BP Relied on Faulty U.S. Data

[Ed Barrow]

Source: Wall Street Journal

BP PLC and other big oil companies based their plans for responding to a big oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico on U.S. government projections that gave very low odds of oil hitting shore, even in the case of a spill much larger than the current one.

The government models, which oil companies are required to use but have not been updated since 2004, assumed that most of the oil would rapidly evaporate or get broken up by waves or weather. In the weeks since the Deepwater Horizon caught fire and sank, real life has proven these models, prepared by the Interior Department's Mineral Management Service, wrong.

...

BP has come under heavy fire from Congress and environmental groups for its lack of readiness to handle a worst-case spill. But that criticism has overlooked a key fact: BP was required by federal regulators to base its preparations on Interior Department models that were last updated in 2004.

The government's spill models have been at the center of years of debate among scientists that study oil spills. One study in the late 1990s used satellites to track almost 100 "drifters" set loose in the Gulf of Mexico to mimic floating oil. The paths of the drifting objects were compared with what the model predicted. After 30 days, the average discrepancy was 300 miles. "We have observed differences of some magnitude," a 2003 paper said, summarizing the study.

Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703900004575325131111637728.html

[Earth_First]

1. In "the weeks" since...

It's been MONTHS now...

[PSPS]

2. Whatever you say, WSJ. Sold a big ad spread to BP today?

[Turbineguy]

3. Basically anything

the Government did from Jan 20 2001 on is suspect and will remain so until the last vestiges of the Bush administration have been swept away.

[boppers]

4. One of the wealthiest organizations in the world, complaining that they couldn't do better science..

Sorry, not buying this shit. Try another line, BP.

[PufPuf23]

5. I have been certain since the rig sank that BP

would use the flawed MMS's flawed NEPA process for cover.

Those guilty in MMS are the line officer's in the NEPA process and all should be fired and prosecuted (including Salazar).

I would wager that there are a number of MMS scientists that were over-ruled (potential whistle blowers) or toadies to line officers imbedded to favor industry.

The entire royalty system needs an overhaul as well.

[dipsydoodle]

8. Would seem you were right then

What sort of royalties did you have in mind ? I think sufficient to at least triple current the world price of oil would be about right. Would just need all of the Arab countries to rewrite their current agreements with the oil companies too - I'm sure they'd oblige.

[Grassy Knoll]

6. WSJ ?

The fox noise of papers, no surprise here.
Stick to your sorry rag to stock markets .

[LawnKorn]

7. If the disaster response is based on models that are wrong, all off shore drilling should be halted

All the offshore oil platforms should be shut down until such time as accurate models are verified and the proper resources are allocated to handle the projected oil release.

Continued operation using faulty models, which dictate inadequate spill response is only inviting another, perhaps larger, disaster than the one we are currently experiencing.

We need an immediate shutdown of all offshore oil production.

[truthisfreedom]

9. Hear, hear!

[Nihil]

10. Exactly right - good luck!

The chances of doing the right thing when it is in direct conflict
with not only the incredibly powerful fossil fuel lobby but most of
the US population ... well, I don't think they are too hopeful.

You are not wrong but ...

:shrug:

[UpInArms]

11. Flashback Sept 2008: Sex For Oil Scandal At Interior Department

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/10/national/main4436263.shtml

(CBS/ AP) Government officials handling billions of dollars in oil royalties engaged in illicit sex with employees of energy companies they were dealing with and received numerous gifts from them, federal investigators said Wednesday.

The allegations of bad behavior involve 13 government employees in Denver and Washington, reports CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson. Those accused are workers who sell U.S. mineral rights to oil companies. Such sales are one of the government's biggest sources of revenue besides taxes.

But the Inspector General for the Interior Department says they rigged contracts, and engaged in illegal moonlighting, drugs, sex and gift-taking from oil company representatives, according to three reports released Wednesday.

The reports revealed startling allegations including that an employee attended a so-called "treasure hunt" in the desert with all expenses paid by an oil producer, and that a former supervisor - who bought cocaine from a colleague then boosted her performance award - had sex with subordinates, and steered government contracts to an outside business where he also worked, Attkisson reports.

The investigations reveal a "culture of substance abuse and promiscuity" by a small group of individuals "wholly lacking in acceptance of or adherence to government ethical standards," wrote Inspector General Earl E. Devaney.

<snip>

"The government employees who oversee off-shore oil drilling are literally and figuratively in bed with big oil," said Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla.

"This all shows the oil industry holds shocking sway over the administration and even key federal employees," Nelson added. "This is why we must not allow big oil's agenda to be jammed through Congress."

While most government royalties for drilling on federal lands are paid in cash, the government in recent years has been receiving a greater share of its oil and gas royalties in actual product. More of that oil is also being sold on the open market, versus being deposited in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the nation's emergency oil stockpile. Congress earlier this year passed a law halting deposits of oil to the reserve to alleviate high gasoline prices.

[cap]

12. I wonder what the change was to those models that were last updated in 2004?

were the models watered down by BushCo? There was a lot of fooling around with scientists in that administration. Garbage in... garbage out... all scientifically proven.