Oil Leak at Gulf of Mexico Oil Well

[Guest Dan Kuester]

With the latest failed efforts to stop the flow of oil from an uncapped well into the Gulf of Mexico, projections are that the spill may not be contained until late summer, or later.

 

That could affect grain prices for the United States and overseas markets, according to Iowa State University Extension grain markets specialist Chad Hart.

 

Hart, assistant professor of economics, says that if the oil slick enters the shipping lanes there could be a slowdown in shipping traffic.

 

"If the oil slick got into what is called the Southwest Passage - which is a canal that goes from New Orleans out to the Gulf of Mexico - we would be looking at severe delays in getting our corn and soybeans shipped overseas," said Hart.

 

Ships can sail through the oily water, but would need to be cleaned when they enter port.

 

"When a ship comes into port, it would have to be cleaned if it went through the oil slick," said Hart. "And then when it goes to their destination, it would have to be cleaned again when it arrives."

 

The result would be much slower movement of grain out of the Midwest to foreign markets.

 

More than 60 percent of United States grain goes through the port of New Orleans, according to Hart.

 

Right now, according to Hart, the oil spill is moving mainly to the east, so there has been little impact on the shipping lanes, which lay to the west of the slick.

 

"If we end up with a bottleneck down there, we could see prices in the U.S. fall from 10 to 50 cents (per bushel)," said Hart. "Katrina had a similar impact. If that happens, people will start to look at alternative shipping routes. For instance, right now, most of our soybeans that are going to China, go through New Orleans. People may start shipping overland to the Pacific Northwest by rail to ship over to China. That is more expensive, but it is an alternative if the gulf slows down."

 

As long as the spill stays clear of the shipping lanes for the next few months, Hart doesn't feel there will be a huge impact on prices.

 

"In some ways we were lucky on the timing," said Hart. "We ship most of our grain earlier in the year, so right now there are smaller amounts of grain moving."

[Guest August]

BP's Kent Wells provided an June 12 update on the subsea containment efforts: what is being done to collect oil and gas at the sea floor so it doesn't enter the Gulf of Mexico. The update includes current and future plans to collect as much oil and gas as possible until the well has been killed with the relief well efforts.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wP5qBILLoMc

[Guest Anadarko Petroleum]

Following this week's hearings in Washington regarding the Deepwater Horizon tragedy, Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (NYSE: APC) issued the following statement:

 

"The events surrounding the Deepwater Horizon explosion represent a terrible loss for the families of those who lost their lives and an unprecedented environmental tragedy," Anadarko Chairman and CEO Jim Hackett said. "Sadly, it also continues to have tremendous impacts on the livelihoods of many Gulf Coast families and their communities. We, along with others in the industry, have continued to support the Unified Command in its response with technical expertise and specialized equipment.

 

"The mounting evidence clearly demonstrates that this tragedy was preventable and the direct result of BP's reckless decisions and actions. Frankly, we are shocked by the publicly available information that has been disclosed in recent investigations and during this week's testimony that, among other things, indicates BP operated unsafely and failed to monitor and react to several critical warning signs during the drilling of the Macondo well. BP's behavior and actions likely represent gross negligence or willful misconduct and thus affect the obligations of the parties under the operating agreement," continued Hackett.

 

Under the terms of the joint operating agreement (JOA) related to the Mississippi Canyon block 252 lease, BP, as operator, owed duties to its co-owners including Anadarko to perform the drilling of the well in a good and workmanlike manner and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The JOA also provides that BP is responsible to its co-owners for damages caused by its gross negligence or willful misconduct. Importantly, any actions Anadarko may take under the agreement to protect its rights relative to BP's performance as operator in the drilling of the well will in no way shift any financial burden to the American taxpayer. Hackett also said, "We recognize that ultimately we have obligations under Federal law related to the oil spill, but will look to BP to continue to pay all legitimate claims as they have repeatedly stated that they will do."

 

The operator of a well determines the detailed planning and execution of the well, and is responsible for the day-to-day activities of, and decisions executed by, personnel on the rig. Consistent with standard industry practice around the world, non-operating investors rely upon the operator to make the appropriate decisions on the rig.

 

"BP's failures in the drilling of this well are not a reflection of the many tremendously skilled and committed individuals in our industry who work hard every day to deliver needed resources to America. We look forward to continuing to work with the Administration and our industry to identify further enhancements to the industry's operating procedures and practices, and to helping get the Gulf's dedicated workers back to work soon," Hackett said.

 

DONATION OF OIL REVENUE

 

Anadarko also announced that it will donate to charitable and civic agencies along the Gulf Coast any revenue it is entitled to receive from oil recovered from the clean-up efforts.

 

"We hope donating these proceeds to the people of the Gulf Coast will help offset some of the hardships being experienced in so many ways by those living in the affected communities," said Hackett. "We are saddened by the loss of lives that occurred in this accident and the livelihoods that have been damaged by the spill. We continue to offer our prayers to the families of those lost and to all of those who are still suffering through this tragic event."

 

Anadarko Petroleum Corporation's mission is to deliver a competitive and sustainable rate of return to shareholders by exploring for, acquiring and developing oil and natural gas resources vital to the world's health and welfare. As of year-end 2009, the company had approximately 2.3 billion barrels-equivalent of proved reserves, making it one of the world's largest independent exploration and production companies. For more information about Anadarko, please visit

 

http://www.anadarko.com.

[Guest Enoch]

Joe Barton would like to apologize to BP for blocking access to rescuing and incinerating turtles in the oil.

 

joebartonwouldliketoapologize.com

 

[Guest Max]

Joe Barton would like to apologize to BP for destroying the livelihood of the many fisherman in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

[Guest LAW]

This diagram shows the depths and sizes of the different casings installed during the well's construction.

 

http://www.energy.gov/open/documents/3.1_Item_2_Macondo_Well_07_Jun_1900.pdf

[Guest Braxton]

Casing-While-Drilling (CWD) involves integrating casing running with drilling. The resulting CWD process allows casing strings (or liners) to be installed in a well during the hole-making process where all, some parts of, or none of the required drilling tools can be recovered after the casing reaches the required depth.

 

CWD development activity in many of the major operating companies is on the surface casing strings for offshore wells, primarily for deep water in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM). Some operators have focused attention on the challenge of drilling the entire 17 1/2-in. hole section with a 16-in.-liner CWD system.

 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3159/is_10_220/ai_60041601/?tag=content;col1

[Guest Desert Rat]

Joe Barton would like to apologize to BP for destroying the livelihood of the many fisherman in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

 

Hey Joe, I don't apologize to the enemy.

[Guest LAW]

BP Email calling Macondo a nightmare well, April 14, 2010

 

From: Morel, Brian P

Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:31 PM

To: Miller, Richard A

Cc: Hafle, Mark E

Subject: Macondo APB

Rich,

There is a chance we could run a production liner on Macondo instead of the planned long string. As this does not change much for APB based on the original design assumptions of a trapped annular, I don't see any major effects, but wanted to confirm I am not missing something. Attached is the proposed schematic, please let me know if you have any questions. We could be running it in 2-3 days, so need a relative quick response. Sorry for the late notice, this has been nightmare well which has everyone all over the place.

Thanks

 

Brian

 

From: Miller, Richard A

Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 6:03 PM

To: Morel, Brian P

Cc: Hafle, Mark E

Subject: RE: Macondo APB

 

We have flipped design parameters around to the point that I got nervous. I did a rough update of bothmy disk calculations and my WellCat model. All looks fine.

