Judge blocks Gulf offshore drilling moratorium

[TACO]

Judge blocks Gulf offshore drilling moratorium

by Michael Kunzelman / The Associated Press
wwltv.com
Posted on June 22, 2010 at 12:57 PM
Updated today at 1:49 PM
NEW ORLEANS -- A federal judge struck down the Obama administration's six-month ban on deepwater oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico on Tuesday, saying the government rashly concluded that because one rig failed, the others are in immediate danger, too.

The White House promised an immediate appeal. The Interior Department had halted approval of any new permits for deepwater drilling and suspended drilling of 33 exploratory wells in the Gulf.

Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said President Barack Obama believes strongly that drilling at such depths does not make sense and puts the safety of workers "at a danger that the president does not believe we can afford."

Several companies that ferry people and supplies and provide other services to offshore drilling rigs asked U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman in New Orleans to overturn the moratorium.

They argued it was arbitrarily imposed after the April 20 explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig that killed 11 workers and blew out the well 5,000 feet underwater. It has spewed anywhere from 67 million to 127 million gallons of oil into the Gulf.

Feldman sided with the companies, saying in his ruling the Interior Department assumed that because one rig failed, all companies and rigs doing deepwater drilling pose an imminent danger.

"The Deepwater Horizon oil spill is an unprecedented, sad, ugly and inhuman disaster," he wrote. "What seems clear is that the federal government has been pressed by what happened on the Deepwater Horizon into an otherwise sweeping confirmation that all Gulf deepwater drilling activities put us all in a universal threat of irreparable harm."

His ruling prohibits federal officials from enforcing the moratorium until a trial is held. He did not set a trial date.

The Interior Department said it needed time to study the risks of deepwater drilling. But the lawsuit filed by Hornbeck Offshore Services of Covington, La., claimed there was no proof the other operations posed a threat.

Company CEO Todd Hornbeck said after the ruling that he is looking forward to getting back to work.

"It's the right thing for not only the industry but the country," he said.

Earlier in the day, executives at a major oil conference in London warned that the moratorium would cripple world energy supplies. Steven Newman, president and CEO of Transocean Ltd., owner of the rig that exploded, called it an unnecessary overreaction. BP PLC was leasing the rig.

"There are things the administration could implement today that would allow the industry to go back to work tomorrow without an arbitrary six-month time limit," Newman told reporters on the sidelines of the conference.

The moratorium was declared May 6 and originally was to last only through the month. Obama announced May 27 that he was extending it for six months.

In Louisiana, Gov. Bobby Jindal and corporate leaders said that would force drilling rigs to leave the Gulf of Mexico for lucrative business in foreign waters.

They said the loss of business would cost the area thousands of lucrative jobs, most paying more than $50,000 a year. The state's other major economic sector, tourism, is a largely low-wage industry.

Tim Kerner, the mayor of Lafitte, La., cheered Feldman's ruling.

“I love it. I think it's great for the jobs here and the people who depend on them," said Kerner, whose constituents make their living primarily from commercial fishing or oil.

But in its response to the lawsuit, the Interior Department said the moratorium is needed as attempts to stop the leak and clean the Gulf continue and new safety standards are developed.

"A second deepwater blowout could overwhelm the efforts to respond to the current disaster," the Interior Department said.

The government also challenged contentions the moratorium would cause long-term economic harm. Although 33 deepwater drilling sites were affected, there are still 3,600 oil and natural gas production platforms in the Gulf.

Catherine Wannamaker, a lawyer for environmental groups that intervened in the case and supported the moratorium, called the ruling "a step in the wrong direction."

"We think it overlooks the ongoing harm in the Gulf, the devastation it has had on people's lives," she said. "The harm at issue with the Deepwater Horizon spill is bigger than just the Louisiana economy. It affects all of the Gulf."

------
Associated Press Writer Pauline Arrillaga in Lafitte, La., contributed to this report.

(Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

http://www.wwltv.com/news/Judge-bloc...-96900799.html
I know there are some of you who will disagree with this ruling, but for my State, it is good news as we will still have jobs. Yes we hate BP to, but why punish a whole industry for one bad apple!

