Deepwater Horizon Miss. Canyon 252 Oil Leak Timeline

[RWebb]

April 20 - 9:52 pm - Distress call from Deepwater Horizon Rig; Explosion

April 21 - USCG log entry raises concern that blowout could result in 8k bbl/day spill

April 22, morning - Unified Cmd. holds phone conf., discusses potential spill if the rig sinks

April 22 - Rig Sinks; USCG Adm. Allen informs President oil may start leaking into the ocean; Sec. Interior Salazar informs President the spill could become worse than Exxon Valdez; President orders accident response is to be the #1 priority

April 22 - USCG spotter aircraft report a 16 mile2 oil sheen; report it is not as bad as they imagined

April 22, pm - USCG suggests the oil sheen they saw might be residual oil from the fire

April 23 - USCG est.s potential for a leak of up to 64k bbl.; has flown 5 sorties & applied dispersant

April 23 - undersea ROV reports the BOP had closed and sealed off the well

*** may have been looking at the wellhead not the end of the fallen riser pipe; which would explain the lack of oil seen by the ROV

April 23 - BP establishes an incident command post just in case there is a major leak

April 24 - undersea ROV reports oil leak on ocean floor - "small quantity of unknown material”; surveys later give est.s of ~1k bbl./day

[Zeke]

And now we know better. Should have known then. Jail time for all that misinformed.

[WolfeMacleod]

Wait, wait... you forgot to include...

Goldman-Sachs sells off 44% of it's PB Holdings two days (as reported) just prior to rig explosion (as I understand it)
A Series Of Lucky Coincidences Involving Goldman Sachs And BP plc | zero hedge

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by milt

And now we know better. Should have known then. Jail time for all that misinformed.

LOL if we jailed those who spread misinformation on this incident we wouldn't have enough jails. Present company included.

[RWebb]

milt - there is a criminal investigation ongoing

but for any jail time re misinformation, the spreader would have had to be reckless or super-negligent at least, or have done it deliberately (aka "knowledge" or "purpose" to harm basically)

I doubt anyone goes to jail, or should. There could be some hefty civil and criminal penalties tho.

[jyl]

The potential damage to the economy in the affected parts of LA and now FL, if the coast is so fouled that both fishing and tourism are seriously depressed for some years, is probably in the tens of billions. Civil fines depend on the volume of oil and the degree of negligence, but could also be in the ten billion range. The oil industry is going to face higher regulatory hurdles and costs for future offshore drilling, and you know BP is going to be especially under the microscope. I think $5BN to $20BN in damages and fines to BP, plus $BNs in reduced future profits for the whole industry, would be "enough" punishment.

[RWebb]

maybe.

the effects from other oil spills have lingered for over 35 years, so how do you price that??

[jyl]

The economic effects won't last as long as the tar, perhaps. There is still the occasional tar ball on the beaches around Santa Barbara, but the economic damage ended many decades ago.

[cbush]

Let's fine them billions of dollars and give it to the government. Then let's put lots of restrictions on drilling. Slow the process, increase the cost, reduce the output of oil. A brilliant plan because guess what?--WE are the ones that are going to pay for it. Who will profit? The Middle Eastern terrorist supporters that still have access to easy oil. That Deepwater Horizon well was a significant find and would greatly contribute to sustainable oil supplies in the US. Clearly BP will take responsibility and work to clean it up as best as possible, but I would argue that the long term environmental damage pales in comparison to say...East Coast PCB contamination.
In the meantime, let's punish ourselves/the oil companies. I loved $4.50 a gallon gas- anybody for $5?

[jyl]

You seem to assume that making offshore drilling more costly will increase the price of oil and hence gasoline. Why do you think that?

[cbush]

Because I will decrease the supply of relatively cheap oil. How could it not?

[BeyGon]

Originally Posted by jyl

You seem to assume that making offshore drilling more costly will increase the price of oil and hence gasoline. Why do you think that?

shouldn't this have been green?????????