This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Matthew Simmons: Lightning Rod for Gulf Oil Controversy
Matthew Simmons has made a lot of big claims about the oil spill (see videos below).
Because
of his background, Simmons has been interviewed repeatedly in
television, newspaper and radio media. Simmons was an energy adviser to
President George W. Bush, is an adviser to the Oil Depletion Analysis
Centre, and is a member of the National Petroleum Council and the
Council on Foreign Relations, and is former chairman and CEO of Simmons
& Company International, an investment bank catering to oil
companies.
People have become polarized around Simmons as a
lightning rod. For example, people who believe all of Simmons' claims
believe that anyone who questions any of Simmons's claims is working
for BP. On the other extreme, people who think Simmons has gone senile
or is simply talking his book (he's short BP) tar and feather anyone
who questions BP's version of the Gulf narrative as being a crazy
Simmons follower.
So let's assess Simmons' claims one-by-one. And - more importantly -
let's refocus the discussion away from one person and towards the Gulf
itself (Simmons himself will either be vindicated, proven off-base, or
something in between. But that is his personal concern, not ours).
BP's stock Will Go to Zero
Simmons predicts that BP's stock will go to zero. he might be right. Fines under the Clean Water Act are $4,300 per barrel of oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico. And civil and criminal damages could be substantial.
But BP has been doing everything in its power to lowball the amount of oil spilled into the Gulf (and see this), even though it easily could have easily quantified
how much oil is spilling. If the government allows BP to get away with
lowballing the spill number, the fines won't bankrupt BP.
Similarly, if the government let's BP maintain its $75 million liability cap on economic damages, let's BP hide the extent of the damage to the Gulf (see this and this), to perform only a superficial clean up of the Gulf and fails to press criminal charges (or let's BP off with a slap on the wrist), then BP might survive by selling assets.
And remember, BP is still one of the largest suppliers of oil to the U.S. military. See this and this.
In addition, Gordon T. Long argues that the failure of BP would have a greater affect on the U.S. economy than the failure of Lehman.
So some say that - even if it's wrong - BP will be considered "too big to fail" and will be bailed out.
There is a "Lake of Oil" in the Gulf
Simmons claims there is a "lake of oil" in the Gulf, 30 feet thick and miles long.
I don't know about this claim, but scientists have found giant underwater plumes, and NOAA has just announced traces of oil 30 meters thick stretching for quite a ways. See this, this, this and this.
Specifically, because millions of gallons of Corexit have been applied,
many solid plumes have been broken up into giant bodies of solution ...
mixtures of water, oil, methane and dispersant.
But these
solutions can contain levels of oil and other chemicals which are at or
near the levels which are toxic to marine life (see below).
BP Has Killed the Gulf
Simmons told Bloomberg that BP has "killed the Gulf".
Obviously,
the effect on the Gulf will be severe - at least in the short run -
especially because BP has used millions of gallons of Corexit
dispersant, which is highly toxic to animals.
An
independent scientist from the University of Georgia - Dr. Joye - says
that government scientists are underestimating the amount of oxygen
depletion in the Gulf waters. Dr. Joye says that it's not a conspiracy.
Rather, government scientists have only been studying oxygen levels
close to the blown out well. However, oxygen levels are much lower 3-15
kilometers from the leaking wellhead (the water right near the wellhead
has been recently exposed to oil, and so the oil and methane-eating
bacteria haven't had a chance to start breaking it down yet. Further
away from the spill site, the bacteria breaks down the oil and methane
more, depleting oxygen in the process.) See this Wall Street Journal article.
Indeed,
as Dr. Joye notes, scientists have no idea how the large quanties of
dispersant will effect the Gulf's microbial communities (for more
information, watch part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4 and part 5 of Dr. Joye's July 13th press conference).
The bottom line is that the use of so much Corexit in combination
with such huge amounts of oil is a science experiment, and no one knows
the outcome. This might kill the Gulf. Or the Gulf might bounce back
surprisingly fast.
Rob Kendall, director of Texas Tech’s Insitute of Environmental & Human Health, says:
This
is a catastrophe of enormous proportions. To me, this is the biggest
environmental toxicology experiment we’ve ever conducted.
And Kim Withers, a coastal ecologist at Texas A&M University in Corpus Christi notes:
It's like the biggest science experiment ever. Unfortunately, it's a completely uncontrolled experiment.
