Scientists Find Giant Plumes of Oil Forming Under the Gulf

[agentbluescreen]

A large part of unrefined toxic crude so-called "oil" is little more than poisonous, toxic, filthy, decomposing and non-decomposable chemical detritus, biohazards, dissolved and trapped (solvent) gasses, heavy tars and just plain useless-cesspool crud. By adding poisonous chemical detergents to break up the oily part, the unprocessed and unrefined crud that is not heavy enough to settle is merely left in the waters forever, in suspension. Dispersants only work by using all the free oxygen in the water to break up the oily parts of the sludge.

These deadly plumes of crud are forever, billions of years didn't break them down and nothing else will now. The gulf will become a gigantic tub of still-oily and tarry, filthy used bathwater...  forever!

[bigron]

Criminal Negligence:

Despite Knowing It Had a Damaged Blowout Preventer,

BP STILL Cut Corners By Removing the Single Most Important Safety Measure

Washington's blog
http://uruknet.com/?p=m66092&hd=&size=1&l=e

May 17, 2010



Several weeks before the Gulf oil explosion, a key piece of safety equipment - the blowout preventer - was damaged.

As the Times of London reports:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7128842.ece

[Mike Williams, the chief electronics technician on the Deepwater Horizon, and one of the last workers to leave the doomed rig] claimed that the blowout preventer was then damaged when a crewman accidentally moved a joystick, applying hundreds of thousands of pounds of force. Pieces of rubber were found in the drilling fluid, which he said implied damage to a crucial seal. But a supervisor declared the find to be "not a big deal", Mr Williams alleged.

UC Berkeley engineering professor Bob Bea told 60 Minutes that a damaged blowout preventer not only may lead to a catastrophic accident like the Gulf oil spill, but leads to inaccurate pressure readings, so that the well operator doesn't know the real situation, and cannot keep the rig safe.


Bea also said that - despite the damage - BP ordered the rig operator to ignore an even more critical safety measure. Specifically, BP ordered the rig operator to remove the "drilling mud" - a heavy liquid used to keep oil and gas from escaping - before the well was sealed.

According to Bea, the accident would not have occurred had drilling mud been used.


WATCH CBS VIDEO :

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6490378n&tag=api

 

The importance of drilling mud is well-known. For example:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/12/94067/oil-spill-bp-had-wrong-diagram.html#ixzz0oDHoXtEj

Frank Patton, a drilling engineer for the government's Mineral Management Service, which oversees offshore drilling, told a separate inquiry in Kenner, La., that drilling mud "is the most important thing in safety for your well."

And numerous eyewitnesses have confirmed that drilling mud was removed too early.

For example, as the Times-Picayune reports:
http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/05/safety_fluid_was_removed_befor.html

Bickford's client, who was working immediately next to the drill floor at the time of the explosion, claims the rig operators had already started pumping mud out of the riser....

"We had set the bottom cement plug," the [whistleblower] said. "At that point the BOP stack, the blowout preventer, was tested. I don't know the results of that test. However, it must have passed because at that point they elected to displace the marine riser from the vessel to the sea floor. They displaced all the mud out to the riser preparing to unlatch from the well two days later. So they displaced it with sea water."


***

Bickford said his client saw mud being pumped out of the riser and onto boats that normally collect the mud in tanks. Another lawyer, Stuart Smith, said he represents fishermen who witnessed the explosion and saw the mud being extracted beforehand.

***

Other lawsuits by rig workers paint a similar picture. Bill Johnson, a Transocean deck pusher with 35 years of experience on oil rigs, was injured in the explosion and has sued his employer, BP, Halliburton and others in Galveston County, Texas. Johnson's attorney, Kurt Arnold of Houston, said Johnson had a meeting with a BP supervisor about 10 hours before the explosion and was told "things were plugged in the well and good to go. He thinks in retrospect the company man was not following procedure."

Another one of Arnold's clients, roustabout Nick Watson, said mud came back up the hole so suddenly before the explosion that he was trying to wipe it away from his eyes on the deck when the power went out and the first explosion came, Arnold said.


If the final cement plug wasn't in place yet, removing the mud would be at odds with "good oil-field practice" outlined in 2003 by the federal Minerals Management Service. The MMS report, prepared by WEST Engineering Services, warns against single-point failures -- counting on one mode of protection -- by saying that "mud weight is the first round of defense against a kick, followed up by" the blowout preventer. Removing the mud left the blowout preventer as the only failsafe.

"To displace mud above the position of the upper plug with water before setting the upper plug means that you are relying on one barrier for the duration; this is not good," said a deepwater drilling expert who did not want to be identified because he does business with BP. The expert is not involved in the Deepwater Horizon project.

And as McClatchy reported on May 11th:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/11/93977/gulf-oil-spill-inquiry-focuses.html#ixzz0oDIo1rMT

Investigators on Tuesday homed in on whether an uncommon sequence of events involving a decision to remove heavy drilling lubricants early from a pipeline may have triggered the sudden upwelling of gas that led to the explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil rig.

***
Anthony Gervaso, the engineer aboard a supply ship that was parked near the rig when it exploded, told a Coast Guard inquiry in Kenner, La., that he'd learned from his captain that rig workers pulled from the water had said they'd just start removing the drilling lubricant from the well when gas shot up the pipe and exploded.

Tim Probert, an executive of Halliburton, the subcontractor responsible for placing a cement plug in the well, told senators in Washington that the dense drilling fluid had been pulled from the drilling tube and replaced with much lighter seawater before a cement plug had been set to block gas and oil from coming up the pipeline.

Normally, the procedure would have been to place the plug and then switch out the drilling fluid for sea water. But he said the decision to reverse the process came at the instigation of BP, the well's owner.

The switch, he said, was "in accordance with the requirements of the well owner's well construction plan."

The drilling fluid is commonly called mud, but it is a complex and expensive recipe of clay and minerals that is recovered from a well and recycled....

Before a cement plug is installed, muds are the most important and effective way to restrict gasses and fluids held under pressure deep underground.

Probert, asked whether the practice was an unusual sequence of events, told Sen. Jeff Session, R-Ala., that he couldn’t answer that question, but that it had "been used on multiple occasions in the Gulf of Mexico."

As for who was responsible for determining whether it was a normal sequence of events, both Probert and Steven Newman, the CEO of Transocean, which owned the rig, said it would have been up to BP as the well owner to have conversations with MMS about that.

"As the lease operator and the well owner, that falls on BP," Newman said.

***
McKay declined to address the issue of why the decision was made to pull the drilling lubricants early. He said BP knows there were unusual pressure test readings prior to the explosion but that he was not familiar with "the individual procedure on that well."

***

Asked by Sessions whether a blowout would have been less likely if the mud had not been removed, he responded: "I don't know. I don't know."


And see this.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/05/guest-post-eyewitness-reports-suggest-bp-cut-safety-corners-on-deepwater-horizon.html

As Jed Lewison points out:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/5/17/867129/-60-Minutes:-Despite-damaged-blowout-preventer,-BP-cut-corners-immediately-before-explosion

One important implication of this report: BP's $75 million liability cap for economic damages does not apply if the company is guilty of willful negligence, and if last night's 60 Minutes report on the disaster is accurate, BP will certainly be on the hook for everything.


 

[agentbluescreen]

Criminal Negligence:

Despite Knowing It Had a Damaged Blowout Preventer,

BP STILL Cut Corners By Removing the Single Most Important Safety Measure

Washington's blog
http://uruknet.com/?p=m66092&hd=&size=1&l=e

May 17, 2010



Several weeks before the Gulf oil explosion, a key piece of safety equipment - the blowout preventer - was damaged.

As the Times of London reports:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7128842.ece

[Mike Williams, the chief electronics technician on the Deepwater Horizon, and one of the last workers to leave the doomed rig] claimed that the blowout preventer was then damaged when a crewman accidentally moved a joystick, applying hundreds of thousands of pounds of force. Pieces of rubber were found in the drilling fluid, which he said implied damage to a crucial seal. But a supervisor declared the find to be "not a big deal", Mr Williams alleged.

UC Berkeley engineering professor Bob Bea told 60 Minutes that a damaged blowout preventer not only may lead to a catastrophic accident like the Gulf oil spill, but leads to inaccurate pressure readings, so that the well operator doesn't know the real situation, and cannot keep the rig safe.


Bea also said that - despite the damage - BP ordered the rig operator to ignore an even more critical safety measure. Specifically, BP ordered the rig operator to remove the "drilling mud" - a heavy liquid used to keep oil and gas from escaping - before the well was sealed.

According to Bea, the accident would not have occurred had drilling mud been used.


WATCH CBS VIDEO :

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6490378n&tag=api

 

The importance of drilling mud is well-known. For example:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/12/94067/oil-spill-bp-had-wrong-diagram.html#ixzz0oDHoXtEj

Frank Patton, a drilling engineer for the government's Mineral Management Service, which oversees offshore drilling, told a separate inquiry in Kenner, La., that drilling mud "is the most important thing in safety for your well."

And numerous eyewitnesses have confirmed that drilling mud was removed too early.

//clip///

One important implication of this report: BP's $75 million liability cap for economic damages does not apply if the company is guilty of willful negligence, and if last night's 60 Minutes report on the disaster is accurate, BP will certainly be on the hook for everything.

Excellent post, bigron.

BP will certainly be on the hook for everything, including criminal manslaughter.

But it is the US Pentagon Nuclear-Destruction and Mass Murdering Criminal Mafia's Corps of Engineers who will have to stand trial for protecting these corporate-psychopathic killers and their interests and in so doing, mass-murdering our oceans and grossly failing in their duty and responsibility to protect and defend America.


BURY THE LEAK NOW!!

BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW TO DEFEND AND PROTECT AMERICA!

[larsonstdoc]

Excellent post, bigron.

BP will certainly be on the hook for everything, including criminal manslaughter.

But it is the US Pentagon Nuclear-Destruction and Mass Murdering Criminal Mafia's Corps of Engineers who will have to stand trial for protecting these corporate-psychopathic killers and their interests and in so doing, mass-murdering our oceans and grossly failing in their duty and responsibility to protect and defend America.


BURY THE LEAK NOW!!

BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW TO DEFEND AND PROTECT AMERICA!

agentbluescreen,  I saw a guy on Fox yesterday that was in favor of nuking the site IF IT WAS THE LAST RESORT.

He said that they should try controlled demolitions via dynamite first to cover up the pipe as you and I were talking about the other day.  I  also said why don't they try 1000 helicopter loads of used highway cement.

HE ALSO SAID IT WAS BP'S GREED THAT WAS IN THE WAY OF USING DYNAMITE TO PLUG UP THE HOLE.  HE SAID IT IS BP'S INTENTION TO GO BACK IN THERE (AS WE POSTULATED).

I wish I could remember his name.

[flaming_red_pill]

I'm really pissed off about this... Gulf of Mexico accounts for a lot of our food etc... fuggin oilmen. sigh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmWY18pupa4

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/379348/Gulf-of-Mexico/33258/Economic-aspects#toc33259

Biological resources

The shores of the Gulf of Mexico are a major habitat for waterfowl and shorebirds. Substantial colonies of noddies, boobies, pelicans, and other seabirds winter along the coasts of Mexico and Cuba, as well as on offshore islands. There is a marked absence of marine mammals; the only one of significance, the Caribbean manatee, is diminishing in number.

The gulf waters contain huge populations of fish, particularly along the continental shelf. Commercial fishing is of major economic importance and supplies roughly one-fifth of the total catch in the United States. Shrimps, flounder, red snappers, mullet, oysters, ... (100 of 1970 words)

http://bestofneworleans.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A74105
MAY 10, 2010
Gulf Seafood: threatened bounty
The Gulf of Mexico is as central to Louisiana's food heritage as any cuisine or chef


http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/oceanography-book/invertebrates.htm
Invertebrates: The Other Food Source
Commercial Shrimp Species Gulf of Mexico

Midsummer coastal hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico was first recorded in the early 1970s. In recent years (1993-1999), the extent of bottom-water hypoxia (16,000 to 20,000 km2, see Figure 1) has been greater than twice the surface area of the Chesapeake Bay, rivaling extensive hypoxic/anoxic regions of the Baltic and Black Seas. Prior to 1993, the hypoxic zone averaged 8,000 to 9,000 km2 (1985-1992) (Rabalais et al., 1998, 1999). The hypoxic area covered 12,400 km2 in 1998, about the size of Connecticut.

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/gulf-of-mexico-dead-zone-to-grow-dramatically-due-to



Gulf of Mexico 'dead zone' to grow dramatically due to federal biofuel mandate
A new study says efforts to shrink the massive, oxygen-depleted dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico will be stifled if the U.S. continues to increase its biofuel production.
By Bryan Nelson
Wed, Sep 16 2009 at 10:47 PM EST

[agentbluescreen]

agentbluescreen,  I saw a guy on Fox yesterday that was in favor of nuking the site IF IT WAS THE LAST RESORT.

He said that they should try controlled demolitions via dynamite first to cover up the pipe as you and I were talking about the other day.  I  also said why don't they try 1000 helicopter loads of used highway cement.

HE ALSO SAID IT WAS BP'S GREED THAT WAS IN THE WAY OF USING DYNAMITE TO PLUG UP THE HOLE.  HE SAID IT IS BP'S INTENTION TO GO BACK IN THERE (AS WE POSTULATED).

I wish I could remember his name.

Yeah, this is now all about us SHUTTING THE FARK UP and politely tolerating as many hundreds of Exxon Valdiz disasters a day from them, as it takes them to save their damned bloody killer-oil well.

[larsonstdoc]

Yeah, this is now all about us SHUTTING THE FARK UP and politely tolerating as many hundreds of Exxon Valdiz disasters a day from them, as it takes them to save their damned bloody killer-oil well.

  Here's the video of what I was watching--the guy that I couldn't remember his name--Christopher Brownfield

         http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PXTWnWwHsg
              

  THE AUDIO AND VIDEO SEEM TO BE WAY OFF.

[ConcordeWarrior]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/us/16oil.html?src=twt&twt=nytimes


300 FT. THICK!!!

All due to

GREED

[flaming_red_pill]

=(

I have an idea for a way to dispose of garbage; not sure if it would work but it could be used in lower pressure apps and eventually high pressure if they effin figure it out


Carbon Polymer Casing laid over Bricks of Compressed Garbage; i.e. compact/burn/compact + HERMETICALLY SEAL.

We could build skyscrapers out of garbage theoretically.

I am no engineer though...

[agentbluescreen]

 Here's the video of what I was watching--the guy that I couldn't remember his name--Christopher Brownfield

         http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PXTWnWwHsg
              

  THE AUDIO AND VIDEO SEEM TO BE WAY OFF.

Nonetheless it's a great report. As the guest points out -even lowly "conventional explosives" have an excellent and much safer chance of sealing off this broken well.

But what I'm concerned with is the depth and sturdiness of the ocean floor above the deposit (eg how deep they drilled through what), Shaped charges are a much simpler solution that should have been applied yesterday, what they have done is given BP a free license to pollute as long and as much as they feel like, and to further, even, pollute their pollution, to cover it up, to boot!


This insanity is not "liberal" it's criminal.

How can they get away with this? It's like a bad science fiction novel. If you tried to sell it as a movie script nobody would believe it.

It's just like Alex says "you can't make this corporatist shit up!"

[larsonstdoc]

Nonetheless it's a great report. As the guest points out -even lowly "conventional explosives" have an excellent and much safer chance of sealing off this broken well.

But what I'm concerned with is the depth and sturdiness of the ocean floor above the deposit (eg how deep they drilled through what), Shaped charges are a much simpler solution that should have been applied yesterday, what they have done is given BP a free license to pollute as long and as much as they feel like, and to further, even, pollute their pollution, to cover it up, to boot!


This insanity is not "liberal" it's criminal.

How can they get away with this? It's like a bad science fiction novel.

They say there is at least 15,000 feet between the gulf floor and the top of the oil find.  Around 3 miles.  Of course only a geologist would know the composition of the rock/sand between the two.  It's gotta be pretty hard if if kept all that oil down there for 1000's of years.

[chris jones]

The company man dictates on a rig, though the superintendent can dispute his call, the co man= he is the final word, (who was the co man?)

The neglegence is criminal...if in fact it was that.

There are 11 oil men going tooth and nail with these guys, these 11 are pros a minimum of 30 years experience per man, from sub sea managers, mud engineers, and superintendents.

they knew this field was enorumous, the risks involved, they knew their epuiment was hazardous-illegal, every regulation was broken.

My question is why aren't these guys being charged, are they outof country, in Tahiti, the virgin islands?
Offshore accounts?
We all want to get to the bottom of this, whats needed here is these guys are charged and testimonys given and made public. Without that we are at the hands of the spinmakers of the Elites, and thats what they are doing to date, spinning a web. The longer this goes on the more cover they get.

