The Cost of Oil: BP Reaches $20 Billion Settlement with the Federal Government

In the largest single entity settlement in the Department of Justice's history, BP will have to pay $20.8 for its role in the infamous Gulf of Mexico oil spill in April, 2010. Since the disastrous explosion of the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform BP has been engaged in protracted negotiations with the federal government. Now the Department of Justice have finalized the settlement with BP. The settlement comes after years of legal wrangling. In July, the Supreme Court denied the company’s appeal to block benefits for those not directly affected by the spill.

As reported by The Hill, the fine breaks down as follows

• $5.5 billion to settle civil claims under the Clean Water Act
• $7.1 billion for environmental restoration work
• $700 million to compensate for still-unknown damages to natural resources in the region
• $4.9 million to Gulf Coast states affected by the spill
• $1 billion to local communities. Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas will split that portion of the settlement.
• BP has also already spent more than $1 billion on environmental restoration work in the area

Almost $9 billion of the settlement money will be used by for a Gulf restoration fund. This money will be invested in coastal and habitat repair, water quality improvement in wetlands and recreational projects in the region.

Biologists have observed that the 3.19 million gallons of oil that pored into the Gulf is having long term effects that continue to this day.

"This is still the largest environmental penalty under the Clean Water Act and Oil Pollution Act, ever," Attorney General Loretta Lynch said. "BP is receiving the punishment it deserves while also providing critical compensation to the damage to the Gulf region."

The punishment will serve as a deterrent that will hopefully prevent similar disasters in the future.

"The steep penalty should inspire BP and its peers to take every measure necessary to ensure that nothing like this can ever happen again," Lynch said.

The $20.8 billion fine is separate from the class-action settlement with businesses and individuals affected by the spill.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy noted that the settlement includes $700 million to address any potential environmental damages that officials have yet to discover.

"Justice is not about dumping a pile of money and walking away," McCarthy said. "It is about investing in sustainable ways that empower and strengthen the Gulf communities over the long term."

The settlement still needs to be approved by a federal court.

Related
BP's Legal Wrangling Five Years After the Gulf Oil Spill
The Toll on Wildlife from the Gulf of Mexico BP Oil Spill
BP's Gulf Oil Spill: Summary of Research Evidence Five Years Later
The BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Five Years Later
Supreme Court Gives BP a Lump of Coal for Christmas
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?
Infographic - BP Oil Spill 4 Years Later
Video - The Ongoing Impacts of the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico
The Cost of Oil: BP Barred from Doing Business with the US
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for Tens of Billions
BP's Corporate Irresponsibility
Responsibility for the Costs of the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Offshore Drilling
Managing the Massive Gulf Oil Spill
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Read More»

BP's Legal Wrangling Five Years After the Gulf Oil Spill

BP has a lengthy criminal rap sheet that culminated in the Deepwater Horizon explosion in the Gulf of Mexico. Despite BP's long criminal history they are anything but repentant. Rather than accept the penalties levied against them for the 2010 spill they are doing everything in their power to minimize their legal and financial responsibilities.

US District Court judge Carl Barbier found that BP was guilty of "gross negligence" and "willful misconduct." Although the trial concluded earlier this year, the final settlement has yet to be announced.

All throughout the legal proceedings BP has waged a massive and misleading advertising campaign which gives the impression that all is well in the Gulf. However this contention is squarely refuted by the science.

The statutory penalty in the Clean Water Act for BP's actions its actions is $4,300 per gallon, or over $18 billion. Thus far BP has agreed to pay $4.5 billion in related criminal and civil penalties and faces additional fines, as well as to thousands of claims by individuals and companies. It’s also agreed to resolve most private-party lawsuits as part of an uncapped settlement BP values at about $9.2 billion

Whatever the fines, they will be a fraction of the actual costs to the economy, wildlife and the Gulf ecosystem.

After months of negotiations the EPA gave BP the right to bid for US contracts and oil leases on March 2014. However, BPs misinformation and refusal to take full responsibility for the Gulf oil spill casts aspersions on the EPA decision.

As reported by Bloomberg, the EPA imposed the contract suspension in 2012 after determining that BP hadn’t fully corrected deficiencies that led to the Gulf oil spill. BP sued the EPA in federal court in Houston seeking to lift the suspension and then dropped the lawsuit after a deal was reached.

As explained by Tyson Slocum, director of the Public Citizen’s Energy Program in Washington, the EPA decision was premature. This "lets a corporate felon and repeat offender off the hook for its crimes against people and the environment," Slocum said in a statement. BP "was on criminal probation at the time of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, and it has failed to prove that it is a responsible contractor."

The government suspended BP’s rights to seek federal contracts after the company pleaded guilty to 11 counts of felony seaman’s manslaughter, two pollution violations and one count of lying to Congress in connection with the spill.

In addition to the spill, the EPA cited the 2005 explosion at a BP-owned Texas City, Texas, refinery and two oil spills in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, as grounds for the 2012 debarment. At the time of the April 2010 spill, BP was on probation after pleading guilty in 2007 to a felony air-pollution charge and paying a $50 million fine for the explosion in Texas City that killed 15 workers.

Related
The Toll on Wildlife from the Gulf of Mexico BP Oil Spill
Research Summary of BP's Gulf Oil Spill
Supreme Court Gives BP a Lump of Coal for Christmas
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?

Read More»

The Toll on Wildlife from the Gulf of Mexico BP Oil Spill

A number of wildlife species have been devastated by the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. This includes seabirds, turtles, fish, and vegetation.

Between 800,000 and one million sea birds have died from oil exposure in the Gulf of Mexico since 2010. Entire seabird populations have suffered from major die-offs. Oil related deaths include 12 percent of brown pelicans (over 200,000 have been exposed to oil),  almost one third (32 percent) of northern gulf laughing birds and 13 percent of royal turns. A total of 20,000 Kemp's turtles and 60,000 Ridley turtles died in 2010.

Five times the normal rate of lung disease have been observed in bottlenose dolphins and a total of 1000 dolphins have been found stranded between 2010 and 2015.

Under the water a number of species were impacted including oysters and sea grass which provide food and habitat for a wide range of aquatic life. There has been an 85 percent reduction in the diversity of northern gulf seaweed habitats. Species that depend on this seaweed include shrimps, lobsters and crabs.

In the two years following the disaster there was a 50 percent drop in oysters and 10 square miles of sea grass were adversely impacted.

The importance of the gulf oil spill on fish species is important because two thirds of fish species that live in the area of the spill are found only in the gulf. As few as 50 Brydes whales are thought to be left in the gulf and the calves of this species are particularly vulnerable to the dispersant used to break-up the spill. Dispersants are also thought to have adverse health impacts on Sperm Whales and other species

To this day fish species continue to suffer from disruptions to their growth, development and reproduction. Some fish species were found to be covered in lesions due to the spill.

Heart defects and other morphological abnormalities have been found Atlantic bluefin, yellowfin tunas and an amberjack species. Swordfish, marlin, mackerel and other Gulf species may also suffer from similar impacts.

It will take years if not decades to understand the full scope on the impacts.

Related
BP's Legal Wrangling Five Years After the Gulf Oil Spill
Research Summary of BP's Gulf Oil Spill
Supreme Court Gives BP a Lump of Coal for Christmas
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?

Read More»

Research Summary of BP's Gulf Oil Spill

A number of studies indicate that the environmental impacts of the BP's 2010 oil spill in the gulf is anything but over. Huge amounts of oil are still on the ocean floor and this is finding its way into the food chain. Other studies show fish that spawn in these oil contaminated waters in the Gulf are suffering from a wide range of lethal deformities.

A study published earlier this year suggested that the oil that lingers in the Gulf of Mexico continues to pose a threat to local ecosystems. The study by Florida researchers indicates that About 3,243 sq miles (8,400 square km) of the sea floor is still covered with oil from the disaster.

