You are browsing the archive for environmental activism.

Threatened Wildlife Resents Industry Sponsorship of Louisiana Senators, Pelosi Already Capitulating?

9:21 am in Uncategorized by Seymour Friendly

Updated at bottom.

British Petroleum claims that it has placed a valve over one of the Horizon well leaks, halting or containing the flow of oil from that leak. This is good news in that there are only now two (known) leaks remaining, however, even BP is having to admit that closing this particular leak has not substantially impacted the overall spill rate. As BP continues work on containment chambers for the remaining two leaks, NOAA and BP have attempted the untested approach of undersea deployment of different types of chemical dispersants. These dispersants were directly injected into the leak flows undersea at a rate of 9 gallons per minute. Over 200,000 gallons of these dispersants are available if the approach is deemed "successful", "success" in this case meaning that addressing a toxic oil spill relies on injecting 200,000+ gallons of chemicals into the Gulf waters in a technique that still leaves hundreds of thousands of gallons of dispersed oil waste in the water. It doesn’t have to be a slick to be toxic, and it is a disheartening thing that the best potential short term approach to the leaks is injecting more unnatural chemicals into the water in great quantities.

The threat to wildlife is fairly large. The Fish and Wildlife Service can count up to 34,000 birds alone that are in principle threatened by this disaster. This enumeration leaves out of consideration all marine life affected from the microbial size to the size of a sperm whale.

As the shorelines and coastal waters of Louisiana are threatened by the Horizon oil spill, Louisiana’s two Senators – David Vitter and Mary Landrieu speak out in favor of continuing offshore oil drilling.

Here’s Mary Landrieu:

… “We must continue to drill,” she said.

She has compared the disaster in the Gulf to two previous disasters – the nuclear meltdown at three mile island and also the Challenger space shuttle explosion.

In the case of three mile island, she said, the US essentially shut down its nuclear program and now is worse off for it – behind the French and others in nuclear energy, dependent on foreign oil.

She also brought up the Challenger explosion. But as a counterpoint to three mile island.

“What we did not do is end the space program. We did not stop launching. We did not stop exploring,” she said.

“We have to find a way to make sure it never happens again, strengthen our resolve and… continue to be the world leader,” she said of offshore drilling.

“I am not saying that to minimize this disaster… There may be those who need to be held accountable,” said Landrieu, but she argued that offshore drilling leads to less pollution than other actives.

“We don’t think that burying our head in the sand and pretending that our country doesn’t need this energy is the way to go,” she said …

And here is David Vitter talking to "Fox News":

… Vitter said that the administration shouldn’t back off its plans to allow increased energy exploration despite the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that has spilled onto his home state of Louisiana.

"I don’t think that there’s any argument that we should just start shutting down activity now, or even start shutting down new activity that’s planned," Vitter said Sunday during an appearance on Fox News. "Clearly there have got to be changes made because of this incident. But we certainly shouldn’t start shutting things down."

The administration has sent signals, most prominently by White House senior advisor David Axelrod during an appearance Friday on "Good Morning America," that it would halt starts on new exploration projects until an investigation into the causes of the current spill could be completed.

"I think that was the wrong approach," Vitter said, adding that it was his belief that the president itself had walked back that pause on new drilling to some extent. …

They call it "the best government money can buy". Since being elected in 1996, Mary Landrieu has accepted at least 2/3 of a million dollars in oil industry campaign donations. In the current Congress, she has been the #15 largest recipient of such donations – Blanche Lincoln being the #1 largest recipient this year, and holding a career total over half a million dollars in donations. In his short time in the Senate, David Vitter has accepted at least 1/4 of a million dollars in these donations.

And my, how those donations make party lines seem irrelevant. Below is a table showing how Vitter and Landrieu have voted lock step together on legislation of interest to the oil industry, ranging from voting against profit tax increases on the industry through legislation expanding offshore oil and gas exploitation.

Oil Industry Donations to Senators 1998-2010 (source: opensecrets.org)
Mary Landrieu (D-LA, 1996-)
David Vitter (R-LA, 2004-)
$662,505
$225,300
Key Energy Votes of Senators
Bill
Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
David Vitter (R-LA)
S-3044
N
N
S-3711
Y
Y
S Amdt 4825
N
N
S Amdt 4207
Y
Y
S Amdt 1704
N
N
S Amdt 1566
Y
Y

  • S-3711: Expand Gulf offshore oil drilling
  • S-3044: Increase taxes on oil company profits
  • S Amdt 4825: Carbon Cap and Trade
  • S Amdt 4207 to S Con Res 70: Offshore natural gas development
  • S Amdt 1704: Alternative energy subsidies
  • S Amdt 1566: Offshore drilling in Virginia

Let the people of Louisiana listen to their elected Senators selling them out to the oil industry even as the slick continues to grow and their environment and livelihoods are threatened. And those of us who want to know how Louisiana became so defenseless to the oil industry can start by looking at Mary Landrieu and David Vitter, sponsored by British Petroleum and numerous other oil interests.

Finally, let’s not forget that Barack Obama and John McCain were the 2008 top recipients of oil industry donations. While McCain had in excess of $2,000,000, Obama still managed to haul in over $800,000 in one year, about the same as the career sum totals of Landrieu and Vitter combined.

With that bit of information in place, is there any doubt as to why it is that Barack Obama led the charge on embracing offshore oil drilling as the first and foremost part of his national energy and climate change policy?

And with officials this easily bought off, even the highest officials in the country, is there any doubt as to what sort of regulatory framework the oil industry can buy for itself, and how as a result we can have no response capacity between the Federal government and the entirety of the oil industry sufficient to respond to an easily predictable disaster?

Update 1:
Joseph Lieberman has declared that expansion of offshore drilling will still be part of the energy bill in the Senate:

… Sen. Joe Lieberman, I/D-Conn., said today offshore oil and gas drilling provisions will remain in a draft Senate climate and energy bill he has coauthored, despite a massive Gulf Coast spill that has given fresh ammunition to drilling critics.

"There were good reasons for us to put in offshore drilling, and this terrible accident is very rare in drilling," Lieberman said. "I mean, accidents happen. You learn from them and you try not to make sure they don’t happen again."

When asked whether the spill would change any of the drilling language he and Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., have developed, Lieberman said, "I don’t think so; certainly not to lead us to remove it." He said the draft would allow drilling as close as 75 miles from the U.S. coastline.

Lieberman said the goal of their plan is less dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels in general, adding that the bill ensures greater environmental protection regarding drilling than current law. "I think the arguments are there," he said …

The famously reprehensible Lieberman is back and in action. The man is like a cross between Dr. Evil and the Energizer Bunny.

Nancy Pelosi is already signalling progressive House capitulation to the oil industry:

… Meanwhile, in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., remained optimistic — even determined — that Congress can pass an energy bill this year. "Certainly the risk presented by offshore drilling is something that has to be taken into consideration," said Pelosi, speaking to reporters. "But we must pass this bill. And we will find our area of agreement… between the House and the Senate — to pass it.

"I don’t think this [oil spill] is something that will stop it," Pelosi added. …

Pelosi, since assuming the House Speaker role, has become a broken record of capitulation, compromise, and failed progressive leadership. I really wish she would step down from her position.

Finally, Steny Hoyer is unsurprisingly unwilling to get in the way of Obama’s oil drilling plans:

… Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., later echoed those sentiments. "We cannot be hostage to those who sell us oil, who may or may not care a whole lot about our security," said Hoyer. "So, it’s very, very critical that we continue to move ahead on energy independence." …

FDL_BP_Banner31.jpg

Four-Story, Rusty Steel Box Built As Consolation to Northern Gannet, Horizon Spill Out of Control

1:48 pm in Uncategorized by Seymour Friendly

The latest spill extent graphic from NOAA shows an increasingly staggering area impacted by the Horizon well leak by mid-week. Winds have reversed now, spreading the slick Westward, and temporarily relieving fears that the slick could migrate to the East Coast though Atlantic fisheries could still be impacted.

The slick is now so large that space-based resources such as those held by NASA are needed to monitor it. The Coast Guard conceded days ago that there is no exact way to know how much oil has spilled. Simply multiplying the current best-guess flow rate from the three well leaks by the number of days since April 22 would place the total spill volume in excess of 2 million gallons of oil. Confusion reigns as to what magnitude of disaster we are really seeing as some note that the spill is not the worst in history in terms of volume of oil spilled, whereas others rely on potential economic and environmental ramifications.

A chorus of buffoons has begun playing politics and making ludicrous, embarrassing statements worthy of note:

… "We don’t know what the event that has allowed for this massive oil to be released," Perry said. "And until we know that, I hope we don’t see a knee-jerk reaction across this country that says we’re going to shut down drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, because the cost to this country will be staggering." — Texas Governor Rick Perry, calling the spill "just an act of God" — Note to Rick: If God created an environmentally disastrous offshore oil spill, couldn’t that be God telling us to stop offshore drilling? etc

… “This bill was strongly criticized by hard-core environmentalist wackos because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling and nuclear plants,” said Limbaugh of the yet to be unveiled Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate and energy bill.

“What better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig?” Limbaugh asked. “I’m just, I’m just noting the timing here.” — Rush Limbaugh, Department of Unfoundable and Unforgivable Insinuations.

… What I want people to know is this isn’t Katrina. This is not Armageddon. I did this for the Coast Guard many years ago. Yeah, it’s bad. And it’s terrible that there’s a spill out there. But I would remind people that the oil is twenty miles from any marsh. … That chocolate milk looking spill starts breaking up in smaller pieces … It is tending to break up naturally …" — Representative Gene Taylor, confusing the milk his mommy put in his lunchbox with the oil spill he was flying over.

… "This is exactly what they want, because now he can pander to the environmentalists and say, ‘I’m gonna shut it down because it’s too dangerous,’" Brown said. "This president has never supported big oil, he’s never supported offshore drilling, and now he has an excuse to shut it back down." — Michael "Brownie" Brown, taking a break from managing the Arabian horse club long enough to help confuse and muddle the response to another Gulf disaster.

Bill Kristol apparently thinks that the disaster wouldn’t have been an issue if the drilling was only closer to shore. Note to Bill: the drilling was far offshore because that is where an accessible, desirable location in the Tiber oil field was located. "Fox News" probably shouldn’t ask Bill about oil drilling anymore if he makes statements so stupid that one doesn’t even need to point out his ideologically bent worldview to expose him as a fool. Bill doesn’t seem to grasp that it was BP that told us everything was fine drilling in deep water location offshore, that BP sought permission to explore and drill in these waters, and that it is the oil industry that wants deep water drilling, not a conspiracy of liberal environmentalists who think deep water is OK just not right off the beach.

Finally, we have a truly ominous statement from Robert Gibbs, the Obama administration mouthpiece:

"The president was specific in ordering [Department of Interior] Secretary [Ken] Salazar to look at all the possible aspects of what could go wrong in this instance [and] to report back to him in that thirty day period," Gibbs said in response to a question from the Huffington Post. "This is an administration that is going to take any information we can get from that and have that dictate our decision making going forward. I think it would be premature to get too far ahead of where Secretary Salazar’s investigation is."

The fact that the Obama administration is doing anything besides going full speed ahead in rolling back their previous support for more offshore oil drilling, even as this terrible spill is in its early stages, is very disheartening. Furthermore, Gibbs seems to be indicating that Obama views Ken Salazar, a drilling proponent, as the "lead" figure in the investigation. That too is frightening. It’s not clear what is premature about a spill that now requires NASA and NOAA satellite resources to monitor, its so huge.

The coming weeks are going to show us a lot about President Obama. I think many of us will agree that, if we emerge from the spill of the Deepwater Horizon with anything less than a permanent moratorium on expanded offshore oil drilling, and climate change energe policies moving forward without this drilling built in, that Obama will have permanently discredited himself with the environment, and, further, as a guardian of the public interest.

Greenpeace has moved online and on-the-ground resources into place in the Gulf area. On its web site Greenpeace has taken a step I find quite laudable in the charge to raise awareness about the implications of this spill. View their oil spill site. Note that partway down the page Greenpeace has assembled a high-quality graphic displaying "maps" of Horizon-like spill extents if they were to happen in other proposed drilling sites. I encourage everyone to spread this graphic around, go viral with it. This is exactly the kind of easy, visual, and immediate representation of what can happen around any of these proposed drilling sites we need right now, supportable by what has factually happened in the last two weeks.

The Sierra Club has on its web page a replay of the burning rig photo from the first two days of the Horizon fire, that has a "donate money to help" statement printed over it. The Sierra Club has had high-ranking figures present in online media but it appears that the Club is going to use the disaster as a fundraising bonanza. I’d give the Sierra Club an "F" if it wasn’t for a few written pieces I’ve seen from them in recent days on the widely-read Huffington Post. Instead, I’ll give them an "E", for "Exploitation", that is, their apparent intention of prioritizing their fundraising in the disaster. They might as well sell sea turtle meat by the seashore. They interleave the picture of a Northern Gannet being scrubbed of oil with the burning rig picture. With all their resources, do they not have a single photographer on the ground in the Gulf getting their own pictures for them?

Oceana has built up a presence in the issue that deserves its own web log entry. I encourage people to watch what Oceana does wit this disaster. Likewise, the NRDC appears to be going full throttle on raising awareness, they are showing up over and over in mass media coverage.

As 3/4 of the boom available to contain the spill fails in rough weather – and it was an insufficient amount by far – BP has prepared the first of three "containment chambers" they hope to mitigate the spill’s extent in the months remaining before their intervention well can be drilled. Looking at the image of the rusty, improvised, clunky four-story steel box that is to be lowered into a mile of water even after we know that most of the spilled oil can never be cleaned up I ask myself: how did it come to this?

Couldn’t the 350 million dollars that went into the building of the Deepwater Horizon have resulted in a response to a predictable disaster that didn’t boil down to the panicked attempt to construct a crude steel box to lower over a spewing well leak? This is the real story here – how did two hundred-billion-dollar-plus corporations (BP and Transoceanic), with massive engineering resources available, working within a supposed Federal regulatory environment, produce a spectacular high-tech failure and ecological disaster and the only response that the Federal government and BP have together is an insufficient amount of boom breaking down under moderate wave action at the coastline, and a rusty four-story steel box intended to sit under a mile of water over a high-tech well with a 450,000 kilogram blowout preventer that never activated? I believe that the answer to that question will be sufficient, once made clear, to permanently block or end deepwater offshore drilling.

FDL_BP_Banner31.jpg

Horizon Spill Continues, Rome Burns, Nero Gets Out His Stradivarius

12:10 pm in BP oil disaster, Energy by Seymour Friendly

Continuing in a series of diaries here.

The Horizon spill disaster has now entered the "media madness" phase. Regular mass media has done what it does best, which is to take a disaster, and sensationalize aspects of it, creating hysteria and alarm almost as if they are an entertainment product. The first victim in this process is fact itself – simple detailed, factual information about the spill status and its impact are increasingly hard to find in the wall of noise.

The Coast Guard and NOAA have a graphic depicting high-quality predictions of spill extents by Tuesday here. Comparison with a previous graphic showing the projection for Saturday seems to show the spill driven by winds to expand towards more and more of the Gulf coastline. Winds may reverse afterwards driving the slick growth directly into the Delta wetlands in and around the mouth of the Mississipi river. There is not a concise, detailed picture of what shore and marine impact has actually taken place so far. I have not found a good simple estimate of current surface area. All eyes are on the potential and likely impact. The New York Times has assembled an "interactive" (meaning it has a slider control) graphic that simply displays a prettied-up time sequence of the technical spill extent graphics from the Coast Guard and NOAA, on a regional map that indicates the presence of marshlands (!) in the Gulf Coast region.

Detailed information on current environmental and species impact appears limited to the single story of the first bird treated for oil coverage. Media has played and replayed the images of this Northern Gannet being scrubbed with dishwashing detergent by rescuers. We need more information on what has actually happened now that the spill has contact coastal wetlands and shores. Mass media appears to be dropping the ball on this critical issue.

Much noise has been made about the calculations of a single Florida-based academician that he claims show the spill is already "worse" than the Exxon Valdez spill. It is probably quite fair to disagree with estimates of total spill volume to date – even the clowns at BP, who have a dedicated stake in downplaying estimates of spill volume – have had to admit their deeply limited capacity to gauge and respond to the spewing well. However, I encourage all of us, if we are to take the Valdez disaster as a benchmark in the environmental and economic damage that an offshore oil spill can cause, to quit thinking in terms of gallons of oil released, or even simple spill extent in surface area. The history of large oil spills worldwide is quite extensive. Neither the Valdez spill nor the Horizon spill will be the "biggest", by far, in the contest of what disaster poured more oil into the water. The Horizon spill is not the first nor, currently, the worst Gulf oil spill ever.

The damage these spills cause is measurable in terms of species and ecosystem impact, communities wrecked economically, and livelihoods ruined.

There is a much deeper story here. Article after article after article after article has highlighted and exposed just how ill-prepared both industry and government were for a predictable disaster in an offshore drilling operation that both industry and government together allowed to proceed. The deeper story, in the context of the history of oil spills, wherein the Deepwater Horizon appears as the most recent, massive, and technologically advanced drilling platform, which exploded, capsized and sunk, leaving behind a disastrously spewing well, is that industry and government have never been prepared for these spills when they happen. The deeper story in this wreck that is being missed is the story of an industrial energy production system – offshore oil drilling – that is in general emphasized by a big industry and normally co-opted or co-erced government officials and agencies – and that continues to produce major disasters despite decades of technological focus and advance. As worry emerges that even the Eastern US coastline could be threatened by this spill industry and government officials begin to search for a solution to an "unprecedented" problem that should have been planned for completely and soundly prior to any drilling permit or license being issued.

Here is an excellent graphic showing what is going to be done, over the next three months, while the well spews oil. Another oil rig operated by BP is going to start drilling another well that will go three miles into the seafloor to "intervene" in the spewing well. The fact that this response is the only available is a total indictment of the industry and government in the failure to plan for an easily predictable disaster. The fact that this response is the only available, after a long history of oil spills, is evidence or proof that offshore oil drilling is simply too dangerous – neither industry nor government nor the two together will ever take sufficient (and costly!) steps to make it environmentally safe.

I’d really like to see this compelling narrative presented clearly to the public.

Reports have emerged of an internal government document declaring the possibility that further degradation of the ruined Horizon riser pipe or complete failure of the well seal could produce an undersea "gusher" escalating the spill levels to a new catastrophic extent. This report indicates no probability or likelihood of such an event. We can all hope that this situation does not come to pass.

Political gamesmanship has begun in Washington, DC. The Obama administration has "placed on hold" – apparently holds aren’t just popular in the Senate – offshore projects. None were planned in the nearest-term anyway. Agency officials have tried to place blame on the oil industry neglecting the fact that the government had an oversight and regulatory role in producing this disaster without a shred of a doubt. Opposition to further drilling is beginning to emerge from a few sane voices in the Congress. The House Progressive Chorus remains silent. Industry is beginning its own internal witch hunt in which Halliburton may be a designated scapegoat for a much broader failure. Activist organizations are beginning to make tepid appearances in mass media. To date, there has not been a single protest or demonstration visible in mass media, not a single Zodiac filled with activists in the spill zone, nothing except softcore editorial appearances.

Shockingly, there is apparently a bailout mechanism of some sort available by which costs beyond a certain level to industry in the mess may be subsidized or supported by a Federal fund. The cleanup costs are partially sent to the public via an oil or gas tax ultimately paid by consumers. This tax and the bailout it underpins must be put to death completely, soon. Bankrupting BP is not punishment enough for this disaster.

It is worth the time and space needed to note that, in media response to this spill, the New York Times leads the charge in transforming the disaster into a news/entertainment product. The Times’ last two fact-reporting pieces were from Friday and Saturday. Neither piece reported anything so banal as, say, the current extent of the oil slick, or specific locations of impact. The Saturday piece seemed to rely on recapping of official appearances on television talk shows – including the notoriously bent "Fox News" channel. The Times produced one of its typically empty editorials written in the obligatory quasi-authoritative, patronizing tone. They might as well have entitled the piece "Conventional Wisdom Digest". An equally useless guest editorial communicates an un-risky recital of the risks of oil. The Times kicks off Sunday with the spill by giving room to people who want to babble about setting off nuclear bombs on the sea floor of the Gulf of Mexico. The Times expended Helene Cooper on an in-depth report on the kabuki in Washington DC surrounding Obama’s decision to attend the White House Correspondent’s dinner rather than fly to the Gulf, which he did the next day.

I single out the Times for this criticism because in my view, the Times has the greatest possible resources for serious reporting on the Horizon disaster, and produces 4/5 pablum and filler in its output.

I will try to follow on to this diary again. There is more and more non-information to filter through in the sensationalizing coverage of the disaster. As the environmental, political, and economic dimensions of this disaster begin to evolve, we’ll all have to work to try to present a clear, and compelling narrative that the only real issue here is the fact that offshore oil drilling is allowed and will continue to be allowed. This drilling is the mountaintop removal of ocean resource exploitation and it must be stopped.

FDL_BP_Banner31.jpg

Horizon Oil Slick Makes Shorefall; Disaster Writ Large Across Gulf Coast

12:37 pm in BP oil disaster, Energy by Seymour Friendly

This is the latest edition of an on-going diary update.

Since the revelation that the well beneath the destroyed riser pipe left behind the Deepwater Horizon explosion and sinking is pouring in excess of 200,000 gallons of oil per day into the Gulf Coast waters regular mass media has begun to mobilize its resources.

An official graphic showing the projected extent of the spill tomorrow is now available from the Coast Guard and NOAA. The Flickr photostream available at that link has a substantial number of graphics showing time growth of spill extents and other information. The graphic I link to above dispalys at least two large impact zones on the Louisiana Gulf Coast. Comparison of this Saturday projection of spill extent with the reported spill extent from Wednesday shows a fairly awesome expected spill growth. The Gulf Coast is going to see a slick covering thousands of square miles, beyond the capacity of combined Federal and industry response to contain. This spill is expected to involve a volume of oil on par or beyond the volume spilled in the Exxon Valdez disaster; the largest extent of the Exxon Valdez spill was in excess of 11,000 square miles, coating over 1300 miles of coastline. The Gulf of Mexico itself is less than 1,000 miles wide. Depending on wind, currents, and other conditions, a very large extent of coastline could be impacted by the spill. The State of Florida has declared a state of emergency for its entire West coast.

The satellite-imagery based size measurement from SkyTruth.org places the spill extent yesterday at in excess of 2,200 square miles.

The New York Times has a graphic showing yesterday’s extent and also identifying at least 8 species likely to be impacted by this huge oil spill. Clearly, if the New York Times can display picture or graphics of 8 species likely to be impacted, then the reality on the shore and in the water in the Gulf will be a much, much larger environmental and species impact. Beyond species impact, many billions of dollars in seafood harvesting and other commercial activities are likely to take a hit.

The political games have begun. President Obama has declared a temporary suspension on the issuance of new offshore leases until an unspecified future point in time. This is not particularly meaningful, however, as in the near-term, there was no new activity planned. Obama continues, sadly, to maintain a supportive position towards offshore oil drilling:

… “I continue to believe that domestic oil production is an important part of our overall strategy for energy security,” Mr. Obama said on Friday, addressing concerns about whether the administration would continue with its plan to increase drilling in the Gulf.

Even so, he said, “the local economies and livelihoods of the people of the Gulf Coast as well as the ecology of the region are at stake.” …

Notice that the environment is the last concern mentioned by Obama in his statement.

Obama has ordered an investigation which appears to be owned by three of his agency heads, including drilling proponent and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. Obama has ordered Salazar to make a report in 30 days on what steps must be taken to prevent future spills like this one. Given that the spill response will still be an emergency disaster response underway in 30 days, this is a strong indication that Obama intends to make a perfunctory response to the disaster before declaring that more drilling can take place so long as a hastily-determined set of "new safeguards" are observed.

The next several weeks will show us all very, very clearly, where Obama’s allegiances are: he is either going to remain allied with the oil industry, which will continue with future drilling offshore if allowed, or he will adhere to his previous campaign promises to environmentalists and oppose offshore oil drilling.

To his credit, Senator Bill Nelson of Florida has come out guns blazing against any climate change legislation that would, perversely, contain Obama’s offshore oil drilling expansion:

… On Friday, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) said that a bill that includes provisions to increase offshore drilling off the coast of the United States (as envisioned by, among others, the White House) would be a non-starter in the Senate.

"As the White House looks down the line, it wants a climate change bill later this year," Nelson told MSNBC. "[Sen.] Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) was insisting that there’s going to be offshore drilling. I think that’s dead on arrival." …

Nelson’s motivations are not 100% clear, but he has responded more rapidly and forcefully than, for example, Greenpeace. A US Senator beating Greenpeace to opposition against offshore oil drilling, publicly, after a disaster like this, is both a black mark for Greenpeace (which should have had activists in Zodiacs in the spill zone from Day One) as well as a feather in the Senator’s hat.

