Federal Government Might Have Lied About Severity of Gulf Oil Spill

A preliminary report states that the federal government might have lied about the severity of the gulf oil spill

By Nicholas Moroni

The federal government refused to tell the public just how bad the gulf oil spill was, according to The Associated Press.

The wire service cited a preliminary report by the National Oil Spill Comission which states that the Obama administration refused to allow government scientists to provide the public with more realistic figures as to how bad the spill was.

For weeks, scientists wanted to disclose worst-case scenarios to the public as evidence that the rate at which oil leaking from the failed Macondo well was increasing. However, the federal government stood in the way.

Initially, the public was told that the busted well was pumping out 1,000 barrels every day. Soon that number increased to 5,000 barrels daily. That estimate was based off of faulty evidence. That actual figure averaged 64,000 barrels each day by the end of the disaster.

"The government appears to have taken an overly casual approach to...calculation and release," the report stated.

The commission was put together by the administration to investigate the spill.

What's more, members of the Obama camp came under fire for misleading the public about the fate of the spilled oil.

"Our scientists have done an official assessment, and more than three-quarters of the oil is gone," Carol Browner, director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy boasted on NBC 5's Today Show.

The Interior Department and various facets of the federal government echoed this statement thorughout the summer.

"Gone" actually meants that the oil had been dispersed, dissolved, or evaporated; thus, it could still be there.

Hearings Provide Little Information Into Failed Well

Deepwater Horizon

(Photo by US Coast Guard/Courtesy of Sky Truth)

BP and parties connected to Deepwater Horizon refuse to take blame for failed well

By Nicholas Moroni

BP representatives answered questions posed by members of The National Academy of Engineering regarding the failed well that led to the gulf spill today.

Issues regarding the safety of the well, workers' conditions, and the emergence response system attached to the well all came under fire.

BP sought to dodge blame for many of these issues in a report it recently published. The board today challenged many of the reports findings.

BP and Halliburton have ping-ponged the relevance of a supposed flawed cement job on the well. Halliburton told the Academy that BP's report was "erroneous."

The Academy is studying the report and looking into the well at the request of Interior secretary Ken Salazar.

No entity has been forthcoming to take responsibilty for the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon.

"It is clear that you could go further into the analysis," said Mark Bly, BP head of safety and operations.

Relief Well Finished, BP Says

Blown-out BP well is declared "dead"

By Nicholas Moroni

BP and the federal government stated today that a months-long operation to seal the failed well in the Gulf of Mexico is completed.

Drilled alongside the once-gushing Macondo well, which leaked subsequent to the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig, a relief well (there are two of them) is reportedl intersected, and cement was pumped into the bottom of the Macondo well, thus sealing it.

The Macondo well was fitted in July with a temporary cap, but today was officially declared "dead," with the completion of the cement that had been pumped, and the relief well, which acts as a sealent from the bottom.

"This is a significant milestone in the response to the Deepwater Horizon tragedy and is the final step in a complex and unprecedented subsea operation - finally confirming that this well no longer presents a threat to the Gulf of Mexico," BP CEO Tony Haywayrd said in a company press release. "However, there is still more to be done. BP's commitment to complete our work and restore the damage done to the Gulf of Mexico, the Gulf coast and the livelihoods of the people across the region remains unchanged."

Retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the federal government's lead man in the response, said the well no longer posed any threat.

4 million barrels of oil leaked into gulf waters and BP has paid $9.5 billion in response since the spill.

History Indicates Gulf of Mexico Spill is Among World's Largest

A sign on a building along Louisiana Highway

1 (LA 1) in Lafourche, La. (Photo by Nicholas

Moroni)

Ten of the world's largest oil spills: the Deepwater Horizon now has a spot on the list

By Nicholas Moroni

Recently, Live Science, Foreign Policy, History.com (The History Channel's Web site), and scores of other publications have put out articles listing the worst oil spills in the history of the world. At the time these articles appeared, the gushing Macondo well - which leaked over 200 million gallons of oil - in the Gulf of Mexico was not comparable to some of the catastrophic spills cited.

