TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Archive | May, 2010

Feds Ignored 1994 Federal Plan, No Fire Boom in Sight

By on 04 May 2010

–updated–

“There is no good answer to this,” one senior administration official said. “There is no readily apparent solution besides one that could take three months. … If it doesn’t show the impotence of the government, it shows the limits of the government.” – White House in P.R. ‘panic’ over spill

The Politico headline not exactly what the Obama White House wanted to see, and it was a jolt coming across Mike Allen’s Playbook first thing this morning. However, regarding the “limits of government,” which is certainly true, it’s also about following procedures already in place to help the feds get it right when a catastrophe occurs. However, when you’re a president who inherits an institutionalized mess at the agency who manages offshore oil drilling it complicates things exponentially.

First to some potential good news.

“Right now what people are fearing has not materialized,” said Edward B. Overton, professor emeritus of environmental science at Louisiana State University and an expert on oil spills. “People have the idea of an Exxon Valdez, with a gunky, smelly black tide looming over the horizon waiting to wash ashore. I do not anticipate this will happen down here unless things get a lot worse.” [...]

Other experts said that while the potential for catastrophe remained, there were reasons to remain guardedly optimistic.

“The sky is not falling,” said Quenton R. Dokken, a marine biologist and the executive director of the Gulf of Mexico Foundation, a conservation group in Corpus Christi, Tex. “We’ve certainly stepped in a hole and we’re going to have to work ourselves out of it, but it isn’t the end of the Gulf of Mexico.”

Too bad it was delivered by people who have vested interests, as Daniel Stone of Newsweek reveals.

Pres. Obama said, “Let me be clear, BP is responsible for this leak. BP will be paying for the bill.” Like the money is the only thing that matters.

Many questions remain. What about the federal response? Someone in position of authority at the federal level has some explaining to do.

ABC has also picked up this little tidbit, which was first posted by the Mobile Press Register.

If U.S. officials had followed up on a 1994 response plan for a major Gulf oil spill, it is possible that the spill could have been kept under control and far from land.

The problem: The federal government did not have a single fire boom on hand.

But in order to conduct a successful test burn eight days after the Deepwater Horizon well began releasing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf, officials had to purchase one from a company in Illinois. [...]

It’s obvious that the federal response plan trip-wire that could have mitigated some of the serious damage simply wasn’t followed.

When federal officials called, Elastec/American Marine, shipped the only boom it had in stock, Jeff Bohleber, chief financial officer for Elastec, said today.

At federal officials’ behest, the company began calling customers in other countries and asking if the U.S. government could borrow their fire booms for a few days, he said.

A single fire boom being towed by two boats can burn up to 1,800 barrels of oil an hour, Bohleber said. That translates to 75,000 gallons an hour, raising the possibility that the spill could have been contained at the accident scene 100 miles from shore.

“They said this was the tool of last resort. No, this is absolutely the asset of first use. Get in there and start burning oil before the spill gets out of hand,” Bohleber said. “If they had six or seven of these systems in place when this happened and got out there and started burning, it would have significantly lessened the amount of oil that got loose.”

Someone needs to ask and have answered why it took government officials a full week to do a test burn, something that was clearly a first step scenario.

Some will call this the blame game similar to Robert Gibbs saying the Obama administration would keep the “boot on the throat” of BP, this time turning to the Obama administration. However, this is what government is put in place to do and why we pay taxes. Yet once again it appears like federal officials may have failed on a serious level by simply not following a 1994 response plan already set in place.

What we’re seeing is that whatever political party is in power, nobody is prepared for massive federal disasters when they occur. It’s the old saying, you have to have been there before.

Meanwhile BP is pointing the finger at Transocean’s drilling rig, which is what is believed to have failed. What BP’s Hayward cannot defend is the safety record of its company, which has been criticized before.

It’s about competence, not politics. This time it’s happening on a Democrat’s watch and so far it’s been a game of catch up, simply because the Obama administration failed federal management 101: get out in front of a catastrophe, which I believe it took too long for them to do.

But wafting over the feds’ daunting job under Obama is the reality of another nightmare he inherited.

This one run down by the Wall Street Journal last week that had to do with cementing, which brought in a company that has been at the losing end of ethical lapses throughout the last decade: Hallibruton. Couple this with the corruption of Minerals Management Service (Interior Department division responsible for offshore drilling), and what you’ve got is a toxic set up for historic failures. Somewhere between 2000 and 2003, when policy was changed, with the oil industry pushing back on new regulations, the damage was done. From the Wall Street Journal last week, “Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device”:

U.S. regulators have considered mandating the use of remote-control acoustic switches or other back-up equipment at least since 2000. After a drilling ship accidentally released oil, the Minerals Management Service issued a safety notice that said a back-up system is “an essential component of a deepwater drilling system.”

The industry argued against the acoustic systems. A 2001 report from the International Association of Drilling Contractors said “significant doubts remain in regard to the ability of this type of system to provide a reliable emergency back-up control system during an actual well flowing incident.”

By 2003, U.S. regulators decided remote-controlled safeguards needed more study. A report commissioned by the Minerals Management Service said “acoustic systems are not recommended because they tend to be very costly.” [...]

William Galston at TNR asks some interesting questions, including that we shouldn’t do more drilling until we get some answers. Sounds like a plan to me.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

Law Enforcement Tracks Down Failed Times Square Bomber

By on 04 May 2010

Well, what do you know. It doesn’t take mass hysteria and waving of wild-eyed rhetoric to get the job done. Meanwhile, Sect. Janet Napolitano, Sen. Schumer and Rep. Peter King prove that when you don’t know anything you should err on the side of saying so.

It also helps when the reason the bomb failed was the man planning it had fertilizer, but not the right kind that would have exploded. However, everyone knows it could have gone the other way.

But there is no need to panic. Waving your arms and freaking out over a foiled terrorist getting Miranda rights read to him doesn’t mean anything except that the U.S. takes all criminals seriously, but that voiding their rights doesn’t keep anyone safer. Only good police work, citizen involvement, and investigative follow through can accomplish this task.

On the other side of panic are public officials and legislators talking because there is a camera in front of them, pulling statements out of PR bags instead of simply stating facts. The first I’m led to is Sect. Janet Napolitano’s statement on Sunday.

“When they say it’s certainly a one-off, it’s an appropriate question to say, ‘How do you know that; was this based on real briefings?’ ” said John Dinges, a professor at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. “To me, the most basic question in journalism is, ‘How do you know that?’ They won’t always tell you, but you can gauge a lot by their response.”

Jake Tapper did not follow up with that question.

When Napolitano said “at this point I have no information that it’s anything other than a one-off,” it’s clear she had absolutely no evidence to deliver a verdict, with “at this point” not revealing what it is officials did know.

Next was Sen. Chuck Schumer’s “The odds are quite high that this was a lone wolf” was equally clueless, because there weren’t enough facts in to make that statement. Pete King swinging for the wingnut fence when he invoked South Park: “the whole issue with ‘South Park,’ which Islamic terrorists were threatening to have retribution for.”

The S.U.V. packed with the makings of a car bomb was parked near the headquarters of Viacom, the conglomerate that owns Comedy Central, the cable network that carries the cartoon series Mr. King was talking about. [...] Mr. King, the Republican congressman, said the “South Park” theory was “one possibility out of a hundred.” And, as it happens, Comedy Central’s offices are in Manhattan, but not in the building in Times Square.

The idiocy of Pete King’s unrelenting stupidity continues unabated by any effort at self-reflection.

So, with the help of alert citizens, a sharp-eyed vendor and the woman who sold the man the Pathfinder, the U.S. law enforcement complex, from local to FBI and beyond, tracked down the suspect at J.F.K. Airport before he was about to board a plane to Dubai, and he will be arraigned today. Additionally, there may be evidence that a second person was involved, with clues in the minivan leading to further leads. It’s an ongoing investigation with many investigative tributaries yet to be mined.

As Michael Bloomberg said, if you see something, say something:

Bloomberg praised police officers, but also took time to acknowledge the efforts of average citizens. A Times Square vendor, Duane Jackson, first noticed the SUV and alerted police.

“He saw something and he said to the cop, ‘Hey, this is strange,’” said the mayor. “That’s exactly what you need.”

What we’ve learned just this morning is that it was a disposable cellphone that led FBI agents to the Pakistani man who allegedly prepared the failed car bomb. “They were able to basically get one phone number and by running it through a number of databases, figure out who they thought the guy was,” on official told POLITICO.

Three cheers for the good guys and alert citizens who, regardless that the would be bomber was foiled by his own ineptitude, proved ready for the real thing.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

Nukes, Nuts, and Denial

By on 03 May 2010

We therefore face a stark, unattractive reality. There are only two options: Iran gets nuclear weapons, or someone uses pre-emptive military force to break Iran’s nuclear fuel cycle and paralyze its program, at least temporarily. There is no possibility the Obama administration will use force, despite its confused and ever-changing formulation about the military option always being “on the table.” That leaves Israel, which the administration is implicitly threatening not to resupply with airplanes and weapons lost in attacking Iran—thereby rendering Israel vulnerable to potential retaliation from Hezbollah and Hamas. [...] – Get Ready for a Nuclear Iran, by John Bolton

Good for our side. Walking out on Ahmadinejad was a good way to start the week. I only wish Harry Truman was still alive to give that raving megalomaniac a history lesson about the war against Japan. Maybe HBO should send the Iranian thug a copy of “The Pacific,” you know, just to get him started. But Ahmadinejad lecturing Barack Obama to join the “humane movement” should come with a laugh track.

But contrary to John Bolton’s blathering, Israel can attack Iran with their conventional force, a mighty machine, if threatened. Israel also has nukes, which Bolton conveniently blocks from his brain, adhering to the U.S. secrecy pact we’ve had with Israel, which has never rendered the obvious a secret. I guess Mr. Bolton has also forgotten Bush 41′s reaction when Israel built settlements in 1991 (he denied loan guarantees, and received anti-Semitic letters as a result.). Of course Israel’s Netanyahu must protect his nation. Nobody should argue otherwise. However, Israel and the U.S., which will supply $2.7 billion of military aid to Israel this year, also have separate priorities in the Middle East, which while making us allies in many areas, also puts us at odds on other issues.

Sect. Clinton is in an unenviable position right now. She’s leading the U.S. delegation to the review conference for the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which started today. Egypt is putting forth a proposal for a nuclear-free Middle East. Hard to get there if Israel won’t even publicly admit they have nuclear weapons, with the U.S. supporting this adolescent posturing through grandfathered policy.

From Eli Lake:

[...] For 40 years, the United States has been a partner in Israel’s nuclear opacity as well. In a deal fashioned in 1969 between President Nixon and Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, the United States does not pressure Israel to join the treaty, which would require the Jewish state to give up its nuclear weapons. Israel, in turn, does not acknowledge it has the weapons.

The Egyptian working paper of March 2010 on the nuclear-free Middle East threatens to upset this secret understanding. Specifically, it would require member states of the NPT to “disclose in their national reports on the implementation of the resolution on the Middle East all information available to them on the nature and scope of Israeli nuclear facilities and activities, including information pertaining to previous nuclear transfers to Israel.”

The Egyptian working paper also calls for a conference by 2011 on making the Middle East free of nuclear weapons and a special envoy to coordinate such a conference. [...]

Israel has every right to not sign the NPT, as well as continue with their nuclear weapons program, which Amb. Michael Oren was forced to number by Fareed Zakaria last year. Israel isn’t fooling anyone with their silence, nor is the U.S. by abetting it, and since Israel believes their security depends on nukes they should defend their right to their arsenal, let the world’s condemnation fall where it may.

