Hurricane Isaac Could Stir Up Oil from BP Spill

Beyond Wind & Rain: Isaac Could Stir Up Oil

August 30, 2012

LiveScience.com - As Tropical Storm Isaac roars over Louisiana and elsewhere on the Gulf Coast, it threatens to disrupt a fragile environment that's still recovering from BP's Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the summer of 2010.

By disturbing the sediments in which the spilled oil is buried, near the beach and deeper in the water, the hurricane could release large quantities of oil, several researchers warn.

"This is another disaster on top of the hurricane that we're going to have to deal with," Garret Graves, chairman of Louisiana's Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority, told the Huffington Post. "The threat is not insignificant."

So far there have been no reports of oil, but that isn't surprising considering most everybody is taking shelter or has evacuated the area, said Lt. Alyssa Johnson, operation officer at the National Response Center, a federal organization responsible for coordinating a response plan to environmental releases of oil or other hazardous materials. [Latest News on Isaac]

Storm surge

Isaac's storm surge, expected to reach heights of 6 to 12 feet (about 2 to 3.5 meters), could transport oil inland, where it could further affect marshlands and wildlife or come into contact with people, Graves told the Bloomberg news service. It also could flood areas containing contaminants such as pesticides, fertilizers and septic system bacteria and wash these back out into coastal waters or into groundwater, University of Florida researcher Andrew Zimmerman told OurAmazingPlanet in an email.

But it's unclear how much oil remains in Gulf sediments and along the shoreline — and how much might be stirred up.

"It could be a lot or a little," said University of Florida researcher Andrew Zimmerman.

An estimated 1 million gallons of MC 252 oil from the Deepwater Horizon spill has been distributed throughout the sediment underwater, on the beach and in marshes, according to Nanciann Regalado, speaking a spokesperson at the U.S. Department of the Interior.

"After danger to humans has passed and field teams can get into the field, samples of oil that has been exposed will be taken," Regalado told OurAmazingPlanet. If chemical analysis finds that the oil was from the Deepwater Horizon, BP may be required to clean up the oil, she added.

Exactly how far below the surface sediment and oil can be disturbed by a hurricane isn't clear, but meteorologist Jeff Masters said large hurricanes can create currents capable of mobilizing whatever oil is at the bottom.

Nick Shay, a professor of meteorology and physical oceanography at the University of Miami, told the Huffington Post this was possible. Hurricanes can "bring whatever is near the bottom up higher in the water column, and currents can then push it towards the coast," he said.

Erosion

Isaac also could worsen erosion in the area by pounding the shore with waves. According to the National Hurricane Center, Isaac is likely to cause significant erosion of 89 percent of Mississippi's beaches.

The Deepwater Horizon disaster began with a deadly blowout on April 20, 2010, and spilled an estimated 205 million gallons of crude into the Gulf. Among other damage, the oil killed marsh grasses that prevent erosion. For 18 months afterward, marsh erosion rates doubled to 10 feet (3 meters) per year, said University of Florida researcher Brian Silliman.

Most of the grass has grown back, but how it will weather this storm is unclear. Barrier islands and coastlines could be eroded, affecting nesting areas for many kinds of wildlife, including birds and turtles.

Biggest impact

The biggest environmental impact of Isaac will be erosion causing the loss of wetlands, Masters said. A 2011 study by the United States Geological Survey found that four hurricanes in the past seven years — Katrina, Rita, Gustav and Ike — together destroyed about 250 square miles (650 square kilometers) of Louisiana.

"I expect Isaac will destroy 50-100 square miles of wetlands," or about 130 to 260 square kilometers, Masters told OurAmazingPlanet.

A spokesman for BP said the company isn't worried about Isaac.

"Consistent with the past two hurricane seasons, we do not expect any significant impact of residual MC 252 oil following Hurricane Isaac," Ray Melick told the Huffington Post.

Although plants and animals are well-adapted to storms like this, Zimmerman said, they have a lowered ability to cope when they are already stressed from human activities.

Luckily, Regalado said, bird nesting season in the area is largely finished and most wintering birds haven't arrived. However, loggerhead sea turtle nesting season is in full swing, and many nests are at risk of flooding.

'Horribly Mutated' Creatures Living in the Gulf of Mexico Due to BP Oil Spill

Two Years Later, Fish Sick Near BP Oil Spill Site

April 19, 2012

AP - When fishermen returned to the deep reefs of the Gulf of Mexico weeks after BP's gushing oil well was capped, they started catching grouper and red snapper with large open sores and strange black streaks, lesions they said they'd never seen and promptly blamed on the spill.

Now, two years after the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and sank, killing 11 men and touching off the worst offshore spill in U.S. history, the latest research into its effects is starting to back up those early reports from the docks: The ailing fish bear hallmarks of diseases tied to petroleum and other pollutants.

Those illnesses don't pose an increased health threat to humans, scientists say, but they could be devastating to prized species and the people who make their living catching them.

There's no saying for sure what's causing the diseases in what's still a relatively small percentage of the fish, because the scientists have no baseline data on sick fish in the Gulf before the spill to form a frame of reference. The first comprehensive research may be years from publication. And the Gulf is assaulted with all kinds of contaminants every day.

Still, it's clear to fishermen and researchers alike that something's amiss.

— A recent batch of test results revealed the presence of oil in the bile extracted from fish caught in August 2011, a year after BP's broken well was capped and nearly 15 months after it first blew out on April 20, 2010.

"Bile tells you what a fish's last meal was," said Steve Murawski, a marine biologist with the University of South Florida who was chief science adviser for the National Marine Fisheries Service until November 2010 when he began working on oil spill studies for USF. "There was as late as August of last year an oil source out there that some of those animals were consuming."

Bile in red snapper, yellow-edge grouper and a few other species contained on average 125 parts per million of naphthalene, a compound found in crude oil, Murawski said. Scientists expect to find almost none of the toxin in fish captured in the open ocean.

"Those levels are indicative of polluted urban estuaries," he said.

— Last summer, a team of scientists led by USF has done what experts say is the most extensive study yet of sick fish in shallow and deep Gulf waters. Over seven cruises in July and August, the scientists caught about 4,000 fish — from Florida's Dry Tortugas to central Louisiana — using miles-long fishing lines dragged from close to shore out to depths of 600 feet. The work was funded with a federal government grant and help from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute.

About 3 percent of the fish they caught displayed gashes, ulcers and parasites symptomatic of environmental contamination, according to Murawski, the lead researcher. The number of sick fish rose not only as scientists moved west away from the relatively clean and oil-free waters of Florida but also as they pushed into deeper waters off the coasts of Alabama, Mississippi and especially Louisiana, near where the Deepwater Horizon sank.

About 10 percent of mud-dwelling tile fish caught in the DeSoto Canyon, to the northeast of the well, showed signs of sickness.

"The closer to the oil rig, the higher frequency was" of sick fish, Murawski said.

Past studies off the Atlantic Seaboard found about 1 percent of fish suffering from diseases, Murawski said. For now, he's taking that as a historical reference point; but he says it's not possible to directly apply that baseline to the Gulf, which is warmer and because of that an incubator for bacteria and parasites that could be the cause of lesions and sicknesses. Other important differences are that oil and natural gas have been pouring out of fissures from the floor of the Gulf for centuries, and the muddy waters of the Mississippi River flush into the same spots where scientists and fishermen are finding sick fish.

— Laboratory work over the past winter on the USF samples indicates the immune systems of the fish were impaired from an unknown environmental stress or contamination. Other researchers say they have come to similar conclusions over the past year.

"Some of the things I've seen over the past year or so I've never seen before," said Will Patterson, a marine biologist at the University of South Alabama and at the Dauphin Island Sea Lab. "Things like fin rot, large open sores on fish, those were some of the more disturbing types of things we saw. Different changes in pigment, red snapper with large black streaks on them."

All of this has biologists — and many fishermen — worried.

James Cowan, a reef fish expert at Louisiana State University doing long-term sampling for the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, received his first report of fish with what looked like ulcers in November 2010. He began reading up on what scientific literature was available on oil spills and fish.

"There is so much in the literature that links exposure to PAHs (the compounds in oil) to exactly what we are seeing: sicknesses, lesions and everything else," Cowan said.

Even if oil could be pinpointed as a contaminant, however, it's difficult to definitively tie it to BP's Macondo well. The Gulf is littered with natural oil seeps, pipelines and oil wells and pollution from passing ships. In addition, there are the discharge of the Mississippi River, salinity and temperature fluctuations and other ecological factors to consider.

These early findings with fish are not out of step with what researchers are turning up all over the Gulf two years after the spill: The oil disaster whacked the Gulf. In the past year, research has emerged showing deep-water corals, seaweed beds, inshore bait fish, dolphins and other species were injured by the spill.

"There is lots of circumstantial evidence that something is still awry," said Christopher D'Elia, the dean of LSU's School of the Coast and Environment. "On the whole, it is not as much environmental damage as originally projected. Doesn't mean there is none."

Portions of a few bays remain closed because of the spill.

For the second year, fishermen like Wayne Werner, a 53-year-old Louisiana captain who catches red snapper commercially, are calling in with reports of lesions.

He and other fishermen said they want to get to the bottom of a problem that's forcing them to take longer trips to fishing spots outside the spill zone and perpetuating their fear for their livelihoods.

"Every time we talked about bad fish, everybody kind of went nuts on us. Just like, 'You're hear-saying,' you know? And we're saying, 'Well, they're there,'" he said this week.

"They're still there. Now that the water is getting warm again, we're starting to see more and more again."

BP Oil Spill: The 'Horribly Mutated' Creatures Living in the Gulf

Fish, shrimp, and crabs are missing eyes and suffering strange deformities, according to a harrowing new report — yet the FDA insists the seafood's safe to eat

April 19, 2012

The Week - Shrimp born without eyes, clawless crabs, and fish with visible tumors are among the "horribly mutated" marine animals found in the waters off the Gulf Coast, according to a new report from Al Jazeera. Scientists say the problem is a side effect of the April 2010 explosion of BP's Deepwater Horizon oil rig, which killed 11 people and spilled at least 4.9 million barrels of oil into the ocean.

Here, a brief guide to the damage:

Is it just the oil that caused mutations?

No. Also to blame are the nearly 2 million gallons of chemical dispersants, such as petroleum distillates and 2-butoxyethanol, used for the subsequent clean-up. The solvents used in the aftermath of the spill, long known to be "mutagenic," are powerful enough to dissolve oil, grease, and rubber, says Casey Chan at Gizmodo. That's great for sopping up oil, "but terrible for the environment."

What kinds of deformities are cropping up?

Among the disturbing mutations: Shrimp with tumors on their heads; fish that lack eyes or are missing flaps over their gills; fish with oozing sores; crabs with holes in their shells; crabs that are missing claws and spikes, or are encased in soft shells instead of hard ones.

"I've never seen anything like this," Dr. Jim Cowan of Louisiana State University tells Al Jazeera. "The fishermen have never seen anything like this."

How has this affected the fishing industry?

The Gulf of Mexico supplies more than 40 percent of all commercial seafood in the continental U.S.

"At the height of the last shrimp season, in September, one of our friends caught 400 pounds of [eyeless shrimp]," Louisiana fisher Tracy Kuhns tells Al Jazeera.

At least 50 percent of shrimp caught in Barataria Bay, a popular shrimping destination heavily impacted by the spill, were found to be missing their eyes during that period. Yet the Louisiana government maintains that its fish is safe to eat.

Is there any other evidence of mutations?

A separate survey from the University of South Florida found that two to five percent of the fish in the Gulf were found to have skin lesions or sores following the spill. Before the Deepwater Horizon disaster, that figure was just one-tenth of 1 percent.

What does BP say?

"Seafood from the Gulf of Mexico is among the most tested in the world," the energy company says in a statement. And "according to the FDA and NOAA, it is as safe now as it was before the accident."

Still, on Wednesday, BP reached a $7.8 billion out-of-court settlement with lawyers representing thousands of individuals and businesses affected by the disaster. The Gulf seafood industry will reportedly receive $2 billion in compensation.

Other stories from this topic:

• By the numbers: The return of deepwater drilling: By the numbers
• Opinion Brief: Is the Gulf of Mexico really 'back to normal'?
• Fact Sheet: BP oil spill: 9 strange facts

Oil from BP Spill Enters Gulf of Mexico Food Chain

Oil from Deepwater Horizon Disaster Entered Food Chain in the Gulf of Mexico

March 20, 2012

ScienceDaily - Since the explosion on the BP Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20, 2010, scientists have been working to understand the impact that this disaster has had on the environment. For months, crude oil gushed into the water at a rate of approximately 53,000 barrels per day before the well was capped on July 15, 2010. A new study confirms that oil from the Macondo well made it into the ocean's food chain through the tiniest of organisms, zooplankton.

Tiny drifting animals in the ocean, zooplankton are useful to track oil-derived pollution. They serve as food for baby fish and shrimp and act as conduits for the movement of oil contamination and pollutants into the food chain. The study confirms that not only did oil affect the ecosystem in the Gulf during the blowout, but it was still entering the food web after the well was capped.

Oil, which is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons and other chemicals, contains polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which can be used to fingerprint oil and determine its provenance. The researchers were able to identify the signature unique to the Deep Water Horizon well in the Gulf of Mexico.

"Our research helped to determine a 'fingerprint' of the Deepwater Horizon spill -- something that other researchers interested the spill may be able to use," said Dr. Siddhartha Mitra of Eastern Carolina University. "Furthermore, our work demonstrated that zooplankton in the Northern Gulf of Mexico accumulated toxic compounds derived from the Macondo well."

The team's research indicates that the fingerprint of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill could be found in some zooplankton in the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem at low levels, as much as a month after the leaking wellhead was capped. In addition, the extent of the contamination seemed to be patchy. Some zooplankton at certain locations far removed from the spill showed evidence of contamination, whereas zooplankton in other locations, sometimes near the spill, showed lower indications of exposure to the oil-derived pollutants.

"Traces of oil in the zooplankton prove that they had contact with the oil and the likelihood that oil compounds may be working their way up the food chain," said Dr. Michael Roman of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science.

The study was led by East Carolina University with researchers from the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Oregon State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, and U.S. Geological Survey. The paper, "Macondo-1 well oil-derived polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in mesozooplankton from the northern Gulf of Mexico," was published in the February issue of Geographical Research Letters.

Russia Oil Spills Wreak Devastation

Russia Oil Spills Wreak Devastation

In Russia's northern oil fields, an environmental tragedy _ drip by drip

December 18, 2011

AP - On the bright yellow tundra outside this oil town near the Arctic Circle, a pitch-black pool of crude stretches toward the horizon. The source: a decommissioned well whose rusty screws ooze with oil, viscous like jam.

This is the face of Russia's oil country, a sprawling, inhospitable zone that experts say represents the world's worst ecological oil catastrophe.

Environmentalists estimate at least 1 percent of Russia's annual oil production, or 5 million tons, is spilled every year. That is equivalent to one Deepwater Horizon-scale leak about every two months. Crumbling infrastructure and a harsh climate combine to spell disaster in the world's largest oil producer, responsible for 13 percent of global output.

Oil, stubbornly seeping through rusty pipelines and old wells, contaminates soil, kills all plants that grow on it and destroys habitats for mammals and birds. Half a million tons every year get into rivers that flow into the Arctic Ocean, the government says, upsetting the delicate environmental balance in those waters.

It's part of a legacy of environmental tragedy that has plagued Russia and the countries of its former Soviet empire for decades, from the nuclear horrors of Chernobyl in Ukraine to lethal chemical waste in the Russian city of Dzerzhinsk and paper mill pollution seeping into Siberia's Lake Baikal, which holds one-fifth of the world's supply of fresh water.

Oil spills in Russia are less dramatic than disasters in the Gulf of Mexico or the North Sea, more the result of a drip-drip of leaked crude than a sudden explosion. But they're more numerous than in any other oil-producing nation including insurgency-hit Nigeria, and combined they spill far more than anywhere else in the world, scientists say.

"Oil and oil products get spilled literally every day," said Dr. Grigory Barenboim, senior researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of Water Problems.

No hard figures on the scope of oil spills in Russia are available, but Greenpeace estimates that at least 5 million tons leak every year in a country producing about 500 million tons a year.

Dr. Irina Ivshina, of the government-financed Institute of the Environment and Genetics of Microorganisms, supports the 5 million ton estimate, as does the World Wildlife Fund.

The figure is derived from two sources: Russian state-funded research that shows 10-15 percent of Russian oil leakage enters rivers; and a 2010 report commissioned by the Natural Resources Ministry that shows nearly 500,000 tons slips into northern Russian rivers every year and flow into the Arctic.

The estimate is considered conservative: The Russian Economic Development Ministry in a report last year estimated spills at up to 20 million tons per year.

That astonishing number, for which the ministry offered no elaboration, appears to be based partly on the fact most small leaks in Russia go unreported. Under Russian law, leaks of less than 8 tons are classified only as "incidents" and carry no penalties.

Russian oil spills also elude detection because most happen in the vast swaths of unpopulated tundra and conifer forestin the north, caused either by ruptured pipes or leakage from decommissioned wells.

Weather conditions in most oil provinces are brutal, with temperatures routinely dropping below minus 40 degrees Celsius (minus 40 Fahrenheit) in winter. That makes pipelines brittle and prone to rupture unless they are regularly replaced and their condition monitored.

Asked by The Associated Press to comment, the Natural Resources Ministry and the Energy Ministry said they have no data on oil spills and referred to the other ministry for further inquiries.

Even counting only the 500,000 tons officially reported to be leaking into northern rivers every year, Russia is by far the worst oil polluter in the world.

—Nigeria, which produces one-fifth as much oil as Russia, logged 110,000 tons spilled in 2009, much of that due to rebel attacks on pipelines.

—The U.S., the world's third-largest oil producer, logged 341 pipeline ruptures in 2010 — compared to Russia's 18,000 — with 17,600 tons of oil leaking as a result, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Spills have averaged 14,900 tons a year between 2001 and 2010.

—Canada, which produces oil in weather conditions as harsh as Russia's, does not see anything near Russia's scale of disaster. Eleven pipeline accidents were reported to Canada's Transport Safety Board last year, while media reports of leaks, ranging from sizable spills to a tiny leak in a farmer's backyard, come to a total of 7,700 tons a year.

—In Norway, Russia's northwestern oil neighbor, spills amounted to some 3,000 tons a year in the past few years, said Hanne Marie Oeren, head of the oil and gas section at Norway's Climate and Pollution Agency.

Now that Russian companies are moving to the Arctic to tap vast but hard-to-get oil and gas riches, scientists voice concerns that Russia's outdated technologies and shoddy safety record make for a potential environmental calamity there.

Gazpromneft, an oil subsidiary of the gas giant Gazprom, is preparing to drill for oil in the Arctic's Pechora Sea, even as environmentalists complain that the drilling platform is outdated and the company is not ready to deal with potential accidents.

Government scientists acknowledge that Russia does not currently have the required technology to develop Arctic fields but say it will be years before the country actually starts drilling.

"We must start the work now, do the exploration and develop the technology so that we would be able to ... start pumping oil from the Arctic in the middle of this century," Alexei Kontorovich, chairman of the council on geology, oil and gas fields at the Russian Academy of Sciences, told a recent news conference.

The same academy's Barenboim said, however, that Russian technology is developing too slowly to make it a safe bet for Arctic exploration.

"Over the past years, environmental risks have increased more sharply compared to how far our technologies, funds, equipment and skills to deal with them have advanced," he said.

In 1994, the republic of Komi, where Usinsk lies 60 kilometers (40 miles) south of the Arctic Circle, became the scene of Russia's largest oil spill when an estimated 100,000 tons splashed from an aging pipeline.

It killed plants and animals, and polluted up to 40 kilometers (25 miles) of two local rivers, killing thousands of fish. In villages most affected, respiratory diseases rose by some 28 percent in the year following the leak.

Seen from a helicopter, the oil production area is dotted with pitch-black ponds. Fresh leaks are easy to find once you step into the tundra north of Usinsk. To spot a leak, find a dying tree. Fir trees with drooping gray, dry branches look as though scorched by a wildfire. They are growing insoil polluted by oil.

Usinsk spokeswoman Tatyana Khimichuk said the city administration had no powers to influence oil company operations.

"Everything that happens at the oil fields is Lukoil's responsibility," she said, referring to Russia's second largest oil company, which owns a network of pipelines in the region.

Komi's environmental protection officials also blamed oil companies. The local prosecutor's office said in a report this year that the main problem is "that companies that extract hydrocarbons focus on making profits rather than how to use the resources rationally."

Valery Bratenkov works as a foreman at oil fields outside Usinsk. After hours, he is with a local environmental group. Bratenkov used to point out to his Lukoil bosses that oil spills routinely happen under their noses and asked them to repair the pipelines.

"They were offended and said that costs too much money," he said.

Activists like Bratenkov find it hard if not impossible to hold authorities to account in the area since some 90 percent of the local population comprises oil workers and their families who have moved from other regions of Russia, and depend on the industry for their livelihood.

Representatives of Lukoil denied claims that they try to conceal spills and leaks, and said that no more than 2.7 tons leaked last year from its production areas in Komi.