• Gulf War - Leaving Kuwait on January 21, 1991, Iraqi forces released valves and pipelines from oil tankers as they retreated and spilled between 150 million and 450 million gallons of oil into the Persian Gulf.
• Ixtoc 1 Spill - This occurred in the wee hours of June 3, 1979, when a flaming mixture of oil and gas shut up a drilling well located off the coast of Cidudad del Carmen, Mexico, in the Gulf of Mexico. All the workers aboard the rig were able to evacuate safely, but the explosion leaked close to 140 million barrels of oil; and, ironically, what was once a tiny shrimping town is now a haven for oil exploration.
• Atlantic Empress/Aegean Captain Collision - These two carriers, which happened to be brimming with oil, collided 10 miles off the coast of Trinidad and Tabago in the midst of a tropical storm on July 19, 1979. Both ships caught fire and 26 crewmembers perished. Around 90 million gallons of oil was spilled.
• Fergana Valley - A total of 88 million gallons of oil were spilled into this dense industrial region of eastern Uzbekistan in March 1992. This remains the world's largest inland spill. Reports surrounding the cause of the incident appear to be scarce.
• Nowruz Platform - During the Iran/Iraq war, an Irani oil tanker collided with a platform in the Persian Gulf on February 10, 1983. The crash caused the platform to tilt at a 45-degree angle and uncap a well, ultimately spilling 1,500 barrels of oil into the gulf daily until it was capped in September of that year. Iraqi forces then attacked the platform when workers were attempting the capping, and oil on the deck resulted in a fire which claimed 11 lives. A nearby platform was then ambushed by Iraqi helicopters, which resulted in an additional spill. When workers finally capped this well in March 1985, nine men died in the process. A total of 80 million gallons leaked.
• ABT Summer - This Liberian tanker held 260,000 tons of crude and exploded off the coast of Angola on May 28, 1991, killing five crew members.
• Castillo de Beliver - On August 6, 1983, a fire broke out on board this Spanish tanker as it was sailing in waters along the coast of Cape Town, South Africa. An explosion occurred, and 79 million gallons of oil leaked into the water.
• Amoco Cadiz - This tanker wreck and the resulting spill of 69 million gallons of oil brought the world its first images of oil-slicked birds. The crash occurred on March 16, 1978 off the coast of Portsall, France, and 240 miles of the Brittany coast suffered extensive damage.
• M/T Haven - Six crew members died and 45 million gallons of oil spilled into the Mediterranean coasts of Italy and France when this very large crude container (VLCC) exploded off the coast of Genoa, Italy on April 11, 1991.
• Odyssey - This American drilling-rig blew up off the coast of Novia Scotia in November 1988. The accident caused one death and 42 million gallons of oil leaked.

To date, it is surmised that over 200 millions gallons of oil were spilled from the Macondo well, granting it a second-place ranking among the world's largest oil spills.

BP's Report on Deepwater Horizon Explosion and Failed Well Leaves Questions

Questions are unanswered in BP's report on the explosion aboard Deepwater Horizon

By Nicholas Moroni

BP's release of a preliminary report on the events surrounding the April 20 explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon that led to three months of spewing oil in the Gulf of Mexico, hints at a defensive role that the company will probably be playing as it faces investigations and litigation in the future.

"No single factor caused the Macondo well tragedy. Rather, a sequence of failures involving a number of different parties" caused the oil rig to explode and the oil spill in the gulf, BP stated in a press release today. In the aforementioned report, the oil giant names Transocean (which owned the Deepwater Horizon), Cameron International (the manufacturer of the failed blowout preventer) and Halliburton (accused of performing a shoddy job in pouring cement down the well: one that might have failed to stop firy oil and gas from rising to the surface and to cause the explosion), as responsible entities.

Similar to the blame game that was played recently in Houston at federal investigative hearings; mea culpas from entities linked to BP and the Deepwater Horizon were not forthcoming.

The Washington Post published the following statements in an article today:

• "It is evident that a series of events rather than a single mistake or failure led to the tragedy," said BP CEO Tony Hayward, who has been silent for months, and will step down from his post on October 1 - he will be taking a position in Russia, and will yield less power within the company. Bob Dudley will take over as CEO.
• "In both its design and construction, BP made a series of cost-saving decisions that increased risk - in some cases severly," read a statement from Transocean.
• "The well owner [BP] is responsible for designing the well program and any testing related to the well," Halliburton rebutted in a statement.

The report, which was presented at a press conference in Washington, D.C. today, failed to hold anyone in particular within BP responsible for the explosion.

The report did claim that the blowout did not rise from the sides of the well (an area known as the annulus); but, rather up the center - an indication that the company may dodge blame for operating with a cheaper casing that had been assessed as riskier, and going with a reduced number of centralizers (they keep the casing in place, and the company used).

BP will remain on the defensive as it stands to face billions of dollars in fines that could be imposd under the Clean Water Act and the Oil Pollution Act.

The Justice Dept. is already investigating BP, and the company is facing litigation from states and individual plaintiffs.

BP Continues to Pay for Study of Environmental Impacts of Oil Spill

A seagull rests atop a boom in Grand Isle, La.

(Photo by Nicholas Moroni)

BP Continues to pay into a $500 million research fund it pledged to uphold in May

By Nicholas Moroni

BP stated today that it will hand over $10 million to the National Institutes of Health in order to study the environmental impacts of the three-month-long oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, The Times-Picayune reported today.

The money is part of a broader $500 million pledge that the oil giant made in May. BP will fund research into potentially long-term environmental damage that may occur subsequent to the 5 million barrels of oil, and the 1-2 million gallons of dispersants that were used to dissipate the oil in the wake of the spill. Little is known about the dispersants: the EPA has dubbed them "non-toxic," but the EDF questions that ascertainment.

The NIH (a congressionally-funded organization that conducts research in the name of enhancing human and environmental health) will be governing the distribution of funds to public agencies and Gulf Coast academic institutions that will conduct research.

This is the second round of payments: in June, LSU, The Florida Institute of Oceanography under the University of South Florida, and the Northern Gulf Institute, headed by Mississippi State University each received $5 million, $10 million, and $10 million, respectively.

Last month, The Los Angeles Times reported that the South Florida researchers had discovered the presence of oil in plants that are crucial to the diets of many sea organisms.

Blowout Preventer on Failed Well in Gulf of Mexico Waters Removed

The failed blowout preventer atop the Macondo Well was removed today

By Nicholas Moroni

BP was able to remove the failed blowout preventer after a robot was submerged unto the seafloor to retrieve the 50-foot, 300-ton device, The Associated Press reported today.

The device is important to Justice Dept. investigations that will be udertaken to understand why the device did not seal the well after the April 20th explosion.

Hundreds of lawsuits have already been filed against the potentially liable companies, and lawyers will be watching the findings, as many more could follow.

For its part, BP claimed it has already spent $8 billion in the gulf - throughout the saga, the company has pledged to take "full responsibility." It has also agreed to pay into a $20 billion escrow fund for spill victims.

The New York Times reported today that BP announced that recently proposed legislation that would deny the compnay drilling permits in the gulf could impede its ability to pay into the fund.

Relief Well, Bottom Kill, Static Kill, What?

A caricature made in protest of the

spill in the Gulf of Mexico along Louisiana

Highway 1, in Lafourche, La.

(Photo by Nicholas Moroni)

Due to the gulf spill, industry terminology is now part of the public discourse; but, what does "bottom kill" mean?

By Nicholas Moroni

Four months after the disastrous explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in Gulf of Mexico waters off the coast of Louisiana - one that led to a failed oil well that was only recently tamed - both BP and the federal response have supplemented news coverage of the oil spill with a slew of industry terminology. But, what is the difference between a "static kill" and "bottom kill?" And, didn't they already try the latter? No, that was the failed "top kill" method."

Provided below is a list of some of the methodologies employed in the wake of the spill, concise definitions, and whether or not they were successful in stanching the 4.9 billion gallons of crude that gushed into the gulf between April 20 and July 15.

• COREXIT Dispersants - The federal government allowed BP to spray between 1 and 2 million gallons of chemical dispersants from the company COREXIT (COREXIT 9500 and COREXIT 9527). The use of the product is controversial because the effects of its chemical compounds are largely unknown. The EDF cites a study that claims the dispersants do have levels of toxicity; while the EPA has offered a classification of "non-toxic". A company spokesperson claimed the dispersants largely comprise "detergents." (A fisherman in Cut Off, La., near the Gulf of Mexico, told this reporter that a friend of his that had been hired by BP to lay booms and spot oil had been exposed to the dispersants. Toxins in COREXIT allegedly poisoned the man's bloodstream. The fisherman, who at the time was receiving emergency payments from BP, asked that his name not be disclosed, because he claimed "it was in his contract" with BP not to speak negatively about the company. "I can't say what I want to say," he muttered.) The federal government claims that 75 percent of the oil at water level has dissipated, largely due to the use of dispersants.
• Cofferdam - A dome intended to collect the leaking oil. The effort failed after icy, crystallized gas blocked pipes in the structure, preventing it from garnering the gushing oil.
• Top Kill - BP attempted to stop the oil by pumping mud down the well from the top. Because of the high pressure of the gushing well, this effort was unsuccessful.
• Junk Shot - After the Top Kill effort failed, BP attempted to shoot debris such as shredded rubber tires and golf balls down the well. The plan was then to pump mud and cement down the well to seal it once the oil was stopped, or the pressure quelled by the "junk." This too was futile.
• Static Kill - Similar to top kill; it's only "static" because the oil leaking into the gulf had been halted after a cap was placed upon the failed blowout preventer (the device that is supposed to seal the well in the event that it malfunctions) in July. The static kill might have been successful in plugging the well because the mud that was flushed down the well did not have to contend with an out-of-control well.
• Relief Well - There are two wells in the general proximity of the failed Macondo well that, if all goes according to plan, when the weather in the gulf improves this week, and operations continue, will diagonally intercept the flow of oil from the once-gushing well.
• Bottom Kill - BP and government response teams have hailed this tactic as a silver bullet ever since announcing the drilling of relief wells in June. The process entails pumping mud and cement into the well's sides through the diagonally drilled relief wells. The bottom kill occurs subsequent to the interceptions from the relief well.
• Gentle Tug - This week BP will also attempt to remove the original blowout preventer that failed and caused the April 20 explosion, as well as the cap stack that was placed atop it in mid July to reduce the amount of oil leaking out of the well.

Real Estate Agents in Gulf States Hit by Oil Spill Lobby for Cash

(Twitpic by BourbonRealty)

Real estate representatives from the gulf region secure $68 million in financial reparations for losses in sales they attribute to the oil spill

By Nicholas Moroni

Recognizing the adverse financial impact that the BP oil spill has had on the real estate industry in the gulf region, several industry representatives from five states in the area recently flew to Washington, D.C. and successfully lobbied for $68 million of BP's $20 billion escrow fund, The Daily Comet, a local newspaper in Lafourche, La., reported on Sunday.

According to the article, real estate agents motivated by a post-spill sales abatement, decided to make certain that they would be compensated through BP's escrow fund, which is being adminsitered by Washington attorney Ken Feinberg's Gulf Coast Claims Facility. The piece also states that a driving force in the decision to pursue lobbying was a shared concern that the real estate industry would not be provided for under the auspices of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which guides for the GCCF protocol - either through the GCCF or through litigation.

"If realtors were to sue BP under the Oil Pollution Act, they would not be awarded any funds," Malcom Young, CEO of Louisiana Realtors, told The Comet.

It should be noted though, that under OPA, spill victims with legitimate claims are to have their losses accomodated, with the possibility of interest, by the responsible party - in this case, BP, however, the fund will not accomodate moratorium-related losses.

Realtors are saying that buyers are backing out because of lack of capital due to a job shortage that now permeates the region as a result of the drilling moratorium, while out-of-town lenders are skeptical to loan to oil industry employees that could be out of jobs and default on payments. The region is heavily dependent on the oil industry.

Finally, the article cites a study by the research group CoreLogic which estimates that the gulf region could lose up to $648 in homes sales this year, and as much as $3 billion over five years.

Gulf of Mexico Well Sealing Stalled by Bad Weather

Bad weather stalls the plugging of the failed well in the Gulf of Mexico

By Nicholas Moroni

Poor weather conditions in the Gulf of Mexico prevented an operation to plug the failed well that resulted in the months-long oil spill in the gulf region, The Associated Press reported today.

The AP article cited a phone conference delivered this morning by retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen (the federal go-to-man for the spill response effort) to a group of reporters, in which he said that waves "six to eight feet high" in waters off the coast of Louisiana pose too great a risk for BP engineers and rig workers that would attempt to remove the failed blowout preventer and replace it with a new one. The blowout preventer was supposed to seal the well, when a surge of natural gas mixed with oil in the well's pipeline causing the deadly explosion of the Deepwater Horizon on April 20.

A temporary cap that was applied in July to collect oil through a pipeline that lead to several vessels - one that was loosely fitted and failed to permanently seal the leak at the time - will also be removed.

The response team will then apply a new cap, and connect it to a relief well that is still a work in progress. 50 feet of drilling still needs to take place to complete that well, but after that scientists will pump cement and mud into the well to permanently seal the well.

In July, BP successfully halted the flow of oil into the gulf after an 86 days of an out-of-control gusher. An estimated 4.9 billion barrels (around 206 gallons) of oil leaked into the gulf waters througout that time.

Allen said operations will resume in two to three days.

Transocean Operatives Tesitfy at Federal Hearing

Deepwater Horizon oil rig following the April 20 explosion that led to

the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Transocean leased the rig to BP and

Halliburton was responsible for the cement job in the well

that some have called the cause of the blowout.

(Photo by US Coast Guard/Courtesy of SkyTruth)

US Coast Guard and Bureau of Energy Management hearings in Houston illuminate a kerfuffled Deepwater Horizon rig

By Nicholas Moroni

The joint US Coast Guard/Bureau of Energy Management federal hearings into the ongoing oil saga in the gulf continue today in Houston; however, yesterday's session was marred with a self-inflicted portrayal of disorganization among the leaders aboard the ill-fated Deepwater Horizon oil rig - which sank on April 20, killing 11 crew members.

Transocean - the company that leased the rig to BP - operatives were on the hot seat yesteday as federal officials pushed to reveal a lack of communication and organization that in no way facilitated the crew's response to the blown-out well. When US Coast Guard Capt. Hung Nguyen asked rig manager Paul Johnson matter-of-factly, "Are you clear who was in charge?"; Johnson replied, "I'm not sure."

The Los Angeles Times also reported that after the blowout, crew members were awaiting orders from senior personnel - orders they never received.

Daun Winslow, a Transocean division manager, claimed that Curt Kuchta, the rig's captain, turned to him to inquire as to whether or not he should perfrom an emergency disconnect of the drill from the well. Winslow also said he had to urge Kuchta to deploy the lifeboats.

The LA Times also published a series of troubling findings from a September 2009 audit of the rig that were summoned at yesterday's hearings - among them:

• Not all relevant personnel on the rig were knowledgeable about drilling and well operation practices.
• A review showed significant overdue maintenance jobs that required more than 3,545 man hours.
• No single person on board could account for which alarms had been disabled and for what reason.
• A warning on understaffing was issued saying that any further reduction of experienced personnel may be "detrimental to the performance of the rig."

The hearings proceed today, with BP and Haliburton representatives being called to testify, although the Houston Chronicle reported yesterday that Brian Morel, a BP drilling engineer, plans to exercise his Fifth Amendment rights by refusing to say anything that might incriminate him in any wrong-doing.

One of the Halliburton employees expected to testify today was supposedly in direct contact with Morel and other BP representatives about the cement job in the weeks leading up to the well explosion. A faulty cement job by Halliburton may have caused the explosion: if the cement is not properly set in a well, oil and gas can mix and surge up the well at extremely high rates of speed, causing an explosive force.

As the federal hearings continue, and perhaps the finger-pointing, the question of whether or not these companies and other BP associates will be shielded under claimants' agreements to waive litigation following a settlement with attorney Ken Feinberg's Gulf Coast Claims Facility - something Feinberg is still pondering.

Gulf Coast Claims Facility Criticized

Ken Feinberg (Photo by Bill Starling/

Courtesy of Press-Register)

Ken Feinberg's Gulf Coast Claims Facility receives criticism in its earliest stages

By Nicholas Moroni

Ken Feinberg's Gulf Claims Facility began officially evaluating the claims of alleged spill victims amid a choir of criticism. In the days preceding the transition, Attorneys General from Florida, Louisiana and Mississippi have all offered up their qualms with the manner in which Feinberg will apparently determine the legitimacy of claims.

Feinberg has maintained that proximity to the spill will be a major factor - a cause for concern for residents in regions further away from the shoreline, who claim the spill's effects were still largely felt. In Florida, where oil did show up along the shoreline, tourism in the state has reportedly taken a nosedive, which some credit to the general region's image. Feinberg has stated that stigmatization is not legitimate cause for compensation.

"We've got a proposed geographic map along the Gulf Coast that gives us some flexibility of how we will define proximity," the Washington attorney recently told The Palm Beach Post. However, The Wall Street Journal reported today that Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum said there is more stringency to Feinberg's loosely defined protocol than is found in the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. He called Feinberg's described methods "completely unacceptable."

Claimants, the attorneys general, and elected individuals have taken issue with Feinberg's ill-deifined position on the responsibilty of business associates of BP. Uncertainty as to whether these companies can be sued following a final settlement, and the deduction of any money paid to fisherman that participated in BP's Vessel of Opportunity clean-up routine, are controverstial topics.

"Mr. Feinberg appears to be completely tone-deaf to the concerns of people along the Gulf Coast," Alabama Attorney General Troy King told The Journal.

Feinberg at this time is mending the protocol he released last week, so all of the evaluation process is subject to change.

To his critics, if litigation is a better options, he advises them to "go ahead."

Gulf Coast Claims Facility Viewed Suspiciously

Ken Feinberg at a town hall meeting in Bayou La Batre, Ala.

(Photo by Bill Starling/Courtesy of Press-Register)

The Gulf Coast Claims Facility is being viewed suspiciously

By Nicholas Moroni

As attorney Ken Feinberg's Gulf Coast Claims Facility officially takes over the BP claims process on Monday, August 23, some have adopted a precarious view of the operation.

Fisherman, restaurant owners, distributors, hotel owners, and other entities are cautiosuly approaching the claims process. Many are uncertain that the initial emergency payments and a final settlement with BP - after which the right to sue is waved - will cover long term damages. The unfortunate reality, however, is that many spill victims cannot finance a potentially lengthy legal battle with BP and its affiliates; subsequently, some are uneasily taking the initial payments, but are not entirely committed to settling.

"The conern is you're going to have people essentially being taken advantage of because they have economic straits - they get quick, low settlements and out of economic necessity they take them, but in the long run they are not better off," Stephen J. Herman, a New Orleans lawyer, told The New York Times.

Throughout the past two months, Feinberg has toured the Gulf region conducting town hall meetings in an attempt to promote the $20 billion escrow account set up by BP in June, which will be used to compensate spill victims. At one meeting in July, he told a congregation that anyone with a legitimate claim that opts out of a settlement is "crazy."

There are other causes for concern. BP's business affiliates (Transocean, Cameron, Halliburton, and others) that were involved - directly, or indriectly - in the April 20 sinking of the Deepwater Horizon are shielded, so claimants cannot file suit following a settlement. What's more, spill victims that have been receiving emergency payments from BP, or fisherman that were hired to spot oil and lay booms thorugh BP's Vessel of Opportunity program, will have their wages deducted from any payment.

Ken Feinberg's Claims Protocol Released

Ken Feinberg (right) at a town hall meeting in Bayou La Batre,

Ala. (Photo by Bill Starling/Courtesy of Press-Register)

Ken Feinberg releases protocol for the Gulf Coast Coast Claims Facility

By Nicholas Moroni

As attorney Ken Feinberg plans to officially take over the administration of the claims process on Monday as head of the Gulf Coast Claims Facility, he announced today the protocol for his deliberations.

Not surprisingly, claimants seeking financial reparartions for alleged damage suffered subsequent to the BP oil spill, will largely have to rely on the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 as the framework that determines the legitimacy of their claims. Feinberg has announced that he will be slightly flexible in his determinations, however OPA is heavily referenced.

For example, with regards to businesses, the protocal states that a legitimate claim can be made for damages suffered as a result of injury and/or destruction or loss of property or revenue: a page right out of the post-Exxon Valdez legislation.

However, the guidelines also state that anyone, regardless of whether or not that individual is the owner of the business, is techinically eligible for compensation as long as he or she is able to prove a loss.

What's more, in certain cases, Feinberg will not require the heavy loads of paperwork BP mandated prior to even considering certain claims. Fisherman and deck hands that deal in cash, can call upon a third party to vouch for the vailidty of their claim.

"When the claims center opens on August 23, the entire claims process will be in place to get people out the door, and money to those most deeply affected," Feinberg told the Alabama news blog, al.com.

Oil Still in Gulf of Mexico Waters

Phytoplankton plume in the Gulf of Mexico off of the coast of Louisiana.

The plume is the green-colored region closest the shoreline.

Phytoplankton is an important nutrient for many sea

organisms. (Photo by NASA/Courtesy of Wikimedia)

The explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig on April 20,

which resulted in the death of 11 workers, and caused

the Macondo well to leak for three months.

(Photo by US Coast Guard/Courtesy of SkyTruth)

Scientists claim that much oil can still be found in the gulf

By Nicholas Moroni

Despite President Obama's recent Gulf Coast PR trip, aimed at reassuring the public that much of the region's waters are safe and the area "is open for business," and the Department of the Interior's claim that three-quarters of the surmised 200 million gallons of oil that leaked from the busted Macondo well has either dissipated or been dispersed, scientists insist that danger lurks on the ocean floor.

A recent article in the Los Angeles Times cites analysis by scientists claiming that significant portions of the oil can still be found on the seabed. Droplets of oil have appeared among the sediments in an underwater canyon off the coast of Louisiana that, prior to the Macondo well being capped last month, was the sight of clouds of leaking oil for months. That canyon, known as the DeSoto Canyon hosts an area rife with phytoplankton - tiny particles in plants integral to the diets of marine life in the region. Scientists worry that sea creatures eating the plants will be ingesting unknown levels of toxicity that may, in turn, be passed on to humans that eat seafood.

"The idea that this could have an impact on the food web and on the biological system is certainly a reality," Dave Hollander, a marine geochemist, told a Web writer for WUSF, a National Public Radio branch in Florida.

Hollander and a team of scientists from the University of South Florida underwent research for 10 days on a vessel, traveling throughout the region.

Furthermore, several scientists also told the Associated Press it is their opinion that 80 percent of the oil can still be found under the water.

Florida Files Lawsuit Against BP

Florida is the latest state to file a lawsuit against BP; $1 billion is sought for damages to tourism industry

By Nicholas Moroni

Florida plans to file suit against BP in response to damages suffered by the tourism industry, Bloomberg Business Week reported today.

According to the publication, Florida plans to seek $1 billion in reparations for a loss in revenue due to alleged stigamtization the entire state experienced (including regions away from the Gulf of Mexico). A steep decline in tax revenue is also believed to be part of the state's incentive in pursuing a suit against the London-based company.

"We're hoping that rather than jobs lost and[/]or services to Floridians being lost, that we can develop some type of dialogue to get interim relief," Steve Yarrid, a Tampa Bay lawyer appointed by Florida governor Charlie Christ to oversee legal issues surrounding the spill, told Bloomberg.

Florida would not be the first state pursuing litigation: Alabama and Mississippi have turned to federal courts to seek reparations, as well.

BP will Transfer Claims to Ken Feinberg

Ken Feinberg (right) at a town hall meeting in Bayou La Batre,

Ala. (Photo by Bill Starling/Courtesy of Press-Register)

BP hands claims process to Ken Feinberg, who begins deliberating on August 23.

By Nicholas Moroni

BP will hand over the claims process to third-party administrator Ken Feinberg this Wednesday, The Associated Press reported today. Feinberg will begin evaluating the merits of claims on August 23 as chief of the Gulf Coast Claims Facility.

The oil giant reports that it has paid upward of $300 million in claims subsequent to the April 20 sinking of the Deepwater Horizon rig, which led to the death of 11 workers and caused the Macondo well to spew oil for 86 days before being capped. BP has been accused of keeping claimaints in limbo, though, in a supposed effort to pass the buck on to Feinberg, who will then be forced to "officially deny" claims, something BP often reminds the public it has not done. Note, though, only 29 percent of claimants have receieved any payment from the company.

In a telephone conversation, BP spokesperson Mark Proegler scoffed at the notion that the company was simply waiting to place the burden of denying claims on Feinberg, and stated that BP "[hasn't] denied any legitimate claims."

