Pfotenhauer: ‘I Was Misinformed’ About Hurricane Oil Spills
Pfotenhauer: ‘I Was Misinformed’ About Hurricane Oil Spills
Today on MSNBC, David Schuster challenged Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) policy adviser Nancy Pfotenhauer’s claim that “we withstood hurricanes Rita and Katrina and did not spill a drop” of oil.
Schuster pointed out that “the U.S. Mineral Management Service said that Katrina and Rita caused 124 offshore spills for a total of more than 743,000 gallons of oil and refined products spilled” and asked Pfotenhauer if she wanted to “take back” what she said:
SCHUSTER: So Nancy, do you want to take back what you said?
PFOTENHAUER: Well, I actually do. I was misinformed…the point is still that we had a remarkable performance, that you had about 16,000 barrels that were lost during two of the worst storms that have ever…keep in mind David that 1,700 barrels per day naturally seeps into the ocean floor, so 365 days a year you’re at about 620,000 barrels per day, pardon me per year, that naturally seep into the ocean floor. So this is a really remarkable performance of technology.
Watch It:
But Pfotenhauer, a right-wing energy lobbyist, is misinformed still. According to a report from the County of Santa Barbara, CA, “the effects of seeps and spills differ hugely.” As one planner put it, “if seeps and spills are the same, why aren’t all the beaches covered with mounds of fresh tar and dead birds?”:
The key difference has to do with release rates and spatial concentration of the oil. Seeps release large amounts of oil over large areas of the ocean gradually throughout the year. Spills release large amounts of oil from a point source in a short time.
In fact the real “remarkable performance” has been the parade of conservatives repeating false claims to justify expanding offshore drilling.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
46 Responses to “Pfotenhauer: ‘I Was Misinformed’ About Hurricane Oil Spills”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
God, these repugs are just STUPID.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:19 pmPfotenhauer: …the point is still that we had a remarkable performance, that you had about 16,000 barrels that were lost during two of the worst storms that have ever…
Yeah, that would be remarkable if the platforms were all operating at full capacity throughout the storm... but in fact, they were shut down, weren't they?
July 17th, 2008 at 9:20 pmBut thank god for David Shuster's willingness to challenge one of these spin-puppets with the truth.
It's sad that something like this is so remarkable. A responsible media would do this regularly.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:22 pmOMG - I didn't know that there was seepage? She just told me that off-shore drilling is more dangerous to the environment than I realized. Say no to off shore drilling.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:25 pmThese phucking repugs will just say anything, over and over again, even when it's been proven that what they are saying and the truth are two totally different things.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:27 pmRalph - we only get one hour of responsible media/night, during the week and that is with Keith Olberman.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:27 pmYeah, ten years down the line we won't see a bit of an effect on price but we'll see the effect on the shore. Any spillage, seepage, or leakage will end up raising the price. We can all sit back and enjoy the oily irony.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:37 pmAwwww, what's three-quarters of a million barrels between friends?
Or maybe her response should have been McCain Standard #342: "Oh, you knew what I meant..."
July 17th, 2008 at 9:43 pmWell, I could say "unbelievable," but of course, from the mouth of this kind of Republican, it's not unbelievable at all. I guess, in their mind, naturally-occuring seepage from the ocean floor throughout the year that amounts to 1700 barrels per day is equivalent to 16,000 barrels worth of oil spilling within 24-48 hours. This is an apples vs. oranges argument and is meaningless.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:50 pmWell done Shuster.
However... follow-up questions;
The no-oil spills claim has been put forth by various Republicans over the last week, so it seems everyone who has made the claim has been equally 'misinformed' as just explained that you were .
As a point of interest, because after all as a policy adviser to a potential President getting the facts right before making policy decision is pretty important, so who misinformed you?
And is it possible that same person misinformed everyone else who made the same claim, individually or do you suppose that once the misinformation was out there everyone then just assumed it was true without checking into themselves?
I'm just asking because , you know, if yo get your facts wrong then that can affect policy and the public wants to be sure that their president is making good decisions.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:53 pmNotice how quickly she rattled off the 16,000 barrel figure. She knew she had been lying before & had her backup story all ready. It was no "gotcha" moment. The lie & the followup was planned.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:53 pm#11....you took the words right out of my disgusted mouth. Thanks.
July 17th, 2008 at 9:56 pmWell, I actually do. I was misinformed...
That's because you insist on listening to the wrong people. All ideologues do that. The truth is available for all those interested, but that's the rub, you actually have to be interested in the truth.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
July 17th, 2008 at 10:03 pmthis ot but to good to miss.
senator craig makes a speech on the floor of the senate.
*
from c&l,
Sen Larry Craig: Don’t let foreigners “jerk us around by the gas nozzle”
#
thank you.
*
July 17th, 2008 at 10:06 pm"The key difference has to do with release rates and spatial concentration of the oil. Seeps release large amounts of oil over large areas of the ocean gradually throughout the year. Spills release large amounts of oil from a point source in a short time."
By a similar token to the above; an oil spill (even one of huge volume) that occurs during a hurricane will be dispersed by the tremendous wind and wave action of the hurricane. The oil spill happened and may have adverse effects. However, it will not have localized, severe, concentrated environmental impact (i.e., it will not have similar, horrible environmental effects such as ExxonMobil's Valdez Oil Spill).
July 17th, 2008 at 10:12 pmThey had a "remarkable performance" Heck of a job, Pfotey!!!! Amazing they can still find things to feel good about when it comes to Katrina.
July 17th, 2008 at 10:13 pmJeremiah Says:
"By a similar token to the above; an oil spill (even one of huge volume) that occurs during a hurricane will be dispersed by the tremendous wind and wave action of the hurricane."
Though as the general direction of Katrina's wind and waves were into the shore, one can surmise that at ;east some of the oil ended up on the shore, rather than just being flung about in the middle of the ocean.
July 17th, 2008 at 10:37 pmOK. Lets take them at their word. They were misinformed.
A month ago they started saying it. There was an outcry for the past month which they have ignored.
Does this show any sort of intellectual rigor ? Does this show any willingness to learn ?
Or, does it show a stuborness to refuse to listen and learn ?
July 17th, 2008 at 10:45 pm"Though as the general direction of Katrina’s wind and waves were into the shore, one can surmise that at ;east some of the oil ended up on the shore, rather than just being flung about in the middle of the ocean."
Hypothetically, yes, but in reality the oil that reached shore would be in a dispersed state (i.e., no oil slicks, no oil soaked birds, no acute environmental disaster, no ExxonMobil Valdez Atrocity).
July 17th, 2008 at 10:55 pm"OK, so I lied, but the fact is they could have leaked even worse than they did. Yippee."
July 17th, 2008 at 10:56 pmReally Jeremiah, that is just your opinion isn't it. Do you have any hard data that hasn't been gathered by the oil companies on that. I didn't think so.
July 17th, 2008 at 10:57 pmIt's kind of remarkable how a man with such a limited intellect like McCain can find so many other dullards to speak on his behalf.
July 17th, 2008 at 11:12 pmIs there ANYTHING the conservatives won't lie about?
July 17th, 2008 at 11:38 pmucsbclassics53 Says:
Is there ANYTHING the conservatives won’t lie about?
Actually, their ability to lie. They find that to be SOOOOO F'ing easy and do it all the time!!!
July 18th, 2008 at 12:23 amCan we get a check on the NeoCon math?? Google says:
743 000 US gallons = 23 967.7419 barrels
Am I missing something?
July 18th, 2008 at 12:35 amA "...parade of conservatives repeating false claims to justify expanding offshore drilling"?
No one could have predicted!
#77 in a series...
July 18th, 2008 at 1:19 amIf only progressives were willing to lie so often, so well, so convincingly for their cause.
I truly believe that Americans, nay, humans in general prefer lies to the truth, at least 75% of the time.
Oy.
July 18th, 2008 at 1:20 amThese little GOP liars and bullies just melt into a pool of primal slime when confronted with a stubborn truth-speaker. Right on, David Schuster!
July 18th, 2008 at 1:22 amMisinformed by whom? Fox News/Rupert Murdoch/Roger Ailes? Drudge? Karl Rove?
July 18th, 2008 at 1:27 amPfotenhauer misfires with more misinformed gibberish. The "really remarkable performance of technology" has yet to demonstrate that just one quart of oil can be made to naturally or, even un-so, seep into the ocean floor per year.
This is scary....McCain relies on these experts.
July 18th, 2008 at 2:03 amAnd to think these people on the right have been running(into the ground)this for twenty two of the past thirty years and all I can say is WOW.....these people suck !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 18th, 2008 at 2:17 amwhere did all of it go? What happened to the oil, where’s all the dead birds and oil slicks?