In fact, Israeli transparency might even lead the way to real negotiation and diplomacy that actually means something, instead of smoke and mirror gamesmanship while everyone pretends there’s a reason for continued Israeli stonewalling on what everyone knows.

Let’s just quit playing these silly games that Israel should be held to a different standard on transparency than every other nation around the globe, minus India, Pakistan and North Korea (which withdrew from the NPT in 2003).

Again from Lake’s article:

The official Israeli statement, for example, from the International Atomic Energy Agency conference in September endorsed the long-term goal of a nuclear-free Middle East.

It also said, “in our view, progress towards realizing this vision cannot be made without a fundamental change in regional circumstances, including a significant transformation in the attitude of states in the region towards Israel.”

A “transformation of attitude” is needed in the U.S. as well, though I’m not holding my breath. Sen. Chuck Schumer illustrates the infantile thinking of the political class in this country where Israel is concerned. Mr. Schumer revealed that there is no criticism allowed towards Israel, regardless of whether it’s well directed or not. Any politician daring to separate United States interests when necessary, even though many of our goals align with Israeli goals, is destined to find him- or herself unemployed.

Israel needs to become transparent about their nuclear arsenal, and the U.S. has to help our friend and quit accepting the double standard that allows Israeli opacity, which is no longer serving them or us, let alone peace across the greater Middle East.

Read full story · Comments { 31 }

Politifact v. BP’s Lamar McKay: Statements ‘Barely True’

By on 03 May 2010

[...] The process is tricky. A 2007 study by the U.S. Minerals Management Service found that cementing was the single most-important factor in 18 of 39 well blowouts in the Gulf of Mexico over a 14-year period. – Halliburton in spotlight in gulf spill probe – Investigators look at the company’s role in cementing the deepwater drill hole in the Gulf of Mexico. Transocean and BP also face questioning.

In Sean Hannity’s fervor to call BP’s oil catastrophe “Obama’s Katrina,” a waft of desperation floated into the ether as he squealed on wingnut radio. Maybe that’s because the rules that might have stopped the Gulf disaster were rendered under former oil man and Pres. George W. Bush.

“There was a big debate under the Bush administration whether or not to require additional oil drilling safeguards but [federal regulators] decided not to require any additional mandatory safeguards, believing the industry would be motivated to do it themselves,” Carl Pope, Chairman of the Sierra Club told ABC News. – BP Fought Safety Measures at Deepwater Oil Rigs – Owner of Louisiana Oil Well Objected to System That Would Have Shut Off Spill

It follows a Republican pattern that businesses will regulate themselves. Reagan thought the same thing and look where that got us.

I’ve known or come into contact with some truly great oil men in my life. But BP’s Lamar McKay doesn’t appear to be one of them. In fact, he’s the type of guy that gives good oil men a very bad name, a shadow of what an energy man with the dual responsibility to watch over the earth’s ecosystem acts like.

As an example, BP has been ordered to stop circulating settlement offers (via Memorandum) to coastal Alabamans in exchange for an agreement not to sue.

BP had distributed a contract to fishermen it was hiring that waived their right to sue BP and required confidentiality and other items, sparking protests in Louisiana and elsewhere.

I know it’s silly to expect, but instead of hustling residents likely decimated by BP’s unpreparedness for what drilling 5,000 ft down into the ocean bed might cause, as a veteran oil expert with whom I was trading emails on BP’s colossal catastrophe in the Gulf mentioned first, where’s the prostrate apology from BP? I know, can’t reveal culpability, even in the face of naked guilt. Instead they’re playing let’s make a deal with coastal residents, coupled with a cover your ass mentality that is immoral.

Where’s the contrite nature that should come with going into someone’s home and trashing the place? Instead, as Politifact ran it down after Mr. McKay, BP’s chairman and president of BP America, was on “The Week,” all we got was malarkey. Here’s a snippet of the back and forth, with Politifact going after McKay, finding everything he said “barely true.”

