Preliminary evidence is indicating the tragic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico may have been prevented if the United States required the same type of safety standards and oil spill prevention regulations on the New Horizon rig as other countries mandate on deep-water oil drilling platforms operating in their territorial waters. Using the Gulf of Mexico catastrophe as a catalyst, the United States can take this tragic accident and take the lead to encourage the world community to enact a multinational treaty regulating offshore drilling. Utilizing international law precedents codified under the Law of the Sea, the global community needs to set up a uniform set of safety requirements and basic operating procedures for the thousands of offshore rigs operating around the planet.
Examining the issue of offshore drilling from an international affairs perspective, it is clear that international oil companies (IOCs) such as British Petroleum, need to be required to follow the same type of safety requirements and basic operating procedures regardless if the offshore drilling platform is in the Gulf of Mexico, the Caspian Sea, or off the coast of Angola.
As reported in The Wall Street Journal on April 28, two major oil-producing countries require secondary remote-controlled shut-off switches on offshore oilrigs operating in their territorial waters, which might have prevented the April 20 explosion on the Deepwater Horizon.
Norway, which has huge oil and gas reserves in the North Sea, since 1993 has required all off shore oil rigs operating in its territorial waters, to have secondary remote-controlled shut-off switches. Brazil, another large oil producing country, has required secondary remote-controlled shut-off switches on all offshore oil rigs since 2007, following an accident which like the recent Deepwater accident, also killed 11 workers.
While it was commendable for The Wall Street Journal to report on one of the most under reported aspects of the Gulf oil spill, the editors at the Journal missed an opportunity to expand on why the United States or Great Britain does not require the use of acoustic triggers. As in most instances in covering regulatory issues in Washington, all the journalists have to do with that part of the story, is to follow the money.
Helping to light the path of discovery for investigative journalists to follow the trail of money, was a recent report by the non partisan research group, The Center for Responsive Politics, which reported that in 2009, British Petroleum spent $16 million to influence legislation pending in Congress.
According to the research group, British Petroleum, during the first quarter of 2010, has kept up this pace by spending nearly $3.53 million on federal lobbying. With that kind of influence, it might explain why the United States does not require secondary remote-controlled shut-off switches in off shore oilrigs operating in American territorial waters.
British Petroleum is not alone in lobbying Congress for less regulation and oversight. According to The Center of Responsive Politics, the amount British Petroleum lobbied in 2009 is only a drop of dirty money in the well of influence running below Washington DC. Totaling more than $169 million, the money spent by British Petroleum pails in comparison to the amount of money spent by the entire oil and gas industry in 2009. Compared to the 22 million dollars a lobbied by the environmental industry in 2009, it is not surprising that oil companies won the battle not to be required to have more safety features and oil spill protection devices.
While sometimes takes a catastrophe to awaken the average American out of their bad habit of indifference and disinterest in politics, the ever-expanding oil slick could be an opportunity for the public to mobilize and become more engaged in how government regulation is enacted. Instead of just reacting to the news, the residents of the Gulf Coast should becoming more engaged in the political process and demand their elected leaders to enact tougher regulations concerning offshore drilling. Requiring secondary safety systems like blow out preventers and remote-controlled shut-off switches will protect both the oil industry and the public from costly oil recovery expenses.
0 comments:
Post a Comment