Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CajunConservative

The OSLTF is only on the hook up to liabilities of $75 million, according to this artcile today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/us/02liability.html

The fund is huge, but not huge enough is the entire aquaculture of the Gulf is destroyed. No wonder BP is offering $5000 to each Alabama landowner the relinquishes their right to sue.


68 posted on 05/03/2010 11:23:04 AM PDT by worst-case scenario (Striving to reach the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: worst-case scenario
Of course it won't be enough to pay for the spill but the fact is that there is a good chunk of change in place to deal with this along with the laws to speed things up.

Of course the feds f'd up in their response and must get the same flack that that they gave Pres. Bush.

Despite plan, not a single fire boom on hand on Gulf Coast at time of oil spill

If U.S. officials had followed up on a 1994 response plan for a major Gulf oil spill, it is possible that the spill could have been kept under control and far from land.

The problem: The federal government did not have a single fire boom on hand.

But in order to conduct a successful test burn eight days after the Deepwater Horizon well began releasing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf, officials had to purchase one from a company in Illinois.

When federal officials called, Elastec/American Marine, shipped the only boom it had in stock, Jeff Bohleber, chief financial officer for Elastec, said today.

At federal officials' behest, the company began calling customers in other countries and asking if the U.S. government could borrow their fire booms for a few days, he said.

( Photobucket Why don't we have more on hand? )

A single fire boom being towed by two boats can burn up to 1,800 barrels of oil an hour, Bohleber said. That translates to 75,000 gallons an hour, raising the possibility that the spill could have been contained at the accident scene 100 miles from shore.

"They said this was the tool of last resort. No, this is absolutely the asset of first use. Get in there and start burning oil before the spill gets out of hand," Bohleber said. "If they had six or seven of these systems in place when this happened and got out there and started burning, it would have significantly lessened the amount of oil that got loose."

In the days after the rig sank, U.S Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mary Landry said the government had all the assets it needed. She did not discuss why officials waited more than a week to conduct a test burn.

At the time, former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration oil spill response coordinator Ron Gouget -- who helped craft the 1994 plan -- told the Press-Register that officials had pre-approval for burning. "The whole reason the plan was created was so we could pull the trigger right away." Gouget speculated that burning could have captured 95 percent of the oil as it spilled from the well.


70 posted on 05/03/2010 12:00:42 PM PDT by CajunConservative (Shut Up Mary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson