GOOD

Gulf Spill Panel Urges Tougher Offshore Drilling Oversight Necessary

The Gulf oil spill panel issued their final report and recommendations to the president. They are both extreme and entirely reasonable.

In the wake of the Deepwater Horizon explosion, as the oil still gushed into Gulf waters, the president formed a commission to figure out what went wrong, and how to prevent a similar disaster in the future. Commission members claim that the president told them to "follow the facts wherever they led," and so for six months they've been doing exactly that.

Today, the commission released its final report. Impressively, the authors didn't mince words, essentially saying that if industry's practices and government oversight don't improve, another disaster is all but inevitable.


It's a monster of a document (398 pages), and I haven't come close to finishing it yet. But I have tackled the intro, the first couple chapters, and the recommendations. It's actually a pretty fascinating read. Chapter One is honestly the best narrative journalism I've read of that fateful day in April. Chapters Two and Three are good history lessons on offshore drilling in America and the regulation (or lack thereof) of the industry.

The conclusions and recommendations, though, are probably most important. A summary of the commission's conclusions, provided in the intro, may look on first glance like common sense criticism that you've probably spouted off to your friends, but in the world of D.C. politics, they are pretty severe. From the intro (pdf), all bold is mine:

    \n
  • The explosive loss of the Macondo well could have been prevented.
  • The immediate causes of the Macondo well blowout can be traced to a series of identifiable mistakes made by BP, Halliburton, and Transocean that reveal such systematic failures in risk management that they place in doubt the safety culture of the entire industry.
  • Deepwater energy exploration and production, particularly at the frontiers of experience, involve risks for which neither industry nor government has been adequately prepared, but for which they can and must be prepared in the future.
  • To assure human safety and environmental protection, regulatory oversight of leasing, energy exploration, and production require reforms even beyond those significant reforms already initiated since the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Fundamental reform will be needed in both the structure of those in charge of regulatory oversight and their internal decisionmaking process to ensure their political autonomy, technical expertise, and their full consideration of environmental protection concerns.
  • Because regulatory oversight alone will not be sufficient to ensure adequate safety, the oil and gas industry will need to take its own, unilateral steps to increase dramatically safety throughout the industry, including self-policing mechanisms that supplement governmental enforcement.
  • The technology, laws and regulations, and practices for containing, responding to, and cleaning up spills lag behind the real risks associated with deepwater drilling into large, high-pressure reservoirs of oil and gas located far offshore and thousands of feet below the ocean’s surface. Government must close the existing gap and industry must support rather than resist that effort.
  • Scientific understanding of environmental conditions in sensitive environments in deep Gulf waters, along the region’s coastal habitats, and in areas proposed for more drilling, such as the Arctic, is inadequate. The same is true of the human and natural impacts of oil spills.
  • \n

In terms of straight up recommendations, there are many. The biggies, in my view, are these:

    \n
  • Raise the current $75 million cap on corporate liability for any damages from a future oil spill. Industry, particularly drillers, will fight this tooth and nail.
  • Create an offshore drilling safety board, funded by the industry, like those that currently serve the chemical and nuclear industries, to help oversee drilling and share best practices.
  • Create a new independent monitoring office within the Department of the Interior, with significant budget, manpower and authority, and a director who serves a set term and operates independently, and not answering to the administration-appointed secretary.
  • Extend the review period for new drilling applications from the current 30 days to at least 60 days to better assess environmental and safety risks. What's the big rush, anyways? That oil isn't going anywhere.
  • Greatly improve disaster response capabilities in the Arctic Ocean before any new drilling is allowed there.
  • \n

In his comments about the commission's recommendations, Bob Graham, the former Senator and co-chair of this commission, reminded Americans that:

these resources belong to all of us. They belong to the American people. It is our government’s responsibility to ensure that their exploration and extraction occurs in a way that is beneficial to the country. Drilling offshore is a privilege to be earned, not simply a right to be exercised by private corporations.

\n

He continued with a warning:

If dramatic steps are not taken, I’m afraid at some point in the coming years another failure will occur, and we will wonder why did the Congress, why did the administration, why did the industry allow this to happen again.

