Tar mat coats marsh in Bay Jimmy off Louisiana's Barataria Bay, March 2012 (NWF staff photo)

Ryan Lambert has been a Cajun fishing and hunting guide for 31 years and is alarmed by the decline he’s seen in the last two.

“This [Bay Jimmy] island should be covered with shorebirds and there are none,” he says. “They ought to be nesting in here. Any island before this oil spill, you come up to an island like this and you can’t hear yourself think. And look, it’s void of life.” Lambert says his speckled trout catch is also down 98 percent.

“You know, we’re used to going out … where this water is coming through and [picking] up 40 fish right there, no problem in a half hour,” he says. “You go try to catch a fish there right now, that’s not happening.” Lambert says he’s tired of hearing “Everything’s fine, come on down,” a message in some of BP’s ads. “Our whole life is upside-down, on hold, waiting to see what happens.”

He says two years later, it’s not fine — and it’s far from over.

It’s not just BP that wants to pretend everything’s fine—plenty of members of Congress have been more eager to rush back to reckless drilling than they have been to commit the federal government to comprehensive Gulf restoration.

I joined The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann last week to talk about continued Congressional inaction in the face of ongoing evidence of the oil’s destruction, particularly the troubling dolphin deaths:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to ask your members of Congress dedicate BP’s oil spill fines and penalties to Gulf restoration.

LIKE and SHARE this image on Facebook to spread the word that it's not over.

Since the start of the spill, more than 500 dolphins have been found stranded in the oil spill zone—four times the historical average. April is the 26^th consecutive month with above-average strandings, with higher mortality rates in 2011 than in 2010.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recently called the length and severity of the current rash of dolphin strandings “unprecedented.”

As part of its effort to determine the cause of the dolphin strandings, NOAA did an in-depth study of dolphins in Barataria Bay, an area that was heavily oiled during the BP oil spill. The researchers found that many of the animals were underweight, anemic, had low hormone levels, low blood sugar, and some had signs of liver damage. These symptoms are similar to those seen in other mammals exposed to oil.

As a top-level predator, the poor health of dolphins in the most heavily oiled areas suggests possible ecosystem-wide effects of the oil.  Dolphins can inhale oil vapors, ingest oil when feeding, absorb it through their skin or eat contaminated fish.

The Gulf of Mexico is in dire need of restoration. NOAA estimates that as many as 450 miles of shoreline remain affected by oil from the Deepwater Horizon well. But even before the oil spill, the Gulf of Mexico was a degraded ecosystem, affected by wetlands loss, overfishing, nutrient run-off, and other problems.

The impacts of the Gulf oil disaster will be unfolding for years, if not decades. The initial disaster response focused on removing oil, with little action taken to address the long-term wetlands habitat degradation exacerbated by the oil disaster.

BP and the other companies responsible for the Gulf oil disaster will rightly pay billions in penalties for their flagrant violations of the Clean Water Act. But unless Congress takes action, money from these fines could end up spent on unrelated programs.

Click here to make sure Congress dedicates the money from BP’s oil spill fines to Gulf restoration!

Much of the material in this post comes from A Degraded Gulf of Mexico: Wildlife and Wetlands Two Years Into the Gulf Oil Disaster.

Striped dolphins swim through BP oil, April 2012 (NOAA's National Ocean Service)

Based on comprehensive physicals of 32 live dolphins from Barataria Bay in the summer of 2011, preliminary results show that many of the dolphins in the study are underweight, anemic, have low blood sugar and/or some symptoms of liver and lung disease. Nearly half also have abnormally low levels of the hormones that help with stress response, metabolism and immune function.

Researchers fear that some of the study dolphins are in such poor health that they will not survive. One of these dolphins, which was last observed and studied in late 2011, was found dead in January 2012. [...]

NOAA is sharing the preliminary results from the study so that stranding responders and veterinarians can better care for live stranded dolphins and look for similar health conditions.

Since February 2010, more than 675 dolphins have stranded in the northern Gulf of Mexico (Franklin County, Florida, to the Louisiana/Texas border)–a much higher rate than the usual average of 74 dolphins per year, prompting NOAA to declare an Unusual Mortality Event (UME) and investigate the cause of death for as many of the dolphins as possible. The vast majority of stranded dolphins have been found dead; however, 33 have stranded alive and seven have been taken to facilities for rehabilitation.

