BP Challenge To Oil Spill Size Could Affect Fine

WASHINGTON — BP is mounting a new challenge to the U.S. government's estimates of how much oil flowed from the runaway well deep below the Gulf of Mexico, an argument that could reduce by billions of dollars the federal pollution fines it faces for the largest offshore oil spill in history.

BP's lawyers are arguing that the government overstated the spill by 20 to 50 percent, staffers working for the presidential oil spill commission said Friday. In a 10-page document obtained by The Associated Press, BP says the government's spill estimate of 206 million gallons is "overstated by a significant amount" and the company said any consensus around that number is premature and inaccurate.

The company submitted the document to the commission, the Justice Department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

"They rely on incomplete or inaccurate information, rest in large part on assumptions that have not been validated, and are subject to far greater uncertainties than have been acknowledged," BP wrote. "BP fully intends to present its own estimate as soon as the information is available to get the science right."

In a statement Friday, the company said the government's estimates failed to account for equipment that could obstruct the flow of oil and gas, such as the blowout preventer, making its numbers "highly unreliable."

BP's request could save it as much as $10.5 billion or as little as $1.1 billion, depending on factors such as whether the government concludes that BP acted negligently. For context, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's entire federal budget for 2010 was $10.3 billion. President Barack Obama has said he wants Congress to set aside some of the money BP pays for fines for the Gulf's coastal restoration. Louisiana lawmakers are pushing legislation that would require at least 80 percent of the civil and criminal penalties charged to BP, and possibly other companies, to be returned to the Gulf Coast.

William K. Reilly, co-chairman of the presidential commission, expressed amazement at BP's case Friday. Reilly headed the Environmental Protection Agency under President George H.W. Bush.

"They are going to argue that it is 50 percent less" than the government's total? Reilly asked. "Wow."

Under the Clean Water Act, the oil giant – which owned and operated the well – faces fines of up to $1,100 for each barrel of oil spilled. If BP were found to have committed gross negligence or willful misconduct, the fine could be up to $4,300 per barrel.

That means that based on the government's estimate of 206 million gallons, BP could face civil fines alone of between $5.4 billion and $21.1 billion.

"They are going to argue it was less," said Priya Aiyar, the commission's deputy chief counsel. "BP has not offered its own numbers yet, but BP has told us that it thinks the government's numbers are too high and thinks the actual flow rate can be actually 20 to 50 percent lower."

Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., a member of the House energy panel that is investigating the spill, said in a statement Friday to the AP that BP has done whatever it could to avoid revealing the true flow rate of the spill.

"With billions of dollars at stake, it is no surprise that they are now litigating the very numbers which they sought to impede," Markey said. "The government engaged independent scientists and multiple techniques to arrive at their estimate. Additional independent peer-reviewed studies have corroborated their estimate. BP has a high bar to meet to overturn this estimate."

BP's argument could be bolstered by the federal government's missteps in coming up with a final estimate for the spill's volume. The Obama administration has offered nearly 10 estimates of how much oil flowed from the BP well, coming up with a refined conclusion late last month of 206 million gallons, which is likely its last.

Internal documents released late Friday under the Freedom of Information Act show that the White House was intimately involved in deciding how scientific information was portrayed to the public, particularly when it came to the August 4 release of a document that showed where the spilled oil had gone. The five-page report, which was touted by Carol Browner, the president's energy adviser, on morning talk shows and at White House press briefing showed that half the oil was gone – either from evaporation, burning, skimming or recovery at the well head.

The 3,500 pages of documents reveal that the administration wanted the oil budget to show its efforts to respond to the disaster were working, despite objections from top EPA officials, including Administrator Lisa Jackson, over how some of the data was presented.

An earlier version of the press release issued with the paper said that 33 percent of the oil released was captured or mitigated by recovery efforts.

A final version, changed hours before its release, said "the vast majority" of the spilled oil was addressed by recovery efforts or had naturally dispersed or evaporated.

That morning, Browner appeared on national television saying that an initial assessment by federal scientists showed "more than three-quarters of the oil is gone."

In an e-mail sent later that morning addressed to Browner's assistant, Heather Zichal, NOAA chief Jane Lubchenco finds fault with the White House's interpretation of the report's numbers and attribution of the report solely to NOAA. The report was drafted by several agencies.

