http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/oyster-population-plummets-louisiana/story?id14404214

By CHRISTINA CARON (@cdcaron)
Aug. 29, 2011

Today, on the sixth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, Louisiana and
Mississippi are battling a sharp decline in the oyster population,
which may not recover until 2013 now that a two-year influx of fresh
water has killed off millions of the mollusks.

After the BP oil spill in 2010, water was diverted out of the
Mississippi River to keep the oil away from coastal wetlands. In the
process, freshwater flooded into oyster hatcheries, disrupting the
delicate saline balance required for oysters to survive. When saline
levels get too low, algae die, eliminating the oyster’s food supply.

And if it weren’t already enough that the Gulf Coast had been hammered
by the largest oil spill in U.S. history as well as record drought,
oyster farmers got hit again in May after rain and snowmelt had caused
the Mississippi River to rise higher than it had in 70 years.

The Army Corps of Engineers opened the Bonnet Carre Spillway, located
west of New Orleans, to divert rising Mississippi River floodwaters
from the city. Soon after, they also opened the Morganza spillway,
diverting water away from both Baton Rouge and New Orleans, and adding
even more fresh water to oyster grounds.

“This year we’ll produce about 50 percent of our traditional in-shell
oysters,” said Mike Voisin, CEO of Motivatit Seafoods, which typically
produces about 20 million pounds of in-shell oysters.

During a typical oyster season, which starts in September in Louisiana,
Voisin said the state produces a third of the nation’s oysters. But
this year, he estimates the number will decline from an average of 250
million pounds to about 125 million pounds.

Next year, he expects the number of oysters produced to decline even
further, to 87.5 million pounds, and the price of oysters to rise.

Oyster Population Declines in Louisiana, Mississippi

The 2010 water diversion was successful in preventing Louisiana’s
coastline from becoming contaminated, Voisin said.

“We have 7,500 miles of coastline around Louisiana and only had 400
miles that were oiled.”

But the impact that diversion had on the oysters will likely last until
2013, possibly longer.

Voisin, who also serves as chairman of the Gulf Seafood Marketing
Coalition, says oyster producers east of the Mississippi River are now
also investigating a mysterious substance growing on the shells oyster
larvae attach to (commonly referred to as “cultch”). He believes it’s
due to the lack of harvesting in the area after the BP oil spill.

An oyster mortality study conducted in August of 2010 and published
this year found an estimated 77 percent of the oysters in the Breton
Sound basin off the Louisiana coast died.

In Mississippi, the oyster population had huge losses, especially in
the western Mississippi Sound, which houses most of the commercial
reefs.

“From our preliminary assessment it’s pretty severe,” said Scott
Gordon, shellfish bureau director at the Mississippi Department of
Marine Resources. “There’s no denying the freshwater flooding did have
an impact on the oysters.”

Mississippi’s restoration efforts will eventually make an impact, he
said, but probably not for another 18 to 24 months, the time it takes
for oysters to grow. Currently water salinities are back to normal, and
the state will continue cultivating cultch plants, providing oyster
shells or limestone for the oyster larvae to attach, using $3 million
in restoration funding.

In Louisiana, however, water salinity continues to be a problem.

Alligator farmer Stephen Sagrera, Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries
Commission chairman, said the oyster population has been “severely
hurt” by the extra freshwater, and the 7-member commission will take up
the issue Thursday when it sets dates for the upcoming oyster season.

“We just have to get the right salinity in the waters,” he said,
acknowledging, “That’s up to mother nature.

Special thanks to Richard Charter

Public News Service-FL

August 31, 2011

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – The dispersants used in cleaning up the Gulf Deepwater Horizon oil disaster may have the same types of adverse effects on humans and wildlife as does the oil itself, according to a new report from Earthjustice, the environmental advocacy law firm.

One scientist who has reviewed the data is D.L. Valentine, a biochemist at the University of Southern California.

“Five chemicals were associated with cancer; 33 chemicals in dispersants were associated with skin irritation from rashes or burns; 33 chemicals are linked to eye irritation; 11 chemicals suspected or potential respiratory toxins or irritants; 11 chemicals in the dispersants are suspected kidney toxins.”

More data should be available about the effects of the dispersants used in the BP oil spill, the researchers say. BP responds that fallout from the chemicals used has been minimal.