Politician proponents of drilling have been understandably muted. Those of us in awe and horror at the spectacle of this disaster glumly await the first of these figures to return to vocally supporting offshore drilling and attacking environmental opponents as "alarmists". It’s inevitable.

It will take time – and possibly irretrievable forensic evidence – to determine the root cause of the explosion that led to this disaster. It is highly likely that the combined weight of the oil industry will be thrown into the attempt to sideline serious investigation into what happened, and to sweep the issue under the rug with a sizable payment from BP taken as sufficient accountability. Allied politicians – and right now, that includes not only Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, but the Obama team itself – will probably cooperate. Current whispers implicate Transoceanic and BP for not placing an acoustic remote control onto the well blowout preventer valve, along with shoddy work by Halliburton in sealing the well with cement. It is important not to jump to conclusions that just because the name "Halliburton" has been invoked that the famous contractor is to blame. Doing so will provide a convenient scapegoat to those who might want to prevent a truly broad inquiry into what happened, an inquiry that might show just how hopelessly dangerous and risky offshore oil drilling is.

Our first oil-covered bird has been recovered and treated. The Northern Gannet is a six pound bird with an adult wingspan of in excess of 5 feet, primarily a snow white in color. Like many birds, they perform elaborate mating rituals in the breeding season. They eat small fish found near the surface – likely to be far less available after an oil spill – and have recovered from previous habitat destruction that endangered them to a much more stable population level.

Their Gulf Coast habitat is assuredly threatened again, and this species of bird will be hit hard by this disastrous oil spill.

The disaster is beginning to blossom, and many dyamic aspects are emerging. Activist organization response is becoming more visible and I will try to follow on with a summary of what I can find nearer the end of today. It is vitally important that we all hold these environmental organizations accountable for going huge on this issue, now, while it is still possible to derail further attempts at expanding offshore oil drilling. As the oil just begins to hit shore, the picture of near term likely environmental damage is becoming clearer. Politician response is also growing. I will attempt to follow on to this diary with further diaries today, tomorrow, and Sunday, with updates and insight as time and information allows.

And, still, under 5,000 feet of water, is the 32.5 million rusting kilograms of the Deepwater Horizon itself. It is not clear if the 700,000 gallons of diesel fuel contained in the wreck is drainable, or if the wreck itself can be re-floated and raised. Given the magnitude of the leaking well and spill disaster, the Horizon is likely to be disregarded for a long time, abandoned, a toxic deep-sea artificial reef sitting at the bottom of the ocean.

FDL_BP_Banner31.jpg

Initial Responses of Environmental Organizations to the Horizon Disaster

5:00 pm in BP oil disaster, Energy by Seymour Friendly

This a preliminary step in starting to monitor the responses and activities of various environmental organizations to the Horizon disaster. Many mainstream activist and pressure group organizations that claim to be populist/leftist/liberal/progressive at this point are regularly accused of doing little but exploiting crises and disaster to advance their own fundraising totals. For a textbook example see: "Abortion Rights Advocacy Groups and Health Care Reform".

Environmental organizations are no different.

As of yesterday, NRDC had a single, tepid, isolated web-log entry (along with a bulk-published fund-raising "diary" on the FDL web site from its "action fund"), Greenpeace had a weak click-to-email campaign on a rough page deeply buried in its web site, and organizations like Oceana and Sierra Club had made a couple of boilerplate statements to the press.

It appears that, finally, given a now-apparent mounting disaster which is without a doubt mediagenic, Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Oceana, and the NRDC have begun to mount publicity campaigns.

NRDC has barely upped its ante with another web log entry, from a higher-level figure, calling for a moratorium or time-out on offshore drilling:

… We believe that, in light of this recent tragedy, there should be a time-out on any action to proceed with new offshore drilling until there has been a full and independent investigation of the causes of this blowout, an assessment of whether and how such accidents can be avoided in the future, and a full understanding of the environmental risks of drilling to sensitive and ecologically important areas in these regions as well as the economic impacts to ocean and coastal communities. …

Oceana has issued a press release, to its credit, directly opposing Obama’s drilling plans:

Read the rest of this entry →