The impact of the moratorium will worsen in the months ahead as drilling rigs move on to other prospects, such as in Africa.

Both Republicans and Democrats in Louisiana say the federal moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico — put in place after the BP oil spill — is now that state’s biggest problem.  US federal government officials and many environmental activists say the temporary ban on drilling is necessary to prevent further accidents.  But people in the Gulf region are worried that many of the well-paying jobs provided by the energy industry might leave and never come back.

The recent oil spill left many fishing boats idle in the Mississippi Delta and along the Gulf of Mexico coast. But more people in Louisiana make a living from the oil and gas industry than from fishing.  And the moratorium has put hundreds of them out of work.

Waylon La Font and Mathew Cheramie are both residents of the Mississippi Delta who have worked on fishing boats as well as in energy production. They now fish on their own time because there is little work available, according to Cheramie. “It is hard to find jobs and what work you do find is not guaranteed to be steady, you know, because with the economy already down like it is and they are putting this moratorium on us, it is just making things worse,” Cheramie said.

Waylon La Font Waylon La Font

LaFont says he used to make money in commercial fishing and in new home construction, but the oil spill and the moratorium have hit both. “The moratorium is eliminating the oil field from working so, in turn, the people that have been working in the oil fields are not going to build, so we ain’t [don't] have any residential homes being built,” LaFront said, “everybody [is] building or repairing their homes.”

LaFont and Cheramie love nature and want to keep this area protected from oil spills, but Mathew Cheramie does not believe a moratorium on all deepwater drilling was necessary. “What they need to do is take a step back, correct their drilling, continue, but step up your safety personnel to make sure the job is being done safely and correctly,” Cheramie said.

Mathew Cheramie Mathew Cheramie

Such views baffle many people from outside the region, according to Eric Smith, Associate Director of Tulane University’s Energy Institute. “They think the fishermen and the oil and gas guys should be duking it out in the street, but they are not,” Smith said, “because they are the same people.”

Smith says the impact of the moratorium will worsen in the months ahead. He says drilling rigs cost up to a million dollars a day, so oil companies cannot afford to leave them idle. He says eight rigs that were on their way to the Gulf were diverted to other locations after the ban was imposed, and two others have left since then.  “If you are a company like Murphy, which is one of the rigs that did leave, and you have prospects in Africa as well as here and you see you cannot drill in the Gulf for a couple of years and you are under contract for the rig for five years, you will just move it to Africa and work,” he explained.

Recently-published reports show that US government officials have estimated the moratorium could cost around 23,000 US jobs.

But Smith says the world may also feel the impact, since the drilling ban will make it difficult for Gulf producers to maintain the current oil production level of 1.7 million barrels a day.  “The whole world only has about 5 million-barrels-a-day of spare capacity and consumption is about 87 million barrels, so when we take away that Gulf of Mexico production, you are talking double-digit percentages of the world’s capacity that gets chewed up,” he said.

President Obama says the moratorium could end sooner than the November 30 date established by the Interior Department — if a commission studying the disaster finishes its work sooner.

The president argues that, regardless of the moratorium’s short-term economic impact, the action is necessary to protect the Gulf’s natural treasures from potential future accidents.

Original Article

Outlay triples that of year-ago period

WASHINGTON — BP spent $93 million on advertising between April and July, three times as much as it did the year before, according to a report released by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

BP officials told committee staff that they increased advertising in newspapers and TV in part to keep Gulf Coast residents informed of issues related to the massive oil spill that began April 20 and to ensure transparency during the recovery process.

That explanation didn’t sit well with Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Fla., who suggested the Energy and Commerce Committee determine the extent of BP’s advertising response to the biggest oil spill in U.S. history.

“BP’s extensive advertising campaign that is solely focused on polishing its corporate image in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon blowout disaster is making people angry,” Castor said. “As small businesses, fishermen, and mom and pop motels, hotels and restaurants struggle to make ends meet, they are bombarded by BP’s corporate marketing largess day after day.”

The company would be better off “doing more to address the damage to the Gulf Coast tourism industry, fishing industry, and for researchers and for the taxpayers,” Castor said.

In its report to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, BP said it significantly increased the markets in which it ran local newspaper advertisements during the 2010 period.

From April through the end of July 2009, the company ran local newspaper ads in only two states and the District of Columbia. During that same period in 2010, the company ran local newspaper advertisements in 126 markets in 17 states, including the states directly affected by the oil spill, Louisiana, Florida, Alabama and Mississippi, as well as California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Texas. The Times-Picayune is one of the newspapers that has run BP ads.

BP said it ran fewer TV ad radio spots during April-July 2010 than the previous year, but a higher percentage of the 2010 ads were longer — 60 seconds instead of 30 seconds — and ran in national rather than regional markets, increasing costs substantially.

The company also provided $89.5 million in grants to aid tourism promotion efforts in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi during the spill disaster, and some of that money likely were used for advertising by each state or its tourism agency, according to the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Original Article

Louisiana and Texas scientists gathered on the Tulane University campus Thursday to comment on a proposed sampling plan aimed at answering lingering questions about how much oil and dispersant remains in the Gulf of Mexico and adjacent shoreline from the BP Macondo blowout.

“This is a plan to keep working until we’re satisfied we know where the oil is and, in particular, anything we can do about it,” said Steve Murawski, chief science adviser for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, who explained the plan to participants.

Conflicting government and scientific reports, Murawski said, have resulted in public confusion about what components of the oil or dispersants are still in the water and how long they will last, and over statements that the oil has changed forms through dilution or diffusion but has not completely disappeared.

“Unless we can demonstrate to everyone’s satisfaction that we looked in pretty much every place it could be, then there will always be more questions,” he said. “From the foot of the beach where the tide goes back and forth to around the well site and deeper.”

Thursday’s meeting in the Rogers Memorial Chapel at Tulane University was the last of three by Unified Command officials, including representatives of several federal agencies and BP and about 50 scientists. On Tuesday, officials met with Florida scientists at the University of South Florida in St. Petersburg, and on Wednesday with scientists from Alabama and Mississippi at the Mississippi State University Extension Center in Biloxi.

The comprehensive search for oil and dispersant was proposed by National Incident Commander Adm. Thad Allen on Aug. 13, when he said he’d try to unify all existing and future research efforts.

The effort follows repeated questions about how much oil or its breakdown products from the well accident remain in tiny droplets or other forms contained in underwater plumes far from the wellhead, in sediment on the ocean floor, on the surface or along the shoreline, after federal officials released an initial accounting that seemed to conclude that only 26 percent of the oil still existed.

Allen directed Rear Adm. Paul Zukunft, the federal on-scene coordinator, to develop a plan that would:

Monitor and assess the distribution of oil remaining in the water column or in bottom sediments.

Evaluate the distribution of “indicators of breakdown products” of dispersants used in the oil spill response, meaning any chemical compounds remaining when the dispersants weather and age.

Identify any additional response requirements that may be needed to address subsurface oil.

A handout that was to be provided to the scientists attending Thursday’s meeting, which was closed to the public, suggested that Unified Command officials wanted to hear from the scientists on how to gather samples to answer several questions:

Where are the oil and dispersants now, and in what concentrations?

Are concentrations present that could pose a hazard to human health?

How quickly are the oil and dispersants degrading or dispersing, and where are their breakdown products?

Where are there opportunities to recover oil from the environment?

Allen’s proposal calls for including academic and private scientific institutional partners and state agencies in planning and executing the new oil and dispersant monitoring plan. He also said officials should use scientific cruises and other assets that already had been deployed by the federal government or by private organizations and universities, and incorporate data that already had been collected into the studies.

That’s a positive step, said Michael Blum, an assistant professor in Tulane’s department of ecology and evolutionary biology who is studying how coastal marsh plants and the microbes that live in and around them respond to the spill.

“One of the questions that has always come up is what is the role of the academic community, how are we supporting the response effort, how are we responding to the long-term monitoring needs,” Blum said after the meeting. “There’s been a lot of confusion about what we could actually do. In many respects a lot of folks feel like they’re on the periphery of what’s going on.”

The plan calls for communicating information that’s gathered as part of the oil and dispersant search on a regular basis to both the scientific community and the public, and to coordinate the new studies with other monitoring strategies already under way, such as surveys of seafood conducted to assure its safety.

That’s another positive, Blum said, if federal officials follow through on their promise.

“There’s a general perception that there’s lot of data that’s not being made available,” he said, adding that he believes the problem stems in part from the huge amount of data that has been gathered too quickly for the Unified Command to deal with it.

Murawski agreed.

“It’s pretty clear that there’s a bit of unawareness of the amount of data, its availability and how to use it,” he said. “So clearly, we need to do more than simply lay the data out there. We need more of a mechanism to interact with the scientists.”

Murawski said the information also will be made available to the general public, which will have an opportunity to comment on the sampling plan when it is released in a few days.

“If the public perceives that there are gaps in the plan, in terms of spatial coverage or the parameters we’re looking at, we’re going to speak to that kind of input” in the plan’s final version, Murawski said.

A number of scientists urged more emphasis on long-term study of the effects of the oil and dispersant on all areas of the Gulf, a concern that mirrors similar questions raised by the public, Murawski said.

“People are very concerned about how we understand the long-term impacts of that oil,” he said. “They want to see that we have enough intellectual horsepower, enough funding to understand those big societal questions, as well.”

He said government and industry officials hope the data from the study also will help guide future oil spill responses.

“People are asking, because of the events of today (the explosion and fire on Marine Energy’s Vermilion 380 platform), how much better prepared are we now for responding to a big oil spill like this in deep water?” Murawski said. “What have we (learned) about dispersants, is that an efficacious technology? What have we learned about our ability to track oil, to be geared up in a response? And I think the scientific community wants to help in those lessons learned.”

Original Article

CHEYENNE, Wyo. — Oil and gas representatives are voicing criticism about the first proposed changes to Wyoming’s oil and gas leasing contract in nearly three decades, including a provision increasing royalties paid to the state.

The Office of State Lands and Investments has proposed rewriting almost the entire standard oil and gas leasing contract. The most controversial proposal would raise the maximum amount for state royalties from 16 2/3 percent to 18 3/4 percent.

The royalty hike will bring Wyoming in line with royalty rates in other states, State Lands and Investments assistant director Harold Kemp told the Casper Star-Tribune.

Other proposed contract changes would require the operator to return to the state any land not included in a drilling unit at the end of the primary term of the lease.

Kemp said the changes are needed to bring contracts up to date and reflect existing state regulations or commonly used interpretations of ambiguous language in the current leasing form.

Oil and gas contracts have become larger and more complicated since the early 1980s when the current contract was written, he said.

“I do think (the lease) is definitely not contemporary with the times,” he said.

But oil and gas industry representatives Wednesday questioned the wisdom of a royalty hike, saying it would actually lead to a decrease in state revenues because energy companies would choose cheaper leases on federal and private land.

Maurice Brown, an investor in oil and gas leases, said that that if the royalty increase goes through, he would cut his investments by at least 50 percent.

“The goose is running across here, and that goose is laying eggs, and now you’re going to put a choke on it,” Brown said.

Others said the new contract would require the state to hire more staff, an assertion Kemp denied.

Kemp said his office will submit a proposal to the State Board of Land Commissioners during their next meeting Oct. 7.

Original Article

HOUSTON — The Houston City Council has approved a three-year agreement to allow a company to explore for natural gas reserves beneath three municipal parks.

The $200,000 lease is with Southern Star Exploration, with the city standing to get 25 percent if natural gas is found and recovered. The proposal involves Herman Brown, Brock and Maxey parks.

Mayor Annise Parker says if natural gas is found, drilling would take place from nearby property, with no drilling allowed in the parks. Parker says any gains would be reinvested in the park where the natural gas was found.

The Houston Chronicle reported Thursday that some neighbors have cited environmental concerns.

Original Article

An EPA report published Tuesday told residents near Pavillion, Wyoming to avoid drinking and cooking with well water after tests revealed petroleum hydrocarbons and other contaminants in 17 out of 19 wells near the town. Many residents worry that local drilling for natural gas is to blame. The EPA is still investigating.

“EPA has not reached any conclusions about how constituents of concern are occurring in domestic wells,” the report said. [Reuters]

As the agency continues its investigation, it along with other government organizations and the natural gas company EnCana, will provide alternative drinking water sources for affected residents. EnCana volunteered to provide the water, though a company representative told the AP that company’s tie to the contaminated the wells is unclear–since the chemicals appeared in earlier EPA tests, before EnCana’s drilling started in 2005.

For Pavillion, which has around 250 nearby gas drilling sites, the report adds to findings from earlier well tests taken in the spring of 2009.

In spring 2008, residents of Pavillion–concerned about the quality of their drinking water–contacted the EPA in Denver, Colorado. The agency sampled 39 individual wells (37 residential wells and two municipal wells) in March 2009 and found nitrate, arsenic and methane gas. The agency conducted the second sampling in January 2010. [CNN]

fracking

The news adds to concerns about natural gas companies’ hydraulic fracturing, commonly called fracking. Though individual gas companies use different drilling techniques for different geological structures, the basics involve drilling around 1,000 to 8,000 feet underground and pumping in 50,000 to 350,ooo gallons of water to crack the underlying rock. After removing 15 to 80 percent of that then-contaminated water, the gas company can pump out the natural gas which flows from the cracks. The water usually comes from local surface water or groundwater; once contaminated, it can go back to surface water if filtered or into a new well underground.

As 80beats discussed in June, some believe natural gas could soon satisfy a large proportion of the United States energy needs, an estimated (pdf) 20 percent by 2020. As a result, more people are demanding a better understanding of hydraulic fracturing’s effects on drinking water sources. The EPA plans to conduct an extensive, two-year study on hydraulic fracturing starting later this year.

Original Article

BP still has plenty to do to clean up oil spilled from its now-capped Macondo well and to repair the damage caused to our region’s natural resources and economy.

But containment efforts are winding down, and it’s good that government officials and the company have finalized plans detailing how and when those operations are to be scaled back.

The strategy will help address the most pressing concern: how and when to collect more than 300 miles of protective boom that remain in Louisiana waterways. Some state and federal officials are concerned that leaving so much boom out there could hurt the marshes if a hurricane landed in our region.

Advertisement

Handling Louisiana’s boom will take time. It took BP nearly six weeks to retrieve 1.6 million feet of boom in Alabama, Florida and parts of Mississippi. Louisiana alone has that much boom, so collecting it here is likely to last through the hurricane season’s busiest period.

The new plan recognizes that the threat of additional oil washing ashore means some areas will need to keep boom in place. Just as important, it requires that local officials agree before BP removes oil containment equipment. Gov. Bobby Jindal said that should help prevent a repeat of past disputes over resources being moved out prematurely, and he’s right.

The strategy also includes steps to monitor the presence of submerged oil in the Gulf — and that cannot be overlooked. Scientists are monitoring 400 “sentinel” stations: crab traps filled with absorbent boom meant to capture any oil in the water column.

Officials said the offshore or near-shore stations have shown no signs of lingering oil. But having a plan to monitor any submerged oil and to wrap up this massive cleanup in an orderly manner is an important step.

Original Article

An oil rig off the coast of Louisiana in the Gulf of Mexico has exploded, sending all 13 oil workers into the Gulf, one of whom remains missing. A search and rescue effort by the U.S. Coast Guard is already underway. The explosion comes shortly after oil finally stopped flowing into the Gulf (for the moment) from another rig that had been severely damaged by a large explosion. Fortunately, early reports say this explosion occurred at an oil rig that is not currently producing, drastically reducing the potential for further environmental damage.

Despite strong encouragement from many liberals and environmental activists, that crisis did not secure sweeping energy reform legislation or the full Democratic backing of long-sought cap and trade proposals. Even President Obama’s offshore drilling moratorium was initially knocked down by a state court. In the wake of that long and difficult episode, many are greeting this most recent event with deep, almost macabre cynicism about our ability to learn from disaster.

Original Article