Among the roadblocks to determining the total health effects of chemical dispersants has been the government itself, says biologist Doug Inkley at the National Wildlife Federation.

“Unfortunately, a lot of the scientific assessments that are currently under way, under the National Resources Damage Assessment, are being held confidential.”

Earthjustice says its findings call for more research, greater disclosure, comprehensive toxicity testing, and more careful selection of the least toxic dispersants when needed for an oil-spill response.

The report, “The Chaos Of Clean-Up,” reviews scientific research on each of 57 chemical ingredients in dispersants, acknowledging that the actual formulas for specific dispersants are not made public. Its findings are online at earthjustice.org.

Click here to view this story on the Public News Service RSS site and access an audio version of this and other stories: http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/21903-1

Special thanks to Richard Charter

“En route to Singapore, the rig took on water, which forced repairs and an extensive inspection to assure its seaworthiness.” Nice beginning. DV

http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/08/26/cuba-oil-idINN1E77P03U20110826

Reuters

Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:39pm IST
* Rig expected to arrive in Cuban waters in November
* Repsol to drill first wells soon after rig arrival
* Cuba says may have 20 billion barrels of oil offshore
By Jeff Franks

HAVANA, Aug 26 (Reuters) – A new, Chinese-built drilling rig was expected to depart Singapore on Friday or later this weekend on its way to Cuba where it will be used to usher in a new era in offshore oil exploration for the communist-led island.

The Scarabeo 9, owned by Italian oil giant Eni SpA’s [ENI.MI) offshore unit Saipem [SPMI.MI] and contracted in Cuba by Spanish oil firm Repsol YPF [REP.MC], was anchored in Singapore and ready to leave on what an Eni spokesman said would be an 80-day voyage.

A Western diplomat in Havana said the rig would stop in South Africa and Brazil before reaching Cuba in November, with the expectation it will start drilling shortly after arrival.
Oil experts on the island say Cuba may have 20 billion barrels of oil in its still-untapped portion of the Gulf of Mexico, although the U.S. Geological Survey estimates reserves are a more modest 5 billion barrels.

Repsol drilled a well in Cuban waters in 2004 and found oil there, but for various reasons, including the longstanding U.S. trade embargo against the island, has not drilled again.
For Cuba, a big oil find will give its struggling economy a boost and reduce or eliminate its dependence on oil-rich leftist ally Venezuela, which ships 113,000 barrels a day to the island at reduced prices.

Opponents of the Cuban government fear that if significant oil reserves are discovered, it will only further entrench the communist system and its leaders.

Cuban President Raul Castro, 80, is in the midst of liberalizing the Soviet-style economy with the goal of assuring the survival of communism once he and his elderly leadership group are gone.

The Scarabeo 9, which has the latest technology and is capable of drilling in up to 12,000 feet (3,600 meters) of water, was built in Yantai CIMC Raffles Shipyards in Yantai, China, but after a number of delays was shipped to the Keppel FELS [KPLM.SI] shipyard in Singapore last fall for completion.

En route to Singapore, the rig took on water, which forced repairs and an extensive inspection to assure its seaworthiness.

Repsol, in a consortium with Norway’s Statoil [STL.OL] and a unit of India’s ONGC [ONGC.BO], is expected to drill one or two wells before passing the rig to Malaysia’s state-owned oil company Petronas and then on the ONGC unit, ONGC Videsh, both of which have leased their own exploration blocks in Cuba’s offshore.

Venezuela’s PDVSA has said it plans to drill in Cuban waters within a year, while China’s national oil company is considering whether to lease offshore blocks as well, a Cuban oil official recently told Reuters.

Cuban waters border the U.S. part of the Gulf of Mexico and that of Mexico, but U.S. oil companies are forbidden from working in Cuba due to the U.S. embargo put in place five decades ago with the aim of toppling Cuba’s communist government.