\n

The findings and recommendations of the commission seem to be pretty level-headed, and the government would be right to heed them. Some environmentalists would prefer an all out ban on offshore drilling (or, at least, on deepwater offshore drilling), and plenty of conservatives will be arguing for self-regulation and lax oversight. In this case, the moderate, sane, sensible position sounds like such a dramatic condemnation because of how freewheeling and unregulated the oil industry has been running for the past three or so decades. Of course, those oil interests are the strongest force of all in Washington, D.C., so it will still remain to be seen just how closely the administration—and, more importantly, Congress—adheres to the commission's recommendations. Democrat senators and representatives are already planning on introducing legislation based on the report, but their Republican counterparts aren't promising anything more than that they'll read the report.

Articles

The global climate change strikes on Friday are said to have been the largest protest for climate change in history. An estimated four million people participated in 2,500 events across 163 countries on all seven continents. That included an estimated 300,000 Australians, but a total of zero were in Hyde Park in Sydney, despite a viral photo that claims otherwise.

Australian Youth Coal Coalition, a pro-coal Facebook page, posted a photo showing trash strewn across a park after what appears to have been a large event. "Look at the mess today's climate protesters left behind in beautiful Hyde Park," the photo was captioned. "So much plastic. So much landfill. So sad." The only problem is, the photo wasn't taken after a climate change protest. It wasn't even taken in Australia.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
via GOOD / YouTube

Last Friday, millions of people in 150 countries across the globe took to the streets to urge world leaders to enact dramatic solutions to combat climate change.

The Climate Strike was inspired, in part, by Greta Thunberg, a 16-year-old girl from Sweden who has captured worldwide attention for her tireless work to hold lawmakers responsible for the climate crisis.

The strike gave people across the planet the opportunity to make their voices heard before the U.N. General Assembly Climate Summit in New York City on Monday.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Photo by Casey Horner on Unsplash

As world leaders meet to discuss new ways to tackle climate change at the U.N. Climate Action Summit, they might miss one very big part of healing nature – nature. In a new short film, youth climate change activist Greta Thunberg and George Monbiot, a writer for the Guardian, talked about how we need to use nature as a solution to climate change.

There's a huge push to curb emissions, but it's not the be all end all of handling climate change; we also need to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. While we don't have technology to do that for us, there is another solution. "There is a magic machine that sucks carbon out of the air, costs very little, and builds itself. It's called a tree," Monboit says in the film. Researchers found that we could get rid of two-thirds of the carbon dioxide that we've emitted during the industrial era just by growing trees. That amounts to 205 billion tons of carbon. Right now, deforestation of tropical forests is responsible for 20% of current greenhouse emissions.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Climate Action Tracker

In 2016, 196 countries signed the Paris Agreement, pledging to combat climate change by taking action to curb the increase in global temperatures. The Paris Agreement requires countries to report on their emissions and what steps they're taking to implement those plans. Now that the countries are coming together again for the U.N. Climate Action Summit in New York City, it's worth taking a look at what kind of progress they've made.

The Climate Action Trackerkeeps tabs on what each country is doing to limit warming, and if they're meeting their self-set goals. Countries are graded based on whether or not their actions would help limit warming to 1.5 degrees C.

According to a recent article from National Geographic, The Gambia, Morocco, and India are at the head of the class. "Even though carbon emissions in The Gambia, Morocco, and India are expected to rise, they'll fall short of exceeding the 1.5-degree Celsius limit," the article reads. Saudi Arabia, Russia and the United States, on the other hand, get a big fat F. "Projected emissions in Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the United States are far greater than what it would take to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius."

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Screenshot via Sweden.se/Twitter (left) Wikimedia Commons (right)

Greta Thunberg has been dubbed the "Joan of Arc of climate change" for good reason. The 16-year-old activist embodies the courage and conviction of the unlikely underdog heroine, as well as the seemingly innate ability to lead a movement.

Thunberg has dedicated her young life to waking up the world to the climate crisis we face and cutting the crap that gets in the way of fixing it. Her speeches are a unique blend of calm rationality and no-holds-barred bluntness. She speaks truth to power, dispassionately and unflinchingly, and it is glorious.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet