transits of Exxon tankers through PWS. There had not been a single
accident. It follows that there was no risk, and no need for the system
that cost about $500K to implement. And according to the regulatory
scheme in place, the Coast Guard could not demand implementation, and
moral suasion wasn't enough to move Exxon.

The case of the Deepwater Horizon is similar. In this case BP was asked
install an a piece of remotely operated equipment that could be activated
from off the rig and stop oil flow at the well head, some 18,000 ft below the
surface. BP declined citing no demonstrated need, excessive cost -- about
$500K -- and the opinion that it probably wouldn't work anyway. Again
the accident history showed that there was no demonstrable need as there
have been no similar casualties in the Gulf, that is loss of an entire rig --
and 11 lives.

In the case of the Deepwater Horizon, the potential size of the "spill,"
more properly a "release," is unlimited. How big is the oil bubble the rig's drill
had tapped? How long will it take to secure the drill head or drill another well
to relieve the pressure?

What has happened in these cases is not the "fault" of the responsible
federal oversight agencies. It is a known weakness of the Federal
regulatory process. It is reactive, not forward looking or forward leaning.
At least in the maritime world, regulations are made in response to
casualties/disasters/loss of life. That's the way the process was designed
and implemented. Woe be to the agency that in good conscience, the
public trust, or mere good intentions tries to implement and enforce
regulations without irrefutable statistical proof they are needed and have
a huge positive cost/benefit ratio.

Up to now, Exxon has paid an estimated $8.5B for the Valdez spill. That's
against the cost of the local GPS system of ~$500K, that's a 17,000 to 1
payout. Yet IIRC, in recent years Exxon has reported record annual
profits. (What is wrong with this picture?)

I trust, hopefully not to be proven otherwise, that the Federal Nuclear
Regulatory Agency has the authority to be more proactive in protecting
us.

In the case of the airlines, most every disaster has accompanying loss of
life. Citizens as taxpayers and voters and probable frequent fliers don't
like the sound of that and insist on strong commercial aviation regulations
and frequent on-site oversight. Citizens who live anywhere in the country
can easily conjure up a picture of commercial aircraft falling out of the
sky and obliterating them, their loved ones, or neighbors, no matter where
they live.

The same is not true for safety concerns for activities on or under the
oceans, gulfs, etc. Most citizens never see the oceans/off shore waters all
that often. On a daily basis, they don't feel any urgency or anticipate any
effect on them or their loved ones. Changes will come slowly if at all.

BEGIN RANT :target:

What ever happened to, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure?"
IMHO, it's really pretty simple. Under the constant influence of Wall Street
and the lust for short term profits the axiom has been rewritten. It now
reads:
A penny of profits is better than an ounce of prevention, and trust me,
we won't ever need a cure.

But the system is broken. When will it become not just apparent but a
matter of urgent concern to the people and their elected representatives
that our "Homeland Security" is not just troops in the field, or domestic
anti-terrorist measures.

True Homeland Security is needed here, right where we live, not away
out/over there, half a world away. It has to do with the security of our
banking and investment institutions, with the effectiveness of our
educational system, with the safety of our promised social security
programs, the non-over exploitation of our natural resources -- our legacy
to the future -- with readily available clean water for every one, the
availability of competent health care. When will we as a nation wake up?

END RANT. :flame:

(Feel free to add your most anger provoking nationally self-inflicted
"Homeland Security" short falls/violations.)

See also The Ambulance in the Valley.

 

I'm not trying to dismiss your concerns, Felt; it sounded to me like the first concern was politics, and not the things that really matter - some of which you mentioned in your second post.

I'm not playing cards. This is all too real.

 

I think we should do away with all domestic oil production and buy everything we need from the Middle East.

 

Re: Both Exxon Valdez and Deepwater Horizon were Preventable. !@#$%

I will say that as a result of the Valdez spill, two heavy tugs escort the tankers in and out of Valdez (albeit the were trying just recently to reduce it to one). Also I believe the last single hull tanker is due to retire real soon (now all double hull). Also there is now actively monitor with radar as well. So there is change happening unfortunately it took such a disaster to make it happen.
So yeah, I hear you on the prevention thing.

 

Each disaster is a fluke, a one in a million. Or billion. Unfortunately, there are infinite ways for things to go wrong.

The people who want energy independence have their collective heads up their arses. Rather than demand wind and solar, they are hoping the inevitable next oil disaster will not happen.

 

Daily Kos: BP Oil Platform Spill Disaster is CHENEY'S Fault UPDATED

"An 'acoustic switch' would have prevented this catastrophe - it's a failsafe that shuts the flow of oil off at the source - they cost only about half a million dollars each, and are required in off-shore drilling platforms in most of the world...except for the United States. This was one of the new deregulations devised by Dick Cheney during his secret meetings with the oil industry at the beginning of Bush's first term."

Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device - WSJ.com

 

pelican brief-jurassic park. life imitates art.

 

Politics being what politics is; corruption and bribery and lobbying having the power they do; the vast quantities of money involved; and the imperfection of machines built by people; all together mean that this sort of accident is INEVITABLE as long as we Americans DEMAND gasoline.

Petroleum is a drug, and just as all the law-enforcement in the world will not stop the flow of drugs into the country while the demand for them remains and people are willing to pay whatever they must to get them; so also these sorts of accidents will continue to occur as long as WE remain addicted to gasoline and are willing to pay whatever we must (in money and environmental degradation) to get it.

No matter what accident you anticipate and regulate against, whether pro-actively or reactively, something else will go wrong that you did not think of. As Pogo said, the enemy is us, and specifically our addiction to oil. In other threads, drug addicts have been called "criminals" because there happen to be laws against using drugs. But WE, ALL OF US are drug addicts, and our addiction is causing far more harm than the drugs people put into themselves with needles or by smoking.

BP didn't cause this. Dick Cheney didn't cause it. You and I caused it. And if we cannot break our addiction, there will be other oil disasters, some lesser, and some greater, than this one.

 

While I don't like the immediate politicization of every issue either, I don't see how a bunch of bloggers can do anything to stop the oil flow. If this was the White House's response, that would be a different story.

 

The Gulf Coast oil spill is a consequence of our oil addiction.