Ivan Blokov, campaign director at Greenpeace Russia, who studies oil spills, said the situation in Komi is replicated across Russia's oil-producing regions, which stretch from the Black Sea in the southwest to the Chinese border in Russia's Far East.

"It is happening everywhere," Blokov said. "It's typical of any oil field in Russia. The system is old and it is not being replaced in time by any oil company in the country."

What also worries scientists and environmentalists is that oil spills are not confined to abandoned or aging fields. Alarmingly, accidents happen at brand new pipelines, said Barenboim. At least 400 tons leaked from a new pipeline in two separate accidents in Russia's Far East last year, according to media reports and oil companies. Transneft's pipeline that brings Russian oil from Eastern Siberia to China was put into operation just months before the two spills happened.

The oil industry in Komi has been sapping nature for decades, killing or forcing out reindeer and fish. Locals like the 63-year-old Bratenkov are afraid that when big oil leaves, there will be only poisoned terrain left in its wake.

"Fishing, hunting — it's all gone," Bratenkov said.

Oil Bubbling Up is 'Dead Ringer Match' for BP’s Macondo Well

Neurotoxic shellfish poisoning (NSP) threatening human health along Texas Gulf Coast prompted Texas Department of Health to warn people to stay away from the Gulf area from Brownsville through Galveston where 4.2 million have been killed in the ongoing great Gulf die-off and to not eat the shellfish from there... Health officials have closed all oyster harvesting from Texas coastal waters due to the algae bloom known as red tide. The Texas Department of State Health Services on Wednesday announced the ban covers commercial and recreational harvesting of oysters, clams and mussels. The agency is also advising people not to harvest and eat oysters, clams, or mussels from Texas coastal waters. The algae contains a toxin that can lead to shellfish poisoning in humans. Spokeswoman Christine Mann says there's no time frame for the harvesting closure as state officials continue to monitor the red tide. The public can normally harvest oysters from November through April. Experts say the red tide, present early September along Texas, has killed at least 3 million fish. - Red tide closes all oyster harvesting in Texas; 4.2 Million Dead Fish; Texas Warns Stay Away from Gulf, The Associated Press, October 26, 2011

NOAA Oil Analyst: Oil Bubbling Up is 'Dead Ringer Match' for BP’s Macondo — NOAA Spokesman Claims It May Not Be Related to Blowout

September 29, 2011

Florida Oil Spill Law - LSU confirms oil from BP well; feds collect samples, Press-Register, September 26, 2011:

While the source of the oil bubbling up around the Deepwater Horizon site remains a mystery, a Louisiana State University scientist says further chemical analysis has confirmed that the oil originated in BP’s well, and not from other nearby sources, as federal officials have suggested. [...]

“Yes, the oil that you took was confirmed as MC252, but it does not necessarily mean it is in any way related to the (Deepwater Horizon) spill. Most of the oil throughout the region can be preliminarily identified as MC252 type,” the [Sept. 15 email from Ben Sherman, a NOAA spokesman] read. Sherman went on to say that NOAA’s Scientific Support Coordinator had consulted with the LSU chemists and determined that the oil might not be from the BP well.

Overton said federal officials were wrong. He said he rechecked the newspaper’s oil samples using the more refined analysis recommended by BP’s scientists and federal officials. [...]

Ed Overton, LSU chemist who did most of NOAA’s oil analysis during the spill:

• “They were suggesting I had jumped the gun when I said it matched (BP’s well).”
• “They are incorrect. I have double-checked, and I am even more convinced after using the suggestions that BP made that this was the Macondo oil. I think it is 99.9 percent confirmed that it came from that reservoir.”
• “It is a dead-ringer match. I was amazed that the ratios matched as good as they did.”

CONFIRMED: Oil Bubbling Up Above Macondo Well is Chemical Match to BP’s Crude, Says NOAA’s Ed Overton

August 26, 2011

Florida Oil Spill Law - Scientific analysis has confirmed that oil bubbling up above BP’s sealed Deepwater Horizon well in recent days is a chemical match for the hundreds of millions of gallons of oil that spewed into the Gulf last summer. [...]

“After examining the data, I think it’s a dead ringer for the MC252 oil, as good a match as I’ve seen,” [Ed] Overton* wrote in an email to the newspaper. [...]

In an emailed statement, BP officials wrote that the company had a vessel stationed at the site all day Thursday but never saw any oil. [...]

“There is still no evidence that the oil came from the Macondo well,” BP officials wrote in the emailed statement. [...]

How is the oil escaping?

Bob Bea, a prominent University of California petroleum engineer:

“Looks suspicious. The point of surfacing about one mile from the well is about the point that the oil should show up [...] Perhaps connections that developed between the well annulus (outside the casing), the reservoir sands about 17,000 feet below the seafloor and the natural seep fault features” could provide a pathway for oil to move from deep underground to the seafloor.

*“During the aftermath of the oil spill, Overton’s lab evaluated samples for NOAA, performing chemical analyses to determine toxicity levels and other important qualities of the oil. His lab has been studying the environmental impact of oil spills for NOAA since 1984, analyzing samples [...]” -Louisiana State University Media Relations, March 15, 2011

The Gulf of Mexico is Dying

Oil Still Gushing from BP Well in Gulf

September 2, 2011

American Free Press - Recent news reports confirm what many have alleged for over a year: British Petroleum’s “Macondo” well site has never stopped leaking.

The mainstream media blackout on this subject is keeping the public unaware of the continuing tragedy and preventing another communal outcry for accountability from the government as well as Big Oil.

AFP has followed this story closely and can now confirm that not only was the Deepwater Horizon incident under-reported in scope, this botched drilling job continues to destroy the food supply, ecosystem and human lives each day.

This reporter has been communicating with a source from the Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference who said in April that the Gulf of Mexico is the “most fractured seafloor in the world.” Now, this insider has gone further, saying that the ocean floor will “leak forever unless the Earth can seal itself with an earthquake.”

The source, who requested anonymity for personal safety, directed this reporter to an article at Global Research in which the case for multiple and multiplying leaks is made with expert scientific precision. The article states that:

When the well was capped, “putting the system back under pressure forced the upsurging hydrocarbons to find weaknesses throughout the greater system, which revealed all sorts of compromised, fractured and unsettled geology.”

It went on to report:

“Under high pressure it will find every point of egress through the rock and sediment formations all the way up to the seafloor where it will find any point of exit that is available. The longer and more forcefully that it flows throughout the fractured area, which is dependent on the volume, temperature and pressure at the source of the hydrocarbons, the more its corrosive effects will widen, broaden and enlarge the channels, cracks and crevices throughout the sub-seafloor geology, thereby creating a predicament that no science, technology or equipment can remedy.”

Bonny Schumaker, founder of On Wings of Care, recently wrote about her flyover of the gulf region. On Aug. 19, she reported:

“Today we flew about 500 miles over the gulf to check out yet more reports of oil. We didn’t even get to some of the places reported, because in just a few hours we had already found plenty in at least four distinct locations—all within 75 miles of the shores of Louisiana.”

She continued,

“We found significant amounts of oil in globule form still at the Deepwater Horizon site and at the Taylor Energy site, and we saw miles-long surface rainbow sheens from two different leaking platforms between [Deepwater Horizon] and the Chandeleur Islands.”

