More

Gulf Oil Spill: BP's Costs Appear Manageable 8 Months Later

Gulf Oil Spill

CHRIS KAHN   12/29/10 12:04 PM ET   AP

NEW YORK — As the Gulf oil spill gushed out of control, BP's financial liabilities seemed big enough to sink the company. No more.

Cleanup, government fines, lawsuits, legal fees and damage claims will likely exceed the $40 billion that BP has publicly estimated, according to an Associated Press analysis. But they'll be far below the highest estimates made over the summer by legal experts and prominent Wall Street banks, such as Goldman Sachs, which said costs could near $200 billion.

BP will survive the worst oil spill in U.S. history for several key reasons: it has little debt; its global businesses are forecast to generate $26 billion next year in cash flow from operations; the environmental impact of the spill isn't as bad as feared; and the government seems unlikely to ban BP from Gulf drilling. To bolster its finances, BP has cut its dividend, issued debt and sold more than $21 billion in assets.

"It could have been a lot worse," says Tyler Priest, a University of Houston petroleum historian who serves on President Obama's oil spill investigation committee. "BP is going to come back from this."

Many influential investors appear to agree. According to Thomson Reuters, 23 firms with $1 billion or more invested in the stock market, including BlackRock Investment Management, Managed Account Advisors and Rydex Security Global Investors, more than doubled their holdings of BP stock from July through September.

At $44.11, BP's stock price has risen 63 percent from its low of $27.02 on June 25. It's still down 27 percent from its close of $60.48 on April 20, the day of the spill. The well was capped on July 15.

The AP analysis shows the company is likely to face $38 billion to $60 billion in spill-related costs. A settlement with the federal government could reduce that amount, while a successful class-action lawsuit could add billions more.

The analysis includes:

_The $10.7 billion that BP already has paid to plug its well, clean up the spilled oil and pay damage claims and other costs.

_A $20 billion fund that BP set up in August for individuals and private businesses that were affected by the spill. The fund, known as the Gulf Coast Claims Facility, pays for environmental damage, personal injury, cleanup and lost earnings. The fund so far has paid $2.7 billion to address nearly 168,000 claims. Nearly half a million individuals and businesses have filed claims, and those that settle with the fund give up their right to sue the company. If any of the $20 billion is left over, it goes back to BP.

_Fines: The Justice Department is suing BP for violating the Clean Water Act. Fines are based on how much oil was spilled. The government's estimate of 4.9 million barrels means BP faces between $5.4 billion and $21.1 billion in fines. The upper limit applies if investigators conclude BP acted with gross negligence. The government has a history of settling with companies for as little as 50 cents on the dollar in order to avoid lengthy disputes, says Eric Schaeffer, former head of the Environmental Protection Agency's enforcement division.

_Legal fees: BP has hired lawyers, engineers and geologists to defend the company. These experts could cost as much as $2 billion, according to Mitratech Inc., a consulting firm that handles legal and trial logistics for Fortune 500 companies.

_Lawsuits: The toughest costs to estimate are future settlements and judgments from the hundreds of lawsuits filed against BP, including any class actions. Shrimpers, oystermen, charter-boat operators, restaurant workers and real-estate developers are suing BP for lost business. Oil rig workers and cleanup crews are making personal injury claims. And Gulf states and local governments are expected to sue for lost tax revenue and environmental damages. Alabama is seeking an initial $148 million from BP. Analysts at Citigroup say settlements, judgments and punitive damages from these suits will total as much as $6 billion.

Legal experts caution that the unpredictability of juries makes it difficult to estimate the cost of losing a class-action lawsuit. A successful class-action could easily double the Citigroup estimate for total legal liabilities, says Alexandra Lahav, a University of Connecticut professor who studies such lawsuits.

BP may be able to spread the spill's costs around. Minority partners Anadarko Petroleum Corp. and MOEX 2007 LLC own 35 percent of the operation, and rig owner Transocean Ltd. also may be asked to pay. "Companies have the incentive to settle with BP to put the matter behind them," FBR analyst Robert MacKenzie says. He expects BP to get as much as $2 billion from Transocean and as much as $4 billion from Anadarko.

"We've set aside what we think is the right amount to pay for the relevant costs" from the spill, BP spokeswoman Sheila Williams says.

Since the spill, BP has moved aggressively to shore up its finances.

The company suspended its quarterly dividend of 84 cents a share, which cost it $10.5 billion last year. It also raised $21 billion in asset sales that include: $7 billion for its stake in Pan American Energy; $7 billion for oil fields in the U.S., Canada and Egypt; $1.9 billion for its Colombian exploration business; and $1.8 billion for assets in Vietnam and Venezuela. BP also raised $3.5 billion in an Oct. 1. bond sale.

From April through June, when BP's stock was tanking, Fred Fromm, who manages a natural resources fund for Franklin Templeton Investments, scooped up 170,000 shares. Their value climbed by more than $2 million in the third quarter.

A few weeks after the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and sank, scientists worried the oil slick would reach the Gulf's Loop Current, which sweeps around Florida and up the East Coast. Beaches would be damaged along the way. But BP got lucky. Gulf winds kept shifting, which kept the oil concentrated in the waters south of Louisiana, said David Hollander, a University of South Florida chemical oceanographer. And hurricanes mostly avoided the region.

Scientists disagree about how much oil remains in the Gulf, but already the streaky sheens of oil on the surface are mostly gone. The more oil that remains, the greater the potential for environmental lawsuits.

Whatever remains, "it won't impact their long-term ability to do business," says Citigroup oil analyst Mark Fletcher.

Exxon dealt with lawsuits for decades after its Valdez supertanker ran aground and spilled 11 million gallons of crude into Alaska's Prince William Sound in 1989. The spill cost Exxon $4.5 billion – nearly half of which went to clean up the oil. The rest was spent on payments to residents and businesses, punitive damages and settlements with the government.

Exxon never lost its perch among industry leaders, and BP won't either, says Citigroup's Fletcher. BP remains among the top oil drillers in a world that runs on petroleum, and that may be the best way to judge the company's lasting power.

"Did (Valdez) stop anyone from buying Exxon gasoline? No. Exxon's results are better than anyone's on a multiyear basis," Fletcher said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

NEW YORK — As the Gulf oil spill gushed out of control, BP's financial liabilities seemed big enough to sink the company. No more. Cleanup, government fines, lawsuits, legal fees and damage cla...
NEW YORK — As the Gulf oil spill gushed out of control, BP's financial liabilities seemed big enough to sink the company. No more. Cleanup, government fines, lawsuits, legal fees and damage cla...
Filed by Travis Donovan  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,147
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (37 total)
01:50 PM on 12/31/2010
The Question is, While we're destroying the Earth bit by bit, will money be a factor STILL in the future in order to restore Earth? If it is, then i'll say we're screwed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GreenKate
11:11 AM on 12/31/2010
Of course they will survive, but they won't get any of my paycheck.

When it comes to BP and their subsidiaries Arco, AM-PM and Castrol I just pass them by.

Still don't use Exxon either. Never going back. Of course they will still be rich but not by me.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:20 PM on 12/30/2010
In other words, life goes on for BP as usual. No setback really, not of any consequence, anyways.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GreenKate
11:13 AM on 12/31/2010
Thank god that poor soul got his life back! He's probably spending new year's on his yacht at this very moment, b***ching about what a terrible year it has been for HIM.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Opinionated Lady
Buy American - Bring industry home
10:57 AM on 12/30/2010
Here's something related, if you really want to become alarmed about the situation in the Gulf-
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22514
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GreenKate
11:16 AM on 12/31/2010
Fanned and faved. Thanks for the link. That is a great website that I hadn't looked at for awhile. Will bookmark it now. Happy new year.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Opinionated Lady
Buy American - Bring industry home
11:47 AM on 12/31/2010
Happy New Year, Kate.
01:00 PM on 01/18/2011
If you are truly buying into the above web post you may want to take a step back and remove the green colored glasses. Try to read the report objectively once and see if you can pick out the remarkable bias. The diction alone should expose that the authors are not operating from an impartial scientific standpoint. ( I have read a LOT of scientific articles and this is not one!)
SoSorry
There are no gods.
09:58 AM on 12/30/2010
"the environmental impact of the spill isn't as bad as feared"
Really?? Freak In A
12:56 PM on 01/18/2011
Is this intended to be taken as "no kidding!" or "are you kidding me?!" ? Personally I can understand either viewpoint but in truth it is not hard to believe that the severity of the spill was initially overstated and has now been rightsized.
photo
Soulsurfer
Solar Electrician,Longtime Surfin'Fool
09:48 AM on 12/30/2010
"The costs of the oil spill will not impact BP's ability to do business." And that's the most important thing, isn't it? What a wonderful world we live in.
smahl
I miss the days of Paul Wellstone.
08:23 AM on 12/30/2010
Ever since I first saw that photo of the bird I have never stepped foot back in a BP and do not plan on doing so. I.m sure BP doesn't care they lost me as a customer but I feel better about myself.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
frameofmind2
04:12 AM on 12/30/2010
I would really like to know how anybody can know an unknown quantity?

So how is it the article is written in such way to indicate "known" total costs of the cleanup which isn't finished, or if it is, is even more telling, which is impossible by any stretch of any one's imagination.

Especially when you consider the protocols imposed for "cleanup" where really protocols to get rid of the oil “evidence/oil” as cheaply as possible without the smallest regard for the environment. This is especially true for the defence of the Gulf Coast or lack there of, is more accurate. Pathetic, Criminal Negligence,

The bottom line to the top line, was how to minimizing "costs" at any cost possible. The resulting decisions by BP, because they were in charge, (like it or lump it) were financial costs to the company.

Cause and Effect, with every action there is an opposite and equal reaction, unfortunately in this case we are talking about pollution, with every drop of oil is capable of polluting far more then one gallon of pristine ocean water.

Anybody want to venture a guess as to what one barrel of oil would contaminate quantitatively in ocean water?

Part 1
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
frameofmind2
04:14 AM on 12/30/2010
The fact is once the oil rig blew, and was lost, taking with it the murder of 11 working family men, BP was faced with a very important decision, which was how were they going to recover and or get rid of most of the oil as cheaply as possible to the company in the short and long run.

The correct answer for BP, was to allow the oil to surface intact, and then uploading the oil onto tankers, in so doing removing 100% of the oil/pollutant from the environment. The resulting effects of removing the oil would have been the saving of hundreds of miles in coastline, the ocean at large, tens of thousands of jobs add infinitum...... For BP their choice was the worst for everybody concerned, for the pollution will be with us long after we (the living presently) are all long gone. Calculate the cost of that one for me.

Never mind the cause and effect to the ocean and people of the Gulf in every or any aspect from what I witnessed through the media, or in this case the lack of coverage, so what's new? Fortunately I have seen enough to be a witness to a crime or more like many crimes starting with the murders of 11 men, due to for starters violation of safety protocols.

Part 2
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
frameofmind2
04:40 AM on 12/30/2010
BP chose to get rid of the oil largely through chemically treating the oil with dispersants, a million and a half gallons of dispersant the last I heard. More pollution that changed the oil chemically to separate and sink into the depths of the ocean of the Gulf of Mexico, to remain for decades, re: Exxon Valdez.

With the final outcome yet to be written, this is all so sad on so many levels......

Where is the justice for anybody and everybody......

Oh, I forgot, for BP
photo
Chaucea
Think of the otters!
03:47 AM on 12/30/2010
That picture of the oil saturated bird, struggling desperately against the side of a ship has been, for me, the most iconic and powerful image of this horrific, tragic disaster. :-(
09:21 PM on 12/29/2010
The environmental impact? what about the financial and economical for the region? Deep water wells still aren't pumping - more imported oil - higher prices for the public.
09:25 PM on 12/29/2010
Decimated seafood industry, sick people, lost jobs, tainted food...the list goes on.
01:57 AM on 12/30/2010
agreed
09:09 PM on 12/29/2010
"the environmental impact of the spill isn't as bad as feared"

Wow. Are you kidding me? Do you actually believe this environmental impact can be quantified a few months after the well was "capped?" This is precisely why BP will recover from this. They, along with the Feds, did a masterful job of getting this story out of the media as quickly as possible.

What a joke.
07:43 PM on 12/29/2010
It’s sad that oil companies can be careless and don’t have to face any major throwbacks. The damage may not have been as bad as it could’ve potentially been, but it still left a definite mark for many. People who lived around the gulf were affected and private businesses involved in the gulf lost money and precious time. Animals in the area didn’t stand a chance, and many lost their lives. How long will it be until the water is truly completely safe? All of these are factors that the company can simply shrug off with their uninterrupted flow of money.
The company has money set aside to pay for any damage, injuries, etc. that have come to the private businesses. If you planned on pressing charges, they offer you a settlement, and you give up your right to press charges again. If you look at the big picture, they have it down perfectly. Say you don’t agree to the settlement, and you continue pressing charges. What is the chance that you would win against this mega-company? It’s more likely that you would leave empty-handed, and with your problems lying in your lap. So make it easy on yourself and BP, take the set amount that they give you, and forget about pressing charges.
07:18 PM on 12/29/2010
Why I May Be Wrong

I’ve written that the BP gusher was a bad thing. I still believe it was…and continues to be.
BUT…
I know only what I read and see on TV. I live roughly 1500 miles from the Gulf and have never come closer to a shrimp boat than the day I saw ‘Forest Gump.’
For all I know, every word Tony Hayward has said is true as glue. I never attended a BP board meeting so I have no idea what Hayward told his directors. For all I know, he told them 1000 times that BP must always put safety and environmental risks first, and profits second. For all I know, he was the lone voice of reason but was voted down 30-1 by his board 50 times.
You get the idea.
The best I can do is to read maybe five different news sources; never Fox because that would be stupid. And I try to reason things out for at least 24 seconds before I start typing. Ex: “ Wouldn’t BP have tried to avoid killing those 11 workers? Okay, corporate decision-makers care more about profit than about, well, anything that doesn’t threaten their egos. But surely they didn’t want to kill those workers, if only due to legal exposure.…” And so on.
How can I do better? I’m asking.
01:08 PM on 01/18/2011
Business - like war - is hell, and sometimes war almost seems clean by comparison. I will submit that any real blame cast directly at the feet of Tony Hayward or any CEO/President for that matter is simply public frustration and society's need for a whipping boy. (The same can be said for 90% of blame laid at the feet of any U.S. President.) Certainly nobody at BP desired the turn of events which took place and it is also plausible that financial motives were the only ones driving decision making. Fortunately the punitive regulations which do exist for circumstances like this help to shape those financial motivated decisions to be socially (and by extension environmentally) responsible ones.

You can do better than them by making your decisions based on your own beliefs not others. If every corporate CEO in the world acted on their own personal morals and not "what is best for the business", the world would indeed be a better place. Unfortunately, this will never happen, because business is itself a messy business.
07:10 PM on 12/29/2010
BP cruelly killed that poor pelican and countless other creatures. Tucker Carlson is probably calling for the execution of all BP employees.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
doodlebug2
Moe. Larry the cheese
06:27 PM on 12/29/2010
This shoots Ron Pauls enviromental theories in the %^$!
In his manifesto he claims that regs should be gotten rid of because companies will not pollute and do bad things because the consequences are worse,. So after several months it is business as usual, see citizens we (BP et al. ) can do what the want because the consequences are terrible.
Still it boils down that most of our consumer citizenery does not care. filler up!