Deep Water Drilling Ban Cost 23,000 Jobs

[Toro]

I think this generally displays the cluelessness of the administration.

Senior Obama administration officials concluded the federal moratorium on deepwater oil drilling would cost roughly 23,000 jobs, but went ahead with the ban because they didn't trust the industry's safety equipment and the government's own inspection process, according to previously undisclosed documents.

Marcia McNutt, an Obama administration science adviser, commented on the corporate culture of BP in a memo sent to Michael Bromwich, the administration's new top offshore oil exploration regulator, on June 28.

Critics of the moratorium, including Gulf Coast political figures and oil-industry leaders, have said it is crippling the region's economy, and some have called on the administration to make public its economic analysis. A federal judge who in June threw out an earlier six-month moratorium faulted the administration for playing down the economic effects.

After his action, administration officials considered alternatives and weighed the economic costs, the newly released documents show. The Justice Department filed them in a New Orleans court this week, in response to the latest round of litigation over the moratorium.

Spanning more than 27,000 pages, they provide an unusually detailed look at the debate about how to respond to legal and political opposition to the moratorium.

They show the new top regulator or offshore oil exploration, Michael Bromwich, told Interior Secretary Ken Salazar that a six-month deepwater-drilling halt would result in "lost direct employment" affecting approximately 9,450 workers and "lost jobs from indirect and induced effects" affecting about 13,797 more. The July 10 memo cited an analysis by Mr. Bromwich's agency that assumed direct employment on affected rigs would "resume normally once the rigs resume operations."

Asked to comment, a White House spokesman said the administration "well understood, and understands, the enormous importance of oil and gas to the region's economy," but the potential economic risks from another spill to other elements of the Gulf economy—such as fishing and tourism—also informed the administration's deliberations, "especially as spill-response resources were fully engaged to address the BP Deepwater Horizon spill." A spokesman for the Interior Department declined to comment on the documents. An American Petroleum Institute spokesman said the documents show "the government itself understood there would be significant impacts felt throughout the region." ...

Administration Foresaw 23,000 Lost Jobs from Drilling Ban - WSJ.com

One might understand a moratorium during an economic boom, but shutting down an industry during one of the worst economic recessions is dumb.

I get that the administration wants to avoid another disaster but the odds of another such mishap are extremely small, unless they had some tangible evidence that another explosion was highly probable. But I haven't seen that. The costs of shutting down the industry relative to the probability of another disaster isn't worth it, given that it is so difficult to get a job right now.

 

[Madeline]

I can see mebbe forcing inspections and reevaluations of safety plans. But I wonder how much we can drag down the Gulf and its people? At the very least, those affected should be permitted to recover in full from BP.

 

[Greenbeard]

That's a tough one. If this were the product of a meteorite falling out of the sky, a ban would probably be overkill. If, however, it's suspected that the accident is a product of an organizational culture of dangerous corner-cutting and risk-taking then, depending on how bad it's gotten, there may well be an elevated risk of more of these "accidents" happening in the near future. And while 23,000 jobs is nothing to sneeze at, the fallout of another disaster could be much higher than that. For example, here are the estimates of this spill on just one state:

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico could end up costing Florida 195,000 jobs and $10.9 billion in spending, research from the University of Central Florida shows.

Now, would a second oil spill just hit the same stores, restaurants, and other businesses that are already closing up in the wake of this one, limiting the additional fallout? Maybe, I don't know. But it seems that if you have reason to believe there's a decent chance that a corrupt culture (in government and in the private sector) has significantly raised the risks of this happening again and potentially killing >100,000 jobs, a ban could be justified. I'd like to hear more about the government's risk assessment on this one.

 

[ba1614]

This administration doesn't care how they get their agenda through, or who gets fucked, as long as they get the control they're after.

I don't know what's worse, the people pulling this shit off, or the silly fuckers who refuse to open their eyes and see what's going on around them?

