DOCSLIB.ORG

The Deepwater Horizon Disaster and Opening

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Deepwater Horizon Disaster and Opening Abstract “SURPRISE! YOU’RE DEAD!” THE DEEPWATER HORIZON DISASTER AND OPENING STATEMENTS IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION by Deborah M. Welsh November, 2014 Director of Dissertation: Dr. Donna J. Kain Major Department: English This dissertation explores the ways in which various powerful groups used different genres of opening statements to create and control the version of the reality of a high stakes situation, namely, the April 20, 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster. Specifically, in the dissertation I identify and analyze the features and rhetorical moves that typify the genres of legal and non-legal opening statements, and focus on the communicative dynamics that define interactions between speakers and audiences in court opening statements, Congressional opening statements, and public press conference statements. I use critical discourse analysis and genre analysis to pinpoint the rhetorical moves used in each genre of opening statements. I make the claim that legal court opening statements use epideictic rhetoric to convince decision makers to act in a particular way. I also make visible the connections that exist between technical and professional communicators and the development of corporate business texts, focusing particularly on positive changes needed in the field, including increased participation in the construction of texts for businesses, and need for using their experience, expertise and ethics to also advocate for the common good. Keywords: opening statements, epideictic rhetoric, technical and professional communication, primacy, critical discourse analysis, genre theory “SURPRISE! YOU’RE DEAD!” THE DEEPWATER HORIZON DISASTER AND OPENING STATEMENTS IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION A Dissertation Presented To the Faculty of the Department of English East Carolina University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Deborah M. Welsh November, 2014 © Deborah M. Welsh, 2014 “SURPRISE! YOU’RE DEAD!”: THE DEEPWATER HORIZON DISASTER AND OPENING STATEMENTS IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION by Deborah M. Welsh APPROVED BY: DIRECTOR OF DISSERTATION: _________________________________________________ Donna J. Kain, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: _______________________________________________________ Brent Henze, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: _______________________________________________________ Erin A. Frost, Ph.D COMMITTEE MEMBER: _______________________________________________________ Carmine Scavo, Ph.D. CHAIR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH: _____________________________________ Jeffrey Johnson, Ph.D. DEAN OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL: ___________________________________________ Paul J. Gemperline, Ph.D. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I owe debts of gratitude to many people who helped me to write this dissertation, most of whom I will never to be able to repay in full. First, I gratefully acknowledge the assistance and support in this project from my Chair, Dr. Donna Kain. Thank you, Dr. Brent Henze, for helping me to expand my focus on the entire project. I also thank Dr. Erin Frost for agreeing to sign on to my committee at a late date. Her knowledge of the Gulf Coast geography and first-hand experience with the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon disaster is awesome, and her revision suggestions and comments were a breath of fresh air. I especially thank Dr. Carmine Scavo, who guided me through my MPA defense many years ago and is now seeing me through to the end of this dissertation. Thank you most of all to my husband, Dave, who is my hero in every sense of the word, and gave me the courage to go forward on the worst days. Thank you to Vince and Crystal, Bridget and Joseph, and Dixie, whose telephone calls, texts and Facebook posts and videos of my precious grandbabies made me smile and laugh and remember what is really important in life. Finally, I dedicate this work to my angel granddaughter in heaven, Catharine. TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page ............................................................................................................................. i Copyright Page.................................................................................................................... ii Signature Page ................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ v List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1: Introduction And Background ........................................................................................ 1 Research Context ....................................................................................................................... 10 Deepwater Horizon Disaster Background ............................................................................. 10 The Criminal Case and Trial ................................................................................................. 12 The Civil Case and Trial ....................................................................................................... 12 Multi-District Litigation (MDL) ........................................................................................... 13 Opening Statements ................................................................................................................... 16 The broad uses of the term “opening statement”................................................................... 20 The MDL opening statement ................................................................................................. 21 Importance of Ethical Knowledge Transfer to TPC Professionals ............................................ 22 Corporate culture and technical communication ................................................................... 24 Corporate criminal acts ......................................................................................................... 28 Research Gap ............................................................................................................................. 30 Opening statements and constitutive rhetoric ............................................................................ 33 Language and social practice ..................................................................................................... 34 Kairos .................................................................................................................................... 35 Epideictic vs. Forensic Rhetoric ............................................................................................ 36 Content, Organization and Analytical Approach .................................................................. 40 Chapter 2: Review Of Literature .................................................................................................... 42 Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) ........................................................................................... 42 Evolving Views of Genre in the Literature of Rhetoric and Professional Communication ..................................................................................................... 53 Discourse communities/communities of practice and genre use ........................................... 54 Opening Statements and Genre ................................................................................................. 56 Genre, Legal Jargon and Plain English ................................................................................. 58 Kairos and the Importance of Primacy ...................................................................................... 61 Opening statements and epideictic rhetoric ............................................................................... 64 Chapter 3: Methodology ................................................................................................................ 67 Qualitative Research .................................................................................................................. 68 Data Collection and Rationale ................................................................................................... 69 Court Documents ................................................................................................................... 71 Judge’s Amended Pre-Trial Order ........................................................................ 72 Trial Transcripts .................................................................................................... 72 Criminal Documents. ............................................................................................ 73 Congressional Testimony ...................................................................................................... 74 Presidential Press Conference Transcripts ............................................................................ 74 Peripheral Media Data ........................................................................................................... 75 Analytical Framework ............................................................................................................... 75 Coding the Data: Critical Discourse Analysis ......................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Putting a Freeze on Arctic Ocean Drilling America’S Inability to Respond to an Oil Spill in the Arctic
    AP PHOTO/JUDY P PHOTO/JUDY AP A TRICK, FILE TRICK, Putting a Freeze on Arctic Ocean Drilling America’s Inability to Respond to an Oil Spill in the Arctic Kiley Kroh, Michael Conathan, and Emma Huvos February 2012 WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.ORG Putting a Freeze on Arctic Ocean Drilling America’s Inability to Respond to an Oil Spill in the Arctic Kiley Kroh, Michael Conathan, and Emma Huvos February 2012 COVER: The Coast Guard Cutter Healy escorts the Russian-flagged tanker Renda 250 miles south of Nome on January 6. The vessels are transiting through ice up to five-feet thick in this area.T he 370-foot tanker Renda will have to go through more than 300 miles of sea ice to get to Nome, a city of about 3,500 people on the western Alaska coastline that did not get its last pre-winter fuel delivery because of a massive storm. If the delivery of diesel fuel and unleaded gasoline is not made, the city likely will run short of fuel supplies before another barge delivery can be made in spring. AP Photo/US Coast Guard - Petty Officer 1st Class Sara Francis Contents vii MAP: Oil spill response capacity in the Arctic and Gulf of Mexico: Resources within 500 miles of BP spill site and Shell’s proposed Arctic exploration 1 Introduction and summary 5 The Deepwater Horizon response and aftermath 11 The realities of the Arctic 16 MAP: Arctic oil spill response capacity: Resources within 500 miles of Shell’s proposed drilling sites 23 Shell’s plans and emergency preparations 27 Recommendations 31 Conclusion 32 About the authors and acknowledgements 33 Additional
    [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]
  • Oil and Chemical Spills: Federal Emergency Response Framework
    Oil and Chemical Spills: Federal Emergency Response Framework David M. Bearden Specialist in Environmental Policy Jonathan L. Ramseur Specialist in Environmental Policy August 29, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R43251 Oil and Chemical Spills: Federal Emergency Response Framework Summary Thousands of oil and chemical spills of varying size and magnitude occur in the United States each year. When a spill occurs, state and local officials located in proximity to the incident generally are the first responders and may elevate an incident for federal attention if greater resources are desired. The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, often referred to as the National Contingency Plan (NCP), establishes the procedures for the federal response to oil and chemical spills. The scope of the NCP encompasses discharges of oil into or upon U.S. waters and adjoining shorelines and releases of hazardous substances into the environment. The NCP was developed in 1968 and has been revised on multiple occasions to implement the federal statutory response authorities that Congress has expanded over time. Three federal environmental statutes authorized the development of the NCP: the Clean Water Act, as amended; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended; and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. Several executive orders have delegated the presidential response authorities of these statutes to federal departments and agencies that implement the NCP. The lead federal agency serves as the On-Scene Coordinator to direct the federal response. Generally, EPA leads the federal response within the inland zone, and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Minerals Management Service Reorganization: Hearings
