Boardman writes: "As the second week of toxic air in Mayflower begins, here are more of the questions this disaster raises and some of the current answers, subject to future refinement."
Workers cleaned up oil following a spill from Exxon's Pegasus pipeline near Mayflower, Ark., Monday. (photo: GreenPeace/Reuters)
The Press and Public Are Contained
08 April 13
he first "Tar Sands Oil Arkansas" (published April 7) discussed a number of questions raised by the ExxonMobil Pegasus pipeline that burst in Mayflower, Arkansas, on March 29, pumping tar sands oil � technically Wabasca Heavy crude oil � into a residential neighborhood for almost an hour.
Among the questions touched on in that piece were protecting the pipeline from terrorists, residents suing ExxonMobil in federal court, the nature of Wabasca Heavy tar sands oil, some effects of the spill, and the "martial law" atmosphere described by reporters trying to look at the cleanup site.
As the second week of toxic air in Mayflower begins, here are more of the questions this disaster raises and some of the current answers, subject to future refinement. A reader writes:
What is the point of origin of the leak? In front of whose house? Why no image of the hole in the ground or in the pipe? Was it corrosion, a weld failure, sabotage by cutting or explosives, or WHAT? Do we have to wait for NTSB for answers? Are ExxonMobil and their execs too big to jail?
The point of origin appears to be in the woods, behind the houses, and underground. The absence of images is unexplained.
Corrosion or weld failure seem to be two likely possibilities for the cause of the leak.
As reported so far, the spill started quietly, with no one aware of the moment it started. It's not clear how long it took for someone to become aware, but not too long, presumably.
The circumstances known so far make sabotage (or inadvertence) by cutting, explosion, backhoe, bulldozer, or other means seem unlikely.
Several of the press releases issued by the Mayflower Incident Unified Command Joint Information Center over the past several days conclude with the statement: "The cause of the spill is under investigation."
Since ExxonMobil and its employees have not yet been convicted of committing a crime, it seems premature to consider jailing them.
Why were the pipeline and the residential subdivision built so close together?
Close is a relative term. There's no suggestion so far that the subdivision was built illegally, or didn't have the right permits, or interfered with the pipeline right of way, or anything like that.
Interestingly, though, the Arkansas Times interviewed a former ExxonMobil pipeline worker who raised questions about the company's commitment to safety.
The report continued:
He raised, too, a question mentioned here yesterday by another pipeline engineer about the wisdom of building new subdivisions over existing pipelines, as happened in Mayflower.
Considering the potential stress of building on top of a pipeline and the high pressure used when transporting heavy crude,� the developer of Northwoods should have worked with Exxon to reroute Pegasus around the neighborhood.
Other options, he said, include replacing the section of the pipeline with newer, stronger steel or burying it deeper under the ground. But ... pipeline companies have little incentive to take costly preventive action.
Even if they get a fine the fine will be a small fraction of the cost to correct a dangerous condition, he said.
Who Is the Mayflower Incident Unified Command?
The command's letterhead includes the logos for ExxonMobil, Faulkner County, the U.S. Environmental Protection Service (EPA), and the City of Mayflower, Arkansas.
It has been hard for reporters on the scene to learn much more. Even CBS News had to stay outside the yellow tape.
Hasn't ExxonMobil been forthcoming with information and documentation relating to the Pegasus pipeline rupture?
Well, no, not really.
As a result, Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel has issued a subpoena for relevant documents from ExxonMobil. The deadline for complying with the subpoena is April 10, almost two weeks after the spill. ExxonMobil has said it will comply.
Why isn't ExxonMobil more open, since we give them subsidies and tax breaks worth billions of dollars every year?
Don't start with that. This is about Mayflower, Arkansas. You can read about the tax shelter and subsidy thing somewhere else, such as American Progress.
But ExxonMobil does have to pay into the federally mandated fund for oil spill cleanups, right?
Yes and no. It's the "no" part that matters here.
With the Pegasus pipeline pumping Wabasca Heavy tar sands oil, ExxonMobil is not required to pay anything into the oil spill cleanup fund. Not a penny. Why? Because tar sands oil, according to the law written by Congress and interpreted by our tax collectors, is not oil. So its pumpers are exempt from contributing to the cleanup fund.
If it were more traditional, lighter crude oil in the pipeline, someone would be paying 8 cents per barrel into the oil-spill liability trust fund.