 

If we run the 9-7/8" x 7" as a long string, then the design resembles the original configuration, at least from an APB standpoint. The outward-acting 16" rupture disks mitigate 9-7/8" collapse loads due to B annulus APB. I do not have the final disk depth, so I guessed it is around 9,500'.

 

If the 9-7/8" x 7" is run as a liner (per your schematic), then there is a risk that a trapped annulus forms between the 7" and 9-7/8" liners. The WellCat model predicts an incremental 2,350 psi APB in that annulus. To keep the 7" from collapsing, the pressure inside the 7" at 17,157' TVD needs to be 4,800 psi or greater. Assuming that the production packer is set above this depth, then the 4,800 psi could dictate a reservoir abandonment pressure limit. We can hash this out in the completion phase, but you may want to alert completions of that possible issue.

 

Let me know if you have questions. I'll be in Westlake Thursday morning and have an early afternoon flight to catch.

 

Rich

 

From: Hafle, Mark E

Sent: Wed Apr 14 23:09:46 2010

To: Miller, Richard A

Subject: RE: Macondo APB

Importance: Normal

 

Thanks Rich. This has been a crazy well for sure.

 

Mark

[Guest LAW]

Essentially Annular Pressure Relief System (APRS) is a simple solution to an uncomplicated problem,’ says John Staudt of Hunting Energy, ‘unfortunately just a very difficult one to deal with. Often called a Burst Disk it is more correctly a Rupture Disk, a tiny safety device that sits in the side-wall of the casing of a well.’

 

The well wall is constructed from steel tubing that becomes smaller in diameter the deeper it is used. In diagram form it would appear to be telescopic as each decreasingly sized pipe slots inside the previous one on its way down towards the oil or gas reserve. As these smaller sized casings are cemented into place, they can leave a space between the tubes called an annulus. During the construction process it is not unusual for blockages to occur, trapping liquids in this area. The annulus is then at the mercy of typically high temperatures radiating from the inner most tube as production comes on stream. The resulting pressure differential, due to the thermal expansion of the fluid both inwards on the production tube or outwards on the larger casing, can cause total failure that is unrecoverable if the tubing collapses.

 

Click Here for PDF

[Guest Literati]

Republican Governor Barbour thinks the President is doing a decent job with the Gulf.

 

“As someone who went through Katrina, I know that everything doesn’t always work like you want it to,” Mr. Barbour said Tuesday on a Jackson radio program hosted by the Mississippi political analyst Sid Salter. “You kind of make it up as you go along.”

 

He added that the Obama administration, in its response, has "done more right than wrong."

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/20/us/20barbour.html

[Guest A friend of Dusty]

"Meet The Press" moderator, David Gregory asked Governor Barbour, "What is your assessment of how well coordinated the federal, state and local officials are, not only in your state, but also in Louisiana and Florida?"

 

Barbour answered, "Nothing is satisfactory until the well is shut in. When the well's capped and then clean up the oil and then BP pay the bills. Until all of that is done, nothing is satisfactory. But as I've said before and I said it to the president, I think that the government has done more right that wrong. I thought appointing Ken Feinberg, who's got a great reputation that is well deserved, is good for BP and good for the government. Leave BP out of that. But BP's got to pay."

 

To see the interview in its entirety, log on to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ and click on "Meet The Press".

[Guest Blue Bayou]

We all know that BP is responsible for the spill, constantly saying that in press releases and interviews does nothing to fix the problem. If the dems care so much about the animals and the people down here on the gulf coast, they would have every available ship out here and taking all the help offered, no matter what country it comes from.

[Guest ALWAYS RED]

"From the beginning, the effort has been bedeviled by a lack of preparation, organization, urgency and clear lines of authority among federal, state and local officials, as well as BP. As a result, officials and experts say, the damage to the coastline and wildlife has been worse than it might have been if the response had been faster and orchestrated more effectively." - The New York Times, 6/15/10

 

The House Republican Conference, along with the Committees on Natural Resources, Energy and Commerce, Oversight and Government Reform, and Transpiration and Infrastructure, have compiled the following questions and answers and timeline surrounding the ongoing Gulf of Mexico oil spill tragedy and the Administration's response.

 

TIMELINE

 

April 20, 2010: Explosion on BP's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig tragically kills 11 workers.

 

April 24, 2010: First oil leak is revealed by the Administration.

 

April 28, 2010: Interior Secretary Salazar travels to BP Command Center in Houston.

 

April 29, 2010: Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano announces a "Spill of National Significance" and President Obama makes first public remarks on the disaster.

 

April 30, 2010: President deploys senior Administration officials to Gulf region and makes remarks. Louisiana National Guard activated.

 

May 2, 2010: President visits Gulf for the first time.

 

May 4, 2010: Cabinet officials brief Members of Congress for the first time.

 

May 11, 2010: Louisiana requests emergency permission from the federal government to dredge barriers and construct berms.

 

May 27, 2010: Federal government grants Louisiana partial permission to dredge.

 

May 28, 2010: President makes his second visit to the Gulf and states, "I am the president and the buck stops with me."

 

May 29, 2010: BP announces that its "top kill" plan to fill the well had failed.

 

June 2, 2010: Obama Administration finally approves of Louisiana's plan to dredge and tells BP to pay $360 million for five new berms. The Justice Department announces a criminal investigation into the explosion and spill.

 

June 14, 2010: Senate Democrats write to BP calling on the company to set up a $20 billion, independently administered escrow fund to compensate victims of the spill.

 

June 15, 2010: President Obama makes Oval Office speech on oil spill and uses crisis to push climate change legislation.

 

June 16, 2010: President Obama meets with BP executives at the White House.

 

 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

 

How much oil is spilling into the Gulf of Mexico?

 

Answer: As of late Tuesday, June 15, 2010, government officials estimated that 35,000-60,000 barrels per day are spilling into the Gulf of Mexico. All told, as of Monday, June 14, 2010, estimates suggest that between 40 million and 115 million gallons of oil have been spilled-far exceeding the Exxon Valdez disaster.

 

What is the current status of efforts to stop the leak?

 

Answer: BP is currently drilling two relief wells intended to stop the leak. In the interim, BP is capturing approximately 15,000 barrels of oil per day, developing additional containment capacity and bringing additional vessels to the region, using dispersants, and conducting in-situ burns. The leak likely will not be stopped for good until relief wells are complete in August 2010.

 

How does the Oil Pollution Act work?

 

Answer: The Oil Pollution Act makes the owners or operators of vessels and facilities that discharge oil into the environment responsible for repaying economic damages that result from the spill. The law also limits responsible parties' liability in certain situations, and allows claims over and above that liability to be paid from an oil industry-financed trust fund, the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF). Oil industry financing of the OSLTF maintains the law's "polluter pays" principles. The balance in the Fund now stands at more than $1.5 billion.

 

The Coast Guard is the federal on-scene coordinator for the response to marine spills. For spills that require more advanced response, a unified command center is established by the federal agency serving as the on-scene coordinator. A unified command center includes representatives from federal, state and local governments and the responsible parties. As spills become larger and more complex, multiple local command centers can be set up, as well as regional response commands and, in the case of a Spill of National Significance, a National Incident Command.

 

What is the president's legal responsibility to respond to the oil spill?

 

Answer: The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) provides direct presidential authority for oil spill response. Section 4201 of OPA provides the president with the specific authority and responsibility to remove oil from navigable waters and adjoining shorelines, including directing or monitoring all federal, state, and private actions. Clearly, by law the president is ultimately responsible for leading the oil spill clean-up, although the responsible company will pay for the response effort and taxpayers must not be left on the hook.

 

Who are the responsible parties for this spill and what are they required to pay under current law?

 

Answer: The law delineates between various potential sources of oil spills (tankers, offshore facilities, etc.) There are two in this incident: the Transocean-owned Deepwater Horizon rig (one) that was drilling BP's well (two). The Coast Guard has already named both BP and Transocean as "responsible parties" for this oil spill-under OPA they are 100 percent responsible for all cleanup costs, including those incurred by government agencies.

 

As "responsible parties," BP and Transocean are also responsible for paying economic and environmental damages-on which OPA places a liability cap of $75 million per incident. Federal regulators could determine that this explosion, sinking and ongoing spill involves multiple "incidents" each subject to a separate $75 million liability cap. Most importantly, if a responsible party is found to be grossly negligent, engaged in willful misconduct or to have violated regulations then the $75 million cap no longer applies and the responsible parties are responsible for all costs.

 

BP has made public commitments promising to cover damages in excess of this cap-and there has been a bipartisan demand by Republicans and Democrats that BP be fully responsible for all costs of this spill. There is a clear need for Congress to review raising these caps, but care must be taken to ensure informed action is taken-arbitrary or hasty increases could have unknown, negative consequences that put companies out of business, cost jobs and harm our economy.

 

How are costs for cleanup efforts and damages paid under the Oil Pollution Act?

 

Answer: Claimants are required to file a claim with the responsible party, BP. If the claim is denied, the individual may submit the claim to the Coast Guard's National Pollution Funds Center which can use money held within the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to cover eligible costs. Under this scenario, the Coast Guard would make a reimbursement request to BP and all recouped funds would be deposited in the Fund.

 

What about an independent escrow fund?

 

Answer: The White House and Democrats in Congress have proposed forcing BP to set up an independently-administered escrow fund to compensate victims of the spill. Congressional Democrats have said they want it to be a $20 billion fund while the White House has not yet named a dollar number. In his Oval Office address to the nation, President Obama said that he would direct BP to "set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed." BP subsequently agreed to a $20 billion fund to be administered by Kenneth Feinberg, the Administration's "pay czar."

Would waiving the Jones Act help the response effort?

 

Answer: Yes. The Jones Act requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried in U.S.-flagged ships, constructed and owned in the U.S. and crewed by U.S. residents. Waiving the Jones Act, like President Bush did after Hurricane Katrina, would allow specialized foreign ships to participate in more of the spill response effort.

 

Without waiving the Jones Act, the U.S. is missing out on real, available resources. For example, Sweden has three skimming ships which could be utilized, Norway has offered a third of its spill response equipment, and the Netherlands offered skimming ships, but the Administration refused them. Additionally, according to Rep. Jeff Miller (R-FL) and Sen. George LeMieux (R-FL), there are more than 2,000 skimmer vessels available, but only 32 are deployed off the Florida coast. Rep. Miller and Sen. LeMieux have asked President Obama to waive portions of the Jones Act, which LeMieux says is partially responsible for the lack of international aid.

 

It seems many aspects of the response have relied on taking action and then seeing if it works.

 

Does the Oil Pollution Act authorize research that might have answered some of these operational questions before the Gulf crisis?

 

Answer: The act establishes an interagency oil spill research committee and authorizes $27.5 million in oil spill research. Virtually none of that money has ever been appropriated, and many important questions about how to best respond to oil spills remain unanswered.

 

When did the administration become aware of the spill potential as a result of the Deepwater explosion?

 

Answer: From the Oversight and Government Reform Committee's review of Coast Guard logs, it appears that on Day One, on-scene responders notified senior officials that the blowout preventer was not working and estimated a potential spill of 8,000 barrels per day. These logs appear to contradict the official timeline posted on the White House blog.

 

What federal assets has the administration committed to the response effort?

 

Answer: The White House blog is vague and does not distinguish between federally-owned and privately-owned assets. From what GOP staff on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee have uncovered thus far, there are relatively few federally-owned assets involved. The vast majority are owned and operated by local small businesses under BP contract.

 

Who within the Minerals Management Service (MMS) reviewed and approved BP's spill response plan?

 

Answer: It appears that BP's approved plan was riddled with inaccuracies. This included not only a gross underestimate of what a potential spill may entail and outdated contact information. The response plan also did not compensate for the well-known loop current and even listed a response expert who had been deceased for some time. MMS has refused to cooperate with GOP Oversight and Government Reform staff to make responsible MMS officials available for transcribed interviews.

 

Who at the Interior Department authorized an apparent manipulation of the peer-reviewed assessment used by the White House to justify the recent six-month drilling moratorium?

 

Answer: The scientists who peer reviewed the document claim that the Interior Department inserted language recommending a moratorium after they had signed off on the document. Secretary Salazar has apologized, but he has yet to explain the political slight-of-hand involved in promoting the moratorium.

 

Who at MMS inspected and signed off on the Deepwater Horizon as safe and operational prior to the explosion? Answer:

 

An Interior Department Inspector General report has revealed that field inspectors rubber-stamped inspection papers submitted by oil companies. While there is no indication that rig inspectors falsified Deepwater Horizon's safety inspections, the revelation casts considerable doubt upon MMS's credibility.

 

What should be done to reform the Minerals Management Service (MMS)?

 

Answer: There is bipartisan consensus that fundamental changes need to be made to MMS to ensure American-made energy production is the safest in the world, though it's important to learn from this spill so that informed decisions are made. Any changes must be done right and thoughtfully in order to protect the environment, taxpayers and American jobs.

 

What will be the impact of President Obama's six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling?

Answer: The Obama Administration's six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling could have a devastating economic impact on Gulf Coast communities who are already suffering. Deepwater wells generate 80 percent of the Gulf's oil production and 45 percent of its natural gas. The moratorium will affect 33 oil rigs, and companies have already started moving those rigs out of the Gulf to foreign waters where they are allowed to drill.

 

According to the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association, direct and indirect job losses resulting from a moratorium on offshore drilling could range from 42,000 to 120,000. A report by the Energy Information Administration states that a six-month moratorium on drilling would cut oil production by 70,000 barrels per day in 2011. Additionally, the Administration has put a de facto moratorium on shallow water drilling as well, as new permits will be on hold until new safety regulations and inspection procedures are in place. The loss of energy production will increase U.S. dependence on foreign oil, which will be transported by large oil tankers from foreign countries to the U.S. coastline, increasing the risk of spills and environmental damage.

[Guest America is Funny]

How funny do you have to be a American Republican and actually APOLOGIZE to the company that is responsible for the spill?? That's like apologizing to a convicted rapist for the TV not working in prison... you people have lost your ever-loving minds down there.

Good luck with that.

[Guest American4Progress]

Last month, BP CEO Tony Hayward lamented the continuing Gulf oil spill crisis was preventing a return to his privileged life of skiing and sailing. "There's no one who wants this over more than I do," said Hayward. "I would like my life back." While Hayward, who is still in charge of BP operations, apologized for his remarks, the perception that the oil giant's chief executive does not recognize the effect his company's oil spill is having on the Gulf Coast economy and environment became even more apparent this weekend. "Two days after Mr. Hayward angered lawmakers on Capitol Hill with his refusal to provide details during testimony about the worst offshore oil spill in United States history," photographers spotted Hayward on his yacht, which was competing at the JP Morgan Asset Management Round the Island Race off the Isle of Wight in the English Channel. But while Hayward relaxes on his yacht, millions of gallons of oil continue to gush in the Gulf sending crude as far east as Panama City, FL. As the disaster continues to devastate the economy, reports of the spill's ravaging effects on the Gulf Coast's environment and local wildlife persist -- "a rare and endangered species of sea turtle is being burned alive in BP's controlled burns of the oil swirling around the Gulf of Mexico, and a boat captain tasked with saving them says the company has blocked rescue efforts."

 

OFFICIALS CHASTISE HAYWARD: Yesterday on ABC's This Week, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said Hayward yachting off the English coast during the oil crisis is "part of a long line of P.R. gaffes and mistakes." "[T]o quote Tony Hayward, he has got his life back," Emanuel said, adding, "I think we can all conclude that Tony Hayward is not going to have a second career in PR consulting." Other lawmakers were more critical of Hayward, seeming to acknowledge that the situation is beyond PR crises and that Hayward and BP appear to lack any understanding of the Gulf spill's disastrous consequences. On CBS's Face the Nation yesterday, Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA) said he is "very disappointed at how out of touch the executives at BP are." On the same program, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) called on Hayward to step down. "I thought the fact that the chairman of BP had the gall, the arrogance, to go to a yacht race...in England, while all of this was going on here was the height of stupidity. And I believe myself that he should go," Shelby said.

 

HAYWARD'S GOP FRIENDS: One of Hayward's friends on Capitol Hill, Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), last week apologized to Hayward for what he perceived as a White House "shakedown" of BP and its executives. Many Republicans and conservative pundits leaped to Barton's defense. The Republican Study Committee (RSC) concurred with Barton, firing off a statement declaring that the $20 billion dollar escrow account negotiated by BP and the Obama administration for victims of the oil catastrophe in the gulf is a "Chicago-Style Political Shakedown." Reps. John Fleming (R-LA) and Jim Jordan (R-OH) agreed with the RSC and Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said he shares Barton's concerns. Indeed, New York Times' columnist Frank Rich noted, "The spill's sole positive benefit has been to unambiguously expose the hard right, for all its populist pandering to the Tea Partiers, as a stalking horse for its most rapacious corporate patrons." Other Republicans weren't as eager to come to Barton's defense. "I couldn't disagree with Joe Barton more," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell yesterday on Fox News Sunday. "t somewhat baffles me with respect to why he apologized to BP," Cao said. "I condemn Mr. Barton's statement. Mr. Barton's remarks are out of touch with this tragedy and I feel his comments call into question his judgment and ability to serve in a leadership on the Energy and Commerce Committee," Rep. Jeff Miller (R-FL) said. Republicans told Barton last week that he should either apologize for his remarks or face losing his Energy Committee chairmanship. Hours later, Barton backtracked. "I apologize for using the term 'shakedown' with regard to yesterday's actions at the White House this morning, and I retract my apology to BP," he said in a statement.

 

MORE BP MALFEASANCE: An employee who worked on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that exploded last April causing the oil spill has told the BBC that he had identified a leak in the rig's blowout preventer safety device weeks before the explosion and informed BP about it. The worker, Tyrone Benton, said the leak was not fixed in time and, instead, the company relied on a second preventer. "That is unacceptable," Professor Tad Patzek, petroleum expert at the University of Texas, said. "If you see any evidence of the blowout preventer not functioning properly, you should fix it by whatever means possible." Additionally, Congressional investigators have found that BP used a well design the investigators labeled as "risky" in more than one-third of its deepwater wells in the Gulf of Mexico. The Wall Street Journal reports that BP used the cheaper "long-string" design "significantly more often than most peers" -- including on the Deepwater Horizon rig. "The decision," says a letter from Reps. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Bart Stupak (D-MI), "appears to have been made to save time and reduce costs." Moreover, a newly released internal BP document shows that the oil giant estimated that up to 4.2 million gallons of oil per day could gush from a damaged well in the Gulf. Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) said in a press release that BP's estimate stands "in sharp contrast to BP's initial claim that the leak was just 1,000 barrels a day."

[Guest LAW]

U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, last week held a hearing to examine what caused the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig and the oil spill that continues to spread across the Gulf of Mexico. This hearing, entitled “Role of BP in Deepwater Horizon Explosion and Oil Spill,” is third Stupak has held on the Gulf spill, including a field hearing in Chalmette, Louisiana and the fifth hearing overall in the Energy & Commerce Committee.

 

Stupak delivered the following statement:

 

"Today is day 59 of the BP oil spill that has devastated much of the Gulf of Mexico. Eleven men lost their lives the day the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig exploded and in the 59 days that have followed countless people have lost their livelihood as the oil spill closes fishing grounds and pollutes the shores of three states.

 

This is the third hearing that the Oversight & Investigations Subcommittee has held and the fifth hearing overall in the Energy & Commerce Committee. Our first hearing exposed problems discovered with the Blowout Preventer and several other factors that contributed to the disaster. Our second hearing was a field hearing in the New Orleans area where we heard from the widows of two men who died in the Deepwater Horizon explosion as well as shrimpers and other small business owners who have suffered from the environmental catastrophe that followed.

 

Our staff has spent weeks combing through hundreds of thousands of pages of documents and sitting through more than 50 hours of briefings by corporate, governmental and academic experts in an attempt to piece together what went wrong with BP’s exploration of the Macondo well. We have reviewed several questionable decisions BP made in the days and hours leading up to the explosion, and what we have learned so far is alarming.

We have learned that time and again BP officials had warning signs that this was – as one employee put it – "a nightmare well." They made choices that set safety aside in exchange for cost cutting and time saving decisions. For example

 

· They disregarded questionable results from pressure tests after cementing in the well.

 

· BP selected the riskier of two options for their well design. They could have hung a liner from the lower end of the casing already in the well and install a "tieback" on top of the liner, which would have provided additional barriers to a release of hydrocarbons. Instead they lowered a full string of new casing, which took less time and cost less, but did not provide the same protection against escaping hydrocarbons.

 

· BP was warned by their cement contractor Halliburton that the well could have a "SEVERE gas flow problem” if BP lowered the final string of casing with only six centralizers instead of the 21 Halliburton recommended. BP rejected Halliburton’s advice to use additional centralizers and in an e-mail on April 16, a BP official involved in the decision explained: "it will take 10 hours to install them. … I do not like this."

 

· BP chose not to fully circulate the mud in the well from the bottom to the top, which was an industry recommended best practice that would have allowed them to test for gas in the mud.

 

· BP chose not to use a casing hanger lockdown sleeve, which would have provided extra protection against a blowout from below.

 

These are just a few of the issues that led up to the disaster. Once the Deepwater Horizon exploded and sank to the bottom of the sea, BP's response to contain the leak and clean up the spilled oil was equally as poor. They issued low-ball estimates of the amount of oil flowing from the well, which may have led to a scaled back response. We discovered that BP's oil spill response plan was virtually identical to other oil companies' plans. In a hearing Tuesday, ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson admitted that once spills occur "We are not well-equipped to handle them." BP’s peer oil companies all told us at Tuesday’s hearing that they would not have drilled the well as BP did.

 

Our witness today, Mr. Tony Hayward, is the Chief Executive Officer of BP. Shortly after Mr. Hayward took over as the CEO in 2007, he held a town hall meeting with employees in Houston. At this meeting he discussed the need for BP to be leaner, with fewer people in decision making processes. An article from the September 27, 2007 Guardian newspaper titled “Hayward Says Oil Company Has Become Too Cautious” reads "'Assurance is killing us," Mr Hayward told US staff, noting that too many people were engaged in decision-making leading to excessive cautiousness, something that critics of its safety performance in the US might question."

 

We received notes taken by a BP employee who attended that meeting. The employee's notes summarize Mr. Hayward’s as follows: "I don’t think having all these layers of assurance reduce risk and it can actually increase it. The best way to reduce risk is to have deep technical competence where we need it. Individuals need to be accountable for risk and to manage it.” I find this cavalier attitude towards assessing risk unbelievable given the fact that at the time BP had just been responsible for the largest oil leak in Alaska’s history on the North Slope, as well as the 2005 Texas City refinery explosion which killed 15 workers and injured another 170.

 

I must ask Mr. Hayward whether it was wise to adopt his leaner decision making process with input from fewer people and a new approach to managing risk.

 

Under the leadership of Bob Malone, the former Chairman and President of BP America, BP created an independent office of the Ombudsman headed by Judge Stanley Sporkin. The Ombudsman’s office was established because line workers reported fearing retaliation if they reported safety concerns to management. When the current Chairman and President Lamar McKay took over, I met with him and he suggested that he hoped to improve the culture enough to make the Ombudsman’s office unnecessary so he could shut it down. I urged him not to eliminate the office because it serves a significant role in investigating employee complaints.

 

I am more concerned than ever. I am concerned that in the corporate culture, from BP CEO Tony Hayward down to Chairman and President of BP America Lamar McKay, and Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles there is a willingness to cut costs and take greater risks.

I look forward to hearing Mr. Hayward answer the many hard hitting questions our Committee members will ask today. I hope we will hear honest, contrite, and substantive answers.

 

Mr. Hayward, you owe it to all Americans. We are not a small people, but we wish to get our lives back. For the Americans who live and work on the Gulf Coast, it may take years to get their lives back. For the families of those who were killed or injured, they may never get their lives back. Mr. Hayward, I am sure you will get your life back and land with a golden parachute back in England. But we in America are left with the terrible consequences of BP’s reckless disregard for safety."

[Guest DMosley]

Who lives in a pineapple under the sea? Spongebob Squarepants! Who died in the oil spill because of BP? Spongebob Squarepants.

 

[Guest LAW]

Press Briefing by Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton, 6/21/10

 

Q A couple questions on the oil spill. Feinberg said he wants to speed up the claims process, but it still seems like there aren’t really strict guidelines for what claims would be paid out, what claims are legitimate. Should people in the Gulf be expecting some sort of outline on those claims?

 

MR. BURTON: Well, the claims process is now moving over with Feinberg, where he’s setting up a process by which to handle the $20 billion facility that was set up. So hopefully in the very short term that will be handled. BP right now is already handling some of the claims. And the President has said he wants to make sure that the process if fair, that it’s prompt, and that BP has the money set aside to do exactly what’s necessary in order to pay the claims.

 

Q So would the recommendation to Gulf residents be to wait until you get some guidelines on what’s going to be paid out, or to just file whatever you think is appropriate at this point?

 

MR. BURTON: The recommendation would be to, if you're ready to file, file, and try to get this in process as quickly as possible. If you file now and you want to appeal it later, then you can do that through the facility that Mr. Feinberg is setting up. And he would encourage you to move as fast as you can to reclaim some of the damages that BP owes you

 

Q And I know that BP announced its new total for costs today. The government has so far only announced that its cost were $69 million. Should BP be getting a larger bill?

 

MR. BURTON: Oh, well, we're going to continue to make sure that BP pays for every single penny that they’re responsible for. So we'll be pressing them --

 

Q Is there a new government estimate beyond that $69 million?

 

MR. BURTON: I don't have one for you, but I can guarantee that we'll be pressing them to pay every single dime that they ask, so, yes, there’s going to be more bills.

 

Q Could you get back to us on a new estimate bill?

 

MR. BURTON: As soon as we've got one you will get it.

 

Q I’m wondering that since the meeting the President and other administration officials had with BP, has anything changed at all in terms of BP being more transparent, more forthcoming with information? Anything at all changed significantly since that meeting?

 

MR. BURTON: Well, the thing that changed is there’s now an account with $20 billion in it from which we’re making sure that BP pays out the claims that they owe.

 

Q But in terms of the tone? I mean, there had been this sense that leading up to that meeting, the President was using strong language in calling out BP. Does the administration feel like BP is now working more with the administration, working harder to do what it’s supposed to do in terms of cleaning up the spill and plugging this leak?

 

MR. BURTON: BP has a large set of responsibilities that they need to be attending to in order to make sure that they are cleaning up the oil that’s spilled, plugging the hole that’s still open on the bottom of the ocean, and making sure that folks in the Gulf are paid their claims in a quick, prompt, and fair manner. And we’re making sure that they do all those things. Thad Allen is leading that effort down in the Gulf. But we’re not going to let up as a result of any meeting. We’re going to continue to apply pressure until we feel like they’ve paid what they’ve owed, that they’ve cleaned up the mess that they’ve made, and that the people down there are taken care of.

 

Q Tony Hayward and his yachting habit, does the administration see that as just a problem with Tony Hayward? Or is that reflective of how BP has addressed this entire problem?

 

MR. BURTON: You know, look, if Tony Hayward wants to put a skimmer on that yacht and bring it down to the Gulf, we’d be happy to have his help. But what’s important isn’t what Tony Hayward is doing in his free time; it’s what BP is doing to take responsibility for the mess that they’ve made. You heard Rahm talk about it this weekend. You heard everybody in the administration continue to press BP. They’ve got to clean up the oil. They’ve got to stop that oil from coming out. And they’ve got to make sure that they’re paying the claims to the people of the region.

 

So Tony Hayward, I guess, took himself at his word that he was going to get his life back here. It’s clear that he has. But what’s important to us is that the people in the Gulf get their lives back. It’s not so easy for them to just take a weekend away and forget about everything that's happening down there. They're dealing with it every single day. They're going to have to deal with it for the foreseeable future, and what we think is important is that BP takes its responsibility to make sure that they're doing everything that they can.

 

Q But the new man supposedly in charge on a day-to-day basis -- it was weeks before he even got any oil on his clothes. I mean is there -- is it not just Tony Hayward? Is this reflective of the attitude of BP? And does it make it difficult for them to be a partner of the administration in fighting this thing?

 

MR. BURTON: We’ve fought hard to make sure that BP is living up to their responsibilities. We’re going to continue to do that. There’s been times when we’ve pushed them and they’ve listened in quick order, like when we said that their containment strategy wasn’t fast enough, that it wasn’t good enough. In 48 hours, they turned around and gave us a better plan.

 

So we’re going to continue to push them. And where we think that they're not moving fast enough, we’re going to continue to make sure that they do. But that's what we’re focused on -- not necessarily on how people are spending their free time.

