Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
The five most profitable companies in the world last year made their money in oil and gas. And yet for all the investment corporations like BP have made into finding and extracting fossil fuels, they appear to have made precious little progress in figuring out how clean up beaches and wetlands and water when something goes wrong.
BP made $21.1 billion in profits last year alone, and yet its response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster looks pitiful and is pitiful, with booms that don't work and aren't placed right, and bamboo pickets that don't hold it in place, and workers who keep shoveling at the same spot in the sand because the oil just keeps coming.
Could it really be this bad? Could BP and its kin really not know how to clean up oil spills, 20 years after the Exxon Valdez? Yes, says one of the co-chairs of President Obama's new BP Oil Spill Commission, former EPA administrator and oil executive William Reilly:
The extraordinary success of this industry in developing technology to go deeper and deeper into the sea to put down a well, essential well, and then go out in all directions to get the product up is breathtaking.
And the condition, as nearly as I can tell from looking at the photographs and the movies from what's happening in the Gulf, is that the response technology is about as primitive as it was in the Exxon Valdez case. That is the skimmers that are dysfunctional in the open ocean, the booms that break, as you say, with the slightest wave action, dispersants that are not ready for prime time, that may or may not be toxic, something that has to be determined in the event, which seems to me ought to have been anticipated, with impacts on fish that really need to be very carefully acknowledged and may or may not have been.
I would say that it's really scandalous that the response capability, even on the surface, not just the subsurface where we have admittedly a case of virtually nothing to work effectively is really going to be a prime focus of our review and has got to be a major priority of the commission.
Reilly noted his record of levying fines at the EPA, and called for a "serious regulatory apparatus" to force the industry to never let this kind of disaster happen again. He said he will take a leave of absence from the board of Conoco Phillips, where he serves as a director of the oil company while the commission conducts its investigation. Reilly said he raised the issue of his involvement in the oil industry and says he understand that the "president considered it an advantage that I do know the industry and have experience with it."
[TRMS interview with commission chairs Sen. Bob Graham and William Reilly]
[How primitive is the response? This primitive]
Leave a Comment:
Without an army of on scene personnel, the effort to protect the wetlands and life on them is pathetic and useless.
Not only have we had over a month to prepare for this man made catastrophe, we've had decades of knowing how devastating the effects of such an accident like this could be. And the companies and government have done all but nothing to protect us.
Nothing is being done to get the oil out of the water and collect it. Such as massive suction pumps placed at the mouth of the gusher. At least some of the oil could be kept from dispersing.
To put the turd in the punchbowl, it is fact that BP and possibly also our Executive branch, is putting blocks on reporting of what is happening. Shielding observations of the damage being done just increases the publics awareness of how we have been duped.
Without some effective opposition to this corporate hurtful wrongdoing and destruction of our environment, trust in our governance will not last long.
I’m glad Rachel brought up the “potential” conflict of interest presented by Bill Reilly in leading this investigative commission while being a member of the Conoco-Phillips Board of Directors (since 1998 when it was just Conoco, just recently re-elected at the shareholders’ meeting on 5/12/10). It was a totally fair question to ask Mr. Reilly, and his response provided information that as far as I can tell had not been reported in prior news on the investigative commission. However, I am not convinced that a temporary leave of absence from this position he has held for 12 years -- and no doubt fully expects to be there waiting for him when he returns -- provides a meaningful separation to remove the conflict of interest. Even if he is willing to forego the $200K director’s compensation for a year or so, he still has a couple million dollars’ interest in Conoco-Phillips stock which would doubtless be harmed should the commission’s recommendations add cost or restrictions to existing and future oil development and extraction.
But there is another troubling aspect to Reilly’s leadership of this committee, further illuminated by his remarks last night. He said, “I would say that it's really scandalous that the response capability, even on the surface, not just the subsurface where we have admittedly a case of virtually nothing to work effectively is really going to be a prime focus of our review and has got to be a major priority of the commission.” Scandalous? Really? REALLY? As a long-time director of Conoco, how is it coming to him as a surprise that the oil industry doesn’t put safety first and is not prepared to respond and minimize the effects of the inevitable spills? It would have been illuminating to discover what actions he took as a director to ensure Conoco-Phillips’ oil extraction activities did put safety and environmental stewardship first….
Regarding the commission itself, it seems to date only Reilly and Graham have been named. When are the rest of the commission members going to be identified and what is their timetable for completing their review? When do they expect to have interim recommendations for stop-gap corrective actions until the final recommendations can be implemented?
Arghh.
Rachel - your reporting on this disaster is HEROIC! Thank you so much.
I am in tears this morning watching your podcast.
- your number one fan in Brazil.
Conflict of interest issues aside for a moment, I wonder how effective this commission will be, regardless of its ultimate findings and recommendations. How many of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations have been implemented?
Take a look at the videos on this link. Why isn’t this “miracle” being considered in the Gulf clean-up effort?
http://push.pickensplan.com/profiles/blogs/need-everybodys-help-a-company
I agree with mightbealiberal: the potential conflict of interest has concerned me from the get-go. Yes, it makes sense to have someone on the board who knows the industry intimately, but we've already seen way too much of a comfort zone between Big Oil and the people who are supposed to regulate it. If people with a deep investment in oil are going to be heading up this commission, how are we supposed to trust that they'll recommend cracking down effectively, even if it ends up costing the oil industry a bundle? And I suspect that it WILL cost the oil industry a bundle, if they're required to do things like dig a relief well at the same time they're digging a new undersea well, put R&D into new cleanup technology, and truly make safety a #1 priority. None of that's going to come cheap, and the oil industry is likely to fight it every step of the way. Will Reilly really be able to make those recommendations? I hope so, or this commission is just lip service. Again.
So what he is saying, in regards to the most fines in history on his watch at the EPA, 'When I was in charge, the environment went through an unprecedented amount of destruction.'
If I was making billions of dollars of profit and only paying a few million in fines, I'd pay the fines with a smile. We can all thank the supreme court for allowing the corporation to exploit our nation without fear of assuming responsibility for there actions, limited liability, oh yea in a court of law the corporation is look upon as a person, albeit a psychopath. If you won't question his integrity I will and do.
Did I mention, I LOVE YOU RACHEL, keep throwing out those inquiries, 'cause I want to know.
As a supporter of the president, I'd recommend less frivolous news and more urgency over dealing with BP as the company that has destroyed life on the Gulf coast. Admiral Allen should not seem to be the BP spokesman. Ask what FDR would do and how he would respond to all those people whose lives are being ruined by this disaster.
As for this commission, so far it looks like a dog and pony show. Put Carville on the friggin committee. Obama needs to get serious and rethink his own dependence on big oil.
http://www2.dupont.com/Oil_and_Gas_Extraction/en_US/ Dupont not at all affiliated with the oil industry? Sure it is involved in a variety of industries, but it clearly still has an interest in drilling.
Agree. I was going to make this comment also, you beat me to it. BTW DuPont was also the former parent company for Conoco before it became Conoco-Phillips.
The reason oil companies don't rush into a cleanup is that they know most of this oil will have to dissipate on its own - very little will ever actually be skimmed or absorbed. The cleanup of the marshes will be as damaging as the spill, and will be a show meant to keep people from complaining that nothing is happening.
Look at the history of the Exxon Valdez and Prince William Sound. It is/was an act.
Rachel, I am a big fan of all of your exposés, you could get a medal for indecent exposure! BUT, I think you dropped the ball with this Reilly character, sure he may have an impressive record as far as it goes, but how often did he have to be shouted down at Conoco board meetings for trying to get the corp to be ready for this eventuality? How often did he stand up and fight for an industry that devoted enough of their insane profits to be prepared for catastrophic spills [hee hee!--gushers]?
Please keep up your oh so valuable work, we love it out here.
Rob S
Even I knew about the MMS and their sex and drugs antics from reading about it. How come the new guy Salazar (sp) didn't go in the department and clean house?I'd like to know what he HAS done for the last year. I say dump him and get a more assertive person to manage it.
I agree Salazar is too cozy with the oil and coal companies. What is his responsibility with this disaster.
I also knew the MMS had its problems why didn't he clean house? These people at MMS are replaceable. Everyone is. Lets start with Salazar because many think he needs to go...he is a torn in Obama's administration. But the right will want him to stay because look what he's given us so far.
