On October 5th, President Obama signs an Executive Order creating the Gulf Coast Restoration Task Force,
President Obama Signs Executive Order Forming Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force
http://www.greenlodgingnews.com/president-obama-signs-executive-order-forming-gulf
Gulf Coast Restoration Task Force Gets Under Way - ScienceInsider
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/10/gulf-coast-restoration-task-force.html
READ THE EXECUTIVE ORDER here---> http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/10/05/executive-order-gulf-coast-ecosystem-restoration-task-forceUnfortunately, the news on this Task Force can only be found in the most of obscure "green" newspapers, and perhaps a short blurb somewhere that I couldn't find.....
It was not reported in any detail by any of the major Newspapers or electronic media that I can locate.....
So What was reported the day after the Restoration Task Force was signed into existence, a move that should have been mainly cheered as a good move.....?
Less than 4 weeks before an election in which Obama is being made the subject of Referendum, Reuters comes out with a Story on how a report that "will" be coming out, penned by the very commission that Obama established to look into the Spill, was bad news for the Administration. The Smear is such because many of the comments in
the report focuses on the first 10 days of the spill (making it appear that everyone had equipment like BPs ready to go, but yet the Obama Admin "relied" on BP instead and were too "Optimistic".....10 days in), but the article is written in a way that it is not made clear.......and because it is Reuters, it is dissiminated Far and Wide....and of course the electronic media runs with it.....
White House relied too much on BP, blocked spill info
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6953Q720101006
First Read - Obama agenda: A stinging reporthttp://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/10/07/5249282-obama-agenda-a-stinging-reportSo then, the White House responds to the "accusations" made in the smear story.....
but that response is just simply ignored....Guess cause most folks don't like to read and plus,
with several good news days for the Democrats last week,
and Obama's approval rating going back up.......
looking into the specifics of this anatomical smear would simply be
a let down for those in search of a good smear on the President.
Here's the response, nevertheless.
FROM OMB:
“NOAA produced a report at the request of the Unified Command to project the most likely movement of oil. As part of its function to coordinate and review all interagency materials developed in response to the BP oil spill, OMB led a review of a preliminary report and provided comments to ensure the analysis reflected the best known information at the time and accurately reflected the limitation of the model and available information, including response actions. For example, the initial analysis did not include the fact that there was use of boom, skimming, burning, and/or other methods to contain and remove the oil and therefore ran the risk of not accurately reflecting response actions taken. NOAA incorporated the feedback, and the eventual report reflected this improved analysis which is available online:
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100702_longterm.html . The facts bear out that the federal response significantly mitigated the impact of the spill.
As for the predictions about the spill flow rate, senior government officials were clear with the public what the worst-case flow rate could be: in early May, Secretary Salazar and Admiral Thad Allen told the American people that the worst case scenario could be more than 100,000 barrels a day. In addition, BP reported in 2009 that a blowout of the Deepwater Horizon (MC 252) could yield 162,000 barrels of oil a day (
http://media.al.com/live/other/BP%20drill%20plan.pdf ).
Since the Deepwater Horizon explosion the night of April 20, federal authorities, both military and civilian, have been working on-site and around the clock to respond to and mitigate the impact of the resulting BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The federal government response was full force and immediate, and the response focused on state and local plans and evolved when needed. As directed by the President, the response was based on science, even when that pitted us against BP or state and local officials, and the response pushed BP every step of the way. Finally, and most importantly, the response provided results for the people of the Gulf Coast.”
EARLIER PRESS REPORTS ABOUT THE BP OIL SPILL FLOW RATE:5/2/10: AP Reported that Adm. Allen Said the Volume of Spewing Oil Could Climb to 100,000 Barrels a Day in the Event of a Total Wellhead Failure. “Adm. Thad Allen, the Coast Guard commandant, said the volume of spewing oil could climb to 100,000 barrels a day in the event of a total wellhead failure, a much greater breach than is believed to exist now.”
5/5/10: NY Times Reported that Federal Officials Had Raised the Possibility of a Leak of More than 100,00 Barrels a Day if the Well Were to Flow Unchecked. “Federal officials have raised the possibility of a leak of more than 100,000 barrels a day if the well were to flow unchecked, but the chances of that situation occurring were unclear.”
6/21/10: Washington Post Reported that Rep. Markey Released an Internal BP Document that Showed the Companies Estimate of a Worst-Case Scenario Was 100,00 Barrels Per Day. “Also on Sunday, Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), chairman of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee, released an internal BP document showing that the company estimated the worst-case scenario for a spill at the Deepwater Horizon well as being 100,000 barrels per day. When it submitted the document to Congress, BP had told the House Energy and Commerce Committee that the worst-case scenario was 60,000 barrels a day.”
5/2/10 : CNN- CROWLEY: What is the worst-case scenario, while we're on that?
SALAZAR: The worst-case scenario is we could have 100,000 barrels or more of oil flowing out. And the requirements BP has is to have the capability to respond to that kind of a spill. And it means doing everything that's going on, including containing the well down at the bottom, mitigating the impacts on the sea, mitigating impacts as things happen on shore.
You're talking about a multi-billion dollar company here who is, I believe, the fourth-largest company in the world. And we will not spare any effort on the part of the United States of America to make sure that all of their resources are brought effectively to address the problem.
CROWLEY: Admiral Allen, just while we have that 100,000 figure, that being sort of disaster, is that something you fear the most? Do you think that could happen?
ALLEN: Well, if we lost the total wellhead, it could be 100,000 barrels or more a day. I think - just to follow up on what Secretary Napolitano said, this whole thing has been kind of a process of discovery. It wasn't until they remotely-operated vehicles down, were able to survey the entire length of the 5,000-foot pipe-riser that was crumpled on the ocean floor, that we finally found three sequential leaks over a period of about 72 hours.
And as I told some folks, you know, the difference between 1,000 and 5,000 barrels a day, when you look at the potential discharge of 100,000, leads me to believe that there are a lot of inaccuracies associated with trying to estimate flow from a broken pipe at 5,000 feet. That's the reason it's so very, very important we focus on stopping this leak right away.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4567021&mesg_id=4567026
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
