http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/learning-lessons-from-deepwater-horizon/1224920

By Frank Alcock, special to the Times
In Print: Sunday, April 15, 2012

Editor’s note: April 20 will be the second anniversary of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
On April 2, 2010, President Barack Obama defended his decision to open up new areas to offshore drilling by claiming that “oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills.” It was a mantra all too familiar to Floridians. Oil spills happen, yes, but statistically speaking they are rarely caused by drilling rigs. Working on behalf of the Century Commission for a Sustainable Florida, the nonpartisan Collins Center for Public Policy issued a report that same month that did not find fault with this claim.

I should know. I was a primary author of the report. Requested by former Senate President Jeff Atwater, the report tried to provide fair and accurate answers to questions pertaining to the ban on drilling in or near Florida’s state waters. We based our answers on the best available knowledge and vetted them through experts.

The statistics on oil spills supported the general claim that oil spills associated with drilling rig blowouts were extremely rare. The total volume of oil spilled in U.S. waters was a small fraction of 1 percent of what was produced in U.S. waters; and only a small portion of that number was attributable to drilling rigs (in comparison with spills associated with transport and coastal runoff). And according to the National Academy of Sciences, the vast majority of oil found in marine waters actually results from naturally occurring seepage through the seabed.

Shortly after the release of the Collins Center report, the Florida House released a 180-page formal risk assessment by the Willis Group consulting company. The Willis report’s conclusions weren’t markedly different from those of the Collins Center. But they more forcefully downplayed the blowout risks. Referencing an accident off the coast of Australia that occurred in the summer of 2009, Willis argued that stricter regulations in U.S. waters meant a similar incident in the gulf should be considered a 1-in-100-year event.
Eleven days after the Willis report was released, the Deepwater Horizon exploded.

Before Deepwater Horizon, the prevailing narrative suggested that: (1) offshore drilling risks could never be eliminated completely, but they were modest, stable and well understood; (2) the industry’s capacity and approach to effectively manage these risks had dramatically improved over time; and (3) the U.S. oil and gas regulatory regime was among the safest and strongest in the world.

After the accident, investigations have refuted this narrative and instead suggested that: (1) accident risks have dramatically increased in recent years due to the targeting of resources in deeper water and in deeper, older geology; (2) the industry’s capacity and approach to managing accidental spill risks has remained stagnant; and (3) the U.S. oil and gas regulatory regime is relatively weak and has not kept pace with international best practices.

One might be tempted to ask what Deepwater Horizon has to do with the drilling debate in Florida. Florida state waters are quite shallow. This is true. Many of the aforementioned challenges associated with deepwater drilling would not be encountered within state waters.

But we shouldn’t overlook the connection between Florida’s drilling ban and the buffer zone it is granted in the federal waters of the eastern gulf. The latter continues to be politically dependent upon the former. And a number of lessons that were learned from Deepwater Horizon can and should be applied to the decisions Floridians make with respect to drilling in its coastal state waters.

These lessons revolve around the themes of knowledge, transparency, capacity and incentives. Overall, offshore drilling policies should strive to generate knowledge of potential risks and rewards – which are often site-specific – and make that knowledge accessible to industry, government and the general public. If societies decide – through democratic political processes – that moving forward with exploration and development of oil and gas resources presents an acceptable risk, then the issue becomes one of risk management capacity.

Can risks be effectively managed given existing capacity in specific firms and specific government agencies? Finally, given sufficient capacity, does the regulatory regime harmonize risk-reward relationships or do weak sanctions and modest liability caps generate conditions associated with market failure? Florida’s 2009-10 drilling debate left something to be desired with each of these themes.

As we pause to reflect on the two-year anniversary of Deepwater Horizon, we should try to get past the blame game and draw some meaningful lessons for the future. Perhaps more important, though, we shouldn’t be so naive to think that these lessons are of little concern to Floridians.

___________________

Frank Alcock is a senior fellow at the Collins Center for Public Policy, former director of the Marine Policy Institute at Mote Marine Laboratory, former director of Environmental Studies at New College of Florida, and a former policy analyst at the U.S. Department of Energy. His entire analysis of the lessons learned from the spill can be found at www.collinscenter.org.
[Last modified: Apr 14, 2012 04:31 AM]

Special thanks to Richard Charter

http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/article1224936.ece

In Print: Monday, April 16, 2012

Above, crew members work in June 2010 to clean up spilled oil from Deepwater Horizon that washed ashore at Pensacola Beach. At left, the Deepwater Horizon rig burns on April 21, 2010. Eleven workers on the rig were killed and more than 200 million gallons of oil were spilled before the well was killed months later.

The SECOND anniversary of America’s worst environmental disaster on Friday should serve as a reminder to the nation that there remains much work to be done. There has been progress in the two years since the explosion of the BP-leased drilling rig Deepwater Horizon. The federal government has imposed new standards to make offshore oil drilling safer. BP, after an inexcusable start, has begun cleaning up the environmental and economic damage. And scientists are beginning to discern the long-term impacts to the Gulf of Mexico. But many of these efforts still exist only on paper. And, amid the rapid expansion of gulf drilling, more reform is needed to ensure the next oil spill does not wreak the same damage on people, the economy and the environment. Three areas in particular need attention.

Safety

The government still trusts the drilling industry to self-police.
The Obama administration ordered a number of safety and regulatory reforms in response to the deaths of 11 workers on the Deepwater rig and the release of more than 200 million gallons of oil. All operators – regardless of water depth – must demonstrate they can deal with a worst-case blowout.
Wells and casings must have stronger designs. Deepwater rigs must be able to contain a blowout under the harsh conditions thousands of feet below the sea’s surface. The measures also require that rig operators be better trained, and that the industry share its knowledge and equipment in an emergency.

But many safety standards are industry-driven, and the government is taking it on faith that operators can contain blowouts in the growing sector of deepwater drilling. Leading agencies such as the Interior Department, which oversees offshore drilling, and the Coast Guard, which would respond to any crisis, are still struggling to carry out their new responsibilities. Inspectors have tested so few containment caps, congressional auditors reported in February, that “there is limited assurance that operators are prepared to respond to a subsea blowout.” Yet in the last year the government approved some 360 deepwater permits.

Environment

The desire to move on can’t come at the expense of the gulf’s long-term health.
The spill caused the closure of 88,000 square miles of federal waters to fishing. Four million feet of oil boom were deployed. Hundreds of miles of gulf coast shoreline required cleaning by machine or by hand. Researchers are still reporting tar mats buried in the sand. Louisiana’s oyster beds were hard hit. So were coastal marshes. Dead dolphins have washed up in unusually high numbers. Marine scientists are finding diseased fish and dead deep-sea coral. Then there is the unknown impact of putting 1.8 million gallons of dispersant in the water in an effort to keep the oil from the surface and the shore.

The federal government has already produced two overarching plans for restoring the gulf, which provides the nation 90 percent of its offshore oil and gas and one-third of its seafood. A long-term damage assessment is ongoing that will prioritize spending and keep states and local communities on track.

And BP has pledged $1 billion toward early restoration projects in four gulf states, including Florida. Some work – rebuilding marshes, dunes and oyster habitat – will be straightforward. But scientists won’t know the larger ecological impact to the gulf for another 20 years. That’s why Congress needs to increase the paltry fines on any spill, which currently range from $1,100 to $4,300 per 42-gallon barrel, and dedicate the vast majority of that money to repairing the very water bodies that are harmed.

Damages

BP’s victims still need to be made whole, and the government should increase the $75 million damage cap for future spills.

It took a nudge by the federal government for BP to put serious money on the table, and putting the claims to bed quickly and fairly may require more prodding. BP has paid more than $8 billion in mostly private claims (with the biggest chunk in Florida) and $14 billion on the cleanup. It pledged another $180 million for tourist promotion in the gulf states ($62 million for Florida) and an additional $82 million to test and market gulf seafood. These are substantial down payments. The company cannot be allowed to slide on its commitments as images from the disaster fade from the front pages.

BP is scheduled to roll out the terms this week of a proposed settlement to resolve the vast majority of private claims for monetary and medical losses.

The federal judge overseeing the case will need to ensure the deal, valued at an additional $8 billion, is fair and has the flexibility to cover legitimate damages that emerge later. The coverage for medical care must cover the long arc that can exist before health problems arise. And claimants will need help in navigating what could be three separate processes for getting their money.

And while BP waived its limits under the current $75 million cap in fines for an offshore spill, a company with smaller pockets might not have the same wherewithal or self-interest to act similarly to repair the company brand. That would frustrate the victims of any future spill even more, and make it harder for the federal government and the states to begin the long road to recovery.

[Last modified: Apr 15, 2012 04:30 AM]

Special thanks to Richard Charter

http://www.adn.com/2012/04/15/2424853/inupiat-tribal-leader-wins-large.html

Cannon claims $150,000 award, continues fight to deny Shell Oil.
By LISA DEMER
Anchorage Daily News
Published: April 16th, 2012 12:56 AM
Last Modified: April 16th, 2012 12:56 AM

Her father was a Point Hope whaling captain. Her mother taught her how to butcher the bowhead and care for the meat. The family depended on the sea and land for so much.

