SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: coug who wrote (79889)5/1/2010 8:42:40 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
BP’s Response to Oil Spill Lacking, Officials Say (Update1)

By Jessica Resnick-Ault, Jim Polson and Katarzyna Klimasinska

May 1 (Bloomberg) -- BP Plc should be doing more to protect coastal areas in the Gulf of Mexico from an oil slick formed after a drilling rig explosion, state and federal officials said.

“BP’s current resources are not adequate to meet the three challenges we face,” Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal said. “The three challenges we face are stopping the leak, protecting our coast, preparation for a swift cleanup of our impacted areas.” Jindal, speaking yesterday at a press conference with federal officials in Robert, Louisiana, said he had urged BP to seek additional federal help.

U.S. President Barack Obama plans to visit the U.S. Gulf Coast in the next 48 hours, an administration official said today. Tony Hayward, BP’s chief executive officer, is on his way from London to Louisiana to oversee the fight on the oil spill and will stay several days, Toby Odone, a London-based spokesman, said in a phone interview over the phone.

BP has tried to contain the oil within booms, suck it into skimming vessels, disperse it with aerial spray and burn it. This evening, BP will inject chemicals almost 5,000 feet below the surface where remote-operated vehicles have identified three leaks from crumpled pipe, hoping to disperse the pollution before it reaches the surface, Doug Suttles, chief operating officer of exploration and production, said at the press conference.

Largest Response Effort

“We’ve so far mounted the largest response effort ever utilized in the world,” Suttles said. “We’ve utilized every technology available. We’ve applied every resource requested.”

“We’re very frustrated that we haven’t been able to bring the flow of oil to a stop and we haven’t been able to stop the oil from reaching the shore,” Suttles said in an interview after the press conference. “Right now, what the various branches of government are doing is seeing what are the appropriate resources.”

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has estimated the well is spewing 5,000 barrels of crude oil a day into the Gulf of Mexico. At that rate, the volume of the spill would exceed Alaska’s 1989 Exxon Valdez accident by the third week of June.

More Assets

Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano urged BP at the press conference to lend additional assets to the cleanup and supplement efforts already under way. The administration has anticipated a “worst-case scenario” since the Deepwater Horizon rig, owned by Transocean Ltd. and leased to BP, sank last week, said Mary Landry, a U.S. Coast Guard Rear Admiral who is coordinating the federal response with BP.

The German government offered to help the U.S. battle the oil spill, saying it is “very concerned about the size of the catastrophe,” according to an e-mailed statement today.

Federal officials increased their response to the spill, as Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said he’ll form an Outer Continental Shelf Safety board to recommend safety improvements for offshore drilling.

“We’re going to make sure that any leases going forward have those safeguards,” President Barack Obama said in remarks at the White House yesterday. “Domestic oil production is an important part” of U.S. energy policy, Obama said. “But I’ve always said it must be done responsibly, for the safety of our workers and our environment.”

Rig Inspections

Salazar said the U.S. Minerals Management Service, which oversees drilling activity, has begun inspecting all 30 deepwater drilling rigs and 47 deepwater platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.

“I pressed the CEOs of BP as well as the engineers to work harder and faster and smarter to get the job done,” Salazar said, describing a meeting this week in Houston about the spill response. “I have asked other companies from across the oil and gas industry to bring their global expertise to the situation.”

Louisiana asked Defense Secretary Robert Gates to lend the National Guard to the effort. That would put 6,000 soldiers and airmen on active duty for at least 90 days, adding security, medical support, engineers, communications capability and cleanup crews, Jindal said.

The Louisiana Guard is ready to deploy 600 troops upon Defense Department approval and has ordered 1,500 protective suits for the cleanup, he said.

Fisherman Aid Sought

Jindal said he’s asked the U.S. Department of Commerce to declare a commercial fisheries failure in the state, making financial aid available to fishermen and businesses. Louisiana has the largest fishery in the lower 48 states, he said.

“This oil spill will certainly adversely affect the productivity of this ecosystem and fishing families across our state,” he said.

Florida Governor Charlie Crist has also declared a state of emergency for five counties due to potential danger from the spill. Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour issued a similar order for the Gulf coast of that state.

