TalkBaja.com » Baja Mexico Forums » Baja News Wire

Reuters - The Obama administration on Wednesday appealed a court ruling that blocked its six-month moratorium on deepwater oil drilling after a judge said it was not adequately justified despite the crude oil spill from BP Plc's leaking well in the Gulf of Mexico.




More...

oh, oh....looks like this could cost us.....

Well; I suppose it's a very slight improvement over mis-characterizing the scientists' opinions and then issuing another ban as an end-run around the first unfavorable ruling.

And the flow of escaping crude has increased as of yesterday...

Yeah, a ban will decrease the flow rate... excellent ...

No but it seems totally ridiculous to me to lift the ban until the issues behind why this accident happened in the first place are investigated. I have spent a lot of time on offshore oil rigs including jack ups, drill ships and stationary platforms going back several decades. I have a very good idea of how they work - mechanically, economically and politically. Oil companies have had MMS in their back pocket for a long time and until that department gets ransacked and rebuilt, I say move forward with extreme caution as far as any offshore drilling.

Something tells me you might be a bit more sympathetic if this spill were washing up and destroying the coastline along our west coast beaches, right in front of where you live...

Unfortunately this segment of this disaster isn't about the risk, but (oversimplifying the judge's 22 page "tongue lashing")about the government's ability to make an honest, valid case that the risk exists. Cripes, we have an administration of nothing but lawyers and now they aren't even very good at that!

I agree Dusty - I am not a big fan of this administration but to simply side against them for political reasons makes no sense to me either. Something tells me that perhaps this judge might not be the most impartial one to make such a ruling either...

The federal judge who overturned Barack Obama's offshore drilling moratorium reported owning stock in numerous companies involved in the offshore oil industry — including Transocean, which leased the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig to BP prior to its April 20 explosion in the Gulf of Mexico — according to 2008 financial disclosure reports...

link to article

Not at all... think any reasonable person knows exactly what happened..

All Laws and regulation and/or programs which are in place to prevent and/or mitigate an event such as this were not followed... its that simple

It is really very easy to check it out.. review all submitted required documentation, with a close eye on any and all "categorical exclusion" issued by the Department of Interior on any operation anywhere.. not just the Gulf.. follow those up first.. get out and enforce the law

We already know who, how and why.. just need the locations .... then send out the Coast Guard.. (Sorry I don't remember the outstanding information that was supplied by a former Coast Guard individual who posted) and insure that all operations are in compliance, those that are not... shut them down until they are... don't think there will be many.. most of the folks out there have already done a double take and have most likely checked it out already and are getting all together to keep from having that happen

Acts of God, and stupidity should have been taken into account along with any and all negative impacts ALL that is their job at the Department of Interior as the current law reads... there are no exemptions from compliance with the Laws and Regulations from the E.P.A that I'm aware of at this time... as indicated before.. enforcement actions are another issue, however this issues timing may be just right to be revisited, as I for one was not happy with the call way back when it was made, by President Reagan.. or it could have been from Nancy based on astrology.. I just did not like the call.. but, live with it...

This was no act of God.

Coast Guard? That sounds nice but unless you have worked on an offshore rig and understand the myriad of complexities that arise and the enormity of it all - that could never begin to be uncovered by a simple Coast Guard inspection. There is little if anything they could do to help prevent such occurrences in the future. The heart of the problem is in the early work done in the permits and specifically in the area of procedures, monitoring and reporting. A good example is the field offshore Santa Barbara where ExxonMobil has three platforms. Exxon was the original operator (before the Exxon-Mobil merger) and faced much more stringent controls when permitting their SYU facility as compared to the platforms before that and other similar operations.

Why?

The SYU facility came after Valdez and all eyes were on them. MMS could not be "handled" and the County of Santa Barbara flexed a lot of political muscle as well to make sure that the plant would be run in a very safe and transparent manner. I have been through their operation and it is nothing at all like what you see out on the gulf, where MMS does little more than cursory looks at the books, a quick tour and then a flight back to shore for a day of golf and drinks. It is the dirty little secret well known throughout the industry. The oil industry will always seek the cheapest way to do things - it's always about the bottom line no matter how many procedures and policies are put into place. It is cheaper to buy off MMS.

Safe drilling with minimum risk to the environment takes monitoring and control by an independent agency to ensure those policies and procedures are followed ; something the MMS was supposed to be doing, but are not.

I'll put another nickel in the pot......The government could have/ should have asked for a different venue, different judge, even if they lost on that it would have strengthened their appeal.

For me it's not a political thing at all. Republicans, Democrats all of them can be bought, just a question as to whether they are street walkers or courtesans.

Based on what I've learned from this, I think deep water drilling this close to shore is obviously too risky for us and not risky enough for those who drill. Practically speaking you eliminate the risk entirely by outlawing it completely and understand and have willingness to bear those consequences . Or you place the risk completely on the driller in a "you bet your company" permission where a company has proven their capabilities and posts a bond equal to all of their assets for each new drill site. See how many takers you get...and if you do get one, you can be damn sure that there will be supervision and safety checks the likes of which a tinker toy shop like MMS has never seen.

Capitalism has many very painful ways of dealing with greed and less than optimal work. I think we need to remember how to use them.

Much as I may agree, personally, with the idea of an immediate moratorium, having just read the judge's opinion, I tend to agree with the judge. The government has been allowing deep sea drilling for some time, now. The fact that, suddenly, one well blew up does not, IMO, provie a likelihood of IMMINENT risk of (new) irreparable harm from allowing drilling to continue, for the time being. Nor do I think it supports an argument that "geez, we (the government) did not know or have reason to know about the dangers of deep sea drilling until the explosion. Now that we do, we want to reverse, summarily, all of our prior decisions granting permission for drilling." The expert 'evidence' was innacurate, as discussed above. Absent evidence of an imminent risk of harm, the government does not seem to have been justified in bypassing the normal administrative procedures that must be followed prior to making such a decision.