 

Q Oil spill. How does Ken Feinberg -- does Ken Feinberg get compensated out of the $20 billion fund, or separately by BP?

 

MR. BURTON: I don't know. I’ll check.

 

Q And would you waive the Jones Act for Mr. Hayward if he chose to put a skimmer on his yacht? (Laughter.)

 

MR. BURTON: As I’m sure you know, I don't think he would need it, because he’d be so far out at sea. (Laughter.)

 

Q Bill, in light of the BP internal document that has just surfaced regarding the possibility that there may be perhaps two times as much oil spilling into the Gulf, does this administration still think that the initial $20 billion in the fund is adequate?

 

MR. BURTON: Well, keep in mind we never said that $20 billion was a cap. It’s where we started because we feel like we needed to move as quickly as possible to make sure that people were getting their claims paid by this independent facility that was set up. So we’ll continue to apply pressure until we see that all the claims are paid.

 

Q Thank you.

 

MR. BURTON: Yes.

 

Q The President met with General James Amos last Thursday. He’s the nominee for Marine commandant. Are you familiar with that meeting --

 

MR. BURTON: I’m not familiar with the meeting, no.

 

Q Okay, all right, well, I’m wondering since he’s the nominee for Marine commandant, if “don't ask, don't tell” -- if his views on “don't ask, don't tell” are something that the President is taking into consideration? In other words, all the service --

 

MR. BURTON: I’ll have to check and get back to you.

 

Q Okay, thank you.

 

Q Some Republicans are equating the President’s weekend golf games with Tony Hayward’s yacht. I wonder first, is that fair? And if it’s not fair, is it really fair to take off after Tony Hayward’s yachting?

 

MR. BURTON: Well, for starters, I welcomed his yacht to the Gulf. So I don't know if that's taking off on it. But secondly, I don't think that there’s a person in this country that doesn’t think that their President ought to have a little time to clear his mind. And so after a week where the President was taking on the oil spill, got an historic agreement with BP to put aside $20 billion to pay claims; after a day on Friday when he strengthened lobbying ethics rules in the White House; after going to Ohio to talk about the economy and see the progress that's being made in some of those stimulus projects that are happening around the country -- all the different issues that the President is dealing with, I think that a little bit of time to himself on Father’s Day weekend probably does us all good as American citizens that our President is taking that time.

 

Q And do you have an update on the $100 million issue -- the $100 million pot for the moratorium workers? As of Friday, there was still not much clarity about how exactly that’s going to be doled out, since it’s not part of the Feinberg pot. Is the White House even involved in that? And where does that stand?

 

MR. BURTON: Well, we’re involved to the extent that in the legislation that would eliminate the cap on punitive damages for oil companies that’s currently moving its way through Congress, in there, there are ways to take care of oil rig workers that maybe weren’t eligible for unemployment like contractors and folks like that who are working in those outfits.

 

So we’re looking at a variety of different sources where some of those workers can be compensated for their lost work, and we’re going to continue to do that.

 

Q Actually on that line, the President asked his commission to see if they can hasten their findings that impact the moratorium. Do you guys have an ETA on any of that?

 

MR. BURTON: I’ll check.

 

Q Back to the oil rig workers. Can they claim money from the $20 billion, or is that a separate, segregated fund? Can money for the oil rig workers be taken from the $20 billion fund?

 

MR. BURTON: Well, it’s a separate pool of money specifically for the oil workers. Now, if they’re affected somehow as a result of another business that they have or some other claims that they’re filing, I don't think that they’re precluded from making claims to that $20 billion.

 

Q Can it be used to compensate oil rig workers?

 

MR. BURTON: Specifically for -- I'm going to double-check and make a hundred percent sure, but that's what that extra fund is for.

 

Q And I want to make sure, BP’s contribution of $100 million, that’s its liability for that? It was a goodwill gesture -- are they liable for anything?

 

MR. BURTON: It was voluntary on their part, but we're going to keep going to BP as far as we think that it’s necessary to reclaim what we think they owe.

 

Q So they would be on the hook for more than $100 million?

 

MR. BURTON: They’re certainly on the hook for more than just was agreed upon at this meeting last week, so if there are places where we think that we can come to agreement, then we're going to do that.

 

Q I'm sorry, I'm not clear. Will their liability exceed $100 million?

 

MR. BURTON: I think there’s a lot of legal questions that we’re still going over and we'll take those one day at a time.

 

Q Will that be under the 1990 law --

 

MR. BURTON: I think there’s a lot of different legal questions as it relates to that.

 

Q Related to that, a couple days ago I asked Robert if at some point the administration would put forward so the public can look at and all interested parties could look at the actual legal language of the agreements reached with BP, both on this $20 billion fund and the $100 million fund for compensation for these very questions. Is the administration committed to putting that document out so everyone could take a look at it?

 

MR. BURTON: The document is still be finalized itself. You already have the one-pager that explains everything that's in there --

 

Q But as you just said, there are lots of outstanding legal questions and I'm curious if we'll all be able to take a look at that at some point in the future.

 

MR. BURTON: Yes, you sure will.

 

Q You will be putting that out?

 

MR. BURTON: Yes.

 

Q Okay. There was a federal lawsuit or injunction filed today by those in the deepwater industry seeking to reverse the six-month moratorium, arguing that just because there is -- in their words -- one accident, it shouldn’t be able to idle an entire industry. The judge said today that he will rule on this by Wednesday. How involved is the administration in combating that request for an injunction, and what’s, again at this point, the defense for a blanket moratorium on everyone when many argue we can do this safely; one bad actor should not penalize an entire industry and the people who are dependent upon it for employment?

 

MR. BURTON: Well, the defense for the moratorium is that the President thinks we need to do every single thing that we can do to ensure the safety of those workers who are out on those rigs, and until he can say that he’s done everything that he thinks is appropriate to ensure their safety he doesn’t want to move forward on this drilling. So the defense is we got into this mess in large part because of people who cut corners, and we're not going to cut corners as it relates to protecting American workers. And that's why there’s a moratorium.

 

Q First question, over the weekend Sarah Palin tweeted that “Rahm Emanuel is as shallow, narrow-minded, political, irresponsible as they come to falsely claim Barton’s BP comment is GOP philosophy. Rahm, you lie.” Can you give us as unvarnished as possible reaction to that that you may have gotten from Rahm or, if not, then --

 

MR. BURTON: If only Vice President Biden were here today. (Laughter.) Well, I think as a leader of the Republican Party, people would be interested in knowing whether or not she thinks that, as Congressman Barton said, that $20 billion set aside in a fund to pay the claims for people who have been harmed by BP’s oil spill was a “shakedown.” I don't think the American people think that. And I know that Governor Palin spends a lot of time on the speaking circuit and maybe she didn’t see that a lot of leaders in the party -- in her party -- were actually going out there and saying, in fact, this was a shakedown and were defending Barton’s comments. And so I would just say that we're satisfied that we're doing everything we can to take care of the folks in the Gulf region and if she doesn’t want to own Congressman Barton’s comments, that doesn’t surprise me.

 

Q Did Rahm say anything, though, that you're aware of about this tweet from Sarah Palin?

 

MR. BURTON: I did not talk to Rahm about the tweet from Sarah Palin.

 

Q Did you say she’s “a” leader or “the” leader?

 

MR. BURTON: I said “a” leader.