Get the guilty on the stand, find the truth. 911 was the blatant genocide of innocents, this too will be on a par in the long run.

i mentioned this before but its worth repeating. A good man and sub sea engineer attempted to give advise to the rig super on board, isolate the BOP, he was stonewalled. To boot he knew this guy on a first name basis, he is one pizzed of man.

[Jackson Holly]

Chris:

Were they operating in open, "international" waters? Do any laws apply?

These a-holes are pirates and they always operate if possible in the open oceans.

[Okinawa]

Purposely Killing The Gulf?
http://www.rense.com/general90/gulff.htm
By J. Speer-Williams
5-17-10
 

The private, foreign International Monetary/Banking Cartel controls its puppets in Washington as it controls its oil company executives. And everything the Cartel does is anti-life, there are absolutely no exceptions; and their pretended Gulf oil clean-up is a glaring case in point.
 
Instead of cleaning up the unprecedented catastrophe created by the Cartel's mega-corporations (Halliburton, Transocean, and British Petroleum), these very same companies seem to be purposely killing our Gulf of Mexico, under the pretense of cleaning it up.
 
Instead of using safe, non-toxic ways to gather up the rogue oil gushing from their incompetence, or planned cataclysm, the private Cartel is using an extremely toxic chemical dispersant, with the approval of the Obama administration.
 
Alan Levine, the head of Louisiana's Department of Health and Hospitals, said: "We don't have any data or evidence behind the use of these chemicals in the water. We're now basically using one of the richest ecosystems in the world as a laboratory."
 
As reported in Britain's Telegraph, Louisiana state Secretary of the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Robert Barham reported: "We're very disappointed in their [EPA and oil company executives] approach. The federal procedures call for a consensus between federal authorities, the responsible party and the states involved. When we met and expressed our concerns [over the use of dispersants], apparently they decided to go without us."
 
And go they did. Obama's Environmental Protection Agency allowed BP to turn our Gulf of Mexico into a toxic testing ground, instead of removing the crude oil.
 
British Petroleum (BP) has even refused to use their own oil tankers, lying in the Gulf, to suck up most of the runaway oil, and possibly salvage it for sale later, as was done after a Saudi spill in the '90's. That method was so successful, it vacuumed up about 85 percent of that renegade oil.
 
Nick Pozzi, a former oil pipeline engineering and operations project manager is puzzled why BP did not salvage perfectly good crude oil for later sale, and to thereby protect marine and wildlife.
 
What Mr. Pozzi does not know is the oil companies are owned by the world's only legal counterfeiters ­ the International Monetary/Banking Cartel - who can "print" all the money they want, so making money on Gulf oil was not important to them. Killing the Gulf of Mexico is, apparently, important to them, for their own cryptic and esoteric reasons.
 
If the Cartel had wanted to save marine life, any oil they had not vacuumed up could have been mulched with any number of non-toxic materials, such as "Oil Sponge," a name trademarked by Phase III, Inc.
 
Rated as the "best performing" absorbent by the US Army Corp of Engineers, Oil Sponge is 100% organic, and is made from renewable resources.
 
Oil Sponge is built using a microbial and nutrient package, capable of transforming oil hydrocarbons into a safe bi-product of carbon dioxide and water.
 
But, the governmental bureaucrats of the Obama administration, and the Cartel's oil executives, had no interest in using an environmentally friendly product to clean up what is the greatest man-made environmental disaster of all time they seemed intent on making this unbelievable cataclysm far, far worse, and one that could never be cleaned up.
 
It cannot yet be proven that the Monetary Cartel purposely blew up their own wellhead, but the crimes they have committed in their so-called "clean-up" efforts are well documented, in spite of no corporate media outrage.
 
After the Exxon Valdez incident of March 1989, Mycelx of Georgia developed what looks like a paper towel to soak up to 50 times its weight in oil. And while this product is used from the Middle East to Europe to Canada it was of no interest to the parties Obama charged with cleaning up the Gulf of the floating oil those very same parties caused.
 
Then there is the Aerohaz product manufactured by Sustainable Technologies, Inc. that encapsulates environmental contaminants, making crude oil and other oil like substances easy to retrieve.
 
Even hair naturally separates oil from water, leaving large tar globs, in which mushrooms can then be seeded. And as the mushrooms grow, they digest the oil, leaving non-toxic organics, which can then be composed into soil, great for growing healthy vegetables.
 
Anyone who has ever had a bad hair day knows how well hair will retain oil. In fact, Lisa Gautier, president of Matter of Fact (website for hair salons) has collected 400,000 pounds of hair, and stuffed it all into nylons to be used as booms near Gulf shores.
 
This idea could have been a shot in the arm of our dying economy, by creating organic compose for the millions of nutrient depleted farm acres in the world. Also there could have been a viable cottage industry of collecting hair from salons.
 
And, hair is certainly a renewable resource, with most of us contributing.  But neither Obama or the Cartel has done anything for our dying US and world economy, but ensure it dies, while feebly pretending to resuscitate it.
 
And now that they've probably destroyed the tourist, shrimping, and fishing industries along the Gulf Coast, we'll be hearing about more "stimulus packages" that will make what money we do have even more worthless as it enriches Wall Street.
 
But in the world of what could have been, there's hay, sawdust, crushed volcanic rock, and even kitty litter that could have mulched with the oil on the surface of the Gulf waters, making for easy pick-up.
 
But, oil industry executives and their confederates in the Obama administration quickly made sure that all spewing oil would either sink well below the surface, or never rise to it, with over half a million gallons of their dispersants. Now the oil that's been gushing for weeks can never be vacuumed up or safely neutralized.
 
Worse yet, these international enemies of humanity, and life in the Gulf, committed their dastardly deed of deeply submerging the floating oil with an extremely dangerous chemical dispersant that would deny all marine creatures oxygen, thus killing them, and marine plant life to boot, as major underwater currents carry this poisonous oily plume through-out the Gulf and into the Atlantic.
 
Trying to give this mass murder a positive spin, BP spokesman John Crabtree said his corporation had dropped more than 560,000 gallons of [toxic] chemical dispersants on the surface slicks and 28,700 gallons of the chemical at the subsea wellhead, 5,000 feet below sea-level.
 
Crabtree's justification for such an insane, criminal act was that the dispersants would drive the oil well below the water's surface, thus keeping it away from coastal shorelines. So instead of removing the oil, BP decided to make the oil even more toxic, and drive it deep into the ocean where it can never be retrieved, but will kill all marine life in its path.
 
Mandy Joyce, a marine sciences professor at the University of Georgia carefully chose her words about  BP's deplorable dispersants: "Anything that requires oxygen will not be able to survive that water. The food web is going to change. You could stymie the entire production level of the Gulf of Mexico. That's a very real possibility."
 
BP's chemical dispersants contain 2-butoxyethanol, a compound that kills marine and wildlife, exactly the life our clean-up measures should try to save.
 
BP's chemical dispersants, currently being dropped by airplanes, break the crude oil into tiny droplets that sink well below the water's surface, where they form a giant cloud or plume, making it impossible to gather, as is the obvious intention.
 
And with this poisonous plume creating a dead zone, currently estimated to be about the size of Delaware and Rhode Island combined, hidden at about 3,000 feet of water, no one can place an accurate figure on how much oil has actually rushed into the Gulf.
 
And once this death dealing plume reaches the large, rapidly moving Loop Current, this oily cloud of doom could swing toward Florida and Cuba, killing the coral reefs and marine life there.
 
According to Stephen Howden, an oceanographer at the University of Southern Mississippi, the Loop Current could drag the oxygen destroying cloud into shallower waters thus potentially impacting the coral reefs and fisheries near Florida's coast.
 
University of Georgia's Mandy Joyce said, "It's a good thing the oil is not damaging the coast line, but to say everything is fine because its not hitting the coast is missing a very important part of this equation."
 
And I would say, Ms. Joyce's statement is a serious understatement.
 
Another person famous for misleading and under stated remarks is our president, Barack Obama.
 
There can be no denying that President Obama and his EPA regulators are accomplices to the crimes in the Gulf of Halliburton, Transocean, and British Petroleum by allowing these perpetrators of the disaster to be the ones in charge of the capping and clean-up efforts.
 
How much longer will our government allow these corporate criminals to fail with the capping of the oil gushers ,and making a dead zone of the Gulf of Mexico and perhaps the Atlantic ocean?
 
Thus far, President Obama has made a grandstand play by pretending to excoriate the oil company executives responsible for the Gulf tragedy for not taking proper responsibility.
 
Excuse me Sir, it's you who should have taken control and responsibility by tasking competent individuals and companies to cap this runaway well, and to clean up the mess, without destroying the entire Gulf of Mexico in the process.
 
