I am pleased the Obama Administration has announced that two experienced and fair-minded figures will head up his independent commission to investigate the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster. On May 4, we sent a letter to the President urging him to take launch an investigation, and I appreciate that he has responded.
Former Senator Bob Graham was raised in the Everglades and has been a champion of responsible environmental protections as governor of Florida and in the U.S. Senate. As Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, he co-sponsored legislation overhauling the intelligence community in the aftermath of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. He is well equipped to assess this disaster and recommend needed change.
William Reilly served as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for four years under President George H.W. Bush. Prior to that, he was president of the World Wildlife Fund and The Conservation Foundation. As president and CEO of Aqua International Partners, Reilly overseas international investments in water purification and wastewater management in developing countries.
Both men have demonstrated the expertise and the commitment to environmental protection needed to ensure the success of this commission's vital work.
But it's essential that the commission be given the right mandate. As I told the New York Times, the commission must review whether, when, and where offshore drilling should occur.
In order to do that, it must have a broad and wide-ranging charge. That is the only way to ensure the commission is free to make credible and comprehensive recommendations on how to prevent future disasters and protect our oceans and coastlines.
On Friday, NRDC sent another letter to President Obama elaborating on what the commission should be asked to do. Specifically, it should address three sets of issues.
1. The causes of the disaster and the adequacy of the response. The problems that led to the destruction of the Deepwater Horizon, the loss of 11 lives, and the massive oil leak cannot be solved if they are not fully understood. This means not only exploring the mechanical causes of the blowout, but also understanding the systemic regulatory failures that seem to have made such an event more likely and more damaging.
The commission must also look at everything from the way standards for equipment and operations are written and enforced to the way leasing, exploration plans, and production plans are evaluated and approved. It should also evaluate the response to determine whether BP and the government had effective procedures in place to contain and clean up the oil, protect public health and the environment, keep the public informed and carry out their legal responsibilities related to liability.
2. The regulatory changes needed to strengthen environmental protection and prevent future disasters. The commission should be charged with making specific recommendations on how to change statutes, regulations, and monitoring and enforcement procedures. This should include procedures designed to prevent blowouts and other oil spills, both acute and chronic. And it should include the systems that must be in place to enable both oil companies and the government to respond adequately when such events do occur.
3. The guidelines for siting offshore drilling. The commission should recommend the criteria the government should use when deciding whether, where, and how seismic exploration and offshore drilling should be allowed to occur, given the risks these activities pose. These recommendations should inform the Administration's broader efforts to implement a more comprehensive ocean policy that would increase the protection of our oceans.
As we await the commission's report and recommendations, the administration should place a moratorium on all new oil drilling activities -- including the drilling planned in the Arctic this summer. The current broken system is not capable of ensuring the safety of new offshore drilling activities, especially in challenging and extremely vulnerable environments like the Arctic Ocean. No one can claim at this point to be ignorant of the extent of the risks moving forward.
I realize that the investigation we are suggesting would be extensive and require a variety of expertise. But the continuing crisis in the Gulf has demonstrated beyond any doubt that every aspect of our system of regulating oil exploration is broken. We need a thorough enough review so we can learn how to start over.
This post originally appeared on NRDC's Switchboard blog.
Joseph A. Palermo: And Carter Thought He Faced National Malaise
Kevin Grandia: BP CEO Hayward: 'We Had Too Many People Working to Save the World'
Roy Rivenburg: BP's New Cleanup Plan: Divert Oil Spill to Bermuda Triangle
Nikolas Kozloff: BP and the Perilous Voyage of Bama the Manatee
Why is British Petroleum "Drilling in our Back Yard" and selling our oil back to us that is if and when they learn how to extract it without spilling it.
Since when do we allow other countries to sneak in to our domain and rob us of our natural resources and then sell them back to us at a "Bargain Price"???
R
Love
Bette
REMEMBER: The best way to save the Earth and to eliminate corporations is to live simply, laugh often, love always and live in harmony with nature.
I am TIRED of this "hampster wheel" we are FORCED to be on...THINKING that " I'm gettin somewhere now" !!
People spend ALL of their BEST time of life CHASINg funny lookin paper JUST to KEEP some PERSON from TAKING what they have..and on it goes from person to person
I have one question for Ms. Palin (and all those "get government out of our lives" folks): How do you think this no government oversight thingy is working for the country you wanted to be the VP of?
As an aside, I will make one prediction now: As soon as it becomes clear to BP that they will face huge damage claims, BP will declare bankruptcy. I think we're talking weeks, months at the most.
NOSMAVAN
Actually, Sarah for once was right, which only means how Stupid Baby Stupid, the Obama administration has been in blowing this (see my thougts just below).
Unbelievably, Obama's blinking administration has yet to realize this and still thinks that a few boot footprints on the throat of BP and insincere promises to Americans will suffice. Just give this another week as the public begins to absorb these realities:
1) BP could have sopped up 85% of the oil with super tankers to put it in, as was readily accomplished in a huge spill in the Middle East. They haven't done this is because the strategy being used (do nothing/stall) is -- that's right -- cheaper!
2) A number of engineers know that the flow could have been stopped by now and suspect that it hasn't because the fix would permanently eliminate this lucrative well. So BP has been stalling hoping to find an option that would not kill the well.
3) BP's subsidiary-produced dispersant is more toxic and less effective than several alternatives, but those cost money for BP buy. The Obama administration ordered BP to use to use the nonBP dispersant, but BP is thumbing their nose at Barack.
So, this Gulf gusher isn't Obama's Katrina or Waterloo, it's his Pearl Harbor! If he can't handle it, he can Kiss the Baby along with everyone in the Gulf region.
Even if it was stopped temporarily, new fissures would be opened by the pressure of the intact portion
of the well, and instead of one gusher, you might end up with a dozen or more. That's why some have, unfortunately, suggested that the only sure way to stem the flow permanently would be with a nuclear bomb.........!
I know this sounds desperate and crazy, but something has got to be done.
Repatriation of wildlife and fish is generally extremely costly, iffy, and takes a long, long time to bring about, even when the environment is reasonably healthy. So when its been despoiled, the problems become greatly magnified.
Optimism in this case, though well intended, is better rejected for reality and anger.