The BP Deepwater Horizon oil disaster: Terminology, a silver lining, and a graph
I have three things I want to say about the BP oil disaster.
First, a note on terminology. Let’s not call it a “spill.”
A “spill” is when my son knocks over his glass of milk. A “spill” is when you slip on some ice and graze your knee. A “spill” is what you do to the beans, as in someone accidentally letting slip the date of a surprise party.
BP’s CEO Tony Hayward is happy to call this a “spill,” because that word fits his position that this is only a “relatively tiny” event.
The truth is, of course, that it’s already been over a month, and this is now the world’s second worst oil disaster ever (probably) — and it’s not over.
BP’s original estimate of the flow rate was between 1,000 to 5,000 barrels per day. Current estimates suggest it was actually 95,000 barrels per day. So far, up to 491,000 tonnes of oil may have been released. In comparison, Exxon Valdez was 37,000 tonnes, and we’re still seeing the effects of that 20 years later. The current disaster is already more than 13 Valdezes.
So I reject “spill.” I use “disaster” and am considering “catastrophe.”
Second, there is a sliver of a silver lining. That formulation is this:
Three Mile Island is to nuclear power
as
Deepwater Horizon is to offshore drilling
Now for the record, I support nuclear power. I believe today’s nuclear power plants are safe and efficient. (France, the world’s leader, generates more than 75% of their power via nuclear plants.) Just 300 new nuclear power plants would end our dependence on fossil fuels for powering our cities — eliminating the need for coal mining, ending mining disasters. But because Three Mile Island happened, almost no politician will ever risk their career by advocating more nuclear power plants. That one accident, which killed no one, slowed our adoption of nuclear power dramatically.
In contrast, I oppose off-shore drilling, mostly due to spills and environmental factors. Because of Deepwater Horizon and the public outcry, it’s likely now that moratoriums and state-by-state bans will be enacted that last many decades. I’m glad of that, at least.
Finally, let’s do a quick comparison. Oil company profits are obscene. BP earned $6.1 billion in profit for Q1, which ended 20 days before the disaster began. As of May 24, they estimated they had spent $760 million on the recovery. However, it appears that about a third of that is the lost profit of $6 million per day because Deepwater Horizon isn’t operating. Separately, they also pledged $500 million for research into the environmental impact of the disaster.
So they’ve managed to find it in their hearts to spend a mere 17.3% of their Q1 profit on the disaster.
That’s insulting.

May 26th, 2010 at 12:35 pm
“Three Mile Island is to nuclear power as Deepwater Horizon is to offshore drilling”
I so hope you’re wrong on that. The very LAST thing we need is to slow down oil production in the USA, and increase our reliance on foreign oil.
May 26th, 2010 at 1:23 pm
I’d prefer to see us decrease our reliance on foreign oil by going nuclear and renewable.
May 26th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
I like the idea of Nuclear. But I don’t think we should stop off shore drilling. I think we just need to make sure BP pays for everything. Not just the stopping and immediate clean ups (in which they recoup some of the oil anyways), but need to pay for all damage done, repay anything the government has spent on this. They need to pay out to all affected communities.
I think there is a danger to anything we do on a large scale as people. We just need to make sure who ever does an large scale, potentially dangerous to either people or the environment is a able and will pay for any damages they incur.
I think this will help prevent future issues, and may have helped prevent this one if it made more economic sense to BP to put in more safety measures ahead of time.
May 27th, 2010 at 6:13 pm
Where’s the edit button? I don’t like the grammar in my post.
May 28th, 2010 at 12:21 pm
Sorry, Dario, no editing. Unless you’re me. I can make any changes for you, though.
June 4th, 2010 at 12:53 pm
At the time I wrote the article, the Wiki article listing oil spills didn’t have the entry for the 1909 Lakeview gusher, which is bigger than the current disaster. So when I said “world’s second largest” in the article, it appears “third largest” is more accurate.
(Thanks to my friend Brandon for pointing out the error.)
June 10th, 2010 at 4:56 am
you do not know what you are talking about!
nuke means death
August 23rd, 2010 at 1:29 am
your right Stephen oil spill DISASTER would perfectly fit with what happen to the Gulf