Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

BP spill worse than Exxon Valdez, what exactly are the media critics expecting?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 06:05 PM
Original message
BP spill worse than Exxon Valdez, what exactly are the media critics expecting?
BP spill eclipses Exxon Valdez, says government

On May 17, there were at least 130,000 barrels of oil on the surface of the Gulf of Mexico, and a similar amount had been skimmed off the surface or evaporated, according to a panel of government scientists known as the Flow Rate Technical Group.

The findings, made public by U.S. Geological Survey Director Marcia McNutt, confirm that more oil has been spilled from BP's leaking well than the estimated 257,000 barrels that fouled Alaska's Prince William Sound by the grounding of the Exxon Valdez tanker.

If the panel's calculations are accurate, a total of at least 260,000 barrels of oil had spilled into the ocean by May 17.

The high-end estimate of oil on the water that day was 270,000 barrels, with a similar amount contained or evaporated, the panel found.

<...>


The Exxon clean up took years.

How was the spill cleaned up?

Complicated question. It took more than four summers of cleanup efforts before the effort was called off. Not all beaches were cleaned and some beaches remain oiled today. At its peak the cleanup effort included 10,000 workers, about 1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters, known as Exxon's army, navy, and air force. It is widely believed, however, that wave action from winter storms did more to clean the beaches than all the human effort involved.

link


There are more than 20,000 people involved in the clean up and containment effort in the Gulf.


The Ongoing Administration-Wide Response to the Deepwater BP Oil Spill: May 26, 2010

By the Numbers to Date:

•Personnel were quickly deployed and more than 20,000 are currently responding to protect the shoreline and wildlife.

•Approximately 1,300 vessels are responding on site, including skimmers, tugs, barges, and recovery vessels to assist in containment and cleanup efforts—in addition to dozens of aircraft, remotely operated vehicles, and multiple mobile offshore drilling units.

•More than 1.85 million feet of containment boom and 1.25 million feet of sorbent boom have been deployed to contain the spill—and approximately 300,000 feet of containment boom and 1 million feet of sorbent boom are available.

•Approximately 11 million gallons of an oil-water mix have been recovered.

•Approximately 840,000 gallons of total dispersant have been deployed—700,000 on the surface and 140,000 subsea. More than 380,000 gallons are available.

•17 staging areas are in place and ready to protect sensitive shorelines, including: Dauphin Island, Ala., Orange Beach, Ala., Theodore, Ala., Panama City, Fla., Pensacola, Fla., Port St. Joe, Fla., St. Marks, Fla., Amelia, La., Cocodrie, La., Grand Isle, La., Shell Beach, La., Slidell, La., St. Mary, La.; Venice, La., Biloxi, Miss., Pascagoula, Miss., and Pass Christian, Miss.


The Obama administration has launched a massive clean up effort, employing more than twice the number of people involved at the peak of the Exxon Valdez clean up.

Aside from criticizing that effort, the media pundits are attempting to shift focus from eight years of dereliction under Bush to accuse the Obama administration of oversight failure, specifically at the MMS.

As Robert Kennedy Jr. points out, the MMS was corrupted under Bush:

Then, between January and March of 2001, incoming Vice President Dick Cheney conducted secret meetings with over 100 oil industry officials allowing them to draft a wish list of industry demands to be implemented by the oil friendly administration. Cheney also used that time to re-staff the Minerals Management Service with oil industry toadies including a cabal of his Wyoming carbon cronies. In 2003, newly reconstituted Minerals Management Service genuflected to the oil cartel by recommending the removal of the proposed requirement for acoustic switches. The Minerals Management Service's 2003 study concluded that "acoustic systems are not recommended because they tend to be very costly."


The Obama administration took immediate steps to address the corruption.

Steven Benen puts it in context:

<...

Indeed, it wasn't Obama who approved this rig. It wasn't Obama who ignored the need for remote acoustic shutoff switches. It wasn't Obama who corrupted the MMS. It wasn't Obama who spent eight years downplaying the need for regulations and oversight of the oil industry.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. What are they expecting?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. The crazy thing is
they're trying to characterize the responses as failed. It's bizarre.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. That was one helluva blow job Cheney gave the oil industry, wasn't it? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
4. They're second guessing as they would with any administration on whose watch
a disaster of this magnitude occurred.

Better get used to it, because it's going to go on for month and months- if not years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-27-10 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Second guessing?
Saying the administration isn't doing anything and failed to respond in a timely way isn't second guessing, it's blatantly distorting the facts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC