Rolling 2010 Oil Spill Thread

Because the mess in the Gulf doesn't have its own thread, because I never followed up on what happened to that stranded tanker on the Great Barrier Reef, and because every time one of these spills happens I'm downright humbled by how horrible it all is on many different levels.

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6519/slide_6519_86881_large.jpg

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6519/slide_6519_86629_large.jpg?1272747057015

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/05/02/us/02spill_CA1/02spill_CA1-popup.jpg

http://softporal.ucoz.ru/Music4/Gorillaz-Plastic_Beach_2010.jpg

RE: Great Barrier Reef wreck, and I hate that I'm linking to the Washington Fucking Examiner for this, but the ship was eventually successfully lifted off the reef, 3 tons of oil ended up being spilled, and arrests have been made for straying waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay outside of the shipping lane. In all likelihood the arrests will result in a fine to some massive corporation that they'll barely notice. JUSTICE.

Anyone else eeried out by the graphic similarity of the swirling oil vortex to Katrina?

ugh, I was trying to find some new pictures of the oil spill and found this fucker, who has decided to dedicate his life to making horrible companies look as good as possible when they massively screw up.

BP Must Assert Greater Control Over the Oil Spill Pictures and Story

As a first priority, BP is failing to manage the pictures of the crisis. Right now, stock footage and photos of indigenous animals in peril are telling a powerful story about what many expect to happen in the coming hours. Meanwhile, images of the massive clean-up effort – and the hard-working men and women that are carrying it out – are nowhere to be seen. At a time when BP can ill-afford to be perceived as a faceless corporate entity, this imbalance needs to be remedied.

He was honored as "Crisis Manager of the year for 2007 for his work on the spinach E. coli crisis, the industry-wide pet food recalls, and the lead paint toy recalls.

Yaaaaay!

It makes me think of a story I just read about the world's third richest man defending Goldman Sachs. Let me read the world's third poorest man's opinion instead.

eating so much local seafood right now before it's all fucking gone. dear bp: fuck you and die.

yah and so the new orleans times-picayune which you think would be all over this story is paying not quite enough attention. top story right now: jazzfest. distant 2nd or 3rd: catastrophic river of roofing tar making its way toward us. fuck them too.

LA Times: BP's containment problem is unprecedented

The problem with the April 20 spill is that it isn't really a spill: It‘s a gush, like an underwater oil volcano. A hot column of oil and gas is spurting into freezing, black waters nearly a mile down, where the pressure nears a ton per inch, impossible for divers to endure. Experts call it a continuous, round-the-clock calamity, unlike a leaking tanker, which might empty in hours or days.

...To BP falls the daunting task of trying to stop the gush before it becomes the most damaging spill in American history. If the flow is not stopped, it will exhaust the natural reservoir of oil beneath the sea floor, experts say. Many months, at least, could pass.

As I mentioned on the other thread, the initial estimates were 1,000 barrels per day (BP's estimate), which was then recently revised upward to 5,000 barrels/day (collaborative estimate between NOAA, US Coast Guard and...BP again), and now recent reports from WSJ are suggesting it might actually be closer to 25,000 barrels/day (1 million gallons/day). Further, both BP officials and Dept. of the Interior are saying that it may take at least 90 days to stop the oil flow.

So...I guess they gave up on the idea of setting the oil on fire, once they realized they'd have to keep setting it on fire for months? Or...?

http://i43.tinypic.com/wr0u41.jpg

I was trying to find some new pictures of the oil spill and found this fucker

I'm sure it's only a coincidence that he looks a lot like Dick Morris did in the '90s. Have we isolated which part of the DNA turns someone into a slimy opportunist asshole yet?

http://i40.tinypic.com/ets8q1.jpg

More reassuring information: BP's Initial Exploration Plan for the well that's currently leaking, besides concluding that drilling there did not pose a significant risk to the shore that's currently being fucked up, also mentions that BP has the capabilities to respond to a "worst case scenario" of a 300,000 gallon/day leak (Section 7.1). Remember, we may actually be at 1,000,000 gallons/day right now.

Section 14.2.3.2 WETLANDS

"An accidental oil spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to wetlands. However, due to the distance to shore (48 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected."

And similar language for the sections on beaches, shore birds and coastal nesting birds, and wildlife.

