Day 106 BP Oil Spill: "Kill" Delayed; New Leak Estimates

Aug 3: The expected "static kill" operation was delayed due to a small leak in the top cap. BP issued a brief announcement indicating that "during final preparations to commence with the injectivity test, a small hydraulic leak was discovered in the capping stack hydraulic control system." The injectivity test , scheduled to take place Monday (August 2) was rescheduled until the leak is repaired. BP said, "It is anticipated that the injectivity test and possibly the static kill will take place Tuesday (August 3).

 

    Also, on August 2, based on new pressure readings, data, and analysis, the U.S. scientific teams charged by National Incident Commander Thad Allen with determining the flow of oil from BP's leaking well have refined their estimates of the oil flow prior to the well being capped on July 15. The new estimates, which draw heavily on recent oil reservoir modeling and on pressure readings of a closed system, are the most accurate to date and have an uncertainty of plus or minus approximately 10 percent. The scientific teams estimate that 53,000 barrels of oil per day were leaking from BP's well immediately preceding its closure via the capping stack.

 

    According to a release, recent measurements and modeling also show that, as a result of depletion of the hydrocarbon reservoir, the daily flow rate decreased over the 87 days prior to the well's closure. Based on these measurements and modeling, the scientific teams estimate that, at the beginning of the spill, 62,000 barrels of oil per day were leaking from the well. As previously reported by WIMS, initial estimates from BP and the Federal government were 1,000 barrels/day, and then 5,000 barrels/day.

 

    Overall, the scientific teams estimate that approximately 4.9 million barrels of oil have been released from the well. Not all of this oil and gas flowed into the ocean; containment activities conducted by BP under U.S. direction captured approximately 800,000 barrels of oil prior to the capping of the well.

 

    The new estimates reflect the collaborative work and discussions of the National Incident Command's Flow Rate Technical Group (FRTG), led by United States Geological Survey (USGS) Director Marcia McNutt, and a team of Department of Energy (DOE) scientists and engineers, led by Energy Secretary Steven Chu. At meetings on July 30 and July 31, the group of Federal and independent scientists and engineers discussed new analyses and data points to provide the updated range, relying heavily on newly available pressure readings from the new containment cap. An estimation of how much the flow rate has decreased over time was enabled by observing the pressure at shut in and by initial pressure estimates for the well when it was first drilled.

 

    The release indicates that the improved flow rate estimate brings together the work of several scientific teams and is based on a combination of analyses of high resolution videos taken by ROVs, measurements and modeling of reservoir and well properties, acoustic technologies, and measurements of oil collected by the oil production ship together with pressure measurements inside the containment cap. The installation of a new containment cap and the subsequent well integrity testing procedure provided the opportunity to calculate the flow by measuring the pressure at the top of the well as the choke and kill valves were manipulated after the main containment valve was closed to trap hydrocarbons.

 

    Representative Ed Markey (D-MA), Chairman of the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee of the Energy & Commerce Committee, issued a release reminding that BP officials stated that a maximum estimated flow would be 60,000 barrels a day, with a mid-range estimate of 40,000 barrels a day at a May 4, briefing to Members of Congress on the spill. He said, "Today we learned that BP's initial worst case scenario has been the reality since day one of this disaster. Had BP owned up to the size and magnitude of this oil spill from the very beginning, the government and families in the Gulf would have been better prepared to respond to this tragedy."

 

    Markey also indicated, "It took over 100 days and the pressure of flow rate calculations by independent scientists using high-definition undersea video to tell the world what BP most likely suspected from the start." He said additionally, last week he released documents indicating that BP assumed a flow rate of 53,000 barrels per day as early as July 6 when calculating how much dispersant to apply. Markey also reminded that the flow rate of the well will have substantial financial implications for the company. Under current law, BP would have to pay a fine of at least $1,100 and up to $4,300 per barrel of oil spilled, with the higher figure in the case of gross negligence being found against the company. Assuming 4 million barrels released and not recovered that could be a range of $4.4 to $17.2 billion.

 

    On August 3, BP announced that it has instituted a series of actions to expedite claim payments to businesses impacted by the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, including establishing an Immediate Action Claims Team. Darryl Willis, of the BP Claims Team said, "While we have paid thousands of business claims over the past 13 weeks, we recognize the frustration of small business owners who still have claims pending as we transition from the BP claims process to the Gulf Coast Claims Facility. We heard from many businesspeople who are suffering, so we acted. These changes are designed to cut through paperwork and expedite payments."

 

    About 2,600 business claims were processed over the past three days, using new guidelines developed to specifically address challenges faced by businesses. As a result, business claims totaling $9 million were approved Saturday, Sunday and Monday. The payments will be mailed to businesses this week. BP said the new procedures include paying claims from tourist businesses not directly linked to the natural resource but located in close proximity to the affected tourist resource, such as an oiled beach; simplifying documentation requirements; easing requirements for start-up businesses to prove a loss; and increasing the delegation of authority for adjusters.

 

    Access a release from BP on the delay (click here). Access a release on the new leak estimates (click here). Access a release from Rep. Markey (click here). Access a release on new payment procedures (click here). Access more information on BP activities from the BP response website (click here). Access the Restore the Gulf website for more information (click here). Access the Unified Command website which contains additional information (click here).

Day 105 BP Oil Spill: "Kill" Starts Tonight; Dispersant Concerns

Aug 1: At a mid-afternoon, Sunday press briefing, National Incident Commander for the Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill, Admiral Thad Allen indicated that the current pressure in the capping stack is 6,980 pounds. He said it continues to rise and give indications he said is what they expect with a well with integrity.

    He said they were in the process of laying the final casing run for the relief well and casing has now been placed at the bottom of the well bore. BP is circulating fluids just to make sure it's clean and ready to go. He said they are making preparations (now expected to begin this evening) to do the hydrostatic or "static kill" (from the top).  He said BP will be doing what is called an "injectivity test" to make sure that all the systems are operating properly. And there is a sequence of events that has to be followed before they can actually start pumping mud into the capping stack itself.

    He said the mud boats, the pumping boats and the Q4000 are online and all the systems have been tested and they are ready to go. He indicated cleanup operations continue to survey the entire area for tar balls and any type of oil. Additionally, they are continuing to replace boom that was damaged during the recent storm and pick up absorbent boom that has oil on it and replace that with clean boom and we'll continue to do that. Allen also indicated that the interception from the relief well, or so-called "bottom kill" would begin "probably five to seven days at a minimum after the static kill. . . most optimistic five to seven days after the static kill."

