What Was True Intent Of Oil Flack Letter Writer?
The Tampa Tribune
Published: July 5, 2008
The letter from David Mica of the Florida Petroleum Council was, shall we say, carefully worded.
He states that during hurricanes Katrina and Rita "...no significant amounts of oil spilled into the sea - a testament to the industry's innovative technologies and numerous safety exercises." However, he is relying on a U.S. government definition of "significant oil spill," meaning greater than 10,000 barrels in a single spill.
The U.S. Minerals Management Service (www. mms.gov) reports that hurricane Katrina destroyed 46 oil platforms and four jackup rigs. Rita destroyed 65 platforms and four rigs. Per MMS, there were 125 separate oil spills for a total of at least 16,300 barrels spilled into the sea. But the oil industry is not confined to the sea. During Katrina, flooding caused a spill at Murphy Oil's St. Bernard Parish refinery, resulting in at least 2,000 homesites becoming unusable. Murphy settled a class action suit for $330 million.
After berating Florida for using a lot of oil but producing only 1 percent of U.S. crude, Mica says "Allowing access to the resources beneath Florida's coastline..." By "resources" does he mean oil or natural gas? The information I'm getting from geologists is that the eastern Gulf of Mexico, unlike the western Gulf, is not very favorable for oil formation. The location that the industry seems most interested in developing is the Destin Dome, just 25 miles off the Florida Panhandle. It was once thought to be a promising source of oil, but there have been at least 15 dry holes. It can, however, produce significant amounts of natural gas. So, does the industry believe that the coast of Florida is a potential source of gas but not oil?
If so, gasoline prices are irrelevant to the question of drilling. If the industry thinks there is oil off the Florida coast, where do they think it is, and how much oil do they think is there?
In other words, would the potential economic benefit from drilling be greater than the potential loss to the tourism and fishing industry?
Finally, why is Mica writing a letter to the editor? The ban on offshore drilling was put in place by an executive order issued by George Bush I that was extended by President Clinton. George Bush II could lift the order this afternoon with a stroke of his pen. Why isn't Mica addressing his letter to President Bush?
Is this campaign against the drilling moratorium for real? Or is it a ploy to divert the blame for high gasoline prices away from the Republican administration and toward environmentalists and Democrats? Is Mica carrying water for the oil industry or for John McCain?
Dallas Dunlap
Brooksville
Reader Comments
Posted by ( StBernard4ever ) on July 5, 2008 at 9:03 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Even after the worse residential crude oil spill in America, Murphy Oil USA, Inc is expanding their tank farm without changing the foundation or berm designs; not even anchoring so the tanks dont lift in the next flood. The expansion is on what seems to be lower land that is closer to the MRGO (the Mississippi River GulfCoast Outlet that is considered the hurricane floodwaters alley). Most of the homesites were cleaned by Murphy and placed back into residential use. Properties on the four streets west of the refinery were given an option to participate in the Murphy buyout program. Although Murphy had stated in Federal court that the property would be used for a green zone buffer, the refinery already has plans for expansion into this established, revitalized neighborhood, starting with a petrochemical testing lab.
Report Inappropriate Comments
Posted by ( MYManners ) on July 5, 2008 at 10:15 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
"Finally, why is Mica writing a letter to the editor? "
Uhm, Freedom of speech? Or rant in your case...
Report Inappropriate Comments
No comments:
Post a Comment