B.P.'s Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Thread (it's all here).....

Stretch

House Member
Feb 16, 2003
3,924
19
38
Australia
Oil Slickonomics

May 2, 2010, David Kotok, Chairman and Chief Investment Officer​
“At its current leak rate of 5,000 barrels of oil per day, the spill could surpass the size of the 1969 Santa Barbara spill by next week. If the leak cannot be contained, it could exceed the size of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill off Alaska by mid June.” Paul Harrison, Environmental Defense Fund

Three scenarios lie ahead. They rank as bad, worse, and ugliest (the latter being catastrophic and unprecedented). There is no “good” here.

The Bad.

Containment chambers are put in place and they catch the outflow from the three ruptures that are currently pouring 200,000 gallons of oil into the Gulf every day. If this works, it will take until June to complete. The chambers are 30-foot-high steel configurations that must be placed on the ocean floor at a depth of one mile. This has never been done before. If early containment is successful, the damages from this accident will be in the tens of billions. The cleanup will take years. The economic impact will be in the five states that have frontal coastline on the Gulf of Mexico: Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

The Worse.

The containment attempts fail and oil spews for months, until a new well can successfully be drilled to a depth of 13000 feet below the 5000-foot-deep ocean floor, and then concrete and mud are injected into the existing ruptured well until it is successfully closed and sealed. Work on this approach is already commencing. Timeframe for success is at least three months. Note the new well will have to come within about 20 feet of the existing point where the original well enters the reservoir at a distance of 3.5 miles from the surface drilling rig. Damages by this time may be measured in the hundreds of billions. Cleanup will take many, many years. Tourism, fishing, all related industries may be fundamentally changed for as much as a generation. Spread to Mexico and other Gulf geography is possible.

The Ugliest.

This spew stoppage takes longer to reach a full closure; the subsequent cleanup may take a decade. The Gulf becomes a damaged sea for a generation. The oil slick leaks beyond the western Florida coast, enters the Gulfstream and reaches the eastern coast of the United States and beyond. Use your imagination for the rest of the damage. Monetary cost is now measured in the many hundreds of billions of dollars.

Some thoughts about markets and impacts.

Usually, the first estimates in any crises are too low. That is true here. 1000 barrels a day is now 5000, and some estimates of spillage are trending higher. No one knows exactly. The containment and boom mechanism is subject to weather cooperation as we can see this weekend. Soon we are entering the hurricane season. The thoughts of a storm stirring up the Gulf, hampering any cleanup or remediation drilling effort and creating a huge 10,000 square mile black stew is frightening to every professional in the business.

This will be a financial calamity for many firms, not just BP and its partners and service providers. Their liabilities are immense and must not be underestimated. The first estimate of $12.5 billion is only a starter.

Thousands of small and independent businesses as well as larger public companies in tourism are hurt here. This is not just about the source of half the nation’s shrimp. That is already a casualty. It’s also about the bank loans for the $200,000 shrimp boat and the house the boat owner and/or his employees live in and the fact that this shock piles on a fragile financial system that is trying to recover from a three-year financial crisis. Case study, my fishing guide in the Everglades splits his time between Florida and Louisiana. His May bookings in LA have cancelled. His colleagues lost theirs and their lodge will be empty. They are busy trying to find work in the clean up. For him, his wife and eleven year old daughter, his $600 a day guide fees just went “poof”. When I asked him if he thought he had a legal claim on BP, he said he hadn’t thought about it yet but it gave him pause. As we suggested above, the $12.5 billion loss estimate is only a starter.

Federal deficit spending will certainly rise by tens, and maybe hundreds, of billions as emergency appropriations are directed at larger and larger efforts to clean up this mess. At the same time, federal and state revenues tied to Gulf-region businesses will fall. My colleague John Mousseau will be discussing the impact on state and local government debt in a separate research commentary.

We expect that the Federal Reserve will extend the timeframe that we have come to know as the “extended period” in the making of its monetary policy. We do not expect the Fed to raise interest rates at all for the rest of this year, and maybe well into next year. We expect to see the deterioration of the economic statistics for the US to reveal the onset of this oil-slick crisis in May, and the negative impact will intensify during the summer months. A “double-dip” recession probably has been made more likely by this tragedy.

We are at the highest level of cash in our US stock accounts that we have seen in over a year and a half. We expect a market correction will present entry points at lower stock prices. We have exited the financial sectors, including the insurance ETF. We now worry about the banks that are exposed. We do not own the major oil stocks now. Some of them face enormous liability payments.

In addition, the offshore-drilling energy sector will face much-increased and more costly regulation. Deepwater and all offshore drilling in the US has been set back for a generation, just as Three Mile Island set back nuclear power development for decades. No politician can win an election now with a permissive view on drilling. Sarah Palin’s “Drill, baby, drill” now condemns her to political marginalization. Off shore drilling has lurched to the top of the political agenda in this November’s election cycle.

Readers may be interested in following events on the NOAA website: http://response.restoration.noaa.gov .

Cumberland Advisors - Market Commentary
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,906
1,905
113
I guess that because of this disaster we won't be hearing from too many right wingers as to how we absolutely must have more oil drilling or the known world will come to an abrupt end. It will be interesting to see how much BP will pay for it and how much subsidization the government will continue to give it.

BP shouldn't be paying for anything. How on Earth is BP to blame for this? All Obama is doing is showing his worrying anti-Britishness again.

Obama said that BP will pay, despite the fact that the rig is owned and operated by an AMERICAN firm (TransOcean) and the work preceding the explosion that killed 11 workers was being carried out by the American government's favourite contractor, Halliburton (which has a history of poor quality and blunders), another US firm.

And US environment campaigners say BP underestimated the risks.

Does any oil firm over-estimate risk? And isn't it the duty of governments - in this case the US government - licensing drilling operations to assess risk independently?

The US government knew there was a risk of New Orleans being devastated if a hurricane burst the inadequate levees. But they preferred to take the risk rather than spend billions on new flood defences.

BP has accepted responsibility for the oil spill and the cleanup costs even though it has indicated that the accident was not their fault and the rig was run by TransOcean personnel.

I may also be right in saying that it was also US companies which caused other oil disasters - Occidental over the Piper Alpha disaster of 1988 off the coast of Britain which killed 167 people with only 59 survivors (which, in terms of human life, put the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the shade) and Amoco for the Amoco Cadiz disaster off the coast of France in 1978. Amoco was ordered to pay $120 million in damages and restitution to France.

If BP has any responsibilty then it shares responsibility with its US contractors and the US federal government. Britain, and BP, should tell Obama to get stuffed and get Halliburton and TransOcean to pay, and then pull troops out of Afghanistan and let the US fend for itself. America is in the wrong for shifting the blame on a foreign company.
 
Last edited:

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
BP shouldn't be paying for anything. How on Earth is BP to blame for this?

BP is responsible for it. Since Transocean was under contract to BP, BP can turn around and sue Transocean and any other contractors under their employ, but the work was being done on BP property by people contracted by BP to do the work, so BP is responsible.
 

Slim Chance

Electoral Member
Nov 26, 2009
475
13
18
BP is responsible for it. Since Transocean was under contract to BP, BP can turn around and sue Transocean and any other contractors under their employ, but the work was being done on BP property by people contracted by BP to do the work, so BP is responsible.


The work was done on American property that was licensed to BP. BP hired the contractors and equipment manufacturers to perform certain components associated with the project.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
The work was done on American property that was licensed to BP. BP hired the contractors and equipment manufacturers to perform certain components associated with the project.

BP owns the lease for the drilling rights, so legally it is considered the same as BP property, as far as drilling-related activity.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
So if BP has to develop a new process that greatl aids any clean-up of the land do they get to 're-coup' their losses by marketing that. Any fines they pay do not come out of the share-holders pockets, it comes out the pockets of the people who use their products. If they get bailouts subsidized by the taxpayer the taxpayer should just take charge of the cleanup since they would do a more efficient job because it is 'their money and their land'. That would seem to be somewhat logical so that route will not be taken. Part of the clean-up might mean moving many people away from the devastated areas if a decade long cleanup is forcast.
Why could they not make a larger version of those orange barriers and deploy it around the rig, something that would stick 10 ft out of the water and go 50 ft beneath the waves. The rising oil should get deep enough to be pumped (without large amounts of sea water)into a barge and from there onto a tanker for removal to a processing facility. Such a defensive measure could be the standard recovery method for off-shore spills. The whole system could be held and deployed by boats no larger than shrimp boats and some would have to remain attached to the boom to keep it in place, inside the boom would be best as the could also be used as a 'pumper' .
Rather than sawdust why not plastic pellets than can then be recovered and 'cleaned as reused. Sawdust could catch the oil if it made contact with the oil before it got wet. A plastic pellet with little wispy fingers might be able to catch more sludge than a smooth surface. If a tinsel like plastic product was made (that still had some wispy fingers was dropped the same way we fire forest fires all the tinsel should result in a floating mat that at lest holds the oil together. Collecting it would be like gathering warm toffee. Clean it off an reuse as needed.
Iran offered to help, how do they clean up their spills from the beaches and marshes?
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
BP shouldn't be paying for anything. How on Earth is BP to blame for this? All Obama is doing is showing his worrying anti-Britishness again.

Obama said that BP will pay, despite the fact that the rig is owned and operated by an AMERICAN firm (TransOcean) and the work preceding the explosion that killed 11 workers was being carried out by the American government's favourite contractor, Halliburton (which has a history of poor quality and blunders), another US firm.
If it is owned and operated by Transocean, then why haven't BP's directors simply said it has nothing to do with BP?

And US environment campaigners say BP underestimated the risks.

