The BP Catastrophe: It Is Always Worse Than They Are Telling Us

Since the explosion on the British Petroleum (BP) rig Deep Water Horizon on April 20, authorities have consistently underestimated the impact of the disaster.  The government was too slow to mobilize and effectively coordinate resources.  Stock analysts, a couple weeks after the event, urged investors to buy BP stock, suggesting the crisis was contained.  Even some scientists said that while the damage would be bad, it was not a biological Armageddon.  They were all wrong.  We are witnessing the worst ecological disaster in American History, and it could still be even worse than we think.

Experts first told us that 5,000 barrels of oil were gushing from the well every day.  Then they said it was really more like 25,000 to 30,000 barrels, the equivalent of a new Exxon Valdez spill every eight to ten days.   Tuesday’s Washington Post reported that in fact the daily total is 35,000 to 60,000 barrels of oil.  It should surprise no one if these estimates go up yet again.

Now a friend who works for the Coast Guard and specializes in environmental disasters at sea tells me that insiders are saying the hemorrhaging oil may actually be the lesser of two aspects of the calamity.   As the oil pours out, it’s accompanied by 188,000 to 527,000 metric tons of methane gas.  This gas has the potential to completely destroy all aquatic life throughout the Gulf of Mexico at depths below 400 meters.

While this appalling scenario has been largely ignored by the mainstream media, bloggers were writing about the possibility of a Gulf-wide “dead zone” in mid-May.  Here is a particularly good description of the threat posted at the Daily Kos.

For years scientists have been monitoring a dead zone at the mouth of the Mississippi, where an over-abundance of Nitrogen runoff from American agriculture takes oxygen out of the water, killing sea life.  The dead zone is made worse, by the way, as a result of America’s ill-conceived government-backed ethanol industry.

Just as the Nitrogen bonds with Oxygen and takes it out of the water, so the Carbon in the Methane gas pouring out of the BP well is also removing Oxygen.  Currents may carry lonely Carbon molecules throughout the entire Gulf of Mexico in search of Oxygen with which to bond, turning to CO2 and water, and making the entire Gulf one humongous dead zone.

BP is currently capable of siphoning off a maximum of 18,000 of the now-estimated 35,000 to 60,000 barrels of oil spewing forth.  The corporation plans to bring in other ships and claims a capacity to siphon off up to 80,000 barrels by mid July, but do these figures include removing the gas, and if so, how much?  Gas volume to oil volume is about 3000 to 1.   BP also intends to add a “choke” line which is intended to bring oil and gas to the surface and then burn both, but the Washington Post reports this will have the capacity of eliminating only an additional 10,000 barrels per day, and these would appear to be barrels of oil.  How much gas will continue to escape into the water?

Desperate situations call for radical measures.  One such proposal is to set off a nuclear bomb below the floor of the Gulf, and thus collapse the well hole.   As farfetched as this idea sounds, the old Soviet Union successfully employed this method on land.  Here is an interesting (as well as entertaining) video clip describing the event.

Former President Bill Clinton’s Labor Secretary Robert Reich is calling for more radical legal action.  Specifically, he wants BP to be put under temporary receivership.  As Reich forcefully argues, BP needs to be made subservient to American taxpayers until the cost of the disaster for which they are responsible is paid in full.  Any incentives to protect investors and profits first need to be removed.

So far, the response of the Administration has been disappointing.  One reason voters elect Democrats instead of Republicans is that they expect Democrats to protect the environment.  If the Republicans are as irresponsible as the Democrats say when it comes to environmental protection, then why was there not a systematic review of off-shore drilling regulation when they came to power?  At least one would have expected such a review when the Administration proposed more off-shore drilling.

Secretary of Energy Steven Chu implausibly claims that the Administration was “planning for the worst case scenario from the beginning.”  If this were true, the ships now being called for would already be in place.  Likewise, the President’s speech last night does not inspire confidence.  On the one hand, a little contrition and humility were in order, but this President doesn’t do contrition and humility (he is much better at blame).  On the other hand, we were left wondering if the plan going forward is sufficiently bold.  All Americans share in the horror of their fellow citizens from the Gulf states who are watching the oily tide come in.  Please, somebody do something.