Patterico's Pontifications

5/2/2010

Did the Obama Administration Bungle the Oil Spill?

Filed under: Environment,Obama — DRJ @ 7:57 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

“Video from NOAA site shows officials knew quickly of potential for massive oil flow.
*** [Yet it] took President Obama 12 days to visit the disaster area today. Yesterday, The New York Times reported that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was not aware the Defense Department had equipment for dealing with oil slicks.”

Alabama Press Register via Doug Ross:

“Federal officials should have started burning oil off the surface of the Gulf last week, almost as soon as the spill happened, said the former oil spill response coordinator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Ron Gouget, who also managed Louisiana’s oil response team for a time, said federal officials missed a narrow window of opportunity to gain control of the spill by burning last week, before the spill spread hundreds of miles across the Gulf, and before winds began blowing toward shore.

He also said the heavy use of dispersants, which cause oil to sink, has likely knocked so much oil into the water column that portions of the Gulf may be on the threshold of becoming toxic to marine life.”

The Gouget article appeared April 29, 2010, in a regional Alabama newspaper. Bloggers and the Washington Examiner found it. Where is the rest of the media?

— DRJ

Comments (27)

27 Responses to “Did the Obama Administration Bungle the Oil Spill?”

“Where is the rest of the media?”

You are kidding, right?
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 5/2/2010 @ 9:01 pm
Barcky cared more about distorting his political opponents in a speech at Michigan’s graduation, and his little love-fest with the MSM last night, than he did about the people of the Gulf.

Imagine how the MSM would have treated Buuuuuuuuussssssssshhhhhhhhh. Actually, you do not have to imagine. We know damn good and well how extensive their mendoucheous behavior was.
JD (c1a2b8) — 5/2/2010 @ 9:18 pm
A cynic would say this is actually a doubleplusgood for the President.

The adoring press gets to show just how presidential and concerned he is about the problem. He’s got a whole wad of bureaucrats to throw under the bus, plus a great, big corporation with “British” in its name to blame.

And now, he doesn’t have to allow any more offshore oil drilling to benefit the bloated coffers of the evil oil companies. So, he gets the eco-folk off his back.

And even better, it distracts everyone from the economy and unemployment and sets up a clear playing field for the elections, because, unfortunately, this seems to be a slow-motion disaster.

The bestest yet, though, is he doesn’t get to take the blame.

Cynic hat off: And he really shouldn’t take the blame.

This may turn out to be a truly significant ecological disaster affecting thousands of livelihoods and it needs to be taken seriously.

The President can’t make it better, but he does have a leadership role in preventing it from being worse.

I’m not going to prematurely vilify Obama in this case because I don’t want to tread the same disgusting road the left took against Bush after Katrina.

Political points are fun and games. Life is a bit tougher.
Ag80 (f67beb) — 5/2/2010 @ 9:44 pm
I’m hopeful the containment plan works long enough to let them cap the well or drill a relief well. If so, this may end in a week or two.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 5/2/2010 @ 9:47 pm
Where is the rest of the media?

– DRJ

…they are in deep discussions with Rahm and Axelrod on how best to spin this to be:

All BP’s fault….

and….

proof that we should stop drilling for oil….

….it will take the press a few days to get their talking points together on how to deflect any blame toward Obama and make it about the fat cat oil companies and the eeeeeeeeeeevil Republicans…

…..the liberals have already given Obama a pass on:

….. waging war (using rendition,indefinite detention,NSA wiretapping,bombing civilians,enhanced interrogation,and the Patriot Act)

…being neck deep in corruption and money from Wall St. and the many lobbyist Obama takes care of…

……the multitude of broken promises like pay-as-you-go,no taxes on the middle class,Health Care bill is deficit neutral, premiums won’t rise,signing statements,transparency….

….they might as well give him a pass on watching one of the worst environmental disasters to hit this country from his vacation spot in Asheville.

…..9 days to get Napolitano down to the gulf and we are going to hear “the system worked” from Obama and his activists friends in the media.
Baxter Greene (af5030) — 5/2/2010 @ 10:16 pm
BP is not an American oil company. That’s a key to why the Administration didn’t focus on the spill as quickly as possible, because from a political standpoint, they didn’t see the same sort of gain to be had if, instead of the BP Deepwater Horizon rig that blew up, it had been the ExxonMobil Deepwater Horizon rig blowing apart in the Gulf.

While there are lots of folks on the left who hate all oil companies (well, maybe not Citgo as long as Hugo’s owning it), there are just certain firms in each sector that set the left off to salivating at the any chance to demonize. ExxonMobil or Halliburton in the oil industry; Walmart or McDonald’s in other sectors. Attacking BP would have meant going after non-American citizens at the top levels of the company and possibly entwined the White House into a new kerfuffle with the British government (not that Obama has had any problems dissing the Brits, but he, Axelrod and Rahm probably didn’t want to completely kill off Labour’s chances in the upcoming elections).

So the target wasn’t low-hanging fruit they could score easy political points off off — ‘evil’ Gordon Brown and his oil business cronies just doesn’t get the same reaction as ‘evil’ Bush and Cheney and their oilfield pals — and as a result, the White House didn’t see the need right off the bat to make it a major priority.
John (d4490d) — 5/2/2010 @ 11:08 pm
I think Halliburton was a subcontractor on this well and I’m sure everyone involved will be sued. But, for now, it looks like the companies at the most financial risk are BP, Transocean, and Cameron.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 5/2/2010 @ 11:16 pm
Plus, I suspect Obama was hopeful the spill would be resolved without major problems. After all, he had just authorized offshore drilling so he couldn’t easily change sides and claim offshore drilling is bad or dangerous. It would make people question his judgment and he can’t afford that since he won the election based on his supposed superior judgment.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 5/2/2010 @ 11:20 pm
This report does not seem to corroborate Napolitano’s statement that they did not start a burn off sooner because of the weather:

This is what Napolitano said May 2:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2765f59e-5625-11df-b835-00144feab49a.html

The administration has faced criticism that a “controlled burn” of the spill did not begin until four days after a new leak was discovered. Ms Napolitano, who along with other US officials took to the airwaves on Sunday to discuss the leak, said early efforts to contain the spill had been impeded by weather conditions.
“Mother Nature has not exactly been friendly,” she said on ABC News.

This report states that they were focused on finding survivors and put the containment plans second:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63K4I920100421

A safety zone with a radius of five nautical miles around the crippled vessel was declared to keep traffic in the area at a minimum, but cleanup efforts had not yet been initiated, the spokeswoman said.
“There is a slick, but right now we’re focused on search and rescue,” she said.

..there are other statements to the effect that the weather was bad during the “weekend” of the spill that prevented them from burning….but that is clearly 3-4 days after the spill that started on Tues. April 20th.

…of course rescue efforts have priority…but with the massive resources available….rescue could have proceeded along with containment.

…it is obvious by the escalation of manpower and resources that are there, and headed there now ,that BP and the Feds grossly underestimated what it was going to take to solve this problem.

….as the video shows…they knew that the possibility of a much bigger problem was there but yet they did not treat it as such.

Napolitano’s comment :
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/us/01gulf.html?ref=todayspaper

The delay meant that the Homeland Security Department waited until late this week to formally request a more robust response from the Department of Defense, with Ms. Napolitano acknowledging even as late as Thursday afternoon that she did not know if the Defense Department even had equipment that might be helpful.

….does not exactly install major confidence that the Feds were prepared and had control of the situation.

…According to this law passed in 1989:

A law passed a year after the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster makes the owner of a rig or vessel responsible for cleaning up a spill. But oversight of the cleanup is designated to the Coast Guard, with advice from other federal agencies.

….this was the Feds responsibility to take control and handle this disaster…..

….which they obviously did not.
Baxter Greene (af5030) — 5/2/2010 @ 11:44 pm
There you go again, asking that the National Command Authority actually know which laws apply, and what they say and mean.
That’s just mean, and partisan!
Can’t we all just get along?
AD - RtR/OS! (45c403) — 5/2/2010 @ 11:47 pm
I am married to an Obamamama, who not only listens to NPR but downloads it to her iPod, and she just called me while making her way to work through a construction zone to scold me for criticizing the Administration’s response yesterday because, it seems, NPR told her on the car radio that Obama finally flew to Louisiana. Obama’s unicorn is still trasversing the skies on a rainbow bridge for a lot of people, I think.
nk (db4a41) — 5/3/2010 @ 4:40 am
That reminds me of the old Sesame Street song,
“which of these things is not like the other.”
Dmac (21311c) — 5/3/2010 @ 6:32 am
#11 nk:

Obama’s unicorn is still trasversing the skies on a rainbow bridge for a lot of people

That’s discouraging. Some that I have talked to have blamed others (ie, the press, the TEA partiers) for making him “look bad,” because they don’t “like him.” They cannot and will not accept that he isn’t all that he says he is.

Enablers enabling the Enabler in Chief.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 5/3/2010 @ 6:47 am
Off-shore drilling regulations require that blow-out preventers (BOP) be installed and functional, and that a Blow-out Specialist be on-site 24/7 to monitor equipment performance. Blow-out prevention is nothing new, it’s one of the many required safeguards considered necessary before off-shore drilling is allowed.

There are multiple back-up systems designed to prevent disasters like the one unfolding in the Gulf. BOPs are even supposed to have fail-safe shear rams installed to crimp the pipes as a last resort.

Following the initial explosion the Blow-out preventer should have been immediately activated. It would have cut off the flow of oil and stopped the fire, possibly keeping the oil rig afloat. Why that wasn’t done, and why we haven’t had any sort of explanation of why the Blow-out wasn’t prevented is the elephant in Obama’s living room.
ropelight (334377) — 5/3/2010 @ 7:13 am
BP’s COO Doug Suttles is on FOX now explaining that the BOP was faulty and failed to activate either on command or in automatic mode.
ropelight (334377) — 5/3/2010 @ 7:19 am
gee, its almost like having a president with virtually no administrative experience was a bad idea…
A.W. (e7d72e) — 5/3/2010 @ 7:32 am
Did the Obama Administration Bungle the Oil Spill?

Wait a darn minute here, didn’t Captain Wonderful just jet down to the Gulf and proclaim that it was BP’s fault? What more do you want?
kansas (7b4374) — 5/3/2010 @ 7:53 am
Far be it from me to defend an idiot like Napolitano, but…

Delaying the oil spill burn because rescue efforts were still underway could be legitimate. I wouldn’t want to start a burn if I wasn’t very sure that I wouldn’t be torching survivors. However, how long would it take to determine the burn zone was clear of people? (I can’t speak to whether the weather prevented the burn strategy.)

Also, I don’t expect the head of DHS to know every detail about every scenario of every disaster. However, she better damned well have people on her speed dial that do, and get them on task stat. Sounds like she did NOT in this case.

I still give her a D, at best.
Tex Lovera (456ded) — 5/3/2010 @ 9:24 am
Comment by Tex Lovera — 5/3/2010 @ 9:24 am

The only one she has is Adm.Thad Allen, who made her look the conspicuous fool she is.
AD - RtR/OS! (ad3aba) — 5/3/2010 @ 9:59 am
Actually the spill itself was originally on fire. There has been some criticism about putting the fire out after the rig itself sank. I know the first is to put the fire out but in some situations you are far better off to allow the fuel to burn as it escapes from confinement rather than extinguishing the fire and allowing the fuel to collect in massive quantities. (Going back to my long ago, brief fire brigade training dealing with liquid and gaseous fuels.)
Have Blue (854a6e) — 5/3/2010 @ 10:04 am
Tex – To your last comment, What would the press have said if it had been Brown (of heckuva job Brownie fame) who had made the comment that he was unaware of the capabilities that were on hand to respond?
Have Blue (854a6e) — 5/3/2010 @ 10:07 am
Has anyone raised the specter of terrorism or sabotage? Or are such speculations among the forbidden topics which clearly fall outside the limits of free speech today?
ropelight (334377) — 5/3/2010 @ 10:42 am
Comment by Have Blue — 5/3/2010 @ 10:04 am

I seem to recall that Red Adair would let a blow-out burn (and start it burning if it wasn’t already) to get rid of all of the dangerous gas until he had everything in place to deal with it.
Not sure how that applies to submerged well heads, but it seems like a lesson lost.
AD - RtR/OS! (ad3aba) — 5/3/2010 @ 10:46 am
ropelight – my parents live down in the Fort Walton area – sabotage is definitely a topic of conversation at the lunch counters.

Then again, probably just a bunch of cranky old Tea Partiers spreading wackado conspiracy theories.
Em (017d3c) — 5/3/2010 @ 5:09 pm
AD – The issue with a terrestrial blow out is that you are creating a potentially horrific conflagration if you allow the rapid build up of fuel just waiting for ignition. At sea the problem is not as immediately serious. The oil floats on the water, which tends to moderate any conflagration, and additionally disperses the fuel over a large area. Ironically the very thing that moderates the potential for an explosion or fire causes the widespread damage from relatively dispersed oil.
Actually the problem they will probably have in this case is trying to concentrate the oil into a small enough area and concentrated enough to actually ignite it and maintain a burn off.
Have Blue (854a6e) — 5/3/2010 @ 10:47 pm
Mr. Obama left BP to its own devices for at least a week after the spill, citing federal law which makes oil companies responsible for the cleanup of damaged rigs. To follow the law like an automaton rather than take an early lead on what will likely be the worst environmental disaster in United States is criminal. A small group of elites, concerned solely with how this event will affect BP’s bottom line and seemingly not at all with the environmental and broader economic disaster the incident is sure to wreck, have directed the cleanup. Mr. Obama, you are a fraud, an utter disappointment and –save for amassing personal political power and wealth– a resounding failure. Shame — yes, shame — shame on you Mr. Obama. To represent a change of guard, a politician concerned with the welfare of the average citizen, and to be not at all any of those things. At least with Bush it was clear what we were getting. Words cannot express my disgust with you, Mr. Obama.
citizen (ea8492) — 5/16/2010 @ 4:13 am
Imagine if this involved a republican president every major birdcage linner would be on it for weeks and the green freaks would be demanding they resign but OBAMA is a LIBERAL DEMACRAT so they wont say a thing becuase many of those eniromentalists wackos voted for OBAMA and now feel like suckers
Krazy Kagu (29c2ff) — 6/30/2010 @ 1:34 pm

5/2/2010

Did the Obama Administration Bungle the Oil Spill?

27 Responses to “Did the Obama Administration Bungle the Oil Spill?”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out