Deepwater, Deep Ties, Deep Trouble: a State-Corporate Environmental Crime Analysis of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Deepwater, Deep Ties, Deep Trouble: a State-Corporate Environmental Crime Analysis of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Dissertations Graduate College 8-2012 Deepwater, Deep Ties, Deep Trouble: A State-Corporate Environmental Crime Analysis of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Elizabeth A. Bradshaw Western Michigan University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations Part of the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons, Environmental Policy Commons, and the Politics and Social Change Commons Recommended Citation Bradshaw, Elizabeth A., "Deepwater, Deep Ties, Deep Trouble: A State-Corporate Environmental Crime Analysis of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill" (2012). Dissertations. 53. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/53 This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEEPWATER, DEEP TIES, DEEP TROUBLE: A STATE-CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME ANALYSIS OF THE 2010 GULF OF MEXICO OIL SPILL by Elizabeth A. Bradshaw A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Sociology Advisor: Ronald C. Kramer, Ph.D. Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan August 2012 THE GRADUATE COLLEGE WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN Date June 29, 2012 WE HEREBY APPROVE THE DISSERTATION SUBMITTED BY Elizabeth A. Bradshaw ENTITLED Deepwater, Deep Ties, Deep Trouble: A State-Corporate Environmental Crime Analysis of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill AS PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Doctor of Philosophy Sociology /^^y<^^<^ (Department) Ronald C^ramer, Ph.D Dissertatijzfh Beview Committer Sociology (Program) Gregory J. HowaroyPh.D Dissertation Review Committee Member Susan M. Carlson, Ph.D Dissertation Review Committee Member lymond Dissertation Review Committee Member APPROVED <^£ Date >Li)SV?^ Dean of The Graduate f ollege DEEPWATER, DEEP TIES, DEEP TROUBLE: A STATE-CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME ANALYSIS OF THE 2010 GULF OF MEXICO OIL SPILL Elizabeth A. Bradshaw, Ph.D. Western Michigan University, 2012 The 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill was one of the worst environmental disasters of all time. Using the concept of state-corporate environmental crime, this project applies a case study analysis of secondary data sources including publicly available government reports, corporate documents, academic sources and journalistic accounts to examine the causes of the blowout and the response to the spill. Building on Michalowski and Kramer’s Integrated Theoretical Model of State-Corporate Crime, this study introduces an additional level of analysis- that of the industry- between the organizational and institutional levels. The causes of the Deepwater Horizon explosion are rooted both in the history of federal development of the offshore oil industry, and the organizational actions of the corporations most directly involved: BP, Transocean and Halliburton. Undertaken in close coordination between the federal government and BP, alongside privately contracted oil spill response organizations, the response to the spill can be classified as a state-facilitated corporate cover up of the environmental crimes in the Gulf. This was accomplished through scientific propaganda and censorship of images and information. Working together, BP and the Obama administration sought to downplay the size of the spill and its effects. An unprecedented amount of toxic chemical dispersants were applied at the surface and directly at the wellhead in an effort to conceal the amount of oil. Federal restrictions blocked access to cleanup operations, beaches and airspace, thereby limiting public visibility of the spill. Policing the media blackout was an intricate matrix of federal and local law enforcement, and private security companies hired by BP. Suppression of images and information helped to contain public outrage while allowing BP and the federal government to carry out dangerous response measures with little oversight. As this study demonstrates, the most recent spill is not an isolated instance of state-corporate environmental crime, but rather is the result of the criminogenic structure of the deepwater oil industry. Copyright by Elizabeth A. Bradshaw 2012 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I must extend my sincerest gratitude to my dissertation adviser Dr. Ron Kramer and the other members of my committee, Dr. Greg Howard and Dr. Susan Carlson. Without their mentorship, support, and encouragement not only on this dissertation but for the duration of my graduate education, I would not be the critical scholar that I am today. Additional thanks to the outside member of my committee Dr. Ray Michalowski for his enthusiasm and contributions to this project. Furthermore, the generous support provided by the Dissertation Completion Fellowship from the Graduate College at Western Michigan University has been essential in allowing me to craft such a solid dissertation. Lastly, I am incredibly grateful for my family and friends who have helped keep me grounded throughout this disorienting educational journey. Elizabeth A. Bradshaw ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................. ix CHAPTER I. SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Chapter One: Introduction and Background .................................. 1 Introduction........................................................................... 