Tumblr Icon RSS Icon

Making money on an oil disaster

Posted on  

"Making money on an oil disaster"

Share:

google plus icon

Will BP take responsibility, or squeeze the tragedy for profits the way Exxon did?

To get a daily update on the BP oil disaster and all things climate and energy, click here.

ExxonMobil convened its annual shareholders meeting in Dallas this week as the magnitude of the ongoing BP oil disaster grows. This is a reminder that oil companies need to be held accountable for their actions””both while the oil gushes from the ocean floor and 20 years after the spill. The Exxon Valdez oil accident that slimed Prince William Sound in Alaska in 1989 is a chilling reminder of the need for government oversight and corporate accountability.

Exxon and BP’s broken record

Many would assume that BP””the company responsible for the Gulf Coast disaster””will cover the entire cost of cleanup. But we learned from the Exxon Valdez spill that the reality is very different:

The Exxon Valdez tanker spilled more than 11 million gallons of crude oil into Alaska’s Prince William Sound, which eventually contaminated approximately 1,300 miles of shoreline. The total costs of Exxon Valdez, including both cleanup and also “fines, penalties and claims settlements,” ran as much as $7 billion. Cleanup of the affected region alone cost at least $2.5 billion, and much oil remains.

Yet Exxon made high profits even in the aftermath of the most expensive oil spill in history. They made $3.8 billion profit in 1989 and $5 billion in 1990. And this occurred while Exxon disputed cleanup costs nearly every step of the way.

Exxon fought paying damages and appealed court decisions multiple times, and they have still not paid in full. Years of fighting and court appeals on Exxon’s part finally concluded with a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2008 that found that Exxon only had to pay $507.5 million of the original 1994 court decree for $5 billion in punitive damages. And as of 2009, Exxon had paid only $383 million of this $507.5 million to those who sued, stalling on the rest and fighting the $500 million in interest owed to fishermen and other small businesses from more than 12 years of litigation.

Twenty years later, some of the original plaintiffs are no longer alive to receive, or continue fighting for, their damages. An estimated 8,000 of the original Exxon Valdez plaintiffs have died since the spill while waiting for their compensation as Exxon fought them in court.

Coastal regions and coastlines of the Prince William Sound are still contaminated. The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council’s 2009 status report finds that as much as 16,000 gallons of oil remains in the sound’s intertidal zones today. A 2001 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration study surveyed 96 sites along 8,000 miles of coastline and found that “a total area of approximately 20 acres of shoreline in Prince William Sound is still contaminated with oil. Oil was found at 58 percent of the 91 sites assessed and is estimated to have the linear equivalent of 5.8 km of contaminated shoreline.”

Animals and ecosystems suffered immediately after the spill and still do today. Scientific American reported that, “some 2,000 sea otters, 302 harbor seals and about 250,000 seabirds died in the days immediately following the spill.” The researchers estimate that long term, “shoreline habitats such as mussel beds affected by the spill will take up to 30 years to recover fully.”

Most of the oil cannot be mopped up, In fact, only about 8 percent was ever recovered. Dr. Jeffrey Short of Oceana testified at a hearing on the 20th anniversary of Exxon Valdez that, “Despite heroic efforts involving more than 11,000 people, 2 billion dollars, and aggressive application of the most advanced technology available, only about 8 percent of the oil was ever recovered. This recovery rate is fairly typical rate for a large oil spill. About 20 percent evaporated, 50 percent contaminated beaches, and the rest floated out to the North Pacific Ocean, where it formed tar balls that eventually stranded elsewhere or sank to the seafloor.”

Exxon fought the courts, while BP botched the cleanup

Exxon didn’t fail in its response efforts 20 years ago alone. BP actually joined Exxon in its response efforts””officially BP PLC, the same firm working to stop the gusher in the Gulf of Mexico now.

The Associated Press reports: “BP owned a controlling interest in the Alaska oil industry consortium that was required to write a cleanup plan and respond to the spill two decades ago”¦investigations that followed the Valdez disaster blamed both Exxon and Alyeska for a response that was bungled on many levels.”

