Scientists Sceptical of Government Claims that BP's Spill Doesn't Threaten Gulf

[amborin]

Scientists skeptical of Obama claims BP's spill doesn't threat Gulf


WASHINGTON — Many scientists say they're skeptical of a widely publicized government report Wednesday that concludes much of the oil that gushed from BP's leaking well is gone and poses little threat to the Gulf of Mexico .
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration , the "vast majority" of the 4.9 million barrels released into the Gulf has either evaporated "or been burned, skimmed, and recovered from the wellhead, or dispersed."

"I'm suspect if that's accurate or not," said Ronald Kendall , the director of the Institute of Environmental and Human Health at Texas Tech University and one of the scientists who testified Wednesday at a congressional hearing about the need for more research into the composition and use of chemical dispersants to break up the oil in the Gulf.
"It's an estimate and I'd like to say that even if it's true, there are still 50 to 60 million gallons that are still out there," he said. "It's too early to draw the conclusion that the coast is clear, but there are species there that will tell us.''

The White House used the report to boost public confidence that the accident at BP's drilling site, which killed 11 workers, fouled the Gulf, killed wildlife and disrupted the regional economies from Texas to Florida , is now behind the nation.
Many scientists, however, questioned both the rosy White House assessment and the administration's motives, timing and record of estimating how much oil was flowing......

snip

The government report also fails to account for the effect of vast, underwater plumes of microscopic droplets of oil that remain unmeasured, scientists said, and it downplays the potential long-term effects of the release of as much as 4.1 million barrels of oil in the Gulf of Mexico . Some 800,000 barrels were captured at the wellhead.
The remaining 50 percent in the water is the equivalent of almost eight Exxon Valdez oil spills, until now the country's benchmark environmental disaster.
"Now what we're hearing is they don't think the damage will be as bad as they initially thought," Steiner said. "We have to remember that the same thing was said after the Exxon Valdez. But much of the damage didn't become apparent until the second or third year."
Scientists also questioned the report's methodology.
"There is a lot of uncertainty in these figures," said James H. Cowan, Jr. , a professor in the Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences at....

snip

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20100804/sc_mcclatchy/3586914


***********************************

Mother Jones:

Feds Giving Spill Data to BP—But Public Stays in Dark

The federal government is now painting a rosy picture of the Gulf spill, reporting Wednesday that much of the oil has miraculously disappeared. The folks at the New York Times bought in, proclaiming, "US Finds Most Oil From Spill Poses Little Additional Risk."

But the oil isn't gone. More than 100 million gallons of it—at least nine and a half times more oil than the Exxon Valdez dumped—remain at the surface or dispersed undersea. And the government is still keeping crucial information about the extent of the damage a carefully guarded secret—from everyone except BP.

Under the federal code governing the damage assessment protocol, as the responsible party, BP is guaranteed a role in the process, and therefore has access to data that the government isn't required to show the public. This privileged information, of course, gives BP an advantage, since the company now knows what it's up against in court. In fact, BP has already hired a fleet of scientists to conduct its own assessment of the damage, which the company could use to challenge the government's analysis. BP's scientists have signed three-year confidentiality agreements, meaning they can't disclose their data to the public.

Nine prominent scientists and marine researchers from groups and research institutions including the National Wildlife Federation, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Florida State University sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder and BP CEO Robert Dudley on Tuesday calling for "full and timely transparency of all scientific information" related to the disaster. If the government released the damage data, local and regional conservation and environmental groups could provide valuable insight, said David Pettit, a lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council. But there's no formal public input period until the government issues its draft restoration plan, which could take years.


snip

http://motherjones.com/environment/2010/08/feds-giving-spill-data-to-bp-not-public

[ixion]

1. The government report...

is full of sh*t, as usual.

[katandmoon]

2. K&R

[Ready4Change]

3. Well, do remember

They've laid in a lot of groundwork to make sure that there is very little photographic evidence around to counter their claims.

Ain't that somethin'.