(Additional reporting by Stephen Jewkes in Milan and Marc Frank in Havana; Editing by Vicki Allen)

Special thanks to Richard Charter

> Aug 26, 2011 at 11:04 am
> Our guest blogger is Kiley Kroh, Center for American Progress Associate Director for Ocean Communications.
> The Big Oil-backed Consumer Energy Alliance’s “Open The Gulf” campaign consists of eight ads and an initial two-week run in battleground states, featuring several people describing their hardships as a result of increased fuel cost and the temporary moratorium on Gulf drilling after the BP oil disaster, and advocating opening the Gulf of Mexico to increased offshore drilling. Here’s tugboat operator Cory Kief, backed by somber strings: [VIDEO]
> The ads, complete with sad music and images of abandoned barns and empty docks, also contain several glaring inaccuracies and misleading implications:
>
> MYTH: Opening the gulf to new drilling will lower gas prices. Though Colorado farmer Marc Amesh and truck driver David Boyer may have legitimate concerns that rising fuel costs are putting their jobs and businesses at risk, increased drilling is quite simply not the answer. Instead of providing a real solution, the CEA campaign merely parrots Big Oil lies and perpetuates the falsehood that increased drilling will lower gas prices. Even the non-partisan Energy Information Agency found that whether we dramatically expand offshore drilling or stop selling offshore leases entirely, it will have virtually no effect on gas prices – ever.
>
> MYTH: The Obama administration is not issuing offshore drilling permits or leases. According to statistics from the Bureau of Ocean Energy, Management and Enforcement, 68 new shallow water well permits have been issued since the implementation of new safety and environmental standards on June 8, 2010. Permits have averaged more than seven per month since fall 2010, compared to an average of eight permits per month in 2009. For deepwater permits requiring subsea containment, they have approved 112 permits for 34 unique wells, with 19 permits pending, and 21 permits returned to the operator with requests for additional information, particularly information regarding containment. And perhaps the team at CEA missed last week’s announcement that the administration has scheduled a massive sale of offshore leases in the Gulf of Mexico – an auction that encompasses more than 20 million acres in the western gulf.
>
> Before complaining about the rate of issuing new permits and leases, the industry might want to take stock of what they already have – and aren’t using. A recent study conducted by the Department of Interior found that the vast majority of offshore drilling leases remain idle.
>
> Royal Dutch Shell, whose alarming safety record includes numerous spills and violations, was recently given the green light to drill in both the highly dangerous Arctic and a new development well in the Gulf of Mexico. The company also confirmed that “all five of the floating rigs that Shell was operating in the gulf before last year’s BP oil spill and drilling moratorium are now back to work” – a fact that doesn’t jive with CEA’s deceptive ads.
>
>
> MYTH: The economic potential of offshore oil and gas is worth the risk of another blowout. Despite BP’s efforts to convince the broader public that the oil is gone and the gulf is restored, the reality is much grimmer. While the ultimate toll of the spill won’t be known for several years, there is no denying the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history had a catastrophic impact on the Gulf Coast economy and its residents. An NRDC report found that the Gulf of Mexico saw a 39 percent decline in commercial fishing catches overall between 2009 and 2010, representing a $62 million loss in dockside sales. To date, the oil giant has paid out $5 billion in economic damages to individuals and businesses in the region – with 61,558 new claims received in the past three months – and faces billions more in Clean Water Act fines and NRDA liabilities. After their top execs admitted just one year ago that they weren’t prepared to handle a major offshore spill, CEA’s Big Oil backers might want to reevaluate whether that’s a risk they’re willing to take.
>
> Instead of asking why America’s not doing more for Big Oil, maybe Cory the tugboater, Marc the farmer, and David the truck driver should ask BP, ExxonMobil, Shell, and the others why they keep grubbing for American taxpayers’ dollars to pad their obscene profit margins.
>
> Kiley Kroh
> Associate Director for Ocean Communications
> Center for American Progress
> 202-741-6354
> @OceanProgress

Special thanks to Richard Charter

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/08/24/24greenwire-oil-arpa-e-top-list-of-subsidy-cuts-urged-by-s-57924.html?ref=energy-environment

I really like these proposed funding cuts………….DV

By ELANA SCHOR of Greenwire
Published: August 24, 2011

As the congressional “supercommittee” readies its much-anticipated debt-cutting plan, a quartet of strange-bedfellow groups — two green and two fiscally conservative — today joined forces to pitch $380 billion in cuts to what they billed as environmentally harmful federal subsidies.