Isn't tar sands oil like Wabasca Heavy more difficult and more expensive to clean up than lighter traditional oils?
Yes.
Doesn't that make a difference?
Apparently not to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which administers the cleanup fund. In a 2011 decision, the IRS exempted tar sands oil, diluted bitumen, dilbit fron the 8 cents tax per barrel (42 gallons).
Why doesn't Congress do something about that?
Seriously?
Seriously.
Congressman Ed Markey, D-Mass, has tried.
After a week, has the tar sands oil been contained?
Probably not.
Arkansas Online reported on March 29, the day of the spill, without indicating the source of the information, that "Oil that spilled into waterways from a ruptured pipeline in Mayflower has been contained."
The report continued:
Faulkner County Judge Allen Dodson said blockades have been set up at two different locations along a waterway that flows into Lake Conway. Those blockades are preventing the contaminated water from passing.
A dam made of dirt, wood and other building materials has been erected in the initial ditch that contains a majority of the oil, with an additional blockade set up in two culverts connected to coves that allow water into Lake Conway.
The obstructions will prevent any oil from passing through for an extended period of time, possibly days, Dodson added.
If the oil was contained the first day, what's all the fuss about?
Early reports appear to have been overly optimistic.
There are more than 100 photographs on the web site for the EPA On Site Coordinator, from the period March 29-April 6. They show that the oil got into active waterways almost immediately on March 29. And at least some of the oil was also flowing on the ground and into the street, ending up going down a storm drain.
EPA image #78 shows "Sorbent boom in place at discharge point from neighborhood underneath Main Street" � four days after the spill, on April 2.
EPA image #90 shows "Containment boom installed in Lake Conway" on April 2.
Has tar sands oil reached Lake Conway or not?
ExxonMobil reportedly says it has not.
Grist.org reporter Suzi Parker says that Arkansas Attorney General McDaniel "reported Friday morning [April 5] that there is oil in Lake Conway despite ExxonMobil's assurances to the contrary."
The Grist report adds:
"Great efforts have been taken to limit the spread of the oil to only one area of Lake Conway, which is referred to as the Cove, but the Cove and Lake Conway are hydrologically connected and are therefore one body of water," Aaron Sadler, spokesman for McDaniel, told Grist.
Meanwhile, access to the site continues to be tightly policed. According to InsideClimate, ExxonMobil threatened reporter Lisa Song with arrest on Wednesday when she entered the command center looking for government officials.
So is it like martial law or a police state in Mayflower, or are these just more whiners and media frenzy whippers?
Hard to tell. Of course it could be both.
The restricted area is considerably smaller than the no-fly zone's 78 square miles.
It's not clear what happened to the press conference that was announced for April 6.
Here's the way the Arkansas Times saw it as of April 6:
Public accountability remains a pressing issue. The Faulkner County judge disclaimed responsibility in refusing an Arkansas Democrat-Gazette FOI request for county records related to cleanup activities. This is on top of police-state actions by Faulkner County officials to let Exxon Mobil set rules on public access to affected areas.
The secrecy is wrong. The delegation of authority to a private company is wrong. But Faulkner County officials are deeply in the thrall of the energy industry thanks to the Fayetteville shale play. Public interest takes a backseat.
But didn't Exxon Mobil just win a big time safety award?
Yes, indeed, it did.
The National Safety Council announced on April 3 that ExxonMobil had won the 2013 Green Cross for Safety, awarded at the annual fundraising dinner in Houston that night. The award was for ExxonMobile's "leadership and comprehensive commitment to safety excellence."
According to the National Safety Council press release:
ExxonMobil distinguished itself over a period of years for outstanding achievements in workplace safety, community service, environmental stewardship and responsible citizenship. It believes the best way to meet this commitment is through a capable, committed workforce as well as practices designed to enable safe, secure and environmentally responsible operations. ExxonMobil accomplishes this through clearly defined policies and practices, and with rigorously applied management systems designed to deliver expected results.
It remains steadfast in its goal that "Nobody Gets Hurt."
Past recipients of the Green Cross for Safety medal include the Dow Chemical Company, Schneider Electric North America, Exelon Nuclear, FirstGroup, Delta Air Lines, UPS, DuPont, Liberty Mutual Group, Chrysler Group of DaimlerChrysler, Kenny Construction Company, Ryder System Inc., Intel Corporation and AK Steel.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Irving Krystol ONLY cosseted and cajoled the two most clueless, inward-looking and in Dimwits' case at least, vapidly-incurio us -plus Reagan's accelerating Alzheimer's, was the ideal breeding ground for the coven of brain-damaged patsies listed in the article and their spawn, still pushing endless war!