Last year, the National Wildlife issued a status report on Gulf wildlife and ecosystems warning  to watch dolphin populations for “reduced fitness of adults” – exactly what NOAA is now detailing. ”The poor health of dolphins in the oil spill area was to be expected,” says NWF Senior Scientist Doug Inkley. “The Gulf oil disaster is to marine life what smoking is to humans – it could kill you, and if it doesn’t, your general health suffers.”

Dolphins aren’t the only species showing signs of long-term impacts. A study last year documented the oil’s impact on Gulf killifish, a critical part of the Gulf’s food chain.

Just last week, National Wildlife Federation staffers found oil remains in Barataria Bay marshes and discovered a dead pelican with oil on it. The trip was a reminder that Mississippi River Delta restoration is needed now more than ever. While the Senate passed the RESTORE Act as part of its transportation bill, the House has yet to act.

Speak Up for Gulf Restoration

Speak up for Gulf wildlife and ask your Members of Congress to protect the Gulf’s wildlife and communities by passing the RESTORE Act >>

Tar mat coats marsh in Bay Jimmy off Louisiana's Barataria Bay, March 2012 (Photo: National Wildlife Federation)

The trip made depressingly clear that while national attention has moved on and Congress still hasn’t passed legislation to restore the Gulf, much BP oil remains, it’s easy to find, and it’s never far from the Gulf’s wildlife.

The trip out of Myrtle Grove Marina with Captain Dave Marino was led by David Muth, state director of NWF’s Mississippi River Delta campaign, David White, director of NWF’s Gulf of Mexico Restoration campaign and Alisha Renfro, NWF coastal scientist.

“As they headed south to the corner of Barataria Bay called Bay Jimmy, the tide was high and winds were blowing strong at 20 miles an hour out of the southeast,” said NWF’s David White. “That drove water high up into the marsh, obscuring the oiled edges denuded of vegetation. With such a high water line, it was hard to determine exactly how much oil might remain.”

After finding a safe place to land, it became clear that despite BP’s efforts to mop and scrape marshes, oil remains in various stages of weathering and decomposition. On the surface, it’s now weathered into tar—some small clumps and other large mats—and it’s there for the long term.

“There were a few patches in the marsh that were completely devoid of vegetation. They smelled like asphalt,” said NWF’s Alisha Renfro. “Because it’s so thick, natural processes like sunlight and bacteria have a hard time breaking down the hydrocarbons. It ends up serving like a cap on the marsh surface—a hardened seal that blocks light and gas exchange, diminishes growth and creates a dead zone with little new life. However, baby fiddler crabs and other marsh invertebrates could be seen scuttling across the dead surface.”

Dead, Oil-Covered Pelican Found on Bay Jimmy

(Warning: Graphic Photo)

In the tar-covered marshes, National Wildlife Federation staff found a dead and decomposed American white pelican. Liquid oil was visible on its wing feathers, its origin mysterious, until the staff made a new discovery.

“Wherever we stood in the marshes, liquid oil would squeeze out of the sediment,” said NWF’s Alisha Renfro. “I probed the ground a little and didn’t see the oil right at the surface, so it was probably coming from several centimeters down. During the winter, with cooler temperatures, this oil would be thicker and harder to see since it’s not at the surface, but as it has gotten warmer the oil is far less viscous and can seep back to the marsh surface.”

This photo of a dead American white pelican with oil on its feathers was taken in Louisiana's Bay Jimmy, March 2012. (Photo: National Wildlife Federation)

As you can see in additional photos from the trip at NWF’s Flickr page, marshes continue to show signs of degradation and retreat. That follows the trend NWF staff have witnessed in recent trips, like the collapse of Cat Island’s mangrove trees from a thriving rookery for brown pelicans and other birds in 2010 to a patch of brown lifeless sticks in 2011.

The trip was a reminder that Mississippi River Delta restoration is needed now more than ever. While the Senate passed the RESTORE Act as part of its transportation bill, the House has yet to act.

Speak Up for Gulf Restoration

Speak up for Gulf wildlife and ask your Members of Congress to protect the Gulf’s wildlife and communities by passing the RESTORE Act >>

RESTORE Act a Victory for Gulf’s Ecosystems and Economy

March 8 – The U.S. Senate today passed an amendment to add the RESTORE Act and the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) to the Senate transportation bill. The RESTORE Act would ensure that 80 percent of fines and penalties from the Gulf oil disaster would be dedicated to Gulf Coast restoration.

