http://www.propublica.org/ion/blog/item/In-Gulf-Spill-BP-Using-Dispersants-Banned-in-UK

The ProPublica Blog

In Gulf Spill, BP Using Dispersants Banned in U.K.

by Marian Wang, ProPublica – May 18, 2010 2:24 pm EDT
The two types of dispersants BP is spraying in the Gulf are banned for use [1] on oil spills in the U.K. As EPA-approved products [2], BP has been using them in greater quantities than dispersants have ever been used [3] in the history of US oil spills.
BP is using two products from a line of dispersants called Corexit [4], which EPA data [2] appears to show is more toxic and less effective [5] on South Louisiana crude than other available dispersants, according to Greenwire.
We learned about the U.K. ban from a mention on the New York Times’ website. (The reference was cut from later versions of the article, so we can’t link to the Times, but we found the piece [6] elsewhere.) The Times flagged a letter [7] Rep. Edward Markey, Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, sent to the EPA yesterday. The letter pointed out that both the Corexit products currently being used in the Gulf were removed from a list of approved treatments for oil spills in the UK more than a decade ago. (Here’s the letter [7].)
As we’ve reported, Corexit was also used after Exxon Valdez [8] and was “later linked with health impacts in people including respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders.” One of the two Corexit products also contains a compound associated with “headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems at high doses [9].”
Given that the dispersants are EPA-approved, the choice on which ones to use was left to BP, which had stockpiled large amounts of Corexit and is now ordering more.
BP has defended its choice to use Corexit. A BP spokesman called the product [5] “pretty effective,” and said it had been “rigorously tested.” It is not testing other dispersants, said [5] a spokesman, because it’s focusing on stopping the spill. Mani Ramesh, Nalco’s chief technology officer, disputed claims that its product is harmful to the environment [10], telling Reuters that Corexit’s active ingredient is “an emulsifier also found in ice cream.”
Although Corexit seems to be one of the more toxic choices available, dispersants themselves have the effect of breaking up oil into droplets that linger longer in the water instead of collecting at the surface.
The choice to use them is inherently an environmental tradeoff. Their use in the Gulf spill has limited the instances-and images-of oil-covered seabirds, but has kept effects of the spill mostly underwater. Scientists have discovered giant plumes of dispersed oil [11] in the deep waters of the Gulf, though the EPA has said “there is no information currently available [12]” to link the dispersants to those deep-sea plumes. The plumes are now fast approaching the Gulf loop current [13], which could spread the oil into the Atlantic Ocean.
In a hearing this afternoon, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works that the EPA is working with BP to get less toxic dispersants [14] to the site as quickly as possible, according to Kate Sheppard of Mother Jones.
The EPA, while recognizing long-term effects on the environment are unknown [15], has said that the federal government will regularly analyze [16] the effect of dispersants, and that it will discontinue the application of dispersants underwater [17] “if any negative impacts on the environment outweigh the benefits.”
Write Marian.Wang@propublica.org [18].

Special thanks to Richard Charter

http://www.ogj.com/index/article-display/0688605868/articles/oil-gas-journal/general-interest-2/hse/2010/05/bp-says_it_s_collecting/QP129867/cmpid=EnlDailyMay182010.html

of course if the flowrate is really 17,000 bbl per day….

May 17, 2010
(This story was updated with 2,000 b/d figure, Loop Current details on May 18)
Paula Dittrick
OGJ Senior Staff Writer

HOUSTON, May 17 — A riser insertion tool was estimated to be collecting 2,000 b/d of oil leaking from a deepwater well off Louisiana, which was double the volume that spill response crews had collected the previous day from the estimated 5,000 b/d oil spill.

Doug Suttles, chief operating officer of BP Exploration & Production, told reporters during a May 17 news conference from Robert, La., that the tool was collecting 1,000 b/d. Early on May 18, BP updated that figure to 2,000 b/d.

The tool is a 4-in. steel pipe inserted about 5 ft into a 21-in. damaged riser on the seabed. Oil and gas have been leaking out of the end of the damaged riser, which is about 600 ft from the runaway Macondo well on Mississippi Canyon Block 252. A blowout resulted in a fire and explosion on Transocean Ltd.’s Deepwater Horizon semisubmersible rig on Apr. 20, leaving 11 crew members missing and presumed dead. BP operates the block.

On May 16, BP successfully started collecting oil and gas from the end of the damaged riser. The hydrocarbons are being transported by a riser to the Transocean Discoverer Enterprise drillship on the surface 5,000 ft above the seabed.

“This remains a new technology, and both its continued operation and its effectiveness in capturing the oil and gas remain uncertain,” BP said.

Meanwhile, Suttles said a “top kill” technique could be used possibly during the weekend to stop the flow from the well. Heavy fluids will be pumped through choke and kill lines on the existing blowout preventer into the well.

The choke and kill lines are two 3-in. lines. Weight of the heavy fluids is much heavier than the oil. The mud will be followed by cement to seal the well.