Bloomberg Business Week recently reported that claims from all 50 states have already poured in; and the total number is close to 150,000. Meanwhile, as Feinberg prepares to take the reigns, he acknowledges the daunting task before him

"The further away you are from the Gulf, the less likely it is you will have a valid claim," Feinberg told Bloomberg. "But I will rake a look at each claim."

Feinberg is a Washington attorney noted for administering payments to the family members and victims of 9/11 victims, Vietnam Veterans who suffered effects from Agent Orange dispersants, and victims of the Virginia Tech shootings.

Oily Waste: Where is It All Going?

Clean-up Workers on a beach in Grand Isle, La. in July

fill a bag with oily waste. Throughout the gulf 61 percent

of the waste is reportedly being dumped near minority

communities. (Photo by Nicholas Moroni)

Reports indicate that 61 percent of oily waste ends up in minority communities in the gulf region

By Nicholas Moroni

The Washington Post post reported today that a disproportionate amount of oily waste - that is, oily booms, rags, hazmut suits, gloves, etc. - are being dumped in landfills near minority communities in the gulf region.

According to the article, waste from cleanup efforts subsequent to the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon, which killed 11 workers, and led to an 86-day oil well gusher, 40 miles off the shore of Louisiana, has produced some 45,000 tons of garbage. Of that waste, roughly 61 percent has been dumped near areas that largely comprise minority communities.

"Low income communities are getting dumped on in such a way that is so overwhelming it should raise eyebrows," Robert Bullard, director of the Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark Atlanta University, told the Post.

Residents have also allegedly complained of being disregarded in the decision-making process, and BP had promised to engage and include residents in discourse before dumping oily waste in neighboring landfills.

As contracted haulers dump tons of oily waste daily, one of the greatest unknowns is the effect(s) of any lingering dispersants - traces of which might still be on soiled booms.

Mike Bushman, a spokesman for the dispersant company COREXIT (the formulas 9527 and 9500 were used generously to combat the spilled oil at the outset of the spill) claims both formulas break down almost entirely in a matter of days.

A Louisiana resident who lives just miles from a landfill in Venice (off the gulf) called the move "a slap in the face."

Damages Lawsuits Filed Against BP by Spill Victims Tests the Claims Process

Damages suits against BP to be heard in New Orleans

By Nicholas Moroni

Hundreds of lawsuits filed by spill victims seeking finanical damages from oil giant BP will be heard in a New Orleans court.

Federal judge, Carl Barbier will hear some 300 cases that have been filed by spill victims seeking reparations for financial damages allegedly suffered subsequent to the spill. BP had hoped to avoid such litigation when it agreed in June to earmark a $20 billion escrow fund for spill victims. However, the Financial Times reports the aftermath of the sealed Macondo well has all the makings of Exxon-Valdez litigation.

BP had hoped to have the cases heard in Texas (its headquarters are in Houston): perhaphs in an attempt to appear before a friendlier jury.

Judge Barbier's hearing the cases initally carried some controversy, as well. BP maintained that Barbier's presiding over the cases, would be a conflict of interest because of shares that he held in Transocean (the operator of the sunken Deepwater Horizon rig) and Halliburton, which was involved in the Macondo drilling. Barbier has since sold the shares, and a Court of Appeals conceded that the sale of the shares posed no conflict.

The oil giant claimed it respected the decision, and that it "look[ed] forward to the cases proceeding as expeditiously as possibly."

BP Puts $3 Billion Into Escrow Account For Spill Victims

BP shows signs of good faith by making $3 billion into escrow fund for spill victims

By Nicholas Moroni

BP put $3 billion dollars into a $20 billion dollar escorw account that, in June, the company agreed to pay into for a period of five years.

The initial deposit is being promoted by the company as a token of good faith - a sign, according to incoming BP CEO Bob Dudley, that BP intends to compensate and "stand behind" those affected by the worst oil spill in US History.

In the fourth quarter BP has pledged $2 billion; moreover, an additional $1.25 billion will be added each quarter, until the BP has made settled with all eligible claimants. Note, though, that the White House said that the $20 billion is neither a ceiling, nor a floor.