When this reporter asked her about leaks in the gulf’s seafloor, Ms. Schumaker discussed how often she sees oil residue when flying over the gulf. She said,

“If BP [officials] can’t see anything from the air with their own eyes, can we trust what they claim to see, or don’t see, under the water?”

Ms. Schumaker also pointed out a report that links new oil samples with the Macondo site.

On Aug. 25, The Mobile Press-Register stated that it collected the samples and had them tested by chemists Ed Overton and Scott Miles at Louisiana State University, who “did much of the chemical work used by federal officials to fingerprint the BP oil, known as MC252.” The story quoted Overton as saying,

“After examining the data, I think it’s a dead ringer for theMC252 oil, as good a match as I’ve seen.”

All of this validates what this reporter and AFP have been covering for months. It seems conclusive that even if the actual drill site of Deepwater Horizon has been sufficiently capped, the damage done by BP with U.S. government approval is too extensive to be stopped. The size of the Macondo well and its explosive pressure has been unleashed, breaking through the surface at every point of least resistance, poisoning the gulf with every passing moment.

Frank Whalen has been a radio talk show host for the past 17 years, and worked as a consultant for Maxim magazine. For more news and views from Frank, see www.franklyspeakingradio.com.

Dispersants Used in BP Gulf Oil Spill Linked to Cancer

Dispersants Used in BP Gulf Oil Spill Linked to Cancer

COREXIT 9500 and 9527 are both produced by Nalco/Exxon. Despite ongoing concerns from the public about the toxicity of listed dispersants and their impacts upon the environment, she said, the EPA continues to protect the dispersant manufacturers, who want to keep the ingredients of their products secret.

August 26, 2011

Environment News Service (ENS) - Five of the 57 ingredients in dispersants approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for use on oil spills are linked to cancer, finds a new research report based on data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by environmental groups on the Gulf of Mexico.

The report from Earthjustice, an environmental law firm, along with Toxipedia Consulting Services, is based on material released by the U.S. EPA in response to a Freedom of Information Act request made by Earthjustice on behalf of the Gulf Restoration Network and the Florida Wildlife Federation.

Dispersants are used to clean up oil spills and contain chemicals that break up oil into smaller droplets and move the oil from the surface of the water into the water column.

A plane sprays dispersant over the oil leaked from the BP wellhead in the Gulf of Mexico, May 21, 2010.

Two oil dispersant products were used heavily in the BP oil leak: COREXIT 9500 and 9527, both produced by Nalco/Exxon. BP used over 1.8 million gallons of dispersant during the three-month long oil leak that gushed 4.9 million barrels of crude oil from the Macondo well located about 40 miles southeast of the Louisiana coast.

The report "The Chaos of Clean-Up: Analysis of Potential Health and Environmental Impacts of Chemicals in Dispersant Products" highlights the fact that some dispersants are safer than others.

"The testing can't be done in the moment of the disaster," said Marianne Engelman Lado, an attorney with Earthjustice. "It has to be done ahead of time to avoid the chaos we witnessed during the disaster response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster."

Among the dispersant chemical ingredients linked to cancer are:

• Amides, coco, N,N-bis(hydroxyethyl), which is classed as a likely carcinogen
• Cyclohexene, 1 - methyl - 4 - (1 - methylethenyl) -, (4R) -, which is classed as carcinogenic to rats
• Ethanol, 2-butoxy- which is listed as a possible carcinogen
• Petroleum distillates, hydrotreated light, which are classed as a confirmed animal carcinogens with unknown relevance to humans. These distillates carry the additional warning that exposure by inhalation can cause dizziness, headache, nausea, drowsiness, and unconsciousness and prolonged inhalation of high concentrations may damage the respiratory system.

Gulf residents continue to suffer health effects related to the disaster clean-up.

"The illnesses we observed were quite unique and different from anything that I had ever witnessed before," said Dr. Michael Robichaux, a physician in Raceland, Louisiana.

"Although there were scores of complaints early on, the main problems at this time are a loss of memory, seizure type problems, severe abdominal pain, fatigue, irritability and other neurological and endocrine manifestations," he said.

Click here for a chart that breaks down the ingredients in dispersants and their effects on humans, wildlife and the aquatic environment.

Earthjustice went to court to obtain the ingredients of dispersants eligible for use, health and safety studies on the chemicals in dispersants, and the application materials and toxicity testing results submitted to EPA by dispersant manufacturers seeking to obtain eligibility status for their dispersant.

The request also sought correspondence between the EPA and BP about the selection of an appropriate dispersant during the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

"The goal here is, when dispersant use is required, we use the least toxic dispersants that are appropriate to that specific spill condition," said Manley Fuller of the Florida Wilderness Federation. "To do that, we need to know the ingredients and they need to be tested in field conditions."

Toxipedia.org has made information on the chemicals accessible to the public for the first time through its website.

Cyn Sarthou, executive director of the Gulf Restoration Network, is concerned that choices among dispersants are not being made publicly with full knowledge of their impacts.

"Despite ongoing concerns from the public about the toxicity of listed dispersants and their impacts upon the environment," she said, "the EPA continues to protect the dispersant manufacturers, who want to keep the ingredients of their products secret."

Related:

• Why Did the U.S. Air Force Help BP Spray Corexit, a Dispersant Which the EPA Banned as Too Toxic?
• Oil Spill in the Gulf: The BP, Exxon and Nalco Co. (Corexit) Connection
• U.S. Government Sues All Companies Involved in BP Oil Spill...Except One: Halliburton
• FAA Imposes Flight Restrictions Over Oil Spill Area

Shell Finds Second Oil Leak in Flow Line at Rig Off the Coast of Scotland; BP Pipeline Leaks Oily Mixture onto Alaskan Tundra

Shell's Reputation Hit by North Sea Oil Spill

August 16, 2011

AP — Royal Dutch Shell struggled to contain the worst North Sea oil spill in a decade as well as damage to its credibility Tuesday as a second leak was found in an oil line the company had said was "under control."

Although the amount of oil involved in the Shell spill off the coast of Scotland is an order of magnitude smaller than BP's 2010 Gulf of Mexico disaster — around 1,300 barrels so far compared to an estimated 4.9 million in the Gulf — the spill undercuts Shell's earlier suggestions that it is a safer company than BP.

The Gannet Alpha oil rig, 112 miles (180 kilometers) east of the Scottish city of Aberdeen, is operated by Shell and co-owned by Shell and Esso, a subsidiary of the U.S. oil firm Exxon Mobil. Shell first told U.K. authorities about a leak in a flow line at the rig on Wednesday.

Shell shut down the main leak by closing the well and isolating the reservoir, said Glen Cayley, technical director of Shell's European exploration and production activities. However, he acknowledged that a second, smaller leak at the rig has proved more elusive to control.

"It has proved difficult to find the exact source of the leak because we are dealing with a complex subsea infrastructure and the leak seems to be coming from an awkward place surrounded by marine growth," he said late Tuesday.

"We face a number of technical challenges to ensure that there is no further release of hydrocarbons to the sea, so we are working on this methodically and carefully."