We Should Evacuate the Gulf
On one extreme, Simmons says that the health effects from the huge quantities of oil and methane
released from the oil gusher, plus the huge quantities of Corexit used
by BP, have created a toxic brew which could kill 20 million Gulf coast
residents. He therefore says we should evacuate the Gulf coast.
On
the other extreme, the EPA, NOAA and other government agencies have
tried to downplay all potential health effects, according to a senior EPA analyst and many others. Indeed, the head of the EPA said:
I am walking a fine line between truth and hysteria. We don't want to create a panic.
Hurricanes could - under the right conditions - spread oil and toxic chemicals inland. See this and this
.
Marine toxicologist Dr. Ricki Ott and senior EPA analyst Hugh Kaufman both say that Gulf coastal communities should be evacuated.
And University of California Santa Barbara scientist and marine geochemistry expert Dr. David Valentine says
that - at least when BP is burning oil or gas - the area around the
spill site “had a cloud of smoke hanging over it at all times”,
composed of surface burn smoke and the methane flair-up. He said the
burns form “one thick mass of clouds, and when it rains, a lot of junk
comes down from the particulate“.
I simply don't know enough
about how Corexit, oil and methane combine to know how toxic a brew it
could really become, so I don't know whether evacuations should be
implemented.
We Should Nuke the Well
Simmons says that the only thing which will stop the oil spill is a small nuclear bomb inserted deep into the well.
I have researched this issue, and believe that the use of a nuke has more risk than benefit.
However,
conventional explosives - in the hands of top underwater demolition
experts working closely with top Gulf geologists - might be helpful if
the relief wells fail.
There is a Second, Bigger Leak Miles from the Leak We've Seen on the Videos
Perhaps
Simmons' best-known claim is that there is a second, bigger leak miles
away from the leak we've seen on the videos. Simmons claims that what
we've watched on the underwater videos is a smaller leak at the riser,
and that the main well is miles away and gushing 130,000 barrels a day.
He claims that there is a conspiracy by BP to cover this up.
The
claim that BP has hid the real well from the American people seems
contradicted by the evidence we have at this point. And while I can't
say for sure that the claim of a second, bigger leak somewhere else is
false, I have seen nothing to confirm this to date.
However, given that BP has not provided even basic information to the Congressional Committee chairman who demanded it in writing, that BP has done everything it could to cover up the severity of the problems in the Gulf (see this, this and this),
and that we only see what BP chooses to aim its cameras at, we need to
discover some basic facts about the situation before we can even
discuss this intelligently.
Moreover, because NOAA has
discovered other nearby leaks or seeps and because Admiral Thad Allen
says that the seep 3 kilometers away from the blown out well is from
the Rigel gas field, it is vital to find out what's really going on.
See this, this and this.
And a whistleblower previously told 60 Minutes, there was an accident at the rig a month or more before the April 20th explosion:
[Mike
Williams, the chief electronics technician on the Deepwater Horizon,
and one of the last workers to leave the doomed rig] ... says going faster caused the bottom of the well to split open, swallowing tools and that drilling fluid called "mud."
"We
actually got stuck. And we got stuck so bad we had to send tools down
into the drill pipe and sever the pipe," Williams explained.
That well was abandoned and Deepwater Horizon had to drill a new route to the oil. It cost BP more than two weeks and millions of dollars.
Where
did this incident occur? Was there any leak of oil, or only a loss of
equipment into the drilling mud? Have the underwater cameras, seismic
and sonar equipment taken a look at this location to make sure
everything is stable and is not leaking?
Similarly, as Bloomberg reports, problems at the well actually started in February:
BP Plc was struggling to seal cracks in its Macondo well as far back as February, more than two months before an explosion killed 11 and spewed oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
It
took 10 days to plug the first cracks, according to reports BP filed
with the Minerals Management Service that were later delivered to
congressional investigators. Cracks in the surrounding rock continued to complicate the drilling operation during the ensuing weeks. Left unsealed, they can allow explosive natural gas to rush up the shaft.
“Once
they realized they had oil down there, all the decisions they made were
designed to get that oil at the lowest cost,” said Peter Galvin of the
Center for Biological Diversity, which has been working with
congressional investigators probing the disaster. “It’s been a doomed
voyage from the beginning.”
***
On Feb. 13, BP told the minerals service it was trying to seal cracks in the well about 40 miles (64 kilometers) off the Louisiana coast, drilling documents obtained by Bloomberg show. Investigators are still trying to determine whether the fissures played a role in the disaster.
