Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:20 PM Jan 2012

Report: White House Pressured Scientists to Underestimate BP Spill Size [View all]

http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/01/report-white-house-pressured-scientists-underestimate-bp-spill-size

Back at the height of the massive Gulf oil spill in 2010, there was quite a bit of controversy about just how much crude was blasting out of the well. According to new documents that a watchdog group released on Monday, there was heated debate among the scientists who evaluated the flow rate as well.

For the first few weeks after the spill began in April 2010, BP misled the public about how big it was, and the government repeated BP's estimate without question. And when the government released its own estimate in late May of up to 25,000 barrels per day, that too was controversial—and proved to be far lower than the actual size, which was more like 53,000 barrels of oil per day.

Now, an email released by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) traces efforts to downplay the spill size in the initial weeks back to the White House. The group released a May 29, 2010 email from Dr. Marcia McNutt, the director of the US Geologic Survey and head of the government's Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG), that was released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. The email came after scientists on the flow-rate team complained to McNutt about how the spill figures were conveyed to the press, and in response she cited pressure from the White House as the reason the numbers were low-balled. Rather than reporting that the lower-end estimate of the spill was 25,000 barrels per day, officials cited that figure as the higher-end estimate:

'I cannot tell you what a nightmare the past two days have been dealing with the communications people at the White House, DOI, and the NIC who seem incapable of understanding the concept of a lower bound. The press release that went out on our results was misleading and was not reviewed by a scientist for accuracy.'

McNutt's email reportedly came in response to complaints from scientists on the team about how the flow rate had been handled. PEER also filed a complaint against Dr. William Lehr, a scientist at the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) who was the team lead for the FRTG's plume analysis team. PEER argues that Lehr "manipulated the scientific results" of the team's experts and understated the spill rate in what it communicated. From PEER's release on the complaint:

'Lehr was leader of one of the most important FRTG teams, the “Plume Team” which analyzed videos of the oil leaks to produce the first estimates. Three of the 13 Plume Team experts used a technique called Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) to estimate a leak rate in the range of 25,000 bpd. But three other experts on the Plume Team reported that PIV was underestimating the size of the leak by more than 50%. Those three experts used a different technology to correctly peg the leak rate at 50,000 to 60,000 bpd.'
21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
leftyohiolib Jan 2012 #1
But, but, but................ nm rhett o rick Jan 2012 #2
Anybody here surprised? I won't know what to think of this until the Jackpine Radical Jan 2012 #3
color me {un}surprised. nt xchrom Jan 2012 #4
amazing. But I'm sure it will be rationalized by someone. roguevalley Jan 2012 #12
Not me. I knew then they were lying their asses off... truebrit71 Jan 2012 #13
Bad headline zipplewrath Jan 2012 #5
Nuts. Jackpine Radical Jan 2012 #8
Bollocks. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #14
The author disagrees with you zipplewrath Jan 2012 #15
That spill was truly Obama's Katrina moment XemaSab Jan 2012 #6
He "lost you got good" .... surfdog Jan 2012 #17
Yes XemaSab Jan 2012 #18
There were folks here and at - Hell Hath No Fury Jan 2012 #7
Damn right. Jackpine Radical Jan 2012 #9
Myself, I thought they closed the beaches to protect people EFerrari Jan 2012 #10
Wow, how blind of me. Jackpine Radical Jan 2012 #11
I remember those conversations. woo me with science Jan 2012 #19
Every damned day. woo me with science Jan 2012 #16
All that oil hootinholler Jan 2012 #20
"Obama biggest recipient of BP cash" _ed_ Jan 2012 #21
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Report: White House Press...