“Today’s bipartisan vote is a ray of hope for the people, wildlife and ecosystems hurt by the Gulf oil disaster that began nearly two years ago,” said Larry Schweiger, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation. “It’s now up to the House to follow through on promises to make the Gulf whole again by passing this critical legislation to restore the Gulf Coast’s wetlands and ecosystems, the lifeblood of the Gulf economy. Final passage would represent one of the great conservation achievements in recent memory, protecting and restoring land, water and wildlife along our coasts, in our oceans and our public lands across the country.”

Read NWF’s joint statement with our Gulf Coast restoration partners here.

Court Protects Taxpayers and Environment from Yazoo Pumps

March 7 – The National Wildlife Federation and the Mississippi Wildlife Federation celebrate the recent federal appeals court decision upholding the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to stop construction of the Yazoo Pumps in the Mississippi Delta.

“Today, taxpayers, wildlife and wetlands are safer from the endless drain of the Yazoo Pumps,” said Larry Schweiger, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation. “While the Pumps were touted as a flood control project, they would have drained the taxpayers’ wallets to make flooding worse and destroy valuable habitat for fish and wildlife. We would have been burdened with the environmental and economic damage of this bad investment for generations,” said Schweiger.

And here are highlights from NWF in the News:

• Public News Service: Gulf Coast Restoration Measure Clears Major Hurdle
• The Canadian Press: U.S. Senate rejects latest Republican attempts to force approval of Keystone XL
• High Country News: The BLM struggles to get ahead of oil and gas development in the West
• Fairfax News: County Schools NWF Establish Get2Green Partnership

For more, visit www.nwf.org/News

Today’s vote is a huge step towards restoring the Gulf of Mexico in the wake of the oil spill.

“The Senate’s overwhelming vote in favor of the RESTORE Act reflects the broad nationwide support for revitalizing the Gulf Coast region by ensuring the bulk of the money collected in spill fines is spent in the area that suffered so much harm,” said a joint statement issued by Environmental Defense Fund, National Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation, The Nature Conservancy, Ocean Conservancy and Oxfam America.

Next Steps

While this vote is an incredibly positive development, it’s not over yet. We expect a final vote on the overall Senate transportation bill early next week. The House has already passed a “lite” version of the RESTORE Act as an amendment to their transportation bill, but has not passed a transportation bill itself. Once both transportation bills pass, the differences between the two will need to be worked out in conference.

The National Wildlife Federation will be working hard to make sure the Senate version of the RESTORE Act is included in whatever the final package is, but today’s win and the recent show of support for RESTORE on the House amendment puts us in a strong position to ensure that money from BP’s oil spill fines ends up dedicated to restoration.

Thank you

This vote would not have turned out as well as it did without strong support from the National Wildlife Federation’s supporters. In the past few months, more than 25,000 of you have asked your Senators to support the RESTORE Act.

The principles behind the RESTORE Act have wide public support. A nationwide poll of 1,006 likely general election voters showed that 83 percent of U.S. voters support dedicating BP’s oil spill fines to the region affected, while only 7 percent opposed.

The Deepwater Horizon rig before sinking (photo: Ideum/Flickr)

The trial was set to begin this week, but it was postponed to allow more time for settlement talks between BP and its co-defendants on the one side, and the U.S., the five Gulf states, and numerous injured people and businesses on the other.

The stakes for people and wildlife have never been higher in an environmental lawsuit.

The explosion at BP’s Macondo well was by far the largest environmental disaster in the U.S. history; the well gushed 206 million gallons of oil, nearly 20 times the amount released by the Exxon Valdez.

Among other harmful effects of the Gulf disaster on wildlife and natural resources, it badly damaged coastal wetlands that provide nurseries for much of the Gulf’s seafood and shellfish.

The oil continues to wash ashore and will do so for many years, causing untold damage to wetlands and other sensitive ecosystems. The remaining oil continues to threaten populations of whales, dolphins, sea turtles, deep sea corals and a host of other marine species.

Will BP and its Co-Defendants Be Held Responsible for Restoring the Gulf?

If the right amount of money and the right legal framework for Gulf restoration can be secured, and the costs and uncertainties of trial can be avoided, settlement of the environmental claims would be a very positive thing. However, government attorneys face all kinds of pressures to settle cases on terms that shortchange the environment.

Ultimately, it is up to our elected officials – President Obama and the five Gulf state governors – to ensure that justice is truly done for the Gulf, its wildlife, and the many people who depend on the Gulf’s health for their livelihoods and quality of life.

Sea turtle swims through oily gulf waters, May 2010

According to the relevant environmental laws (described below), BP and its co-defendants are responsible not only for fully restoring the Gulf’s natural resources to their pre-spill condition, but also for many billions of dollars of civil and criminal penalties based on the magnitude of the spill and the recklessness of the behavior that caused it.

Fairness and common sense dictate – as the official oil spill commission and other major studies all have called for, and as the President has promised – that those billions be directed back to the Gulf Coast as a much-needed down payment toward rectifying the decades of environmental insults inflicted upon the ecosystem by the oil industry and others.

Good public process also mandates ensuring citizen oversight and scientific input into the many decisions affecting the health of the Gulf that will be made over the course of settlement implementation. And, given the many unknowns about future impacts of the Gulf disaster on wildlife and natural resources, any deal also must contain a strong reopener provision, one with an enforceable trigger and a reliable funding mechanism to remedy environmental problems if impacts prove to be worse than predicted.

Some commentators have suggested that a $15-$30 billion settlement amount is likely. As discussed below, such amounts may prove to be inadequate. As the details emerge about the government’s draft plan to restore the Gulf to its pre-spill condition, it may become apparent that tens of billions of dollars are needed for this purpose alone. Civil and criminal penalties will add tens of billions of additional liability. The key principles of criminal law – deterring future bad behavior and expressing society’s condemnation of wrongdoing – both must come into play here. Given BP’s financial resources – it netted $25.7 billion in profits in 2011 – the Obama administration and the five Gulf states should make full use of their authorities to secure settlement payments large enough to send a powerful message about the seriousness of the disaster that BP and its co-defendants created.

Factors to Consider in Evaluating a Proposed Settlement

Recent reports suggest that settlement talks about environmental claims are on a much slower track than those involving the tort and admiralty claims filed by individuals and businesses; however, a settlement deal on the environmental claims could emerge in the coming weeks.

If and when a proposed settlement is announced, NWF will insist that it be placed before the public for review and comment before it is finalized. This topic is far too important to be left entirely in the hands of a small number of decision makers in a closed-door settlement conference in New Orleans.

At this juncture, before the details of any settlement are released, reaching any conclusion about what would be a fair settlement amount for the environmental portion of BP’s and its co-defendants’ liability is extremely difficult. Rather than attempting to reach such a conclusion, I will focus on some of the key factors that must be considered.

Lesson Learned: Don’t Trust the Assessments of BP and its Allies

During the first year of the nation’s largest oil spill disaster, BP invested enormous sums in creating the false impression that the devastation in the Gulf was not so bad and that everything was under control.

For example, BP estimated that a mere 1,000 barrels were gushing from the Macondo well each day; the actual figure turned out to be 53,000.

As we approach the second anniversary, BP is at it again, launching 60 second commercials and online ads peddling its “ongoing commitment” to clean up the Gulf and preaching how all is well there. A key task in evaluating any settlement will be ensuring that it confronts the real problems facing the Gulf ecosystem and does not adopt the BP approach of sweeping problems under the rug.

Tallying up the Environmental Law Violations

Three types of payments for environmental law violations must be assessed against BP and its co-defendants: cleanup costs, restoration costs and civil and criminal penalties.

The oil spill particularly affected the Mississippi River Delta. (Image: Louisiana Governor's Office)

2. Restoration costs. The Oil Pollution Act states that the responsible parties must pay the costs of restoring natural resources back to the condition they were in at the time of the disaster.

Restoring the Gulf will be an extremely complex enterprise; no one has ever attempted to rectify an environmental disaster of this magnitude. Some of the natural resources destroyed by the oil, such as wetlands at the very edge of the Mississippi delta, do not appear to be replaceable at their original locations, and so difficult judgments must be made about which newly-restored habitats would create resources of equivalent value.