Caroline Cannon’s lifelong connection to the Arctic Ocean pushed her to become one of the state’s most vocal opponents of offshore oil drilling.
Now, just as Shell Oil is poised to drill exploration wells off Alaska’s northern coast, her advocacy has won her a coveted environmental award.

Cannon, an Inupiat mother of nine and grandmother of 26, is one of this year’s winners of the Goldman Environmental Prize, described as the world’s biggest for grassroots environmentalists.

Cannon and the other five winners from around the world were officially announced Monday. Each will receive $150,000.

Cannon is the former president of the Native Village of Point Hope, the tribal council that has been involved in a number of lawsuits aimed at stopping oil exploration and drilling in the Arctic. She lost her spot on the village council in a close election last year but expects to get back on soon.

Point Hope, a village of about 700 people, is 330 miles southwest of Barrow on a gravel spit that forms the western-most extension of the northwest Alaska coast. The village is one of the oldest continuously occupied Inupiat areas in Alaska, according to the state Division of Community and Regional Affairs.

Cannon has spoken up against offshore drilling countless times. At a national tribal summit with President Barack Obama in 2009, she told him “we are not prepared for this.” She has sat down with environmental leaders and with Shell. She’s traded barbs with Pete Slaiby, Shell’s vice president for Alaska operations, and didn’t quiet down after he corrected some of her assertions in a letter to the editor.

“When you have something you feel strongly about, there’s no turning that light off,” Cannon said in an interview. “Meaning it’s stronger than me.”

She isn’t convinced any oil company could clean up a spill in the Arctic.

“They can say they’ve got it down pat. They’ve got the response. They have all means. Their ships will be there. They have the people trained,” Cannon said, repeating what she and other villagers have been told. But the nearest Coast Guard station is maybe 1,000 miles away. The weather can turn fierce fast and prevent help from arriving. If oil spilled, it might not be cleaned up before freezeup. The traditional ways are too dear to lose, she said.

Federal regulators have approved Shell’s oil spill response plans for both the Beaufort and Chukchi seas. Shell hopes to drill exploratory wells in both locations during this summer’s open water season using separate drilling rigs accompanied by more than a dozen other vessels that could respond in the event of a spill. The company says it is using the most advanced equipment and has invested billions in its Alaska offshore program. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said in February that Shell will be operating under “the strongest oversight, safety requirements, and emergency response plans ever established.”

Shell declined to comment on Cannon or the recognition she’s receiving.
Court challenges by the Point Hope tribe and numerous environmental groups including Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity, and the Alaska Wilderness League had stalled its efforts for years.

Cannon said her parents, Henry and Emma Nashookpuk, had a dog team that hunters used to get to caribou grounds and down to the sea ice for seals. Harvested seals were preserved in the snow head down — life-saving food for villagers and dogs, she said.

One rare year when Point Hope whaling crews didn’t land a whale, a friend in Barrow gave her muktuk that she shared with elders. “One elderly woman literally cried because that was so precious. That is who we are. That little block of muktuk that we brought to her,” Cannon said.

Villagers call the ocean “our garden and our identity,” Cannon said.
Betsy Beardsley, environmental justice director for the Alaska Wilderness League, said Cannon is a powerful speaker.

“She just has a way of painting a picture of life in the Arctic and what’s at stake,” said Beardsley, who planned to be in San Francisco for Monday’s award ceremony. “Many times people are left in tears.”

Even if Shell is able to drill this summer, Cannon’s advocacy has made a difference, Beardsley said.

Villagers are not united against oil drilling. Some see the prospect of jobs and want to give Shell a chance. Still many appreciate Cannon for being well informed, and willing to stand up to the oil company, said Peggy Frankson, the tribal council executive director.

“Shell tries to come here with all the answers but Caroline as well as others, they ask the tough questions they can’t answer,” Frankson said.

This is the 23rd year for the Goldman prize. An international jury picks the winners from nominees submitted by environmental groups and activists. The nomination process is confidential, and vetting the candidates takes months.

The other 2012 winners are: a woman from Kenya fighting a massive dam, a Russian trying to reroute a highway that would bisect a forest, a priest leading a movement against a nickel mine in the Philippines, a mother in Argentina whose infant died from pesticide poisoning organizing others against toxic agriculture chemicals, and an activist in China whose online database and map exposes factories that violate environmental regulations.

The late Richard Goldman and his wife, Rhoda, a Levi Strauss heiress, created the prize in 1990 to reward “ordinary individuals who take extraordinary actions to protect the earth and its inhabitants,” their San Francisco-based foundation says.