Does any oil firm over-estimate risk? And isn't it the duty of governments - in this case the US government - licensing drilling operations to assess risk independently?
Start reading about 2/5 down the page:

BP - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The US government knew there was a risk of New Orleans being devastated if a hurricane burst the inadequate levees. But they preferred to take the risk rather than spend billions on new flood defences.

BP has accepted responsibility for the oil spill and the cleanup costs even though it has indicated that the accident was not their fault and the rig was run by TransOcean personnel.
Who's rig was it?

I may also be right in saying that it was also US companies which caused other oil disasters - Occidental over the Piper Alpha disaster of 1988 off the coast of Britain which killed 167 people with only 59 survivors (which, in terms of human life, put the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the shade) and Amoco for the Amoco Cadiz disaster off the coast of France in 1978. Amoco was ordered to pay $120 million in damages and restitution to France.
Red herring.

BP - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If BP has any responsibilty then it shares responsibility with its US contractors and the US federal government. Britain, and BP, should tell Obama to get stuffed and get Halliburton and TransOcean to pay, and then pull troops out of Afghanistan and let the US fend for itself. America is in the wrong for shifting the blame on a foreign company.
As far as I can see, if the rig wasn't there, nothing would have happened. Whose rig was it? Who contracted Transocean and Haliburton? If Haliburton and Transocean had something to do with it, they are just as culpable.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
As far as I can see, if the rig wasn't there, nothing would have happened. Whose rig was it? If Haliburton and Transocean had something to do with it, they are just as culpable.

The rig was there on request of BP, to put BP's casing, which they directly own, into the formation. They will all be paying, as they are all culpable in varying degrees.
 

Slim Chance

Electoral Member
Nov 26, 2009
475
13
18
They (BP) own the lease (which grants them access to the area) and mineral rights but not the actual property. Further, they do not have this lease for all eternity; there are restrictions and caveats that ensure that the property will be developed within a specified period of time otherwise, BP may lose the rights to that lease. With this in mind, it is not the same as BP (essentially) owning the property... Ultimately, it is a combination of the State and Federal government that "owns" the land, etc.. If you wish to hold the "land owner" culpable, I believe that it would ultimately rest with the government as they are the owner AND they are benefitting directly from BP's operations via royalties.

One might even be able to make the argument that BP is a contractor to the State/Federal government(s).

In terms of the driller, they are a licensed and insured independent contractor. One of the reasons that most every major oil company has distanced themselves from things like drilling and construction is to mitigate the liabilities associated with environmental concerns.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
If you wish to hold the "land owner" culpable, I believe that it would ultimately rest with the government as they are the owner AND they are benefitting directly from BP's operations via royalties.

One might even be able to make the argument that BP is a contractor to the State/Federal government(s).

The land isn't the problem, the oil is, and BP owns the oil.... end of story.
 

Slim Chance

Electoral Member
Nov 26, 2009
475
13
18
One could certainly try to make that argument, but one would be laughed out of the courtroom in short order.

That argument may not be so far fetched.. I've heard of class actions that name government as the defendant in suits revolving around tobacco.
 

Slim Chance

Electoral Member
Nov 26, 2009
475
13
18
Let me ask you a question Anna... If it was CP rail that was transporting the oil and the tanker car derailed and spilled the oil, who'd be responsible?
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
Let me ask you a question Anna... If it was CP rail that was transporting the oil and the tanker car derailed and spilled the oil, who'd be responsible?

On oceanways, such as the Exxon disaster, it is the responsibility of the oil company.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Let me ask you a question Anna... If it was CP rail that was transporting the oil and the tanker car derailed and spilled the oil, who'd be responsible?
Answer my question then I'll answer yours.
Nevermind, Karrie beat me to it.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Drill, Baby, Drill!!!

It was not so long ago that conservative Republicans were chanting this slogan in unison. They made an issue of it in the 2008 election (and lost). Strangely enough, we haven’t heard much of this slogan lately.
Conservatives have a childlike, Fundamentalist faith in big business, in free enterprise, in Wall Street. They regard Wall Street as some kind of demi God of democracy.

Well, if you elevate somebody to the status of demi God, he is invariably going to disappoint you. A few years ago Republicans had this bright idea of privatizing Social Security. Their argument was that average citizen can invest the money in stock market and make much more that what he would get from the government.

Fortunately for Americans, Democrats put a stop to that. If Republicans had privatized Social Security, it is easy to see what would have happened. A few years ago stock market fever was running at it peak, DOW was at 14,000. Most people would have invested their Social Security money in stock market, only to see it plunge and their assets evaporate. Mob psychology being what it is, they would have sold off near the bottom, when DOW was 7000. Today most people would be without any Social Security money (or with very little in their Social Security account).

So whether privatizing Social security or drilling without any restrictions, without any safeguards, Republicans have a childlike faith in free markets, an extreme position. Free market is still the best wealth generating engine invented. However, it is like a wild beast. It must be contained, regulated so that it doesn’t get out of hand.

Anyway, it would be interesting to see if we still continue hearing ‘drill, baby, drill!’, So far there has been a deafening silence on that front.