The manufacturer of Corexit dispersant says it was the government's fault if the substance was applied incorrectly. NIH looking for more volunteers in health study. North Texas has 11 earthquakes in the last 40 days. Shell's Arctic plans go awry, and they get poked, along with BP, by protesters in the UK. BP investigated by Serious Fraud Office. Long Beach woman sentenced in fraud case. New oil discovery in Gulf.
You are in the current Gulf Watchers BP Catastrophe - AUV #592. AUV #591 is here.
Follow the Gulf Watchers tag by going clicking on the heart next to the Gulf Watchers tag at the bottom of this diary. |
Follow the Gulf Watchers Group by going here and clicking on the heart next to where it says "Follow" in the Gulf Watchers Group profile on the right. You will have to scroll down a little to see the profile. |
Bookmark this link to find the latest Gulf Watchers diaries. |
Gulf Watchers Diaries will be posted on every other Tuesday afternoon.
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.
"We can't be held accountable for the government's f*ckups..." --- Nalco
Nalco, the company that manufactures the oil dispersant Corexit - used in the "cleanup" operations after the BP gusher -has requested they be dropped from any litigation involving a class-action settlement related to health and medical problems stemming from contact with the substance.
The request, submitted to US District Judge Carl Barbier in New Orleans, asks that the case be dropped with prejudice - meaning Nalco will not be responsible for any health claims...ever.
This latest twist only adds to the insanely complicated legal web around health claims after the spill.
The proposed class action settlement would include compensation for past and future medical problems related to the spill. Plaintiffs must opt out of the settlement by Oct. 1 if they want to pursue legal action independent of the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee.
Plaintiffs who believe they were harmed by Corexit and opt out of the settlement essentially are gambling that they can win higher damage awards through individual lawsuits against Nalco or the companies that used its dispersant.
“The only way a cleanup worker could bring a suit against Nalco would be to refuse the settlement and not be part of the settlement class,” said Robert Verchick, an environmental law professor at Loyola University who has followed the case. “If you do that, you would risk not getting what you are getting under the settlement.”
Nalco contends that the Clean Water Act (i.e., the US government) was in effect in the cleanup situation, and they, Nalco, were merely following government orders...thus, they cannot be held responsible if anything went wrong.
“Nalco provided Corexit at the express request of the federal on-site coordinators,” Nalco attorneys wrote in the dismissal motion filed in May. “Nalco supplied a product that was and had been listed on the federal government’s list of approved dispersants for decades and that the government repeatedly approved for use during the response.”
It wasn't our fault. We were in Cleveland at the time...
The court-appointed Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee argues that all parties (BP et.al, including Nalco) should not be released from responsibility, either in class-action or independent litigation.
“We believe that BP is 100 percent responsible, but when you look at the facts, it’s hard to say that some of those responder defendants did not contribute to the illnesses of the workers,” said Robin Greenwald, a Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee attorney who helped negotiate the medical side of the proposed settlement with BP. “They put the people out to work and they didn’t give them Tyvek gloves or they didn’t give them masks and the proper clothing to wear, or they didn’t notify them before the plane came by to spray Corexit.”
~
The Environmental Protection Agency has approved Corexit to disperse oil spills on surface water, but plaintiffs have argued it is dangerous and was used in an unreasonable manner. They also said that it has not been tested for use in deep-water situations.
The request was presented to Barbier's court last Friday, but as of this posting he had not ruled on the motion.
Verchick seemed optimistic that Judge Barbier would not rule in Nalco's favor.
“If I had clients suing Nalco, I would want them in Barbier’s court because I think Barbier will have a sense of the case that no one else would, and because he is a good judge,” Verchick said. “Second, I could get relief faster and I could probably have a better chance of a settlement because I would be in with other claimants and have that leverage that comes with numbers.”
Let's hope he's right... |
While NIH researchers seek more volunteers for a health study of cleanup workers...
The National Institutes of Health has 25,000 participants in their study of the aftereffects of the BP spill, but is searching for 15,000 more. Finding more people for the study has become problematic, and mistrust of both BP and the government seems to be a factor for some.
Some people have moved or changed phone numbers, making it hard for researchers to find them. And then there's the issue of trust. Some have rejected requests to participate because the study is run by the government and partially financed by BP, and neither enjoys a high level of confidence these days, researchers said.
"But I hope we can reach out and show people that we really do care and want them to participate so we can address many of the health concerns by those who worked on the spill," said Dale Sandler, chief of the epidemiology branch at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
I'm not sure how I feel about this (as I trust BP about as far as I can throw Tony Heyward's yacht, and being a child of the 60s I often have to force myself to trust our government...) BUT - having said that, it's probably a good thing to get on record as having been affected. Maybe.
For now, Sandler hopes to complete the telephone interviews by the end of December, with home visits and exams expected to run through April. The plan is for regular follow-ups with some of the study volunteers to update their health conditions over time.
Sandler said NIH researchers are looking for volunteers with a wide variety of involvement with the spill. They must be at least 21 years old and have done oil spill cleanup for at least one day or supported the cleanup effort in some way.
|
Tell me again that this isn't caused by fracking... Go ahead, I'll wait.
North Texas rocked by 11 earthquakes in 40 days.
North Texas is - geologically - a pretty stable area that is not too prone to earthquakes. They had none before 2008.
But that has changed. According to USGS reports, there have been 11 small earthquakes in June, and about 30 in the last four years.
This coincides with a large number of new deep injection wells (that is "fracking" boys and girls...) in the area.
A Southern Methodist University study tied quakes from 2008 to 2009 to nearby deep injection wells, and a more recent study by the National Research Council also pointed the finger at injection wells, adding that hydraulic fracturing likely isn’t a contributing factor.
Of course, these events are fairly rare, the study found.
“Only a very small fraction of injection and extraction activity have induced seismic activity noticeable by the public,” said Murray Hitzman, chair of the committee that authored the report.
The quakes in Cleburne, which is 30 miles south of Fort Worth, were enough to get State Farm to send letters to residents, urging them to get earthquake insurance. Nearly all of the quakes were well below the 4.0 mark, which usually brings some damage.
And just a thought in addition to the earthquakes - what is fracking doing to already drought-compromised aquifers? I have worked in west and north Texas. Natural groundwater in that area often tastes kind of nasty, and can be tea-colored, but is usually safe to drink. What will the addition of fracking do? Nothing good, I guarantee... |
I guess we can be thankful for small karmic favors...
Shell hits snags in path to Arctic drilling.
Navigational screw-ups, regulations (thank you!) and a little help from Mother Nature's current climate chaos have served to put a braking effect on Shell's headlong race to foul as much of the Arctic as it can...
Shell’s plans to launch exploratory oil drilling in Arctic waters this summer have been hit by a series of setbacks in recent days, with one of the company’s drillships drifting out of control and the firm separately admitting it won’t be able to comply with the terms of a government-issued air pollution permit that took years to refine.
The developments mark the most recent troubles for Shell Oil Co.’s seven-year quest to begin a new era of drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, decades after first searching for oil under those Arctic waters.
Mother Nature has already postponed the company’s plans to drill up to five wells in the region until early August, because thick ice is still clinging to Alaska’s shores, preventing ships from passing through the area.
Shell spokesmen say they don’t expect further delays to the company’s plans after one of the firm’s drillships, the Noble Discoverer dragged its anchor and drifted toward an island near Dutch Harbor, Alaska on Saturday.
Dragging anchors across the seafloor isn't good, but that damage is much less than would be incurred with drilling. But that also reinforces what we already know - that Shell ain't any better than BP or any of the petro-giants when it comes to safely drilling in extreme environments - or any environment, for that matter.
“All indications are that it did not run aground,” said Shell spokeswoman Kelly op de Weegh. “But our priority is to make sure there are no integrity issues with the Discoverer. That’s why we’re going to send divers down as another precaution.”
At the time, the Discoverer was held by a single anchor to the seafloor about 500 to 570 yards away from shore, where it waits for ice to clear before heading north. When drilling in the Arctic this summer, Shell plans to suspend the vessel over three exploratory wells using an eight-anchor mooring system.
That gave little comfort to conservationists who already have raised concerns with Shell’s Arctic drilling plans.
“Shell can’t keep it’s drill rig under control in a protected harbor,” said Jackie Dragon, Greenpeace’s lead Arctic campaigner. “What will happen when it faces 20-foot swells and sea ice while drilling in the Arctic?”
Shell also has drawn fire for asking the Environmental Protection Agency for leeway after determining it would not be able to comply with emissions limits in key air pollution permits governing its Arctic operations.
According to a request filed with the EPA late on June 28, Shell is asking to be allowed to emit an unlimited amount of ammonia and more nitrogen oxide than originally permitted from the main generator engines on the Discoverer.
At one point, Shell told the EPA in its request, the company had spent nearly $24 million trying to buy, install and test an emission-control system that would allow the engine to meet the approved limits and still fit into a tight space in the Discoverer’s engine room.
Although the general permission has been given to Shell to drill in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, additional permits will be required for individual wells before work can be started. Environmentalists say that the problems Shell has encountered so far do not merit any confidence that they would be able to drill "safely", and could set a dangerous and ultimately unworkable precedent for any further drilling operations.
“If the EPA lets Shell proceed under the auspices of a permit it knows the company will violate, that sets a terrible precedent for going forward in the Arctic,” said Travis Nichols, with Greenpeace.
Environmentalists also say the recent developments are evidence of Shell’s “broken promises” when it comes to Arctic drilling.
“This is a disturbing theme of Shell promising that it’s going to do any number of things and then at the last minute essentially saying they can’t follow through,” said Kristen Miller, government affairs director for the Alaska Wilderness League.
Miller suggested Shell was trying to capitalize on momentum behind its drilling program, which is now closer than ever to beginning after seven years and nearly $5 billion in investments.
Is it too much to hope that this will stall them long enough for the US to change its mind about drilling in the extremes?
Nope, didn't think so...
|
And while we're at it... a little UK activism aimed at Shell's Arctic antics, and also BP...
The latest move in Greenpeace’s Save the Arctic campaign saw British eco-activists shutting down 74 of 119 Shell petrol stations in Edinburgh and London against the brand's plans to drill for oil in the Arctic, leading to the arrests of 24 campaigners on Monday, according to the Guardian.
The campaign is targeting Shell as prepares to begin drilling in the Arctic with Russian oil company Gazprom, a plan that U.S. activists rallied to sue and spoof campaigns to pop up. Protesters scaled the roofs of Shell stations and deployed emergency shut-off switches to stop petrol going to the pumps, removing a fuse that delays it being switched on again, while posting a message on Twitter that, "We're being careful not to destroy property. Even the carefully removed components will go back to Shell."
Greenpeace UK website elaborated, "It's part of the global week of action against Shell that kicked off with the occupation of the head office in the Hague – as well as our live TV channel, follow #tellshell on Twitter for all the latest from around the world."
Here's the video: Shutting Down Shell / The Best Bits...
And Shell wasn't the only target...nice local company BP (it's British Petroleum, you know...) was fondly remembered, just so they wouldn't feel left out.
It's not the only oil and gas brand on the hotseat — rival BP, the London Olympics' official "fuel and gas provider" and "sustainability partner,” is also under siege as environmental groups protest their sponsorship with acts of "brand piracy." On July 5th, activists splashed a six-panel outdoor billboard touting BP's sponsorship of the London 2012 Olympics by defacing them with with oil-black paint. BuzzFeed posted photos showing the six-panel billboard, located along London's Cromwell Road.
Taking responsibility, f-ingthefuture.org commented: "Organisers of the Olympics have decided to allow BP, one of the dirtiest companies on earth, the opportunity to rebrand itself as socially responsible and take an active role in proposing how society should approach climate change. By sponsoring activities like the Cultural Olympiad, the London 2012 Festival, the World Shakespeare Festival and the Games themselves, BP is able to continue its catastrophic, though increasingly profitable, operations. That’s why we had to act."
(h/t Yasuragi) |
BP is dragged into SFO 'bribery’ investigation.
That would be an investigation by the "Serious Fraud Office"... but we just know that BP could never be involved in fraud, could they?
There may have been some less than above board implications about some work done by our BP buddies in Azerbaijan.
The oil giant is understood to have been in contact with SFO investigators over the bribery allegations relating to engineering projects one of its contractors is undertaking in the west Asian state.
The contractor, as yet unnamed, self-reported the allegation of bribery to the SFO after it came to light last year. Although there is no suggestion bribes were paid by BP employees, the oil major could be liable if the contractor is found to be culpable.
If the wrongdoing took place after July 1 last year both BP and the contractor could be prosecuted under the Bribery Act. The act makes a company criminally liable for acts undertaken by its employees, its agents and contractors.
No company has yet been prosecuted by the SFO under the Act although a number of investigations are understood to be ongoing.
Okay you barristers...put on those cool little wigs and get after them. I'm all for piling on, and kicking them mercilessly. Figuratively speaking, you know...
(again, h/t Yasuragi)
|
Again, I'm not quite sure how I feel about this, but I can understand there are always people willing to commit fraud...
Long Beach, MS, woman sentenced in BP oil spill fraud case.
A judge in Gulfport, Miss., has ordered a Long Beach woman to repay $35,300 she wasn't eligible to receive from the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Trust Fund. The Sun Herald reports that U.S. District Judge Walter J. Gex III also put Billie Jean Buza on probation for three years.
Buza pleaded guilty to wire fraud in April. She faced up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.
Prosecutors say Buza received the money after filing a claim for wages lost as a result of the oil spill. She worked at a fashion accessories outlet in Gulfport when the oil spill occurred in April 2010.
Prosecutors say they were prepared to show her hours on the job were reduced but it wasn't because of the oil spill.
Well, it could have been the lack of customers because of the spill, couldn't it? Or maybe she was just a bad employee. |
So much oil, so few beaches not yet fouled...
Helix Energy announces oil discovery in Gulf of Mexico.
Houston-based Helix Energy said it discovered oil at an offshore project off the coast of Galveston, officials said.
The Danny II found oil in the Garden Bank block 506, approximately 145 miles off the shores of Galveston, on Monday, the company said in a press release. The well found oil after drilling more than 14,000 feet in water depths of 2,800 feet, officials said.
“Additional testing to determine the composition of the reservoir fluids is ongoing,” said Johnny Edwards, president of Energy Resource Technology, a subsidiary of Helix. “We will provide an update on Danny II after completion.”
Whoopie. |
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.