He said the secondary spill is now pumping less than one barrel — or 42 gallons — into the cold water each day.

Saket Vemprala, an oil and gas analyst for Business Monitor International, said while any spill is problematic, the North Sea spill is much smaller than the Deepwater Horizon spill.

"The numbers are simply not comparable," he said.

While the BP leak was from the well's head, the Shell leak is from a flow line, so the company knows what to expect, he said.

"There is a finite amount of oil in the flow," Vemprala said.

Still, the shallow-water disaster is an embarrassment for Shell as the company seeks its first license for exploratory drilling off the coast of Alaska. Shell CEO Peter Voser has previously claimed the BP blowout could never have happened to Shell, due to Shell's different well design.

"The risk management practices of some companies in the Gulf of Mexico do lag behind the standards set by other companies," Voser told analysts on a conference call in February. "We at Shell have been applying the best of the North Sea standards to our worldwide operations for many years."

Kenneth E. Arnold, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Engineering who served as an adviser to the U.S. Department of Interior during its probes into the Deepwater Horizon explosion, said the suggestion that any company is not vulnerable to a catastrophe is dubious.

"What we can measure are things that happen frequently enough that there is a trendline," he said, citing injuries, time lost to accidents, minor spills and incidents where a company failed to comply with government rules. "Predicting major disasters — that's something we struggle with."

On the eve of the Gulf disaster, BP had been tipped by some industry insiders as a potential winner of a safety award for its Gulf operations.

Arnold said he would classify a 1,300-barrel spill as "significant" but not catastrophic.

Shell said Tuesday the oil spill sheen has been growing and now covers 6,400 acres (26 square kilometers). Both Shell and the British government predict the oil will disperse naturally and not reach shore.

Cayley, in a statement, said the company "deeply regrets" the spill. He said the first leak was stopped Thursday but now "the oil found a second pathway to the sea."

Shell said it believes the oil is now leaking from a relief valve close to the original leak, and once it is certain of the source, it will stop the spill.

The British government agrees that the leak is small compared with the BP disaster but says it is still substantial for the U.K.'s continental shelf. It has promised to investigate the spill, which is four times the amount leaked by all British rigs into the North Sea in 2009.

Vicky Wyatt of Greenpeace criticized Shell for delaying information about the spill.

"The news that there's now a second leak from the Shell platform will only heighten concerns over how this episode is being handled," she said. "While oil has been flowing, timely information has not."

Shell told U.K. government agencies of the spill on Wednesday, but did not make the news public until Friday. On Saturday it declared that the leak had been contained.

Cayley said Shell was working with environmental groups and government agencies like Marine Scotland on the spill.

"We understand the concerns of environmental organizations like the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds about the ongoing danger any amount of oil can cause to wildlife, and we have been in regular contact with them since Friday," he said.

The last major spill in the North Sea was in 1993, when the oil tanker MV Braer ran aground in the Shetland Islands, spilling around 620,000 barrels of crude into the sea.

BP Pipeline Leaks Oily Mixture onto Alaskan Tundra

July 18, 2011

Reuters - BP reported yet another pipeline leak at its Alaskan oilfields, frustrating the oil giant's attempts to rebuild its reputation after the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

BP said on Monday that a pipeline at its 30,000 barrel per day Lisburne field, which is currently closed for maintenance, ruptured during testing and spilled a mixture of methanol and oily water onto the tundra.

The London-based company has a long history of oil spills at its Alaskan pipelines - accidents which have hurt its public image in the U.S., where around 40 percent of its assets are based.

The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation said the spill occurred on Saturday and amounted to 2,100 to 4,200 gallons.

A BP spokesman said the cleanup was under way and the company would determine the cause "in due course."

Lisburne, which is managed as part of the Greater Prudhoe Bay Unit, has produced no oil since June 18, according to Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission records, suggesting maintenance work requiring a prolonged shutdown. The spokesman said the field had been undergoing "its annual maintenance."

BP's blown out Macondo well caused the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history, spewing almost 5 million barrels of oil into the Gulf and putting BP's future in the U.S. at risk.

Previous problems including leaks from corroded pipelines in Alaska and the fatal Texas City refinery blast in 2005 had already earned the company a poor reputation for safety, something analysts say it needs to address if it is to continue to grow in North America.

BP shares were down 1.089 percent at 454 pence at 0919 GMT.

Production from the entire Lisburne field remains shut off while the spill is addressed, Alaska officials said.

Immediate efforts are focused on containment and cleanup, said Tom DeRuyter, state on-scene coordinator for the Department of Environmental Conservation. The methanol-produced water mix has spread into wet tundra as well as onto a gravel pad, bringing risks to slow-growing vegetation, DeRuyter said.

"You have actively growing plants and they're very susceptible to the contaminants," he said.

The pipeline will also have to be dug up to allow for an investigation into why it failed, he said.

Resumption of normal operations at that part of the field may require a relatively long wait, DeRuyter said.

"I think they're looking at trying to get that pad back up before freeze-up," he said.

Exxon Mobil Pipeline Leaks Oil into Yellowstone River

Exxon Mobil released 42,000 gallons of crude oil into the Yellowstone River through a broken pipeline. The company said that the damage was concentrated within a five- to 10-mile stretch of river. That figure has been growing since, hitting 30 miles in recent days. Later came inaccuracies in how long it took to shut down the pipeline from the company's control room in Houston. After initially saying it took six minutes to shut down the pipeline's pumps and 30 minutes to stop the flow of oil completely, the company revealed in filings with pipeline regulators that it took almost an hour. Company officials insist there was never any intent to deceive. - Montana, Exxon Mobil Split Over River Oil Spill, Associated Press, July 8, 2011

Exxon Mobil Says Oil Leaked into Yellowstone River

July 2, 2011

Reuters - A pipeline operated by Exxon Mobil Corp leaked as many as 1,000 barrels of crude oil into the Yellowstone River in Montana and has been shut down, the company said.

Exxon officials said on Sunday there were traces of oil up to 10 miles downriver from the site of what they called a "very unusual" event, though the governor of Montana said the spill may have spread further.

The U.S. oil company said it had slowed processing rates at its Billings refinery following the leak but did not expect supply disruptions in the area.

Exxon found the leak from the EMPCo pipeline early on Saturday morning. The pipeline runs only in Montana, from Silver Tip to Billings.

The cause of the leak remains unclear. Exxon estimated the oil release at anywhere from 750 to 1,000 barrels. One barrel of oil is equivalent to 42 gallons (163 liters), and the pipeline typically transports 40,000 barrels a day.

"We had no indications that there were any issues with this pipeline," Gary Pruessing, the president of EMPCo, told reporters on a conference call on Sunday.

Pruessing said the pipeline had been shut in May as a precaution as the river approached a high-water point, but that it was judged to be safe and turned back on.

Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer questioned Exxon's contention that the spill into the Yellowstone, the longest undammed river in the United States, was concentrated within a 10-mile area.

"This is a lot of wild country, and they haven't any idea whether it's 5 miles, 50 miles or 100 miles, they're guessing," Schweitzer, a Democrat, told Reuters in a telephone interview.

A full assessment of the oil's spread will not be possible until small boats can be deployed in the river, he said.