1 Oil in Santa Barbara and Power in America..................... 1 Literature Review .................................................................. 6 Definitional Debate ......................................................... 7 State-Corporate Crime.................................................. 11 Environmental Crime .................................................... 19 State-Corporate Environmental Crime........................... 23 Theoretical Approach........................................................... 27 Industry as a Level of Analysis...................................... 31 Research Design and Methods ............................................. 39 Sources of Data ............................................................ 42 Chapter Two: Federal Regulation of the Offshore Oil Industry .... 46 Peak Oil and Deepwater Drilling .......................................... 46 Establishing Federal Control: Early Offshore Oil Claims (1937-1954)......................................................................... 49 iii Table of Contents—continued The Submerged Lands Act and Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953 ........................................................ 51 Federal Royalties from Outer Continental Shelf Leasing (1954-1969)......................................................................... 53 Industry Influence on Government ................................ 55 Environmental Protection vs. Energy Development (1969- 1981)................................................................................... 55 Outer Continental Shelf Leasing Act Amendments ........ 57 Neoliberal Offshore Development: The Rise and Fall of the Minerals Management Service (1982-Present)...................... 59 Area-Wide Leasing ....................................................... 61 The Legislative Push into Deeper Waters ...................... 64 Problems at the Minerals Management Service.............. 65 Normalization of Deviance: The MMS Royalty-in-Kind Program Scandal 2008 .................................................. 69 Conclusions ......................................................................... 73 II. SECTION TWO: CAUSES OF THE DEEPWATER HORIZON EXPLOSION Chapter Three: Corporate Actors ................................................ 75 Overarching Failure of Management at BP, Transocean, Halliburton........................................................................... 75 British Petroleum (BP)......................................................... 77 Lord John Browne, BP CEO 1995-2007....................... 78 Organizational Changes................................................. 79 Prior Offenses............................................................... 82 iv Table of Contents—continued Transocean .......................................................................... 90 Prior Problems with the Deepwater Horizon Rig........... 91 Past Accidents .............................................................. 91 Halliburton........................................................................... 93 Conclusions ......................................................................... 94 Chapter Four: The Blowout of Macondo..................................... 96 BP and the Macondo Well ................................................... 97 Causes of the Blowout ......................................................... 99 Drilling Mud ............................................................... 100 Changes to the Well Design ........................................ 101 Cementing the Well...................................................... 104 The Explosions ........................................................... 110 Failure of the Blowout Preventer.......................................
Recommended publications
  • Deepwater Mobile Oil Rigs in the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Uncertainty of Coastal State Jurisdiction Rebecca K
    Journal of International Business and Law Volume 10 | Issue 2 Article 10 2011 Deepwater Mobile Oil Rigs in the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Uncertainty of Coastal State Jurisdiction Rebecca K. Richards Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/jibl Recommended Citation Richards, Rebecca K. (2011) "Deepwater Mobile Oil Rigs in the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Uncertainty of Coastal State Jurisdiction," Journal of International Business and Law: Vol. 10: Iss. 2, Article 10. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/jibl/vol10/iss2/10 This Notes & Student Works is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of International Business and Law by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Richards: Deepwater Mobile Oil Rigs in the Exclusive Economic Zone and the DEEPWATER MOBILE OIL RIGS IN THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE AND THE UNCERTAINTY OF COASTAL STATE JURISDICTION Rebecca K. Richards* I. INTRODUCTION The involvement of a deepwater mobile oil rig in the April 2010 BP oil spill disaster in the United States exclusive economic zone ("EEZ") in the Gulf of Mexico forcefully demonstrated the potential that deepwater mobile oil rigs have to cause catastrophic harm to the coastal state in ways not presented by fixed oil rigs operating in shallow water.' Though coastal states have this great risk of catastrophic harm, their plenary jurisdiction over deepwa- ter mobile oil rigs is currently uncertain. 2 The vagueness of coastal state jurisdictional author- ity over these rigs3 unacceptably increases the risk of accidents,4 as seen with the BP Deepwater Horizon spill.