To contact the reporters on this story: Jessica Resnick-Ault in New York at jresnickault@bloomberg.net; Jim Polson in New York at jpolson@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: May 1, 2010 08:15 EDT



To: coug who wrote (79889)5/2/2010 2:27:54 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
A Spill of Our Own
_______________________________________________________________

By LISA MARGONELLI
Op-Ed Contributor
The New York Times
May 2, 2010

Oakland, Calif. -- The history of American oil spills is the history of the environmental movement. The 1969 blowout of an oil platform off Santa Barbara, Calif., gave rise to Earth Day as well as President Richard Nixon’s National Environmental Policy Act, and led to a moratorium on new drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts. Twenty years later, the spill from the Exxon Valdez tanker near Alaska quashed the first Bush administration’s ambitions for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and ushered in the laws that made oil shippers liable for damage caused by their cargo.

Now 5,000 barrels of oil a day are apparently spilling from the wrecked Deepwater Horizon rig off New Orleans, and ghastly floating pads of emulsified oil are reaching the sensitive marshlands and coastline of the Gulf of Mexico, coating birds and fish. On Thursday, as the scent of fuel hovered over New Orleans, residents joked online that they should eat fish now, because they might not be able to again for a while. One longtime offshore oil worker told me this looked like a “game changer,” and he was thinking about finding another line of work.

It seems likely that the oil company that holds the lease on Deepwater Horizon, BP, will finally have to abandon its Orwellian “Beyond Petroleum” marketing campaign. This slogan has been so perversely successful that, in 2008, British marketers voted BP’s brand more “green” than Greenpeace. Factually ludicrous, the slogan does accurately reflect drivers’ desire to buy unlimited gasoline while remaining “beyond” all the mess.

In Washington, politicians are trying to get beyond the ugly spill, too. The Obama administration is backpedaling on the president’s commitment to opening more offshore lands to drilling. Senator Bill Nelson of Florida called for an immediate halt to offshore exploration. Representative Ed Markey of Massachusetts prepared to call oil executives to a hearing to discuss oil company profits and the spill.

Oil, however, is too complicated for simple solutions. Whether this spill turns out to be the result of a freakish accident or a cascade of negligence, the likely political outcome will be a moratorium on offshore drilling. Emotionally, I love this idea. Who wants an oil drill in his park or on his coastline? Who doesn’t want to punish Big Oil on behalf of the birds?

Moratoriums have a moral problem, though. All oil comes from someone’s backyard, and when we don’t reduce the amount of oil we consume, and refuse to drill at home, we end up getting people to drill for us in Kazakhstan, Angola and Nigeria — places without America’s strong environmental safeguards or the resources to enforce them.

Kazakhstan, for one, had no comprehensive environmental laws until 2007, and Nigeria has suffered spills equivalent to that of the Exxon Valdez every year since 1969. (As of last year, Nigeria had 2,000 active spills.) Since the Santa Barbara spill of 1969, and the more than 40 Earth Days that have followed, Americans have increased by two-thirds the amount of petroleum we consume in our cars, while nearly quadrupling the quantity we import. Effectively, we’ve been importing oil and exporting spills to villages and waterways all over the world.

The Deepwater Horizon spill illustrates that every gallon of gas is a gallon of risks — risks of spills in production and transport, of worker deaths, of asthma-inducing air pollution and of climate change, to name a few. We should print these risks on every gasoline receipt, just as we label smoking’s risks on cigarette packs. And we should throw our newfound political will behind a sweeping commitment to use less gas — build cars that use less oil (or none at all) and figure out better ways to transport Americans.

Simply pushing oil production away from us does not solve the underlying problem. But much can be done to change drilling on federal lands and possibly make it safer. A good first step would be to reform the federal Minerals Management Service, which is responsible for both environmental enforcement and financial administration of offshore drilling leases. In 2008, this agency was caught up in a wide-ranging ethics scandal — including allegations of financial self-dealing, accepting gifts from energy companies, cocaine use and sexual misconduct — that exposed its ridiculously close relationship with the oil industry.

Several years ago, the agency considered requiring the installation of relatively inexpensive ($500,000) remote-controlled switches on offshore drilling rigs as a backup mechanism for shutting down spills like the one that’s running out of control today — but decided it wasn’t needed because there were other ways for drillers to cut off their wells.

I hope the Deepwater Horizon spill doesn’t get bad enough to join Santa Barbara and Exxon Valdez in the rogues’ gallery of huge environmental disasters. But it should galvanize us to address the real problem with oil spills — the oil.

*Lisa Margonelli, the director of the New America Foundation’s energy initiative, is the author of “Oil on the Brain: Petroleum’s Long, Strange Trip to Your Tank.”

Copyright 2010 The New York Times Company



To: coug who wrote (79889)5/2/2010 5:31:41 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
What Obama Should Say

dailykos.com



To: coug who wrote (79889)5/2/2010 2:17:32 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Criticism of BP over oil spill grows

nzherald.co.nz

By David Usborne

10:31 AM Sunday May 2, 2010

VENICE, Louisiana - Recriminations mounted on Saturday over the part played by BP and possibly by the US energy services giant Halliburton in the environmental catastrophe gathering in the Gulf of Mexico.

A huge oil slick threatens fisheries, bird habitats, tourist beaches, and the livelihoods of countless coastal communities.

The White House, which has been criticised for a faltering federal response last week to the crisis, said that President Barack Obama would visit the region on Sunday. He may cross paths, and swords, with Tony Hayward, the chief executive of BP, who was also on his way here from London.

Federal and state officials have stepped up their criticism of BP, saying it moved too slowly to grasp the scale of the spill after the loss of the Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf, 48 miles from the mouth of the Mississippi River.

"I think they [BP] heard an earful about how unhappy everyone is, and how we expect them to step up to the plate and do more," said Dr Jane Lubchenco, of the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, who was meeting local fishermen to hear their concerns.

Investigators in Washington are focusing on efforts made by BP last year to thwart government efforts to tighten regulations for deep-water drilling, and also on a 2009 plan the company submitted for this particular well in which it insisted that something going wrong which might cause a large spill was "unlikely".

Class action lawsuits have now been filed against both BP and Halliburton, which was contracted to complete the crucial task of installing the cement housing that is meant to stop any seepage around the drill bit as it penetrates the sea bed to pierce the crude reserves. The company has been called to give evidence to Congress amid suspicions that the blow-out may have been caused by a failure of the cement.

Ground zero for the response to the crisis remained the ramshackle series of marinas, shipyards and oil industry support offices here in Venice at the southern end of the Mississippi Delta in Louisiana, where the bumpy, traffic-clogged streets have names such as Coast Guard Road and, indeed, Halliburton Road.

Fisheries east of the mouth of the Mississippi were already closed by early on Saturday. But among local fishermen and charter captains, it was the uncertainty of when the worst of the slick might come - and what kind of damage it would eventually do - that was taking the worst toll.

David Mill, the owner of a fishing charter business, compared his plight to Pearl Harbor. "We just got through Hurricane Katrina, which was a national disaster, and now this. It is kinda like we are fixing to be bombed," he said, perched on the verandah of the Harbour Seafood and Oyster Bar, beer bottle in hand.

"What's gong to happen, we don't know. We don't have a clue and that's the really bad part," said Peter Young, 41, who similarly makes a living, especially in the summer months, taking fishermen from around the world through the Louisiana wetlands looking for species such as the speckled trout. "All we can do is get casse-ed," he said - a local term here in French-influenced Cajun country for drunk.

As federal officials began to assail BP, many of the locals in Venice n almost every one of whom either works directly for the oil and gas industry or has family members who do - were also beginning to wonder why action to protect the local wetlands and fisheries had not started sooner.

Among them was C J Robichaux, who ventured out into the high swells of the Gulf on the southern edges of the barrier islands with a reporter in a small open boat barely bigger than a Vauxhall. Mr Robichaux said he lost his father in 1969 when a hurricane blew the lid off a Chevron storage tank, soaking with oil the area where he lived north of Venice. His father's body was found 10 miles upriver.

White-stomached mullet fling themselves through the surface of the Gulf waters as we cut through a heavy swell and chop. At times it seems flattened by what Mr Robichaux reckons are the ribbons of the oil sheen that experts say are the harbingers of an approaching slick. Occasionally, he throttles back and we gaze at what might almost be a seaborne savannah of gorgeous speckled islands of cane, thick with terns and other seabirds. A small forest of oil rigs clings to the hazy horizon far out to sea.

On a normal day, Mr Robichaux operates a crew boat for oil workers near Port Sulphur, an hour north of here towards New Orleans. But today he is anxious to see how far they have got in deploying the floating booms that are meant to protect the marshlands and fisheries from the encroaching oil. "Not a damn one, not one," he complains over and over as our explorations find no evidence of anything much going on out here aside from military helicopters eyeing us from above. (We are in the area that, just hours later, will be closed down to fishing by the authorities.) While we have both seen workers loading the booms on to boats back in Venice, there is no evidence of them being laid.