Although a few relatively small early restoration projects have been identified, the full federal restoration plan is not expected to be completed until late 2012 at the earliest. Until that plan’s restoration actions and costs are vetted with the public, it is very difficult to estimate what kind of payment will be needed to truly restore the Gulf back to its condition in April 2010. For now, the best guide is the settlement agreement in the next-largest oil disaster in the country, the grounding of the Exxon Valdez tanker in April 1989. In that case, the per-gallon amount paid by Exxon for restoration Alaska’s Prince William Sound was $152 (inflation-adjusted to reflect today’s dollars). Assuming the parties to the Gulf disaster negotiation settle at roughly the same per-gallon amount for the 206 million gallons released from the Macondo well, a restoration payment in the amount of $31 billion would be in order.

Some will argue that focusing on the Exxon Valdez settlement amount obscures the important differences between Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Mexico. It is true that oil breaks down more rapidly in the warm water of the Gulf than in the cold water in Alaska. And it is true that restoration work in Alaska required costly transportation of people and infrastructure from the lower 48 states. On the other hand, there are challenges in the Gulf that did not exist in Prince William Sound, such as the impacts of large volumes of dispersants, the difficulty of skimming off lighter crude, and the near impossibility of removing oil from wetlands.

Ultimately, the methodology for calculating restoration costs in the Gulf needs to be much more sophisticated than applying the Alaska per-barrel restoration cost in the Gulf. However, looking at the per-barrel cost in Alaska tells an important story about how very expensive restoration projects can be.

3.  Civil and Criminal Penalties. The third and final category of environmental payments are the civil and criminal penalties owed under the applicable environmental laws, such as the Clean Water Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Endangered Species Act, and Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. These penalties provide a critical mechanism for addressing the legacy of environmental injuries inflicted on the Gulf by the oil industry and others.

In estimating a fair settlement amount under these statutes, it is crucial to evaluate the evidence of whether BP and any of its co-defendants were grossly negligent in their operation of the Macondo well. A finding of gross negligence would lead to substantially higher civil penalties under the Clean Water Act and a greater likelihood of criminal prosecution as well.

Few if anyone would dispute that BP, rig owner Transocean Ltd. and cement contractor Halliburton Energy Services Inc. share the blame for taking unnecessary risks at the Macondo well. Investigations performed by the Coast Guard, the Department of the Interior and the presidentially-appointed oil spill commission all concurred that a host of reckless actions by these companies to save time and money led inexorably to the disastrous blowout. The facts of the case clearly point to gross negligence.

Clean Water Act Penalties

The Clean Water Act provides for a minimum civil fine of $1,100 per barrel of oil discharged into navigable waters by owners, operators, or persons in charge of offshore facilities or vessels. However, for any defendant found to be grossly negligent or engaged in willful misconduct, the penalty is $4,300 per barrel spilled. Thus, with 4.1 million barrels of oil released into the Gulf and a likely gross negligence finding against BP and Transocean, one could reasonably expect civil Clean Water Act liability for these defendants at up to $17.6 billion each. Liability for the other owners and operators would likely be substantially lower.

Oil against booms in Louisiana Marsh, June 2010

It is appropriate to think in terms of billions of dollars when considering criminal liability for BP, Transocean and Halliburton under the Clean Water Act, however.

University of Michigan Professor David Uhlmann, former chief of the Justice Department’s environmental crimes unit, states that “a multi-billion-dollar criminal fine for BP is likely.”  Moreover, according to Professor Uhlmann, “the total criminal sentence – a combination of fines, restitution and restoration projects – may reach into the tens of billions of dollars.” Uhlmann characterizes the Gulf oil spill as “the most significant environmental case ever prosecuted.”

In deciding what kind of settlement of Clean Water Act criminal penalties is acceptable, prosecutors will consider not only the defendants’ negligence, but also ability to pay, the unprecedented damage to the environment caused by the defendants’ actions, the need to deter future violations and the need for society to make a strong expression of condemnation.

With these factors in mind, and based on the facts publicly available, I estimate that a fair settlement of civil and criminal penalties under the Clean Water Act would require a combined payment of well over $25 billion from all defendants, with BP contributing the lion’s share in light of its ability to pay.

MBTA, MMPA, ESA and OCSLA

A Brown Pelican covered in oil.

Ensuring that Clean Water Act Civil Penalties are used for Gulf Restoration

Under the Clean Water Act, civil penalties recovered by the federal government due to oil spills are deposited into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, where they may be used for oil spill cleanups anywhere in the country. This provision is problematic in this case, where fairness calls for using penalties now to remedy the legacy of environmental harms inflicted on the Gulf of Mexico by the oil and gas industry and others.