I just watched your post on the failed booming in LA.! THANK YOU RACHEL for bringing attention to this. There is a video on YouTube that shows proper booming techniques! ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx8kMXufu3w ) BP is not using them!!! The coast guard know proper booming yet they say nothing!!! It makes me irate to see BP’s BS PR commercial with Tony standing there saying BP is doing everything they can when I know they are not even booming the right way!!! Rachel I would love to see you bust this wide open and thank you for your efforts in this travesty! Keep up the good work!
p,s, sorry about the strong language in the you tube vid.
Just wanted to offer the following quote:
"I have not failed. I've just found 10000 ways that won't work."
NO, that's not BP CEO Tony Hayward, that's Thomas Edison. But it sure fits! Where is Superman when we need him?
I still have concerns about Reilly's ties to oil despite his taking a leave (meaning, obviously, that he'll be back, tho even if he wasn't going to be, he'd still possibly 'owe them one'), but as a Floridian, I've known Sen. Graham (the good one, from FL, not the other from SC) by his work for the state and I trust him implicitly so his words of support go quite a way. He could be deceived but he's not naive and apparently knows Reilly and he really loves the state so he's not about to make any decisions which will be bad or negligent of the whole region.
That oil companies/industry have neglected cleanup technological development for the last 25 years in an understatement. For a view on what New Orlean's Marsh may look like if all this continue indefinitely, look at area suffering the consequence of repeated oil spills and inadequate clean up in their marshes...the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria. The following link is very informative - http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/oil-industry-has-brought-poverty-and-pollution-to-niger-delta-20090630
william reilly does also have ties to the 'world wildlife fund', urban renewal, and renewable energy investments... so it is hard to tell how this "investigation", will go down. we know there are many negligent acts by bp coming to light, so this investigation will largely tell anyone concerned just how cozy reilly and bob graham are with other insiders.
it's a club. politician turns lobbyist, turns investigator. kinda cozy eh? how hard will they go after friends in the club? remains to be seen.
want a hint? want an 'investigator indicator". in the interview with rachel, she asks (paraphrasing), "how can we approve drilling, when they don't know how to clean up a spill?" bob graham: "i can tell you (rachel), that bill and i are committed to doing a thorough diagnosis of what's happened..." oooh, don't go too far there mr. graham, don't go out on a limb. "... tough recommendations to the president as to what we can do to give the american people the 'confidence' that we are going to learn this lesson and not repeat it".
uh yeah, because oil companies, insurance companies, coal companies, drug companies, and the revolving door of corporate politicians and lobbyists just ooze "confidence" that you'll prosecute rich corporations just like you would the lowest of the low in our society. confidence. just oozing with it. "and not repeat it". no way, we're sooo confident bp isn't "beyond prosecution".
bets anyone?
It dosen't matter what other CEO's and executives makw a year, let's
take all the oil company execs out and give them 20 lashes for making
money. Then shut down all oil wells in the USA. Then go buy some
shares of stock in a bicycle or motor scooter company. Then everybody
would be happy. Right. Get a brain, dumbo/////////////////////
see anything wrong with oil companies, or any company for that matter, being able to lobby their way out spending money to develop remediation or prevention measures at the same rate they spend money on research and development of new techniques to make money??? technology needs to progress at the same rate. where did looking at the big picture go??? does the end justify the means???? we don't have a planet, money doesn't mean much, does it??? does this sound radical?? maybe and i don't care. we need to stop sitting on our hands and depending on government and big business to determine our future and the future of out earth.
there's too much politics. too many organizations. too many personal agendas. what happened to the best for the most?
science note... even though oil on the beach is disgusting and an economic nightmare for beach businesses, it can be cleaned up much easier and has much less environmental impact than oil that reaches the small islands and marshes. Oil coats plant life in these areas, greatly reducing and ultimately preventing the O2 exchange. Plants die, roots and all. Soil and rock erode. Repeat on all sides over and over as the oil moves inward. Eventually there's no island. This isn't going to help the buffering affects of these islands during stormy months.
Thanks for pressing this issue.
Thanks for pressing Reilly on this.
Thanks for pressing Reilly on this.
My apology for the multiple postings. I had difficulty with the Newsvine registration process.
I did find a bit more about ConocoPhillips Gulf of Mexico efforts:
http://peureport.blogspot.com/2010/06/william-reilly-takes-temporary-leave.html