 

[Metternich]

Obviously, it's overkill. A moratorium on all BP drill-heads, I'd understand. A moratorium on all drillheads at a certain depth, I'd understand. Hell, I'd even understand a moratorium on all new drillheads; no matter what the elevation, no matter what the company, no matter what the type of drilling is taking place.

What I don't understand is a moratorium on everything. That makes no sense.

 

[boedicca]

The telling pattern is that at first the Obama Administration hyped that the story that the Oil Spill was the Worst Environmental Disaster Ever...using this hype as a pretext to put a moratorium on drilling in place.

Now, rigs are moving out of the Gulf, jobs are destroyed, and the PR impact has contributed to the decline in The One's approval levels. How convenient that they are now declaring that the oil is 75% gone. Of course, it's too late to get the rigs that are leaving / have left back.

 

[Samson]

That's a tough one. If this were the product of a meteorite falling out of the sky, a ban would probably be overkill. If, however, it's suspected that the accident is a product of an organizational culture of dangerous corner-cutting and risk-taking then, depending on how bad it's gotten, there may well be an elevated risk of more of these "accidents" happening in the near future.

True:

On the one hand, we could all imagine the ramifications of yet ANOTHER blow-out in the gulf before 2012.

On the other, there is no PERMANENT ban. In fact, leases are being granted, and the target for resuming drilling is November, a scant 7 months after the TransOcean blowout, and only 3 months after the well will have been shutoff.

Frankly, although I think the 23,000 jobs the Administration believe are "lost" are 1. On the Optimistic End; 2. Will be re-hired before year's end.

Finally, I don't tink there's any doubt that "the accident is a product of an organizational culture of dangerous corner-cutting and risk-taking." The DOI has completely renamed and reorganized the MMS (try to find their site on the internets), and the new Bureau of Ocean Energy, Ecology, and Whatnot is reviewing their licensing requirements.

 

[rdean]

I think this generally displays the cluelessness of the administration.

Senior Obama administration officials concluded the federal moratorium on deepwater oil drilling would cost roughly 23,000 jobs, but went ahead with the ban because they didn't trust the industry's safety equipment and the government's own inspection process, according to previously undisclosed documents.

Marcia McNutt, an Obama administration science adviser, commented on the corporate culture of BP in a memo sent to Michael Bromwich, the administration's new top offshore oil exploration regulator, on June 28.

Critics of the moratorium, including Gulf Coast political figures and oil-industry leaders, have said it is crippling the region's economy, and some have called on the administration to make public its economic analysis. A federal judge who in June threw out an earlier six-month moratorium faulted the administration for playing down the economic effects.

After his action, administration officials considered alternatives and weighed the economic costs, the newly released documents show. The Justice Department filed them in a New Orleans court this week, in response to the latest round of litigation over the moratorium.

Spanning more than 27,000 pages, they provide an unusually detailed look at the debate about how to respond to legal and political opposition to the moratorium.

They show the new top regulator or offshore oil exploration, Michael Bromwich, told Interior Secretary Ken Salazar that a six-month deepwater-drilling halt would result in "lost direct employment" affecting approximately 9,450 workers and "lost jobs from indirect and induced effects" affecting about 13,797 more. The July 10 memo cited an analysis by Mr. Bromwich's agency that assumed direct employment on affected rigs would "resume normally once the rigs resume operations."

Asked to comment, a White House spokesman said the administration "well understood, and understands, the enormous importance of oil and gas to the region's economy," but the potential economic risks from another spill to other elements of the Gulf economy—such as fishing and tourism—also informed the administration's deliberations, "especially as spill-response resources were fully engaged to address the BP Deepwater Horizon spill." A spokesman for the Interior Department declined to comment on the documents. An American Petroleum Institute spokesman said the documents show "the government itself understood there would be significant impacts felt throughout the region." ...

Administration Foresaw 23,000 Lost Jobs from Drilling Ban - WSJ.com

One might understand a moratorium during an economic boom, but shutting down an industry during one of the worst economic recessions is dumb.

I get that the administration wants to avoid another disaster but the odds of another such mishap are extremely small, unless they had some tangible evidence that another explosion was highly probable. But I haven't seen that. The costs of shutting down the industry relative to the probability of another disaster isn't worth it, given that it is so difficult to get a job right now.

Come on, get real. Those on the right don't give a "flying fuck" about American jobs. If they don't care about the Middle Class, don't care to see the middle class insured, even telling the unemployed to "sober up and go get a job". If the right supports policies that move American jobs overseas, then why, suddenly, do they CARE about American jobs?

The short answer, "They don't". What they care about is "corporate profits". Their corporate masters have told them to make this an issue. Maybe as part of their "apology" to BP, that is just what they are doing.

"Oh BP, we are so, so sorry that the Democratic leadership asked you to clean up your mess. How dare they. Don't worry. When Republicans take over the house and senate, we will make sure that you get off scot free. In fact, we will move the entire cost of the clean up to the middle class and we PROMISE to give you another 30 billion in "tax breaks"."

 

[Samson]

I think this generally displays the cluelessness of the administration.

Senior Obama administration officials concluded the federal moratorium on deepwater oil drilling would cost roughly 23,000 jobs, but went ahead with the ban because they didn't trust the industry's safety equipment and the government's own inspection process, according to previously undisclosed documents.

Marcia McNutt, an Obama administration science adviser, commented on the corporate culture of BP in a memo sent to Michael Bromwich, the administration's new top offshore oil exploration regulator, on June 28.

Critics of the moratorium, including Gulf Coast political figures and oil-industry leaders, have said it is crippling the region's economy, and some have called on the administration to make public its economic analysis. A federal judge who in June threw out an earlier six-month moratorium faulted the administration for playing down the economic effects.

After his action, administration officials considered alternatives and weighed the economic costs, the newly released documents show. The Justice Department filed them in a New Orleans court this week, in response to the latest round of litigation over the moratorium.

Spanning more than 27,000 pages, they provide an unusually detailed look at the debate about how to respond to legal and political opposition to the moratorium.

They show the new top regulator or offshore oil exploration, Michael Bromwich, told Interior Secretary Ken Salazar that a six-month deepwater-drilling halt would result in "lost direct employment" affecting approximately 9,450 workers and "lost jobs from indirect and induced effects" affecting about 13,797 more. The July 10 memo cited an analysis by Mr. Bromwich's agency that assumed direct employment on affected rigs would "resume normally once the rigs resume operations."

Asked to comment, a White House spokesman said the administration "well understood, and understands, the enormous importance of oil and gas to the region's economy," but the potential economic risks from another spill to other elements of the Gulf economy—such as fishing and tourism—also informed the administration's deliberations, "especially as spill-response resources were fully engaged to address the BP Deepwater Horizon spill." A spokesman for the Interior Department declined to comment on the documents. An American Petroleum Institute spokesman said the documents show "the government itself understood there would be significant impacts felt throughout the region." ...

Administration Foresaw 23,000 Lost Jobs from Drilling Ban - WSJ.com

One might understand a moratorium during an economic boom, but shutting down an industry during one of the worst economic recessions is dumb.

I get that the administration wants to avoid another disaster but the odds of another such mishap are extremely small, unless they had some tangible evidence that another explosion was highly probable. But I haven't seen that. The costs of shutting down the industry relative to the probability of another disaster isn't worth it, given that it is so difficult to get a job right now.

Come on, get real. Those on the right don't give a "flying fuck" about American jobs. If they don't care about the Middle Class, don't care to see the middle class insured, even telling the unemployed to "sober up and go get a job". If the right supports policies that move American jobs overseas, then why, suddenly, do they CARE about American jobs?