To ensure that Clean Water Act civil penalties are invested in Gulf recovery, Senators Landrieu, Shelby, Nelson and others have introduced the Restore the Gulf Coast Act of 2011 (RESTORE). The bipartisan bill, which dedicates 80% of potential Clean Water Act civil penalties to restoration of the Gulf, has already cleared a key committee and is poised for a possible full Senate floor vote as part of the transportation bill. National Wildlife Federation is part of a broad coalition of organizations strongly supporting RESTORE in part because we believe it is the surest way to ensure that Clean Water Act penalties are not diverted to the federal treasury.

If Congress fails to pass RESTORE, two settlement strategies are potentially available to direct necessary funds to restoration. First, the CWA enables the EPA to negotiate a settlement in which penalties are reduced in return for the violator making a contribution of a similar amount to environmental restoration projects in the affected area. An advantage of this “Supplemental Environmental Projects” approach is that the projects are identified at the time of the settlement and thus the government can ensure that financial resources are focused on Gulf restoration. The recent CWA settlement with MOEX, an owner of a small share of the Macondo well, shows that the government can use the SEP tool to keep at least some CWA civil penalties in the Gulf.

Second, the government plaintiffs can potentially structure a settlement to ensure that the bulk of payments are made by defendants pursuant to environmental laws other than the CWA civil penalty provisions, such as the Oil Pollution Act and the CWA criminal penalty provisions.

Dolphins swim next to oil booms at Petit Bois Island, MS, June 2010 (via Flickr's Deepwater Horizon Response)

The clock is ticking. Coastal Louisiana is currently losing an average of 16.5 square miles of wetlands each year, due in part to oil and gas development. The BP disaster worsens this situation because oil kills the vegetation that holds wetlands together. If no restoration is undertaken, scientists estimate the state could lose an additional 1700 square miles over the next 50 years, with the resulting loss of vital habitats and a crucial storm buffer for New Orleans and other communities.

BP and its co-defendants owe a very large debt to the nation for the April 2010 disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, probably well in excess of the $15- $30 billion estimate put forward by some in the media.

Help ensure that the Gulf ecosystem and its wildlife benefit from any BP settlement >>

Jeff Phillips of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rescues a brown pelican from Barataria Bay in Grand Isle, LA. June 4, 2010.

The amendment, introduced by Rep. Scalise (R-LA), sets aside most of the money from the expected oil spill penalties into a trust fund.

The House’s move sets up the Senate to pass the RESTORE Act, which will also direct oil spill penalty money to the Gulf for restoration. The RESTORE Act is not in conflict with the House amendment but has more specific language directing how this money should be used.

Speak up for the Gulf pelicans and all wildlife that rely on a healthy Gulf! Urge your senators to support S 1400, the RESTORE Act!

The Senate needs to act soon. BP, whose total liability claims clock in at around $71 billion, is furiously working on a settlement deal with the U.S. Department of Justice.

If a settlement is reached before the RESTORE Act is passed, money from BP’s fines could go straight into the Treasury. That’s not right.

The Gulf oil spill was the largest accidental marine oil spill in history—and Gulf wildlife are still struggling in its aftermath. Money from the oil spill penalties should not be a windfall for the Treasury but should be used to restore the Gulf.

Please urge your Senators to support the RESTORE Act today!

Courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard, Deepwater Horizon response.

As we near the two year anniversary of BP’s Deepwater Horizon explosion, the worst environmental disaster in our nation’s history, one has to wonder if BP has learned a thing from that incident. Our Federal Government has yet to fully hold BP accountable as Gulf state residents desperately try to get a vote on the RESTORE Act which would dedicate the BP oil spill penalties to restore the Gulf Coast communities, environment and economy—where the damage from the BP oil spill was done—rather than simply being deposited into the Federal Treasury. After eleven workers lost their lives in the Deepwater incident BP made lofty promises to implement even more stringent safety requirements than mandated by federal regulations to prevent future disasters. After almost two years without accountability, yet another explosion at BP’s Cherry Point refinery in Washington State prove these promises ring hollow.

As fire crews continue their attempt to fully contain the fire from the explosion at BP’s Cherry Point refinery, comments from BP spokesman Scott Dean indicate where Big Oil’s priorities lie.

