Dossier: Fuck BP

Hier tref je de dossiers aan die de afgelopen jaren hier op QFF door de QFFers zijn aangemaakt over diverse zaken die gespeeld hebben of nog steeds spelen.
User avatar
Neut
Super QFF-er
Super QFF-er
Posts: 1499
Joined: Tue 10 May 2011, 15:32

Sat 27 Aug 2011, 00:09

Zou kunnen, ik maak al die grondstoffen liever ongeschikt voor delving, kan qua geweten of qua eco-terroristische biochemische wapens. :) Ik vind het gebruik van gereedschap geen eer doen aan de mogelijkheden van het leven.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Thu 08 Sep 2011, 22:49

WKRG: “Not hard to find oil on the beach and in the water” in Gulf Shores — “Like a debris field of tar balls” (VIDEO)
September 8th, 2011 at 10:43 AM
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/wkrg- ... alls-video


Clean Up of TS Lee Tar Balls Begins, WKRG by Debbie Williams, September 07, 2011:
GULF SHORES, Alabama – Tropical Storm Lee left loads of tar balls on Baldwin County beaches. Some, as big as your fist. [...]

News Five was told clean up crews were out at least twice Wednesday morning but this afternoon it’s not hard to find oil on the beach and in the water.

In the shallow water just past the surf line what looks like a debris field of tar balls. [...]

BP says they will be here till the job is done. [...] By the looks of things, they will be here for some time to come. [...]

Code: Select all

<object width="429" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://vp.mgnetwork.net/viewer.swf?u=319e57102af6102faba2001ec92a4a0d&z=KRG&embed_player=1" ></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://vp.mgnetwork.net/viewer.swf?u=319e57102af6102faba2001ec92a4a0d&z=KRG&embed_player=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="429" height="295"></embed></object>
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Thu 15 Sep 2011, 00:56

Rapport acht BP verantwoordelijk voor olieramp
Laatste update: 14 september 2011 19:20
http://www.nu.nl/buitenland/2615729/rap ... eramp.html


AMSTERDAM - Oliemaatschappij BP draagt de meeste verantwoordelijkheid voor de olieramp van vorig jaar in de Golf van Mexico, de grootste in de geschiedenis van de Verenigde Staten.


Dat staat in een rapport van een onderzoeksteam van de Amerikaanse kustwacht en de Amerikaanse toezichthouder voor olieboringen BOEMRE dat woensdag is vrijgegeven.

Het valt BP vooral aan te rekenen dat er in de dagen voorafgaand aan de ramp een reeks foute beslissingen is genomen met betrekking tot het boortechnische gedeelte.

De veiligheid van het personeel van het booreiland en het milieu kwamen in het geding door het plaatsen van een te zwakke cementen afdekplaat op het boorgat, de dag voor het ongeluk, en het plaatsten van een stalen behuizing in de bron op een instabiel deel van de zeebodem.

Bij een explosie op het booreiland Deepwater Horizon vorig jaar april kwamen elf mensen om het leven. De daaropvolgende olieramp resulteerde in miljarden dollars aan schade. In totaal lekte zo'n achthonderd miljoen liter ruwe olie in zee en werden honderden kilometers kust besmeurd.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Sat 24 Sep 2011, 04:55

Is crude oil still gushing in the Gulf? New ten-mile oil slick spotted near Deepwater Horizon
Thursday, September 22, 2011 by: Jonathan Benson
http://www.naturalnews.com/033650_Deepw ... e_oil.html


(NaturalNews) Roughly a year and a half after the BP oil disaster left the Gulf of Mexico saturated with crude oil and toxic Corexit chemicals, new evidence has surfaced showing what appears to be more crude oil spewing into the ocean. Raw Story explains that Dr. Bonny Schumaker, founder of OnWingsOfCare.org, a nonprofit organization devoted to protecting and preserving wildlife and the environment, recently spotted a ten-mile-long oil slick near the BP Macondo oil well that was supposedly capped shut.

Dr. Schumaker's video of the oil slick, which was uploaded to YouTube on August 30, 2011, can be viewed here:


On September 18, 2010, The Washington Post reported that the BP Macondo oil well was officially dead, adding the US government's declaration that the well was "physically incapable of leaking another drop (of oil)" ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 06725.html ). But Dr. Schumaker's stunning flyover suggests otherwise, revealing what appears to be endless, wispy streams of oil continuing to trail through Gulf waters.

Dr. Schumaker was not the only one to spot the oil, either. Two men from Louisiana State University (LSU) last week took a boat out to the area near the Deepwater Horizon disaster, and they, too, spotted oil slicks all around their boat. They also saw numerous oil "blooms" rising to the top of the water, which indicate perpetual leaks coming from somewhere on the ocean floor.

You can view their video here:
http://video-embed.al.com/services/play ... 7508644001

BP, of course, denies that the oil leaks are connected to the Macondo well. If it is later determined, however, that the well is still leaking, or that BP's drilling operations have caused fissures elsewhere that are now producing the leaks, the company may incur further liability, particularly from suits that were previously dismissed on the assumption that the well had been capped and that cleanup was already in progress ( http://www.myweathertech.com/2011/06/18 ... ayers-are/ ).
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Thu 13 Oct 2011, 01:16

Gulf of Mexico Sea Floor Unstable, Fractured, Spilling Hydrocarbons
Oil and gas are still seeping unabated, says expert. Toxic leakage poses significant public health risks.

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
October 10, 2011

http://real-agenda.com/2011/10/10/gulf- ... rocarbons/

The Gulf of Mexico disaster has not gone away. In fact, it has grown exponentially since the main stream media stopped talking about it. According to the Gulf Rescue Alliance, an organization composed of scientists, medical professionals and seafood industry professionals, among others, the problem cannot be simplified to the damage already caused by the oil spill. It is worse, much worse.

Pools of crude oil float on the surface of Gulf of Mexico waters at the site of the sunken BP/Transocean oil drill the Deepwater Horizon on April 27, 2010. Getty Images

The Real Agenda received exclusive information regarding the current state of the ongoing emergency in the Gulf of Mexico. The latest assessment performed by the Gulf Rescue Alliance reveals not only that the oil spill is still happening, but also that the Gulf of Mexico’s sea floor grew more unstable since the explosion in 2010. Additionally, analysis provided by experts like BK Lim, shows that the geohazards developed that derive from the rolling leakage of toxic matter, combined with the on-going use of the highly toxic chemical dispersant called Corexit will most likely result in the permanent decline of marine life, while posing out-of-control public health risks, just as it did after the Exxon Valdez spill where the same chemical dispersants were used resulting in a rapid decline of the marine life until, for example, the Herring industry completely collapsed and has never recovered since then.

In a letter dated 14 January, 2011 that was sent to Congressman Fred Upton, Chairman House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Congressman John Shimkus Chairman Subcommittee on Environment and Economy, BK Lim warned the congressmen and their committees about the current state of the sub-seabed in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM). In the document, an in-depth assessment of the emergency was provided. It explains why action must be taken immediately. The evaluation of the emergency in the Gulf conducted by Mr. Lim appears credible and is based on his 30 years of experience analyzing the geologic structure of both dry land and underwater drilling sites for major oil industry companies and leading geohazards contractors such as Fugro Geodetic (M) Sdn Bhd, TL Geohydrographics Sdn Bhd, and RPS Energy Pty Ltd.

“The vaporization of enormous amounts of methane hydrates on a scale not seen before, the release of stresses between the lower and upper crust resulting in the abnormal occurrences of low magnitude, shallow earthquakes adjacent to the New Madrid Fault, the sub-seabed underground erosion in the vicinity of the shelf edge undermining the slope stability with possible tsunami-generating, giant, submarine landslides,” said Mr. Lim.

As we now know, the BP explosion that cost the lives of 11 workers was not an accident, but negligence at best and a conspiracy at worst. The latest assessment from the Gulf Rescue Alliance seems to reinforce the fact that BP drilled into the Macondo well with questionable regard for the damage it would cause to the well itself, the sea floor and the marine environment down below.

“There is no question that the oil seepages, gas columns, fissures and blowout craters in the seafloor around the Macondo wellhead, observed from the ROV videos, have been the direct result of indiscriminate drilling, grouting, injection of dispersant and other undisclosed recovery activities,” details the document sent to congressman Upton on January 14 of this year. The direct result of the Deepwater Horizon’s explosion was the massive destruction of life through miles of coastline. The less than adequate cleanup, which helped worsen the disaster, condemned the area to living with tons of toxic chemical dispersants that simply destroyed the eco systems and negatively affected the health of thousands of people who live nearby and millions of others who directly and indirectly depend on the fishing, tourism and natural beauty of the marine life, wildlife and environment.

A review of the documents and news articles during the days and weeks after the underwater explosion, clearly shows that BP was attempting to buy time with various delay tactics and was unwilling to reveal the truth and magnitude of the disaster. While BP was officially battling to kill well A their contractors and other vessels went about with other covert underwater operations, many of which did not seem to be in sync with the urgency of killing “a third undisclosed well which was gushing even more oil”. For example there was this video showing a ROV brushing of the name of another oil company from a new BOP brought into the vicinity of the Macondo wells. BP Clean off Co Logo on BOP – why? – on 9 June 2010.Other videos showed oil gushing from craters on the seafloor and ROV activities (blasting (demolition?), cutting and removal of well casings on the seafloor and from a hole (another well?), dismantling BOP, grouting of seafloor tens to over hundreds of meters away from well A. How could a BOP be dangling for two weeks from 3 to 16 July while BP was showing to the world’s audience the killing and capping of supposedly the only spewing well A from June till 15 July?

In fact, in early media reports animated graphics suggested 3 different leaks locations. BP admitted initially 3 leaks but conveniently reduced to only 1 later; ignoring to explain the “why, when and how”. BP had maintained from the start they had drilled only 1 well. From my analysis in early Aug 2010 I concluded BP could not have drilled only 1 well. They must have drilled 3 wells to account for all the conflicting information. See media reports here.

Videos also confirmed that even as early as May to June, oil and gas were already spewing from the seafloor as far as 7 to over 20 miles from Well A. A satellite photo on 25 May suggests a good correlation between the seabed oil spewing and with the faults and Salt Domes.

Evidently, numerous Youtube video postings not only confirm that BP and multiple federal agencies who were on the scene were not revealing all to the public, but that unknown quantities of hydrocarbons were still leaking out from the reservoir at high pressure and seeping through multiple fault lines to the seabed. “It is not possible to “cap” this oil,” reads Mr. Lim’s analysis. “Until a solution is found to seal these fissures, the hydrocarbons, including Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S), will continue to leak uncontrollably”.

WHAT IS NOW HAPPENING BELOW THE GULF’S WATERS?

The document sent to congressman Fred Upton is accompanied by photos, videos and other documentation that support the concerns expressed by the Gulf Rescue Alliance. Just as a doctor with years of experience in viewing and analyzing x-rays can immediately see a fractured bone or other ailment when a laymen would not see it or understand it’s importance, Lim has years of experience in viewing underwater videos of oil and gas seepage and can quickly see and analyze what is occurring where a laymen would not pick up on it. In his letter, Lim describes what is occurring in a series of underwater videos taken by ROV’s around and near the wellhead.

In one of the videos, Well A, as it is known, appears to be releasing clouds of methane saturated seawater, gas bubbles of methane and re-crystallized methane crystals floating close to the seabed in the vicinity of the Macondo wellhead. On top of this, says the letter, it is also possible to see new fissures and a bulging seabed developing together with an already blown crater.

A second video shows how the very rope that guides the surveying ROV disappears into a dense, darkish cloud of oily fluid. Lim’s document explains how grout materials and old drilling mud that were previously taken to higher altitudes by columns of gas in the water can be seen in the video falling back onto the sea floor. These columns of gas are coming from newly activated venting fissures formed due to sea floor instability and fragility. Viewers can also see re-crystallized methane which appears as transparent and light multicolor materials floating in the water.

The third video shows the “periodic expulsion of the gas through one of the fissures on the seabed. Like geysers, the escaping gas needs to accumulate beneath the top sediment cover until the built-up pressure exceeds the combined water-column and overburden pressure just before each periodic expulsion,” explains the report compiled by the Alliance. According to images obtained from a ROV video, there are pools of tar/oil sediment all over the seafloor which are the direct result of the oil spill.

Although it is very difficult, under the current circumstances, to obtain clear footage of what is going on at that depth, my extensive training and experience in analyzing these types of situations, combined with these footages and others which I have access to, provides proof that oil and gas are still seeping unabated from the uncontrolled leaking reservoir,” warns BK Lim on his letter sent to congressmen Upton and Shimkus on 14 January, 2011.

Independently collected video footage from places like Saint Louis Bay Beach, Pensacola Beach, Santa Rosa Beach, Bon Secour National Wildlife Refuge and other places around the Gulf shows large amounts of fresh Corexit foam on the beach. As Corexit can only be used to sink fresh oil within the first couple of days of it coming up out of the ground, it is yet another indicator that there is an on-going attempt to sink fresh oil below the surface. Surficial bitumen layers (oil tarballs) that made it to the water surface as recently as September 6, due to storm surge are also coming up in massive amounts. According to sources close to the Gulf Rescue Alliance, on August 18, 2011, members of EcoRigs, went out and collected surface water samples that contained crude oil which they believed belonged to the ongoing BP oil spill. They also recorded video evidence of a heavy oil slick on Long Beach Mississippi. The water / oil samples were examined by independent laboratories and the first of those samples to return from the lab on the 28th of September confirmed their concerns: the oil was BP’s and from the Macondo reservoir.

Water sample analysis conducted independently by EcoRigs shows a positive correlation to BP’s oil spill samples. “The presence of fresh BP MC 252 crude oil in surface waters 2 to 14 months after the well was reported to have been capped suggests that crude oil from the BP DWH MC 252 field may have found new pathways to the seafloor.” The evaluations conducted also reveal that the toxic chemical Corexit is now being applied to the subsurface leak located 1500 meters beneath the ocean’s surface at the wellhead. This is done with the intention of further decomposing the oil so that the smaller particles do not make it to the surface and the continuing oil spill can be easily kept from the public eye.

ANOTHER MISHANDLED DISASTER

Just as with Katrina, more than a year into the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the Federal government has shown its ineptitude to adequately solving the consequences of a major disaster. In separate documents gathered by the Gulf Rescue Alliance, more revealing details are provided about how BP and the government handled the oil spill disaster. “The blown crater at the undisclosed 3rd well was spewing more than 100,000 barrels per day. (100,000 barrels estimate was based on the quantity of oil seen on the surface). Even worse the highly corrosive mix of brine, gas and oil ingresses into every crevices and permeable sections of the formation, creating new pathways to the seafloor,” says Mr. Lim. The Alliance subscribed to the standard industrial practice of conducting a detailed seafloor survey as immediately possible, to establish the extent of the seafloor damage following the well blowout. Just as an X-ray would help the surgeon in pin-pointing and planning the most appropriate surgical procedure, such a detailed seafloor and sub-seabed scan would most certainly provide the most strategic approach to stopping the release of hydrocarbons from the beleaguered well or wells. After ignoring repeated calls for such a seafloor survey since the blowout, BP and NOAA suddenly announced such a research survey using the NOAA Okeanos Explorer 15 months later. The only logical conclusion to this late survey is:

“A seafloor survey then (within the first few months) would reveal the ugly truths about the broken seafloor and precarious salt formation they were trying so hard to hide,” continued Mr. Lim. After more than a year of grouting, patching up and destroying all critical evidence in the seabed around the Macondo wells they (BP) were confident enough, the “modified seafloor” would not be incriminating to them. According to Mr. Lim, British Petroleum was very careful not to mention the fact they had drilled 3 wells. If this fact had come out, it would have caused a bomb and they could have been indicted for drilling without permission. “That is what they fear most,” says Lim. BP was also careful to isolate drilling crews away from each other, which according to Lim, is against safety rules because drilling need to be briefed on hazardous and technical problems encountered at earlier drilling stages. Although BP may not have expected the three wells to blow up, this was an almost sure outcome due to the interconnected shallow gas formation (which was one of the main causes of their numerous problems). Further, after urgent requests for recommendations, a formal request was made to the Coast Guard on behalf of Constituent David Fakouri with the Louisiana Economic Foundation demanding seafloor survey and damage assessment be done with a 3rd party observer, but the request was denied.

The recent seafloor survey went on to have totally different emphasis and priorities. This led geohazards expert BK Lim to conclude as follows:

“The vessel’s track history seemed to suggest higher emphasis in the south-western edges of the Biloxi Dome, the southern edged of Whiting Dome and generally south of the Macondo prospects. While there may yet be geologically valid reasons for the emphasis south of the Macondo wells, the shelf edges 6 to 8 km north-west of Macondo Wells and the badly eroded north-western edges of Whiting Dome should at least be surveyed with some grid-lines (see areas P1 and P2).

BP’s vessels had been observed working for quite some time in both areas. The 22 mile long underwater plume (first denied by BP and later confirmed by many independent research cruises), was suspected to have originated from the cracks in the seafloor at these locations. By avoiding these critical areas, can the present survey investigation be truly objective and independent in investigating the truth of the Macondo Blowout?

Almost all the oil sightings are north of the Macondo wells, not south. Why did the survey deliberately (?) avoid the shelf edges north of Macondo. In March 2011, new oil spills were suspected to have come from “leaks in the seabed” north of the Matherhorn field. The shelf edges bordering the Mississippi-Alabama Shelf, appear pretty fractured with large crevices and in potential danger of sliding into gigantic submarine landslides. Submarine landslides are more effective in generating tsunami than quakes without significant landslides. Both the 2011 Japan and 2004 Sumatra Quakes had giant tsunamis due to the accompanying large submarine mass displacement.”

During the first few weeks of the disaster, there was a struggle within BP between thosewho wanted to come clean about the reality of the situation and another group that wanted to cover it up. Apparently the latter group managed to win the struggle and they decided to use the well with the least of the problems (the first and shallowest, Well A, which was drilled to about 5,000 feet below mudline) to be the one staged for the world media as the “show capping” of an oil spill. The third and bigger leak at Well 3, which the late Matt Simmons kept asserting was “the deepest well that reached the Macondo oil resevoir”, was kept out of the public limelight.

A confidential source informed The Real Agenda that credible scientific evidence has been gathered giving high probability to allegations that oil is, in fact, still leaking and that inadequate oil spill response protocols were employed by the EPA, Coast Guard and other officials at Federal and State levels throughout the disaster. According to the source, the compilation of the scientific evidence is not just an edict of worrisome errors but criminal negligence resulting in a worsened tragedy throughout the Gulf States and Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem resulting in serious human health consequences—with EPA being at the head of that mismanagement.

The source further reports that between May 2010 and March 2011 long after the reported capping of the BP well in July of 2010 the average toxicity levels in the Gulf Region waters from Texas to Florida were persisting at unsafe levels and that, in some cases, they were thousands of times higher than EPA established safety threshold levels. It was during this same period of time that federal government agencies put out propaganda saying everything on the Gulf of Mexico was safe, including seafood, air and sea water.

It has been alleged that NOAA’s testing methods were flawed resulting in the “all is safe now in the Gulf” proclamation by responsible agencies. A separate concern is the fact that BP has a $500 million fund paying for continuing studies on the after effects of the spill and use of Corexit leading to concerns by independent scientists over the transparency and availability of this information to the public. Scientists under BP or government contracts conducting studies are not permitted to publicize or discuss any of their data until delivered to their employers. With some of these studies estimated to take several years, the public won’t know the truth until years later.

On September 13, 2011 new oil was seen close to where the original BP oil explosion occurred. Due to the fact the EPA insists on using Corexit as the only possible solution to the problem, the most important issue up to this point -the dire consequences of using Corexit- are not being addressed. Corexit not only contaminates the Gulf of Mexico and the human populations established throughout, but also is ineffective remediating the core problem: cleaning the Gulf waters as fast as possible. The only thing Corexit has proven is its effectiveness to pollute the waters and the Gulf as a whole. Why then does the EPA and the federal government insist on using it? It is interesting to note that none of the official statements by either the EPA or the oil companies state that Corexit cleans up the waters. They do, however, repeatedly state that Corexit is “effective”, which misleads the public into thinking that Corexit is cleaning up the waters. What Corexit is effective at is sinking it below the surface where it is difficult to see and quantify just how much is there, and breaking it up into small particles and spreading the contamination far and wide making the potential problems of toxic exposure to both humans and all the flora and fauna exponentially worse.

EPA ENFORCES ANTIQUATED OIL SPILL CLEAN UP PROTOCOLS

On its website, the EPA mildly agrees that using Corexit as a tool to clean the Gulf has “trade offs”. The question is, where are the positives? The oil is not being cleaned, but the waters and the complete ecosystem are being contaminated. Given the Federal Government’s line of action, it seems the task at hand is to make things worse, instead of better. Even after BP requested to test on the DWH oil already-proven, effective, non-toxic alternative oil spill cleanup technologies the EPA refused to allow those alternative technologies to be utilized.

One of the most highly regarded products suggested by scientists and environmental and conservation groups is Oil Spill Eater II, which is not only approved by the EPA, but also listed as part of an official list of products for oil spill cleanup, called the National Contingency Plan (or NCP List) that have been tested and approved as workable for emergencies like the one now taking place in the Gulf of Mexico.

According to the Gulf Rescue Alliance, BP’s requests to use Oil Spill Eater II were denied by the EPA and regional federally controlled response team officials. The Real Agenda additionally received documents showing formal requests were made by the Governor of Louisiana Mississippi and Alabama to use or conduct trials on OSE II in their states. In June 2010, the EPA sent a letter to Louisiana Governor Jindal denying the use of bioremediation methods for the DWH oil. Per documents obtained by the Gulf Rescue Alliance, the letter had a number of inaccuracies and misleading statements in it, and showed a surprising lack of understanding of the natural process that mother nature follows to clean up an oil spill. This effectively took off the table all but one of the non-toxic products on the NCP list for use in the Gulf of Mexico blowout. The only non-toxic product which did not fit under the detailed description of why the EPA stated that bioremediation would have only limited value, unwittingly made the case for the immediate use of OSE II. When this was pointed out to the EPA in a subsequent letter by OSEI, the company that manufactures and distributes OSE II, the EPA ignored the letter. BP America’s Chief Counsel stated in a conference call with the OSEI Corporation, in September of 2011 that BP was not able to use OSE II to treat the oil disaster because “BP is bound by the government’s decision” —bound by the EPA mandate [to keep using Corexit]. Consequently, it is estimated by sources outside of BP that BP could “have saved an estimated $36 billion in clean up costs if they had deployed the EPA approved alternative to Corexit. Gulf Rescue Alliance members state that it is in possession of voluminous documentation that indicates the EPA arbitrarily blocks any attempt to use environmentally friendly methods to clean the Gulf and instead prefers to use Corexit with no regard for the marine life and public’s health from the now proven to be fatally toxic chemical dispersant.

The use of friendlier technologies could not have only saved the Gulf’s ecosystem in the earlier stages of the disaster, but it would have also reduced the costs of the clean-up process for both the federal government and BP itself and prevented untold damage. Instead, the disaster in the Gulf continues to endanger everything and everyone as the toxic contamination spreads, and the costs of the clean-up process -which are now estimated in the tens of billions of dollars- continue to skyrocket.

Given the EPA’s decision not to help resolve the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, community organizations such as the Surfrider Foundation and the Center for Biological Diversity have filed lawsuitsthat ask the EPA to conduct long-term studies that evaluate the impacts of Corexit on the environment and endangered species. It is expected that these lawsuits will act as a wake-up call to the EPA, NOAA and the U.S. Coast Guard, which appear to have made a conscious effort to block all alternatives directed towards the use of OSE II or any other environmentally friendly and truly effective technologies or techniques to clean the Gulf swiftly and effectively.

Luis R. Miranda is a Journalist with 15 years of experience. He is the founder and editor of The Real Agenda
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Mon 17 Oct 2011, 16:45

BP schikt aansprakelijkheid olieramp
Laatste update: 17 oktober 2011 10:12
http://www.nu.nl/economie/2643292/bp-sc ... eramp.html


AMSTERDAM - De oliemaatschappijen BP en Anadarko Petroleum Co. hebben hun geschil over de aansprakelijkheid voor de olieramp in de Golf van Mexico geschikt.


Het Amerikaanse Anadarko stort omgerekend bijna drie miljard euro in het herstelfonds dat het Britse BP in het leven heeft geroepen.

Anadarko bezat een belang van 25 procent in de Macondo-bron, die in april 2010 langdurig olie lekte. De overdracht van dat aandeel aan BP maakt deel uit van de schikking.

Het herstelfonds, dat BP ruim veertien miljard euro ter beschikking heeft gesteld, moet de schadeclaims van door de olieramp benadeelde partijen vergoeden. Volgens BP behelst de schikking geen schuldbekentenis.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Tue 06 Dec 2011, 18:26

Halliburton vernietigde bewijsmateriaal over olieramp BP
Laatste update: 6 december 2011 11:20
http://www.nujij.nl/algemeen/halliburto ... 8448.lynkx


AMSTERDAM - Het bedrijf Halliburton heeft bewust bewijsmateriaal over de olieramp in de Golf van Mexico van 2010 vernietigd.

Dat zei een woordvoerder van de oliereus BP tijdens een hoorzitting in het Amerikaanse New Orleans, meldt de Britse BBC.

Halliburton zou testresultaten over het bij de Macondobron gebruikte cement hebben verwijderd, aldus BP. Halliburton noemt de beschuldigingen onwaar.

De staat van het cement zou een bepalende rol bij de olieramp hebben gespeeld.

Bij een explosie op het booreiland Deepwater Horizon vorig jaar april kwamen elf mensen om het leven. De daaropvolgende olieramp resulteerde in miljarden dollars aan schade. In totaal lekte zo'n achthonderd miljoen liter ruwe olie in zee en werden honderden kilometers kust besmeurd.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
FreeElectron
Super QFF-er
Super QFF-er
Posts: 4292
Joined: Fri 12 Nov 2010, 22:26

Tue 06 Dec 2011, 18:29

[quote=""combi" post=47967"]
Bij een explosie op het booreiland Deepwater Horizon vorig jaar april kwamen elf mensen om het leven. De daaropvolgende olieramp resulteerde in miljarden dollars aan schade. In totaal lekte zo'n achthonderd miljoen liter ruwe olie in zee en werden honderden kilometers kust besmeurd.[/quote]

Geen woord over de schade aan Moeder Aarde en haar kinderen ..... :angry: :sick:
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Tue 17 Jan 2012, 00:25

Dauphin Island fish show up with lesions, BP spill link questioned
Published: Wednesday, January 11, 2012, 6:04 AM
http://blog.al.com/live/2012/01/dauphin ... up_wi.html


DAUPHIN ISLAND, Alabama -- More than half the fish caught Monday by Press-Register reporters in the surf off Dauphin Island had bloody red lesions on their bodies.

Image
Two thirds of the whiting caught by the Press-Register on Dauphin Island Monday had lesions on their bodies. The fish live in the turbulent surf zone, where much of BP's oil ended up. Scientists said there might be a connection between the spill and the appearance of the lesions, but cautioned that other factors may be at play. The large fish in the background weighed 12 pounds. The smaller fish in the foreground were about 12 inches long. (Ben Raines/Press-Register)

Fishing along an uninhabited portion of the barrier island during a trip to survey beaches for tarballs, the newspaper caught 21 fish, 14 of them with lesions. Of those fish, eight had lesions a quarter of an inch across or smaller, while 6 had much larger blemishes.

Most of the fish were whiting, a small species common to the surf zone throughout the Gulf of Mexico. Whiting grow to about 2 pounds and are ubiquitous in the surf year round, commonly found inside the first sand bar near breaking waves.

A 12-pound black drum also exhibited lesions.

Scientists contacted by the newspaper noted that whiting spend their lives close to shore in the area most affected by the Gulf oil spill. Buried mats of oil persist in the surf zone along the Mississippi and Alabama coasts and tarballs remain common on the beach.

BP crews working at the water’s edge on Mississippi’s Petit Bois Island — adjacent to Dauphin Island — collect about 250 pounds of tarballs per day, company officials said Tuesday.

But, the scientists cautioned, many factors could be to blame, and disease has always been a part of the Gulf ecosystem.

“Certainly there is reason to be concerned about these kind of results. Understanding what it means will require a more carefully designed scientific investigation,” said John Valentine, head of the Dauphin Island Sea Lab, after examining photographs of the newspaper’s catch.

“You’d want to know how widespread this is. There’s plenty of reason to be concerned if it turns out to be a widespread phenomenon, and if it spreads across multiple species.”

Both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Marine Fisheries Service have been researching possible connections between disease seen in offshore species and the Gulf oil spill. In response to questions, the agencies referred the newspaper to Steve Murawski, a University of South Florida researcher.

Murawski found that about 3 percent of Gulf fish were afflicted with some type of lesion during sampling conducted for the government after the spill. He said the lesions seen on the whiting “don’t look like the standard skin ulcers we’ve seen associated with the Deepwater Horizon.”

“When you get high frequency of fish disease in a location, sure it’s a cause for concern. But without any chemistry we can’t connect it to Deepwater Horizon,” Murawski said. “It looks like there is some kind of pathogen, a bacteria or parasite.”

He asked the newspaper for samples of affected fish, as did Will Patterson with the Dauphin Island Sea Lab.

The livers and bile of the fish will be analyzed for the presence of oil-related compounds, both said.

Jim Cowan — a Louisiana State University scientist also investigating the presence of disease in the red snapper population since the spill — said his work suggests sick fish are more common in locations that received oil during the spill.

Tarballs were visible in the surf in the area where the Press-Register caught the diseased whiting.

“Whiting are in the drum family. They only live about two or three years. They spawn offshore, but the juveniles come in and live in the high-energy surf zone. They are unique among the drum in that they are really restricted to those high-energy, high-salinity areas,” said Bob Shipp, head of marine sciences at the University of South Alabama.

The lesions are similar in appearance to wounds seen on fish in Mobile Bay four years ago during a widespread disease outbreak. In that case, scientists blamed a bacteria called Pfiesteria, and said fish were left vulnerable to infection due to a large influx of freshwater that carried industrial pollutants, pesticides and fertilizers.

“They definitely have lesions, but it is consistent with what we usually see in the spring in Mobile Bay. They look like the lesions we usually see each year after the water warms up,” said Chris Blankenship, director of the Alabama Marine Resources division.

“We’ll get somebody down there and catch some. Out of an abundance of caution we need to take a look, given everything that has happened in the last two years.”

Valentine agreed that it was important to follow up given the possible connection to the oil spill.

“All we’ve done so far is test for acute effects,” Valentine said, discussing the bulk of science done since the spill. “We haven’t looked at the possible chronic effects that are more subtle and take a long time to develop. That may be what you’re seeing in these fish. Or it could be completely unrelated to BP.”

(Press-Register reporter Jeff Dute contributed to this report.)
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Sat 28 Jan 2012, 00:55

Transocean, the owner of the Deepwater Horizon rig, is shielded from some damage claims stemming from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, a US judge has ruled.
By Richard Blackden, New York

11:41PM GMT 26 Jan 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... rules.html


District Judge Carl Barbier ruled that, under the terms of Transocean’s drilling contract with BP, the rig owner is not liable for damage claims bought by third parties relating to any pollution beneath the surface of the water.

“BP is required to indemnify Transocean for compensatory damages asserted by third parties against Transocean related to pollution that did not originate on or above the surface of the water, even if the claim is the result of Transocean’s strict liability, negligence or gross negligence,” according to the ruling filed in a New Orleans court on Thursday.

BP argued in court last month that Transocean’s conduct on the rig rendered the agreement void.

However, Judge Barbier also ruled that Transocean remains liable for any punitive damages, as well as fines the US government may impose.