The short answer, "They don't". What they care about is "corporate profits". Their corporate masters have told them to make this an issue. Maybe as part of their "apology" to BP, that is just what they are doing.

"Oh BP, we are so, so sorry that the Democratic leadership asked you to clean up your mess. How dare they. Don't worry. When Republicans take over the house and senate, we will make sure that you get off scot free. In fact, we will move the entire cost of the clean up to the middle class and we PROMISE to give you another 30 billion in "tax breaks"."

Yes its all a Right Wing conspiracy by Republicans......<<<<YAWN>>>>......could you possibly ever make a point without being a partisan robot?

 

[Truthmatters]

How many jobs did the spill kill?

This accident PROOVES there is something wrong with the inspection system and who knows how many of the other rigs are just as vulnerable.

No one likes the jobs put on hold but lets remember 11 people DIED in this accident.

You should not have to DIE for a job.

 

[Toro]

I think this generally displays the cluelessness of the administration.

Senior Obama administration officials concluded the federal moratorium on deepwater oil drilling would cost roughly 23,000 jobs, but went ahead with the ban because they didn't trust the industry's safety equipment and the government's own inspection process, according to previously undisclosed documents.

Marcia McNutt, an Obama administration science adviser, commented on the corporate culture of BP in a memo sent to Michael Bromwich, the administration's new top offshore oil exploration regulator, on June 28.

Critics of the moratorium, including Gulf Coast political figures and oil-industry leaders, have said it is crippling the region's economy, and some have called on the administration to make public its economic analysis. A federal judge who in June threw out an earlier six-month moratorium faulted the administration for playing down the economic effects.

After his action, administration officials considered alternatives and weighed the economic costs, the newly released documents show. The Justice Department filed them in a New Orleans court this week, in response to the latest round of litigation over the moratorium.

Spanning more than 27,000 pages, they provide an unusually detailed look at the debate about how to respond to legal and political opposition to the moratorium.

They show the new top regulator or offshore oil exploration, Michael Bromwich, told Interior Secretary Ken Salazar that a six-month deepwater-drilling halt would result in "lost direct employment" affecting approximately 9,450 workers and "lost jobs from indirect and induced effects" affecting about 13,797 more. The July 10 memo cited an analysis by Mr. Bromwich's agency that assumed direct employment on affected rigs would "resume normally once the rigs resume operations."

Asked to comment, a White House spokesman said the administration "well understood, and understands, the enormous importance of oil and gas to the region's economy," but the potential economic risks from another spill to other elements of the Gulf economy—such as fishing and tourism—also informed the administration's deliberations, "especially as spill-response resources were fully engaged to address the BP Deepwater Horizon spill." A spokesman for the Interior Department declined to comment on the documents. An American Petroleum Institute spokesman said the documents show "the government itself understood there would be significant impacts felt throughout the region." ...

Administration Foresaw 23,000 Lost Jobs from Drilling Ban - WSJ.com

One might understand a moratorium during an economic boom, but shutting down an industry during one of the worst economic recessions is dumb.

I get that the administration wants to avoid another disaster but the odds of another such mishap are extremely small, unless they had some tangible evidence that another explosion was highly probable. But I haven't seen that. The costs of shutting down the industry relative to the probability of another disaster isn't worth it, given that it is so difficult to get a job right now.

Come on, get real. Those on the right don't give a "flying fuck" about American jobs. If they don't care about the Middle Class, don't care to see the middle class insured, even telling the unemployed to "sober up and go get a job". If the right supports policies that move American jobs overseas, then why, suddenly, do they CARE about American jobs?

The short answer, "They don't". What they care about is "corporate profits". Their corporate masters have told them to make this an issue. Maybe as part of their "apology" to BP, that is just what they are doing.

"Oh BP, we are so, so sorry that the Democratic leadership asked you to clean up your mess. How dare they. Don't worry. When Republicans take over the house and senate, we will make sure that you get off scot free. In fact, we will move the entire cost of the clean up to the middle class and we PROMISE to give you another 30 billion in "tax breaks"."