“Just a few months ago, a BP executive protested proposed new safety regulations for oil rigs, writing to the government that quote, ‘while BP is supportive of companies having a system in place to reduce risks, accidents, injuries and spills, we are not supportive of extensive proscriptive regulations.’ Will BP continue to fight and lobby against safety regulations?” Tapper asked.

“Well, I would characterize the letter you’re talking about slightly differently,” McKay said. “That letter was in response to the government’s request for input on safety regulations that the MMS was looking at. The rest of the letter actually recommends improvements and specific recommendations around safety regulations should they choose to change them. So we’re not fighting anything about safety. Safety is the number one priority. We’re going to figure out what happened here, and that is going to help the MMS and help ourselves and help the industry get safer, so we’re not fighting anything about safety.”

The new rules imposed by the Minerals Management Service in June of 2009 were specific. Bottom line is that BP didn’t like them, thinking self-regulation would be better… for BP.

Politifact eviscerates McKay’s talking points, making him someone no one should trust.

We compared BP’s suggestions for changes to the MMS regulations. Some of the suggestions are for language changes or technical fixes. But we found that in many cases, BP was suggesting changes that would give the company fewer responsibilities or more flexibility under the proposed rules.

Here are a few examples:

On Hazards Analysis, BP suggested language to make it clear that BP doesn’t have to develop procedures for third-party companies. It also said it shouldn’t have to develop analyses for property damage if the damage doesn’t affect worker safety or the environment.

For Operating Procedures, BP suggested language so that all employees would not have access to all safety procedures, but only to documentation that specifically apply to their jobs.

On Mechanical Integrity, BP objected to language that required equipment to meet manufacturer’s recommendations or specifications. A company’s own specifications should be sufficient, the letter said. “Many of our inspection and testing requirements, while meeting regulations, are risk based in approach,” the letter said.

On regular safety audits, BP said that audits should occur based on “performance and risk rather than a prescribed schedule.”

Overall, the ideas in BP’s letter point toward limiting the impact of new rules and making them apply to more narrow circumstances.

McKay told Tapper that, “The rest of the letter actually recommends improvements and specific recommendations around safety regulations should they choose to change them.” This gives the impression that BP was trying to work with regulators to make the safety regulations better, to make conditions safer. But most of what the letter suggests are ways to make the regulations less of a burden for BP. Certainly this is an “improvement” from BP’s perspective, but we don’t see how it makes safety “the number one priority.” So we rate his statement Barely True.

The very sad truth is that nothing BP does now can repair the damage done to the Gulf coastal region, especially where the environment is concerned. The economic loss to residents will be untold.

Unfortunately, from the “drill, baby, drill” Sarah Palin pack to Pres. Obama’s wait now, drill later, no one has come close to offering corporate assurances that will mitigate the dangers of another catastrophic oil disaster, if oil companies are allowed to drill at depths of 5,000 ft.

Pres. Obama’s support for drilling offshore is predicated upon America’s dependence on fossil fuel, which will last into the next generation.

That’s because the United States hasn’t the fortitude, the discipline, or the foresight to move beyond 20th century answers to a long-term challenge that no leader today wants to tackle.

Pres. Obama is just another politician with no answers, offering visits to destroyed areas of America, because another corporation screwed up. From mining disasters to oil spills, Obama hasn’t any more of a clue on energy as the last Republican.

It’s on days like these that I think of Al Gore, and just what this country lost when the Supreme Court handed the presidency to Bush.

Ocean life impact pictures via Huffington Post.

TM Note: This essay has been updated to include information on Haliburton, via LA Times.

Read full story · Comments { 13 }

Sunday Morning After, with Bill Maher Blasting Obama Over Oil

By on 02 May 2010

“Look,” Obama said, “obviously I’ve learned this year that politics can be a tough business. But there are times you can’t help but laugh. You know what really tickles me? Eric Massa,” he said of the former Democratic congressman from New York State who resigned amid allegations of sexual harrassment of staffers. “Apparently, Eric claimed that (White House Chief of Staff) Rahm Emanuel came up to him in the House locker room, stark naked, screaming obscenities at him. “To which I say, welcome to my world.” – W.H. C’spondents: Humor birthing room

A “crude car bomb” was found in New York City. However, Sect. Janet Napolitano says there’s no evidence that it was “anything other than a one-off.”

A crude car bomb of propane, gasoline and fireworks was discovered in a smoking Nissan Pathfinder in the heart of Times Square on Saturday evening, prompting the evacuation of thousands of tourists and theatergoers on a warm and busy night. Although the device had apparently started to detonate, there was no explosion, and early on Sunday the authorities were still seeking a suspect and motive.

“We are very lucky,” Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said at a 2:15 a.m. press conference. “We avoided what could have been a very deadly event.”

As for what Bill Maher said on Friday night, I’m all over it, Bill. Because the truth is that since the BP oil catastrophe, Obama’s mantra of wait now, drill later, seen through the prism of our spill, baby, spill reality, is not all that much different from what the right-wing crowd like Sarah Palin is promoting.

MAHER: The Teabag, well, you know they always say they feel like neither Party represents them. That’s how I feel this week. So Teabaggers, you’re not alone. And the reason why is because yes, I’m mad at the oil company who didn’t obviously build their rig well enough. I’m mad at America in general because we should have gotten off the oil tit starting in the ’70s. I’m mad at the people who go, “Drill, baby, drill.” And by the way, they should turn up on the Gulf Coast and start cleaning up the birds with their “Drill, baby, drill” t-shirts. But I’ll tell you who I’m really mad at which is Barack Obama. Couple of weeks ago, the President, our President said, “It turns out the oil rigs today generally don’t cause oil spills. They are technologically very advanced.” Now if, if I was quoting George Bush, this crowd would be laughing in hysterics.

LAURA TYSON, ECONOMIST AND FORMER CLINTON ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yes they would.

MAHER: So, why isn’t Barack Obama getting more shit for this? I think he should.

…and since it’s Sunday, Sect. Clinton will be on with David Gregory, who finally gets a new set. It’s marvelous and long overdue. We’ll now have to see how they use it.

As for the Gulf spill, beyond yesterday’s phone call with Denis McDonough, Com. Thad Allen and John Brennan, I reached out to oil experts on the matter. One of the big critiques so far is that the PR effort is lousy, though that’s my wording not theirs. Senior officials need to do more than be on media calls. There’s an overall outreach effort that is also lacking, according to experts who know the drill. But everyone agrees that BP will be judged on how effective they are in stopping the leak at the source, not to mention their on PR efforts, which begin today on “This Week.” I also heard beefs about the constant mantra that BP will pay for the spill, which is hardly the only issue rising to the top on this one. How the catastrophe will be managed is the bottom line. BP is looking like they were in no way prepared for what has erupted in the Gulf, which lends extra weight to what one long-time oil pro said, which is that you have to have a structure in place to handle the response management of a catastrophe of this size; not simply concoct one after something explodes. Pres. Obama’s on his way there today.

What’s on your mind today? Consider this an open news thread.

Read full story · Comments { 28 }

Platitudes from Palin, Obama Chants Wait Now, Drill Later, While Rush Questions Timing

