Obama Administration and BP Turned Down Dutch Oil Skimmers on Day 3
U.S. and BP slow to accept Dutch expertise
By LOREN STEFFY - Houston Chronicle – 06/08/2010
Three days after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch government offered to help.
It was willing to provide ships outfitted with oil-skimming booms, and it proposed a plan for building sand barriers to protect sensitive marshlands.
The response from the Obama administration and BP, which are coordinating the cleanup: “The embassy got a nice letter from the administration that said, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’” said Geert Visser, consul general for the Netherlands in Houston.
Now, almost seven weeks later, as the oil spewing from the battered well spreads across the Gulf and soils pristine beaches and coastline, BP and our government have reconsidered.
U.S. ships are being outfitted this week with four pairs of the skimming booms airlifted from the Netherlands and should be deployed within days. Each pair can process 5 million gallons of water a day, removing 20,000 tons of oil and sludge.
At that rate, how much more oil could have been removed from the Gulf during the past month?
The uncoordinated response to an offer of assistance has become characteristic of this disaster’s response. Too often, BP and the government don’t seem to know what the other is doing, and the response has seemed too slow and too confused.
Federal law has also hampered the assistance. The Jones Act, the maritime law that requires all goods be carried in U.S. waters by U.S.-flagged ships, has prevented Dutch ships with spill-fighting equipment from entering U.S. coastal areas.
“What’s wrong with accepting outside help?” Visser asked. “If there’s a country that’s experienced with building dikes and managing water, it’s the Netherlands.”
Even if, three days after the rig exploded, it seemed as if the Dutch equipment and expertise wasn’t needed, wouldn’t it have been better to accept it, to err on the side of having too many resources available rather than not enough?
BP has been inundated with well-intentioned cleanup suggestions, but the Dutch offer was different. It came through official channels, from a government offering to share its demonstrated expertise.
Many in the U.S., including the president, have expressed frustration with the handling of the cleanup. In the Netherlands, the response would have been different, Visser said.
There, the government owns the cleanup equipment, including the skimmers now being deployed in the Gulf.
“If there’s a spill in the Netherlands, we give the oil companies 12 hours to react,” he said.
If the response is inadequate or the companies are unprepared, the government takes over and sends the companies the bill.
While the skimmers should soon be in use, the plan for building sand barriers remains more uncertain. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal supports the idea, and the Coast Guard has tentatively approved the pro-ject. One of the proposals being considered was developed by the Dutch marine contractor Van Oord and Deltares, a Dutch research institute that specializes in environmental issues in deltas, coastal areas and rivers. They have a strategy to begin building 60-mile-long sand dikes within three weeks.
That proposal, like the offer for skimmers, was rebuffed but later accepted by the government. BP has begun paying about $360 million to cover the costs. Once again, though, the Jones Act may be getting in the way. American dredging companies, which lack the dike-building expertise of the Dutch, want to do the work themselves, Visser said.
“We don’t want to take over, but we have the equipment,” he said.
While he battles the bureaucracy, the people of Louisiana suffer, their livelihoods in jeopardy from the onslaught of oil.
“Let’s forget about politics; let’s get it done,” Visser said.
By LOREN STEFFY - Houston Chronicle – 06/08/2010
Three days after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch government offered to help.
It was willing to provide ships outfitted with oil-skimming booms, and it proposed a plan for building sand barriers to protect sensitive marshlands.
The response from the Obama administration and BP, which are coordinating the cleanup: “The embassy got a nice letter from the administration that said, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’” said Geert Visser, consul general for the Netherlands in Houston.
Now, almost seven weeks later, as the oil spewing from the battered well spreads across the Gulf and soils pristine beaches and coastline, BP and our government have reconsidered.
U.S. ships are being outfitted this week with four pairs of the skimming booms airlifted from the Netherlands and should be deployed within days. Each pair can process 5 million gallons of water a day, removing 20,000 tons of oil and sludge.
At that rate, how much more oil could have been removed from the Gulf during the past month?
The uncoordinated response to an offer of assistance has become characteristic of this disaster’s response. Too often, BP and the government don’t seem to know what the other is doing, and the response has seemed too slow and too confused.
Federal law has also hampered the assistance. The Jones Act, the maritime law that requires all goods be carried in U.S. waters by U.S.-flagged ships, has prevented Dutch ships with spill-fighting equipment from entering U.S. coastal areas.
“What’s wrong with accepting outside help?” Visser asked. “If there’s a country that’s experienced with building dikes and managing water, it’s the Netherlands.”
Even if, three days after the rig exploded, it seemed as if the Dutch equipment and expertise wasn’t needed, wouldn’t it have been better to accept it, to err on the side of having too many resources available rather than not enough?
BP has been inundated with well-intentioned cleanup suggestions, but the Dutch offer was different. It came through official channels, from a government offering to share its demonstrated expertise.
Many in the U.S., including the president, have expressed frustration with the handling of the cleanup. In the Netherlands, the response would have been different, Visser said.
There, the government owns the cleanup equipment, including the skimmers now being deployed in the Gulf.
“If there’s a spill in the Netherlands, we give the oil companies 12 hours to react,” he said.
If the response is inadequate or the companies are unprepared, the government takes over and sends the companies the bill.
While the skimmers should soon be in use, the plan for building sand barriers remains more uncertain. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal supports the idea, and the Coast Guard has tentatively approved the pro-ject. One of the proposals being considered was developed by the Dutch marine contractor Van Oord and Deltares, a Dutch research institute that specializes in environmental issues in deltas, coastal areas and rivers. They have a strategy to begin building 60-mile-long sand dikes within three weeks.
That proposal, like the offer for skimmers, was rebuffed but later accepted by the government. BP has begun paying about $360 million to cover the costs. Once again, though, the Jones Act may be getting in the way. American dredging companies, which lack the dike-building expertise of the Dutch, want to do the work themselves, Visser said.
“We don’t want to take over, but we have the equipment,” he said.
While he battles the bureaucracy, the people of Louisiana suffer, their livelihoods in jeopardy from the onslaught of oil.
“Let’s forget about politics; let’s get it done,” Visser said.
Views: 23
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by kittycatmama on
-
Definition of The Jones Act
The Jones Act is officially titled the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, although it came to be known as the Jones Act after Senator Wesley Jones, who sponsored it. The act was passed in response to concerns about the health of the Merchant Marine, and to establish protections for sailors. Prior to passage of the Jones Act, sailors who were injured on the job had few options for recovering damages or getting assistance; recognizing the inherent danger of working at sea and the value of trained seamen, the Jones Act established a system of benefits for sailors.
Two parts of the Jones Act are of particular historical importance. The first heavily promoted American built, owned, and staffed ships. This was accomplished by restricting shipping and passenger trade within the United States to American owned or American flagged ships, and stipulated that 75% of a ship's crew must consist of American citizens. In addition, the use of foreign parts and labor in ship construction and repair was also heavily restricted. This section of the Jones Act was intended to create a strong, well staffed Merchant Marine which could ably serve the United States during both peace and war.
The second important section of the Jones Act created benefits for sailors which are extremely far reaching. Any sailor who is injured at sea is entitled to maintenance and cure, meaning that the sailor's employer must pay him or her a daily stipend and provide medical care to treat the injury. In addition, sailors can also sue for damages if their injuries were caused by negligence on the part of the ship's owners or other crew members, or if they sailed on unseaworthy vessels. These damages include death benefits, in the event that a sailor is killed on the job.
Anyone who spends at least 30% of his or her time in active service on a Merchant Marine vessel can qualify for Jones Act benefits. This includes all staff on board ship, from the Captain on down. The benefits provided by the Jones Act can be significantly higher than benefits for workers on land.
NOTE: PRESIDENT BUSH SUSPENEDED THE JONES ACT TO RESPOND TO KATRINA. -
-
Permalink Reply by Steve P on
-
Interesting article. Haven't seen anything like this in the Washington Post or NY Times. And very nice summary of the Jones Act. Needless to say, there's almost no chance that the Obama Administration would suspend the Jones Act - union issues.
-
-
Permalink Reply by kittycatmama on
-
that is exactly why he didn't suspend it--union issues. The union came ahead of our welands and coastal jobs
-
-
Permalink Reply by P.G. on
-
Obama could have made exceptions.
Now he should be asked to explain why he didn't... -
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Blake on
-
Jack Blake says Barry Obama is a jack ass!
Jack Blake would also boycott BP if they were down here!
jack Blake says don't drill in deepwater if we can't plug a blowout quicker than this!
Jack Blake says BP's and Barry Obama's results suck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Long live the HS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Jack Blake has spoken. -
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Blog Posts
The Lithium Connection to Shale Drilling
Shale drilling and lithium extraction are seemingly distinct activities, but there is a growing connection between the two as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions. While shale drilling primarily targets…
ContinuePosted by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on November 20, 2024 at 12:40
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Miller County, Arkansas
27 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
South Caddo Parish Group
440 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
400 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
244 members
-
Fayetteville Shale
149 members
-
North Caddo Parish
358 members
-
Central Texas Gas
63 members
-
Cass County, TX
119 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
