Oil use statistics

There are some fascinating snippets around regarding the increasingly appalling disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. After the Exxon Valdez disaster Greenpeace ran an advert that said:

It wasn't the Exxon Valdez captain's driving that caused the Alaskan oil spill. It was yours. ~Greenpeace advertisement, New York Times, 25 February 1990

As always with major environmental incidents there appear to be a large number of contributing factors. The culture of the three companies involved in the drilling, the lack of adequate regulation and oversight, the drive to cut costs to maximise profit; all the usual culprits.

And now the blame allocation is well under way. I have occasionally said that any Quality Management System has a secret procedure, QP00 'Allocation of Blame'. In this disaster it is quite obvious that management systems have not been properly implemented. The blame allocation flow chart is flailing around, coating everyone in a slime of toxic sludge. I know that politically everyone wants to be teflon coated however I feel that right now the extreme effort could be more appropriately directed to stopping the flow and dealing with the pollution. What was learned from the Valdez? That sooner or later, if corners are cut there will be a disaster. Here we have just such another instance. Cutting edge technology occasionally falls over. The closer to the edge we are the more likely the fall over the ragged edge of disaster. The closer to the edge the more important that we have an effective plan in place for when it all goes wrong. Because it will.

So, whilst we are looking for someone to blame, BP's statistics have been published in the Guardian with a fascinating graphic showing which countries have the highest oil consumption and where the proven reserves are. Have a look. There is also an interesting opinion piece in the Washington Times which brings you and me into the blame target and comments that if we want to avoid this sort of thing we (the general public) need to learn to live with higher prices because safety costs money.

I admit I have a mild tendency to smugness in my assessment of my own environmental impact but in reality I, in common with most middle-class greenies in the UK, account for the use of a great deal of oil. But then it is so much easier to see the mote in someone else's eye!

Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

There has been coverage in the news about the huge oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the allocation of blame procedure* has already started. As I understand it at the moment up to 5,000 barrels of oil a day are flowing into the sea with no immediate way of stopping the flow. It's location, in open water, means it has great potential to spread. This has come at a very bad time for the oil industry, shortly after the US had given the go ahead for off-shore drilling in certain areas, although President Obama has said this will not stand in the way of further development. Predictions were that oil would be pushed into the shoreline and barrier marshes of Louisiana threatening the diverse wildlife in the area. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has stated that the spill is of national significance which means, "A spill that, due to its severity, size, location, actual or potential impact on the public health and welfare or the environment, or the necessary response effort, is so complex that it requires extraordinary co-ordination of federal, state, local, and responsible party resources to contain and clean up the discharge."

My favourite quote so far is from Poppy757 commenting on a story in the Guardian:

'Oil is a finite resource, it seems to me to be rather careless to decorate shorelines with it.'

*I've always thought that the there was a secret quality procedure in every Quality Management System called 'Allocation of Blame'.