By on 01 May 2010

UPDATE (4:20 pm) – Call run by Denis McDonough, with Commandant Thad Allen (the go-to guy after Hurricane Katrina), and John Brennan notes: Tweets here. Thad Allen said the history making BP oil spill in the Gulf began with a “catastrophic explosion.” Goal is to 1) “stop this thing at the source; extensive pressure on BP; 2) attack oil on the sea; 3) protect resources; 4) recover and mitigate what happens in the area. Thad Allen: “impossible” to ascertain how much oil being released, from 1,000 – 5,000 gallons, but it doesn’t matter if the source leak cannot be stopped. John Brennan: Obama “fully engaged from beginning.. no effort be spared.” Clear Obama is leaning forward on this disaster. Reuters’ question on BP: Will be judged by whether they can stop the oil at the source. “BP is the responsible party,” says Allen. Com. Thad Allen has talked to Adm. Mike Mullen on possible suport. 1st goal is to “stop this thing @ source… extensive pressure on BP.” Dept of Defense and BP are working together. Allen said C130s, which can cover 250 acres of oil, are dropping dispersants from the air, which is being effective. Thad Allen, good news: BP put pipe 5,000 ft down using dispersants as test; “appeared visually to have impact.” Watching ecosystem. Contact with shoreline depends on weather, said Thad Allen; close to Louisiana right now, including Mississippi and Alabama; booms at “1 million feet.” A lot of oil out there, so the “real question is when and where.” Question on relief well: “staging equipment in preparation to drill; put platform in place… that has all started… vessels have arrived on scene.” Couple of rigs have shut down due to “proximity of oil,” but will follow up. Most incidences deal with water level problems, “until we cap the well we have a indeterminate amount of oil,” so the history making part of this spill is the depth of the well at 5,000 ft, as well as the equipment required (including robots) to get the job done. The total number of breeches of the BP catastrophe is now three, according to Denis McDonough, who closed the call. Further updates available at deepwaterhorizonresponse.com

___________________original post below__________________

Documents obtained by the AP reveal British Petroleum wasn’t at all prepared for the calamity their incompetence has produced. A BP “environmental study” judged it “unlikely” that a major oil spill would occur.

The plan for the Deepwater Horizon well, filed with the federal Minerals Management Service, said repeatedly that it was “unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities.” Robert Wiygul, an Ocean Springs, Miss.-based environmental lawyer and board member for the Gulf Restoration Network, said he doesn’t see anything in the document suggesting BP addressed the kind of technology needed to control a spill at that depth of water.

But spill, baby, spill BP did.

From the National Audubon Society.

The “drill here, drill now” crowd’s slogan seems even more sophomoric than it was when they first uttered it. Never mind that Pres. Obama took up their charge.

However, for an Alaskan, let alone a former governor who lived through the trauma, economic calamity, and environmental catastrophe of Exxon-Valdez spill, Sarah Palin’s Facebook musings on BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig Gulf disaster, that may be bigger than what Alaska experienced, is all platitudes, no substance.

That said, Pres. Obama’s statement isn’t anything to write home about either: he’s still behind his offshore plan, but just wants to wait to learn more on how the BP disaster occurred.

None of our leaders understand what BP has done, the possible negligence, which perhaps rises to the level of corporate indifference mixed with sheer, unadulterated incompetence. They look like the Mickey Mouse of oil production at this point, no offense intended to the great mouse.

That BP was never concerned about the wildlife damage, the horrible consequences to bird life seems obvious, otherwise they would have had a plan in place in case the worse happened. Calling it “unlikely,” then not preparing is beyond contemptible. Beyond the birds, there are sperm whales, as well as bluefin tuna, with sea turtles in danger as they make their way to nest in Southern states, all of them at risk.

This is part of what Sarah had to say:

… As an Alaskan, I can speak from the heart about the tragedy of an oil spill. For as long as I live, I will never forget the day the Exxon-Valdez ran aground on Bligh Reef and millions of gallons of North Slope crude poured into the waters of our beautiful Prince William Sound. The spill was devastating to so many Alaskans who, like my own family, make their living on the water from our commercial fishing industry. “Heartbreaking” was the word my husband Todd, an Alaska Native and trained oil spill responder, used to describe the scene as we watched it unfold on land and water that we feel is sacred.

Alaskans understand the tragedy of an oil spill, and we’ve taken steps to do all we can to prevent another Exxon tragedy, but we are still pro-development. We still believe in responsible development, which includes drilling to extract energy sources, because we know that there is an inherent link between energy and security, energy and prosperity, and energy and freedom. Production of our own resources means security for America and opportunities for American workers. We need oil, and if we don’t drill for it here, we have to purchase it from countries that not only do not like America and can use energy purchases as a weapon against us, but also do not have the oversight that America has.

In the coming days, there will be hearings to discover the cause of the explosion and the subsequent leak. Actions will be taken to increase oversight to prevent future accidents. Government can and must play an appropriate role here. If a company was lax in its prevention practices, it must be held accountable. It is inexcusable for any oil company to not invest in preventative measures. They must be held accountable or the public will forever distrust the industry. [...]

Breton Island Bird Sanctuary

Spokespeople for spill, baby, spill like Sarah should take a breath before jumping from Oh This Is Terrible, Prayers Go Forth to We Can Still Drill Here, Drill Now, You Betcha!

Oh, and by all means, after the tragedy occurs let’s make sure BP is held accountable.

What about legislators acting like stewards of our great nation, while holding corporations like BP accountable for being prepared for the worst before it actually (and inevitably) occurs?

The BP oil rig that collapsed on the ocean floor is the size of two football fields. This BP drilling site was 5,000 feet down, with no one ever having to deal with a leak of this size at this depth. However, from the looks of things BP has simply left this mess in the Coast Guard’s lap. That they’ll pay for it isn’t enough.

When corporations go exploring down to the depths of 5,000 feet, public officials and politicians, even spill, baby, spill spokespeople like Sarah Palin, should be prepared with more than platitudes when catastrophic environmental and economic disaster threatens a region. Politicians like Palin and, yes, even Pres. Obama need to put down their drill down, drill deep sloganeering on behalf of an industry that is flying blind in the deep blue sea, to take a moment to put in place an immediate release emergency clean up policy in case the inevitable happens.

As for BP, I’m obviously no oil expert, but you don’t have to be one to guess that this corporation had absolutely no clue what they were doing down at 5,000 ft. below sea level, drilling where few have gone before. Robots and remotely operated vehicles on the ocean floor aren’t enough to guarantee no damage will be done, with a blow-out preventer valve not seeming near enough of a back up. We’re finding out what happens when it fails to work, with the added horror that BP had absolutely no back up if the blow-out preventer valve didn’t seal.

Pres. Obama is headed towards the Gulf region to survey the damage. You know, because after Rush, Sean Hannity and the entire wingnut radio band started calling this “Obama’s Katrina” (with the New York Times jumping in too) he has to look like he isn’t George W. Bush. However, Rush’s carnival barking went beyond bizarre when he implied it was all some big plan. It’s not as good as his Bill Clinton drug runner rant, but it’s still sci-fi worthy:

RUSH: I want to get back to the timing of the blowing up, the explosion out there in the Gulf of Mexico of this oil rig. Since they’re sending SWAT teams down there now this changes the whole perspective of this. Now, lest we forget, ladies and gentlemen, the carbon tax bill, cap and trade that was scheduled to be announced on Earth Day. I remember that. And then it was postponed for a couple of days later after Earth Day, and then of course immigration has now moved in front of it. But this bill, the cap-and-trade bill, was strongly criticized by hardcore environmentalist wackos because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling and nuclear plants, nuclear plant investment. So, since they’re sending SWAT teams down there, folks, since they’re sending SWAT teams to inspect the other rigs, what better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig? I’m just noting the timing here.

Idiocy reins on the right.

But as the oil reaches perishable wetlands, once again because of the short-sightedness of her leaders, America is reduced to the pathetic, fossil fuel dependent, indebted lumbering empire, with no energy enlightenment to be seen over the oil slicked shores of the Southern Gulf coastal region, which is just the latest proof of a reality that no politician in America wants to face.

The problem with the April 20 spill is that it isn’t really a spill: It‘s a gush, like an underwater oil volcano. A hot column of oil and gas is spurting into freezing, black waters nearly a mile down, where the pressure nears a ton per inch, impossible for divers to endure. Experts call it a continuous, round-the-clock calamity, unlike a leaking tanker,which might empty in hours or days.” – BP’s containment problem is unprecedented

Read full story · Comments { 29 }