And instead of excoriating the oil company executives and government bureaucrats who dumped over a half million gallons of toxic dispersants into the Gulf, you should be arresting them for crimes against humanity, not to mention their crimes against marine and wildlife.
 
Additionally, Obama's teleprompter writers had the ignorance to state the ridiculous: "I know BP has committed to pay for the response effort, and we will hold them to their obligation," read Obama.
 
The very obvious point Mr. Obama, is you should have saved our Gulf of Mexico, by making sure Transocean, Halliburton, and British Petroleum had absolutely nothing to do with the clean-up efforts, rather than making them pay to turn the Gulf into a dead zone.
 
President Obama went on to say many parties, including the federal government should accept blame for the disaster, he stopped short of saying he, himself, should be held responsible for his part in so destroying so much life in the Gulf.
 
"There is oil leaking. We need to stop it, and we need to stop it as soon as possible," said Obama.
 
It's not a leak, Mr. Obama. It's a volcanic gusher spewing out an Exxon Valdez every two to four days.
 
From whales and dolphins to sardines, from starfish to coral reefs, from microscopic organisms to all the fish in the sea, the Cartel has embarked upon killing, and will kill unless they are stopped. Are you man enough for the job, Mr. President?
 
J. Speer-Williams jsw4@mac.com

[chris jones]

Chris:

Were they operating in open, "international" waters? Do any laws apply?

These a-holes are pirates and they always operate if possible in the open oceans.

hI J.H.
yOU BET THE REGS APPLY, AND YES THEY EVEN IN INTERNATIONAL WATERS THEY ARE UNDER LAW TO KEEP  WITHIN REGUALTIONS.
Ive been on the rig that went down, and on the Transocean deepwater expedition. I'm not a oil man but I have seen them in action , goten to know many of them.
There is no excuse whatsoever for their criminal negligence. A good friend of mine, a sub sea manager worked on both these rigs, he is the guy I have mentioned, a man honest as the day is long, he has been on rigs in this service since he was a kid and he is 52 years of age. Never has he seen this type of compounded disregard of regs, not the present team on site that will not take assistance and blatantly stonewalled him and 10 more pros off, stonewalled them.
Point, there is no way he or the others would have allowed this disaster, they would have fought the company man tooth and nail, even if it meant their own contract was cut and they were shipped off the rig.

They knew they were on one of the biggest feilds, the potential of disaster yet they covered the illegalities.
The buck does not stop on board the rig, they have BIG DOGS on land that were aware. Rest assured of that.There are some big rats swimming in that crude. The question we need to ask is who was in the loop, how far did this go, and who was involved. They need to be exposed before its too late, or the truth will be burried along with the 11 men who lost their lives. Why is the the fed avoiding this??
Too many IFFS, here we have a antother deception within. This was criminal and they know it!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jackson Holly]

Here is a good site on the existing UN and other international regulations. It is several pages so I won't copy it in full ... just a couple excerpts. I believe the rig was operating at about 100 miles out ... and that does seem to be within US waters ... right Chris?

http://www.touchoilandgas.com/environmental-standards-offshore-drilling-a101-1.html

Environmental Standards for Offshore Drilling

Alan Spackman
Director, Offshore Technical and Regulatory Affairs, International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The need for measures to address pollution from offshore oil and gas activities has been considered by the General Assembly of the United Nations and, for several years, has been discussed actively within both the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) and the International Maritime Organization. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) creates both an obligation and provides a structure for such measures, which are being pursued by several United Nations organisations. The United Nations CSD has considered the matter and has concluded that “there is no compelling need at this time to further develop globally applicable environmental regulations in respect of the exploitation and exploration aspects of offshore oil and gas activities.”

Nonetheless, views are divided. Those in favour of international regulations or guidelines have argued that there are many oil- producing regions that do not have the capacity to develop either national or regional standards and that some kind of international regulations or guidelines would help them. Those who have argued against global measures contend that offshore oil and gas activities only pose a threat of local pollution, which can be dealt with through national regulations or regional agreements. The industry itself has developed only a modest number of high-level standards. The implementation of meaningful environmental management systems by the oil companies, coupled with changes to well design and overall operational procedures, may offer a means of reducing adverse environmental impacts whilst avoiding prescriptive regulations.

The United Nations and a Structure for Environmental Regulation of Offshore Activities

The United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process was established by the General Assembly (1) to facilitate the annual review by the assembly of developments in ocean affairs. It held its third meeting on 8–15 April 2002. The report of this meeting (2) makes the following recommendations with respect to offshore oil and gas activities.

    * The General Assembly should recommend that regional seas conventions and action plans in regions where offshore oil and gas industries are developing or are in prospect, and where installations do not exist, should develop programmes and/or measures to prevent, reduce and control pollution from offshore installations.
    * The General Assembly should invite regional seas conventions and action plans that have developed such programmes and measures to make their information and experience available for this process.
    * The General Assembly should invite International Maritime Organization (IMO), United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to undertake an initiative, involving the relevant regional organisations as well as the oil and gas industry, to develop guidance on the best environmental practices to prevent and control pollution from accidents on offshore installations and to mitigate their effects.

The UNCLOS, which entered into force on 16 November 1994, is a widely accepted treaty, having been accepted by 138 nations (states party) as of 1 October 2002. The convention provides an overall framework for environmental governance of offshore and, to some extent, onshore oil and gas exploration and production operations. The implementation and enforcement principles of UNCLOS can be summarised as follows.

    * States party must adopt laws and regulations on pollution from land-based sources and through the atmosphere, taking into account international provisions, and enforce these laws and regulations (Articles 207(1), 212(1), 213 and 222).
    * With respect to seabed activities subject to national jurisdiction, states party must adopt and enforce national laws and regulations to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment arising from, or in connection with, seabed activities subject to their jurisdiction and from artificial islands, installations and structures, which must be no less effective than international rules, standards and recommended practices and procedures. States are also required to endeavour to harmonise their policies at the appropriate regional level (Articles 208 and 214).
    * States shall adopt laws and regulations and take other measures on pollution from seabed activities and from dumping, which shall be no less effective than international (in the case of dumping, global) rules and standards (Articles 139, 208, 209, 210 and 214).
    * Coastal states are required to adopt and enforce national laws and regulations to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment from artificial islands, installations and structures under their jurisdiction. Furthermore, states must adopt measures to minimise, to the fullest possible extent, pollution from installations and devices used in the exploration or exploitation of the natural resources of the seabed and subsoil (Articles 194, 208 and 210).
    * States should co-operate in establishing contingency plans against pollution (Article 199).
    * States shall enforce this legislation within their jurisdiction (including vessels flying their flag and aircraft of their registry) and ensure that their nationals, and bodies controlled by such nationals, comply with the requirements applicable in the areas of the seabed that are beyond national jurisdiction, known as ‘the area’ (Articles 139, 208, 209, 210 and 214).
    * States must adopt laws and regulations on pollution from vessels that are entitled to fly their flag (flag states) that are at least as effective as generally accepted international rules and standards (Articles 139, 208, 209, 210 and 214). Industry trade organisations have also developed a framework of standards, recommended practices and other guidelines for environmental protection. The principal such organisations for the oil and gas industries are the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP), the International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC) and the American Petroleum Institute (API). These organisations represent their membership before government and governmental organisations. (3) The Society of Petroleum Engineers sponsors a semi- annual environmental conference and a number of regional conferences with environmental ‘best practice’ as their focus.

It is noteworthy that Articles 208, 209 and 211 of UNCLOS do not differentiate between international standards, recommended practices and procedures developed by intergovernmental bodies such as the IMO and those developed by the industry organisations producing internationally recognised standards such as the ISO, OGP, IADC and API.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Offshore Activities in Areas Subject to National Jurisdiction

Under UNCLOS, exploitation of seabed mineral resources is subject to the exclusive control of the adjacent coastal state out to the limit of its exclusive economic zone or the limit of its continental shelf if the continental shelf extends beyond 200 miles. In 1996, the United Nations CSD concluded that “there is no compelling need at this time to further develop globally applicable environmental regulations in respect of the exploitation andexploration aspects of offshore oil and gas activities." (5) Further, it was concluded that “the primary focus of action on the environmental aspects of offshore oil and gas operations continues to be at the national, sub-regional and regional levels,” and noted that, in support of such action, there was a need to “share information on the development and application of satisfactory environmental management systems." (6)

Thirteen ‘regional seas’ programmes (7) have been established under the auspices of UNEP, involving more than 140 nations. Two other regional programmes are based on free-standing conventions: The Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention) and the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea (Helsinki Convention). In addition, a high-level intergovernmental forum, the Arctic Council, has been established to address the mutual concerns faced by the Arctic governments and indigenous populations.