Meanwhile, an internal NOAA document from April 28 suggests that the leak could be "an order of magnitude higher than previously thought." On April 28, they were estimating it at 5,000 barrels/day, so an order of magnitude higher would be 50,000 barrels/day, or over 2 million gallons/day.

Da-da-da-daaamnn...

10 and 99 are also an order of magnitude higher than 5, but yeah, not good.

And here's the leak, apparently:

http://i43.tinypic.com/wa67mf.jpg

xpost to caek: really? I guess I always thought an order of magnitude was a factor of 10, but you're definitely more authoritative on the subject! So is 10.0 an order of magnitude higher than 9.9?

Here's another update: New Cleanup Method Shows Promise for Well Leaking About 210,000 Gallons a Day

Officials in charge of the cleanup of a massive oil spill now approaching three Gulf Coast states said Saturday that a new technique in battling the leaks 5,000 feet beneath the sea showed promise.

Among the various weapons employed against the gushing crude has been the distribution of chemical dispersants on the water’s surface to break down the oil. The new approach involves the deployment of the dispersants underwater, near the source of the leaks. Officials said that in two tests, it appeared to be keeping crude oil from rising to the surface and that the procedure might be used more frequently once evaluations of its impact on the deepwater ecology were completed.

Anyone else reaaaaaally skeptical about this idea of sweeping the oil under a rug? Also: "Estimates are useful, but we are planning far beyond that, he [Adm. Thad W. Allen, the commandant of the Coast Guard] said.” It doesn’t really matter, he said, whether it is 1,000 barrels or 5,000 barrels a day that are leaking, he said."

It doesn't really matter? Would 25,000 barrels a day matter? Or 50,000 for that matter? btw, memo to NYT: your leak estimates are already out of date.

A good discussion of how the blowout initially occurred, and legal liability.

A radio interview with a Deepwater Horizon crew member describing the incident.

Halliburton's name keeps coming up here and there as an involved party, and that first link provides even more reasons to believe they were primarily responsible, although, as the author mentions, it's BP who will almost certainly be footing the bill.

Some pictures from Sanpaku's first link up there:

http://i44.tinypic.com/28tb2va.jpg
http://i44.tinypic.com/r1akvn.jpg

the distribution of chemical dispersants on the water’s surface to break down the oil

These chemicals that break down oil, do they like dissolve completely into water undetected afterward and lose all their organic-molecule-destroying properties soon after getting rid of the oil? Cos we're talking about a LOT of oil and I would think we would need a LOT of these chemical dispersants and in that case what are the impacts they will have?

xp Z S:

For comparison, there's the natural oil seeps just offshore Coal Oil Point, Santa Barbara, California, normally flow 100 barrels of crude per day.

This is visible as surface sheen and beach crud/tarballs. Every so often thousands of birds are killed. Seepage probably could be dramatically reduced by producing from that reservoir to reduce pressure (this has worked in other parts of the Santa Barbara field). That hasn't been politically possible since the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill.

So, somewhere between 100 barrels/day and 5,000 barrels/day (the current high-side estimate for Deepwater Horizon) is the threshold where environmental damage from oil matters enough for us to take action.

The LA Times story you just linked to says that SkyTruth has a "rock bottom" estimate of 25,000 barrels/day.

But yeah, I take your point, regardless of the amount this is unconscionable.

From Cleanup specialists not optimistic (Globe and Mail)

Mr. Miller, whose firm has helped stop out-of-control wells across the world, faulted first-response crews for making a bad situation much worse.

When an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig ignited a massive fire on April 20, fire boats raced to put it out. Pictures show at least four vessels pumping massive streams of water onto the rig.

That was a mistake, Mr. Miller said.

“Why they put the fire out is beyond me,” he said. “Basically once it was burning it’s not going to get any worse. But when they pulled all those fire boats out there, the result was they sunk the rig by filling it full of water.”

He blames the oil leak on that act, since the sinking oil rig took with it the main connection to the well, which is located 1,500 metres below water. That allowed oil to leak out. Had the fire been left alone, the oil would have burned instead – a more palatable choice, he said.

Basically, putting out wellhead fires offshore is a terrible idea.

It was 4/20, cut them some slack.

Maybe this is why the blowout preventer malfunctioned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqhXz6mVPTM

My impression is that the initial response to the incident was focused on rescuing or recovering the missing crew, which might explain the eagerness to put out the fire. I guess I can't fault an effort to save lives, but those first key hours seems to have been a squandered opportunity to lessen the severity of the disaster.

^but actually I kind of think the crew of these rigs assumes considerable risk when they sign up, and given the horror of this disaster, securing the rig ought to be the top priority.

Oil Spills deserve their own double entendre in the spirit of the oh-so-subtle "Drill, Baby, Drill."

was waiting for this thread to get started. the whole thing just sickens me enormously.

This breaks my heart. Adam, my heart goes out to you and all my friends/family back in NOLA. My uncles a shrimper. Well, I guess now he used to be. Looks like it's expected to reach Pensacola by Wed at the latest.

xpost to caek: really? I guess I always thought an order of magnitude was a factor of 10, but you're definitely more authoritative on the subject! So is 10.0 an order of magnitude higher than 9.9?

― biologically wrong (Z S), Sunday, May 2, 2010 1:46 AM (10 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

strictly, yes. but it's strict definition is vague (i.e. 10.001 to 99.999), and its actual day-to-day usage adds even more vagueness, so figuring out what someone means and then how precisely they mean it is not always straightforward. party time!

This breaks my heart. Adam, my heart goes out to you and all my friends/family back in NOLA. My uncles a shrimper. Well, I guess now he used to be. Looks like it's expected to reach Pensacola by Wed at the latest.

thx kyle. am gonna go down to that bp station on tchoupitoulas and beat down the attendant. want me to give him one for you?

i am not the only person to make it a point to go out and eat a huge shrimp po boy (dressed, please, and add a ton of crystal hot sauce)--when i got to work last night a number of people told me they'd done the same thing. we all, i think, feel powerless in the path of all consuming poison ooze so we exert what agency we can.

the times-picayune continues its moronic coverage: yesterday's crop of articles included one about some podunk oil-beholden coastal alabama and mississippi congresspeople telling us it's not that bad and one about how not that many birds are oily.

Since nothing related to the environment or energy can occur without a large portion of the U.S. population taking a batshit insane position on it, I shouldn't be surprised to see the developing conspiracies:

Rush Limbaugh pointed out that the explosion occurred on April 21st, the day before 'Earth Day.' He also reminded us that Al Gore had previously encouraged environmental nutjobs to engage in civil disobedience against the construction of coal plants that don't have carbon capture technology. 'Eco-terrorists' exist and have done millions of dollars worth of criminal damage. Fire is one of the main tools of their evil trade. I'm not claiming the Deep Horizon was bombed by eco-terrorists, although I don't believe it's out of the realm of possibility. But, it would take some serious money and ability to pull off an attack like that, so I would tend to think much bigger than college hippie eco-wackos with some money-backing -- a foreign government, perhaps. Of course, before I could finish writing my thoughts here, I just heard Michael Savage posing the same questions. He also said there is a theory on a Russian website that claims North Korea is behind this. The article claims that North Korea torpedoed the Deepwater Horizon, which was apparently built and financed by South Korea. Torpedoes would make sense for the results we see.... There are a number of international 'suspects' who might want to do something like this. They range from Muslim terrorists to the Red Chinese, Venezuela and beyond. Remember that China and Russia are drilling out there, as well, and they would benefit from America cutting back on our own drilling.

That's from the Dakota Voice, summarizing the cognitive dissonance that is triggered in the brainstems of people that have been duped into defending Big Oil for the last several decades.

and they would benefit from America cutting back on our own drilling

Again, how does this work outside of a fantasy world where oil companies can only sell where they drill?

I believe it works something like this:

1. The GOP has been pushing offshore drilling relentlessly for decades as core "energy solution".
2. Offshore drilling won't significantly improve ANYTHING, whether that's the price of gasoline or the problems of keeping up with demand.
3. It's really hard to admit you're wrong.
__________
4. Ignore anything approaching reality when it comes to offshore drilling.

You gotta admit it's funny to see them holding the W-era "stay the course" line even as this disaster unfolds. It's fucking sucks tho, and I'm really sorry for anyone that lives in the Gulf area. This is definitely a "getting caught selling your mom's TV to a pawn shop to score junk" and anyone that wants to defend oil production needs an intervention.

I just can't believe there's a giant artery of OIL gushing thousands of gallons into the Gulf and it's going to take a minimum of 90 days to stop. can you even stop it? how do you get down there? what if it doesn't work?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_NHVPmXi04PI/RrALG6oLHHI/AAAAAAAAAOU/JNgqO_5i5Vo/S660/cthulhu-ocean2.jpg

it was nice knowing you guys, see you in the next life

I think the 90 days estimate is coming from the amount of time it would take to drill a SECOND well on the seabed to siphon off some of the oil/reduce the pressure on the gusher. At first that idea was floated as sort of a worst-case scenario plan, in case all the other ideas didn't work, but it's looking more and more likely from what I'm seeing. I just watched the new Coast Guard leader on the spill, Admiral forgot his name, on Meet the Press, and when he was asked about what countermeasures they're taking, he was still saying something like "BP is working very hard on plans to mitigate the..." Given BP's track record of success on this over the past week, umm...

what incentive does BP have to deal with this in a timely manner?

They're on the hook for cleanup costs, which of course increase with every day that the oil is still leaking.

To me, its not so much about defending big oil.

So far, alternatives to petroleum for liquid vehicular fuel are few and (as yet) not competitively priced.

If we believe we can simply stop producing from domestic resources, we're simply displacing the production to other, often more ecologically sensitive areas of the world. While its possible that we (in the US) as a service economy might survive by cutting each others's hair, creating financial industries devoted to disguising risk, or sponsoring our empire's version of gladitorial combat in the judicial system, none of those are readily exportable.

Perhaps China will continue to extend our credit lines. But when the rinminbi is revalued, it will be to halt supply driven price inflation within China. The rinminbi can be revalued much higher to better bid for limited world resources, before it impacts that nation's labor price advantage. They can outbid us for any surplus petroleum energy easily, even at current exchange rates.

We (in the US) only produce about 30% of our liquid fuel/petroleum needs. For 60 years an suburban infrastructure development has been predicated upon cheap liquid fuels for transportation.

Can you walk to work?

In a decade US oil demand coverage goes to 20% (or less), while world supply declines. This will be worst for nations who are too small to have reserve currencies. But its bad, very bad, for the US as well. Any industry subject to trade might benefit from the leveling of currencies and relative labor costs, but it will be harmed as raw materials climb.

We (in the US) still have some liquid fuel reserves that might be exploited, and their contribution will be to defer the day our suburban sprawl must become self sufficient. They can buy us time to convert to shale gas, wind, solar and other fuels.

As for the oil industry, the U.S. Gulf of Mexico is one prospective basin among about 40 worldwide. The capital (rigs and other capital intensive items) will move elsewhere, and 20,000 America-based mid-skilled workers will have to find alternative means of support.

I agree, especially on the point that less production here just means more production elsewhere. It's the opposition to any measure that might even REDUCE the use of oil and other fossil fuels that is outrageous. Between the mid-70s and last year, fuel efficiency of our vehicle fleet actually DECREASED, even as 40 mpg became the norm in Europe and Japan. High speed trains? Even as, again, Europe and Asia made rapid advances so that their citizens would have the option of traveling conveniently and relatively cheaply from city to city, we let our passenger rail system collapse over the past century.

And, of course, there's the biggest gift of all to the oil industry - the refusal to even consider a price on carbon. Alternatives to oil and coal already are competitively priced, if the costs of oil and coal reflected their true costs to the environment and society. That's a subsidy to the oil industry that comes in the form of a cost that should be imposed but isn't. On top of that there are more transparent subsidies, like reduced corporate income taxes on companies that are making higher profits in history.

I agree with all you've said. Sometimes I've decribed my political views (elsewhere) as green libertarian. While the two philosophies may seem intractably opposed, the real problem with lassais fair approaches it that they don't place a price on environmental externalies. These are fundamental, the social inequity issues can be solved, should a steady state environment permit general prosperity.

In the future, our descendants will live in a world of low-impact high-technology renewable resources. That's never been a question. The issue is how we can tranform from here to there.

My view is not dissimilar to that of James Hanson: carbon emission rights trading is a failure where it's been tried. It enriches traders & lawyers but does little to actually throttle carbon production. Simply put a final use tax on carbon, and adjust the taxation rate to match the externalities.

As for this spill? I lived through IXTOC 1, and while it took a season for volunteers to clean the beaches from Brownsville to Galveston, it was done. No species perished. We'll solve this.

