J
udge Barbier commenting on the upcoming second phase of the BP trial:
NEW ORLEANS (AP) - The federal judge presiding over a trial arising
from the nation's worst offshore oil spill says it could be difficult to
determine how much crude spewed into the Gulf of Mexico from BP's
busted well in 2010.
U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier noted during a
hearing Thursday that there wasn't a "meter" attached to BP's blown-out
Macondo well.
Right there wasn't... although it's worth noting that
BP wasn't very helpful in getting us anything close to a ballpark estimate.
Former vice president of exploration Gulf of Mexico David
Rainey faces a new indictment that he knew of the Congressional investigation
he was previously charged with when he allegedly gave false information on the
spill to the House Committee on Energy & Commerce, Reuters reported.
In May a federal judge dismissed a criminal charge against
Rainey concerning the obstruction allegation which involved allegedly lying
about the amount of oil which was spilling from the ruptured Macondo well.
Rainey said initially the estimated flow was about 5000
barrels per day but internal BP documents from the time showed the company
believed the rate was likely much higher.
The flow rate issue is sensitive because civil fines that BP will have to
pay under the US Clean Water Act are based in part on the number of barrels
spilled.
Oh and the White House didn't help either.
Initial reports were that 1,000 barrels a day was spilling into the
Gulf. During the second week of the spill, the flow estimate was
increased to 5,000 barrels a day, and the last estimate, after the flow
of oil had stopped, was 52,700 to 62,200 barrels a day.
The
commission said that in late April or early May the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration wanted to release some of the worst-case
scenarios for the amount of oil spilling into the gulf.
But
it said the White House Office of Management and Budget denied NOAA's
request, according to NOAA staff interviewed by the commission.
While
the Obama administration said the lower flow rates did not affect the
administration's response to the spill, the commission staff said the
hugely understated estimates resulted in less public confidence in the
pronouncements about the disaster from both the federal government and
BP.
It said that the Obama administration was misleading in
suggesting that its report in August that as much as 75 percent of the
oil had been removed had been peer reviewed by scientists. Independent
scientists provided recommendations on "analysis methods" and
contributed field data, but it is unclear "whether any of the
independent scientists actually reviewed the final report prior to its
release," the commission report said.
Anyway, just because the thing isn't strictly metered doesn't mean we can't come up with an estimated rate.
Entergy does it all the time, for example.
No comments:
Post a Comment