“Under the decision Transocean is, at a minimum, financially responsible for any punitive damages, fines and penalties flowing from its own conduct,” BP said after the ruling.

BP said on Thursday night the ruling “makes clear that contractors will be held accountable for their actions under the law.”

“While all official investigations have concluded that Transocean played a causal role in the accident, the contractor has long contended it is fully indemnified by BP for the liabilities resulting from the oil spill,” BP added. “The Court rejected this view.”

The ruling is the latest chapter in a legal battle between the companies involved in the blow out in April 2010 of the Macondo well, which killed 11 people and caused the worst offshore oil spill in US history.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Mon 30 Jan 2012, 03:45

Gulf Coast Children Experiencing Health Challenges (VIDEO)
January 24th, 2012 at 08:33 AM
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/gulf- ... ges-video/


De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Thu 23 Feb 2012, 20:49

BP aansprakelijk voor kosten olielek
Laatste update: 23 februari 2012 09:10
http://www.nu.nl/economie/2747683/bp-aa ... ielek.html


NEW ORLEANS - Oliemaatschappijen BP en Anadarko Petroleum zijn aansprakelijk voor de schade die is ontstaan door de olieramp in de Golf van Mexico in 2010.

Dat heeft een Amerikaanse rechter woensdag bepaald.

Door de uitspraak hangen de twee bedrijven miljardenclaims boven het hoofd. BP en Anadarko waren de eigenaren van de Macondo-oliebron, waar in april 2010 na een explosie op het booreiland Deepwater Horizon de grootste olielekkage in de Amerikaanse geschiedenis ontstond.

Een woordvoerder van BP zei in een reactie dat de Britse oliemaatschappij al meer dan 8 miljard dollar aan claims heeft vergoed.

BP zal alle verdere ''legitieme claims'' betalen en zal helpen de schade aan economie en milieu te herstellen, voegde hij eraan toe.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Fri 13 Apr 2012, 18:41

'Olielek Golf van Mexico heeft natuurlijke oorzaak'
Laatste update: 13 april 2012 07:05
http://www.nu.nl/buitenland/2786157/oli ... rzaak.html


HOUSTON - De olievlek in de Golf van Mexico heeft een natuurlijke oorzaak. Dat hebben onderzoekers bij Shell geconstateerd, zo meldden ingewijden vrijdag aan persbureau Reuters.

''De onderzoekers zijn er bijna 100 procent zeker van dat de olie in de buurt van twee olie- en gasplatforms van Shell afkomstig is uit een natuurlijke lekkage uit de zeebodem'', aldus een ingewijde.

Donderdag zei Shell al dat er geen aanwijzingen waren dat het laagje olie tussen de platformen Mars en Ursa van Shell afkomstig was.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Thu 19 Apr 2012, 18:15



It's almost two years since BP's oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Now, scientists say they have found deformities among seafood and a great decline in the numbers of marine life. Dahr Jamail reports from New Orleans.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
User avatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16003
Joined: Sat 21 Aug 2010, 21:27

Wed 09 May 2012, 14:31

2 Years Later, Grim Photos From the BP Disaster
By Kate Sheppard

Mon May. 7, 2012 3:00 AM PDT
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/ ... -bp-photos


It's been two years since the Deepwater Horizon disaster unleashed 4.9 million barrels of oil on the Gulf of Mexico. In the midst of the disaster, BP and its contractors did everything they could to keep people from seeing the scale of the disaster. But new photos released Monday offer some new insight to just how grim the Gulf became for sea life.

The images were released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request that Greenpeace filed back in August 2010, asking for any communication related to endangered and threatened Gulf species. Now, many months later, Greenpeace received a response from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that included more than 100 photos from the spill, including many of critically endangered Kemp's Ridley sea turtles dead and covered in oil.

Most photos are missing dates and descriptions, though the FOIA request covered the period of April 20, 2010, to July 30, 2010. But they're pretty shocking—which is probably why they weren't made public at the height of the spill. "It just makes me furious," said John Hocevar, a marine biologist who works for Greenpeace. "I had so many conversations with people in various government agencies working on the Gulf spill, and I feel like they were hiding things from all of us."

"The White House was sitting on this stuff for over two years, at the same time they were saying everything was fine, that the oil was gone, and while they were rushing ahead with plans for new drilling in the Gulf, the Arctic, elsewhere," Hocevar continued. "It's just not okay. This is not an acceptable type of collateral damage."

Mother Jones has requested comment from NOAA but had not received a response at press time.

Jump below the fold to see some of the photos that have been kept under wraps for the past two years:

foto's op de site: http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/ ... -bp-photos
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet
Top
Post Reply

Return to “QFF Dossiers”