You are in the current Gulf Watchers BP Catastrophe - AUV #443. ROV #442 is here.
Bookmark this link to find the latest Gulf Watchers diaries.
Follow the Gulf Watchers tag on DK4 by going here and clicking on the "+". (The settings probably will not carry over when DK4 goes live and you will have to redo them).
Please RECOMMEND THIS DIARY, the motherships have been discontinued.
Gulf Watchers Diary Schedule
Monday - evening drive time
Wednesday - morning
Friday - morning
Friday Block Party - evening
Sunday - morning
Part one of the digest of diaries is here and part two is here.
Please be kind to kossacks with bandwidth issues. Please do not post images or videos. Again, many thanks for this.
-----------------
BP's complex corporate structure means any damages have to be weighed against the risk of bankrupting its Gulf subsidiary. The Obama administration has sued BP and several of its partners in the oil well disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, potentially exposing them to billions in legal costs. The action, filed in a New Orleans court yesterday, accuses them of violating safety regulations, and seeks unlimited damages to cover the costs of cleaning up the oil, the losses suffered by local businesses, and the damage done to the environment.
Aside from BP, the suit names Transocean, which owned the rig, Anadarko Petroleum and MOEX Offshore, which were minority partners in the well, and Lloyd's of London.
Halliburton, which has come under intense scrutiny in investigations for the faulty design and construction of the cement seal at the bottom of the well, is not listed in the suit. But Attorney General Eric Holder said the complaint could be amended at a later date, and that criminal and civil investigations into the oil disaster would continue.
Holder said all parties would be held accountable:
"I've seen the devastation that this oil spill caused throughout the region, to individuals and to families, to communities and to businesses, to coastlines, to wetlands, as well as to wildlife. We will not hesitate to take whatever steps are necessary to hold accountable those responsible for this spill."
The 27-page complaint filed yesterday accuses BP and the other companies of failing to use the safest available techniques to drill the well and provide continuous monitoring of its conditions, and of failing to protect employees on the rig and the natural resources of the Gulf.
A commission appointed by President Obama this month accused all the firms involved of bad management and communications breakdown, citing nearly a dozen occasions where workers took poor decisions that compromised safety.
Last week, a coastguard investigation heard that the Halliburton employee in charge of monitoring well control missed the first signs of dangerous pressure levels because he was on a cigarette break.
BP already faces hundreds of other law suits filed by fishing interests, hotel chains, restauranteurs, even condo owners who say the spill ruined their holidays. The state of Alabama is also suing BP and other firms connected to the disaster.
-----------------
Well, if we can't get anyone to go for pitchforks and torches... A report from the Guardian UK (just a little glimpse of how they see us across the big pond...) says that nothing as large as the Gulf spill can be totally made right through the courts, but it does feel good to try and sue the bastards. As the Guardian points out, this is America...
The DOJ suit cites damage to the Gulf's natural resources, wildlife and their associated human activities. These natural resources don't just have aesthetic value for a few bird watchers; they have economic value, too. As much as we like to think of ourselves as insulated from nature, we still depend on the complex marine ecosystem for our sustenance, all the way down to the plankton at the bottom of the food chain. The oil executives may tell us we need to be pragmatic in considering the economic effects of environmental controls, but the disaster has already had a pretty big practical effect on the shrimpers, who had 4,200 square miles of Gulf waters closed to their boats last month after tar balls were found in their nets.
US Attorney General Eric Holder, while not being specific with respect to damages, said:
"The full extent of potential injuries, destruction, loss and loss of services is not yet fully known and may not be fully known for many years."
And that sketches out a pretty good picture on how long the wheels of justice will take to grind out a settlement. But is this just kabuki theater?
The lawsuit isn't intended to compensate victims, but to give pause to those managers who are too willing to cut corners on safety. And in the meanwhile, the companies will have to set aside enormous reserves against legal losses, and carry the reserves on their books until all claims are settled. BP's shares fell 3% on the news of the lawsuit. With luck, the oil and gas companies' risk managers will look at the numbers and tell the engineers to tighten up on their safety procedures.
Okay, so they will police themselves, from the goodness of their little shriveled corporate hearts? Let me know how that works out...
Holder still maintains that a civil suit is just the beginning, and the DOJ is "making progress" on possible criminal charges; the criminals as yet unspecified.
The response from BP was as expected; downplaying the significance of the lawsuit.
BP, which owned 65 percent of the lease on the Macondo well, noted that the suit was filed against those designated as "responsible parties" under the law, and that the government's allegations don't constitute any finding of liability. The company said it will respond to the suit "in a timely manner and will continue to cooperate with all government investigations and inquiries," and noted that it has set aside $20 billion to pay all legitimate claims.
The government was required to file its suit by Dec. 15 to participate in the discovery in the consolidated litigation in New Orleans overseen by Judge Carl Barbier. While the Justice Department's suit was filed as a separate action, it is expected to be brought into the consolidated case.
The lead plaintiff attorneys in that case, Steve Herman and Jim Roy, said they look forward to continuing to work with the U.S. government in pursuing justice for all victims of the Deepwater Horizon tragedy.
In seeking to hold the defendants liable "without limitation," the Justice Department also didn't attempt to quantify the amount of money that it's seeking. Efforts to tally the oil spill's toll on the environment are ongoing, so the Justice Department simply said that damages to the environment, real property and personal property far exceeded $75 million.
David Pettit, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said he expects that the federal government will add claims under other environmental laws once the natural resource damage assessment is further along. Unlike the cost per barrel of oil that's spelled out in the Clean Water Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act doesn't say how much a dolphin is worth, Pettit said, so claims under many environmental laws are typically settled rather than going to trial.
Two other parties in the suit, Andarko and MOEX Offshore -- although the Justice Department said they were provided with detailed technical information, and had to approve BP's activities - were very quick to point fingers at BP.
Anadarko Petroleum, which held a 25 percent stake in the Macondo well, described itself as "a non-operating minority interest holder" that was "not involved in the operations or decisions that occurred on the drilling rig." Anadarko said that while it may have obligations under federal law, ultimate responsibility rests with the operator, BP, and it looks to BP to pay all legitimate claims. Anadarko said it stands by statements it made in June that "the operator's decisions and actions on the rig likely amount to gross negligence and/or willful misconduct," which it believes will have a direct bearing on responsibility under the joint operating agreement between the leaseholders.
MOEX Offshore, which held a 10 percent stake in the lease, said it "had no authority or responsibility to direct activities on the Deepwater Horizon," and was reviewing the lawsuit.
A response from the third party in the suit could shed some light on the reasons the dispersant Corexit was use so quickly and so copiously.
Transocean, owner of the actual Deepwater Horizon rig, maintains they are only responsible for oil emanating from the rig on or above the surface of the water, and not from the wellhead... If the oil never reaches the surface, we aren't responsible for it!
The company also said that when BP hired Transocean as its drilling contractor, BP indemnified it and agreed to assume full responsibility. "The calculations, blueprints and step-by-step construction procedures for the Macondo well were crafted by BP engineers and approved by federal regulators. As contractors to BP, Transocean employees executed various steps in those plans at the instruction of BP engineers on the rig and on shore," Transocean said in a statement.
Conspicuous in absence is Halliburton, along with several other companies providing services to the major players.
The suit's omissions are noteworthy. It does not name other companies that provided services in drilling the well, such as Halliburton, which poured the cement at the failed well, or companies that manufactured components of the well that malfunctioned, such as Cameron International, manufacturer of the blowout preventer.
-----------------
The Guardian has a handle on things - that the DOJ lawsuit is a Band-Aid as treatment for a multiple compound fracture:
Even if the lawyers are successful in suing the perpetrators of this spill, though, we still have larger problems with the energy industry. Maybe the lawyers can help prevent future explosions like the one on the Deepwater Horizon, but the planet is still on a slow boil from the burning of fossil fuels.
-----------------
Almost no oil recovered from sand berms
NEW ORLEANS -- The big set of sand barriers erected by Louisiana's governor to protect the coastline at the height of the Gulf oil spill was criticized by a presidential commission Thursday as a colossal, $200 million waste of BP's money so far.
Precious little oil ever washed up on the berms, according to the commission - a finding corroborated by a log of oil sightings and other government documents obtained by The Associated Press through a public records request.
Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal ordered the berms built over the objections of scientists and federal agencies - and secured money from BP to do it - out of frustration over what he saw as inaction by the Obama administration. During the crisis, Jindal boasted that the sand walls were stopping oil from coming ashore, and the idea proved popular in Louisiana.
In its stinging report, however, the commission, appointed by President Obama to investigate the spill, called the project "underwhelmingly effective, overwhelmingly expensive." Still, the panel did concede that the sand might ultimately prove helpful in Louisiana's long-term effort to restore its badly eroded coastline.
Jindal was not too pleased with the commission's report, and disputed the findings on the berms.
"This report is partisan revisionist history at taxpayer expense," the governor said in a statement. "The report's assertion that the berms did not pass the commission's 'cost benefit analysis' is insulting to the thousands of people whose way of life depends on the health of our working coast."
"Partisan revisionist history"? Bobby, just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean it's a conspiracy...
A BP spokeswoman said the company had no comment on the report.
-----------------
California regulators okay major greenhouse gas rules.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Hoping other states will follow suit, California regulators overwhelmingly approved the nation's most extensive system giving owners of power plants, refineries and other major polluters financial incentives to emit fewer greenhouse gases.
The Air Resources Board voted 9-1 Thursday to pass the key piece of California's 2006 climate law — called AB32.
"We're inventing this," said Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the state's air quality board. "There is still going to be quite a bit of action needed before it becomes operational."
Officials said they hope that other states will follow the lead of the world's eighth largest economy. State officials also are discussing plans to link the new system with similar ones under way or being planned in Canada, Europe and Asia.
California is trying to "fill the vacuum created by the failure of Congress to pass any kind of climate or energy legislation for many years now," said Nichols.
But the deniers were also there...
A standing-room only board chambers featured testimony from more than 170 witnesses Thursday. Outside the chambers, a few climate change skeptics held signs reading "Global Warming: Science by Homer Simpson."
Some businesses that would fall under the new rules say the system could dampen California's already flagging economy, complicate lawmakers' efforts to close a $28.1 billion revenue shortfall and lead to an increase in the price of electricity.
The rate increases, however, would still need approval from the state.
-----------------
Don't forget tonight's Block Party, when your hostess is ursoklevar! Urso has been hearing voices...we'll find out what kind and why tonight.
PLEASE visit Pam LaPier's diary to find out how you can help the Gulf now and in the future. We don't have to be idle! And thanks to Crashing Vor and Pam LaPier for working on this!
Previous Gulf Watcher diaries:
The last Mothership has links to reference material.
Previous motherships and ROV's from this extensive live blog effort may be found here.
Again, to keep bandwidth down, please do not post images or videos.