What an achievement!
As long as people continue to believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by Osama Bin Laden and al Qaida, the world will continue on its path to its own self-destruction.
(Continued)
I first noticed Viggo Mortensen when he was interviewed by Charlie Rose in 2002 on his upcoming debut of "Lord of the Ring - The Two Towers." Reference the following URL:
http://www.brego.net/viggo/viggo-politics.php
I don't remember how I caught this program since I generally don't watch Charlie Rose, but I did. It's one of the things that sticks out in my mind, almost like September 11th, 2001. He wore a T-shirt on which he wrote using a sharpie, "No More Blood for Oil." This was a year before Bush illegally invaded Iraq. Viggo already knew at the time of this interview that Bush was planning on invading Iraq in 2003. If you watch Democracy Now, Amy plays a portion of the video from that interview.
I especially liked the ending of his movie entitled "Hidalgo" because of his support for the wild mustangs which are being systematically destroyed by the U.S. government via the BLM.
In any case, Radscal, I would suggest that you watch his interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3vbTuo47VQ&list=PLFCF256772039511C&index=33
He was under constant attack by Charlie Rose for his wearing of the T-shirt. I wonder how Charlie Rose feels today about what he did in 2002 when he interviewed Viggo Mortensen?
You're right. That was an incredible interview with Mortensen. I haven't seen any of the Rings/Hobbit flicks, and so was unaware of this actor, but I'm really impressed with him as a human being.
Thanks.
The title of the movie, "Hidalgo," is actually the name of his horse which is a wild mustang which together run many cross-country races.
The main plot of the movie which is supposed to be a true story was that he signed up to run a cross-country race in Arabia across the ocean in which the prize money was $100,000, a lot of money at that time. Until the very end of the movie, no one viewing the film really knows why he did this. I like to protect the wild animals that roam the open areas of our nation, and one of them is the wild mustang who are quickly becoming an endangered species if the BLM can get its way.
The race was long and hard, but, in the end he won the money. The scene then turns to his return to the U.S. at a remote location where the U.S. calvary is about to slaughter thousands upon thousands of wild mustangs that they had corralled. Mortensen rides up to the officer in charge and hands him a note in which he paid the U.S. government to allow these horses to run free. He and two Indians open all the gates and let all the mustangs run free including his own horse, Hildago.
Could you give a specific example of such "libel", Mr. Weismann?
If any other country but Israel has profited from 9/11 and the resulting War on Terror, could you please name that country, Mr. Weismann?
Please write/educate US more.
https://books.google.com/books?id=DD8oNl63gBEC&dq=Perle+Reagan&source=gbs_navlinks_s
This book which will come as a surprise to many educated observers and historians suggests that Jews and Jewish intellectuals have played a considerable role in the development and shaping of modern American conservatism. The focus is on the rise of a group of Jewish intellectuals and activists known as neoconservative s who began to impact on American public policy during the Cold War with the Soviet Union and most recently in the lead up to and invasion of Iraq. It presents a portrait of the life and work of the original and small group of neocons including Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and Sidney Hook. This group has grown into a new generation who operate as columnists in conservative think tanks like The Heritage and The American Enterprise Institute, at colleges and universities, and in government in the second Bush Administration including such lightning rod figures as Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Elliot Abrams. The book suggests the neo cons have been so significant in reshaping modern American conservatism and public policy that they constitute a Neoconservative Revolution."
I agree with you and Weissman - putting ANY label on Jews (blacks, Muslims) nationalism is simplistic/xeno phobic. Not all Germans were Nazis, not all Russians were/are communists etc.
The liberal imperialists, as they are better classified, also come from the Cold War Truman/CIA crowd -- that is their common root. Brzezinski, his spawn Albright, and the lying twins, Susan Rice and Power, are just as obsessively bent on achieving the goals of PNAC as the neo-cons, and are fully allied with them, e.g., with the Libyan intervention, Ukraine, and the anti-Assad mantra.
Sadly, other than a tease, Weissman gave them a pass in his article. Perhaps he will pick this up in a future article.
"Big Money and the Corporate State: How Global Banks, Corporations, and Speculators Rule and How to Nonviolently Break Their Hold."
Gotta read that one. First time I couldn't find anything to disagree with!