While no global measures have been adopted regulating the discharges directly arising from the exploration, exploitation and associated offshore processing of oil and gas, harmonised regulations with respect to the exploration and exploitation of oil and gas have been developed as part of the Baltic, Mediterranean, north-east Atlantic and Kuwait regional programmes and under the Arctic Council. The matter has been considered by other regional programmes; however, in general, they have decided that other issues should be given higher priority.

OGP has issued industry-specific guidelines for operations in tropical rain forests, onshore areas in arctic and sub-arctic areas, arctic offshore regions, mangrove areas and ‘sensitive’ environments.

The regional programmes also offer a means for intergovernmental exchanges on regulatory practice and experiences, including exchange of information on best environmental practice. The UNEP maintains a website (9) to facilitate the exchange of such information as it relates to offshore oil and gas exploration and production.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Jackson Holly]

This is a good discussion of the UNCLOS TREATY mentioned in the article I posted above. I wonder if the treaty will make the people of the United States liable for damages to other countries' shorelines if this thing continues and spreads?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea

EXCERPT:

The issue of varying claims of territorial waters was raised in the UN in 1967 by Arvid Pardo, of Malta, and in 1973 the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea was convened in New York. In an attempt to reduce the possibility of groups of nation-states dominating the negotiations, the conference used a consensus process rather than majority vote. With more than 160 nations participating, the conference lasted until 1982. The resulting convention came into force on November 16, 1994, one year after the sixtieth state, Guyana, ratified the treaty.

The convention introduced a number of provisions. The most significant issues covered were setting limits, navigation, archipelagic status and transit regimes, exclusive economic zones (EEZs), continental shelf jurisdiction, deep seabed mining, the exploitation regime, protection of the marine environment, scientific research, and settlement of disputes.

The convention set the limit of various areas, measured from a carefully defined baseline. (Normally, a sea baseline follows the low-water line, but when the coastline is deeply indented, has fringing islands or is highly unstable, straight baselines may be used.) The areas are as follows:

Internal waters

    Covers all water and waterways on the landward side of the baseline. The coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Foreign vessels have no right of passage within internal waters.

Territorial waters

    Out to 12 nautical miles from the baseline, the coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Vessels were given the right of innocent passage through any territorial waters, with strategic straits allowing the passage of military craft as transit passage, in that naval vessels are allowed to maintain postures that would be illegal in territorial waters. "Innocent passage" is defined by the convention as passing through waters in an expeditious and continuous manner, which is not “prejudicial to the peace, good order or the security” of the coastal state. Fishing, polluting, weapons practice, and spying are not “innocent", and submarines and other underwater vehicles are required to navigate on the surface and to show their flag. Nations can also temporarily suspend innocent passage in specific areas of their territorial seas, if doing so is essential for the protection of its security.

Archipelagic waters

    The convention set the definition of Archipelagic States in Part IV, which also defines how the state can draw its territorial borders. A baseline is drawn between the outermost points of the outermost islands, subject to these points being sufficiently close to one another. All waters inside this baseline are designated Archipelagic Waters. The state has full sovereignty over these waters (like internal waters), but foreign vessels have right of innocent passage through archipelagic waters (like territorial waters).

Contiguous zone

    Beyond the 12 nautical mile limit there was a further 12 nautical miles or 24 nautical miles from the territorial sea baselines limit, the contiguous zone, in which a state could continue to enforce laws in four specific areas: pollution, taxation, customs, and immigration.

Exclusive economic zones (EEZs)

    Extends from the edge of the territorial sea out to 200 nautical miles from the baseline. Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. In casual use, the term may include the territorial sea and even the continental shelf. The EEZs were introduced to halt the increasingly heated clashes over fishing rights, although oil was also becoming important. The success of an offshore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico in 1947 was soon repeated elsewhere in the world, and by 1970 it was technically feasible to operate in waters 4000 metres deep. Foreign nations have the freedom of navigation and overflight, subject to the regulation of the coastal states. Foreign states may also lay submarine pipes and cables.

Continental shelf

    The continental shelf is defined as the natural prolongation of the land territory to the continental margin’s outer edge, or 200 nautical miles from the coastal state’s baseline, whichever is greater. State’s continental shelf may exceed 200 nautical miles until the natural prolongation ends. However, it may never exceed 350 nautical miles from the baseline; or it may never exceed 100 nautical miles beyond the 2,500 meter isobath (the line connecting the depth of 2,500 meters). Coastal states have the right to harvest mineral and non-living material in the subsoil of its continental shelf, to the exclusion of others. Coastal states also have exclusive control over living resources "attached" to the continental shelf, but not to creatures living in the water column beyond the exclusive economic zone.

Aside from its provisions defining ocean boundaries, the convention establishes general obligations for safeguarding the marine environment and protecting freedom of scientific research on the high seas, and also creates an innovative legal regime for controlling mineral resource exploitation in deep seabed areas beyond national jurisdiction, through an International Seabed Authority and the Common heritage of mankind principle.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Jackson Holly]

From another source concerning UNCLOS treaty:

Marine Pollution.  States would be bound to prevent and control marine pollution from any source and would be liable for damage caused by violation of their international obligations to combat marine pollution.'

~~~~~~~~~~~~

I believe we are liable!

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/United-Nations/Law-of-the-Sea-Provisions-of-UNCLOS.html

[H0llyw00d]

Even late yesterday, multiple government agencies have held to the BP claim that the leak is only 5,000 barrels a day, though most scientists have challenged those numbers.

The spokespeople for NOAA, the Coastguard, Homeland Security, MMS are all saying that no oil has reached the Loop current, which connects to and feeds into the gulfstream which could take the oil gusher's output all the way the east coast, even to Europe. .

These same spokespersons are saying that they question the reality of the ten mile by three mile by 300 yard curtain of oil reported on Friday in the NY Times.

Yet we have a coastguard image showing tarballs just found in the keys.

[larsonstdoc]

 Question:  There have been many possible solutions to stop this leak brought up by us at Prison Planet Forum and by the so called experts.  I like the solution of controlled demolitions.  Soetoro is not doing anything to get this leak stopped.  I think that because BP is involved and they haven't "bombed the area", QUEEN ELIZABETH IS BEHIND THIS --so that BP doesn't lose this 15,000 foot pipe below the leaking hole and 100's of millions of dollars that they have invested on this fiasco.  BP wants to eventually go back in and grab the oil.  What do you think?

[ekimdrachir]

They can either try to contain the water and scoop it up, separate the water from the oil ( hah! ) and reuse both halfs... one for bottled water irrigation etc, and the food supply chain, and the oil for whatever they want. if they dont try to nuke the hole. that will cause a much bigger leak and fire.



http://wakeup2010.blogspot.com/2010/05/may-18th-2010-oil-spill-remnants-map.html

[bigron]

Washington - Industry Complicity Behind the Gulf Disaster

by Stephen Lendman

May 18, 2010
http://uruknet.info/?p=m66114&hd=&size=1&l=e

It's common practice in America. A government-Wall Street cabal caused the financial crisis and subsequent fallout. Now debated financial reform is a stealth scheme to let bankers self-regulate. Rogue Democrats rammed through health reform to ration care and enrich corporate providers. Defense, technology, and related firms profit hugely from permanent wars, and a regulatory-free Washington - energy industry alliance lies at the root of the Gulf disaster, by far America's greatest ever environmental calamity, worsening daily with no fail-safe, or perhaps any, way to stop it.

It's too big even for the major media to ignore - to wit, on May 15, New York Times writer Justin Gillis headlined, "Giant Plumes of Oil Found Forming Under the Gulf of Mexico," saying:

Alarming reports show "Scientists are finding enormous oil plumes in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, including one as large as 10 miles long, 3 miles wide and 300 feet thick in spots. The discovery" shows that BP and the Obama administration lied about the incident's severity, and they're still lying.

According to University of Georgia researcher Samantha Joye, "There's a shocking amount of oil in the deep water, relative to" what's visible on the surface, the tip of a big and growing iceberg, this one containing oil. "There's a tremendous amount of oil in multiple layers, three or four or five layers deep in the water column."

Worse still, it's depleting Gulf oxygen, prompting fears about killing sea life in the effected areas and permanently destroying the livelihood of area fisherman who supply 20% of the nation's supply.

Already since April 20, oxygen levels are down 30%, a pace that if maintained "could draw (it) down to very low levels that are dangerous to animals in a couple of months. This is alarming."

Even The Times admits the daily flow may be as high as 80,000 barrels (3.4 million gallons or the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez spill around every three days). Yet the Obama administration and BP still claim only 5,000 barrels a day, and company officials won't let scientists use sophisticated instruments to measure the output more accurately on the ocean floor. Clearly they have something to hide, but there's no way to suppress the growing ecological devastation once clear evidence substantiates it.

The National Institute for Undersea Science head, Ray Highsmith, worries that rapid oxygen depletion may create huge dead zones, especially on the seafloor. He called this:

"a new type event, and it's critically important that we really understand it, because of the incredible number of oil platforms not only in the Gulf of Mexico but all over the world now. We need to know what these events are like, what their outcomes can be, and what can be done to deal with the (inevitable) next one."

Despite industry and administration denials, these type events are foreseeable, often preventable, or at least their severity under proper regulatory scrutiny, what's not in place nor in prospect with enough teeth to matter. The Interior Department's Mineral Management Service (MMS) long ago left industry giants free to pollute and spill, at most assessing occasional pocket change fines.

In the weeks preceding the Gulf incident, numerous red flags were apparent but ignored. On May 10, Science Insider writer Richard Kerr headlined, "Gulf Spill: Did Pesky Hydrates Trigger the Blowout? saying:

"Methane-trapping ice of the kind that has frustrated the first attempt to contain (the spill) may have been the root cause of the blowout....according to University of California Berkeley Professor Robert Bea (head of the school's Center for Catastrophic Risk Management), who has extensive access to BP plc documents on the incident. (If so), the US oil and gas industry would have to tread even more lightly" in its offshore search for energy.

With 55 years experience assessing risks, Bea said "there was concern at this location for gas hydrates. We're out to the (water depth) where it ought to be there." The deeper the water, the greater the pressure, and according to Bea, gas hydrates likely contaminated the cement encasing the well.

Halliburton knew the risk that let natural gas shoot up a riser pipe and explode, but claimed a new chemical cement would be resistant to methane hydrate-caused damage. Bea, however, believes it was tainted with the same slushy gas hydrate that scuttled BP's plan to contain the spill with a giant dome and may frustrate other attempted solutions, no matter what company officials claim.

He explained the chemicals used likely emitted enough heat to thaw gases from their methane hydrate form that shot them up the bore and riser. Concrete well plugs should have blocked them, but the final one wasn't installed.

The explosion followed a seawater geyser shooting 240 feet in the air, then a second eruption of mud, gas and water. Its gas component ignited, and afterwards a firestorm, uncontainable because the blowout preventer failed.

On May 14, John Byrne's Raw Story article titled, "Oil spill could go on for years, experts say" cites a worst case scenario from two of them. According to Matthew Simmons, retired investment bank Simmons & Company chairman, specializing in "the entire spectrum of the energy industry," BP and US military engineers have no idea how to stop the flow, calling efforts to plug it a "joke."

Incoming American Association of Petroleum Geologists head David Resink addressed the enormity of the spill, saying:

"You're talking about a reservoir that could have tens of millions of barrels in it." At the current spill rate, it "would take years to deplete," and already appears ten times or more greater than earlier reports, now compounded by the administration leaving BP in charge of cleanup efforts with no oversight of its work.

Earlier the company was exempted from an environmental impact study and spill contingency plan, both of which contributed to the growing disaster. Now with a real emergency, untested blowout preventers are still used, and no new regulations are expected or enforcement of existing ones, despite hundreds of operating Gulf rigs (some in deeper waters than Deepwater Horizon), any of which might leak, perhaps explode, and release more contamination.

In addition, none have remote-control shut-off switches, an acoustic device that operates automatically to prevent small problems from becoming greater, and the administration keeps granting "categorical exclusions" (27 in total), exempting Big Oil from environmental impact studies.

The Center for Biological Diversity's Kieran Suckling called it "inconceivable that MMS (regulators, aware of the worst environmental disaster in US history, could) then rubber stamp new BP drilling permits based on (its) patently false statements that an oil spill cannot occur and would not be dangerous if it did."

On May 15, Skytruth.org reported that the "COSMO-SkyMed radar image taken yesterday is somewhat ominous," showing a 4,922 square mile slick, much larger than two days earlier, and that's only what's visible on the surface. "And we think we've discovered an unrelated leak from a nearby platform that was installed back in 1984. A small, dark slick appears next to this platform on radar satellite images from April 26, May 8, and May 13" plus the latest one. It's not major but shows a chronic unaddressed problem. In this case, one that needs to be checked to assure it doesn't worsen.

On May 11, Public Citizen's Tyson Slocum, Director of its Energy Program, called on Congress to enact reforms, specifically HR 5214: Big Oil Prevention Act of 2010 "To require oil polluters to pay the full cost of oil spills, and for other purposes." It would increase their liability from a meaningless $75 million to $10 billion, but, in fact, should legislate no limit - in other words, "Your Spill, Your Bill," the entire cost with no government bailouts.

Senator Lisa Murkowski (R. Alaska), introduced S. 3309, making consumers liable for a like amount through an 8-cent per barrel tax on domestic oil and 9 cents for imported.

New regulations are vitally needed to require tested blowout preventers, shut-off switches, MMS enforcement instead of rubber-stamping industry demands, or perhaps shifting its responsibility to the EPA, OCHA, or a new body, independent of industry officials and their dominance - a tall order, but anything less assures new disasters compounding old ones.

More still in the way of huge fines, denials of new leases, making misconduct this grave a criminal offense, banning new drilling until all new measures are in place and enforced, and prohibiting all new offshore drilling, leasing, and permitting, especially in deep water because of the unacceptable risks, now apparent.

Slocum adds that "we should be aggressively developing forms of renewable energy," the obvious solution not taken, but it's "the only way to reduce the chances of a repeat of this nightmarish disaster that gets worse by the day," with no end of it in sight no matter what BP claims or does. It's an inveterate liar and can't be believed.

As for its claiming a successful tube insertion drawing oil to a surface ship, some healthy skepticism is in order. Most likely, it's a PR stunt, not a solution to halt most oil from spilling, spreading, and contaminating because no one's sure how to stop it.

Slocum also urges car owners to boycott BP for at least three months. The following link lets them pledge and comment: http://www.citizen.org/boycott-bp.

It says "Send a clear message to BP by boycotting its gas and retail store products. Don't spend a cent of your hard-earned money to feed the bottom line of a corporation that has a sordid history of negligence, willfully violates environment regulations, and is spewing thousands and thousands of barrels of oil a day into the Gulf of Mexico," that may cause permanent widespread contamination and an end to the way of life for thousands area residents.

Chemical Dispersants - Solving or Compounding the Disaster?

Environment scientists fear using them poses more risks than solutions, and according to the EPA:

"Dispersants have not been used extensively in the United States because of possible long term environment effects, difficulties with timely and effective application, disagreement among scientists and research data about their environmental effects, effectiveness, and toxicity concerns."

It's why Defenders of Wildlife Richard Charter (a marine biology expert) says using them is "a giant experiment (because their) chemical toxicity (in) many ways is worse than oil."

BP is using two Corexit dispersants, not rated effective or safe for marine life, yet EPA approved them, risking far greater ecological damage.

For competitive reasons, Corexit won't disclose what's in them, but a worker safety sheet for one says it includes 2-butoxyethanol, associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems at high doses.

Mixtures of solvents, surfactants and other additives, they work by breaking up an oil slick's surface tension to make it more water soluble, according to the National Academy of Sciences. But once dispersed, they generally sink or stay suspended in deep water, while treated oil can collect on the seafloor where shellfish and other organisms feed, in turn become food for other sea life, then humans.

What fish and animals eat, we do, including all toxins they ingest. It's why the National Academy of Sciences warns about "insufficient understanding of the fate (and effects) of dispersed oil in aquatic ecosystems," whatever the benefits like preventing less of it contaminating coastlines.

Because of the spill's size over a vast area, BP has available around one-third of the world's dispersant supply, so imagine the amount toxicity to be unleashed, with its clear risks to sea life and humans. Former University of Alaska marine conservation professor Richard Steiner and other experts wonder how much the public is being deceived by coverup and denial. The combination of oil and dispersant toxins will kill millions of organisms they contaminate, what Richard Charter explains saying:

"You are trying to mitigate the volume of the spill with dispersant, but the price you pay is increased toxicity," or, in fact, making a horrific disaster worse.

Dispersants also endanger coral reefs, several within reach of the spill, including Flower Bank Gardens 75 - 115 miles off Louisiana and Texas, and Florida Middle Grounds off the Florida panhandle with their rich diversity of marine life.

As for BP and the Obama administration, dispersant use is all gain and little pain, the idea being to break up as much oil as possible, let it sink, be out of sight and declare success, when, in fact, we may end up with a far greater catastrophe that's our problem, not theirs. That's how a business-government cabal works, stealing our wealth, civil liberties, and health for profit and dominance while claiming they're on our side.

A Final Comment

On April 30, Defenders of Wildlife Richard Charter issued the following statement, along with DW's executive VP Jamie Rappaport Clark, hoping the Gulf disaster is a wake up call to halt dangerous drilling and protect the environment.

"In a catastrophe that imperils the entire Gulf Coast (and perhaps beyond), offshore oil drilling has again proven to be unreliable and unsafe. As officials gamble with untested means to stop the flow, oil continues to gush into the Gulf and move towards our beaches, coastal communities, wildlife habitat and fisheries. Wildlife refuges and estuaries in Louisiana, Mississippi, (Alabama), and possibly the coast of Florida, along with thousands of migrating birds, sea turtles, whales and dolphins, river otters and many other species lie potentially in the path of the spill. The extent of the environmental and economic impacts of the spill have yet to be seen, but clearly raise grave concerns for any expansion of drilling off of our coasts in the future."

DW also said since 2006, Gulf rigs have experienced 509 fires, including nine major ones that killed at least two people and seriously injured another dozen, according to the Minerals Management Services. With this type record and the current disaster, tolerating operations this hazardous endanger the environment, humanity, and all planetary life. If that's not reason enough to stop them, what is?

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.




 

[chris jones]

I can only state my observations of what I've seen on board these rigs in Brasil S.A., I was on both of the transocean  rigs and had a birdseye veiw of the inner regs in regard to safety.

Again I'm not an oil man, however I witnessed the safety aspects. In the countrys I worked on .
These rigs were contracted, paid a daily rate, the comapny men on board, FISCALS, were all over the safety of the vessels. The company men are the bottom line in all phases of the operations, safety being the highest of prioritys.

When the BOP is dropped it is a crytical operation, the entire higher echelon on board are involved. These units are big babys, and costs in the mega millions. Before they are set, they are tested inside & out, the specifications are mindbending to include the fact they must meet standards. This BOP had welding done without xrays, this is a no go, a seal had broken and was ignored. That alone would call for extreme measure to be taken to insure safety.
 I remember the company men shutting down rigs that  did not meet the standard safety requirements.
I too remember naval personell coming on board to have safety inspections, if the rig did not meet with their standards they were fined or shut down and given time to repair.
My point, these guys crossed the line, there is a standard to drilling that is integral for the safety of the rig in every aspect. As we can see the outcome of neglagence, it can not be forgotten that to 11 hard working men lost their lives due to this abortion. These are standards that each and every rig I visited was adhered to.
There is a rig manager who is on land and coordinating the drilling, and at times helicopters to the rig and checks -oversees the rig and safety, he is answerable to higher ups on each phase. If pressure is dumped on the manager to get the job done and FK the safety it comes from the base big dogs.

Again i can only speak about foriegn drilling areas, not stateside, I did not work at sea stateside. But in all honesty each and every expeerience I had , safety was a priority. Sub sea engineers did not muck around. These guys i know were sharp puppys, they knew the rig and the lives of the crew were in their hands. These guys are not on their own out on a rig, the braniacs are on land calling the shots. there is a chain of command.

What I have not been able to find is an investigation,, time has gone by and the longer it does the more coverups can be set in motion, this catastrophy must be investigated and each and every man responsible for this should be held accountable and give testimony and investigated, this goes up the ladder to base management.

Folks, I can not beleive this was an oversight, the big dogs knew the risks, WHY DID THEY SLIDE ON THIS.

Couple this with the following actions taken to closein the well. BOP isolation should have been the first step taken, was it???

If the ongoing attempt  was in fact to get back on the well to get the oil, Why not another deepwater rig was not beeing sent in to drill. Surely they have a another rig in the vacinity. Do they want the spill to continue

,J.H. and Larson did a fine search , I just want to add one tid bit.

Last year, BP, the owner of the well that blew up in the gulf, teamed with other offshore operators to oppose a proposed rule that would have required stricter safety and environmental standards and more frequent inspections. BP said that “extensive, prescriptive” regulations were not needed for offshore drilling, and urged the minerals service to allow operators to define the steps they would take to ensure safety largely on their own.

As to the rigs workers who were killed and or injured, I am with hopes they FK BP inside out, sue their ballsaks.......A step further, the people of every effected area need to sue their arse off, and hopefully get to the bottom of the WHYs and Who's were the instigators of this disaster.

There are many a man who are honest,hard working folk, who will not bend the rules, and in the mindset that the crew on board and their lives are at risk if they do not perform with the highest level of safety a priority. Upper managemnt needs to be on the carpet, charged for criminal neglect upt ot the big dogs.
Why is a investigation not going TODAY.

The outcome of this domestically will be chaos, domestic injury, another FK show in our faces. This was another knife in the back of the people.

[donnay]

Deepwater Horizon's Blowout, Part 1
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6490348n&tag=contentMain;cbsCarousel

Deepwater Horizon's Blowout, Part 2
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6490378n&tag=contentMain;contentAux

[tinfoiltruth]

I know 60 minutes is a fairly biased show and they twist stories to the way they want them told. But man if even part of this that guys story is true BP is Screwed.

I wouldn't be suprised if key witnesses started to disappear.


also there are a few pictures in the video of what looks like right after the explosion were there is that hole in the helipad. which still doesnt seem right.

[H0llyw00d]

WOW...even the cryptKeeper showed up to protest!!!!

[chris jones]

I know 60 minutes is a fairly biased show and they twist stories to the way they want them told. But man if even part of this that guys story is true BP is Screwed.

I wouldn't be suprised if key witnesses started to disappear.


also there are a few pictures in the video of what looks like right after the explosion were there is that hole in the helipad. which still doesnt seem right.

The key witnesses-e participants will either take the long deep fall, or be bribed,intimidated,gagged,in a car wreck, have a heart attack, suicide, or missing.

[L2Design]

OIL RIG PEOPLE:

My husbands' oil rig had an accident -- the LIFEBOAT had faulty fiberglass/eyelets? Well, 4 men
that were doing the lifeboat safety exercise plunged 80 feet. Two men died. So I'm thinking
the Deepwater Horizon might have had the same thing happen with the lifeboat.

DEATHBOATs.. just be careful. Know your exits.

Have anyone else had this happen? I'm curious. And I wonder what brand of lifeboat they are.

[chris jones]

HI-L2Design.

Thats not realy to do with the oil workers, its the responsibility of the barge master, or captain.*Maritime..
To add, to the best of my knowledge, maritime law requires inspections, where i have worked the navy and or coast guard are responsible for this.
The safety man assinged to the rig should have been on this to boot.

[larsonstdoc]

http://www.sunherald.com/2010/05/18/2191533/day-29-189-dead-animals-have-been.html



DAY 29: 189 dead animals have been found
 

Federal officials say 189 dead sea turtles, birds and other animals have been found along Gulf of Mexico coastlines since a massive oil spill started last month. The total includes 154 sea turtles, primarily the endangered Kemp’s ridley variety, 12 dolphins and 23 birds. What they don’t know is how many were killed by oil or chemical dispersants. Acting U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Rowan Gould says the spill’s effects could be felt for decades and may never be fully known because so many affected creatures live far offshore.
Native Americans
Like many American Indians on the bayou, Emary Billiot blames oil companies for ruining his ancestral marsh over the decades. Still, he’s always been able to fish — but now even that is not a certainty. The oil spill has closed bays and lakes in Louisiana’s bountiful delta, including fishing grounds that feed the last American-Indian villages in three parishes. It is a bitter blow for the tribes of south Louisiana, who charge that drilling has already destroyed their swamps and that oil and land companies illegally grabbed vast areas.
Justice department
Miami’s top federal prosecutor says the Justice Department is closely monitoring the Gulf oil spill but currently there is no criminal investigation of BP or the other companies involved. U.S. Attorney Willy Ferrer said the federal government’s focus now is on stopping the oil leak and cleaning up the mess.

[larsonstdoc]

http://www.sunherald.com/2010/05/18/2189499/scientists-spill-could-reach-fla.html

Feds: Most oil still not near strong loop current
By MATT SEDENSKY - Associated Press Writer
 

 
MIAMI -- Government scientists surveyed the Gulf of Mexico on Tuesday to determine if oil from a massive spill off Louisiana entered a powerful current that could take it to Florida.
Jane Lubchenco, administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said aerial surveys showed some tendrils of light oil close to or already in the loop current, which circulates in the Gulf and takes water south to the Florida Keys and the Gulf Stream. But most oil remained dozens of miles away from the current.
Lubchenco said it would take about eight to 10 days after oil enters the current before it begins to reach Florida. But scientists from the University of South Florida forecast it could reach Key West by Sunday.
 
AP Photo - Tar balls retrieved Monday from Fort Zachary State Park in Key West, Fla., are shown in this Monday, May 17, 2010 photo provided by the U.S. Coast Guard on Tuesday, May 18, 2010. The U.S. Coast Guard reported that 20 tar balls were found off Key West on Monday, but said a lab analysis would have to determine their origin. Tar balls can occur naturally or come from other sources such as ships.

Meantime, 20 tar balls were found off Key West on Monday, and several others on Tuesday, though it had not yet been determined if they were from the Gulf spill. Tar balls can occur naturally or come from other sources such as ships.

[bigron]

Shocking NASA Image: Never-Seen-Before Southeast Oil Slick Arm

by Kevin Grandia
Blogger on Social Media and Public Policy
Posted: May 18, 2010 11:35 PM
 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-grandia/shocking-nasa-image-never_b_581206.html 
   
   
A startling new image released by NASA today shows a massive column of oil extending out Southeast towards the open ocean.

This column has not been visible in any satellite photos taken so far and will no doubt change the estimated extent of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster.




(click here to make the image even bigger)  http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/44000/44006/gulf_tmo_2010137_lrg.jpg

According to NASA the column is visible because it was taken when the sun was reflecting off the oil making the sheen much more prominent. The photo was taken by NASA's Terra satellite yesterday (May 18th, 2010)

[L2Design]

HI-L2Design.

Thats not realy to do with the oil workers, its the responsibility of the barge master, or captain.*Maritime..
To add, to the best of my knowledge, maritime law requires inspections, where i have worked the navy and or coast guard are responsible for this.
The safety man assinged to the rig should have been on this to boot.

Thank you! Yah he said something about the Navy...
We are in the Brazil area...

[donnay]

Deepwater Horizon: Send us your ideas for capping the BP oil spill

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/may/17/deepwater-horizon-oil-spill

[jeremystalked1]

They're going to have to rig a LOT of football games to make up for this faux pas.

[chris jones]

Thank you! Yah he said something about the Navy...
We are in the Brazil area...

Hi  L2Design,
A question, does you husband work in the Macae region or up north? I remember hearing about an accident of this nature some years back.
I bet a buck to a dime that your husband is of the oppinion that this disaster was criminal.
We can see the domestic implications of this, but I have to add that the familys of the victims are suffering like hell right now,but, I am with hope that they are enraged and spearhead the movement for criminal charges and investigation. Its a priority and they must vent their anger.
All offshore workers and maritime are well aware of the risks involved as to storms, a hurricane etc. Mother nature going wild, we have to acept them as part of the territory, but criminal negligence on the part of those of who they depend for survival, big dogs, and disregard for the lives of their crew is a diferent kettle of fish.  CJ

[bigron]

Looming Environmental Catastrophe:

Gulf Oil Being Pulled Into Loop Current


By Washington's Blog
 
Global Research, May 19, 2010
Washington's Blog - 2010-05-17
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19218

The oil is now being pulled into the loop current.

As AP notes:


On Sunday, researchers said computer models show oil has already entered the loop current that could carry the toxic goo toward the Keys, the third-longest barrier reef in the world.


This is shown in the following image from the University of Wisconsin and NASA:


Figure 1. Satellite image of the oil spill taken at 12:40 EDT Monday May 17, 2010. The location of the Loop Current is superimposed. Image credit: University of Wisconsin and NASA

University of Florida's Ocean Circulation Group provides the following projections:












For background on the loop current and the oil spill, see this (definitely must see) :

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/05/oil-spill-how-bad.html



 

[hosam]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKTtezc7-js&feature=player_embedded

burn baby burn

well these guys are burning the oil of course because its cheaper and easier
and to hell with air and sea  pollution 
what about the co2 " not for us its only for you to pay taxes "
and the great American government are watching and assuring confidence in its "partner"

 

[agentbluescreen]

Looming Environmental Catastrophe:

Gulf Oil Being Pulled Into Loop Current

/clip/
For background on the loop current and the oil spill, see this (definitely must see) :

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/05/oil-spill-how-bad.html

The visible portion of the upper, lightest-coagulated "oil scum-froth" from the Careless Criminal Negligence-British Petroleum Three Billion Barrel Oil Drilling Mismanagement and Federal Government-FEMA/Pentagon Mafia Corruption, Corps of Engineers Corporatism Disaster is only 5% to 7% of the actual spill pollution.

The leaking poisons from this criminlly irresponsible, disgustingly deliberate murderous drilling crime could have been very, very easily safely SEALED AND STOPPED weeks ago...

[Satyagraha]

Heavy oil reaches Louisiana marshland; tar balls found in Key West
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/18/AR2010051801676.html?hpid=topnews
By David A. Fahrenthold and Joel Achenbach
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 19, 2010



VENICE, LA. -- A tide of sludgy oil has begun washing into the fringes of Louisiana's coastal marshes, officials said Tuesday, as BP continued to siphon some of the oil gushing from a damaged well on the gulf floor but remained days away from trying to cap the leak.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar told Senate committees Tuesday that the company would attempt a "dynamic kill" of the oil well Saturday. That procedure involves pumping thick mud into the well in hopes of blocking the oil.

And hundreds of miles from the Louisiana coast, there was a worrisome discovery: Tar balls, sticky clumps of decayed oil, were found Monday in Key West, Fla. Officials said they were being tested to determine whether they came from the leaking BP well.

But the most ominous news came from south Louisiana, where the Mississippi Delta peters out into the Gulf of Mexico. There, instead of the tar balls that had previously washed ashore from the spill, thick, brown oil was infiltrating the edges of the marshes.

"If I had been standing up, I would have fell to my knees," said Billy Nungesser, president of Plaquemines Parish, La., about the moment that he heard the news. Nungesser, whose parish follows the Mississippi out to sea, said the oil had been spotted at places called South Pass and Pass-a-Loutre. "It's our greatest fear."

If these marshes are destroyed by oil, it could mean huge losses for the area's seafood industry and a reduction in Louisiana's already skimpy shield against a hurricane storm surge. "We're finished. We're out of business" if that happens, Nungesser said.

This news was not a huge surprise: For days, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration had predicted that thick oil might make landfall near here. These marshes are the closest land to the spot where the Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling rig sank April 22.

But Louisiana officials said the oil's arrival underscored the need for their radical-sounding solution: the construction of a chain of small offshore islands to block the oil from the coast.

"This is the first time we've seen this much heavy oil this far into our wetlands," Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) said at a news conference here in Venice, the last town before the coastal marshes begin. "We know there's a lot more heavy oil behind it that hasn't made it to shore yet."

Also Tuesday, BP said it was slowly increasing the amount of oil it was siphoning away from the leaking well, using a tube inserted into a broken-off pipe Sunday. BP said it was removing 2,000 barrels of oil a day from the leak, up from 1,000.

It's not clear how much of the spilling oil that represents: Officials had first estimated the leak at 5,000 barrels a day, but outside experts have said it appears much larger than that. Video of the leak, released by U.S. Sens. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), showed oil continuing to billow out of the leaking pipe, even with the siphon pipe inserted into it.

The company's plan to stop the leak involves pumping heavy "kill mud" at 40 barrels a minute into openings in the blowout preventer, a mechanism that surrounds the drill pipe. If the influx of mud does not clog the drill pipe, a BP spokesman said, the company could still use a "junk shot" later -- pumping larger debris such as golf balls and pieces of tire into the mechanism.

Mark Proegler, a BP spokesman, said the company had not used the mud-pumping technique earlier because it had to first gather data about pressures inside the blowout preventer. "It takes a while to gather the information we need," he said.

So far, officials said, the oil has not caused catastrophic damage on shore: Just 23 "oiled" birds have been found dead, in contrast to the tens of thousands killed by the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989. But scientists are worried about vast areas of oil floating underwater, unseen.

That worry was heightened by Monday's discovery in Key West. If the tar balls found there are determined to have come from the BP leak, that could mean some oil has made its way into the Inner Loop currents of the Gulf Stream. NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco said that oil swept up in the current might take eight to 10 days to reach the Florida Keys.

Exxon Mobil, meanwhile, said it had delayed plans to start drilling an exploration well this week in the Gulf of Mexico.