~Jim Wilke
To the willfully ignorant, who didn't pay any attention to the news that mentioned, time and again, the toxic sludge floating on the flood waters in New Orleans and other places:
Hurricane Katrina's flood waters unleashed 1 million gallons of oil from one of the massive storage tanks at Murphy Oil's nearby refinery. The spill spread over 1 square mile and stained 1,700 homes, making it one of the largest environmental spills to occur in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
But it was far from the only one.
Industry says there was no way to prepare for spills
Government agencies -even the oil companies- acknowledged there were spills:
“Oil got into the neighborhoods,” Jean Kelly, a spokeswoman for the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality told MSNBC.com on Wednesday. [...]
Rodney Mallett, a responder at the state's oil spill task force, told MSNBC.com that little is known about the Venice slick so far.
Second oil spill feared on Mississippi River
And here is another news piece:
More than a month after Hurricane Katrina, environmental workers are still struggling to clean up the 50 oil spills along the Gulf Coast. An estimated 190,000 barrels, or nearly 8 million gallons of oil spilled into Louisiana's waterways — and into some of its neighborhoods.
Oil spills foul Louisiana neighborhoods
You just demonstrated you cannot be trusted to have an informed discussion on this topic, considering the oil spills were so openly talked about in the media after Katrina. It was, quite literally, all over the news. Under what rock on what planet have you been living lately?
July 18th, 2008 at 4:16 amPfotenhauer: ‘I Was Misinformed’ About Hurricane Oil Spills
When is the crappy GOP gonna' roll out the "It wasn't me , it was the one-armed man" excuse/defense ?
July 18th, 2008 at 7:19 amGregor Samsa
July 18th, 2008 at 4:16 am
Excellent post, Gregor. "Willfully ignorant" seems to be the most accurate description yet for our visiting trolls. They do not wish to argue from facts, only talking points which, according to the people they admire, are just as valid as facts in debate.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:50 am"Shayne Says:
Really Jeremiah, that is just your opinion isn’t it. Do you have any hard data that hasn’t been gathered by the oil companies on that. I didn’t think so."
Just think of it in terms of physics. Oil spilled during a hurricane will not form an oil slick and will not cause effects similar to the ExxonMobil Valdez Tragedy. It may cause environmental damage but it would be spread out, not localized and acute.
Any oil spill that continued or occurred after the hurricane could cause an oil slick and acute, localized damage
July 18th, 2008 at 8:03 amTrue to repub-li-thug form, rather than admitting she was wrong she blames others who "misinformed" her. Isn't there even one GOPer who will accept responsibility for his own actions, rather than blaming someone else?
July 18th, 2008 at 8:09 amLess than five minutes with "The Google" and she could have been informed. Sounds like she only wanted to know what we wanted to know.
That's the way these people operate. "We have to ivade Iraq to stop their WMDs!" Oops, sorry, we were misinformed, not our fault. We have just been shown a preview of what the McCain Presidency would be like.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:25 amThat's what Schuster should have followed with:
"So, are we to expect the McCain administration to say things and do things based on misinformation? Is that what we have to look forward to?"
July 18th, 2008 at 8:27 amPFOTENHAUER: "Well, I actually do. I was misinformed…"
And then you were sent on a media jag to spread that "misinformation" to the sheeple. Just like the Chinese are drilling off Cuba and opening up off shore drilling will bring immediate relief at the pump. The is the GOP's favorite tactic. Intentionally spreading lies en masse to the press and the public starting from Shrub, then McCant and on downhill to advisors, Senators, Congress, neocon radio hosts and their "base" in the MSM. Let the lie spread and fester and even after the truth has been put out there, keep lying as long as possible because some people will still believe it. If faced with the facts, they try their best to give the lie equal air time (even if you admit the falsehood). The "Chinese are drilling" lie was discredited allmost immediately but the GOP stuck to their disingenuous talking point for months. The MSM laps it up like so much bbq. I believe Olbermann said once something to the effect that the MSM considers "fair and balanced" giving the same amount of credence and time to the lie as they do the truth. Unfortunately the GOP has mastered the coordination of misinformation. Goebels would be proud of his little devotees in the GOP.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:11 amGregor Samsa,
Excellent articles, but as we’re on the topic of offshore drilling, I would like to deal with that mostly. The first news article you linked happened on land at an oil refinery. Unfortunately that does not have much factor into the offshore drilling debate. Regardless, there was a gem of what Jeremiah was saying linked in that first article, “In some cases, the natural disaster actually minimized the environmental one. Oil can't harm towns already destroyed by winds and floodwaters. Sunlight evaporated, and water diluted, many spills.” It is not exactly promising to use the logic of “it was broken already, so we can’t break it anymore,” but there is some truth to the statement. The best logic in the article linked comes from Denny Larson, coordinator of the Refinery Reform Campaign, “people have said for years that they shouldn’t have facilities in low-lying coastal areas where contamination risks are great… it’s the poorest possible choice."
Ditto for the second article and third articles, they talk exclusively about on shore oil spills. The only telling line is the one you linked which includes the words “along the Gulf Coast.”
By Googling “Katrina offshore oil spills” I was found, unfortunately quite early in the disaster, an article from msnbc; http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9365607/ that quotes the Coast Guard, “As for oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico, Paskewich said the Coast Guard has fielded no reports of offshore spills there,” but, “leaks could spring when the thousands of oil platforms and hundreds of miles of pipeline are restarted” which I believe was the case. As per the skytruth photos of oil spills all along the gulf, “Paskewich dismissed suggestions by an environmental advocacy group that satellite photos showed some 7,000 square miles of oil floating in the Gulf, saying numerous flyovers revealed only minor sheening.”
The rest of the front page on Google was dominated by political blogs and articles, so I opted to read the one (admitting I only read one!) from a news agency, and that one was woefully inadequate about what happened when the pipelines were turned back on.
So It seems most of the environmental impact occurred on shore at refineries and storage facilities which were located too close to low lying coastal regions. The nature of the disaster softened the environmental blow in at least some instances. Any photo satellite pictures taken before the oil pipelines were restarted paint a dubious picture of the damage, at least according to an agency that was directing real eye-in-the-sky flyovers of the area.
To me this does not mean abandon offshore drilling because of the dangers it poses. First, it means more strategically place our oil refining and storing capabilities on land to cope better with environmental events, and second inspecting oil pipelines and offshore oil rigs before pumping can be allowed to be restarted to prevent leakage once pumping resumes.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:33 am“Pfotenhauer: ‘I Was Misinformed’ About Hurricane Oil Spills”
NO. YOU were the one 'misinforming' = LYING!
July 18th, 2008 at 11:38 amWayne,
Thanks. It's amazing to me how many of these people (assuming they are, in fact, people) can't tell facts from opinion.
Niffy,
I realise the topic is off-shore drilling. However, I've seen the reichwingers' talking points morph from
There were no spills
to
There were no major spills
to
Those spills did not touch land
I believe I've shown all those arguments to be fallacious. It didn't take very long, or too much effort, by the way.
July 18th, 2008 at 12:12 pmThis discussion of whether or not oil spills occurred during Katrina and Rita strikes me as odd because if an offshore oil spill was going to occur with no way of preventing it, then about the best thing that cold happen to hide the evidence of the oil spill and to a large degree to alleviate the environmental effects of the oil spill would be for severe storm (e.g., hurricane) to occur.
As I understand it, the highest risk of large scale oil spills and environmental catastrophe from offshore oil production is in the transport of the oil (e.g., shallow water pipelines failures, tanker collisions, tanker grounding, tanker offloading, etc). ExxonMobil Valdez colliding with Alaska was an example of this.
July 19th, 2008 at 12:45 amWhy is it these people are so stupid they do not do their homework before they speak? I can tell you why. Because the media so seldom call them on anything they say, they usually get by with it. This time someone did.
There were oil spills. And the collapse of oil rigs. It was in the news at the time of Katrina.
Stupid!!!
July 19th, 2008 at 8:27 pmThe oil pollution in the wake of Hurricane Katrina could be among the worst recorded in North America, officials trying to coordinate the clean-up say. The US coastguard, which is responsible for the marine environment, said yesterday more than 6.5 million gallons of crude oil had been spilt in at least seven major incidents. The previous worst spill in US waters was the 11m gallons in Alaskan waters from the Exxon Valdez in 1989.
The EPA called the spills “worse than the worst-case scenario."
more + photos here...
August 1st, 2008 at 4:13 pmhttp://batcave911.blogspot.com/2008/07/mccain-katrina-oil-spill.html
by the way, i live on the outskirts of New Orleans, and the Murphy spill caused friends of mine to leave and not come back.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:22 pmThere is still a good bit of "black mud" in some areas, and still unfortunately, some neighborhoods that are almost still totally empty.
Brad
http://www.911review.org/Hurricane_Katrina/photos/