    On Saturday, July 31, Representative Ed Markey (D-MA), Chair of the House Environment and Energy Committee, Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, released a letter sent to National Incident Commander Thad Allen and documents revealing that the U.S. Coast Guard, tasked with limiting BP's use of toxic dispersants during the Gulf oil spill disaster, "repeatedly allowed the oil company to use excessive amounts of the chemical on the surface of the ocean." Markey indicates that these exemptions were granted on a daily basis despite a prior Federal directive that the company cease that tactic to combat the spill except in "rare" circumstances. The exemptions were also extended to Houma Unified Command, an oil spill response center in Houma, LA, which consists of U.S. Coast Guard and other personnel and reports to the Federal On Scene Coordinator.

    Markey indicates that, "In many cases, these applications appeared to be rubber stamped by the Coast Guard, including pre-approvals for weeks' worth of unlimited use, as well as retroactive approvals for surface applications of dispersants for which BP failed to obtain prior permission. These actions by the Coast Guard appear to have largely undercut a directive it co-signed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that said that dispersant chemicals be used on the ocean's surface only in 'rare cases,' and only with advance approval."

    Rep. Markey's letter was based on an analysis conducted by the Energy and Environment Subcommittee staff and showed that by comparing the amounts BP reported using to Congress to the amounts contained in the company's requests for exemptions from the ban on surface dispersants it submitted to the Coast Guard, that BP often exceeded its own requests, with little indication that it informed the Coast Guard or that the Coast Guard attempted to verify whether BP was shooting past the approved volumes.

    Markey said, "BP carpet bombed the ocean with these chemicals, and the Coast Guard allowed them to do it. Rep. Markey has authored numerous oversight letters to EPA, the Coast Guard and the FDA related to dispersant use, and has also introduced H.R.5608, legislation that would require more extensive testing of these chemicals before they are used. According to publicly disclosed amounts, more than 1.8 million gallons of toxic dispersants were used to break up the oil as it came out of the well, as well as after it reached the ocean surface. The validity of those numbers are now in question.

    Markey cites for example, in one approval request, one of BP's top executives, Doug Suttles, claimed that the maximum daily application of dispersants on the surface in the days preceding June 16, 2010 was 3,360 gallons. However, an examination of the dispersant totals BP provided to congressional staff in its daily "Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Response Updates" indicates that on June 11, BP said it applied 14,305 gallons of the chemical on the surface; on June 13, 36,000 gallons; and on June 14, 10,706 gallons. Markey said, "Either BP was lying to Congress or to the Coast Guard about how much dispersants they were shooting onto the ocean. These huge discrepancies also raise the question of whether the Coast Guard made sufficient efforts to verify the information BP provided in support of its requests, and whether it exercised appropriate oversight surrounding the use of these toxic chemicals."

    When asked about Markey's most recent letter, Thad Allen said, "I have had numerous discussions with Lisa Jackson and continue to have numerous discussions regarding dispersant use. This is something that we have worked together as leaders. It was determined back in late May that we needed to reduce the amount of dispersant but we also understand that sometimes there is no other way to attack than to use dispersant if it's not a situation where you can skim or do an in-situ burn or the weather conditions might preclude those two. We established a goal to reduce dispersant use by 75 percent. At the time the capping stack went on we reduced that to 72 percent. . . There is no disagreement between Lisa Jackson and I regarding what we want to do with dispersants. It really is an issue of just trying to make decisions day to day based on where the oil is at out there."

    Allen emphasized, "Let me clear it up. It's not a decision by BP on whether or not to use dispersants. It's a decision by the Federal on-scene coordinator whether to approve the incident commander's recommendation to use dispersants once they've been located by surveillance aircraft and has an opportunity to use them. It's a very disciplined doctrinal process on how this works. In the end it may be executed by BP through a contractor. But these are all decisions made by the Federal on-scene coordinator because that's where the responsibility rests." EPA released its 2nd phase dispersant testing results today (August 2) [See article below].

    Access an update briefing from the Unified Command (click here). Access the on-going response update from UC (click here). Access a release from Rep. Markey with extensive links to letters and documentation (click here). Access more information on BP activities from the BP response website (click here). Access the Restore the Gulf website for more information (click here). Access the Unified Command website which contains additional information (click here).

Senate Hearing On Gulf Natural Resource Damage Assessment

Jul 27: The Senate Environment and Pubic Works (EPW) Committee, Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife, Chaired by Senator Benjamin Cardin (D-MD), held a hearing entitled, "Assessing Natural Resource Damages Resulting from the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster." Witnesses included representatives from the: Southeast Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS); Assessment and Restoration Division, Office of Response and Restoration National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Smithsonian Institution; Exxon Valdez Trustee Council; Ocean Conservancy; National Aquarium Conservation Center; and Jefferson Parish Council.

 

    The hearing came two days prior to a report in Time magazine article entitled, "The BP Spill: Has the Damage Been Exaggerated?" Time's environmental reporter Michael Grunwald reports that "the damage seems to have been limited. The number of bird kills is far lower than those occurring after the Exxon Valdez spill, much of the surface oil has already begun to break down in the warm Gulf waters and the sensitive wetlands of Louisiana have largely escaped serious oiling. . ." Grunwald report comes as many reports from the Gulf are indicating that surface oil is actually becoming hard to find and discussions are underway about scaling back the response and recovery operations. Also today (July 30), NOAA reported that the Southern Florida, the Florida Keys and the East Coast are not likely to experience any effects from the remaining oil on the surface [See related article this issue].

 

    Grunwald, who said the reality of his reporting surprised him. He said it was not what he expected to find. He said, "The scientists I spoke with cite four basic reasons the initial eco-fears seem overblown. First, the Deepwater oil, unlike the black glop from the Valdez, is unusually light and degradable, which is why the slick in the Gulf is dissolving surprisingly rapidly now that the gusher has been capped. Second, the Gulf of Mexico, unlike Alaska's Prince William Sound, is very warm, which has helped bacteria break down the oil. Third, heavy flows of Mississippi River water have helped keep the oil away from the coast, where it can do much more damage. And finally, Mother Nature can be incredibly resilient. Van Heerden's assessment team showed me around Casse-tete Island in Timbalier Bay, where new shoots of Spartina grasses were sprouting in oiled marshes and new leaves were growing on the first black mangroves I've ever seen that were actually black. . ."

    In a statement on the hearing Senator Cardin said, "BP and its partners are responsible for repairing the environmental destruction they have caused, in addition to the economic devastation. But if we can't trust BP to tell us how much oil had been leaking into the Gulf of Mexico for three months, why should we trust them when it comes to assessing the damage they have done to our environment?. We can't afford to have the same incomplete approach to assessment when it comes to cleaning our waters and restoring our fishing stocks or bird populations or any of the other critical ecosystem restoration tasks that lie ahead.

    "If we are going to get the restoration work done right and if we are going to hold BP and its partners accountable for the true extent of the damage they've caused, then we need an accurate and complete assessment. The answers developed through a Natural Resource Damage Assessment determine the size of the bill presented to BP and its partners. They shape the scale and scope of the restoration work done to repair the damage. This is a legal process, conducted by federal and state agencies, to identify how natural resources have been injured, the best methods for restoring them, and the type and amount of restoration needed to compensate the public.

    "The first priority in this disaster has been to stop the flow of oil from well. We're heartened by recent progress and hope the well will soon be sealed for good. We must ensure our responders have the resources and organization they need to remove the oil that's in the water and to protect the Gulf coast. But even when the oil is removed to the extent possible, it will not be enough to fully restore water and wildlife or compensate the public for the loss of these natural resources.

    Senator Inhofe said, "I am working on a report on the Administration's response to the BP incident thus far.  To date we have discovered numerous bureaucratic delays to mitigation and containment caused by federal entities, and I look forward to a thoughtful discussion on some of those issues today. After the tragic Exxon Valdez spill, which occurred over 20 years ago now, Congress worked diligently to pass the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) to help address many of the legislative gaps and shortcomings highlighted by that tragedy.  The OPA was created with the important goals of strengthening federal authority over oil spill removal actions, creating a federal liability scheme for addressing oil spills, and addressing the issues of removal costs and damages.  OPA established a solid framework for response that was missing during the Exxon Valdez spill. This hearing can help us examine the process of natural resource damage assessment currently underway and hopefully give us the necessary guidance to improve any inadequacies. . ."

 

    The FWS explained that when an oil spill occurs, response efforts and the natural resource damage assessment and restoration (NRDAR) process under the Oil Pollution Act and its implementing regulations begin immediately. The U.S. Coast Guard leads response activities related to marine and coastal oil spills while the U.S. EPA is the lead for inland or hazardous waste spills. Other Federal and state agencies assist in the process. FWS said, "The scope and magnitude of natural resource injuries and other impacts resulting from the BP/Deepwater Horizon oil spill are extraordinary and still not fully known. We do not know at this time the extent of the injuries, but we believe that in all likelihood, they will affect fish, wildlife and plant resources in the Gulf, and possibly in other areas across the country, for years or more likely decades to come."

    Dr. Robert B. Spies, President, Applied Marine Sciences; Former Chief Scientist, Exxon Valdez Trustee Council testified, "It is critically important that we do all we can to ensure that the pre- and post-impact status of the Gulf ecosystems, including contaminant characterizations, is being assessed and documented as rigorously as possible in at least the most biologically productive and sensitive parts of the Gulf coast. These areas include the estuaries and especially the marshes and wetlands behind the barrier islands along the coast, which are the breeding and nursery grounds of myriad aquatic, intertidal, and avian species. Given the widespread and intensive application of chemical dispersants, the very large amounts of oil on the ocean's surface, and the presence of large quantities of subsurface oil, it also is critical to be sampling oceanic surface, deepwater and bottom communities as well."

    Access the hearing website and link to testimony, statements and a webcast (click here). Access the Time article (click here). Access a video interview with Time's Michael Grunwald and Bernard Charbonnet, former chairman of the New Orleans Port Authority on Hardball with Chris Matthews (click here). Access a release from Sen. Cardin (click here).

Dems, GOP & Interests Far Apart On TSCA Reform

Jul 29: The House Energy & Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, held a hearing on H.R. 5820, the "Toxic Chemicals Safety Act of 2010," The legislation, introduced last week by Representatives Bobby Rush (D-IL), Chairman of the Subcommittee, and Henry Waxman (R-CA), Chairman of the full committee [See WIMS 7/23/10]. The bill would amend the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 to ensure that the public and the environment are protected from risks resulting from chemical exposure.

 

    Witnesses testifying at the hearing included: Steve Owens, Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, U.S. EPA; Richard Denison, Ph.D., Senior Scientist, Environmental Defense Fund; Calvin M. Dooley, President and Chief Executive Officer, American Chemistry Council; Construction Specialties, Inc.; Connecticut Coalition for Environmental Justice; Beth Bosley, Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates, Inc.; and Ken Cook, President, Environmental Working Group.

 

    Chairman Waxman, in an opening statement said, "This statute has been fundamentally unchanged for 34 years. When it has been amended, it is with new titles that address discrete issues and bypass the unworkable structure of the current law. TSCA has become a patchwork, not a framework. . . The result is that the U.S. is not leading the global move towards safer chemicals. Americans' public health is not being protected. And American businesses are behind the curve when they should be leading the world in innovative and safe chemical development."

 

    He said, "This bill will address the failures of TSCA and set up a flexible, responsive, and workable system for protecting health and the environment while promoting American jobs and innovation. Under this legislation, all chemicals will be subject to a safety review, and the burden of proof will be rightly shifted from EPA to chemical manufacturers. Basic safety data will be generated and made public. Commercial users of chemicals will get the information they need to make better business decisions. New policies will encourage the development of safer chemicals and create the green jobs of tomorrow."

 

    Full Committee Ranking Member, Joe Barton (R-TX) said in a statement, "As drafted, this bill would have sweeping ramifications for our economy. By regulating all entities that make, process, sell, or dispose of anything with a chemical in it, including consumer goods, it directly impacts every business, every home and every person in America and shuffles every level of a nationwide manufacturing economy that was struggling even before the recession drove unemployment to nearly 10 percent.

 

    Rep. Barton list four reasons why "I am so troubled by this legislation. First, the testing requirements in the bill are so over the top that they remind me of the same mistakes made in the toy bill. . . Secondly, the current administrator of the EPA says the current program dealing with new chemicals is a model program. Yet, this bill overhauls that model program and makes it harder instead of easier to get newer, safer products to consumers. . . "Thirdly, the so-called safety standard is neither safe nor standard because it is so impractical. . . Finally, the pre-emption provisions in the bill are just irresponsible. It incentivizes states to enact conflicting laws, which will only undermine the national marketplace and make products more expensive for everybody."

 

    Rep. Barton concluded, "Mr. Chairman, I think this bill is unworkable. I am open to being convinced otherwise by our witnesses, but that's going to be a steep order. Americans don't want unsafe chemicals. They also don't want feckless regulations that kill their jobs and make life harder. The federal government has a blind spot for how ordinary Americans live and knack for making it tougher on them through well-intentioned bills like this one."

 

    EPA testified that, "The time has come to bring TSCA into the 21st Century and give the American people the protection from harmful chemicals they expect. . . TSCA fallen behind the industry it is intended to regulate, it has also proven an inadequate tool for providing the protection against chemical risks that the public rightfully expects. Mr. Chairman, the bill recently introduced by you and Chairman Waxman represents an important step toward providing greater protection for the health and safety of the American people, particularly our children. . .

 

    "This legislation would require that all chemicals be reviewed against a safety standard that appears to be based on sound science and reflects risk‐based criteria protective of human health and the environment. It would squarely place the burden on industry to provide data to demonstrate that chemicals are safe. It would give EPA significantly greater authority to require any data necessary to assess the safety of chemicals and to quickly take action on chemicals which cause harm. . ."

 

    The American Chemistry Council (ACC) said, "Despite some improvements, there are still significant fundamental issues in the legislation that undermine its workability. . . There are many aspects of HR5820 that we feel need to be addressed. Today, I'd like to highlight three: the safety standard, the regulation of new chemicals and the regulation of products imported into the United States. . ." The Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates, Inc said, "On balance, however, we are sorry to say that the bill before us today is still overreaching and unworkable. It would have a substantial negative impact on a strategic American industry that is already fighting recession and foreign competition. . ."

 

    (EDF) said that many of the problems with TSCA and U.S. chemical regulation "would be largely or entirely ameliorated by adoption of the legislation. . . H.R. 5820, the Toxic Chemicals Safety Act of 2010.  It provides the framework for a comprehensive, systematic solution to a set of problems that until now have been addressed, if at all, through reactive, piecemeal actions. . .  In our view, H.R. 5820 strikes the right balance, by reforming TSCA first and foremost to fully protect human health and the environment (including the most vulnerable among us) . . ."

 

    Environmental Working Group (EWG) said, "H.R.5820, the Toxic Chemicals Safety Act of 2010, is essential to fixing our broken toxic chemicals policy." Will recommending further strengthening measures, EWG said, "We support H.R. 5820 and the steps Chairmen Rush and Waxman have taken to ensure a strong safety standard, mandate stronger EPA authority to put the burden on industry to show a chemical is safe before it goes on the market promote prioritization, require a minimum data set and address abuses of confidential business information claims."

 

    Access the hearing website for links to opening statements, testimony, background and a webcast (click here). Access the statement from Rep. Barton (click here). Access a release from Rush-Waxman and link to the full text, a summary and a section-by-section summary (click here). Access additional information and background (click here). Access legislative details for H.R. 5820 (click here).

Rhetoric Heats Up On Scaled-Back Senate Energy Bill

Jul 28: Yesterday (July 27), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), announced the Democrats' scaled back energy bill [See WIMS 7/26/10] -- The Clean Energy Jobs and Oil Accountability Act. Senator Reid and Senator John Kerry both indicated last week that they did not have any Republican votes to pass a more comprehensive energy and climate bill including the anticipated cap-and-trade program [See WIMS 7/23/10]. As previously announced, Senator Reid's bill would, ". . .ensure that BP pays to clean up its mess. Second, it would invest in Home Star, a bipartisan energy efficiency program that lowers consumers' energy costs and create jobs. Third, it would protect the environment by investing in the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Fourth, it would reduce our dependence on oil by making investments in vehicles that run on electricity and natural gas. Finally, it would increase the amount that oil companies are required to pay into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund."

 

    Now it appears that there will continue to be a major political battle between Republican's and Democrats over the provisions of the bill -- particularly those dealing with the BP oil spill. U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following statement today (July 28) regarding Senate consideration of what he called "a responsible approach to addressing the oil spill." Senator McConnell said, "It's now perfectly obvious that Democrats are doing their best to keep us from passing a serious energy bill before the August recess. Later today, we expect the Majority Leader to offer the Democrat alternative to the oil spill response bill that Republicans proposed last week. This is not a serious exercise.

    "All indications are that they don't intend to have a real debate about one of the most important issues we face. Anybody who's been around here for any period of time knows energy bills take at least a couple of weeks. So it doesn't appear that there's either time or willingness on the other side to debate this critical issue. We would have liked to have had a debate on ideas we've already offered. Our energy bill would give the President the ability to raise the liability caps on economic damages done by companies like BP -- without driving small independent oil producers out of business. It would lift the administration's job-killing moratorium on off-shore drilling as soon as new safety standards are met -- a moratorium that one senior Gulf State Democrat has said `Could cost more jobs than the oil spill itself.'

    "I mean, how can you have a serious energy debate without addressing a problem that a leading Gulf State Democrat says is costing more jobs than the spill itself? Our bill has a true bipartisan commission -- with subpoena power -- to investigate the oil spill, rather than the President's anti-drilling commission. Importantly, it also takes good ideas from Democrats, including Senator Bingaman's idea for much needed reform at MMS.  Surely we can all agree that this administration's oversight at MMS is in need of major reform. Our bill includes revenue sharing for coastal states that allow offshore drilling to help them prepare for and deal with disasters like the one we have right now in the Gulf.

    "So we've got our own ideas. We've got some of their ideas. Our bill doesn't kill jobs. It doesn't put a moratorium on production.  We're not interested in yet another debate about a Democrat bill in which the prerequisite is killing more jobs. Our bill would address this crisis at hand. Their bill would use the crisis to stifle business and kill jobs in a region that's in desperate need of jobs.  It was my hope that we could have a real debate about energy. Clearly, the Majority isn't interested in that debate." 

    In response to the Republicans, Jim Manley, spokesman for Senator Reid, released a statement saying, "Republicans want taxpayers to foot the bill for BP's disaster and allow BP to use endless legal battles to run out the clock on those whose livelihoods they destroyed -- just like Exxon did to victims of the Valdez spill. Republicans should come to their senses and remember that they represent the American people, not BP. Our responsibility is to make sure the Americans affected by this disaster are made whole -- not to protect BP's profits.
 
    "You would have to be incredibly out of touch to think we should bail out BP for the disaster they caused in the Gulf, yet that is exactly what Senate Republicans are proposing. Besides the fact that the Republican plan does nothing to create jobs, their proposal would essentially trust BP to pay back the millions of Americans whose livelihoods they've ruined. This defies common sense. These hard-working people just had the rug pulled out from under them, and Democrats believe they should not be forced to fight BP's army of corporate lawyers for years to come just to get the compensation they deserve."

 

    Today, Senate Majority Leader Reid and Senators Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Bob Menendez (D-NJ) joined Larry Laseter of the Home Star Coalition and Marilyn Heiman of Pew Environment Group at a press conference to discuss the Clean Energy Jobs and Oil Accountability Act. Senator Reid said, "There are many ways to end our addiction to oil and this bill is one of them. This bill creates jobs that can never be outsourced by strengthening companies that make energy efficiency products. It also saves consumers money -- about $1 billion a year over the next 10 years -- by cutting energy costs and giving them incentives to make their homes more energy efficient. And it changes the law to make it crystal clear that polluters -- not the taxpayers -- are going to be held responsible for cleaning up the Gulf."

 

    In the meantime, a coalition including may major environmental groups, issued a statement saying, "As we witness the worst industry-caused environmental catastrophe in our history, the deadliest coal mining disaster in 40 years, and sweat through the hottest first 6 months of any year on record, there's never been a more urgent time to move forward with a clean energy and climate policy. There's no doubt that big oil, big coal, their army of lobbyists and their partners in Congress are cheering the obstruction that blocked Senate action on clean energy and climate legislation. Their cheers are cheers for China taking the lead in clean energy jobs, the Middle East getting more of our money, and America getting more
pollution and fewer jobs.

    "At every opportunity, a minority of Senators who are in the pocket of America's largest polluters in the coal and oil industries chose obstruction over working together to solve America's energy and national security challenges. As a result of their actions, the big polluters will continue to reap record profits at the expense of Americans. As we look forward, one thing is clear: the Senate's job is not done. They must use every opportunity available to address clean energy and climate reform by working to limit carbon pollution and invest in new clean energy sources that are made in America, including protecting the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to crack down on polluters."

    Some of the major groups endorsing the statement included: 1Sky, Center for American Progress Action Fund, Clean Water Action, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, Environment America, Environmental Defense Fund, League of Conservation Voters, National Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, Union of Concerned Scientists, US Climate Action Network, and many, many more regional, state and local groups.

    The American Petroleum Institute President and CEO Jack Gerard issued a statement saying the Democrat's bill would "cost American jobs, slow economic growth and will place our energy security at risk." He said, "While full details of the Senate bill are not yet available, the liability provision sticks out as a jobs killer. Requiring an unattainable level of insurance coverage for domestic energy producers on the Outer Continental Shelf will force the vast majority of American companies out of U.S. waters, according to insurers. This would cut domestic production, kill American jobs, slow economic growth and cost billions in federal oil and natural gas revenues.

    "Even those that could self insure operations would see costs skyrocket, driving investments out of the United States, further hurting our economy, employment and energy security, according to a recent analysis by Wood Mackenzie. While we are glad that the bill recognizes the need to analyze the economic repercussions of the current deepwater moratorium, a better tack would have been to repeal it. Majority Leader Reid suggests his bill will create 150,000 new jobs, but our analysis indicates that failing to develop in the deepwater of the Gulf of Mexico will cost more than that -- 175,000 jobs, the majority of them in already hard-hit Gulf Coast communities. Clearly, that is not a win for Americans."

    Access Senator Reid's announcement of the Democratic bill and link to a 24-page summary (click here). Access the statement from Senator McConnell (click here). Access Sen. Reid's response to Republicans (click here). Access a release from Senate Democrats including a list of some of the supporters of the bill (click here). Access the statement from the environmental coalition with a complete list of signers (click here). Access the API statement (click here).

Day 99 BP Oil Spill: Hayward Out; Dudley In; $32.2 Bln Cleanup

Jul 27: As recovery, "killing" and cleanup operations were beginning to resume following the halt of operation due to tropical storm Bonnie, the news of resigning BP executive Tony Hayward and BP's reporting of its 2nd quarter financial situation dominated the Gulf oil spill news. As expected, BP announced that, by mutual agreement with the BP board, Tony Hayward is to step down as group chief executive with effect from October 1, 2010. He will be succeeded as of that date by fellow executive director Robert Dudley.

 

    BP chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg said, "The BP board is deeply saddened to lose a CEO whose success over some three years in driving the performance of the company was so widely and deservedly admired. The tragedy of the Macondo well explosion and subsequent environmental damage has been a watershed incident. BP remains a strong business with fine assets, excellent people and a vital role to play in meeting the world's energy needs. But it will be a different company going forward, requiring fresh leadership supported by robust governance and a very engaged board."

    Svanberg continued saying, "We are highly fortunate to have a successor of the caliber of Bob Dudley who has spent his working life in the oil industry both in the US and overseas and has proved himself a robust operator in the toughest circumstances." Bob Dudley (54) is a main board director of BP and currently runs the recently-established unit responsible for clean-up operations and compensation programs in the Gulf of Mexico. He joined BP from Amoco after the merger of the two companies in 1998. He was president and CEO of BP's Russian joint venture, TNK-BP, until 2008. 

    Dudley said, "I am honored to be given the job of rebuilding BP's strengths and reputation but sad at the circumstances. I have the greatest admiration for Tony, both for the job he has done since he became CEO in 2007 and for his unremitting dedication to dealing with the Gulf of Mexico disaster. I do not underestimate the nature of the task ahead, but the company is financially robust with an enviable portfolio of assets and professional teams that are among the best in the industry. I believe this combination - allied to clear, strategic direction - will put BP on the road to recovery."

 

    On his appointment, Dudley will be based in London and will hand over his present duties in the US to Lamar McKay, chairman and president of BP America. Dudley said, "In this change of roles, I particularly want the people of the Gulf Coast to know that my commitment to remediation and restitution in the region is not lessened. I gave a promise to make it right and I will keep that promise."

    Hayward will remain on the BP board until November 30, 2010. BP also plans to nominate him as a non-executive director of TNK-BP. BP said that under the terms of his contract Hayward would receive a year's salary in lieu of notice, amounting to £1.045 million ($1.6157 million).

 

    BP also announced that it will tell analysts today that it plans to sell assets for up to $30 billion over the next 18 months, primarily in the upstream business, and selected on the basis that they are worth more to other companies than to BP. This portfolio high grading will leave the company with a smaller but higher quality Exploration & Production business. Meanwhile BP continues to access new business opportunities, with new agreements in Azerbaijan, Egypt, China and Indonesia announced since the end of the first quarter.

 

    The company said it was taking a prudent approach to managing the balance sheet and its financial liquidity, in order to ensure that BP has the flexibility to meet all of its future financial obligations. As a result it plans to reduce its net debt level down to a range of $10-$15 billion within the next 18 months, compared to net debt of $23 billion at the end of June. BP said group capital spending for 2010 and 2011 will be about $18 billion a year, in line with previous forecasts. In reporting second quarter results, BP revealed that it is taking a charge of $32.2 billion to reflect the impact of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, including costs to date of $2.9 billion for the response and a charge of $29.3 billion for future costs, including the funding of the $20 billion escrow fund.  The company revealed the charge as it announced a headline replacement cost loss for the quarter of $17 billion.

 

    Access a lengthy release on Haywood and Dudley (click here). Access a release with details on the 2nd Quarter financials (click here). Access more details on the 2Q financials (click here). Access more information on BP activities from the BP response website (click here). Access the Restore the Gulf website for more information (click here). Access the Unified Command website which contains additional information (click here).

Day 98 BP Oil Spill: Storm Fizzles; Operations Resume; Hayward Out?

Jun 26: On July 23, with the guidance and approval of the National Incident Commander (NIC) and the leadership and direction of the Federal government, relief well activities at the MC252 well site were temporarily suspended because of potentially adverse weather associated with Tropical Storm Bonnie. Following the passing of the weather system, the DDIII drilling rig returned to the relief well site on July 24 and is taking steps necessary to reconnect with the well and resume drilling operations. These steps are expected to take a number of days. The DDII drilling rig is moving back into position, and will take steps necessary to reconnect to the second relief well. However, work on the second relief well has been suspended so as not to interfere with the first.

 

    On Saturday evening (July 24) Admiral Thad Allen, National Incident Commander for the Deepwater Horizon BP oil spill and NOAA Administrator Dr. Jane Lubchenco reported on the diminishing impacts from the weather conditions in the Gulf and said, "We do not expect any significant storm surge along the coast. Because Bonnie has weakened, all tropical storm warnings along the Northern Gulf Coast have been discontinued. We expect that Bonnie should help dissipate and weather the oil that's at the surface. It will spread the surface slick out and thereby lower oil concentrations. It's expected to break tar patches and tar mass into smaller tar balls which means faster weathering and faster natural biodegradation. It will also cause more natural dispersion, again lowering the concentration of oil in the water and making it more available to the natural bacteria that are in the water that do this natural biodegradation."

 

    On Sunday evening (July 25), Allen reported that there had been a series of meetings in Houston earlier in the day with the science team and representatives of BP with extensive discussion about the efforts to remobilize assets at the source and make preparations for installing the casing and moving on with the "static kill" (from the top) and the "bottom kill" (from the interceptor relief well). Apparently the current strategy is to do the static kill and then proceed with the well intercept. Simultaenously, the plan involves working toward a second vertical riser to recover more oil should a backup be necessary.

 

    Allen explained, "The time line is roughly over the next week. We'll return the Development Driller III, run the riser pipe, latch in [connecting the riser pipe to the lower marine riser package], pull that undersea containment device, which they call a packer. They're going to need to circulate conditioning fluids through that pipe line to make sure it's ready what they call conditioning a hole and then some time in the next week they'll be in a position to be able to run that (nine and sent to eight inch) liner which is the critical path right now to moving -- to move ahead. Once that liner is laid, they're going to put cement in and around it. And at that point the two vessels that were supporting the liner operation, one call the Blue Dolphin, the other is called the Center Line will redeploy and hook up with the Q4000. This is sometime -- this will be sometime during the week of 1 August. And they will set up for that to be able to inject the static kill and during that week of August subject to the (inaudible) I'm sorry the containment pipe being installed and cemented in then we will go to the static kill with the Q4000. So generally the next week will be prep, making sure everything is ready to go and getting the liner run and then the week of the first of August is when we will attempt to do the static kill and then move back and finish the bottom kill."

 

    Also, on July 26, BP issued a brief release stating, "BP notes the press speculation over the weekend regarding potential changes to management and the charge for the costs of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. BP confirms that no final decision has been made on these matters. A Board meeting is being held on Monday evening ahead of the announcement of the second quarter results on 27th July. Any decisions will be announced as appropriate." The speculation is that BP's Chief Executive Tony Hayward will be replaced by Bob Dudley who recently took over the job as BP's point man for the Gulf of Mexico cleanup job. BP current share price is approaching $39, and the market value is $121 billion.

 

    Access the late Sunday briefing of Allen for more details on the upcoming strategy (click here). Access a July 25 summary of operations (click here). Access the Restore the Gulf website for more information (click here). Access the Unified Command website which contains additional information (click here). Access more information on BP activities from the BP response website (click here).

Sen. Dems Back Off On Comprehensive Energy-Climate Bill

Sen. Dems Back Off On Comprehensive Energy-Climate Bill - Jul 22: At a news conference following a Senate Democratic caucus meeting, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senator John Kerry (D-MA) admitted that Democrats cannot get even one Republican to work with them on crafting a comprehensive energy and climate bill; and thus, they are essentially scrapping plans for an attempt to pass comprehensive legislation before the August recess. Senator Kerry attempted to put a positive spin on the situation and indicated there was still hope and that the White House and the Majority Leader were still leaving the door open for a possible last minute compromise.

 

    As an alternative, Majority Leader Reid said in the next few days he will introduce a four part bill that will cover the following: it will hold BP accountable for the Gulf oil spill; it will decrease dependence on foreign oil by encouraging natural gas development and big rig truck conversion to natural gas (i.e. the Pickens Plan, see link below); it will legislate the "Home Star" energy efficiency program; and he said it would put money back into the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

 

    Senator Kerry said, ". . . we've always known from day one, that in order to pass comprehensive energy/climate legislation, you've got to reach 60 votes, and to reach those 60 votes, you've got have some Republicans. And as we stand here today, we do not have one Republican. I think that it's possible to get there. Even this morning, Senator Lieberman and I had a meeting with one Republican who has indicated a willingness to begin working towards something.  Harry Reid, today, is committed to giving us that opportunity, that open door over the next weeks, days, months, whatever it takes to find those 60 votes.

    "The work will continue every single day. In the meantime, as Senator Reid has just said, we have an obligation to the American people, we have an obligation to our country. And that is to respond to the oil spill in the Gulf.  And that's why Senator Reid is going to bring this admittedly narrow, limited bill to the floor because he's determined to do what we can in the timeframe that we have before the August break that will address some of our energy independence and some of the oil spill issues.

    "Now let me be crystal clear. As Senator Reid said, this legislation that he has proposed does not replace climate legislation. It does not replace comprehensive energy legislation. Now President Obama called me before this meeting and said point blank that he is committed to working in these next days at a more intensive pace together with Carol Browner and other members of the administration to help bring together the ability to find sixty votes for that comprehensive legislation. And the leader is committed to getting that comprehensive legislation to the floor as soon as possible, whenever that might turn out to be. . ."

    The Alliance for Climate Protection (ACP), founded by former Vice President Al Gore issued a statement saying, "It is wrong that hundreds of millions of lobbying and advertising dollars from big oil and dirty coal, along with obstruction by the Republican leadership in the Senate, have blocked debate and action on comprehensive climate and energy legislation. These policies will create millions of jobs, rebuild our economy, strengthen our national security and help solve the climate crisis. This opposition to action is in sharp contrast to the overwhelming support of the American people for a clean energy economy. Now President Obama and the U.S. Congress must recommit to utilizing every opportunity to reduce carbon pollution, invest in clean energy sources that are made in America, and support federal efforts to protect the health and welfare of the American people."

    The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) issued a statement saying, "While strong climate legislation is clearly needed, the proposals under consideration in the Senate (i.e. Senators Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act) fell well-short of what is needed to stop global warming. We are far better served by a science-based approach under the existing Clean Air Act, than by a bill that continues to subsidize and pander to the oil and coal industries and other polluters. Any bill truly aimed at dealing with global warming must build upon -- not gut -- our existing foundation of environmental protections. And, importantly, it must achieve the greenhouse pollution reductions necessary to avert dangerous climate disruption. That means reducing carbon dioxide concentrations that currently stand at 392 parts per million to below 350 parts per million. Nothing less will do."

    The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) issued a statement saying, "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid today delivered very bad news to the American people. Continuing obstructionism by the Senate Republican leadership, joined by a handful of Democratic senators, is still blocking the way forward on essential clean energy and climate legislation. It is time for all of us to make our voices heard. Over the recess we must deliver a message to senators: 'Do your job!  We face a triple threat of a stagnant economy, ballooning energy insecurity, and a climate that is coming apart. Don't fail us. Don't fail our children. Don't come home again without having tackled these real and present dangers.'"

 

    The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) issued a statement saying, ". . .The onus isn't only on the Senate. President Obama needs to step up his administration's efforts to make his campaign promise to address climate change a reality. We need the White House to aggressively push for real energy reform. Time is running out. We only have five and half weeks left in this session, and the oil and coal industries are doing what they can to delay legislation and weaken it. We can no longer afford to send a billion dollars a day overseas for imported oil. We can't afford more dirty air, dangerous mining accidents, and oil spilling into our waters. It's long past time for the Senate to protect our future. It should not let this opportunity slip away."

 

        Outspoken climate change critic, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works issued a statement saying, "I am pleased that Sen. Reid decided against resurrecting cap-and-trade legislation before the August recess, owing to the fact that several members of his own party have rightly indicated their opposition to it. Instead, he and other cap-and-trade supporters have signaled a desire to possibly consider such legislation when Congress returns in September. I very much look forward to having yet another debate in the Senate on jobs, consumers, the economy, and the serious damage that a national energy tax would inflict on all three." 

 

    Access Senator Kerry's transcript of the news conference (click here). Access a video of excerpts from the news conference (click here). Access the ACP statement (click here). Access the CBD statement (click here). Access a release from UCS (click here). Access a release from Senator Inhofe (click here). Access a posting from the Pickens Plan which includes links to major media coverage of the Senate Dem's announcement (click here).

NAS Report Recommends Comprehensive GHG Management System

Jul 22: A report by the National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council (NRC) indicates that a comprehensive national response to climate change should be informed by reliable data coordinated through climate services and a greenhouse gas (GHG) monitoring and management system to provide timely information tailored to decision makers at all levels. The report -- Informing an Effective Response to Climate Change -- recommends several mechanisms for improving communication about climate science and responses and calls for a systematic framework for making and evaluating decisions about how to effectively manage the risks posed by climate change. 

 

    Diana Liverman, co-chair of the panel that wrote the report, co-director of the Institute of Environment at the University of Arizona, Tucson, and a senior research fellow at Oxford University said, "Global climate change is a long-term challenge that will require all of us to make many decisions about how to respond. To make choices that are based on the best available science, government agencies, the private sector, and individuals need clear, accessible information about what is happening to the climate and to emissions. We also need information on the implications of different options -- especially to assess whether policies are effective." The report is part of a congressionally requested suite of studies known as America's Climate Choices, which also includes three other recently released reports.  An overarching report to be released later this year will build on all four reports and other materials to offer a scientific framework for shaping the policy choices underlying the nation's efforts to confront climate change. 

 

    The report indicates that the Federal government needs to establish information and reporting systems -- such as climate services and a greenhouse-gas accounting system -- that provide a range of information on climate change and variability, observed changes and causes, potential impacts, and strategies for limiting emissions or adapting to impacts. Although the report does not specify a particular agency to lead Federal efforts, it emphasizes the importance of coordination across the Federal government and with state, local and private sector decision makers. Leadership might come through executive orders, existing units such as the Office of Science and Technology Policy, an expanded U.S. Global Climate Change Research Program, or new entities.

 

    The report says the new national system for providing climate services should inform decision makers and assist them in managing climate-related risks. It would coordinate data among several agencies and incorporate regional expertise. Information should be timely, authoritative, and based on rigorous natural and social science research and tailored to government- and private-sector users at the national, regional, and local levels, the report says. For example, agricultural producers trying to decide which crops to grow need timely seasonal forecasts, data on likely outbreaks of diseases or pests, and advice about long-term strategies for adapting to climate impacts; and forest and park managers need information to control fires and plan for longer-term ecosystem management.

 

    The report identifies several key functions that should be included in climate services, such as enhanced observations and vulnerability analyses on a regional scale, sustained interaction with stakeholders and research to understand their needs, an international information component that provides data on global climate observations and impacts, and a central accessible web portal that encourages sharing of information. These functions might be overlooked if the services are based only on existing Federal capabilities.

 

    The proposed comprehensive GHG management system for monitoring, reporting, and verifying emissions should include a unified accounting protocol and a registry to track emissions at a detailed level. Monitoring is essential for developing effective emissions policies and verifying claims that emissions have been reduced, the report says. Such a system could build on the existing expertise of agencies such as the U.S. EPA and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The systems should also be designed to evaluate and assess state and local government and private-sector responses, many of which already are occurring.  For example, more than half of Americans live in states, counties, and cities that have enacted a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and many private companies are taking significant steps to reduce their carbon footprints.  Federal policies should not unnecessarily supersede measures already being taken regionally or locally.

 

    According to the report, to effectively manage the serious risks posed by climate change, decision makers need to account for many uncertainties about the severity of impacts and options for responding to them and be able to modify their choices based on new information and experience. Therefore, decision makers in the public and private sectors need to implement an iterative risk management strategy that adapts to new information, conditions, or technologies that could affect climate change policies. To that end, the government could also review and revise programs such as Federal crop and flood insurance in the light of the risks of climate change. The study panel endorsed steps already taken by Federal financial and insurance regulators such as the Securities and Exchange Commission to require disclosure requirements for climate change risks.

 

    The report says that although public beliefs and attitudes about climate often shift from year to year, recent opinion polls indicate that many Americans are concerned about climate change and want more information about the causes, consequences, and potential solutions. The report identifies several barriers to communication about climate change and recommends some strategies for overcoming them, such as urging Federal agencies to support training for researchers on how to communicate complex climate change information and uncertainties to different audiences. In addition, a national task force of educators, government leaders, policymakers, and business executives should be established to improve climate change communication and education.

 

    Consumers can play an important role in responding to climate change by choosing to reduce their energy use and selecting more energy-efficient products with lower emissions. The Federal government should review and promote credible product standards and labels for consumers that provide information about energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions. The government should also consider establishing an advisory service on these issues targeted at the public and small businesses.

 

    Access a release from NAS (click here). Access the complete report and an executive summary (click here). Access the America's Climate Choices Project website for links to other reports in the series (click here).

Day 93 BP Oil Spill: More Monitoring; Killing Well Nears

Jul 21: On July 20, at approximately 3:30 PM, the National Incident Commander Thad Allen reported that the government had just authorized BP another 24 hour period for the oil integrity test to continue.  He said the Unified Command (UC) continue to be pleased with the progress as far as monitoring responsiveness to anomalies that are detected. He said the scientific teams from the U.S. Government and BP and other industry experts continue to talk about the pressure difference in the well and the sources for that. The current pressure (yesterday) is 6,834 pounds per square inch and continues to slowly increase between one and two pounds per hour. BP reported the pressure at 6844 psi at 10 AM today (July 21).

 

    He said the team is looking for all indicators of anomalies and are "working very, very hard to make sure that we don't see any indicators that there would be any compromise to the integrity of the well head." He said they are  taking temperature readings which are stable at about 40 degrees Fahrenheit. Any temperature fluctuation will be an indication of movement of products through the well bore that might be something to be concerned about. They continue to collect acoustic, sonar and seismic data and continue to look for anomalies such as gas bubbles. 

 

    There are some minor leaks that are around the blowout preventer and the, and the stacking cap itself.  He said they don't think those are consequential to the response but they are tracking them. They are the source of some hydrates in and around the material. The next 24 to 48 hours they will continue to analyze the seismic data.  The NOAA Vessel, Pices is in place and NOAA will continue to do acoustic monitoring. 

 

    While the monitoring is taking place the largest, most integrated response to the surface oil continues. A total of 750 skimming vessels are now involved in the operation.  We will continue to do that. He said, "We are making great progress with the oil that was released while we were changing out the capping stacks." He reported that the weather has been fairly good holding the oil near or just south of the well head. The winds have started to change and the next 24 to 48 hours, there could be some oil moving to the west to northwest back towards the Mississippi Sound, the Chandelier Breton Sounds and the southeast coast of Louisiana. 

 

    Media reports on July 21, indicate that there is some concern over a developing tropical depression that could move into the area over the weekend. Efforts to permanently close the well either through the interceptor wells and/or a "static kill" which was announced yesterday are likely within the next two weeks. If the developing storm worsens, activity could be delayed. Also, the "seepage" report of couple of days ago, appears to be coming from an older, unrelated well.

 

    In a separate report from BP, the company indicated that it has entered into several agreements to sell "upstream" assets in the United States, Canada and Egypt to Apache Corporation. The deals, together worth a total of $7 billion, comprise BP's Permian Basin assets in Texas and south-east New Mexico, US; its Western Canadian upstream gas assets; and the Western Desert business concessions and East Badr El-din exploration concession in Egypt. BP said the decision to make the divestments follows the announcement made by BP last month that it was increasing its target for divestments to $10 billion. The proceeds of the sales will be used by BP to increase the cash available to the group.

 

    BP Chairman, Carl-Henric Svanberg said, "Over the last two months the Board has considered BP's options for generating the cash necessary to meet the obligations likely to arise from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. BP has an extremely strong asset base which is diversified geographically as well as by asset class. The Board believes that there are opportunities to divest assets which are strategically more valuable to other parties than they are to BP. Today's announcement is the first such transaction and meets the value and strategic criteria of both parties." BP's stock price is holding between $36-37 per share and the current market value is $113 billion.

 

    Access the transcript of the July 20 UC briefing (click here). Access the Restore the Gulf website for more information (click here). Access the Unified Command website which contains additional information (click here). Access a release on the divestments with more details on each transaction (click here). Access more information on BP activities from the BP response website (click here).