Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Green" BP Paid $33.5 Million For Alaska Spills, Violations Since 2000

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-22-04 10:09 AM
Original message
"Green" BP Paid $33.5 Million For Alaska Spills, Violations Since 2000
And much, much more . . .

EDIT

"In Alaska, BP has been fined more than $33.5 million for oil spills, safety violations and back taxes involving its operations on the North Slope since 2000. The corporation was already on probation after pleading guilty to felony charges in 1999. It now may be barred from federal contracts due to the failure to meet "corporate accountability and environmental responsibility objectives," according to a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency from Alaska's top pollution regulator, Ernesta Ballard.

BP led lobbying of the Clinton administration to lift the export ban on Alaska's North Slope crude without any mitigation to West Coast states for impacts on the volatility of pump prices or the risk of increasing numbers of foreign tankers. By pushing to drain Alaska's reserves quickly, BP simultaneously subjected the West Coast to wild price fluctuations while increasing political pressure to exploit the Arctic Refuge. A tanker from Iraq recently called on Cherry Point.

At the state level, Washington state has partnered with Big Oil and the Coast Guard for even bigger influence. Between BP's Alaska violations and the conviction of a former Coast Guard captain, partnering with criminals is not always in our interest. Richard Softye, who was caught falsifying records for Holland America, previously served BP's interests by opposing Congress' call to fund the dedicated Neah Bay rescue tug as part of the bill lifting the ban on Alaskan oil exports. Instead he promoted a "tug of opportunity system," which would rely on the chance that an appropriate tug would be in the vicinity of a disabled vessel.

In the same bill that passed the last Legislature (creating a four-year source of public revenue for the Neah Bay tug), BP had inserted a requirement for a $200,000 study to see if its new double hull tankers need tug escorts at all. Despite recognizing humans are the cause of most accidents, the Coast Guard does not require any tug escorts on double hull tankers; the state has required a single escort since 1975. Those escorts form the backbone of the tug of opportunity system. Tankers BP charters to send "lean fuel" to California refuse to exchange their ballast water, making BP the primary source of invasive species entering Washington waters."

EDIT

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/191782_bigoil22.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC