Slow Damage: Saturday: May 15 Oil Spill Update

"Dammit, Fernando, why shouldn't it? Why shouldn't a corpse be transmitted by express?"

-- Malcolm Lowry, Under the Volcano

1. Impatient for Disaster.

Most news journalists are in love with the story. When the story begins, say, with a spectacular explosion followed by a continuing oil leak of historic proportions, they want to know how it all will end. If the story seems be unfolding too slowly for their tastes, they grow querulous and impatient. They want to see the disastrous climax now.

If they can't have it, then some of them turn to writing peevish headlines like the one in today's Pensacola News Journal ["Where's the Oil?"] and captious complaints like Cain Burdeau's lede for the Associated Press: "For a spill now nearly half the size of Exxon Valdez, the oil from the Deepwater Horizon disaster is pretty hard to pin down."

To be sure, Burdeau quickly returns to the objective voice of the Impartial Journalist and tells us exactly where the oil can be found, just as shown by the imagery (above) at the Center for Southeast Tropical Advanced Remote Sensing (CSTARS) of the University of Miami:

Satellite images show most of an estimated 4.6 million gallons of oil has pooled in a floating, shape-shifting blob off the Louisiana coast. Some has reached shore as a thin sheen, and gooey bits have washed up as far away as Alabama. But the spill is 23 days old since the Deepwater Horizon exploded April 20 and killed 11 workers, and the thickest stuff hasn't shown up on the coast.

Still, Mr. Burdeau can't help himself from continuing to carp, "So, where's the oil? Where's it going to end up?"

This chronic impatience well may account for the chronically lousy job journalists do with news stories that don't lend themselves to a quick wrap-up. We're thinking, for example, of global climate change, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Dick Cheney's still-secret meetings with oil industry executives at the outset of the George Bush administration, and the century-long collapse of the Chicago Cubs.

Like children, one suspects the attention span of journalists grows shorter with every new television season. We don't know what's to be done about it. Somehow, the news mavens must find a way to sustain their own interest in slow to develop, long-lasting disasters if the public is to be expected to pay attention.

2. Out of Sight, Out of Life.

Though the whereabouts of the oil spill may be out of sight for most journalists, that doesn't mean it's disappeared or that it's a benign presence. National Geographic points out ["Dead Zone in the Making?"] that --

Even if oil never washes up in the refuge, the region's birds may be silenced if the crude lingers deep in the Gulf of Mexico, experts say.

That's because 5,000 barrels of oil (210,000 gallons, or 794,937 liters) a day are thought to be bleeding from a damaged wellhead at the nearby site of the Deepwater Horizon rig disaster. All that oil is poisoning the less photogenic creatures—plankton, sand crabs, and fish larvae, among others—at the base of the region's food web, Schweiger noted.

If the oil spill can't be contained, the Gulf of Mexico could have another "dead zone in the making," according to Sylvia Earle, a marine biologist and National Geographic explorer-in-residence. (National Geographic News is owned by the National Geographic Society.)

As surely as disaster will follow if we continue ignoring the scientific data on global warming, BP's oil spill will have catastrophic consequences up and down the western hemisphere's food chain if Americans do not learn from it.

3. Complex Currents.

Peter Spotts of the Christian Science Monitor does a good job of describing the whys and whereabouts of the large oil lake that's been infiltrating Gulf waters for nearly a month. It's not your father's Exxon Valdez.

For anyone using the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska's Prince William Sound as a visual reference point, it might look as though the Gulf spill so far is a dodged bullet.

But the differences between the two events are significant, cautions Michelle Wood, a marine biologist who recently became head of the ocean chemistry division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Atlantic and Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory in Miami. Not the least of those differences is the seascape into which the oil is flowing.

The Exxon Valdez spill involved a large, single, intense pulse of oil into Prince William Sound – "a shallow, near-shore environment with a rocky coast," she explains. The heavy crude had lots to cling to as it came ashore. In the Gulf, "spill" is a so-far continuous infusion of a lighter grade oil, which at least initially forms a foamy mousse rather than tarry blobs. And so far, the oil has remained far at sea.
* * *
The system is chaotic enough that given enough time, say 90 days, oil in some form could wind up anywhere from the Mexican Coast to Palm Beach, research suggests.
* * *
Once it reaches the surface, currents and ever-shifting winds can carry the oil just about anywhere, adds Peter Niiler, a researcher at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif., who has conducted extensive studies of current patterns in the Gulf.

Results of a 5-year experiment by Peter Niiler of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif., give some idea of who along the Gulf Coast most likely will be effected: everyone.

In a five-year experiment in the late 1990s, Dr. Niiler and a colleague dropped between 700 and 800 drifters – devices to help track currents -– into the Gulf at locations where offshore drilling was taking place.

Within 90 days, the drifters could be anywhere in the Gulf, including Mexico or even as far away as Miami Beach, he says.

4. Floating "Vessels."

Speaking of unpredictable drifting, this week hundreds of lawsuits were filed against BP, Transocean, and Halliburton over the mounting losses caused by the continuing oil spill. The oil corporations are responding with legal filings in Houston which allege that oil platform owner Transocean enjoys limited liability under an 1851 act of Congress still on the books and as owner of the oil platform its liability is limited to no more than $27 million.

1851? That's the year Herman Melville published Moby Dick! This is, as the saying goes, an argument only a lawyer could love. Transocean became a foreign company two years ago when it moved its headquarters from the U.S. to Switzerland. It owns the Deepwater Horizon rig that blew up on April 20.

Because underwater drilling rigs can be floated from one well to the next, the argument goes, it is a "vessel" at sea. Accordingly, Transocean is arguing that it is protected by "Limitation of Liability Act of 1851" and owes the entire universe of claimants no more than a grand total of $26 million and change.

Never mind that Transocean already has collected a "partial" payment of $ 401 million in insurance benefits. As the Wall Street Journal explains it:

Under the LLA of 1851, a vessel owner is liable only for the post-accident value of the vessel and cargo, so long as the owner can show he or she had no knowledge of negligence in the accident, maritime lawyers say. Since “the remains of the. . . Deepwater Horizon now lay sunken” about a mile deep in the federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico, the value of the rig and its cargo comes to no more than $26,764,083, Transocean claims in the filing. Before the accident, the rig was worth around $650 million.

Federal court procedural rules make special provision for admiralty lawsuits. Under Supplemental Rule F (9) --

The complaint shall be filed in any [Federal court] district in which the vessel has been attached or arrested to answer for any claim with respect to which the plaintiff seeks to limit liability; or, if the vessel has not been attached or arrested, then in any district in which the owner has been sued with respect to any such claim. When the vessel has not been attached or arrested to answer the matters aforesaid, and suit has not been commenced against the owner, the proceedings may be had in the district in which the vessel may be, [1] but if the vessel is not within any district and no suit has been commenced in any district, then the complaint may be filed in any district. For the convenience of parties and witnesses, [2] in the interest of justice, the court may transfer the action to any district; if venue is wrongly laid the court shall dismiss or, if it be in the interest of justice, transfer the action to any district in which it could have been brought. If the vessel shall have been sold, the proceeds shall represent the vessel for the purposes of these rules. [numerals added]

You can see where this likely is headed. One obvious point-counterpoint is [1] because "the vessel is not within any district" Transocean (and BP, following it) are seeking the oil-friendly venue of Houston, Texas. But [2] lawyers representing hundreds of individual claimants and perhaps tens upon tens of thousands of potential class members likely will be claiming "the interests of justice" require all their cases be returned to a Multi-District court panel in Louisiana.

And that is just one coupling of the arguments. There will be many more -- whether an oil rig fixed to the ocean floor is a "vessel;" if so whether it was within a federal court "district" other than Southern Texas; whether on balance "the interests of justice" of injured claimants outweigh those of needy oil companies; whether the insurance proceeds to be paid fix a minimum value for the rig; etc., etc., etc. And each of those seemingly dry procedural arguments are, in theory, subject to appeal in higher courts.

The WSJ sums up --

[I]n actuality, the Act very rarely helps companies limit liability. It can, however, allow a defendant to gain some control over the legal process, since a judge could place a stay on all pending litigation, which would then have to be refiled in the federal court where the limitation of liability was sought. Vessel owners routinely seek protection under the act following accidents at sea, lawyers said.

Pensacola Beach residents who've had experience with property insurance claims law after the hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 will recognize what's really going on here. The oil companies are sending a message: 'If you think the environmental effects of the BP oil spill are destined to last a lifetime, wait until your great-grandchildren live long enough to see the end of your lawsuit.'

Standing on the White House lawn, Barack Obama can throw all the "angry" fits he wants over the "ridiculous spectacle" of oil companies publicly blaming each other during congressional hearings. Obama is a lawyer. He knows what's really going on in the courtroom clinches. The oil companies are a tag-team, united in one purpose: to beat down all the fishermen, unemployed service workers, tourist-dependent businesses, beach front property owners, and other claimants.

They'll need a lot more from the president than angry rhetoric.

Claims Friday - Oil Spill Update May 14, 2010

1. Oil Spill Forecast.

The latest public information from NOAA states:

Onshore winds (currently SE 10-15 kts) are forecast to persist at about 10 kts throughout the weekend. The Mississippi Delta, Breton Sound, the Chandeleur Islands and areas directly north
have a potential for shoreline contacts throughout the forecast period.

Locally, skies remain partly overcast but there is little chance of rain or oil for the weekend.

2. Another "Last Weekend."

It often seems as if PNJ columnist Mark O'Brien was born with a mind that anticipated Twitter by half a century; his brain thinks only in ideas needing 140 characters or less.

Nevertheless, Mark actually got something right today: The coming weekend offers "yet another chance for 'one last trip to the beach' before the oil spill turns toward Escambia and Santa Rosa counties." Of course, soon as he says that, tarballs are certain to start washing up on Pensacola Beach.

3. Oil Spill Claims.

For those stupid enough to try it without a lawyer, BP has opened two 'claims offices' in the local area. The Pensacola BP claims office" is at 3960 Navy Blvd., Suites 16 and 17, but no telephone number has been reported. It has another "community outreach office" at 435 E. Government St. which has a local telephone number: (850) 912-8640.

The Gulf Breeze office is "down-the-highway" at 5668 Gulf Breeze Parkway, Unit B-9 in Midway. If memory serves, that's either very near or at the same address of a large business building that was flashing an over-sized banner touting John ("Drill, Baby, Drill") McCain for President in 2008.

Local TV station WEAR was reporting last night that anyone seeking to file a claim will be told to first send in the appropriate claim forms. For further information To get the run-around or listen to corporate propaganda and other communications, claimants are told they can call BP at 1-800-440-0858.

4. Oil Leak Estimates.

We've previously mentioned that"size matters" when it comes to this oil spill. The longer the leak persists, the larger the spill area grows and the more likely some part of it will wash up on Pensacola Beach. Until yesterday, BP had shrewdly refused to release videos of the underwater spill even though it was known the wellhead was being filmed.

Pressure from the White House forced release of at least one, grainy video yesterday. With that, the media's group-think narrative that "only" 5,000 barrels of oil a day was spilling into the Gulf collapsed. Scientists from coast-to-coast now are using the video to gauge the size of the leak -- and the results are shocking.

A commentator on Nature magazine's blog, The Great Beyond, probably is right: calculating the volume of the spill is not rocket science. "You only need to know the diameter of the pipe, and to watch the video to see how fast the oil moves out of the pipe end."