"This is going to affect the Gulf for years to come," Jeff Chanton, the study's lead researcher and a professor of chemical oceanography at Florida State University, said in a statement.

This study corroborates an October study which found that as much as 30 percent of the spilled oil remains on the ocean floor.

"Fish will likely ingest contaminants because worms ingest the sediment, and fish eat the worms. It's a conduit for contamination into the food web."

CBS news quoted the study’s lead researcher, Jeff Chanton, as saying: ‘This is going to affect the Gulf for years to come.

‘Fish will likely ingest contaminants because worms ingest the sediment, and fish eat the worms. It's a conduit for contamination into the food web.’

Dolphins and turtles in the Gulf are dying in record numbers. Bottlenose dolphins have been dying at more than twice the normal rate over the past five years and the nesting habits of the endangered Kemp's Ridley sea turtle changed dramatically around the time of the spill. Commercial fisheries have also seen a reduced yield.

The BP oil spill was an unprecedented disaster and after five years 2 percent of samples of water and seafloor sediment continue to exceed federal toxicity levels. According to research from the Associated Press the overall health of the Gulf of Mexico has declined 11 percent since April 2010.

The research suggests that lingering impacts of the BP oil spill in the Gulf are being felt by tuna and other species that spawned in oiled offshore habitats in the northern Gulf of Mexico. A Stanford NOAA study revealed that the spill is causing severe defects in the developing hearts of Atlantic bluefin, yellowfin tunas and an amberjack species. The study shows that crude oil exposures is slowing the heartbeat or causing an uncoordinated rhythm in these fish, which can ultimately lead to heart failure.

"We know from the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Prince William Sound that recently spawned fish are especially vulnerable to crude oil toxicity," said Nat Scholz, Ph.D., leader of the ecotoxicology program at NOAA’s Northwest Fisheries Science Center in Seattle. “"That spill taught us to pay close attention to the formation and function of the heart."

"This fits the pattern," said Dr. John Incardona, NOAA research toxicologist and the study’s lead author. "The tunas and the amberjack exposed to Deepwater Horizon crude oil were impacted in much the same way that herring were deformed by the Alaska North Slope crude oil spilled in Prince William Sound during the Exxon Valdez accident."

"The timing and location of the spill raised immediate concerns for bluefin tuna," said Barbara Block, Ph.D., a study coauthor and professor of biology at Stanford University. "This spill occurred in prime bluefin spawning habitats, and the new evidence indicates a compromising effect of oil on the physiology and morphology of bluefin embryos and larvae."

The culprit in the heart defect appears to be oil-derived polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). PAHs can persist for many years in marine habitats and cause a variety of adverse environmental effects. Other observed morphological abnormalities on oil-exposed larva were also revealed in the study. This includes poor growth of fins and eyes.

"We now have a better understanding why crude oil is toxic, and it doesn’t bode well for bluefin or yellowfin embryos floating in oiled habitats.” said Block. “At the level of a single heart muscle cell, we’ve found that petroleum acts like a pharmacological drug by blocking key processes that are critical for cardiac cell excitability."

The authors further suggest that other species like cardiac-related impacts on swordfish, marlin, mackerel and other Gulf species may also be impacted cardiac abnormalities if they spawned in proximity to oil.

Experts say it could take "decades" for the ecosystem to recover.

Related
BP's Legal Wrangling Five Years After the Gulf Oil Spill
The Toll on Wildlife from the Gulf of Mexico BP Oil Spill
Supreme Court Gives BP a Lump of Coal for Christmas
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?

Read More»

The BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Five Years Later

Exactly five years ago (April 20, 2010), BP's Deepwater Horizon oil well exploded in the Gulf of Mexico killing 11 people and injuring 17 more. The explosion unleashed one of the worst environmental disasters in human history. For 87 days (April 20 and July 15, 2010) the oil spewed from the well and by the time it was finally contained at least 3.2 million barrels (134 million gallons) of crude oil had contaminated the Gulf of Mexico and 1,100 miles of coastline.

