Federal Government Lied About "Disappearing Oil" (And So Did ADEM)

Video Description:  
It is believed that the amount of oil that spewed into the Gulf of Mexico during the BP oil crisis was grossly underestimated.  
It’s a sobering "I told you so" from many environmentalists.

Watch at Tampa Bay Online

We'll not hold our breaths waiting for ADEM to admit their lies to Alabama's citizens about the "mysterious disappearing" oil and reckless claims of "the water's fine, the seafood is fine."

Of course, the state powers will blame 100% of it on Obama and the feds (which do bear some responsibility admittedly) and not take any modicum of responsibility for throwing caution to the wind in their rush to keep those tourism dollars rolling in. Alabama also bears some responsibility by claiming "everything's safe" and opening Moblie Bay to shrimping quickly, to the surprise of many, and likely basing some of that on estimation from scientific models that some call "psuedo science" and "playing Russian roulette with fisheries."

The season was originally delayed after state officials conducting shrimp surveys in late May pulled up submerged oil on their nets at every location they sampled. State biologists have conducted repeated trawls in Mobile Bay but have yet to report oil on their nets there, officials have said. 

The date of that excerpt was July 22. In a little under two months it went from "oil on their nets at every location" to "no oil?" Does that really sound plausible considering we now know much of the oil is submerged and sank to the bottoms of water bodies?

We don't think most people would consider seafood swimming around in water above layers of oil and dispersant "safe" to consume.

Some more from ADEMs point man Bruce Freeman July 22, 2010:

DAPHNE, Ala. -- Alabama's oil response leaders address a wide variety of issues each day and a top problem is "staying ahead of misconceptions and rumors," according to Bruce Freeman, chief of the office of emergency response at the Alabama Department of Environmental Management.

One of those misconceptions is that the fish and shrimp from the Gulf of Mexico and Mobile Bay are not safe to eat, Freeman told about 30 people who gathered Tuesday evening at a town hall-style meeting at Daphne City Hall.

"The fish are fine, you can eat them. We've found no problems whatsoever," Freeman said. "We go to Mississippi Sound and offshore ..." 

A woman in the audience, Daphne artist Jean-Marie McDonnell, interrupted Freeman.

"I don't believe it," she said.

This rush to open waters to fishing happened after the Exxon Valdez spill too and had very bad results.

But...

The state claims they had their own "experts" and did extensive testing and monitoring which resulted in "no detectable oil."  

Oops.

More from Pro Publica's Marian Wang:

BP and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as we've noted, have recently taken to local schools to "dispel myths" about dispersants and subsurface oil.

A rosy government report from August asserting that most of the spilled oil was gone -- was oversold.

Even though both NOAA chief Jane Lubchenco and White House energy adviser Carol Browner said the August report was peer reviewed, yesterday's report noted that it wasn't:

The criticism that the Oil Budget was not a peer-reviewed scientific report was accurate….
Certain statements by administration officials to the effect that the Oil Budget was a "peer-review[ed]" scientific report, and that it concluded 75% of the oil was "gone," were inaccurate and led to news reports that were misleading. In fact, the Oil Budget was a rough operational tool, and its findings were neither as clear nor as reassuring as the initial rollout suggested.

The heads of NOAA and the White House Office of Management and Budget issued a joint statement responding to the yesterday's reports.

"The federal government response was full force and immediate, and the response focused on state and local plans and evolved when needed," the statement read.

Federal officials and BP executives have both maintained that the low-balled flow rate estimates did not influence the response effort. (But in a generic response plan BP filed before the blowout, BP had said determining a spill's size and volume was "critical to initiating and sustaining an effective response.")

The commission concluded that despite these assertions, initial optimism about the spill "may have affected the scale and speed with which national resources were brought to bear."

It gets better.

The state of Alabama is suing BP for failing to live up to it's responsibilities in the oil spill, but here we have ADEM giving very short public notice of BPs intent to start another well in state waters.

The Governor's office would have known of these plans by BP to start a new well.

Could this be a possible explanation for the public spat between Alabama Attorney General Troy King and Governor Riley? AG King has been annihilated in certain state newspapers and also from the Governor's office for moving forward with the state lawsuit against BP.

Maybe now we may possibly understand why; 

ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

GULF OF MEXICO

NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR A REVIEW OF A CONSISTENCY CERTIFICATION FOR AN ACTIVITY REQUIRING A FEDERAL LICENSE OR PERMIT

Notice is hereby given this October 6, 2010, by authorization of the Alabama Department of Environmental Management.

 

The Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) hereby gives notice that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has requested, in accordance with 15 CFR 930, a review of an applicant’s coastal consistency certification, pursuant to ADEM Administrative Code division 335-8, for a project subject to the Alabama Coastal Area Management Plan.

BP Exploration & Production, Inc. applied to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management for approval of a Supplemental Development Operations Coordinations Document which would authorize drilling, well completion, installation of a sub-sea wellhead, a lease term pipeline, and commencement of production associated with sub-sea wells A-5 and A-6 in Mississippi Canyon Area Block 429. 

The applicant has certified that the proposed activity complies with the state of Alabama’s Coastal Zone Management Program.

Any person wishing to make comments or provide additional information relative to the proposed project’s consistency with the Coastal Area Management Program rules must submit such comments or information in writing to ADEM at the address below within fifteen (15) calendar days following the publication date of this notice. 

Only those comments which address issues within the Department’s scope of authority can be considered. 

All correspondence regarding this proposal should reference application number 2010-252-MMS.

Alabama Department of Environmental Management

4171 Commanders Drive

Mobile, Alabama 36615

Copies of all information submitted are available for public inspection, by appointment, at the ADEM office located at the above address Monday – Friday (except legal holidays), 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. Arrangements for copying should be made in advance. The ADEM division 335-8 rules and this Public Notice are available on the internet at adem.alabama.gov.

After consideration of all written comments and consideration of the requirements of the Alabama Coastal Area Management Act and ADEM Coastal Program rules, the Department will make a final determination. 

The Department’s determination, associated documents and all comments received during the public comment period will be available for inspection at the ADEM office located at the above address during normal working hours. 

Notice of the final permit decision will be sent to any person who requests such notice, in writing, during this comment period.