Why do investigators think fissures back then might have played a part in the April 20 explosion and blowout?
The answers to the above questions must be disclosed so that we can assess what's really going on in the Gulf of Mexico.
To watch Simmons make the claims addressed above, watch these videos:
»
- advertisements -
Wang, my theory is that Simmons will continue to get a LOT of mainstream press. So even if we ignore him on ZH, he'll continue to be a lightning rod, unless his claims are addressed.
Indeed, if he's getting more and more out there, then I smell a disinfo campaign???
Disinfo campaign on the part of whom? And how the hell do you "address" claims that are tinfoil-hat crazy? Your favorite whipping boys - Rockford and Gasmiinder, were the only two commenters here (aside from myself) that made any sense at all, but you and your gang of syncophants did nothing but mock them.
Disinformation? What is with the Council of Foreign Relations guy getting farther out than the tin-foil crowd? How soon does Simmons start talking about alien lizards?
I hereby dejunk you. GW continues to look foolish and keeps coming back for more. Pitiful like the open post "what could go wrong during the tropical storm" (that wasn't). No, if there is disinformation it is from GW, GG and their band of junkers.
Thanks AF. But I am flattered to be junked on the same threads with Rockford and gasmiinder, if I do say so myself. I wouldn't even bother coming back, save that I'm trying to imagine why GW keeps on with these fantasies. Here's my current 'best fit" explanation: In my working career, I ran across a few "managers" who were very insecure in themselves, and kept one or more functional idiots around for the adoration they provided. I fired two of these "managers" myself. An earlier one happened to be my boss, and he eventually fired me, but I had the satisfaction of seeing his company in Chapter 7 within a year. Small comfort - a lot of good men went on the dole because of that.
Merlin,
IMO, people who have lost faith in themselves and begin to "overdrive their headlights" can be a problem.
About 60 years ago Eric Hoffer published a little book called "The True Believer". Eisenhower, as President was reported to have pressed it onto his aids. IMO, no matter what stage of life we are in, it is worth a read. I wound up getting all of his "little books" but that and "The Ordeal of Change" covered enough, so that most of his other writings were redundant.
The connection to this thread is best simple summary I can make is; "In my working career, I ran across a few "managers" who were very insecure in themselves and kept one or more function a idiots around for the adoration they provided."
IMO, the quote succinctly describes the malady and the tell. Folks that are insecure can be dangerous to bottom lines, the people around them and, in the long run, themselves. "Overdriving the headlights" can be a temporary problem for anyone but the truely insecure person seems to have trouble saying; "I don't know, lets talk about this."
Man! Look at all those junks! Musta hit a nerve! MMmmm, I feel good all over. . .
I've never read Hoffer, but I have heard/read some of his quotes, and liked every one of 'em. Now that I've got time, I need to start gathering up the books.
I like what you wrote, but I'm still thinking about how it applies to GW. The people I was remembering never had any faith. They got where they were by influence, family or political. The idea of someone losing it I hadn't considered, (yet).
I junked you.
Because that's what a BP shill would do!
GW - I already gave you a REAL conspiracy. It pretty much hook line and sinker proves BPs negligence and liability in this. Surprised you are still focusing your attention on this nut.
A note to CD: Take a look at FloridaOilSpillLaw's interpretation of NOAA's charts. What do you think?
George, I think it is time to change course re Simmons.I have enjoyed the articles so far very much, especially the intense reaction from the troll/shills.However, there is little to be gained by being distracted from the real issues at hand.
The gulf coast is ruined for fishing...try to imagine what that means for those who have fished there for generations.This needs to be emphasised, along with the concomitant economic impact.
BP used corexit primarily to lower their cleanup bill...this is pure unadulterated evil.
BP is totally to blame for the accident.They must be punished in a way that is commensurate to the damage they have caused.
BP is buying researchers at top speed, and gagging them.I would like to know what kind of bacteria will flourish in the environment they have created...and what that means for health and safety.How toxins accumulate in the food chain and what this impacts would be good to know too.
Many people were hurt by this disaster economically,mentally, and socially.
Focus on the victims plight.And how a repeat disaster can be prevented.
Thank you for your work so far!
You have to be a little more specific GW, I have not been reading FOSL, and am not sure which one you mean. The site has a ton of articles on various NOAA models, findings, charts, predictions, etc.