The worst marine disaster ever damaged bird sanctuaries, marine and wildlife habitats. It also soiled beaches, killed wildlife and devastated local economies. The ecologically vital marsh lands of the gulf coast have not recovered and wildlife is still suffering.

The Gulf may look clean but it is not. Even after a five year $28 billion clean-up operation the repercussions from the spill continue to this day. While much of the oil has evaporated or dissolved, up to 10 million gallons of oil remain on the sea floor. About 3,243 sq miles of the sea floor is still covered with oil from the disaster. Oil can also be found in marshes along the coast and deposits still wash up on shore.

The unprecedented spill took place 5000 feet below the surface of the ocean, 40 miles off the Louisiana coast. It had immediate economic impacts on the fishing industry and tourism. It also took a devastating toll on wildlife. Untold thousands of birds, turtles fish and shrimp were killed in the aftermath and a range of species are being impacted to this day. Dolphins and turtles are dying in record numbers and fisheries are still being affected.

The head of the NOAA during the spill Jane Lubchenco aptly summarized events when she said, "The spill was — and continues to be — a disaster. The bottom line is that oil is nasty stuff. Yes, the Gulf is resilient, but it was hit pretty darn hard."

Related
BP's Legal Wrangling Five Years After the Gulf Oil Spill
The Toll on Wildlife from the Gulf of Mexico BP Oil Spill
BP's Gulf Oil Spill: Summary of Research Evidence Five Years Later
Supreme Court Gives BP a Lump of Coal for Christmas
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?

Read More»

BP Issues Climate Warning and Calls for Carbon Pricing

One of the world's largest oil companies has stated that we have to price carbon to curtail carbon emissions.

The science is clear and there have been a vast number of warnings coming from a wide variety of sources including, AGU, IEA, IPCC, PwC, World Bank, and the World Meteorological Organization stating that our current trajectory is catastrophic. Now even those responsible for the problem are coming forward with warnings of their own.

In a February 2015 report titled, "Energy Outlook 2035," BP says that to keep carbon dioxide emissions within upper threshold limits the world must take coordinated action. 

BP's warning foreshadows demands that will be made for global emissions reductions at the forthcoming COP 21 climate talks at the end of the year in Paris. The UN and many other scientific bodies have repeatedly said that we must keep global temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial times to avert the worst impacts of climate change.

Many people think that the only way we can curtail climate change is through some forms of carbon pricing scheme and it would appear that BP agrees. BP has warned that atmospheric levels of CO2 from burning fossil fuels are unsustainable in the absence of global pollution regulations. The BP report predicts that CO2 emissions will increase by 1pc per year, or 25pc in total, through to 2035.

"The most likely path for carbon emissions, despite current government policies and intentions, does not appear sustainable. The projections highlight the scale of the challenge facing policy makers at this year’s UN-led discussions in Paris. No single change or policy is likely to be sufficient on its own," said BP chief executive, Bob Dudley. "This underpins the importance of policy-makers taking steps that lead to a global price for carbon, which provides the right incentives for everyone to play their part."

The author of the report, BP’s new chief economist Spencer Dale also acknowledged the volatile nature of oil prices from here on in.

"After three years of high and deceptively steady oil prices, the fall of recent months is a stark reminder that the norm in energy markets is one of continuous change," said Mr Dale.

Related
BP's Legal Wrangling Five Years After the Gulf Oil Spill
The Toll on Wildlife from the Gulf of Mexico BP Oil Spill
BP's Gulf Oil Spill: Summary of Research Evidence Five Years Later
The BP Oil Spill in the Gulf Five Years Later
Supreme Court Gives BP a Lump of Coal for Christmas
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?

Read More»

After a Failed Cover-up Shell Sub-Contractor Pleads Guilty

On December 11, Noble Drilling, Shell’s sub-contractor pleaded guilty to eight felony charges relating to environmental and safety violations on board the vessels Noble Discoverer and Kulluk in the Alaskan Arctic in 2012.

In addition to the offenses which include unsafe operating procedures Noble Inc. also tried to cover-up their illegal actions. According to the court ruling, Noble, “actively took steps to conceal its use of illegal [systems]”, and “knowingly made false entries” concealing problems from the authorities. Noble also admitted to illegally discharging bilge water from the Discoverer.

Noble will pay a $12.2m fine and the company has been placed on probation for four years and must upgrade all of its plans to meet safety and environmental protection requirements.

This news comes as Shell prepares to drill in the Arctic's Chukchi Sea next summer.

Shell has scrapped the Kulluk but the replacement called the Polar Pioneer may be worse as it is owned by Transocean, the same company that was behind the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The US Supreme Court recently denied BP's request to reduce its liability for the disaster.

Related
Shell Pauses its Arctic Drilling for 2013
Shell's Game with the Arctic
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising More Safety Concerns
Video - An Oil Rig Belonging to Shell is Grounded in Alaska 
Shell's Game with the Future of the Arctic
Another Offshore Oil Leak this Time from Shell
Lawsuit Protecting the Arctic from Arctic Drilling

Read More»

Supreme Court Gives BP a Lump of Coal for Christmas

The US Supreme Court has rejected BP's bid to decrease the settlement it agreed to pay to businesses and individuals. British Petroleum (BP) is well known for having produced the biggest offshore oil spill in history.

In 2010 BP's Deepwater Horizon exploded killing 11 people and spewing almost 5 million barrels of crude into the Gulf of Mexico. The environmental effects of this spill are being felt to this day.

A study published in October showed how there is a 1,235 square mile ring of coagulated oil residue on the ocean floor.

Another study published in March found that the BP oil spill has caused morphological abnormalities including heart deformities potentially leading to heart failure in several large predatory fish including Atlantic Bluefin tuna, Yellowfin tuna and Amberjacks.

Gulf area business suffered across the board but BP only wants to pay those who can prove that there is a direct link between the oil spill and their losses. On Monday December 8th, the Supreme Court refused to hear BP's argument. So far BP has paid out 2.3 billion of an estimated 9.7 billion to plantiffs. The ruling means that BP will have to pay an additional 7.4 billion to plantiffs.

This is but the latest attempt of BP to shirk its multi-billion dollar responsibility. Just a month earlier BP tried to get the courts to reduce their fines for "gross negligence" under the Clean Water Act from 18 billion to just over 12 billion.

While BP was seeking a multi-billion dollar gift this Christmas, all they got from the courts was a lump of coal.

Related Articles
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill of 2010
Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?
Infographic - BP Oil Spill 4 Years Later
Video - The Ongoing Impacts of the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico
The Cost of Oil: BP Barred from Doing Business with the US
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for Tens of Billions
BP's Corporate Irresponsibility
Responsibility for the Costs of the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Offshore Drilling
Managing the Massive Gulf Oil Spill
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy

Read More»

Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?

A September 4, 2014 federal ruling states that BP was "grossly negligent" in the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. The judge cited BP for recklessness and criticized the company for what he termed "profit-driven decisions." This ruling is a crucial part of holding BP accountable.

On September 2, 2014 Halliburton agreed to pay a 1.1 billion settlement for its role in the disaster, but BP's fines could amount to more than 16 times that amount.

As explained in a statement by national and local organizations in New Orleans working on Mississippi River Delta restoration, "Today’s ruling a vital step toward holding BP accountable, restoring the Gulf."

BP has set aside 3.5 billion for civil penalties under the US Clean Water Act. However, the ruling by US District Judge Carl Barbier could cost the company more than five times that amount. BP may have to pay as much as $18 billion in pollution fines for the Gulf spill. In total the fines could amount to $4,300 for each barrel of crude spilled.

A total of 80 percent of the proceeds will go to environmental restoration projects and the remaining 20 percent will go into a trust fund to cover cleanup costs for future spills. However, no amount of money can repair all the ecological damage, nor will it bring back all of the creatures killed or the 11 workers that perished in the disaster.

In addition to fines, stock prices are another way that these legal proceedings are hurting BP. The company's shares closed down 5.9 percent in London following the federal judge's ruling. The cost have been significant even for an oil giant like BP. Due to the Gulf oil disaster, the company has been forced to sell off assets effectively making it a smaller company.

In the wake of the ruling, Environmental Defense Fund, National Wildlife Federation, National Audubon Society and the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation released the following statement:

"More than 4 years after the BP oil disaster, today’s ruling brings hope and justice for the people, wildlife and ecosystems of Louisiana and the Gulf Coast. For 87 days, the Deepwater Horizon well spewed more than 4.1 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico – because of BP’s egregious conduct. A court of law has confirmed that risky and reckless behavior has consequences. The areas most damaged by the spill cannot wait any longer for restoration to begin. Today’s ruling is a vital step toward holding BP and other parties responsible for the largest oil spill in our nation’s history."

It is hoped that by making the costs of such mishaps so burdensome, it will decrease the likelihood of their recurrence. Has BP learned its lesson?

Rather than accept the ruling, BP has indicated that it will fight the decision. A trial on the Clean Water Act fine is expected to take place in January 2015. Sadly, this tragic debacle is far from over and spill-related litigation may drag on for decades.

New projects including some in the Gulf of Mexico suggest otherwise. As reported by the Wall Street Journal, the company was among the most active bidders in a lease sale in the Gulf last month. Further, the company has reached an all time high in Gulf oil extraction with 10 rigs increasing production by 32 percent over last year.

No matter how much BP pays, it will not be able to stop the egregious impacts on wildlife, nor can it stop the oil that continues to wash ashore from Louisiana to Florida. Given the fact that the impacts of the largest petroleum spill in marine history will last for generations, 18 billion seems like a steal.

Related Articles
Infographic - BP Oil Spill 4 Years Later
Video - The Ongoing Impacts of the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill of 2010
The Cost of Oil: BP Barred from Doing Business with the US
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for Tens of Billions
BP's Corporate Irresponsibility
Responsibility for the Costs of the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Offshore Drilling
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels
The End of Oil and the Next Energy Economy

Read More»

Infographic - BP Oil Spill 4 Years Later

Related Articles
Judge Declares BP is Grossly Negligent but are Fines Enough?
Video - The Ongoing Impacts of the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico
Transocean to Pay $1.4 billion for its Role in the Gulf Oil Spill of 2010
The Cost of Oil: BP Barred from Doing Business with the US
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for Tens of Billions
BP's Corporate Irresponsibility
Responsibility for the Costs of the Gulf Oil Spill
The Costs of Offshore Drilling
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Read More»

Duke Energy Does it Again: More Coal Ash in Public Water

Coal ash spills came into the popular consciousness with the widely reported Dan River Disaster. However, this is far from the only spill of coal ash. Less than two months after Duke energy spilled 30,000 tons of coal ash which decimated 70 miles of the Dan River, there was a repeat. However, this time was different, this time it was clearly intentional.

Duke energy was photographed deliberately dumping wastewater from toxic coal ash into public waterways. The Waterkeeper Alliance released aerial surveillance photos that caught Duke Energy red handed. The images show workers pumping wastewater from two of Duke Energy’s toxic coal ash lagoons into a canal that drains into the Cape Fear River, a source of public drinking water.

The wanton arrogance of this action is underscored by the fact that the incident occurred just days before a federal grand jury convened in Raleigh to hear evidence in a criminal investigation of Duke Energy.

Duke Energy responded by describing the action as part of “routine maintenance.” Contrary to Duke Energy's contention, they did not contact the appropriate regulatory authorities. Further, it is unlawful to discharge any pollutant into a waterway without a proper permit.

In light of these startling photos and Duke Energy's response, Waterkeeper Alliance and Cape Fear Riverkeeper are demanding answers from Duke Energy and North Carolina DENR.

Related Posts
Another Water Contaminating Spill Courtesy of the Coal Industry
Duke Energy Spills Tons of Coal Ash into the Dan River
West Virginia Chemical Spill: Water Contamination from Coal and Regulatory Insufficiency
Bankruptcy Protection for the Company the Poisoned Drinking Water in Virginia
Video - Ongoing West Virginia Water Crisis

Read More»

Top 25 Oil Spills in the Last Decade

Here is a listing of the worst oil spills in the world in the last ten years. The information is listed in the following order: The name of the spill is followed by the country, location, date and quantity of oil spilled. Quantities are measured in tonnes of crude oil with one tonne roughly equal to 308 US gallons, or 7.33 barrels, or 1165 liters. 
______________________

1. Deepwater Horizon, United States, Gulf of Mexico, 20 April 2010 – 15 July 2010, 627,000 tonnes

2. 2010 ExxonMobil oil spill, Nigeria, Niger Delta, 1 May 2010, 95,500tonnes

3. Xingang Port oil spill, China, Yellow Sea, 16 July 2010 - 21 July 2010, 90,000tonnes

4. Montara oil spill, Australia, Timor Sea, 21 August 2009, 30,000 tonnes

5. Jiyeh power station oil spill, Lebanonk, 14 July 2006 - 15 July 2006, 30,000 tonnes

6. Tasman Spirit, Pakistan, Karachi 28 July 2003, 30,000 tonnes

7. Bass Enterprises (Hurricane Katrina), United States, Cox Bay, Louisiana 30 August 2005, 12,000 tonnes

8. 2007 Korea oil spill, South Korea, Yellow Sea, 7 December 2007, 10,800 tonnes

9. 2008 New Orleans oil spill, United States, New Orleans, Louisiana, 28 July 2008, 8,800 tonnes

10. Citgo refinery oil spill United States, Lake Charles, Louisiana, 19 June 2006, 6,500 tonnes

11. Nigeria oil spill Nigeria, Bonga Field, 21 December 2011, 5,500 tonnes

12. 2007 Statfjord oil spill Norway, Norwegian Sea, 12 December 2007, 4,000 tonnes

13. 2011 Little Buffalo oil spill Canada, Alberta, 29 April 2011, 3,800  tonnes

14. Murphy Oil USA refinery spill (Hurricane Katrina) United States, Meraux and Chalmette, Louisiana 30 August 2005, 3,410 tonnes

15. Shell (Hurricane Katrina) United States, Pilottown, Louisiana, 30 August 2005, 3,400 tonnes

16. Kalamazoo River oil spill United States, Kalamazoo River, Calhoun County, Michigan, 26 July 2010, 3,250 tonnes

17. Chevron (Hurricane Katrina) United States, Empire, Louisiana, 30 August 2005, 3,200 tonnes

18. 2MT Bunga Kelana 3 Singapore, Singapore Strait, 25 May 2010, 2,500 tonnes

19. Kab 101 Mexico, Bay of Campeche, 23 October 2007 – 17 December 2007, 1,869 tonnes

20. Guimaras oil spill Philippines, 11 August 2006, 1,540 tonnes

21. MV Selendang Ayu, United States, Unalaska Island, Alaska, 8 December 2004, 1,560 tonnes

22. 2010 Port Arthur oil spill, United States, Port Arthur, Texas, 23 January 2010, 1,500 tonnes

23. Bass Enterprises (Hurricane Katrina), 1,560, 30 August 2005, 1,500 tonnes

24. Arthur Kill storage tank spill (Hurricane Sandy), United States, New Jersey, Sewaren, 29 October 2012 1,130 tonnes

25. Trans-Alaska Pipeline spill, United States, Anchorage, Alaska, 25 May 2010, 1,200 tonnes

Source: Wikipedia

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Another Leaking Pipeline in Montana
Video - Train Carrying Oil Derails Illustrating the Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Managing the Massive Gulf Oil Spill
Oil Spills Add to Concerns about the Keystone XL Pipeline
EPA Slams State Department on its Keystone XL Report
Oil Spills off the Coast of New Zealand
South Dakota Wants Additional Protections Against Spills
Responsibility for the Costs of the Gulf Oil Spill
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
Lawsuit Protecting the Arctic from Oil Spills
Inadequate Safety Measures for the Keystone XL Pipeline
BC Opposes the Northern Gateway Pipeline
Another Offshore Oil Leak
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Read More»

Infographic - How Much Water Does Fracking Consume

Related Articles
Fracking: A Tragic Waste of Water
Natural Gas is Not Clean Energy
Whats the Fracking Problem?
World Water Day 2013: International Year of Water Cooperation
Solutions to the World Water Crisis Requires International Cooperation
Solutions to Diminishing Ground Water
Reducing Water Use in the United States
Water Efficiency: Stopping the Flow from Leaky Pipes
How Much Water is there on Earth
Water as a Weapon of War
Alarming Facts About Water
Population Growth and Climate Change will Add to the World Water Crisis

Read More»

Fracking: A Tragic Waste of Water Resources

The natural gas mining method known as hydraulic fracturing or "fracking" is another major source of water usage and a serious source of contamination. The EPA estimates one well in a coal bed can require anywhere from 200,000 litres to more than 1 million litres while a horizontal well in a shale formation can use between 7.5 million to 19 million litres of water.

The EPA estimates anywhere from 15 to 80 per cent of water is recovered. There are several ways of disposing of the water used in the process. It can be stored underground in impermeable injection wells that prevent it from leaking into the environment or in steel tanks or pits; recycled for use in another fracturing well; or treated and discharged back into the water supply. Because of its high salt content, the waste water is often also bought by municipalities for use in de-icing and dust suppression on roads.

Although the fluid used in fracking is mostly water, some acids, emulsifiers and other chemicals are added to make the water more viscous and effective at fracturing the rock. These include guar gum, boron, zirconium, titanium, iron and polyacrylamide.

Aside from such additives, the process of fracking also releases naturally occurring salts, metals, radioactive elements like barium and strontium and carcinogens like benzene.

Water use: the process uses large amounts of fresh or potable water. Waste disposal: space is needed to store the waste water safely; sometimes, this involves clearing trees or disrupting habitats. The waste water must be treated at facilities that critics say are not always equipped to remove the contaminants particular to hydro-fracking. Contamination: the fear is that the chemicals used and released during fracking contaminate drinking- and groundwater — either during the process itself or through the waste water that is recycled and used afterward. The substances released along with the natural gas can continuing leaking from the well for decades after the extraction process.

In addition to deleterious water impacts, fracking also causes air pollution and adds greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, even before the natural gas is burned in combustion engines. Some of the methane gas being extracted during fracking escapes or is vented at the well head during the process and contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, some people living near fracking wells have complained of noxious fumes that they say cause headaches, nausea and other symptoms and that they attribute to some of the substances released during fracking, such as benzene and toluene. The New York Times reported that parts of Texas where hydro-fracking is common have seen higher rates of asthma although these could not be directly attributed to the industry as the areas had high air pollution generally.

In 2011, researchers at Cornell University concluded that shale gas extraction through fracking causes enough emissions to give it a bigger greenhouse gas footprint than conventional gas or oil.

Related Articles
Natural Gas is Not Clean Energy
Whats the Fracking Problem?
World Water Day 2013: International Year of Water Cooperation
Solutions to the World Water Crisis Requires International Cooperation
Solutions to Diminishing Ground Water
Reducing Water Use in the United States
Water Efficiency: Stopping the Flow from Leaky Pipes
How Much Water is there on Earth
Water as a Weapon of War
Alarming Facts About Water
Population Growth and Climate Change will Add to the World Water Crisis

Read More»