Just How Much Did the Feds Screw Up Gulf Spill Estimates? (Mother Jones)

[G_j]

http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/10/just-how-much-did-feds-screw-gulf-spill-estimates?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+motherjones%2FTheBlueMarble+%28Mother+Jones+|+The+Blue+Marble%29


Just How Much Did the Feds Screw Up Gulf Spill Estimates?

— By Kate Sheppard
Thu Oct. 7, 2010 7:27 AM PDT

The four draft staff reports that the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling released yesterday had quite a bit to say about the Obama administration's botched handling of the BP oil spill. You can see the reports on the spill size and dispersant use for more.

But sometimes, an image really does tell you a lot about the story. That is certainly the case with this graph documenting the flow rate estimates from the government and outside experts over the course of the disaster. The blue lines represent the official government estimates and the green lines show how much independent experts said was spewing from the Gulf well every day.

[SidDithers]

1. The government has estimated that 4.1 million barrels of oil were spilled...

Does Mother Jones have a total that's significantly different than that?

Sid

[TalkingDog]

4. Mother Jones hasn't yet revised their estimates several times to keep up with independent reports

nt

[SidDithers]

7. The spill has been plugged for almost 3 months...

so the daily flow rate estimates are pretty immaterial at this point. Regardless of how many times the daily flow rate estimates were revised, the total volume spilled has been estimated at 4.1 million barrels. And the total volume is pretty much the only number that really matters.

Does Mother Jones have a total number significantly different from 4.1 million barrels?

Sid

[TalkingDog]

8. You are arguing a different point than that offered in the article.

It seems are implying that the government's withholding, downplaying or falsifying information is acceptable because, in the end, they ended up reporting close to the commonly agree upon figures.

Failing to address the point of the article by stubbornly harping on a singular fact devoid of context suggest that your position on the subject is not defensible.

[SidDithers]

9. You seem to think the daily flow estimates...

reported in April and May are somehow important in October, almost 3 months after the well was plugged. Why is that?

The only relevant number at this point is the total oil spilled, estimated to be 4.1 million barrels.

Sid

[G_j]

10. you mean, only relevant to you.

There are others who find that being less than truthful along the way represents a betrayal of public trust.

[TalkingDog]

11. I have no interest in the daily flow estimates. I have an interest in Transparency

offered to voters during the campaign.

John McCain never offered transparency. If he'd done the same thing, I'd feel outrage, but not betrayal and outrage.

[G_j]

2. ==

[nashville_brook]

3. wow -- freaking damnable.

[DirkGently]

5. Bu-bu-but "margin of error" blah blah blah.

[Cal Carpenter]

6. They didn't 'screw it up', they deliberately misled the public

There is an important distinction.

[maryf]

12. K&Rnt