Even so, entire textbooks have been written about how to do it. This morning, NPR aired an interview with the author of one of them. It's definitely worth a listen:

You can read a transcript of the radio report here.

Now, everybody's getting in on the act. The New York Times reports the spill may be as much as "ten times" the size BP has admitted. The pressure on BP to come clean is building. Expect to hear more in coming days.

5. Judge Shopping.

Plaintiffs' lawyers suing BP, Halliburton, and Transocean have asked that the hundred-plus lawsuits already filed be heard "by one of the Multi-district federal judges in New Orleans." By contrast, BP, relying on a predicted Transocean suit, has asked that the cases be assigned only to Houston-based U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes.

We confess that we have never before seen a party to a lawsuit so blatantly judge-shop by asking for a change to a specifically-named judge. Maybe it's a Texas thing. Or, maybe it's a special privilege accorded by law to oil companies under some Congressional statute which we somehow overlooked.

In any event, it may be illuminating to know a little more about Judge Hughes, Transocean's preferred judge. He's an Alabama alum (1963) who graduated from the University of Texas Law School in 1966. He served for a year as President of "Southwest resources" and was appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan in 1985.

For what it's worth, Hughes has earned a dismal rating at The Robing Room from lawyers who have appeared before him. On a scale of 1 ("awful") to 10 ("excellent") Hughes draws an average of 4.7. That's the third-worst of all 19 federal judges in the Southern District of Texas who have been evaluated by lawyers.

Over the years, our personal observation is that lawyers are surprisingly kinder to judges whom they take the time to evaluate than you might suppose if you've ever heard them in casual conversation. To be sure, even formal evaluations are highly subjective. And, no doubt some lawyers who have lost a case or two in a judge's courtroom are not above taking their anger out on the judge with a harsh review -- or even gaming the system by convincing their barrister buddies to help out.

But when it comes to Judge Hughes, judging from the comments section at The Robing Room, certain themes recur with surprising frequently. Among them:

• "worst judge in Texas"
• "pompous and arrogant"
• "a disgrace"
• "biased"
• "ignores rules of discovery"
• "incredibly unfair"
• "hates plaintiffs"

Time and again, the complaint is made that Judge Hughes picks his "favorite" side of a case "early" and if it isn't yours, then "god help you."

Could this explain BP's unusually brash motion to have Judge Hughes hear all the cases filed against it? Ya' think they know him too well?

minor edit 5-14 pm
clarify BP-Transocean-Halliburton suits 5-14 pm

Waxman Committee Cleans Oil Companies' Clocks

Yesterday, the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources was largely treated to a circle jerk of reciprocal finger-pointing. BP Oil Corp. blamed Transocean, Transocean blamed Halliburton, Halliburton blamed BP.

Today, the House Commerce Committee of Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) is showing how a committee hearing should be conducted. The razor-sharp Firedog Lake blogger Marcy Wheeler has the details and the links to committee documents.

As this is written, the committee is still in session and all the evidence has not yet been heard. But right now it's looking very much as if the three oil company executives were all correct: every one of their companies screwed up.

• Halliburton, indeed, may have made a bad cement pour.
• Transocean's "blow out preventer" had been modified in "unexpected ways," [and according to one witness "under the direction of" and "at the expense of" BP]; it wasn't "powerful enough to to cut through joints in the drill pipe;" and it "failed" at the crucial task of receiving and acting on the signal to trigger the device.
• British Petroleum performed "negative pressure" tests on the BOP at least twice the day of the explosion; the BOP failed at least some of those tests; but nevertheless "company officials determined" to end the testing and proceed with well operations.

Today, you can watch the hearings on C-Span 3.

Shorter Senate Oil Disaster Hearing

Shorter Committee Hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources:

• British Petroleum CEO "Mr. McKay said that Transocean was responsible."
  
• Steve Newman, the CEO of Transocean, blamed Halliburton Corp., wondering aloud "whether there had been adequate testing of the cement and the casing process that was in progress at the well when the accident occurred."
• Halliburton's, CEO Tim Probert, blamed British Petroleum, pointing out "that BP directed his company’s activities at the site."

Then the committee adjourned; and in all probability the oil company executives made out more campaign donation checks to senators Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Jeff Sessions (R-AL). Following this, all the senators on the committee who voted to kill the Gulf of Mexico went home happy.

Sunday Morning BP Oil Spill Update

1. Oil River to Arrive in Florida This Week

Yesterday, officials were predicting the eastern edge of the BP oil spill would arrive in Florida tomorrow. Today, the News Journal reports that "Florida Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Michael Sole said Saturday that the slick will likely not hit Florida's coast until Tuesday or Wednesday." Or maybe not, the paper admits. "Those estimates could change depending on wind and currents in the Gulf of Mexico."

Is there any doubt no one knows when, how, or what is really going on?

2. New York Car Bomb Eclipses BP Oil Spill.

The big news today, of course, isn't about the Gulf Coast and the floating oil monster headed our way. It's about the car bomb that emptied Times Square last night.

This is a useful heads-up for coastal residents. The time is fast approaching when it won't be "Gone but not forgotten" but the reverse: "Forgotten but not gone."

That's what to expect in a week or two as what passes these days for the U.S. News Machine tires of the BP oil spill... all the dead fish and animals... the stinky air.... the foul water.... all the discouraged people... and just quietly slips out the door and moves on.

3. Early Warning.

Some of the more well informed reporting on the causes of the leak and the negligence of the oil company, however, is coming out of Great Britain. The London Times is reporting that BP was warned of rig fault 10 years ago":

BP faces fresh questions over the cause of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill after it emerged that problems with the type of equipment that led to the disaster were first reported a decade ago.

In June 2000, the oil giant issued a "notice of default" to Transocean, the operator of the rig that blew up last month. The dispute was over problems with a blowout preventer, a set of iron slabs that should close out-of-control wells. It failed on the Gulf of Mexico rig, triggering the explosion and oil spill.

Transocean acknowledged at the time that the preventer did "not work exactly right". The rig in question, the Discover Enterprise, was unable to operate for extended periods while the problem was fixed.

4. Lasting Effects.

The U.K. Guardian -- formerly known as the Manchester Guardian -- explains why the BP oil spill will live on... and on... and on, even as the corporate news cycle leaves us behind:

Crews have struggled for days without success to activate the well's underwater shut-off valve using remotely operated vehicles. They also are drilling a relief well in hopes of injecting mud and concrete to seal off the leak, but that could take three months.

The prospect of oil pouring into the gulf for such a period could have horrifying effects on wildlife, added [Liverpool University Prof. Chris] Frid. "That part of the gulf's coastline consists of a sedimentary shore with lots of muddy inlets. The oil will penetrate into the mud, and because it contains no oxygen the oil will not biodegrade. For generations, any disturbance of the sediment will bring oil back to the surface and that will happen over a very large area." [emphasis added]

5. The Stink of Oil.

The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency has fired up a new web site dedicated to reporting air quality along the Gulf Coast. Chief concerns are "particulate matter" like smoke in the air, ozone levels, and what the scientists call "volatile organic compounds." That's what the rest of know as "really bad smells."

6. Prize Winner.

As we mentioned last night, Mineral Management Services, the U.S. Interior Department agency in charge of promoting approving and inspecting deep water oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico, postponed this year's 'Safety Awards Luncheon' scheduled for Monday in Houston.

Turns out, last year's winner was BP Corp.'s chief executive officer Daryl Luoma. He couldn't be present this year, but he should'a been a shoe-in to repeat BP's triumph. Last year, MMS handed Luoma the award for his "innovative and visionary approach" to something called "extended-reach drilling technology."

How much more 'extended' can your drilling 'reach' be than sending an oil slick the size of France all the way to Pensacola Beach?