Exxon said earlier that the river's turbulence made it unsafe to use boats, but that the company had sent aircraft to view the spill.

Exxon discovered the leak when a loss of pressure was detected on the pipeline, which dates from 1991, and within six minutes the line was shut off, company officials said.

Some residents were briefly evacuated as a precaution but were allowed to return home later.

CONCERN FOR FARM FIELDS, WILDLIFE

Exxon said it would have about 100 people working on the spill by the end of Sunday.

Alan Jeffers, an Exxon spokesman, said in response to Schweitzer's comments that the company made its assessment that the spill appeared to be confined to within a 10-mile area based on what it had observed and what was reported to it.

"The bulk of it appears to be in that area, but we're continuing to look for oil along the river," he said.

Schweitzer said he was concerned about damage from the spill to farm fields recently flooded when the Yellowstone overflowed, and to the state's trout fishing industry.

Air monitoring has detected no threat to residents from the spill, EMPCo's Pruessing said. Municipal water systems also have shown no signs of infiltration by the oil, he said.

The Billings Gazette on Sunday cited conflicting reports from Exxon officials as to the extent of the leak. The paper carried pictures of absorbent bags piled along the side of a road running parallel to the river, ribbons of oil sticking to logs and one of a turtle stuck in oily mud.

Environmental cleanup firm Clean Harbors is on-site assisting with the early remediation efforts, Exxon said.

The leak came one day after a Maryland jury awarded plaintiffs suing Exxon $1.5 billion in damages for a 2006 leak at a gasoline station.

Scientists Alarmed by Diseased Fish in the Gulf

Scientists Alarmed by Diseased Fish in the Gulf

May 15, 2011

Climate Progress - One year after the BP oil catastrophe, marine life in the Gulf of Mexico is exhibiting some disturbing trends.

Over 150 dead dolphins, including several with oil from the BP spill on their bodies, have washed up along the Gulf Coast this year. Now, scientists are expressing grave concern over the shocking number of fish they’ve discovered in inland waterways and the Gulf of Mexico with skin lesions, fin rot, spots, liver blood clots and other health problems.

Richard Snyder, director of the University of West Florida Center for Environmental Diagnostics and Bioremediation, calls the discovery of so many diseased fish "a huge red flag":

In the years following the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska’s Prince William Sound, the herring fishery collapsed and has not recovered, according to an Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee report. The herring showed similar signs of illness — including skin lesions — that are showing up in Gulf fish

Many of the symptoms scientists see in Gulf fish are consistent with oil exposure. If these recent trends prove to be a result of the BP disaster, then this could very well be a sign of worse things to come. Scientists currently working in the gulf stress that “findings so far demonstrate that studies need to continue far into the future,” again emphasizing the critical need for significant investment in scientific study and the long-term restoration of the Gulf.

The lesson of Prince William Sound’s herring fishery shows that the most devastating effects of the spill could take several years to present themselves. Therefore, Congress, which has failed to pass any sort of post-spill legislation, must use its authority to ensure BP and other responsible parties continue to be held accountable and that funds are directed into research and restoration projects.

The Untold Story of the BP Gulf Oil Disaster

Spill Children: The Untold Story of the BP Gulf Oil Disaster (April 20, 2011)

Soaring Oil Prices Boost BP's Bottom Line

AP Enterprise: BP is Looking Strong a Year Later

April 18, 2011

AP - ...BP employees could be found criminally negligent for the 206 million gallons of oil the U.S. government says gushed from the company's blown-out well and for the 11 men who died when the Deepwater Horizon rig it was leasing exploded. Hundreds of lawsuits and civil and criminal fines could add billions of dollars to its already staggering liabilities. And the findings of several investigations still under way could further damage its reputation.

BP has estimated that the spill will cost the company at least $40.9 billion but is hoping to force some of its partners on the doomed rig to assume some of those costs.

There is also lasting damage in the Gulf, including empty hotels, out-of-work oystermen and fears of a badly disrupted underwater ecosystem. And some of those worst hit by the spill scoff at BP's oft-repeated promises to make people whole again.

"I don't know of one person who has come to me and said, `I've been made whole. I feel good.' Everything is completely negative from everybody," said Louisiana fishing guide Ron Price.

When BP finally managed to cap its runaway well in July and permanently sealed it in September, the bankruptcy talk was reduced to a whisper and the 24-hour-a-day beating the company was taking on television and newspaper front pages eased up.

By the fall, there was talk that the crisis wasn't as bad as feared and that the Gulf might recover sooner than expected. Then soaring oil prices came to the company's rescue, boosting its bottom line. Now, as Wednesday's anniversary approaches, the oil spill that so riveted the nation's attention is beginning to fade into memory.

For the families of the men killed on the rig, BP's resilience can be downright painful.

"BP has never done anything other than send flowers and three people to Jason's memorial service," said Shelley Anderson, the widow of rig worker Jason Anderson.

BP officials point out that they set aside $20 billion for a fund that is still processing claims for victims of the disaster, though only $3.8 billion of it has actually been paid to date. They also still employ cleanup and recovery workers, though far fewer than before.

Company officials also say they are living up to their commitments to restore the region's economy and environment.

"BP has not — and will not — shy away from its responsibilities," CEO Bob Dudley told shareholders at the company's annual meeting, which was marked by scuffles between protesters and security guards, and investor dissent over the performance of several directors.

Dudley took over Oct. 1 as CEO after the ouster of Tony Hayward, who infuriated Gulf residents by saying during the crisis,

"I'd like my life back."

Dudley, who grew up in Mississippi and was the first American ever to lead the British company, quickly sought to move BP beyond the crisis, firing the executive responsible for deep-water wells and announcing a new unit to police safety throughout the company.

BP also signed energy-exploration agreements in Indonesia, China, India and Australia. It agreed to pay $680 million for a controlling interest in Brazilian ethanol and sugar producer CNAA. BP also agreed to pay India's Reliance Industries $7.2 billion for a stake in key oil and gas blocks, and announced a deal with Russia's state-owned oil firm Rosneft that would involve exploration in the Arctic Sea, where a big oil spill could damage a pristine ecosystem far less resilient than the Gulf of Mexico. The deal is facing opposition and is not yet final.

BP isn't shying away from the Gulf, either, though it is moving more methodically there amid the political currents.

The first deep-water permit issued after the Obama administration lifted a post-spill drilling ban went to Noble Energy Inc. for work on a well off the coast of Louisiana. BP is not the operator but it has a 46 percent stake in the well. BP also bought out Shell's 25 percent interest in two Gulf fields in December, making BP the sole owner of both.

Spokesman Scott Dean said BP, the leading leaseholder in the Gulf, will remain active in all facets of the Gulf of Mexico oil exploration. The company has applied for a permit to drill one new well in the Gulf and is certain to apply for more.

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Regulation and Enforcement said BP's applications will be weighed just like any other company's.

"BP is trying to refill its new-project pipeline with deals in the Arctic, offshore India, and Asia, but the Gulf of Mexico remains a key region for the company," said industry analyst Fadel Gheit of Oppenheimer & Co. "They don't want to push too hard, knowing politicians and environmentalists will be all over them."

Despite the uncertainties, BP announced Feb. 1 that it would restore its dividend and that it made a fourth-quarter profit of $5.6 billion, a 30 percent increase from the same period a year earlier. Rising oil prices are certain to boost its cash on hand and could lead to even higher profits. BP's stock fell 54 percent in the months after the spill, but it has regained much of that since then. Its stock is now trading about 20 percent lower than what it was the day before the rig exploded.

BP was able to deflect some of the criticism by shifting the paying of victims' compensation to claims czar Ken Feinberg, who has absorbed much of the blame for what victims say is a slow payment process.

Overall, the oil giant still has a lot of work to do to improve its reputation. Five Gulf Coast residents who had planned to tell investors about their post-spill woes were denied access to the company meeting, prompting confrontations with guards. Inside, hundreds of BP investors questioned board members about what they said was excessive executive pay and a lack of transparency on safety improvements.

In Washington, lawmakers are watching BP closely.

CEO Dudley still spends a great deal of time reassuring detractors.

"We need to earn back your trust, along with that of state and federal leaders and the trust of Gulf Coast residents and customers," he said at an industry conference in Houston last month. "We are determined we will once again restore that trust, and I realize this requires action, not words."

Flashback BP Makes Enough Profit in Four Days to Cover the Costs of the Spill Cleanup Thus Far

May 11, 2010

Think Progress - BP said yesterday that it had already spent $350 million on the spill response, and the company’s stock has taken a big hit, but the “behemoth” company will almost certainly survive the disaster with little long term damage.

BP’s daily profits dwarf the daily cost of spill response, and at the current rate, the company could cover the entire cost of cleanup thus far in just under four days of profits:

For now, at least, BP’s prodigious costs combating the oil spill in the Gulf are outweighed by prodigious profits.

On Monday, BP said it spent $350 million in the first 20 days of the spill response, about $17.5 million a day. It has paid 295 of the 4,700 claims received, for a total of $3.5 million. By contrast, in the first quarter of the year, the London-based oil giant’s profits averaged $93 million a day.

At $93 million a day in profits, BP makes $350 million in about 3.8 days. The Washington Post noted that Exxon, through a decision by the Supreme Court, was able to pay only $507.5 million of the original $5 billion in punitive damages that it had been assessed for the 1989 Valdez disaster.

U.S. Government in Collusion with BP to Cover Up Oil Leak

BP Asks to be Fined for Each Day of Spill, Not for How Much Oil It Leaked

April 6, 2011

The Lookout - In a court filing last night, attorneys for BP argued that the company should be fined for each day its busted well expelled oil into the Gulf last summer, rather than for each barrel it leaked.

As it stands, BP faces civil penalties of between $1,000 and $4,300 per barrel of oil leaked, based on the amount of willful negligence by its employees as determined by federal investigators. With the official government tally of oil leaked in the spill totaling 4.1 million barrels, BP stands to be fined somewhere between $4.1 to $17.6 billion dollars.

But BP wants the feds to use a different method for assessing fines under the Clean Water Act--one in which polluters are fined $32,500 per day for the duration of the spill. This scale would potentially save the oil giant billions. Based on a daily calculation, BP stands to be fined only $2.8 to $4.9 million, depending on whether the government uses the day the well was capped or the day it was permanently sealed as the end date.

In arguing to have its fined accessed in this manner, BP claims that it was not willfully negligent in any way and that current estimates on the amount of oil that leaked are not accurate, a defense it parroted last week in its first sustainability report since the spill.

BP Emails Show Strain Before Spill

Internal BP emails show that there was lots of the behind-the-scenes bickering over well operations prior to the Deepwater Horizon explosion.

April 4, 2011

Houston Chronicle - BP supervisors in Houston exchanged sometimes contentious emails about operations on the company's Macondo well in the month prior to the deadly April 2010 blowout and oil spill.

The emails, which were given to the Houston Chronicle, appear to show strain among managers overseeing the drilling operation, as well as the stress on workers trying to complete the over-budget well and shut it in for production later.

The documents are expected to be evidence this week at hearings in a continuing Coast Guard-Interior Department investigation of the blowout that destroyed the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, killed 11 workers and triggered the spill.

The hearings resumed in a New Orleans suburb on Monday.

In a March 14, 2010, email, David Sims, a BP engineering team leader working on the Macondo project from BP offices in West Houson, responded to an accusation by well team leader John Guide that Sims wasn't listening during a conference call.

Sims, who had been Guide's peer in the organization before a recent promotion, outlined the reasons for one of his decisions, then berated Guide for his management style.

"You seem to love being the victim. Everything is someone else's fault," Sims wrote. "You criticize nearly everything we do on the rig but don't seem to realize that you are responsible for every(thing) we do on the rig."

Guide appeared to have taken the criticism to heart in a later email, responding that he would "consult the team and make well-thought-out decisions."

A lawyer for Guide declined comment on the e-mails. Sims' attorney did not return a call Monday.

Deposition ahead

Sims is scheduled to give a deposition in New Orleans this week in the massive collection of Macondo-related civil lawsuits that have been consolidated there.

In a statement Monday night, BP said the emails provide no new information about the disaster. They "reflect conversations among persons working on the project and have been addressed in a number of investigations already," the company said.

On April 17, just three days before the blast, Guide wrote to Sims about the stress the operations team Guide managed was feeling over actions by the engineering team that planned the work carried out on the rig.

"David, over the past four days there has been so many last minute changes to the operation that the WSL (Well Site Leaders) have finally come to their wits' end," Guide wrote. "The quote is 'flying by the seat of our pants.' "

Millions over budget

The well was originally budgeted at $96 million, but by the time of the blowout BP had spent close to $142 million and was at least 38 days behind schedule. Engineers charged with planning later steps in the drilling and completion of the well were changing them regularly as new issues came up, according to the emails. Guide wrote that work on the well was requiring daily visits from shore-based personnel.

"We have made a special boat or helicopter run everyday," Guide continued. "Everybody wants to do the right thing, but, this huge level of paranoia from engineering leadership is driving chaos... The operation is not going to succeed if we continue in this manner."

Management issues?

A report issued earlier this year by Fred Bartlit, chief counsel for the presidential spill commission, pointed to some email communications surrounding the well as indicative of BP management shortcomings.

Bartlit pointed out that the conflicts stemmed, at least in part, from a reorganization of BP's exploration business that had just taken effect last April. Before the reorganization, all of the engineers and operations personnel for a project reported to the same manager.

But the new structure established separate managers for engineering — the task of designing and planning the rig's work flow, and operations - supervising and communicating with workers carrying out those plans on the rig.

"It is clear that the way BP handled authority and accountability created confusion during the Macondo project," Bartlit wrote.

Not alone in feelings

Others on BP's onshore team shared the dissatisfaction with the reorganization.

John Sprague, a drilling engineer manager who oversaw all of BP's Gulf of Mexico operations, was critical of the restructuring in an April 8 email to a group of BP engineers.

But Sprague conceded one of the likely reasons behind it.

"Granted our Engineering teams are inexperienced," he wrote.

• See: Oil Spill in the Gulf: The BP, Exxon and Nalco Co. (Corexit) Connection
• See: Why Did the U.S. Air Force Help BP Spray Corexit, a Dispersant Which the EPA Banned as Too Toxic?