Perhaps if humanity is very, very lucky, some may find a way to avoid the mass extinction that follows and carry on the human race.

Pehaps.

Hmmm…something seems a 'lil but unreliable about this article.

So wait they are doing something that will "definitely fix it" now? Or is this just more talk?

theoildrum.com says it could prevent oil leaking into the gulf by Monday.

but it would still be a recovery operation permanently fixing it seems a long way off.

theoildrum also has an article on how the relief wells would work

that article is scary as fuck

lebron will finally regret leaving cleveland

i hope that article is as hyperbolic and slapped together as it seems, cuz this would be highly unfortunate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25BE42PzZZc

that would be mad ghey

lol @ dramatiziations of the eruption

that article is scary as fuck

― the resulting pussy stubble (J0rdan S.), Sunday, July 11, 2010 5:29 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark

and also what rent said

O_O

251 million years ago a mammoth undersea methane bubble caused massive explosions, poisoned the atmosphere and destroyed more than 96 percent of all life on Earth. [1] Experts agree that what is known as the Permian extinction event was the greatest mass extinction event in the history of the world. [2]

nice sleight-of-hand here. experts may largely agree that the Permian extinction event was the greatest mass extinction event in the history of the world but they definitely don't widely agree that it was caused by a massive undersea methane bubble.

This event would mean that the earth basically farts us out of existence, confirm/deny

The end-Permian extinctions (there were actually 3 pulses) coincided with the massive CO2 outgassing from the Siberian Traps eruptive event. That said, there's a good chance that destabilization of seabed methane hydrates contributed, though the evidence for methane involvement is stronger with the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.

If you want a brief synopsis of why runaway greenhouse could be much, much worse than reported in most media or by the IPCC (with a walk-on role for methane), see Peter Ward's Impact from the Deep (pdf). For more depth on how methane hydrates can make a bad situation magnitudes worse, though you may never sleep again, see Killer in Our Midst, which is liberally illustrated with nightmares like this:

http://www.killerinourmidst.com/grafix/MC%20diagram%203.jpg

super tentative, but

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100713/us_yblog_upshot/new-bp-containment-cap-working--8230-for-now

my friends are telling me the media has been banned from the gulf spill/clean-up sites! anyone hear anything about this?

my friends are telling me the media has been banned from the gulf spill/clean-up sites! anyone hear anything about this?

This for starters: http://www.prwatch.org/node/9236

i just watched the clip of Cooper talking about that. i had no idea who this "fat allen" guy he was talking about was at first.

anyways. it's disgusting. for a nation so deranged about free speech i'm surprised this seems to be sliding.

did not need to read that methane article

fyi:

http://io9.com/5585294/methane-bubble-doomsday-story-debunked

^^^good science journalism, tbh - did need to read that one - ty max

On interference with media coverage (of the oil spill):

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/07/05/bp/index.html

it is seriously disturbing how the very second the oil reached the shores, the coverage and the images stopped coming to us

these images are just about the most important thing we could be seeing right now. nobody really wants to see them, but we absolutely need to

Here's a fun bit of irony: BBC are reporting that BP will be able to write off its cleanup and compensation expenses against UK and US taxes, saving itself 6 to 10 billion in tax payouts.

http://io9.com/5585294/methane-bubble-doomsday-story-debunked?skyline=true&s=i

Oh nevermind - Max beat me to it.

The Atlantic - Images BP Doesn't Want You To See

Toxicity of Corexit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLtsniN1RTw

etc.

http://akmcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/dalianspill_07_21/d03_24358707.jpg

Oil spill in Dalian, China

Five days ago, in the northeastern port city of Dalian, China, two oil pipelines exploded, sending flames hundreds of feet into the air and burning for over 15 hours, destroying several structures - the cause of the explosion is under investigation. The damaged pipes released thousands of gallons of oil, which flowed into the nearby harbor and the Yellow Sea. The total amount of oil spilled is still not clear, though China Central Television earlier reported an estimate of 1,500 tons (400,000 gallons), as compared to the estimated 94 - 184 million gallons in the BP oil spill off the Louisiana coast. The oil slick has now grown to at least 430 square kilometers (165 sq mi), forcing beaches and port facilities to close while government workers and local fishermen work to contain and clean up the spill. (29 photos total)

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/07/oil_spill_in_dalian_china.html

http://akmcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/dalianspill_07_21/d28_24389075.jpg

Models Resemble Dead Birds in Italian Vogue’s Twisted Oil-Spill Fashion Spread
http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2010/08/models_resemble_dead_birds_and.html

W T F

BP risks Obama row by hinting it may return to stricken oil well
Company's statement it may not give up all claims on Macondo well escalates ongoing struggle with White House

A struggle between BP and the Obama administration over the future of the cemented well in the Gulf of Mexico erupted in public today when the oil company suggested it may drill in the same reservoir again.

