BP Moving Ahead With Offshore Alaska Rig Despite Moratorium

[mod mom]

The New York Times reports today that BP is moving ahead with a project that would drill a two-mile-deep well off the coast of Alaska. How is BP getting around the moratorium on new offshore drilling? It's building its rig on an island -- a man-made island built by BP -- and declaring it "onshore."

The moratorium was instituted in response to the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, a leak BP is legally responsible for. And yet, BP is now the only company allowed to drill a new well in the Arctic.

The moratorium was blocked by a judge, but the Obama administration has challenged the block. Many oil companies are in a holding pattern until the legal challenges are over.

Regulators have granted the project "onshore" status because it sits on the man-made island. And in 2007, the Minerals Management Service opted not to do its own independent analysis of the environmental affects of the project. Instead, the agency allowed BP to write its own environmental review and provide its own documents relating to the Endangered Species Act.

-snip

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/06/nyt_bp_moving_ahead_with_offshore_alaska_rig_despi.php

[amborin]

1. Liberty should be shut down immediately:

".......three miles off the coast of Alaska, BP is moving ahead with a controversial and potentially record-setting project to drill two miles under the sea and then six to eight miles horizontally to reach what is believed to be a 100-million-barrel reservoir of oil under federal waters.

All other new projects in the Arctic have been halted by the Obama administration’s moratorium on offshore drilling, including more traditional projects like Shell Oil’s plans to drill three wells in the Chukchi Sea and two in the Beaufort.

But BP’s project, called Liberty, has been exempted as regulators have granted it status as an “onshore” project even though it is about three miles off the coast in the Beaufort Sea. The reason: it sits on an artificial island — a 31-acre pile of gravel in about 22 feet of water — built by BP.

The project has already received its state and federal environmental permits, but BP has yet to file its final application to federal regulators to begin drilling, which it expects to start in the fall.

Some scientists and environmentalists say that other factors have helped keep the project moving forward.

Rather than conducting their own independent analysis, federal regulators, in a break from usual practice, allowed BP in 2007 to write its own environmental review for the project as well as its own consultation documents relating to the Endangered Species Act, according to two scientists from the Alaska office of the federal Mineral Management Service that oversees drilling.

The environmental assessment was taken away from the agency’s unit that typically handles such reviews, and put in the hands of a different division that was more pro-drilling, said the scientists, who discussed the process because they remained opposed to how it was handled.

“The whole process for approving Liberty was bizarre,” one of the federal scientists said....

[Skidmore]

2. What can we do to stop this negligent company from doing this?

Certainly we should be able to give some meaningful pushback.

[amborin]

not sure; what response is there to any public dissent even re: Deepwater?

[Skidmore]

7. Since MMS is being reconfigured, I would think it would be the opportune

time to push the administration and congress to halt any new drilling by this company in this nation or its waters.

[amborin]

3. dupe

[Altoid_Cyclist]

4. I would say what they're getting away with is unbelievable.

However, since energy giants seem to be able to write their own laws and regulations, I can believe almost anything that they pull.

What is the purpose of having government agencies when they allow this kind of BS to happen? Oh right, it makes it look legitimate to the American people who aren't paying attention.

It was one hell of a planet at some distant point in time.

[amborin]

5. seems the public isn't paying attention;

they're too stressed out and distracted and don't seem to read beyond talking points....

[wordpix]

9. I know, I know, Sandra Bullock's husband is cheating on her! (It's SO distracting)

[Altoid_Cyclist]

13. A few of them in the local area are starting to take notice of the Marcellus drilling.

The local NBC affiliate has two stories on their site today.

Residents Upset Over Speeding Gas Drilling Work Trucks
http://www.wjactv.com/news/24012522/detail.html

Residents Upset Over Flooding Frac Water
http://www.wjactv.com/news/24010702/detail.html

This could be part of the problem.
From: SolveClimate

Hydraulic fracturing, commonly called “fracking,” is used in natural gas wells to push fluid and sand at very high pressure into rock formations to release gas. Fracking fluid can contain chemicals that are hazardous and carcinogenic. Halliburton, a pioneer of the technique, says 35,000 wells are fracked each year.

As more accidents are reported at wells being “fracked” (undergoing hydraulic fracturing), both houses of Congress are considering legislation to close the Halliburton Loophole, so nicknamed not just because Halliburton developed the technique but also because former Halliburton CEO and ex-vice president Dick Cheney urged the creation of the exemption in 2005. More than 160 community and national groups have signed a letter of support for the bills in Congress.


“We’re seeing a real ramp-up of activity of wells going in, and accompanying this rush is drilling companies installing their wells as quickly as possible to make it economical for them. The result of this rush to slapdash these things in the ground are that accidents happen,” Carluccio says.

Rest of article: http://solveclimate.com/blog/20090929/fracking-accidents-prompt-calls-oversight

"Gasland" might have finally got people to pay attention to what's going on in their backyard.

[wordpix]

6. you would think some of the other corps. would be livid since THEY have to shut down but BP doesn't

[wordpix]

8. "fed regulators, in a break from usual practice, allowed BP in 2007 to write its own env. review"

This is a break from usual practice? This was the NORM under BushCo and early Obama MMS.

[amborin]

15. kick

[Skidmore]

10. I went over to the WH contact page and sent the following e-mail

to them:

and I are writing after reading about the stated intent of BP to proceed with drilling for oil in the sea off of the coast of Alaska. We heard about this Liberty well venture yesterday on the news and understand that it will be a high risk venture. Given the past record of MMS, which is being revamped, we are skeptical about how this decision was made. This plan to create an artificial island to permit it to proceed as an "onshore" operation is too cute by half. We are asking your administration to halt any further drilling of this nature off of the coast of our nation in light of the mess it made of the Gulf. One of these disasters is too many, flirting with the potential for another is just plain stupid. We are asking that either Sec. Salazar and/or the President to explain to the nation why this drill has been approved, apparently without a whimper.

....Now to contact my congressman and Senators.

[Winterblues]

11. If the island is not attached to the bottom it is not "on shore".

If it is really a part of the land then I see no problem..A floating island is no different than a floating oil rig..

[Skidmore]

12. You aren't concerned with a company with BP's safety record undertaking

yet another high risk venture? I am. We don't need to risk another disaster with this company.

[Winterblues]

14. I don't think drilling on the surface of the earth is quite so high risk.

Even if they have to drill down two miles, as long as the rig is sitting on real earth. There are literally thousands upon thopusands of wells without risk