“The refinery continues to produce products for customers, and it is too soon to speculate on future supply impacts.”

With over 100 workers evacuated watching the fireball from the parking lot, amazingly BP did not even halt the refining process.

Local news station King5 photo.

Even more alarming, this same BP refinery was fined 13 different times in 2010 for serious safety violations.

So what exorbitant penalty was BP forced to pay for to teach them a lesson for continually putting workers safety at risk? They were fined $69,000. Plain and simple- 23 million dollars per day is worth more than $69,000. Unless this dynamic changes, unless Congress steps up and holds Big Oil accountable for their transgressions, companies like BP will make their billions as Washington State burns, the Gulf suffers and workers lives are put at risk.

Tell Congress to Hold BP accountable!

According to the Alaska Dispatch, a well being drilled by Spanish company Repsol hit a methane gas pocket, which triggered the blowout.  A crew of specialists all the way from Texas is traveling to the site, but meanwhile the well is spewing drilling mud–42,000 gallons and counting.  An expert from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation explained that the drilling mud “is hazardous to the tundra.”

Should Big Oil Be Allowed to Drill (And Spill) in Places Like the Arctic Refuge?

credit, Susanne Miller/USFWS

Some misguided members of Congress are using the excuse that extracting dirty fuels from a beautiful and untouched national treasure will pay for highway projects.  But, thanks to people voicing their outrage across the country, some elected officials are standing up against the transportation and energy bill (H.R. 3408) that would bring ruin to wildlife and wild places.

The “terrible” transportation package in Congress opens up new drilling areas on the East and West Coast, off the coast of Alaska, and in the pristine coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge, which is home to iconic wildlife like polar bears, caribou, Arctic fox, wolves, and more. House Republican leadership are using rare procedural tricks to split the bill up because many Members take serious issue with drilling impacts, so they may lack the votes to pass it all at once.

Representatives object to drilling off the coast of places like California and along the Atlantic coast, where oil spills and well blowouts, like in the Gulf spill and right now in Alaska, threaten communities that depend on tourism. Other lawmakers worry that a provision to grant industry 2 million acres of public land for oil shale speculation would generate zero energy, zero revenue, and zero jobs. A group of House Republicans even sent Speaker Boehner a letter requesting that Arctic Refuge drilling be taken out of the bill, continuing a legacy of moderate support for this pristine wilderness.

All of this new drilling revenue is supposed to pay for a chunk of the $260 billion transportation bill.  But there’s one minor detail:  much of this revenue is speculative and wouldn’t even pay for 1% of the total cost.  Groups like Club for Growth, Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Taxpayers for Common Sense agree that it is a fiscally irresponsible approach to paying for highways, bridges, and mass transit with imaginary money.

But Pipelines Transport Oil, Not People

The transportation package also requires approval of the controversial Keystone XL tar sands pipeline permit within 30 days,  which irresponsibly overturns a recent decision by the President to deny the permit.  This pipeline would move dirty Canadian tar sludge through the heartland of the U.S. to export to foreign countries, making the America complicit in the destruction of wilderness habitat in Alberta’s boreal forests and the senseless  poisoning of wildlife to make room for the pipeline. The transportation legislation, if passed in its current state, would also fuel  climate change that is already causing severe drought and economic damage in the United States.   Building the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would threaten America’s clean water supplies, raise gas prices in the U.S. and result in a net loss to American jobs.

The legislation also waives environmental review for many projects, takes away dedicated dollars for public transportation and even defunds a program to establish safe routes for kids to get to school.

Big Oil is already double-dipping into our wallets.  It is making record profit through taxpayer-funded subsidies and every time we pay at the pump–the industry doesn’t need another expensive gift from us.

Help Protect Wildlife from Arctic Drilling

Arctic wildlife are already suffering from loss of sea ice from global warming.  The lives of species like the ringed seal and the polar bear would be at even greater risk from an oil spill in the Arctic Ocean, which would be virtually impossible to clean up in the remote and rough, frigid waters.  The blowout on Alaska’s North Slope is a perfect example: a crew of specialists had to be called up from Texas to try and control the well.

Wildlife need you to speak up for them and tell their member of Congress that the entire transportation package is a bad deal for wildlife, our clean air and water, and the future of public transportation.

Urge your decision-makers to make the right choice to protect wildlife from drilling >>