The four nonprofits — Taxpayers for Common Sense, Friends of the Earth, Public Citizen and the Heartland Institute — took broad aim at high political priorities of Republicans and Democrats alike in their budget-slashing Green Scissors report. Among the spending items they eyed for phaseout are several of the oil and gas tax breaks unsuccessfully targeted by the White House this year, nuclear power loan guarantees, and a Department of Energy high-tech research program prized by the Obama administration.

Even while offering their slate of energy-money slices to the supercommittee, which must propose more than $1 trillion of cuts to fellow lawmakers by Thanksgiving as part of this month’s sweeping debt limit deal, the advocacy groups acknowledged that many programs they oppose maintain powerful constituencies on Capitol Hill.

“While these cuts are low-hanging fruit” for the four groups, Heartland Vice President Eli Lehrer told reporters today, “we’re not maintaining that they’re going to be easy cuts to make.”

Some of the cuts likely would face weaker resistance than others, such as a proposed repeal of farm supports that were on the chopping block during early spending talks led by Vice President Joe Biden. But others that appear to have momentum face a murky future — for instance, while the ethanol blenders’ tax credit was overwhelmingly rejected by the Senate this year, an alliance of biofuel reformers failed to attach its repeal to the debt-limit deal (E&ENews PM, July 26).

As it stands, the ethanol credit is scheduled to expire at year’s end, allowing Congress to forgo future spending as well as more proactive savings by not acting to renew it.

Ethanol is hardly the only alternative fuel that would see its government support cut by the four groups. The Green Scissors blueprint offers cuts to “clean coal” and carbon capture and sequestration programs as well as DOE’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), created by the 2009 economic stimulus bill to promote “transformational energy research” in areas ranging from fuels to clean electricity.

The Green Scissors sponsors did not include ARPA-E in their overall total, adding a footnote explaining that “not all of this spending funds environmentally harmful projects.” Yet their argument that the nascent agency offers “taxpayer subsidies to develop things that the private sector was already using on a large scale” drew early criticism from its supporters.

“Eliminating funding for ARPA-e would be particularly short-sighted … because of the need for breakthroughs in development of clean, low cost energy sources,” Bipartisan Policy Center senior adviser Paul Bledsoe said via email. “Eating your seed corn is not a national strategy for long-term energy competitiveness.”

Bledsoe’s group also helps to steer the American Energy Innovation Council, a coalition of seven top-tier business chiefs including Microsoft Corp.’s Bill Gates and General Electric Co.’s Jeffrey Immelt, which is calling for a $16 billion annual public-sector investment in clean energy development.

What’s in a subsidy?

Washington’s inability to end two major ethanol subsidies as part of the debt limit deal took root this spring as conservatives battled internally over whether the rollback of tax benefits could be construed as a tax increase — a clash that famously pitted Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) against anti-tax activist Grover Norquist (E&E Daily, June 14).

Former Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.), toppled by a tea party challenger in his re-election race last year and now leading a coalition of conservatives seeking to address climate change, said today that he believed Coburn was the victor in that fight. As a result, Inglis added, GOP members of the newly convened “supercommittee” could consider chopping energy tax expenditures.

“By eliminating subsidies, not only do we get an immediate fiscal benefit in deficit reduction, but we also get the opportunity for growth and revenue flowing to the federal government because of the innovation that could occur as a result,” Inglis said. He was joined by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) in helping the four advocacy groups unveil their Green Scissors recommendations.

Perhaps the biggest unanswered question facing the 12 members of the debt-cutting panel, including House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.), is whether they can take a significant stab at overhauling the tax code given their imminent deadline. Such a tax reform effort likely would be the only viable vehicle for both parties’ leaders to accept politically risky cuts such as a repeal of oil and gas industry benefits.

Inglis said that he hopes the Green Scissors outline could come into play even beyond the “supercommittee” time horizon. But Bledsoe, of the Bipartisan Policy Center, cautioned that “much larger policy issues can best be addressed through a broader deal on tax and budget reform that is desperately needed.

“Reductions in energy subsidies like those for ethanol can play a valuable role in debt reduction, but a systemic approach is needed that considers all national priorities including economic growth, energy security, and environmental impact,” he said.
Click here (pdf) to read the Green Scissors report.

Special thanks to Richard Charter