    S. HRG. 111–1035 MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE REORGANIZATION HEARING BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION SPECIAL HEARING MAY 26, 2010—WASHINGTON, DC Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 57–214 PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri TOM HARKIN, Iowa MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama HERB KOHL, Wisconsin JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire PATTY MURRAY, Washington ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota SUSAN COLLINS, Maine MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio JACK REED, Rhode Island LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey BEN NELSON, Nebraska MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JON TESTER, Montana ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania CHARLES J. HOUY, Staff Director BRUCE EVANS, Minority Staff Director SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California, Chairman ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota ROBERT F.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Interior Ocean Energy Safety Advisory Committee New Orleans, Louisiana July 13-14, 2011
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR OCEAN ENERGY SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA JULY 13-14, 2011 MEETING MINUTES The Ocean Energy Safety Advisory Committee (OESC) held its second public meeting on July 13-14, 2011, at the Astor Crowne Plaza Hotel, 739 Canal Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70130. The meeting agenda (Appendix I) focused on industry, state, academia and Federal initiatives and outreach relevant to the work of the Committee; new technology; and OESC subcommittees’ progress to date. Thirteen of the fifteen Committee members were in attendance (Appendix II). The two Committee members who were not present during the meeting represented the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Academia) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA - Federal government). In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, the meeting was open to the public from 1:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. on July 13 and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on July 14. Approximately 50 members of the public and press were in attendance (Appendix III). The meeting was called to order by Designated Federal Officer (DFO) Brad J. Blythe after establishing quorum. He then introduced OESC Chairman Thomas O. Hunter to lead meeting proceedings. Wednesday, July 13, 2011 The first day of the meeting consisted of presentations on industry initiatives by the Marine Well Containment Company (MWCC) and DeepStar, as well as a presentation by Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) on the Well Containment Screening Tool. BOEMRE Director Michael R. Bromwich offered a few remarks (Appendix IV) of encouragement to the OESC and its subcommittees on their progress to date and future efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Blowout: Legal Legacy of the Deepwater Horizon Catastrophe:Federal Public Law and the Future of Oil and Gas Drilling on the Oute
    Roger Williams University Law Review Volume 17 | Issue 1 Article 10 Winter 2012 Blowout: Legal Legacy of the Deepwater Horizon Catastrophe:Federal Public Law and the Future of Oil and Gas Drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf David Pettit Natural Resources Defense Council David Newman Natural Resources Defense Council Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.rwu.edu/rwu_LR Recommended Citation Pettit, David and Newman, David (2012) "Blowout: Legal Legacy of the Deepwater Horizon Catastrophe:Federal Public Law and the Future of Oil and Gas Drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf," Roger Williams University Law Review: Vol. 17: Iss. 1, Article 10. Available at: http://docs.rwu.edu/rwu_LR/vol17/iss1/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at DOCS@RWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Roger Williams University Law Review by an authorized administrator of DOCS@RWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Federal Public Law and the Future of Oil and Gas Drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf David Pettit* and David Newmant I. INTRODUCTION Transocean's Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling rig, on lease to BP, exploded and caught fire on April 20, 2010. This event caused the deaths of eleven workers and resulted in an oil geyser that spewed millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.' The Deepwater Horizon sank two days after the explosion. Nearly three months later, on July 15, 2010, BP was finally able to cap the well.2 The Flow Rate Technical Group, a group of scientists from federal agencies and academic institutions, estimated that * David Pettit, a 1975 graduate of UCLA Law School, is a Senior Attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Ntl 2010-N06
    OMB Control Number: 1010-0183 OMB Expiration Date: February 28, 2014 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT, REGULATION, AND ENFORCEMENT NTL No. 2010-N06 Effective Date: June 18, 2010 NATIONAL NOTICE TO LESSEES AND OPERATORS OF FEDERAL OIL AND GAS LEASES, OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF (OCS) Information Requirements for Exploration Plans, Development and Production Plans, and Development Operations2015-N01 Coordination Documents on the OCS Purpose No. Pursuant to 30 CFR 250.213(g) an Exploration Plan (EP) must be accompanied by a blowout scenario description. 30 CFR 250.243(h) imposes the same requirement for a Development and Production Plan (DPP) and a Development and Coordination Document (DOCD).1 Pursuant to 30 CFR 250.219 and 250.250, all plans must also be accompanied by information regarding oil spills, includingNTL calculations of your worst case discharge scenario. In April 2008, the Gulf of Mexico Region issued NTL No. 2008-G04 (Information Requirements for Exploration Plans and Development Operations Coordination Documents in the Gulf of Mexico),2 and pursuant to 30 CFR 250.201(c), limited the information required to accompany plans you submit to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (BOEM) (formerly known as MMS) with regard to a blowout scenario andBOEM worst case discharge scenario. The purpose of this Notice to Lessees and Operators (this NTL) is to rescind the limitations set forth in NTL No. 2008-G04 regarding a blowout scenario and worst case discharge scenario, and to provide national guidanceby to Lessees and Operators regarding the content of the information BOEM requires in your blowout scenario and worst case discharge scenario descriptions.
    [Show full text]
  • July 21, 2016 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549-1090
    July 21, 2016 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549-1090 Attn: File No. S7-06-16, Docket No. 33-10064, Business and Financial Disclosure Required by Regulation S-K The Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law,1 University of Chicago Abrams Environmental Law Clinic,2 and Oceana3 respectfully submit these comments in response to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s “concept release” on business and financial disclosures. Specifically, in response to the SEC’s question about increasing environmental disclosures,4 these comments advocate for either new rules or an interpretive release with guidance clarifying the disclosure requirements around the risks from offshore oil and gas operations, particularly in frontier areas like ultra-deepwater and the Arctic Ocean. The SEC is tasked with the tripartite mission of protecting investors; maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and facilitating capital formation.5 In pursuit of that mission, the SEC requires certain mandatory disclosures by issuers of securities. This disclosure regime is driven by the concept that all investors should have access to certain facts about an investment.6 The disclosure of meaningful information to the public creates a common pool of knowledge that investors may use to evaluate for themselves whether to buy, sell, or hold a particular security.7 With changing 1 Policy Integrity is a non-partisan think tank dedicated to improving the quality of government decision-making through advocacy and scholarship in the fields of administrative law, cost-benefit analysis, and public policy. These comments do not necessarily reflect the views of NYU School of Law, if any.
    [Show full text]
  • Obama Vows Help As BP Sees Oil Spill Progress 5 June 2010, by Allen Johnson
    Obama vows help as BP sees oil spill progress 5 June 2010, by Allen Johnson As Obama promised assistance, oil spill-stricken Gulf of Mexico residents anxiously awaited news about BP's latest effort to contain the massive leak, now the worst environmental disaster in US history. The firm has lowered a containment vessel over a leaking ruptured well-pipe allowing oil to collect and be siphoned up via a tube to the Enterprise, a container ship on the surface. The US official overseeing the response to the spill, Marine One with US President Barack Obama aboard Admiral Thad Allen, was to provide an update on and a second support helicopter fly to New Orleans after the process at 1445 GMT, amid uncertainty about Obama met with local business owners and residents in just how much oil was being collected. Grand Isle, Louisiana. US President Barack Obama has promised to use "every resource" to help those affected "The flow of oil and gas to the Enterprise was shut by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, as Americans await news down for three hours overnight," said Coast Guard of BP's latest containment effort. spokesman First Class Petty Officer Zach Zubricki. "It resumed at 3:30 am (0730 GMT)," he told AFP, saying he had no information on how much oil was US President Barack Obama promised on being captured. Saturday to use "every resource" to help those affected by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, as An estimated 20 million gallons of crude has Americans awaited news of BP's latest poured into the Gulf since an April 20 explosion containment effort.
    [Show full text]
  • Lettre Technique Mer- Littoral N°1 Et 2, 2010 2
    1 CENTRE DE DOCUMENTATION DE RECHERCHE ET D'EXPERIMENTATIONS SUR LES POLLUTIONS ACCIDENTELLES DES EAUX 715, Rue Alain Colas, CS 41836 - 29218 BREST CEDEX 2 (Fr) Tél : (33) 02 98 33 10 10 – Fax : (33) 02 98 44 91 38 Courriel : [email protected] - Web : www.cedre.fr Lettres Techniques Mer- Littoral n°29 & 30 222000111000 111---222 Sommaire • Accidents........................................................................................................................................................ 2 Pollution suite à l’échouement volontaire du Vitamin Gas (Province Binh Dinh, Vietnam) ....................... 2 Pollution littorale au fioul lourd suite au naufrage de l’ORCUN C (Mer Noire, Turquie) ............................. 2 Pollution transfrontalière en Méditerranée : l’incident du Strauss (Golfe de Gênes, Italie)....................... 3 Risque chimique et fuite d’hydrocarbures : le naufrage de l’Angel N (Sainte Lucie, Antilles).................. 5 Accident en zone sensible : le cas du Shen Neng 1 (Grande Barrière de corail, Australie)....................... 5 Pollution d’une réserve nationale suite à la fuite d’un oléoduc (Cypress Pipe Line, Delta du Mississippi, USA) .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 La pollution de la plateforme Deepwater Horizon (Golfe du Mexique, USA).................................................. 7 Déversement de brut léger suite à la collision du Bunga Kelana 3 (Détroit de Singapour)
    [Show full text]