 

Q “A” leader.

 

Q On the subject of Ken Feinberg, one of the criticisms that a lot of conservatives are making about the $20 billion is that it would be administered by Feinberg, who is a political appointee. I wonder if you could speak to that criticism. I guess the theory is that, I don’t know, that he would dole out the compensation in a political fashion.

 

MR. BURTON: I don’t understand the criticism. Ken Feinberg is a leader in issues like this. He showed his abilities in a similar situation with the victims of 9/11. And the President is confident that he’s the right guy to make sure that people in the Gulf are taken care of.

 

Q Yes, sorry. I know the administration has said repeatedly that BP is a responsible party. But over the weekend, BP and Anadarko, a Texas-based oil company, kind of traded barbs over whether Anadarko should be partly responsible because they own 25 percent of the well that is currently gushing. Has the administration had any discussions with Anadarko about their potential liability?

 

MR. BURTON: The administration is going to be -- there’s obviously a lot of different players here in this specific well and in the lease. And we’ll be examining all the responsible parties to ensure that people who share in the responsibility share in paying what they owe.

 

Q Were they contacted as part of the $20 billion claims fund?

 

MR. BURTON: They weren’t part of that, no.

[Guest LAW]

Representative Ed Markey (D-Mass.) released an internal BP document showing that the company's own analysis believed that a worst-case scenario, based on damage to the well bore, could result in 100,000 barrels of oil per day.

 

In the document, BP stated: If BOP and wellhead are removed and if we have incorrectly modeled the restrictions – the rate could be as high as ~ 100,000 barrels per day up the casing or 55,000 barrels per day up the annulus (low probability worst cases)

 

The document can be found here: http://globalwarming.house.gov/files/WEB/flowrateBP.pdf

 

This number is in sharp contrast to BP’s initial claim that the leak was just 1,000 barrels a day. At the time this document was made available to Congress, BP claimed the leak was 5,000 barrels a day, and told Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that the worst case scenario was be 60,000 barrels a day. This document tells a different story.

 

"Considering what is now known about BP’s problems with this well prior to the Deepwater Horizon explosion, including cementing issues, leaks in the blowout preventer and gas kicks, BP should have been more honest about the dangerous condition of the well bore," said Markey, the chairman of the Energy and Environment Subcommittee in the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

 

On Thursday, Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen was asked in his daily briefing about the condition of the well bore. He said there, "So what I would tell you is we don't know exactly the condition of the well bore. And that’s one of the unknowns that we’re managing around in terms of risks. And that's the reason we didn't go, didn’t go to excessive pressures on the top kill and decided that we'd deal with containment and then go for the final relief well."

 

According to Admiral Allen: "I think that one thing that nobody knows is the condition of the well bore from below the blowout preventer down to the actual oil field itself. And we don’t know, we don’t know if the well bore has been compromised or not."

 

What the BP document suggests that if the well bore is compromised or becomes compromised, we now know we could be looking at a flow rate 100 times BP's initial estimate. Even if we can't know for certain the condition of the well bore, we should have known how much oil could flow from it--BP did.

 

"When the oil spill started, BP said it was only 1,000 barrels a day. Now we know it could end up being 100 times larger than that in a worst-case scenario," said Markey. "This document raises very troubling questions about what BP knew and when they knew it. It is clear that, from the beginning, BP has not been straightforward with the government or the American people about the true size of this spill. Now the families living and working in the Gulf are suffering from their incompetence."

 

"BP needs to tell us what it will do if the well bore is compromised and 100,000 barrels per day of oil spills into the ocean. At this point, we need real contingency planning, not a plan with dead scientists and walruses," said Markey.

[Guest BP]

Two systems continue to collect oil and gas flowing from the MC252 well and transport them to vessels on the surface. The first is the lower marine riser package (LMRP) containment cap located on top of the Deepwater Horizon’s failed blow-out preventer (BOP). This system, which was installed on June 3, takes oil and gas to the Discoverer Enterprise. A second system, which started on June 16, is connected directly to the BOP and carries oil and gas through a manifold and hoses to the Q4000 vessel on the surface. The Q4000 uses a specialised clean-burning system to flare both oil and gas captured by this second system.

 

On June 19, a total of approximately 11,050 barrels of oil was collected and 25.6 million cubic feet of natural gas was flared on the Discoverer Enterprise. This is less than recent averages because process facilities were shutdown for part of the day. In the same 24-hour period, 9,990 barrels of oil and 17.8 million cubic feet of natural gas were flared on the Q4000. The total volume of oil recovered from both the LMRP containment cap system and the Q4000 since they became operational is approximately 249,500 barrels.

 

Approximately 103,000 barrels of collected oil were transferred from storage on the Discoverer Enterprise to the Overseas Cascade tanker on June 17 and June 18. The Overseas Cascade left the MC252 site on June 18.

 

The volumes of oil and gas that are captured or flared is being updated twice daily on BP’s website, www.bp.com. The LMRP containment cap and Q4000 systems never before have been deployed at these depths and conditions, and their efficiency and ability to contain or flare the oil and gas cannot be assured.

 

Preparations continue for the next step in containment operations. Construction of the first floating riser remains on schedule for the end of June. The Helix Producer vessel then will be connected to this riser and it is currently anticipated that this system will be available to begin first operations around the end of June or early July.

 

Plans also are being developed for further options to provide additional containment capacity and flexibility. These projects are currently anticipated to begin operations around mid-July.

 

Work on the first relief well, which started May 2, continues and has currently reached a measured depth of 15,936 feet. The second relief well, which started May 16, is at a measured depth of 10,000 feet. Both wells are still estimated to take approximately three months to complete from commencement of drilling.

 

Surface Spill Response and Containment

 

Work continues to collect and disperse oil that has reached the surface of the sea, to protect the shoreline of the Gulf of Mexico, and to collect and clean up any oil that has reached shore.

 

Operations to skim oil from the surface of the water now have recovered, in total, approximately 558,000 barrels (23.4 million gallons) of oily liquid.

 

The total length of containment boom deployed as part of efforts to prevent oil from reaching the coast is now about 2.7 million feet (500 miles), and about 3.9 million feet (740 miles) of sorbent boom also has been deployed.

 

Additional information

 

To date, over 65,000 claims have been submitted and more than 32,000 payments have been made, totalling over $105 million.

 

The cost of the response to date amounts to approximately $2.0 billion, including the cost of the spill response, containment, relief well drilling, grants to the Gulf states, claims paid, and federal costs. On June 16, BP announced an agreed package of measures, including the creation of a $20 billion fund to satisfy certain obligations arising from the oil and gas spill. It is too early to quantify other potential costs and liabilities associated with the incident.

[Guest Bob Bea]

There is a very high level of concern for the integrity of the well.

[Guest NOAA]

NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson returned to Galveston, Texas, on June 11 from an eight-day research mission to investigate the presence and distribution of subsurface oil from the Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill. The mission collected water samples for chemical analysis and tested the feasibility of using acoustic and flourometric scanning to help find potential pockets of subsurface oil clouds. The science team onboard included researchers from NOAA, EPA, the University of New Hampshire and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

 

“NOAA is extremely concerned about the health of the Gulf of Mexico and the well-being of the millions of people who depend on these waters for their livelihoods and pleasure,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D. under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. “I’m pleased that agency and academic scientists continue to innovate and explore ways to bring the absolute best science to inform the response and recovery efforts.”

 

The use of acoustic and flourometric sensors can help sweep large areas to detect anomalies in the water column. Researchers then deployed water sampling devices in that same area to determine if the anomaly was in fact caused by the presence of oil.

Initial Observations

 

Water samples and the acoustic data are currently being analyzed in further detail. Chemical analysis of the water samples is underway to determine if oil is present in the water, in what concentrations, and to identify the source of any oil that is found.

 

Initial observations from the mission include:

 

1. Scientists observed high fluorescence and reduced dissolved oxygen anomalies at around 1,100 meters depth, 7.5 nautical miles southwest of the wellhead. Laboratory analysis of water samples from this area is underway to help determine if this is an indication of subsurface oil.

 

2. Scientists also observed a subtle acoustic anomaly in the same vicinity. Additional analysis of the acoustic data from both NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson and NOAA Ship Gordon Gunter will be needed to make further conclusions. Additional field work is also planned to test this method of using acoustic data to locate underwater oil.

 

3. The Moving Vessel Profiler, which allows data to be collected throughout the water column while the vessel was underway, was equipped with a special fluorometer. The fluorometer was tuned to crude oil and was used to collect flourometric data from the surface down to about 100 meters deep in shallower water from Mobile, Ala. to Port Fourchon, La. The samples were taken while the boat was underway, with the instrument moving from the surface to the bottom and back to the surface approximately every 1.5 miles. While there are only limited data to which to compare, the method has been shown to be an effective way to detect water masses with high fluorometry in the coastal zone.

 

Much of Thomas Jefferson's second mission, currently underway, will be focused on gathering more detailed data in the coastal zone, and collecting supporting data with the conductivity (salinity), temperature and depth (CTD) instrument and water samples to further refine our understanding of potential submerged oil in the coastal zone. Any information on anomalous masses discovered in the coastal zone will be shared with other researchers and emergency responders.

 

4. Scientists observed several seeps of what appears to be natural gas in an area of known gas seepage, located to the southwest of the spill site.

 

Next Steps

 

Once the water samples from this mission are analyzed, scientists will compare those findings with the acoustic and flourometric data to determine if the imaging data are useful in helping find subsea oil at low concentrations.

 

“This was a very important mission for us, and we are anxious to get back the final chemical analysis of the water samples we collected. Should this combined method prove effective, it would help researchers more efficiently target their water sampling in future missions in the area,” said Dr. Larry Mayer, director of the Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping Joint Hydrographic Center at University of New Hampshire.

 

Over the course of the 8-day mission, which began in New Orleans, La., on June 3 and ended in Galveston, Texas, on June 11, scientists collected the following types of data:

 

1. 662 nautical miles of acoustic survey data.

2. 271 "moving vessel profiles" of flourometric data. The moving vessel profiler allows data to be collected throughout the water column while the vessel is underway.

3. 24 CTD profiles, which measure conductivity (salinity), temperature, depth as well as dissolved oxygen throughout the water column.

4. More than 130 discrete water samples at varying depths.

 

Water samples have been sent to Alpha Labs in Mass., and TDI Brooks inTexas for further analysis. The full report of the trip is available online.

[Guest BP]

This morning at approximately 0845 CDT a discharge of liquids was observed from a diverter valve on the drillship Discoverer Enterprise, which is on station at the MC252 wellsite. As a precautionary measure, the lower marine riser package (LMRP) containment cap system, attached to the Discoverer Enterprise, has been moved off the Deepwater Horizon’s failed blow-out preventer (BOP) to ensure the safety of operations and allow the unexpected release of liquids to be analysed.

 

Capture of oil and gas through the LMRP cap is therefore temporarily suspended until such time that the cap can be re-installed. Capture of oil and gas through the BOP’s choke line via a manifold to the Q4000 vessel on the surface continues.

[Guest LAW]

Ask a Responder: Q & A with the Commandant of the Coast Guard

 

Tech. Sgt. Cheryl Hackley is serving as a Public Affairs Specialist with the Deepwater Horizon Response. She’s from the Minnesota Air National Guard’s 133 Airlift Wing in St. Paul, Minn.

 

Admiral Robert Papp is the Commandant of Coast Guard. On his third visit to the Gulf Coast region, he spent a few minutes with Air National Guard Tech. Sgt. Hackley, conveying a message to the responders and discussing the Coast Guard’s role in the effort. His full biography can be found online at: http://www.uscg.mil/seniorleadership/bios/admpapp.pdf

 

Q. What are the top priorities for the Coast Guard in this response?

A. The top priorities for the Coast Guard are to make certain we are getting all right people down here, the right aircraft, ships, and other resources that Adm. {Thad} Allen needs. My responsibility as the Commandant is as a Force Provider, in other words, Adm. Allen is the National Incident Commander and is responsible for the carrying out of the operation for the Secretary of Homeland Security. As the Commandant, I’m providing people and resources. So I make sure we have the right talent down here. We’ve recalled over 1,500 of our Reservists, and we’re sending ships, aircraft and boats from around the country to help out in carrying out the operation.

 

Q. Are there any milestones we can cite as Coast Guard successes in conjunction with the response?

 

A. One of the milestones that I’m very proud of is the fact that we have organized our Vessels of Opportunity out there. We’ve had close to 5,000 people step forward to volunteer their boats to help out in this effort. The good news is its 5,000 boats. The bad news is its 5,000 boats. You’ve got to organize them; some of them may not even have radios or means to track them. So if you just send these boats out there, you’re very ineffective in terms of carrying out the operation. So what we’ve done is we’ve provided a Coast Guard overlay to that, forming them up into groups with task forces and strike teams in there. Each one of these groups comprising about 125 vessels that now ultimately can take surveillance from satellite data, long-range aircraft surveillance, and helicopter surveillance and provide them the information so we can direct them to the oil rather than have them out there searching for oil.

 

Q. If you could talk directly to public about our response efforts, what would you tell them?

 

A. If I was speaking directly to the public about our response efforts, what I would tell them is that they’ve been subjected to an awful lot of pictures of tar balls on the beach, pelicans that have been soaked in oil, and all that is very regrettable and we feel very deeply, emotional about that as well. But I don’t think that the great, positive story about all the hard work being done by all these patriotic Americans, not just the Coast Guard, but the Air Force, the Army, the Navy, NOAA, and other intergovernmental agencies are down here really working hard. One of the terms that someone used with me is ‘Every day is a Monday down here.’ People aren’t getting weekends; they are working 14, 15, 20-hour days in some cases, and just really working their hearts out for the citizens of the Gulf region and for our country to make sure this very challenging situation is taken care of.

 

Q. What has this response taught the Coast Guard as responders for longer-term events?

 

A. I think what it has taught the Coast Guard is that sometimes we have to think out of the box a little bit. We have drilled for years for oil spills, but they’ve been spills that probably were predicated on a finite amount of oil being in the water and then having to respond to that and get it cleaned up. We never conceived of an operation where the oil flow would go on for now 62 days and it’s probably going to go on even much longer until they finally get the well cap. So we’re going to have to think about this. I think it’s just not going to be the Coast Guard, it’s going to be our entire government. It’s going to need to think about permitting of offshore drilling rigs, equipment standards, technology, etcetera; that’s all going to have to be taken into consideration. We’re going to have to look at the lessons learned from this operation to decide how we organize the Coast Guard to respond to these things in the future.