Oil continues to spew out of his blasted in the Gulf of Mexico, but BP continued to “innovative” drilling in the Beaufort Sea into U.S. waters north of Alaska. What could go wrong? Plenty. In this context, “innovative” means “experimental.” This plan should be put stop until BP is developing a genuine culture of environmental safety.In an ironic twist that BP critics in a rage, the oil company was the only one who managed to claim an exemption from the six months drilling moratorium imposed by the Obama administration in the aftermath of the catastrophic oil spill BP.
The moratorium was suspended by a court, while the government appeals, BP is involved in plans to drill sideways for seven to nine kilometers along the seabed from a stationary point. This point is on an artificial island of gravel, a perch that BP claims, makes the untested technology land-based and thus exempt from any moratorium on deep sea drilling.
BP has become the classic example of the ability of Big Oil to avoid regulation. The Gulf debacle is not embarrassed enough BP to less aggressive about drilling where environmental risks are high.
There will be more of the same, unless the lessons learned from the Gulf and universally applied.
Big Oil is already underway with many deep-sea drilling plans. A recent Thomson Reuters. com industry report cited “growing belief” that the Gulf disaster was caused by the negligence of BP, and should not be seen as a problem for the industry as a whole. But definitely BP carelessness could be a problem for BP, at least.
The plan is to drill Beaufort, among other things, a symptom of the U.S. regulations that the Gulf is not possible eruption: For years, a government agency regulated and enforced security and the certificates issued to drill, a structural conflict of interest made plain. (The bureau is now split into three, is also said that supervisors are full of far too close to industry.)
In Norway and the United Kingdom, which share jurisdiction over the North Sea oil, an agency deals with permits and oversee a separate safety and environmental standards.
In Canada, responsibility for these matters is alternating with the federal government, provinces, or even a municipality.
We can learn from U.S. mistakes: The Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board and Labrador, for instance, monitor safety and environmental impact of the offshore industry but is also responsible for the maximization of economic benefits. The industry provides one third of Newfoundland revenues – $ 1,400,000,000 per year, so it’s easy to see the potential for problems.
This is a problem that is not going to go away. Experts estimate that this year global oil demand will surpass 2007′s record. And oil is becoming harder to find. Remote drilling, technically challenging and environmentally risky, is increasing.
Better regulation is essential. In December, Canada issued new rules on performance-based, not prescriptive. That is, a scout must demonstrate in advance how a project will be carried out safely. The government will no longer issue rules about such details as auxiliary wells. It is up to companies to demonstrate that they can work safely before they go. This is the approach taken by Norway, widely regarded as the leader in the oil drilling safety.
The need for oil is clear, but so is the need for caution. When more than one mile beneath the surface of the ocean to innovate, things can go very wrong.
source:reuters
New law to encourage investment in mining in India: Caterpillar
Foreign investment in the mining sector will boom once the bill Indias on the sector is passed by parliament, the major infrastructure Caterpillar Asia said at a conference here today. . . Read more »
Caterpillar confronted with high profit expectations
Caterpillar Inc. is facing high expectations on Wall Street now that the company closed on a $ 8. . . Read more »