[brokenandtwisted]

The 'ban' only existed because the whole situation is a PR disaster for Obama. Logically if a moratorium was imposed on all drilling no further disasters would occur. Politicians only act out of self-interest, I believe...this case is no different.

As for fixing the well...let it leak.

[TACO]

The 'ban' only existed because the whole situation is a PR disaster for Obama. Logically if a moratorium was imposed on all drilling no further disasters would occur. Politicians only act out of self-interest, I believe...this case is no different.

As for fixing the well...let it leak.

Yes, I agree it was a knee jerk reaction by a President who does not have a clue!

As for as the leak Obama's biggest mistake was not letting anyone from the oil & gas industry on his commission. Why won't he, is it ignorance or something else more sinister? My opinion it is both!

[Athena]

Yes, I agree it was a knee jerk reaction by a President who does not have a clue!

As for as the leak Obama's biggest mistake was not letting anyone from the oil & gas industry on his commission. Why won't he, is it ignorance or something else more sinister? My opinion it is both!

Here's the problem, TACO:

There is an agency that was long ago established to validate (among other things) the safety measures and Plan Bs established by these drilling companies. This BP disaster proves that they failed. And not just "oops" failed... willfully-turned-a-blind-eye failed. We're talking potential corruption.

As a result, we can't verify the legitimacy of the safety measures of ANY OTHER DRILLING RIG IN THE GULF. With this agency turning a blind eye, for all we know, all the other rigs are disasters waiting to happen. And, perhaps unlike BP, they may not have the resources available to pay for damage they cause.

As a result, the ban isn't as knee-jerk as one might think. To put it in different terms: I'm a Quality Administrator for a manufacturer. If I came into my position only to find out that a chunk of suppliers hadn't been sufficiently vetted, I'd probably put them on a new business hold until I could vet them properly.

Now, this doesn't mean that I agree or disagree with the ban - just that it's not entirely arbitrary. It does have some merit. Of course, I'd be suprised if the Administration planned on vetting these drilling outfits as thoroughly as is necessary.

[runecire]

I definitely agree with your line of thinking, Athena. However, I would feel better about the ban IF it wasn't for such a long time AND if it meant the time period of the ban was being used by the Govt to flood the rigs with inspectors to insure proper operations and safety. Once a rig is cleared, it should be allowed to operate.

This ban may not hurt the oil industry world-wide, but it is hurting those who work on these rigs and those directly involved with those who work the rigs, i.e. ferriers, suppliers, etc. Even local restaurants and stores will be affected by the lost wages of the men. The other 3600 rigs in the gulf are irrelevant since those rigs belong to other nations and DO NOT employ Americans. Everyone else continues to drill, and they don't give a damn about Obama's ban. In 60 years of drilling in the gulf, this is the first major catastrophe.

I just don't think we should end all production because there MIGHT be another accident. We certainly don't ground every plane when one happens to crash, even if the crash is due to poor maintenance or lack of proper inspections. We beef up inspections and make sure the planes are flyable. I just think this total ban is just over the top.

[TACO]

Here's the problem, TACO:

There is an agency that was long ago established to validate (among other things) the safety measures and Plan Bs established by these drilling companies. This BP disaster proves that they failed. And not just "oops" failed... willfully-turned-a-blind-eye failed. We're talking potential corruption.

As a result, we can't verify the legitimacy of the safety measures of ANY OTHER DRILLING RIG IN THE GULF. With this agency turning a blind eye, for all we know, all the other rigs are disasters waiting to happen. And, perhaps unlike BP, they may not have the resources available to pay for damage they cause.

As a result, the ban isn't as knee-jerk as one might think. To put it in different terms: I'm a Quality Administrator for a manufacturer. If I came into my position only to find out that a chunk of suppliers hadn't been sufficiently vetted, I'd probably put them on a new business hold until I could vet them properly.

Now, this doesn't mean that I agree or disagree with the ban - just that it's not entirely arbitrary. It does have some merit. Of course, I'd be suprised if the Administration planned on vetting these drilling outfits as thoroughly as is necessary.

Yes there is corruption it is a shame, but we do not live in a perfect world. I can comment & tell you about other companies I have worked for in the past from experience. I have worked on Jack up barges, Supply boats, & Tugboats. And by far the two best companies I have worked for were Shell & Chevron. If we said it was unsafe, we shut the job down. Yes thats right we stopped pumping mud to the rig, because something was un-safe....do you know how much that cost? At that time we were carrying $1,000,000 (thats correct 1 million dollars) worth of drilling mud! There are some companies that care! Chevron was the same way. THere are some others that I have not personally worked for but from what I hear from my friends tell me they are safe also.

Do you know that before we transfer we have procedures to complete. After we do the paperwork we pass up a 6 inch diameter hose to pump mud up to a rig 90 feet off the water, that has a special fitting so there is no spill when we disconnect. Then we check all the valve system on the boat & the rig does the same, then & only then do we start pumping, with a hand on the E-Stop.

Is there something wrong with MMS, yes there is but just a name change will NOT fix the problem. What we need is to start new, with a mix of people from both sides (& I am not talking dems or repubs) to advise the president. Not like the advisory panel he has now.

I truly think the President is either inept or exploiting this for political gain! Why when other countries offered help, didn't he accept? Why did he really want the 6 month moratorium, was because billionaire George Soros (people for the american way) is heavily invested in the Brazilian oil company PETROBRAS (which is where I know for a fact 3 rigs were suppose to go)? Why are we the US taxpayers helping the Brazilian oil industry with our tax dollars? Why when BP wanted to drill in 500 feet of water, they MMS (& yes this was during Obama's administration) were turned down by the government & told to drill in 5000 feet?

Why do you want to punish a whole industry for one bad player. If it were up to me I would let them to continue to drill. But, would send out inspectors to check records (like some of the companies do now). If equipment was found to be faulty then yes by all means shut the rig down. What happen on that rig was a tragedy, but the fact of the matter is short cuts wanting to be taken by BP led to this situation. Nice how in the beginning they wanted to blame haliburton & transocean. A piece of equipment is only as good as you take care of it. In other words I change the oil in my truck every 3000 mile & rotate my tire every 9000 mile because I know it has to last me thus I take care of it...do you see where i am going with this?

In closing no industry is perfect, but what BP did to the industry was wrong! And I hope Tony Heyward & the rest of the board of BP BURN IN HELL! JMO

[Lizard]

Taco, if you don't post the link to the article that you used to start this thread, I am going to put my Gestapo Crocs up your butt.

[Harley_Tech]

In 60 years of drilling in the gulf, this is the first major catastrophe.

Well, not exactly.

On June 3, 1979, workers aboard the Sedco 135-F semisubmersible drilling rig located in Mexico's Bay of Campeche removed pipe from the Ixtoc-1 well to change the drill-bit.
During this routine process, oil and natural gas under tremendous geologic pressure overcame the weight of the drilling mud and the well blew out. The blowout preventer--a device designed to close the well in the event of a just such an emergency--activated but wasn't powerful enough to shear through the thick pipe being pulled out of the well.
The result was devastating. Hydrocarbons gushing from the well ignited at the surface, and the 63 rig workers, some injured and burned, were rescued before the rig sank. Gas bubbling from the well continued to burn on the surface long after the rig went down.

Read more: http://community.nasdaq.com/news/201...#ixzz0rdEjeLAb

The bad news: It took PEMEX nearly 10 months to drill the two relief wells and stop the spill. Over 290 days, the well gushed oil at an uncontrolled rate. The Ixtoc spill is estimated at 3.3 million barrels (138.6 million gallons) of oil.

This well was in 160' of water and took 10 months to cap. The current well is over 5000' down and will be capped in three months. The last report I saw says that the two wells being drilled to cap the well are within 1000' of their objective. I'd say technology has improved just a bit.

With unemployment at well over 10%, putting tens of thousands more people out of work well past the "6 months" is not wise. When those rigs are banned from drilling, they will be moved to other parts of the world where they can work. Getting them back in the rotation and in the gulf again could take years.

