Your job is to research economic and environmental impacts of April 20, 2010 BP

Question

Your job is to research economic and environmental impacts of April 20, 2010 BP Oil Spill that devastated the Gulf of Mexico dramatically. Unfortunately, in addition to a number of deaths in the oil platform, a massive crude oil was gushing into Gulf at the rate of 800,000 gallons per day for many days. While Norway and other European countries have been drilling oil in the deep sea for many years, they have not experienced such a devastating oil spill accident due to their very strong regulations on oil drilling in waters while many experts claim that oil drillings in US waters were not as strongly as regulated compared with European counties due to strong oil lobbies in the United States. Write an essay on investigation of the BP Oil Spill in terms of economic, environmental, and society impacts. Describe your ideas and suggestions to avoid similar accidents in future.

Explanation / Answer

“You usually hear birds singing, crickets chirping, and a whole cacophony of sound. Now, you hear yourself paddling, and that’s it”. These words spoken by Ralph Portier, an environmental biologist at Louisiana State after an unprecedented event in American history occurred in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20, 2010. Explosions in an oil rig resulted in eleven deaths, 17 injuries and countless of oil wasted (BP 1). The following days Americans watch lived footage of 60,000 barrels of oil flowing into the Gulf of Mexico daily. Such dramatic environmental changes have resulted in countless deaths in the wildlife. The beautiful clears waters of the coast have been replaced by watered saturated with oil. Many coastal residents like Portier yearn for normality. This event raised an uproar of controversies as Americans frantically searched to answer who is responsible for the accident, the extent of damage made on the culture and the environment, and the best method to mitigate the problem. BP is the world’s third largest private oil company who was the lease operator of Mississippi Canyon Block and the owner of the well that exploded. The oil spill affected thousands of Americans, including the coast’s residence, fishermen, and shrimpers. Shrimpers Darla and Todd Rooks have been out of work for five months. The food supplies have been contaminated with harmful toxins. “I’m a seafood dealer. That’s how I make my living. And I’m telling people, when it comes from that over there --motioning to the gulf-- do not eat it” said Darla Rooks. The couple has been forced to stay with relatives not being able to afford rent. Unfortunately the Rooks are not alone. This devastation has thousands of Americans wondering how they will support themselves since their livelihood has been destroyed. Most victims of the oil spill want to know who will clean this up. BP is obviously responsible for some of the actions, on the other hand, other companies equipment was involved in the failure of the oil containment. Those who argue that BP is responsible for the spill mention their history of reckless spills. They have had 518 safety violations over the last two decades. According to Jeanne Pascal, an Environmental Protection Agency attorney, BP should have been debarred a long time ago. She believes the company has been consistently negligent in the past and is hazardous. In the past ten years BP have had four times as many large spills of oil chemicals or waste than their counterpart ConocoPhillips even though ConocoPhillips have produced twice as much oil. President Obama stated “A full investigation will tell us exactly what happened. But it is pretty clear that the system failed, and it failed badly. And for that, there is enough responsibility to go around. And all parties should be willing to accept it”. Several claims have been filed against BP. Individuals who criticize BP for the spill criticize Kenneth Feinberg, the administrator of Claims for Gulf coast, for not properly handling damage claims itself. Some state officials claim that he is laying down the rules with little input from the states most affect. Other complaints of the BP’s administrator are he is setting unrealistic time tables. He gave victims until Nov. 23 to file for temporary payments for loses (King 2). Feinberg stated in an interview that he disagreed with the criticism and that if anyone believed that they weren’t being properly compensated by BP and wanted to spend countless years in court then he said “Go ahead” . Not all believe BP is exclusively responsible for the spill. According to the BP executive report issued in September “The team did not identify any single action or inaction that caused this accident. Rather a complex and interlinked series of mechanical failures, human judgments, engineering design..... Multiple companies, work teams and circumstances were invited over time”.With so many companies and humans involved it is very hard to determine the exact cause of failure in such a complicated procedure. Researchers found eight key causes to the incident. The very last cause they found was the BP emergency mode did not seal the well. This implies that other parts (not manufactured my BP) also failed before their well did. Professor Malcolm Spaulding stated “There were multiple chances to stop this and they all fail” . Texas Governor, Rick Perry, suggested that this was simply an “act of God.”. According to Pascal the government shares responsibility for the incident because they were totally aware of BP’s negligence. In 2004 she received a phone call from a BP employee who described how BP was manipulating inspection reports to hide hazardous flaws. Pascal said “I had documents in which showed the pipelines were in bad shapes and that sooner or later there was going to be some kind of a failure.” Nothing was ever done about Pascal’s warning and on April 20, 2010 her fear happened. Pascal isn’t the only one who believes the government shares responsibility for the spill. President Obama accuses the federal government of having a “cozy” relationship with BP and issuing out permits with little assurance of safety. The exact reason for accident is still being investigated whether or not BP is solely responsible for the spill is unknown. The extent of how much the oil will affect the environment, economy and culture is significant. The oil spill has hurt the environment. Scientist estimates that as much as 80 percent of the oil is still underwater affecting sponges, corals. This will certainly interfere with growth and reproduction damaging the wildlife and its inhabitants. The oil spill also has a negative effect on the economy by decreasing tourism. Tourism is one of the biggest economic drivers of the Gulf region . The oil spill can potentially cause $22.7 billion over the next three years due to the decrease in tourism . Not only does the spill affect the economy and environment it affects the culture. Southern hospitality, good eating and traveling are associated with the south. Louisianan notorious spicy foods may no longer be as prevalent. . The beautiful bayous have been replaced by salty marshes. The welcoming ways of some Southerners have been replaced with worries of relocating and business failure. Most of Coastal residence wants to know the best way to alleviate this problem. There are several different theories that researchers believe could be the solution for the cleanup. These techniques include shovels, skimmers, and even paper towels . The first attempt was to send robots to activate the blowout preventer, however, this failed .BP suggested two solutions: first is to attempt to place domes over the well and the second alternative is to begin drilling which will allow the leaking well to be sealed with dense liquid .Another proposed technique is called situ burn, which cage the oil with booms and set it on fire. Biologist Portier, designed a specialized bacteria, fungi and plants to digest the toxic waste . Portier believes his technique is the most effective way of cleaning the oil without leaving a toxic residue. Other methods to methods have been used to help break up the oil such as dispersing hundreds of thousands of gallons of dispersant in the water . There are different estimations on how long the recovery will take. Scientists are also trying to figure out ways of preventing this devastation again. Suggestions like additional offshore drilling and developing an alternative-energy are being considered by President Obama. Researchers have also made suggestions to BP in particular to help prevent similar accidents. These suggestions include cover contractor, risk assessment, well monitoring, and well control practices, and BOP system maintenance . The oil spill has left a lot of unanswered questions. Controversies have risen from who is actually responsible for the accident, the extent of damage made on the culture and the environment, and the best way to solve the problem. One thing is certain all of these questions must be answered in order for the environment, economy and culture to return to normal. Louisianan, Ralph Porter, said “When I hear crickets and birds again in those marshes” he will know everything is well again.

Due to the international law principle of state sovereignty over natural resources, corporations extracting oil around the world must do so with approval of national governments. Many of the countries with large oil supplies have governments with which the United States has uneasy relations and/or that face significant political instability.12 This legal framework has resulted in significant environmental justice concerns associated with oil extraction around the world. Economically powerful corporations pair with governments wielding sovereign regulatory authority in ways that limit the capacity of vulnerable populations to protect their rights.13 Especially in the poorer countries in which oil extraction takes place, but in the United States as well, these dynamics result in patterns of governmental underenforcement of environmental standards applicable to oil companies. Governments often profit directly from the oil companies' efforts; in the U.S. deepwater drilling context relevant to this article, the government receives royalties from leasing underwater land and drilling rights to oil companies.14 Moreover, in countries with significant armed conflict or human rights violations, the relationship between the corporation and the government at times involves the corporation in that violence. 15 The people who face the greatest environmental risks and harms as a result of this production do not receive its benefits. A voluminous scholarly literature provides narratives of massive environmental degradation intertwined with human suffering that accompanies oil and other extractive industries around the world, as well as the unequal distribution of the burdens and benefits.17 This Article adds to this literature by detailing the ways in which this unequal distribution is not simply a product of developing countries with unstable dictators. While the domestic U.S. version of environmental injustice stemming from the oil industry may be less extreme, the patterns of powerful corporations influencing the substance of law and enforcement in ways that put vulnerable populations at risk and the more limited avenues open to these impacted people are consistent with the rest of the world. The treatment of governments and corporations under international law and its incorporation in domestic legal systems reinforces these difficulties. The international legal system is premised on sovereign and equal states making agreements with each other, whether through treaties or under customary international law. Nation-states are the primary subjects and objects of international law, while corporations, despite their transnational reach, have limited international legal personality.18 While significant scholarship problematizes this structure and suggests ways in which informal dynamics change it, the formal legal system constitutes and regulates corporations primarily through national and subnational law. This national and subnational regulation of corporations becomes particularly problematic in situations like this one in which a mass of subcontracting relationships complicate questions of regulatory authority and liability. Another layer of multiscalar law interacts with the above-described regulatory regime due to the many corporations involved through subcontracting relationships in the drilling project. While BP, as the company with the oil and gas lease from the U.S. government, is the legally responsible party for the spill, eleven other companies with ties to multiple countries (if one counts subsidiaries as distinct companies from their parents) had significant involvement in BP's drilling efforts at the Macondo well site. Under the Outer Continental Shelves Land Act, Louisiana law incorporated as federal law governs these subcontracting relationships, but the entities themselves and the choices that they make present a complex geography of regulatory relationships. For example, the Deepwater Horizon rig was registered under a Marshall Islands flag, giving the Marshall Islands partial regulatory authority under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Together, these substantive and structural complexities create formidable barriers to justice. The following three Parts detail how these dynamics played out in the specific context of the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. They demonstrate the ways in which justice hinges on a myriad of particular decisions regarding many different laws and regulations and in which the types of problems articulated in this Part manifest through situational details.

Impact on Gulf Coast residents, communities, and businesses in the first 20 months after the oil spill Almost from the day of the spill, BOEM, as part of the former Minerals Management Service, re-directed a research team already in the area working on a different project. The new project focused on five key regional economic sectors—offshore oil and gas, fishing, tourism, shipbuilding and fabrication, and retail—and on non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the claims process, and the impacts on different ethnic groups. The study’s success is largely due to the study team’s ability to document the spill’s social effects as they unfolded. Often such information is lost in the heat of the moment. The study takes place in a region highly involved in the oil industry and accustomed to different types of disasters. Some of the effects of the spill were mitigated by the knowledge, understanding, expertise and mechanisms in place. Conversely, the spill’s impacts were heightened by recent, severe hurricanes and flooding and by the fact that even short-term BOEM regulatory actions after the spill might have effects on areas highly involved in the OCS industry.

Impact of the spill on coral habitats

The bureau immediately saw the opportunity to adapt another ongoing study in the summer of 2010 to investigate the impacts of the DWH spill. Supported by BOEM, NOAA’s Office of Exploration and Research and U.S. Geological Survey, this large interagency partnership study had been going on for almost two years. Entitled "Exploration and Research of Northern Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Natural and Artificial Hard Bottom Habitats with Emphasis on Coral Communities: Reefs, Rigs and Wrecks," (also known as Lophelia II), its purpose was to discover and explore deepwater coral habitats in water depths ranging from 1,000 to 9,000 feet. Adapted to focus on DWH-related impacts, researchers sought to identify potential coral habitats near the blowout site, including any located in the direction of a documented subsurface oil plume. Scientists discovered the first impacted deepwater coral habitat in November 2010. Immediately following the spill, BOEM’s Lophelia II study manager became the initial lead of the National Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) Technical Working Group (TWG) for Deep-Sea Corals. Some of the principal investigators from the Lophelia II study were encouraged to join the TWG and began developing the first new study to continue investigations of impacts to the deep-sea corals discovered in 2010. Additional cruises followed, funded by NRDA and other entities.

Impact of the oil spill on tourism

The DWH oil spill had an adverse impact on many tourismrelated businesses such as hotels, restaurants, retailers, and tour operators. Investigators analyzed DWH claims, news reports, employment data, and conducted interviews with people involved in the tourism industry to better understand the impacts. The impacts of the spill were spread across various geographic areas, and the extent of the impacts on people and businesses were shaped by various factors, such as the structure of an area’s economy, clean-up activities, the reparations process, and public perceptions. Tourism rebounded after the initial decline and employment was relatively stable in most areas following DWH.

Analysis of the DWH spill impacts on the seafood industry Some of the most severe and complex economic effects of the DWH spill were on the Gulf of Mexico seafood industry. While there have been some prior analyses of parts of these effects, one of our studies builds a framework for analyzing these economic effects in aggregate. In particular, this study is creating a model that examines the effects of initial shocks (such as the spill event) throughout the supply chains of various fisheries. In particular, the model estimates the impacts of a change in fishermen’s revenues for a certain species (such as shrimp or oysters) to harvesters, dealers, processors, distributors, marketers, and restaurants. This study also entails a descriptive analysis of the DWH impacts on the seafood industry, which provides context to the model’s results. While this study does not—and could not—answer all questions regarding the impacts of the spill, it provides a useful framework for understanding the impacts to the seafood industry that future researchers can build upon. BOEM can also use the results from this study to analyze the effects of various potential future events on the seafood industry.

Assessment of oil spill impacts on coastal archaeological sites BOEM is committed to preservation of the Nation’s archaeological and historic sites. A study titled, “Assessment of the Effects of an Oil Spill on Coastal Archaeological Sites,” was funded in 2014 in response to concerns by the State of Louisiana for coastal archaeological sites that may have been adversely affected by the DWH spill and spill response. So far, archaeologists have completed test excavation on five archaeological sites that may have been impacted by the spill. Seven more sites are likely to be examined before the study is completed in late 2017. This research also highlights how BOEM is seeking diverse scientific analyses on the impacts of the spill by utilizing expertise in anthropology, archaeology, chemistry, environmental sciences, geology, and even nuclear engineering from many universities, Federal and State agencies, and private scientific institutions. Our study partners and collaborators include the following: University of Louisiana at Lafayette, Louisiana Division of Historic Preservation in the Office of Cultural Development, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium, Louisiana Archaeological Survey and Antiquities Commission, the Gulf Coast Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit, Louisiana State University, Beta Analytic Laboratory, University of Missouri and the University of North Carolina, Wilmington.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse Y
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.