    [Show full text]
  • Gulf Oil Disaster Complaint Exhibit 2: Deepwater Horizon Exploratory Plan
    United States Department of the Interior MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 120 1 Elmwood Park Boulevard New Orleans, Louisiana 701 23-2394 In Reply Refer To: MS 5231 April 6, 2009 Ms. Scherie Douglas BP Exploration & Production Inc 501 Westlake Park Boulevard Houston, Texas 77079 Dear Ms. Douglas: Reference is made to the following plan: Control No. N-09349 'n"L'e Initial Exploration Plan (EP) Received February 23, 2009, amended February 25, 2009 Lease (s) OCS-G 32306, Block 252, Mississippi Canyon Area (MC) You are hereby notified that the approval of the subject plan has been granted as of April 6, 2009, in accordance with 30 CFR 250.233(b)(1). This approval includes the activities proposed for Wells A and B. Exercise caution while drilling due to indications of shallow gas and possible water flow. In response to the request accompanying your plan for a hydrogen sulfide (H,S) classification, the area in which the proposed drilling operations are to be conducted is hereby classified, in accordance with 30 CFR 250.490 (c), as "H2S absent. 'I If you have any questions or comments concerning this approval, please contact Michelle Griffitt at (504) 736-2975. Sincerely, Dignally qncd by Michael M ic ha e 1 ~~b~~=MichaelTolbm,o. ou. go". <=us Dale: 1009 04.06 14:51!30 Tol bert -0soo' for Michael J. Saucier Regional Supervisor Field Operations UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT March 10, 2009 MEMORANDUM To: Public Information (MS 5030) From: Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231) Subject: Public Information copy of plan Control # N-09349 Type Initial Exploration Plan Lease(s) OCS-G32306 Block - 252 Mississippi Canyon Area Operator BP Exploration & Production Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Energy Corridor Year Event 1868 Louisiana's First Well, an Exploratory Well Near Bayou Choupique, Hackberry, LA Was a Dry Hole
    AAmmeerriiccaa’’ss EEnneerrggyy CCoorrrriiddoorr LOUISIANA Serving the Nation’s Energy Needs LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES SECRETARY SCOTT A. ANGELLE A state agency report on the economic impacts of the network of energy facilities and energy supply of America’s Wetland. www.dnr.state.la.us America’s Energy Corridor LOUISIANA Serving the Nation’s Energy Needs Prepared by: Louisiana Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Office of the Secretary, Scott A. Angelle Technology Assessment Division T. Michael French, P.E., Director William J. Delmar, Jr., P.E., Assistant Director Paul R. Sprehe, Energy Economist (Primary Author) Acknowledgements: The following individuals and groups have contributed to the research and compilation of this report. Collaborators in this project are experts in their field of work and are greatly appreciated for their time and assistance. State Library of Louisiana, Research Librarians U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Richard Furiga (Ret.) Dave Johnson Ann Rochon Nabil Shourbaji Robert Meyers New Orleans Region Office Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP) Louisiana Offshore Terminal Authority (LOTA) La. Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) Louisiana Oil Spill Coordinator’s Office, Dr. Karolien Debusschere ChevronTexaco and Sabine Pipeline, LLC Port Fourchon Executive Director Ted Falgout Louisiana I Coalition Executive Director Roy Martin Booklet preparation: DNR Public Information Director Phyllis F. Darensbourg Public Information Assistant Charity Glaser For copies of this report, contact the DNR Public Information Office at 225-342-0556 or email request to [email protected]. -i- CONTENTS America’s Energy Corridor LOUISIANA Serving the Nation’s Energy Needs……………………………………………... i Contents…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ii Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… iii Fact Sheet………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231)
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT August 5, 2019 MEMORANDUM To: Public Information (MS 5030) From: Plan Coordinator, FO, Plans Section (MS 5231) Subj ect: Public Information copy of plan Control # S-07968 Type Supplemental Exploration Plan Lease(s) OCS-G36134 Elock - 629 Mississippi Canyon Area Operator LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. Description Subsea Well C and C-ALT Rig Type Not Found Attached is a copy of the subject plan. It has been deemed submitted as of this date and is under review for approval Leslie Wilson Plan Coordinator Site Type/Name Botm Lse/Area/Blk Surface Location Surf Lse/Area/Blk WELL/C G36134/MC/629 6100 FNL, 5062 FEL G36134/MC/629 WELL/C-ALT G36134/MC/629 6100 FNL, 5112 FEL G36134/MC/629 LLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, L.L.C. 1001 Ochsner Boulevard, Suite 100 Covington, Louisiana 70433 SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G 36134 LEASE MISSISSIPPI CANYON BLOCK 629 Prepared By: Sue Sachitana Regulatory Specialist LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. 985-801-4300-Office 985-801-4716-Direct [email protected] Date: July 10, 2019 LLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, L.L.C. SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G 36134 MISSISSIPPI CANYON BLOCK 629 APPENDIX A Plan Contents APPENDIX B General Information APPENDIX C Geological, Geophysical Information APPENDIX D H2S Information APPENDIX E Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information APPENDIX F Waste and Discharge Information APPENDIX G Air Emissions Information APPENDIX H Oil Spill Information APPENDIX I Environmental Monitoring Information APPENDIX J Lease Stipulation Information APPENDIX K Environmental Mitigation Measures Information APPENDIX L Related Facilities and Operations Information APPENDIX M Support Vessels and Aircraft Information APPENDIX N Onshore Support Facilities Information APPENDIX O Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Information APPENDIX P Environmental Impact Analysis APPENDIX Q Administrative Information Mississippi Canyon Block 629, OCS-G-36134 Supplemental Exploration Plan APPENDIX A PLAN CONTENTS (30 CFR Part 550.211 and 550.241) A.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    Index Abraham, Spencer, 82 Anadarko Petroleum Corp., 74, 185 Accidents, industrial, 18 Anderson, Jason, 158 Acheson, Dean, 53 Anderson, Paul, 153 Alaska, 24, 46, 56 –57, 81, 89 Anglo-Persian (Iranian) Oil Co., 45, 49, BP’s maintenance problems, 135 50 –54 fi nes paid by BP for spills, 133, 143 Angola, 12, 38, 41, 70 oil spills, 114, 119–135 Apache Corp., 186 Al-Husseini, Sadad I., 124 Atlantic Richfi eld Co. (ARCO), 30 –31, Allen, Mark, 37–38 56, 57, 114, 125, 126 Allen, Thad, 176 Atlantis, 66, 72, 193 All the Shah’s Men (Kinzer), 51 Azerbaijan, 31, 37, 41, 47 Al-Megrahi, Abdel Basset, 38 Al-Naimi, Ali, 35 –36 Baker, James, 105, 112, 142 Alternative energyCOPYRIGHTED technology, 33 Balzer, MATERIAL Dick, 40 Alyeska Pipeline Service Co., Barbier, Carl, 185 120, 121 Barton, Joe, 151, 182 American Petroleum Institute (API), 82, Bauer, Robert, 182 87, 91 Bea, Bob, 125 –128, 131, 160, 173 Amoco, 28 –30, 36 –37, 106, 125, 126 Bertone, Stephen, 6 –9, 16 217 bbindex.inddindex.indd 221717 112/1/102/1/10 77:05:39:05:39 AAMM INDEX Big Kahuna, 78 establishes victims’ fund after Gulf spill, Blackbeard well, 129, 160 181, 182–183 Bledsoe, Paul, 34 events leading up to Gulf explosion, Blowout preventer (BOP), 92, 146, 155 –173 148, 156 –157, 161, 167, 168, exploration and production unit, 175, 192 10, 145 Bly, Mark, 165 –166, 169 fi nally caps Gulf well, 152 Bondy, Rupert, 145 fi nancial liability from Gulf oil spill, 152 Bowlin, Mike, 30 fi nes paid for safety violations, 133, 143 BP: industrial accidents in U.S., 18 begins developing Alaska, 56 –57 investigation
    [Show full text]
  • Washington Report Volume Xliv December 2015
    WASHINGTON REPORT VOLUME XLIV DECEMBER 2015 IN THIS ISSUE SPECIAL EDITION Thad Allen...........................1 2015 NOIA FALL MEETING REVIEW Thomas Barnett.................1 Ann Coulter........................2 The National Ocean Industries Association Allen added that in events like the Macondo Robert McNally..................2 (NOIA) held its 2015 Fall Meeting from October Well accident, politicians are under tremendous Gale Norton........................3 7 to 9 at the Phoenician in Scottsdale, AZ, with pressure to show results and to be seen as lead- Kirk Lippold........................3 139 members in attendance. ers, but often they can actually hinder the pro- WCR Panel..........................4 cess. When asked what he would have done Committee Speakers.....4-7 The meeting featured nationally known experts differently, Allen said he would have taken con- Executive Committee & on important topics impacting the offshore en- trol of the airspace earlier. It is difficult to juggle Board of Directors.............8 ergy industry, including global affairs, politics, media fly overs, oil spotters and all the neces- Membership Committee..9 energy policy, regulatory issues, accountability, sary response equipment during the heat of a safety and security. Presenters and attendees crisis, and by not closing the airspace sooner President’s Report........9-11 discussed the implications of the looming Presi- rescue and cleanup crews were placed in un- Reception Photos........12-16 dential election, the search for the next House necessary danger, he said. Speaker, the economy, regulatory hurdles fac- ing the industry, offshore technology, offshore Finally, Allen commended industry for avoiding renewables, and seismic testing in the Atlantic. further accidents with the hundreds of vessels that were used throughout the clean up and re- GENERAL SPEAKERS sponse phases.
    [Show full text]
  • BP's Broken Well in Gulf of Mexico Is 'Dead' 20 September 2010
    BP's broken well in Gulf of Mexico is 'dead' 20 September 2010 well poses no continuing threat to the Gulf of Mexico ." The announcement marked an anti-climactic end to a five-month battle to cap a busted undersea well that gushed nearly five million barrels (210 million gallons) of oil into the Gulf, the largest maritime spill in history. No oil has leaked into the Gulf in the three months since the well off the Louisiana coast was plugged in a so-called "top kill" operation, but the US Ships work near the site of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil administration insisted that it also be sealed from spill in August 2010. No oil has leaked into the Gulf in the bottom with a relief well. the three months since the well off the Louisiana coast was plugged in a so-called "top kill" operation, but the A final pressure test of the cement seal was US administration insisted that it also be sealed from the completed at 5:54 am (1054 GMT), officials said. bottom with a relief well. "Today, we achieved an important milestone in our response to the BP oil spill -- the final termination of the damaged well that sat deep under the Gulf of US officials have finally declared BP's broken well Mexico," President Barack Obama said in a in the Gulf of Mexico "dead", five months after a statement. deadly oil rig explosion set off one of the costliest and largest environmental disasters ever. Obama said there was now a diminished need for the massive response to the spill, but "we also Although the troublesome well may have been remain committed to doing everything possible to killed once and for all, BP still faces a long uphill make sure the Gulf Coast recovers fully from this battle to clean up the Gulf, a litany of lawsuits, disaster." billions of dollars in fines and shareholders angered by the firm's instability after its share price He vowed to "see our communities, our businesses more than halved.
    [Show full text]
  • Online Media and the 2016 US Presidential Election
    Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Faris, Robert M., Hal Roberts, Bruce Etling, Nikki Bourassa, Ethan Zuckerman, and Yochai Benkler. 2017. Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society Research Paper. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33759251 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA AUGUST 2017 PARTISANSHIP, Robert Faris Hal Roberts PROPAGANDA, & Bruce Etling Nikki Bourassa DISINFORMATION Ethan Zuckerman Yochai Benkler Online Media & the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This paper is the result of months of effort and has only come to be as a result of the generous input of many people from the Berkman Klein Center and beyond. Jonas Kaiser and Paola Villarreal expanded our thinking around methods and interpretation. Brendan Roach provided excellent research assistance. Rebekah Heacock Jones helped get this research off the ground, and Justin Clark helped bring it home. We are grateful to Gretchen Weber, David Talbot, and Daniel Dennis Jones for their assistance in the production and publication of this study. This paper has also benefited from contributions of many outside the Berkman Klein community. The entire Media Cloud team at the Center for Civic Media at MIT’s Media Lab has been essential to this research.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Costs and Benefits of Deepwater Oil Drilling Regulation
    January 2011 RFF DP 10-62 Understanding the Costs and Benefits of Deepwater Oil Drilling Regulation Alan Krupnick, Sarah Campbell, Mark A. Cohen, and Ian W.H. Parry 1616 P St. NW Washington, DC 20036 202-328-5000 www.rff.org DISCUSSION PAPER Understanding the Costs and Benefits of Deepwater Oil Drilling Regulation Alan Krupnick, Sarah Campbell, Mark A. Cohen, and Ian W.H. Parry Abstract The purpose of this paper is to provide a conceptual framework for understanding how analysis of costs and benefits might be incorporated into an assessment of regulatory policies affecting deepwater drilling. We begin by providing a framework for analyzing the life-cycle impacts of oil drilling and its alternatives, including onshore drilling and importing oil from abroad. We then provide background estimates of the different sources of oil supplied in the United States, look at how other oil supply sources might respond to regulations on deepwater drilling, and consider the economic costs of these regulations. After providing a comprehensive description of the potential costs and benefits from various types of drilling—including, when possible, estimates of the magnitude of these benefits and costs—we discuss the extent to which these costs and benefits may already be taken into account (or reinforced) through the legal, regulatory, and tax systems and through market mechanisms. We conclude by presenting a framework and simple example of how a cost–benefit analysis might be used to inform regulation of deepwater drilling, and sum up the policy implications of our work. Key Words: catastrophic oil spill, cost–benefit analysis, government regulation, liability © 2011 Resources for the Future.
    [Show full text]
  • ANADARKO PETROLEUM CORPORATION Doug Lawler Vice
    www.anadarko.com | NYSE: APC ANADARKO PETROLEUM CORPORATION INVESTOR RELATIONS CONTACTS: John Colglazier Vice President 832/636-2306 Dean Hennings Doug Lawler Manager 832/636-2462 Vice President, Operations Wayne Rodrigs Manager 832/636-2305 May 25, 2011 www.anadarko.com | NYSE: APC Cautionary Language Regarding Forward-Looking Statements and Other Matters This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The words “believe,” “expect,” “plan” or other similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based upon Anadarko’s current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential impact thereon. While Anadarko believes that its expectations are based on reasonable assumptions as and when made, no assurance can be given that such expectations will prove to have been correct. A number of factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the projections, anticipated results or other expectations expressed in this presentation, including the following: Anadarko's ability to successfully drill, complete, test and produce the wells and prospects identified in this presentation; to meet financial and operating guidance; to execute the 2011 capital program and meet the long-term goals identified in this presentation; the outcome of events in the Gulf of Mexico relating to the Deepwater Horizon event and the Company’s ability to successfully defend its stated position under the corresponding Operating Agreement; the legislative and regulatory changes, such as delays in the processing and approval of drilling permits, exploration plans andoil spill response plans, that may impact the Company’s Gulf of Mexico and International offshore operations resulting from the Deepwater Horizon event.
    [Show full text]
  • BP AMERICA LIMITED (Registered No.08842913)
    DocuSign Envelope ID: B44D0D52-3A0E-4614-B970-EFB1960DA373 BP AMERICA LIMITED (Registered No.08842913) ANNUAL REPORT AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 2019 Board of Directors: J C Lyons P J Mather B J S Mathews The directors present the strategic report, their report and the audited financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2019. STRATEGIC REPORT Results The profit for the year after taxation was $6,017 million which, when added to the accumulated loss brought forward at 1 January 2019 of $60 thousand, gives a total accumulated profit carried forward at 31 December 2019 of $6,017 million. Principal activity and review of the business The company holds the investment in BP America Inc. The company incurs an audit fee each year which wholly represents the administrative expenses for the year. No key financial and other performance indicators have been identified for this company. Section 172 (1) statement In governing the company on behalf of its shareholders and discharging their duties under section 172, the board has had regard to the factors set out in section 172 (see below) and other factors which the board considers appropriate. Matters identified that may affect the company’s performance in the long term are set out in the principal risks disclosed in the strategic report below. Section 172 factors Section 172 requires directors to have regard to the following in performing their duties, and as part of the process are required to consider, where relevant: a. The likely long-term consequences of the decision. b. The interests of the company’s employees. c.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Opinion and Discourse on the Intersection of LGBT Issues and Race the Opportunity Agenda
    Opinion Research & Media Content Analysis Public Opinion and Discourse on the Intersection of LGBT Issues and Race The Opportunity Agenda Acknowledgments This research was conducted by Loren Siegel (Executive Summary, What Americans Think about LGBT People, Rights and Issues: A Meta-Analysis of Recent Public Opinion, and Coverage of LGBT Issues in African American Print and Online News Media: An Analysis of Media Content); Elena Shore, Editor/Latino Media Monitor of New America Media (Coverage of LGBT Issues in Latino Print and Online News Media: An Analysis of Media Content); and Cheryl Contee, Austen Levihn- Coon, Kelly Rand, Adriana Dakin, and Catherine Saddlemire of Fission Strategy (Online Discourse about LGBT Issues in African American and Latino Communities: An Analysis of Web 2.0 Content). Loren Siegel acted as Editor-at-Large of the report, with assistance from staff of The Opportunity Agenda. Christopher Moore designed the report. The Opportunity Agenda’s research on the intersection of LGBT rights and racial justice is funded by the Arcus Foundation. The statements made and views expressed are those of The Opportunity Agenda. Special thanks to those who contributed to this project, including Sharda Sekaran, Shareeza Bhola, Rashad Robinson, Kenyon Farrow, Juan Battle, Sharon Lettman, Donna Payne, and Urvashi Vaid. About The Opportunity Agenda The Opportunity Agenda was founded in 2004 with the mission of building the national will to expand opportunity in America. Focused on moving hearts, minds, and policy over time, the organization works with social justice groups, leaders, and movements to advance solutions that expand opportunity for everyone. Through active partnerships, The Opportunity Agenda synthesizes and translates research on barriers to opportunity and corresponding solutions; uses communications and media to understand and influence public opinion; and identifies and advocates for policies that improve people’s lives.
    [Show full text]