{"id":2057,"date":"2010-08-19T16:54:41","date_gmt":"2010-08-19T16:54:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/?p=2057"},"modified":"2010-08-19T16:54:41","modified_gmt":"2010-08-19T16:54:41","slug":"wall-street-journal-oceanographer-to-challenge-us-claims-on-spill-cleanup","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/2010\/08\/19\/wall-street-journal-oceanographer-to-challenge-us-claims-on-spill-cleanup\/","title":{"rendered":"Wall Street Journal: Oceanographer To Challenge US Claims On Spill Cleanup"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>August 18, 2010<\/p>\n<p> http:\/\/online.wsj.com\/article\/BT-CO-20100818-711960.html<\/p>\n<p>By Siobhan Hughes<br \/>\n Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES <\/p>\n<p>WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)&#8211;An oceanographer will tell Congress on Thursday that the Obama administration was &#8220;misleading&#8221; when it claimed that about three-quarters of the oil that gushed from a broken BP PLC (BP, BP.LN) well in the Gulf of Mexico had been broken down or cleaned up.<\/p>\n<p>Ian MacDonald, an oceanographer at Florida State University, will tell a U.S. House Energy and Commerce subcommittee that only 10% of oil discharged into the ocean was &#8220;actually removed from the ocean.&#8221; In a report released earlier this month and touted by the White House, the government emphasized different numbers, saying that 17% of the  oil released by the well had been collected without ever reaching the ocean and about half had dissolved or been dispersed.<\/p>\n<p>The government&#8217;s report &#8220;gives the impression that the clean-up efforts were more effective than they actually were,&#8221; MacDonald will tell the subcommittee on energy and environment. He will say that the report &#8220;mixes very different categories together,&#8221; such as oil that can harm the environment in the future and oil that &#8220;posed no such threat&#8221; once it was pumped into tankers. The prepared testimony was reviewed by Dow Jones Newswires.<\/p>\n<p>On Wednesday, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration chief Jane Lubchenco defended the government&#8217;s estimates, saying that &#8220;we stand by the calculations that we released recently.&#8221; She said that the government was &#8220;going forward&#8221; with &#8220;additional monitoring&#8221; and would change its estimates if &#8220;new information should come to the fore.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Earlier this month, a team led by the U.S. Interior Department and NOAA said that of 4.9 million barrels released by the well, just over one fourth was a &#8220;residual amount&#8221; that was either on or just below the surface as a light sheen and weathered tar balls or had washed ashore.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We really cannot check whether this number should actually be 36% of 19%,&#8221; MacDonald will say. He will say that the report does not provide any citations or formulas that would allow &#8220;an independent reviewer to determine where these numbers actually come from.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>MacDonald will also challenge the government&#8217;s statement that the oil released into the ocean is biodegrading quickly.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Science simply does not know how quickly or slowly oil will degrade either in surface waters of in the deep waters of the Gulf,&#8221; MacDonald will say. He will say that preliminary evidence suggests &#8220;a slow rate of degradation.&#8221; That contradicts the government&#8217;s statement earlier this month that &#8220;oil from the BP Deepwater Horizon spill is biodegrading quickly.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>MacDonald will also say that oil that has resisted dispersion and evaporation &#8220;will be very persistent&#8221; and &#8220;remain potentially harmful for decades.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>MacDonald will say that the gas released by the spill &#8220;should not be ignored.&#8221; He will say that fish exposed to concentrated methane &#8220;have exhibited mortality and neurological damage.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>He will also say that he is concerned about the ability of the Gulf of Mexico to withstand the shock of the oil spill.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;My greatest concern is that portions of the ecosystem may experience &#8220;tipping point&#8221; effects that overwhelm resiliency,&#8221; MacDonald will say. While &#8220;we can hope&#8221; that the spill&#8217;s distance from shore and its depth &#8220;will mitigate the impact,&#8221; scientists &#8220;have to watch with utmost scrutiny.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>MacDonald also will say that the Gulf of Mexico must be &#8220;first in line&#8221; for payments made by BP to compensate for damage from the spill. That could set off a conflict with residents of the Gulf region, who are also seeking compensation for the damage to their livelihoods.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Much as I sympathize with the economic hardship caused by the BP discharge and desire that restitution be paid, a big part&#8211;the biggest part&#8211;of our response must put the Gulf herself first in line for repayment,&#8221; he will say.<\/p>\n<p> -By Siobhan Hughes, Dow Jones Newswires; (202) 862-6654; siobhan.hughes@dowjones.com<\/p>\n<p>Special thanks to Richard Charter<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>August 18, 2010 http:\/\/online.wsj.com\/article\/BT-CO-20100818-711960.html By Siobhan Hughes Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)&#8211;An oceanographer will tell Congress on Thursday that the Obama administration was &#8220;misleading&#8221; when it claimed that about three-quarters of the oil that gushed from a broken BP PLC (BP, BP.LN) well in the Gulf of Mexico had been broken down or &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/2010\/08\/19\/wall-street-journal-oceanographer-to-challenge-us-claims-on-spill-cleanup\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Wall Street Journal: Oceanographer To Challenge US Claims On Spill Cleanup<\/span> <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2057","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2057","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2057"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2057\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2058,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2057\/revisions\/2058"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2057"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2057"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.reefrelieffounders.com\/drilling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2057"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}