The same lack of preparation persists today, as BP workers and trained local employees and officials scramble to contain the gushing oil.

BP profits while disaster unfolds

BP has made huge profits over the last 10 years. In fact, during the early days of the Gulf of Mexico disaster, BP was making “enough profit in four days to cover the costs of the spill cleanup” so far.

BP made $163 billion in profits from 2001 to 2009 and $5.6 billion in the first quarter of 2010. And The Washington Post found that, “BP said it spent $350 million in the first 20 days of the spill response, about $17.5 million a day. It has paid 295 of the 4,700 claims received, for a total of $3.5 million. By contrast, in the first quarter of the year, the London-based oil giant’s profits averaged $93 million a day.”

Meanwhile, contamination in the gulf continues to worsen. BP CEO Tony Hayward bet there would be a “very, very modest” environmental impact on the region, but the gulf’s fisheries and shorelines will likely follow in the tragic path of the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez oil spill“”ruined for decades after. Add thousands of gallons of chemical dispersants used for cleanup to this mix, along with their unknown but potentially toxic effects, and this only compounds the damage to public health, tourism, and the region’s greater economy.

NOAA has already shut down “nearly 20 percent of the commercial and recreational fisheries in the area because of the spill.” And U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke declared a fishery disaster in the Gulf of Mexico on Monday; the affected area includes Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.

There is only more devastation to come to the communities in the region as their local populations and tourism industries suffer a blow not easily nursed back to health.

Holding BP accountable for the aftermath

BP cannot be let off the hook like Exxon was. No matter what anyone does, most of the gushing oil cannot be recovered; this is why BP must be responsible for regional restoration and cleanup””as well as plugging the hole.

BP needs to be held accountable for stopping the oil gusher and for shouldering the safety, health, restoration, and cleanup costs for years to come. President Obama created an independent commission to investigate causes and cleanup options for the disaster, and Congress is attempting to raise oil spill liability caps. But more steps need to be taken to hold BP fully accountable for the aftermath of the disaster.

BP should be required to place its 2010 first quarter profit of $5.6 billion in an escrow account to provide compensation to the fishermen, those in the tourist industry, and others whose livelihoods are threatened. These funds should also be used for cleaning up the soon to be blighted shores.

We are reminded as one of the largest environmental disasters in history continues to unfold in the gulf that we are putting our economy, national security, and environment at greater risk every day that the Senate fails to pass comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation. Yet ExxonMobil and BP both bragged that 2009 was a year of safety and environmental improvements for them; BP even claimed that, “2009 was an outstanding year” for their exploration and production efforts.

The BP Gulf Coast disaster reminds us that the offshore oil industry as a whole carries extreme risks that the American people cannot bear. We must act now to dramatically reduce our oil use, and President Obama and leaders in both parties of Congress must provide the leadership necessary to develop a clean energy and climate solution that becomes law this year.

If you like this post and want a daily update on the BP oil disaster and all things climate and energy, click here.

This is a repost from the Center for American Progress. Susan Lyon is Special Assistant, Daniel J. Weiss is a Senior Fellow and Director of Climate Strategy at the Center for American Progress.

For more information, see:

« »

6 Responses to Making money on an oil disaster

  1. mike roddy says:

    Exxon’s behavior after the Valdez spill showed us what kind of men they are. Which is to say, they’re not really human at all, even with all of that money.

    Tenney Naumer had an interesting thought: Exxon will now position themselves as the good guys, and could pick up BP for a song. They would then become an unstoppable force, and even more psychopathic.

    The legal battle over BP’s reparations could get interesting. Of course the President should place a big chunk of BP’s money in an escrow account. What would be his legal authority to do so? BP is foreign owned. This will require courage and finesse, and cooperation from the British government. And if this goes to the Supreme Court… well, we all know about those guys.

  2. catman306 says:

    On Morning Edition today I heard a story from the Transoceanic Chief mechanic from the Horizon who said that Transoceanic’s people wanted to go slow but a BP executive over ruled them.

    http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=3

    [JR: Yes, that is what 60 Minutes and others have reported.]

  3. David Smith says:

    Does anyone have any idea what ExxonMobile spent in legal costs to avoid responsability and limit financial payout? What is the ratio between legal costs vs cost of cleanup, damages, etc…?

    I would venture that big oil is less concerned with the money for this particular disaster and more concerned with legal precedent for scope of responsability. Legal precedent will effect the entire industry for years to come and could involve hundreds of billions of dollars. Now THAT would impact the industry. Hard to write off as the cost of doing business.

  4. Aaron Lewis says:

    Considering how many oil rigs are operating in the Gulf, I am very surprised that the big oil companies have not trained Gulf fishermen to do oil cleanup operations and supplied all the fishermen with personal protective gear to use when cleaning up an oil spill. Then they could have started cleanup as soon as the oil spill occurred.

    NOT!

    The engineers that designed the Alaska Pipeline, also provided a spill plan. It included such things as extra navigation beacons on Prince William Sound, drug and alcohol tests on tanker crews, and barges of spill response equipment stationed along Prince William Sound. The pipeline operating oil companies rejected that plan as “too expensive”, and had another engineering company write them a plan that was cheaper to operate. The result was the Exxon Valdez spill. The Gulf Oil Spill is not the first time that BP has used a spill plan because it was cheap to operate.

  5. Steve says:

    Exxon’s behavior after the Valdez spill showed us what kind of men they are. Which is to say, they’re not really human at all, even with all of that money.

    Tenney Naumer had an interesting thought: Exxon will now position themselves as the good guys, and could pick up BP for a song. They would then become an unstoppable force, and even more psychopathic.

    The legal battle over BP’s reparations could get interesting. Of course the President should place a big chunk of BP’s money in an escrow account. What would be his legal authority to do so? BP is foreign owned. This will require courage and finesse, and cooperation from the British government. And if this goes to the Supreme Court… well, we all know about those guys.

  6. Rob Shattuck says:

    The oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico is going to have devastating consequences for years to come.

    We can wish we did not have to think about them.

    We have to think about them, however.

    There has already begun the work of government, charity and the law to deal with what has happened in the Gulf.

    Candidates in this year’s elections have reacted and have enunciated campaign positions concerning whether offshore drilling should be limited, whether increased regulation of oil industry operations is needed, and whether a federal law that limits the liability of oil companies should be changed.

    Exercising my citizen’s rights, I have had email correspondence with many candidates about the oil disaster. In this correspondence, I advocated that, regardless of what the policy outcomes are regarding offshore drilling, regulation of the oil industry, and the federal law limiting liability, there is, in my view, one thing that is very wrong related to the oil disaster for which Congress is responsible.

    I think it is very wrong that hundreds of millions or billions of dollars is going to be paid to plaintiffs’ lawyers (and defense lawyers) related to the determination and finalization of BP’s liability and to whom the liability is owing.

    I frankly don’t think it should cost more than $50,000,000 to determine the amount of the liability and to whom it is owed. Hundreds of millions or billions of dollars should not have to be paid to lawyers for their role, and most of those amounts would be much better spent by society as part of the compensation paid to persons who suffer losses from the oil disaster. The moneys could also be better spent by not being paid at all and being available for use by BP and other companies who had the misfortune of contributing to the happening of the accident, in order that those parties can continue their legitimate business of producing oil for the benefit of the county, providing jobs, and paying dividends to hundreds of thousands of stockholders, big and small, including retirement plans, who are dependent on and deserving of financial returns from their investments.

    Recovery from the oil disaster is going to be very onerous. I hope the candidates and the public will debate in the 2010 elections whether plaintiffs’ lawyers should get paid hundreds of millions or billions of dollars as a result, or whether there is better use for the money in how our society recovers.