BP targets one of the world's last unspoilt wildernesses after deal

The Arctic is to become the "new environmental battleground", campaigners warned yesterday after BP announced plans to drill in one of the last great unspoilt wildernesses on earth.

Greenpeace and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) have vowed to confront BP's American boss, Bob Dudley, over the agreement with the Russian state-owned oil giant Rosneft to explore the Kara Sea, north of Siberia. The British energy firm was branded the world's "environmental villain number one" by Friends of the Earth (FoE) yesterday in response to its move to exploit potential oil reserves in the remote waters.

Environmentalists are dismayed that BP, which announced the deal on Friday night, has decided to set up rigs in an area of great biodiversity and treacherous weather conditions. The region is one of the few remaining havens left for a number of endangered species, including polar bears, walruses and beluga whales. And while the waters of the Kara Sea (map at left) are relatively unexplored, they are known to house key fish species such as halibut, capelin and Arctic cod.
The controversial decision to open the area up to oil drilling comes after the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico last April. The disaster wrecked BP's reputation, and campaigners are concerned that the remote Arctic is even more susceptible to environmental disasters.

Mike Childs, FoE's head of climate change, said on Sunday: "BP, a number of years ago, were positioning themselves to be the greenest of the oil companies, promising to go 'beyond petroleum'. This latest move positions them quite nicely as environmental villain number one, given the huge impact they had in the Gulf of Mexico as well."

The oil giant "cannot be trusted" to drill oil in difficult waters, and any oil spill (left: oil in Gulf of Mexico) would be "completely catastrophic". He added:

"The Arctic should be a no-go for fossil fuel extraction as it's one of the few pristine environments we have left. It's very fragile and we should be looking at ways to protect it, not seemingly trying to find ways of wrecking it."

Dax Lovegrove, head of business and industry relations at WWF-UK, said:

"Oil spill response plans in the Arctic are even less adequate than we saw in the Gulf of Mexico. There is less infrastructure, like equipment to ring-fence oil spills and ships to skim off oil on the surface of the water."

Conservationists have previously complained about BP's work with Rosneft off Sakhalin Island in the north Pacific. WWF believes that the companies' constant seismic surveying has caused noise pollution harmful to the last 130 western grey whales (right), only 30 of which are female. Mr Lovegrove added that WWF will be "in direct contact" with Mr Dudley and Rosneft's president Eduard Khudainatov and reviewing its campaigning tactics in light of the deal.

Greenpeace is even more damning of the deal, which also sees BP and Rosneft take shares in each other worth a total of £10bn. Senior climate change campaigner Ben Ayliffe pointed out that the Greenland government last year refused to allow BP to drill in its Arctic waters.

"The Kara Sea is pretty much virgin territory," Mr Ayliffe said. "It's bad news. BP has a pretty average record of safety recently. We don't know if they've learned anything from Deepwater Horizon."

Another Greenpeace spokesman warned yesterday that an oil spill in the Kara Sea could take nine months to clear up. "Imagine that same scenario in the Arctic where are thousands of miles from anywhere, where the drilling season is three or four months long. If you get a leak at the end of that cycle it could run for nine months before you could get back in the next year to try to stop it," said Chris Kronick.

Mr Ayliffe hinted that Greenpeace will campaign heavily on exploitation of the Arctic in 2011. "These two ventures mean it doesn't look like the leopard is changing its spots. BP is going into some of the planet's most pristine wilderness. Questions need to be asked of BP, like why should they be investing shareholders' money in such areas after spending $20bn on Deepwater Horizon."

The costs of the clean-up and compensation in the Gulf of Mexico are expected to reach at least $40bn. The anger over the disaster in the US has convinced BP that its best hopes for growth lie east rather than west.

The Government moved quickly to show its support for the Rosneft deal. The Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne (at right), attended the signing of the agreement and welcomed the move. He said: "BP, as we all know, is coming out of a difficult period in its history, but this partnership shows that BP is very much open for business."

Mr Huhne was accused of betraying his principles by environmentalists. "This is supposed to be the greenest government ever and the Lib Dems in particular have actively pitched for the green vote for years. They are U-turning on the principles they claim to have," said Spencer Fitzgibbon, Green Party spokesman.

FoE's Mike Childs said: "It is disturbing that Chris Huhne is not too worried about the potential environmental impact on one of the most fragile environments in the world."

BP boss Bob Dudley (right) has sought to convince the media and environmentalists that BP is now a much safer company. On Friday he said: "BP is sharing the lessons we learned around the world. You will see BP take these lessons into the heart of the company."

A BP spokesman said that it would be meeting environmental groups to address their concerns. But US congressman Ed Markey called for a review of the deal.

"Even following the largest oil spill in US history, and potentially billions of dollars in fines outstanding, the Russian Bear is apparently bullish about BP," said Mr Markey. "BP once stood for British Petroleum. With this deal, it now stands for Bolshoi Petroleum."

Source:
The Independent,"BP targets one of the world's last unspoilt wildernesses after deal", accessed January 17, 2011
Common Dreams, "BP Targets One of the World's Last Unspoilt Wildernesses", accessed January 17, 2011

Groups sue BP for harm to endangered Gulf wildlife

U.S. environmental groups filed a suit on Wednesday against British-based oil giant BP Plc saying the world's worst offshore spill inflicted "ongoing unlawful" harm on endangered wildlife in the Gulf of Mexico.

The suit is one of thousands of damages cases to stem from the spill from BP's blown-out undersea Macondo well, which between April and July dumped millions of gallons of oil into the sea, fouling coastlines in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. The well was capped in mid-July.

But while the bulk of the cases have been brought by affected individuals, like fishermen, hoteliers and companies, this one brought by conservation groups focuses on endangered sea turtles, whales, birds and Florida manatees.

The case was filed in federal court in Louisiana six months after the DeepWater Horizon rig explosion that triggered the spill. It says that these species were harmed by the leaked oil but also that oil in the ocean continues to do them harm.

"The harmful effects of the BP oil well blowout on endangered and threatened wildlife will continue for many years," said Gregory Buppert, attorney for Defenders of Wildlife, one of the plaintiffs in the case.

"We ask the court to compel BP to provide the resources necessary to ensure (that) imperiled species in the Gulf recover from this disaster," said Buppert, whose organization filed the suit along with the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), the Gulf Restoration Network and the Save the Manatee Club.

Since harm to the species cannot immediately be remedied, the plaintiffs would like BP to set up a fund to help Gulf wildlife as a whole, said SELC lawyer Catherine Wannamaker.

The suit did not estimate a total value for the fund.

But some environmental experts say proving continuing and ongoing harm -- as opposed to simply past harm -- will not be easy for the specific species described in the suit, paving the way for a legal battle.

BP has consistently said it will consider all legitimate claims for damages related to the spill.

The disaster spawned a plethora of lawsuits against BP and partner companies involved in drilling the Macondo well.

Gulf Coast fishermen, hoteliers and others who sustained economic losses through the spill have filed suits because their losses stemmed from environmental damage. One remedy for this group is the $20 billion compensation facility set up by BP and administered by Kenneth Feinberg but victims can also sue BP and many of those cases are consolidated into a multi-district litigation suit in New Orleans.

The Gulf Coast Claims Facility administered by Feinberg has paid $1.45 billion in claims since it took over the claims process from the company on August 23.

A second group of suits was filed by states and the federal government over harm to their natural resources. Louisiana sustained the most damage and could eventually receive billions of dollars in compensation, according to one environmental lawyer.

Lawyers have also filed suits over the terms under which the government has issued permits to oil companies, including six cases filed in federal court by the environmental group Earthjustice, said David Guest, a lawyer with the group.

The suits challenge permits issued by the government's former Minerals Management Service bureau that waived requirements of oil companies to disclose plans in the event of a worst case scenario or a requirement to say how they would deal with the failure of a blowout preventer. This preventer mechanism is designed to avert catastrophic blowouts of wells.

Since the spill, the bureau has been renamed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement. (right)

The effect of the Earthjustice suit and others will be to sharpen scrutiny on government handling of drilling permits, said Adam Babich, director of the environmental law clinic at Tulane University.

Before the spill, "the environmental community was not paying as much attention as they should have. If there are no challenges to government action ... the government gets lazy," he said. The case is Defenders of Wildlife et al v. BP P.L.C. et al, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana as case no. 2:10-CV-03879. The suit lists John Timothy Suttles of the Southern Environmental Law Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina as the attorney for the three animal defense organizations.

Source:
Reuters, "Groups sue BP for harm to endangered Gulf wildlife", accessed October 21, 2010

From the Inbox: Do You Trust BP to drill in polar bear habitat?

BP in the Arctic: Disaster on Ice? Do you trust BP to use risky new drilling technology in pristine Arctic habitats? Tell Interior Secretary Salazar to reject BP’s application to drill in the Beaufort Sea -- and help avert the next oil spill catastrophe! Dear Friend, They’re BACK ... The same company that just brought you the most catastrophic oil spill in American history is now planning a risky new project that would use untested drilling technology in Alaska’s Beaufort Sea -- the heart of America’s polar bear habitat. BP’s so-called Liberty Project would use the biggest rig in the world -- propped up by a manmade gravel island three miles from shore – to drill up to eight miles horizontally, exposing pipes to the same kind of explosive “gas kicks” that led to the blowout in the Gulf. In other words, this latest BP project is a disaster waiting to happen! Please help stop it by signing this urgent Petition of Protest to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. You might have thought BP would lay low after the Gulf disaster: focusing on the cleanup effort and repairing its dismal environmental record. Instead, the company is planning to begin drilling this fall in one of the two Polar Bear Seas that are home to HALF of our nation’s polar bears. Let me share a few facts about BP’s Liberty Project: Even though it’s three miles offshore, this project is NOT subject to President Obama’s moratorium on offshore drilling in the Arctic! That’s because the operation is built on a 31-acre manmade gravel island. In other words, BP is getting a free pass based on a technicality. BP is prepared to drill up to eight miles horizontally in search of oil, even though this type of drilling is even more prone to gas kicks like the one that caused the huge blowout in the Gulf of Mexico. In order to drill these unprecedented wells, BP has commissioned the building of the largest drilling rig in the world! Shockingly, BP was allowed to write its own environmental assessment and emergency response plan for the Liberty Project, just like it did in the Gulf. And we know what happened there. The Obama Administration needs to make clear that the days of BP running the show are over. Tell Secretary Salazar to stop the Liberty Project immediately by denying BP’s application to drill. He is unlikely to do that unless he hears a groundswell of public opposition -- starting with you. BP’s horrendous environmental record is well documented. It is already responsible for the 2010 Gulf disaster, the 2006 oil spill on Alaska’s North Slope (the largest oil spill to date in the region) and the 2005 Texas City explosion that killed 15 workers and injured 170 more. We can’t afford a repeat performance in the Arctic. High winds, freezing temperatures and dangerous sea ice could make cleanup impossible. The nearest Coast Guard station is over 1,000 miles away, and much of the oil spill response equipment on-site is more than two decades old! Tell Secretary Salazar to prevent a disaster on ice by saying No to BP. Sincerely, Peter Lehner Executive Director Natural Resources Defense Council

From the Inbox - What BP doesn't want you to see

Dear Friend, I just finished watching this video -- and I hope every American sees it. Philippe Cousteau, grandson of famous explorer Jacques Cousteau, went underwater off the Gulf Coast to see first-hand what the Deepwater Oil Disaster looks and feels like. And the answer he came back with: "This is a nightmare." Watch this video and share it with all your friends. We've seen the oil start to wash up on shore, and we've seen satellite images of the slick. But that's only the tip of the iceberg: Take a look at the underwater impact of the oil geyser and the dangerous chemicals BP is using to "disperse" it -- effects that could last for decades, even if today's risky "Top Kill" maneuver to plug the well works. It's never been clearer: The consequences of our dependence on oil, from the Deepwater Oil Disaster to the climate crisis, are completely unacceptable. Sincerely, David Boundy Campaign Manager Repower America