Obama should take charge of cleanup in the Gulf

[Forkboy]

MORE THAN a month after BP’s Deepwater Horizon spill, oil is washing up in ugly clumps on beaches and wetlands, coating birds and other marine wildlife with a deadly slick. Just as pelicans and sea turtles are caught in an oily grasp, so is President Obama. Out of political caution, he and his team are framing this huge environmental disaster as BP’s problem, even though it is clear BP doesn’t know how to solve it and hasn’t been honest about its scope.

Despite his reluctance to relieve BP of responsibility, Obama should realize that a crisis of this magnitude should have the government firmly in charge of the cleanup, even if it must leverage the expertise of the private oil industry to find a way to cap the gushing well.
--
It’s appalling that the federal government, under any administration, would allow drilling deep underwater without making adequate preparations for a massive oil leak. But that’s what happened. After the oil spill, Obama announced a moratorium on permits for drilling new wells and said that he is stopping the type of waivers that BP was able to obtain. But, as The New York Times has reported, at least seven new permits for various type of drilling and five environmental waivers have been granted since then. That is an insult to those harmed by the disaster unfolding on the Gulf Coast.

In the long run, the nation needs to move toward alternative energy sources. In the meantime, the crisis demands more than a special commission to review the specifics of what happened on the Deepwater Horizon rig. Above all, it calls for leadership on behalf of the public interest. That is Obama’s job.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2010/05/26/obama_should_take_charge_of_cleanup_in_the_gulf/

[cbayer]

1. What, if any, responsibility do you think the British government has in this?

It occurred to me that if an oil company that was majority American held had a spill, say, off the coast of Norway, we would probably expect the US government to be involved.

They may have said something, but I have heard nothing from the British government on this.

[Ozymanithrax]

2. BP,unlike Pemex, is privatly owned.

They are operating under U.S. law (such as it exists) and are subject to U.S. law. They are not organ of the British Government.

Britain has not legal responsibility in this that I can see.

[cbayer]

3. I wasn't asking about legal responsibility. I was wondering more about an ethical

or social responsibility.

Again, I think if Mobil-Exxon were to have an accident of this magnitude in the waters of another country, we would anticipate that the US government would take a role or offer to assist.

This is not to detract from the argument being made here that the US government needs to step in and take over at this point. There are valid arguments for that position, IMO. I was just curious as to why we have not heard a word from the British government (that I am aware of).

[Ozymanithrax]

5. In August of 2009, a Thai oil company, PTTEPA, was behind a massive...

oil spill off the coast of Australia.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/skytruth/sets/72157622226354812/
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE57K1RM20090823

From everything I've read, the question there, and the question here, will be what failures in the regulatory scheme led to the debacle.

If the U.S. became involved in a spill by one of our companies, it would be driven by the U.S. striving to maintain its reputation on the international stage and its influence with that country. Private corporations are beholden only to local regulatory laws. Ethics, especially ethics that are not enshrined in law, just won't come into play. Britain will not get involved because they get nothing out of being involved. Poisoning fishing in the gulf has a zero impact on their relationship with the U.S. government. But what it would come down to is what were the regulators in the country where the oil was spilled doing. Companies come under the laws of the country where they or their subsidiary work because these companies are private entities.

Because we live in a Oil Civilization where everything we have comes from the intense utilization of oil and related petro chemicals, these spills will continue to happen. Because all the easy oil has been pumped out, oil that is more difficult to get will be drilled. I think there needs to be international agreements and some form of regulatory system in place.

[cbayer]

6. Excellent points about international agreements and regulatory systems.

This is an event with global impact and likely not the last.

Thanks for your thoughts on this. The fact that GB has nothing to gain by becoming involved, in addition to having no legal obligation to do so, makes sense to me.

[jberryhill]

7. Yeah, like that massive US effort after the Union Carbide leak in Bhopal

Not.

[Demeter]

8. Maybe If the US Govt. Had Done Its Job

we could then talk about the UK....

[autorank]

4. He should take charge k*r

First, he needs to take charge of the gulf catastrophe because BP is incompetent in the extreme and because legally this is within 200 miles of our shore, our zone of exclusive economic interest. It's right and it's legal.

Second, he needs to send a message to Kerry and Lieberman and anyone else who put together the oil and nuclear friendly "American Power Act" - the message, pull the bill, start over, stop bull shitting us. It's a frightening bill to appear now. It must be pulled.

[Butch350]

9. All this Rhetoric about an industry that deals in Billions...

and Billions and Billions of dollars.

The oil industry has you buy your collective B*LLS.