Death In The Gulf

As it temporarily fades from the news, the Deepwater Horizon well continues to allow crude oil to gush into the ocean. People living on the coast are already starting to experience health problems due to exposure to the toxic chemicals released from the oil, or byproducts of burning the oil, or of course the dispersant, Corexit. However, the real devastation is occuring out at sea, where BP is attempting to restrict access. This footage was recorded a few days ago:



We hear people talk about the cost of this disaster, but have you noticed that we always use dollar amounts. No mention is made of the lives lost in the fire, or the lives destroyed along the coast, or the devastation to marine life. What will it take to force us to consider the true cost of environmental disaster - and avoid the next one?

The Cost Of Progress - Part 2

By now you've probably heard that the surface area of the "spill" has grown rapidly over the last few days. This disaster will be a headline grabber for the days and probably weeks to come, as it should be. A year from now, most of us will have forgotten about it, or at least consider it a past event.
In 1989, 11 million gallons of crude oil spilled when the Exxon Valdez ran aground. Despite clean-up efforts, the contamination has continued to prolong the disaster over the following years. Similarly, the legal battle continues to this day.



Of course, Exxon and BP are not the only oil companies tied to pollution disasters. Chevron partnered with an Ecuadorian oil company to tap the oil reserves of Ecuador. The scale of pollution left behind is thought to be anywhere between 10 and 30 times worse than the Exxon Valdez spill, and it appears to have been deliberate.


Watch CBS News Videos Online

Toxic oil wastes were dumped in 900 open, unlined pits which contaminated land and groundwater, and have been linked with many deaths and illnesses. The lawsuit was first filed 17 years ago and, as with the Exxon Valdez case, continues to this day.

With an underfunded Superfund program, the EPA struggles to clean up dangerous pollution events in the US. Superfund sites are located in dozens of major cities and many other locations. Almost all of us have "acceptable levels" of dangerous chemical pollutants in our tapwater. We desperately need to have a better set of tools to deal with polluters in this country, and for US companies operating overseas.

Take a look at my latest designs - Cost Of Crude and Growth For The Sake Of Growth

The Cost of Progress

As I type, up to 25000 barrels of oil per day are gushing into the Gulf Of Mexico. The explosion which destroyed the Deepwater Horizon oil platform also claimed 11 lives. Already we are looking for someone to blame as it becomes clear that the flood of oil from the sea floor is proving difficult to stop, and that contingency plans for a spill were inadequate or non-existent. At this point, it will probably turn out to be the worst oil disaster in US history since the volume of oil is not limited to the contents of an oil tanker.
Last week, the main proposal was to burn off the oil. Not surprisingly, this has had little effect. Even if it had, the fire would have produced an airborne cloud of toxins while the most dense chemicals would have dropped to the sea floor. You can read about in-situ burning here. The best clean up technique appears to be rapid containment and removal, but this has not happened.
What could have caused this catastrophe? This is central to the topic of blame. Obama sent SWAT teams to inspect similar rigs, suggesting to the public that terrorism could have been suspected. However, industry insiders and educated observers suspect a more logical cause.
"The problem is that when you drill into these formations, and then try to inject cement into the hole/gaps to prevent leakage, the curing process for that creates heat. That heat can, if not controlled, cause the gas to escape the frozen crystals. If a lot of gas is released all at once, as could happen during the cement/curing process, it can cause a blowout where the cementing is occurring, or force gas and/or oil up the pipeline to the drilling rig on the surface."
Our friends at Halliburton were involved in the construction of the well. There is an article here which covers their role. Halliburton is a "world leader" in cementing well heads.
"Halliburton performed a variety of services on the rig, including cementing, and had four employees stationed on the rig at the time of the accident. Halliburton's employees returned to shore safely, due, in part, to the brave rescue efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard and other organizations.
Halliburton had completed the cementing of the final production casing string in accordance with the well design approximately 20 hours prior to the incident. The cement slurry design was consistent with that utilized in other similar applications."
In 2007, the U.S. Minerals Management Service noted that over 14 years, around half (39) of the well blowouts in the area were due to cementing problems. Halliburton's cementing was blamed for an Australian blowout last year (the well leaked oil for 10 weeks).
Interestingly, Halliburton announced that it would acquire an oil and gas well fire control company less that a month ago. At the very least, this is disaster capitalism at it's finest.
So, who is to blame? It certainly looks like Halliburton had a part to play. The BBC asked a similar question here, where a point was made which most of us like to ignore. Many corporations operate with little concern for anything other than profit. We see that all the time. Would they continue to take such risks if the potential profits declined? In other words, if we consumed less, we would see fewer disasters. We have to accept at least a small portion of the blame.

You may remember the documentary, Who Killed The Electric Car. The answer to the question posed in the film explores similar issues. Real change has to come from the top and the bottom.