“We will never produce oil from this well,” Suttles said. “We want to very clear about that.” The well has flowed in an uncontrolled manner, and it cannot be repaired, he said. “The right thing to do is to permanently plug this well.”

Ultimately, a relief well will intersect the well at 18,000 ft where cement will be pumped to permanently seal the bottom of the well.

Work on the first relief well, which began on May 2, was interrupted to test the BOP, Suttles said, adding that the semi is expected to resume drilling soon. The first relief well is being drilled by the Transocean Development Driller III semi.

Transocean’s Development Driller II drilling rig began drilling the second relief well on May 16. A relief well takes 3 months to complete. The second relief well is being drilled as a backup in case of the first relief well encounters problems.

Tip of spill very close to Loop Current
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists said ocean models indicate tar balls leading the southern edge of the surface oil slick could begin moving more to the southwest and potentially into the Loop Current, possibly beginning in the evening of May 18. The Loop Current would pull the slick toward the Florida Keys and the east coast of Florida.

Suttles said, “There are not large quantities of thick, heavy oil anywhere around the spill. Most of the spill is this thin sheen.”

Speaking at the news conference, NOAA scientist Charlie Henry said information from research vessel R/V Pelican has yet to be analyzed. “Layers of oil are totally untrue,” Henry said of some weekend media reports regarding possible underwater plumes of oil.

NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco issued a news release May 17 saying some media reports were, “misleading, premature, and in some cases, inaccurate.”  On May 18, she had a news conference to tell reporters that the leading-edge tip of the sheen was very close to the Loop Current.
“A lot depends on what the ocean currents do and what the winds do,” Lubchenco said. “A lot will depend on local surface winds and surface conditions.”

Surface spill response
Suttles announced BP has spent more than $500 million on the oil spill response as of May 17.

More than 650 vessels are involved in the response effort on the surface of the sea. Vessels include skimmers, tugs, barges, and recovery vessels. Skimming efforts as of May 17 had recovered 151,000 bbl of oily liquid.

The total length of boom deployed as part of efforts to prevent oil reaching the coast was almost 1.7 million ft, including over 400,000 ft of sorbent boom.

More than 19,000 people from BP, other companies, and government agencies were involved in the response as of May 17.

Contact Paula Dittrick at paulad@ogjonline.com.

 
 
Opening Statement – May 18, 2010
 
Administration Response to Deepwater Horizon Disaster
 
“This is our second hearing on the continuing disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.  The purpose of this and future hearings is to understand the cascade of failures that caused the catastrophic blowout of the oil well being drilled by the Deepwater Horizon rig, and to determine what Congress needs to do to ensure that it never happens again.
 
“Last week, we heard from two distinguished technical experts and heads of the three companies responsible for the disaster on what some of those failures might have been.
 
“Next week we will have a hearing on the issue of liability for damages.
 
“Today, we will hear from Secretary of the Interior Salazar and his senior team in charge of responding to this catastrophic failure.  I would like to focus this hearing on the role of regulatory failure in causing this catastrophe.  Along with the failure of technological systems, and failure of the people operating those systems, regulatory failure is one of the three key interlocking breakdowns that I believe are at the heart of the problem.
 
“I believe that there are several dimensions to regulatory failure in this case.
 
“President Obama suggested one, last week, when he cited a ‘cozy’ relationship between the Minerals Management Service, or MMS, and the industry it was regulating.
 
“There are three other regulatory areas that I think bear some close examination in this hearing:
 
1.     Whether we had the right technical standards in place to govern the drilling being undertaken by the Deepwater Horizon rig;
 
2.     Whether we have been taking a ‘systems’ approach to oversight of deepwater drilling operations, with sufficient staff resources and training to match the complexity of what was being undertaken; and
 
3.     Whether we had adequate mechanisms to follow-up on changes being made to the complex drilling operation for this well, as drilling was proceeding.
 
“The first of these forms of possible regulatory failure – the failure to have the right technical standards in place – may be exemplified by the problems in the cementing of the well.  It’s possible that the extent of the cementing was inadequate for this particular well given its other design features.  However, the amount of cement appears to have met the MMS’s technical standard.  In some ways, having a prescriptive standard that is inadequate in certain systems might be worse than not having a standard at all.
 
“The second form of possible regulatory failure – not having a proper ‘systems approach’ – could be a result of a limited and reactive role that MMS seems to have taken over the years toward these highly complex wells.  Many MMS employees do have relevant expertise and are involved in research in key areas of well safety.  In my view, they need to be more fully engaged with industry in reviewing overall design and implementation of these challenging deepwater wells.
 
“Finally, the third form of possible regulatory failure is exemplified by the lack of follow-through on how approved plans are implemented, including the detection and response to unusual occurrences that might warn of bigger problems.  There appear to have been a number of changes in the well plan during its construction, including those involving the number of structural ‘centralizers’ being used and the point at which drilling mud was withdrawn from the well.  These decisions can be driven by cost and the desire to make up lost time on the drilling project, and it is important to ensure that safety is paramount.  This raises an important question — where was the MMS in this process?  Was it consulted?  Does it have an established role that ensures that it will scrutinize major changes to previously approved plans?
 
“We know that MMS inspectors visit rigs to review activities taking place on them, and while the documentary record of inspections on this particular rig appears somewhat cloudy, it was inspected approximately on a monthly basis.  Is this enough?  How are unusual occurrences and abnormal events, which might indicate the need for more frequent inspections, communicated to the MMS in between inspections?  And are inspectors asking the right questions when they do these visits?
 
“Having identified these three broad categories of possible regulatory failure, the question before us all is, what should we be doing next?
 
“First, I believe that we should find out all we can about problems that existed on the Deepwater Horizon are present in other deepwater drilling operations in the Gulf.
 
“Second, that there should be a comprehensive and independent technical review of the precise drilling plan that was proposed for this well.  I hope the Department of the Interior should make the full drilling plan available for peer review by other industry experts.  
 
“Finally, while I have sketched out some broad areas of obvious failure, we are still learning more about the potential root causes of this disaster on a daily basis.  I believe that we need a more thoroughgoing and independent review of the safety and regulation of OCS oil and gas operations generally.  We have profited by such independent assessments after other major disasters, such as Three Mile Island and the loss of the space shuttle Challenger. I am glad to learn that the President intends to charter such a Commission on his own authority, and look forward to it beginning its work soon.”
 
#   #   #
 
Contact Bill Wicker at 202.224.5243 or bill_wicker@energy.senate.gov
Visit our website at http://energy.senate.gov/public/

BP Rep Speaks About Oil Spill At Keys Meeting

http://www.justnews.com/news/23520030/detail.html

http://www.justnews.com/video/23522867/index.html

Chris Graythen/Getty Images

The public was invited to the meeting in Key Largo where county commissioners met with experts from various agencies to discuss plans to protect the Florida Keys from the oil that has been leaking into the Gulf of Mexico for the last few weeks. 

“I don’t know what they’re going to do. That’s why we’re having the meeting today, so everybody can speak up,” said Monroe County Mayor Sylvia Murphy. 

Although millions of gallons of oil have poured into the Gulf, none has made it to Monroe County yet. But that could change if the wind changes direction, so Murphy is tapping into local resources to devise a plan. 

“All of the alphabet soups you can name are here — Fish and Wildlife, South Florida Water Management District, the Coast Guard commander, representatives from British Petroleum, Department of Environmental Protection, our own emergency manager, the emergency manager from Key West,” Murphy said. 

Officials said they believe there is a good chance the oil will not make it to the Keys, but if it does, it could devastate the coral reefs and the economy. BP representatives said the company would do whatever it takes to prevent that from happening and to clean it up if it does. 

BP representative Keith Seilhan said that if the oil does come toward the Keys, it will most likely come in the form of tar balls. 

“It’s oil that has been exposed to the weather, both the sun, the wind, as well as the physical movement of the ocean,” Seilhan said. 

Seilhan is the first BP representative to make it to the Florida Keys since the oil spill. He said booms may do more harm than they are worth in the Keys because tar balls do not float. 

“What we’re trying to do now is work with different groups to identify other technologies that may impede the movement of tar balls,” Seilhan said. 

Representatives of the U.S. Coast Guard said their plan remains fluid. 

“We will not let our guard down on this, no matter how long it lasts,” said U.S. Coast Guard Capt. Pat DeQuatro. 

With no visible solution in place, Keys residents remain uneasy. 

Tourism has already taken a hit. The coral reefs are vulnerable, and community members said they feel helpless. Residents want answers and solutions, specifically from BP. 

“Anything that’s impacted will be restored,” Seilhan said. 

The mayor said she wants to make a solid plan for the oil slick response before it gets anywhere near the Keys. She stressed preparation, but warned against overreaction. 

“Tourism is our main industry, thank you very much. But there’s nothing wrong with the Florida Keys at this moment,” Murphy said. 

The public was not allowed to speak at the meeting, and the commission did not cast a vote. The meeting served as an event where the experts could discuss their opinions and make decisions for a response plan.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=BBA6351E-F324-475D-95FE-B3D9D57B2D45

May 18, 2010

The benefits of offshore oil drilling are far outweighed by the risks, Senator Bernie Sanders argued at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing on Tuesday.
The senator questioned U.S. Energy Secretary Ken Salazar about a moratorium on offshore drilling in the aftermath of the April 20 blowout at the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico. At the hearing, Sanders noted that the U.S. Energy Information Administration has calculated that opening Atlantic and Pacific coastal waters to offshore drilling would increase the supply of oil by 2030 only enough to shave three-cents per gallon off the price of a gallon of gas. An easier, smarter way to bring down the price of gasoline – without the risks of catastrophic environmental and economic damage – is to raise fuel economy standards for new cars and light trucks sold in the United States.
Making cars that get 35.5 miles per gallon of gas, as federal regulations will require, will save a dollar per gallon by 2030.
To watch the senator at the energy committee hearing, click here. (available shortly)