Drillers, deck hands, support crews, boats and crews that supply rigs, ships and crews that transport the crude, those that process the crude, refinery staff, helicopter services that transport the crews to and from the rigs, people that maintain those aircraft, airports that handle those aircraft, the pilots, the list is virtually endless.

I've already been personally hurt by this drilling ban and I work on motorcycles. Had a customer (offshore roughneck) decide not to do an upgrade to his bike that would have made me a couple of thousand dollars. That in turn impacts this very site, since I don't have extra dollars to send to Morbid like I normally would. Not that I send a lot, but I'm sure Morbid will tell you any little bit helps.

A safety stand down for a week? Reasonable. Shutting down drilling for 6 months? Unreasonable.

So, how much oil has been spilled so far? http://www.khou.com/news/national/By...-96801239.html


R

[TACO]

Sorry
Here"s the link http://www.wwltv.com/news/Judge-bloc...-96900799.html

[Athena]

I definitely agree with your line of thinking, Athena. However, I would feel better about the ban IF it wasn't for such a long time AND if it meant the time period of the ban was being used by the Govt to flood the rigs with inspectors to insure proper operations and safety. Once a rig is cleared, it should be allowed to operate.

Ideally, yeah, that's exactly how it would work. But it's THE GOVERNMENT. Inherently inefficient. You remember Katrina... Black or white, Democrat or Republican, no one's got a magic wand to make shit happen in that ball of red tape. And, while it may be an eternity to the folks in that area, 6 months is a drop in the bucket on a national scale. Just long enough to get one's shit together, really.

Let's remember, here, that Obama's in a lose-lose situation. He's being lambasted by his own party for not doing enough but, had he and the feds swooped in to take over the situation, conservatives would have thrown a royal fit. Is he doing a little flailing as a result? Yeah, he is. But I don't believe for a second that it's out of malice or conspiracy as TACO suggests... no more than I believe Katrina was botched because Bush "hated black people".

These men are not experts in every field - they have to rely on their advisors and other experts. And, sometimes, it's hard to see the right course of action (*cough*increasingtroopsinAfghanistan*cough*).

But, hey - you know what makes America great? That some podunk judge in Louisiana can waltz in and piss all over the feds' parade, overturning the ban. And the feds can't just retaliate... they have to formally appeal through the courts in a very civil and structured manner. No fascism here - the arguments of both sides get reviewed with a great deal of scrutiny, hopefully, leading to the best one being chosen.

America... Fuck yeah.

[TACO]

Athena said,
Ideally, yeah, that's exactly how it would work. But it's THE GOVERNMENT. Inherently inefficient. 6 months is a drop in the bucket on a national scale. Just long enough to get one's shit together, really.
What many fail to realize is that these rigs are expensive to build & maintain. They can not stay idle long, the companies have to pay there bills just like me & you. Let give you example of what could happen if the moratorium is put back in place. It will take 30 days to get a rig towed to Brazil or West Africa. Once they get there they will be there for years. They will sign a multi year contract (Right now as I type, Petrobras is looking to scoop up these rigs). Now they will keep the driller, tool pusher, & the mud engineer. But as far as everyone else they will employ people from overseas. Then the supply boats that service these rigs will go overseas with them. Captains & engineers will go, but the deck crew & engine room crew will not. The specialty companies will lay off there workers. Then it spreads to the communities with the supply chain. This is massive unemployment. Then the price of gas goes up, then the nation complains that why do we have to pay so much? Hell 1985 was nothing compared to what could happen. Then there is the seafood industry, it is ruined. Two major source of employment we have down here both taken away. Where was the rest of the country when we needed help? But no problem it is a drop in the bucket...you got to be kidding me. Go buy your foreign raised seafood. If I have to eat foreign shrimp, well I rather not eat any at all!

Let's remember, here, that Obama's in a lose-lose situation. He's being lambasted by his own party for not doing enough but, had he and the feds swooped in to take over the situation, conservatives would have thrown a royal fit. Is he doing a little flailing as a result? Yeah, he is. But I don't believe for a second that it's out of malice or conspiracy as TACO suggests... no more than I believe Katrina was botched because Bush "hated black people".

Poor little Barry, every bodys picking on him. Well, he is the leader of the free world. The buck stops with him. His actions were slow! And like I mentioned in a previous post about the Soros connection it makes you wonder. Are to Quote President Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel "You never let a crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you could not do before." here I will let you hear it from his mouth [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjMTNPXYu-Y&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjMTNPXYu-Y&feature=related[/ame]


These men are not experts in every field - they have to rely on their advisors and other experts. And, sometimes, it's hard to see the right course of action (*cough*increasingtroopsinAfghanistan*cough*).

Then why did the president when he set up his advisory board, not appoint not one member from the drilling community? Is it IGNORANCE or an AGENDA? It makes you wonder......

[runecire]

Then why did the president when he set up his advisory board, not appoint not one member from the drilling community? Is it IGNORANCE or an AGENDA? It makes you wonder......

It does make me wonder. Also:

Why has Obama NOT lifted the Jones Act? This would allow other countries (13 so far), who have the right equipment, to sail in our waters and help end this catastrophe. Does he really believe we don't need the help, or is he strategizing, or what? Obviously we need the help.

Why is there a warehouse full of equipment in Maine that no one is paying attention to?

Why do we have a disaster plan in place that we, the American people, spent millions on to put into place, and no one is following it? It is a disaster response readiness plan that went completely ignored by the GOVT.

Why was he so concerned about putting blame on BP instead of stepping up and helping to fix things? The old "boot on the throat" ploy.

Why is he so intent on wanting to "kick someones ass" instead of digging in and getting stuff done? Seems waaayyyyy to thuggish for presidential material.

Why does the Coast Guard and Fish and Game keep shutting down operations that will help control the oil spread problem? Anything that is attempted that does not have the president's OkeeDokee is halted, and yet the president is doing nothing but holding talks with people who don't know how to resolve this disaster. The people that do know are ignored or attacked for being "BP sympathizers" or "Enviornment destroyers". A lillte enviornmental destruction in the beginning, i.e. building burms, could have prevented alot of the coastal destruction we are seeing now.

WHY? Why did he wait sooooo looonng to do ANYTHING? Bush was slammed for taking days to respond to Katrina, and yet here we are, months into the spill, and the FEDS have done next to NOTHING except threaten, strong-arm, posture, and bully.

So many more questions than I care to list. No, I have a hard time believing Obama is out to destroy anyone, but he certainly isn't being very leaderlike and/or helping much either. He puts his cronies on these "councils" but doesn't put anyone on that can really do much good. I get the feeling he is more interested in looking tough than looking useful.

[TACO]

I have those same questions runecire. My biggest was the USCG boarding the vessels & stopping them. This is a fiasco!
But I do believe he is out to jam his agenda down the American peoples throats. That is JUST MY OPINION.

[carolinablue]

I am passionate in defense of our environment, but I don't support the drilling ban. BP is the only company I know of with a safety record that should earn prison time. Exxon has had 0 safety incidents in the past 5 years, Shell and Sunoco have had 1 apiece. BP has had 760. That's seven hundred sixty. in 5 years. The numbers come from a CNN report earlier this week; I believe they were using the stats from the regulatory agency. I would have paid attention but I was making calls for Charlie Melancon.
The guys I know who work on the rigs tell us that on the rigs safety rules are unbelievable...if you so much as trip on a conduit, you fill out an incident report. Lose a tool into the water? Same thing.

Halt BP drilling; they are the chronic offenders. Yes, the agencies overseeing permits and safety regulations need to be drastically overhauled. But the safety-first companies should be allowed to continue drilling. A halt while the administration appoints another bunch of study groups and committees is just insane. Unless, of course, the administration plans to pay the salaries of the men and women out of work because of the ban.

And CNN? It's pronounced Mel-aw-saw, not melon-saw. Aggravates me.

[Whisper]

First criminal charges filed in BP oil spill

Washington (CNN) -- A former BP engineer has been charged with destroying 200-plus text messages about the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, including one concluding that the undersea gusher was far worse than reported at the time.