I think that globalization of the economy may also be partially responsible for this mess. Does anyone have an idea as to how many different companies and nations are ultimately involved in this rig and the drilling operation? First, the rig was built in South Korea by Hyundai. Second, it was flagged (for convenience) in the Marshall Islands, which maintains a certain responsibility for inspection and compliance. Not to downplay to possible failure of MMS to responsibly oversee operations, there were employees on board from three major companies, as well as a scattering of other contractors. So, you've got, among others, employees of BP, Transocean, Halliburton, and who know who else. Who is in charge?

And then, there's this:
"The rig owner, Transocean, also had a "strong overall" safety record with no major incidents for 7 years.However an analysts' review "painted a more equivocal picture" with Transocean rigs being disproportionately responsible for safety related incidents in the Gulf and industry surveys reporting concerns over falling quality and performance. In the 3 years 2005 to 2007 Transocean was the owner of 30% of oilrigs active in the Gulf and 33% of incidents that triggered an MMS investigation were on Transocean rigs, but in the 3 years from 2008 to February 15 2010 it owned 42% of rigs but was the owner for nearly 3/4 (73%) of incidents. Industry surveys saw this as an effect of its November 2007 merger with rival GlobalSantaFe. Transocean "has had problems" with both cement seals (2005) and blowout preventers (2006), which are the suspected cause of the Deepwater Horizon loss, although Transocean states cementing is a third party task and it has "a strong maintenance program to keep blowout preventers working". According to the Wall Street Journal online:

"In 2008 and 2009, the surveys ranked Transocean last among deep-water drillers for "job quality" and second to last in 'overall satisfaction'. For three years before the merger, Transocean was the leader or near the top in both measures. Transocean ranked first in 2008 and 2009 in a category that gauges its in-house safety and environmental policies"

All this said, to err on the side of caution by having a moratorium on similar operations until the facts leading to this mess are sorted makes abundant sense to me.

"BP Relied on Faulty U.S. Data" yes its true, its our fault the American taxpayer ... think not

Originally Posted by dusty

I'll put another nickel in the pot......The government could have/ should have asked for a different venue, different judge, even if they lost on that it would have strengthened their appeal.

For me it's not a political thing at all. Republicans, Democrats all of them can be bought, just a question as to whether they are street walkers or courtesans.

Based on what I've learned from this, I think deep water drilling this close to shore is obviously too risky for us and not risky enough for those who drill. Practically speaking you eliminate the risk entirely by outlawing it completely and understand and have willingness to bear those consequences . Or you place the risk completely on the driller in a "you bet your company" permission where a company has proven their capabilities and posts a bond equal to all of their assets for each new drill site. See how many takers you get...and if you do get one, you can be damn sure that there will be supervision and safety checks the likes of which a tinker toy shop like MMS has never seen.

Capitalism has many very painful ways of dealing with greed and less than optimal work. I think we need to remember how to use them.

I'll sign on that one...

Originally Posted by Msterieus

Much as I may agree, personally, with the idea of an immediate moratorium, having just read the judge's opinion, I tend to agree with the judge. The government has been allowing deep sea drilling for some time, now. The fact that, suddenly, one well blew up does not, IMO, provie a likelihood of IMMINENT risk of (new) irreparable harm from allowing drilling to continue, for the time being. Nor do I think it supports an argument that "geez, we (the government) did not know or have reason to know about the dangers of deep sea drilling until the explosion. Now that we do, we want to reverse, summarily, all of our prior decisions granting permission for drilling." The expert 'evidence' was innacurate, as discussed above. Absent evidence of an imminent risk of harm, the government does not seem to have been justified in bypassing the normal administrative procedures that must be followed prior to making such a decision.

The government based their decision to allow drilling on MMS doing their job. It has now come to light (finally!) that they were not. Any large oil spill on land is much easier to contain and mitigate than one at sea. The long term damage and costs from this accident justify taking the extra precaution IMHO. I would much rather err on the side of safety than to take the risk.

But that's just me and I literally grew up in the oil business...

Originally Posted by BajaGringo

The government based their decision to allow drilling on MMS doing their job. It has now come to light (finally!) that they were not. Any large oil spill on land is much easier to contain and mitigate than one at sea. The long term damage and costs from this accident justify taking the extra precaution IMHO. I would much rather err on the side of safety than to take the risk.

But that's just me and I literally grew up in the oil business...

Yes, but due process doesn't work that way, and (much as I'd rather it not be the case), even oil companies are entitled to due process.

Originally Posted by Msterieus

Yes, but due process doesn't work that way, and (much as I'd rather it not be the case), even oil companies are entitled to due process.

Explain that to these guys...

I guess I'm just missing something. There are way over 3,000 wells in the gulf that would not be affected by a moratorium. What has been reported is that some 33 drilling operations are or would be subject to a moratorium. Given that often, when a drilling operation is completed, the well is capped and may not be producing oil for years, I just cannot understand people like Jindal and Barbour making like the moratorium is going to immensely affect the economy of the gulf region. Like what's happening now??

I've heard and read figures that the shut down idles double digit thousands (20-25) of employees related to the 33 drilling rigs. Looks like the low end of the salary range for these people is about 75K. Another "rule of thumb" that plays is that a wealth producing (growing, manufacturing or mining) support about three service type employees...barbers to bankers types. So economically it would be a very big hit for that region.