Reach Lisa Demer at ldemer@adn.com or 257-4390.
Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2012/04/15/2424853/inupiat-tribal-leader-wins-large.html#storylink=cpy

Special thanks to Richard Charter

http://www.nottheanswer.org/

APRIL 16TH, 2012

On June 10, the Emerald Coast Chapter was one of the first local volunteer organizations to begin a Gulf Beach Water Quality Monitoring Program in response to the minimal efforts made by state and federal agencies to monitor against the dangers of the BP oil spill.

Local surfers and swimmers have suffered from burning eyes and mouths, respiratory problems, nose bleeds and have developed toxic exposure rashes since the spill. They wanted to know what is in the water that might be causing these symptoms. The program provided opportunities for greater local public participation in Gulf beach clean-up efforts with a hands-on educational component.

Two years later, oil pollution in the Gulf continues to be is a moving target. While BP has tried to pick up tarballs or tilled them into finer pieces, most of the oil that has come to shore has been seeping into the beach sand on which we sit and play. Current government testing programs results do not provide enough information to the public to truly determine if Gulf beaches are clean enough for family or individual needs. Our monthly independent testing provided an alternate source of information that contradict agency testing results regarding the presence or absence of oil contamination on our beaches.

Below is a summary of the report’s top findings:
1. The data collected confirms that Corexit dispersant mixed with crude oil creates a discernible fluorescent signature when illuminated by 370nm wavelength (UV) light.

2. The use of Corexit as a dispersant has inhibited the microbial degradation of hydrocarbons in the crude oil and has allowed Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) concentration levels to consistently exhibit high toxicity levels in excess of the carcinogenic exposure level specified by NIH and OSHA.

3. Of the 32 sampling sites, mainly in Florida and Alabama, 26 had PAH concentration levels exceeding the established carcinogenic exposure limits. In only three locations, samples were found to be free of PAH contamination.

4. Seventy-one samples were collected. Twenty-three were tested for oil range organics and 16 exceeded the target clean up levels specified by the EPA. Of the 48 samples submitted for PAH tests, 90% of the samples had contamination levels in excess of the carcinogenic exposure limit.

5. Tar product remaining in the coastal zone contains PAH levels likely to be toxic (levels > 80mg/kg). Wet skin dermal contact and absorption of tar product was documented. This unknown risk for human health and safety should be further studied.

6. Carcinogenic PAH compounds from the toxic tar product that concentrates in surface layers from natural beach processes was found to be leaching into the lower layers of beach sediment. One researcher’s published scientific results concluded this could lead to the contamination of local groundwater sources.

The program uses newly developed UV light equipment to detect the tar product and reveal where it is buried in many beach areas and also where it still remains on the surface in the shoreline plunge step area. The tar product samples are then analyzed using GCMS testing methods to determine which toxins may be present and at what concentrations. By returning to locations several times over the past year and analyzing samples, we have been able to determine that the PAH concentrations in most locations are not degrading as hoped for and expected.

The “State of the Beach” oil trend study was conducted by the Surfrider Foundation Emerald Coast Chapter and University of South Florida coastal geologist Rip Kirby. The study was primarily funded by the Surfrider Foundation, grants from Patagonia, O’Neill, and the Norcross Foundation and by personal donations.

Press Release
Summary
To request the complete study, please contact Alexis Henry, Surfrider Foundation, ahenry@surfrider.org or 949.732.6413.

Recent Media coverage: http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/water/oil-from-deepwater-horizon-spill-still-causing-damage-in-gulf-2-years/1225134
To download a variety of videos and photos, please visit the following websites:
Photos: http://www.surfrider.org/emeraldcoast/beach-report/
Videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feOn-0uilKo
POSTED BY SURFRIDER FOUNDATION AT 7:00 AM 0 COMMEN

Special thanks to Richard Charter

http://www.actionnewsjax.com/content/actionlocal/story/Public-meetings-on-offshore-oil-exploration-held/K4fJxZH_S0G3rO3IbvyBXg.cspx

Action News Fox 30 WAWS Ch 47 WTEV
Monday April 16th, 2012

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — The debate over offshore drilling heats up once again, this time in Jacksonville. Just last week, the Obama Administration announced its opening the Atlantic to seismic exploration for oil and gas. It’s the first time in 30 years that’s happened. That exploration could happen from the coast of New Jersey all the way south to Florida.

Supporters say if you don’t want to continue to pay $4 for a gallon of gas, then offshore drilling could be the answer.

However, two years after the BP oil spill in the Gulf, environmentalists say this exploration is a recipe for disaster. They say it would destroy the commercial fishing industry, and negatively affect tourism.
So, what do you think about it? Now is your chance to sound off. The first of a series of public meetings on the issue kicks off today. Both meetings happen at the Jacksonville Marriott on Salisbury Road. One meeting is at 1pm, the second meeting is at 7pm.

Special thanks to Richard Charter