Kurt Mix faces two counts of intentionally destroying evidence requested by authorities, federal prosecutors announced Tuesday. The charges mark the first criminal case brought in conjunction with the 2010 blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, which spewed nearly 5 million barrels of crude into the sea.

Mix had been assigned to estimate the size of the spill, and one of the messages investigators recovered "includes real-time flow-rate analysis" during an effort to plug the damaged well. That data contradicted the company's public statements about the ongoing disaster, according to an FBI agent's affidavit outlining the charges against him.

The effort, called a "top kill," involved plugging the ruptured deep-sea well by pumping heavy drilling fluid into it from the surface, nearly a mile above.

"Before Top Kill commenced, Mix and other engineers had concluded internally that Top Kill was unlikely to succeed if the flow rate was greater than 15,000 barrels of oil per day," the Justice Department said in a statement announcing the charges.

On the first day of the operation, Mix sent a message back to his supervisor that read, "Too much flowrate -- over 15,000 and too large an orifice," an FBI affidavit outlining the charges states. That data indicated "that Top Kill was not working, contrary to BP's public statements at that time," the affidavit states.

When the operation began, the publicly announced estimate of the spill by BP and federal agencies was 5,000 barrels a day, though BP had acknowledged the amount was likely higher. The day after Mix's message, the U.S. government raised its estimate of the spill amount to 12,000 barrels a day; two days later, BP announced that the "Top Kill" attempt had failed.

According to the affidavit, an early estimate of the blowout Mix produced ranged from 64,000 barrels a day to 138,000; another ranged from 1,000 to 146,000 per day. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ultimately concluded that about 59,200 barrels of liquid oil a day flowed from the well before it was capped, making it the worst oil spill in U.S. history.

In a statement issued Tuesday, BP said it was cooperating with Justice Department and other investigations into the spill, which lasted nearly three months. The company had no comment on the allegations against Mix but said it "had clear policies requiring preservation of evidence in this case and has undertaken substantial and ongoing efforts to preserve evidence."

Mix, of the Houston suburb of Katy, resigned from BP in early 2012, the affidavit states. He made his first appearance before a federal judge in Houston on Tuesday afternoon on the charges, which were filed in New Orleans.

Prosecutors said Mix deleted a string of more than 200 messages from his iPhone about October 4, 2010, after he had been told to collect electronic files related to the disaster and prepare to turn them over to a company working for the oil giant's attorneys. He would face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 on each count if convicted.

The Gulf Restoration Network, a New Orleans-based environmental group, said it was pleased to see criminal charges stemming from the spill.

"It is telling that the Department of Justice's charges against Kurt Mix surround efforts to cover up the fact that BP's public estimates of the oil flow rate were far lower than the actual flow rate," the group said in a statement on the arrest. "Establishing accurate flow rates is an important step forward in ensuring that BP pays the highest possible price for every drop of oil that they discharged into the Gulf."

An estimated 4.9 million barrels (206 million gallons) of crude oil poured into the Gulf of Mexico after the April, 20, 2010 explosion that sank the drill rig Deepwater Horizon and killed 11 men aboard. The disaster damaged the region's fishing and tourism industries, a temporary federal ban on deepwater drilling left oilworkers idled, and scientists are still studying the long-term effects of the disaster on the Gulf ecosystem.

BP announced last week that it had reached a settlement estimated at $7.8 billion with thousands of businesses and individuals who filed damage claims in the wake of the spill, and a federal criminal investigation of the disaster is ongoing.

In September, a government report on the spill found that BP, rig owner Transocean and well cement contractor Halliburton shared responsibility for the explosion, but BP was "ultimately responsible" for operations at the site.

BP and Halliburton sued each other in April 2011, each claiming the other was to blame for the deadly explosion and resulting leak. A federal judge in New Orleans ruled this year that Halliburton is not liable for the some of the compensatory damages sought by third parties, leaving BP on the hook for the majority of those claims, while a similar decision came down regarding Transocean.
[...]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/24/us/gul...html?hpt=ju_c2