And this has what to do with a deep water ban?

 

[uscitizen]

Do we know yet what caused the tragedy that killed 11 people? And caused the spill?
and have we put any checks into place to try and prevent it in the future?

Until those things happen we should keep the ban active.

 

[Metternich]

Do we know yet what caused the tragedy that killed 11 people? And caused the spill?
and have we put any checks into place to try and prevent it in the future?

Until those things happen we should keep the ban active.

We do not know what went wrong, and there are already checks to prevent such accidents. The drilling team just chose to ignore those checks.

 

[Charles_Main]

I think this generally displays the cluelessness of the administration.

Senior Obama administration officials concluded the federal moratorium on deepwater oil drilling would cost roughly 23,000 jobs, but went ahead with the ban because they didn't trust the industry's safety equipment and the government's own inspection process, according to previously undisclosed documents.

Marcia McNutt, an Obama administration science adviser, commented on the corporate culture of BP in a memo sent to Michael Bromwich, the administration's new top offshore oil exploration regulator, on June 28.

Critics of the moratorium, including Gulf Coast political figures and oil-industry leaders, have said it is crippling the region's economy, and some have called on the administration to make public its economic analysis. A federal judge who in June threw out an earlier six-month moratorium faulted the administration for playing down the economic effects.

After his action, administration officials considered alternatives and weighed the economic costs, the newly released documents show. The Justice Department filed them in a New Orleans court this week, in response to the latest round of litigation over the moratorium.

Spanning more than 27,000 pages, they provide an unusually detailed look at the debate about how to respond to legal and political opposition to the moratorium.

They show the new top regulator or offshore oil exploration, Michael Bromwich, told Interior Secretary Ken Salazar that a six-month deepwater-drilling halt would result in "lost direct employment" affecting approximately 9,450 workers and "lost jobs from indirect and induced effects" affecting about 13,797 more. The July 10 memo cited an analysis by Mr. Bromwich's agency that assumed direct employment on affected rigs would "resume normally once the rigs resume operations."

Asked to comment, a White House spokesman said the administration "well understood, and understands, the enormous importance of oil and gas to the region's economy," but the potential economic risks from another spill to other elements of the Gulf economy—such as fishing and tourism—also informed the administration's deliberations, "especially as spill-response resources were fully engaged to address the BP Deepwater Horizon spill." A spokesman for the Interior Department declined to comment on the documents. An American Petroleum Institute spokesman said the documents show "the government itself understood there would be significant impacts felt throughout the region." ...

Administration Foresaw 23,000 Lost Jobs from Drilling Ban - WSJ.com

One might understand a moratorium during an economic boom, but shutting down an industry during one of the worst economic recessions is dumb.

I get that the administration wants to avoid another disaster but the odds of another such mishap are extremely small, unless they had some tangible evidence that another explosion was highly probable. But I haven't seen that. The costs of shutting down the industry relative to the probability of another disaster isn't worth it, given that it is so difficult to get a job right now.

It is only dumb if you goal is not to further cripple the US oil industry and you do not care about adverse Economic effects.

 

[WillowTree]

obie wan ain't the sharpest pencil in the box.

 

[Charles_Main]

obie wan ain't the sharpest pencil in the box.

Don't kid yourself, his ineptness does not come from Stupidity it comes from Rigid Ideology. He knows damn well this will hurt our Economy and the Oil Industry. He does not care because it fits his Agenda. Period.

 

[uscitizen]

Do we know yet what caused the tragedy that killed 11 people? And caused the spill?
and have we put any checks into place to try and prevent it in the future?

Until those things happen we should keep the ban active.

We do not know what went wrong, and there are already checks to prevent such accidents. The drilling team just chose to ignore those checks.

How can you say both we do not know what went wrong and the drilling team chose to ignore checks?