In a briefing with reporters meant to symbolise BP's return to business-as-usual in the Gulf, the chief operating officer, Doug Suttles, said the company may not give up all claims on the Macondo well, which leaked five million barrels of oil into the Gulf.

"There's lots of oil and gas here," Suttles said. "We're going to have to think about what to do with that at some point."

BP's former chief executive, Tony Hayward, told Congress in June that there were 50 million recoverable barrels of oil in the reservoir.

The company faces tens of billions of dollars of damages from the spill.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/aug/06/bp-oil-spill-macondo-well

Great idea, geniuses!

Remember reports of submerged, miles-long, frighteningly condensed oil plumes floating around in the Gulf ready to get us? Fiction. Hooey.

http://www.scrippsnews.com/content/ambrose-still-waiting-apocalypse

So says conservative columnist Jay Ambrose, and references the famously impartial National Review to prove it! This revisionist "it was never any big deal" crap from the right wing is really pissing me off today.

this is prob the best magazine feature that i've read in years

http://www.esquire.com/features/gulf-oil-spill-lives-0910

From the Guardian:

LATEST: An offshore oil rig has exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, west of the site of the Deepwater blast in April. More details soon ...

^ what's going on here?

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/02/rescue-efforts-underway-after-oil-rig-accident-in-gulf/

Asked about concerns regarding oil leaks or pollution, Colclough said "there are reports the rig was not actively producing any product, so we don't know if there's any risk of pollution."

Glad it wasn't producing any product, hope all the oil dudes are okay. Thanks Caek!

So first off it's not in production and yet now there's "a mile-long oil sheen in the Gulf of Mexico west of the site of BP's massive spill"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38973757/ns/us_news-life/

The National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill spill is nearing it's 6-month deadline to produce a report, and draft documents are beginning to be issued. A blog-style summary can be found here.

The bits regarding the wildly inaccurate low estimates are interesting:

By initially underestimating the amount of oil flow and then, at the end of the summer, appearing to underestimate the amount of oil remaining in the Gulf, the federal government created the impression that it was either not fully competent to handle the spill or not fully candid with the American people about the scope of the problem.

...The public may have an interest in knowing the rate of flow from the well, while the responsible party may benefit from obfuscating or underestimating the rate of flow because high flow means higher liability. Moreover, a responsible party has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders to minimize costs incurred. This fiduciary duty can be at odds with the public’s interest in maximizing cleanup efforts.

...Given that its potential liability under the Clean Water Act depended directly on the flow rate, BP had real incentives to maintain exclusive control over the ability to estimate that rate.

Just remembering the NYT article that Dayo quoted above way back in mid-May:

BP has resisted entreaties from scientists that they be allowed to use sophisticated instruments at the ocean floor that would give a far more accurate picture of how much oil is really gushing from the well.

“The answer is no to that,” a BP spokesman, Tom Mueller, said on Saturday. “We’re not going to take any extra efforts now to calculate flow there at this point. It’s not relevant to the response effort, and it might even detract from the response effort.”

Tony Hayward, hanging near Brainerd. Well, Duluth, more accurately.

http://projectmindwake.blogspot.com/2011/08/new-oil-leaking-from-deep-water-horizon.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-holder-bp-oil-spill-settlement-20121115,0,335475.story

British oil giant BP is more than prepared for the $4.5 billion in settlement charges it agreed to Thursday, analysts said.

In the third quarter alone, BP raked in sales of more than $93 billion and had a net profit of more than $5.2 billion.

Poor BP

they must be feeling really down

still leaking

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/27/gulf-oil-spill-bathtub-ring_n_6056348.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/03/us/bp-to-pay-gulf-coast-states-18-7-billion-for-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill.html?_r=0