"I'm concerned to hear the oil budget report is being portrayed as saying that 75 percent of the oil is gone and that this is a NOAA report," Lubchenco writes. "Please help make sure that both errors are corrected." The White House acknowledged Browner had misspoke.

Lubchenco explains it was only accurate to say half the oil was gone.

___

Associated Press writers Seth Borenstein and Matthew Daly in Washington and Harry R. Weber in New Orleans contributed to this report.

___

Online:

National Oil Spill Commission: http://www.oilspillcommission.gov

Get HuffPost Green On Twitter and Facebook! Know something we don't? E-mail us at Huffpostgreen@huffingtonpost.com

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.

View the original article here

Susan Smalley, Ph. d.: spirit body medicine: CAN you think and sites affect your physical health?

How you think and feel emotionally can contribute to your physical health and well-being - is simple. The list of scientific studies showing that point comes from various fields of study, including medicine, neuroscience, immunology, genetics, psychiatry and psychology.

Integrative medicine is becoming the examplar of approaches to health based on the importance of treating the whole person--mind, body and spirit, promoting health, prevention and treatment of disease .the ' spirit affects the body and the body affects the mind.

It is now well known that chronic stress is a significant contribution to the disease and the leading cause of death worldwide.Psychiatric disorders such as anxiety and depression are rising in adults and children, and they are estimated to affect such two adult length of vie.Science shows that stress affects a wide range of physiological body, particularly the immune response States, but also important on Ageing (such as the Telomere shortening) factors. A recent study conducted at UCLA illustrates the powerful role social anxiety this anxiety can affect the inflammatory reaction of the organism, and other research shows how diseases of bodies such as irritable disease associated with brain States.

Thus the spirit is a powerful vector to reduce the health of the body.But on the other hand, it can be a powerful vector and to improve.

Yet modern medicine offers very little prescription of a physician to treat our spirit indicates when the issues dealing with the santé.Nous can be told to relax or less stressed, but very often there is no recourse to (apart from serious enough momentary prescription meds release) .c ' is where the role of the spirit and practical body such as meditation, tai chi, yoga or other forms of exercises adapted for mental health is needed.

Search, although still limited, indicating that mindfulness practices (exercises aimed at educating the present moment) are highly beneficial for the health and well-being, affecting a wide range of physiological and subjective, States including:

• Stimulate the immune response in cancer and HIV patients.

• Reduction of pain in patients with chronic pain, including those suffering from arthritis, back pain and headache, among others.

• Improving the effectiveness of changing behaviour such as the reduction of smoking, weight loss programs and addiction.

• Improving cardiovascular health coupled with an integrator of health care.

• Reduce the risk of relapse into clinical depression in half compared to a standard treatment protocol.

• Reduce anxiety and stress in a wide range of physical and mental health disorders.

The mechanisms of how mindfulness alters brain physiology and body is under investigation by the laboratories around the world, but preliminary results indicate changes in brain function and structure, immune cytokines, stress hormones and patterns of gene expression, to name a few.

The means by which mindfulness affects the health and well-being will be a matter of science for the coming decades, but what is already suggested is that it changes our relationship with the thoughts and emotions so that there is a level of "eccentricity" which arises where our experiences are considered less attached RTI ' a way, there is a greater sense of the awareness that these experiences are part of human and less personal or attached to oneself condition when practicing mindfulness exercises (a series of practices is available in books, courses and free downloads) on a regular basis, we can learn to relate to life experiences (if it is a disease, pain or negative mental thinking) with greater ease and serenity.

Scientific evidence suggests that it could and that it improves our health, regardless of the circumstances which may hinder.

For more information, see "fully present: science, art and practice of the Mindfulness" (Smalley and Winston, 2010) .for get free mindfulness practices go to www.marc.ucla.edu and click on "Mindfulness meditations."

?

Follow Susan Smalley, Ph. d. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/suesmalley

This entry transmitted via the service for full-text RSS - if this is your content and you read on someone to another site, please read our FAQ page fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Article five filters features: After Hiroshima - non-rapport Cancer Catastrophe of Fallujah.

View the original article here