Not that they are guaranteed to help anyway, as Mr Robichaux, a slightly grizzled and compact man with a taste for nicotine, observes. "I don't know, with the kind of swell we having now, that those booms are going to do any good anyhow." Today, the waves would slosh over anything less than a yard high.

While in Venice people laboured under a sense of limbo, unable to see the oil but well aware that it was coming (occasionally you catch a petrol whiff), the mood of oil spill experts continued to darken. Most crucially, there was no optimism from anyone that the efforts of BP, with help now from other energy companies, to plug the leak in the ocean floor would be successful.

The prospect remained that the snapped oil pipe rising from the crippled well could continue to spew its poisonous load for three months or longer. The surface slick was already three times larger in area than Hampshire. An internal memo from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, obtained by a newspaper in Alabama, suggested that the rate of leakage could "become unchecked, resulting in a release volume an order of magnitude [ten times] higher than previously thought". That would imply that the 5,000 barrels a day rate of flow - the current estimate - could become 50,000 barrels a day.

Worse still, the oil coming from the well is of a particularly viscous nature which will be hard to clean up. "If I had to pick a bad oil, I'd put this right up there," Ed Overton, an industry expert at Louisiana State University, cautioned. Like other experts, he said everything was combining to make this spill as bad as any seen before. "This has all the characteristics of a category five hurricane."

As he arrives here, Mr Hayward of BP will plunge into what would be any energy company's worst nightmare. The questions awaiting him include why it took the company so long to recognise what was happening one mile under the ocean's surface. This time last week, the word from BP - and the US Coast Guard - was that the spill from the collapse was small. Even when that was exposed as inaccurate, the company insisted that any slick would be contained and would not reach land.

He will also be asked to explain more distant actions, including the company's resistance to Washington's attempts to introduce a new rule to make deep-sea drilling safer. A letter from BP to the US government dated 14 September 2009, made its position clear. "While BP is supportive of companies having a system in place to reduce risks, accidents, injuries and spills, we are not supportive of the extensive prescriptive regulations as proposed in this rule," the letter said.

There could be further embarrassment in passages from the plan for the well site that was submitted by the company to federal authorities last year. While it does not rule out that a leak could harm beaches, wetlands and wildlife refuges, no one should be worried, it said: "due to the distance to shore (48 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected."

Harry Waxman, the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee in the US Congress, instructed Halliburton to brief his investigators on its activities at the rig regarding the cementing of the well hole. It emerged that Halliburton crews completed the cementing just hours before the catastrophic explosion on board the rig on the 20 April that caused it to sink and kill 11 workers at the site.

Elmer Danenberger, formerly with the Department of the Interior, spoke on ABC about the risks of a blow-out if the cementing had not been completed with all possible care. "With these cementing operations it's just a matter of not being attentive enough," he said. "What you want is a closed system. You want the cemented pipe totally sealing the well bore. If you don't have that, you have problems."



To: coug who wrote (79889)5/2/2010 2:31:35 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Apocalypse Again
_____________________________________________________________

by David Helvarg

Published on Sunday, May 2, 2010 by The Huffington Post

It's happened before but you wouldn't know it reading the New York Times. On April 28, the Times wrote a "Gulf Spill" editorial defending continued offshore oil and gas exploration. Without questioning its source it wrote, "the federal Minerals Management Service says there have been no major spills -- defined as 1,000 barrels or more -- in the last 15 years, a period that includes Hurricane Katrina. In that context, the blowout -- while tragic and destructive -- can be seen as a freak occurrence."

But when I was down in the Gulf covering Hurricane Katrina less than five years ago, the Coast Guard reported that over eight million gallons of oil spilled in and around the Gulf, more than two thirds of an Exxon Valdez. Of course, that wasn't from the 180 rigs damaged, destroyed or set adrift like the Jack Up rig Ocean Warwick that I saw grounded in the surf on Dauphin Island Alabama. The MMS, parsing things very finely indeed, was only counting spills from active offshore rigs, not the pipelines, onshore tank farms, refineries and other infrastructure essential to offshore operations.

While traveling the Gulf between hurricanes Katrina and Rita, I was reminded of war zones I'd previously covered, seeing fewer casualties (about 1,600 dead at the time) but far wider destruction. I was convinced that after the dead were all counted and mourned, the massive oil spill would become a major media story. But it never did, much to my surprise and that of some of the Coast Guard Environmental Strike Team members I later interviewed for my book Rescue Warriors. Nor have we heard much about the half million gallons of oil spilled in the Gulf last year when I flew with the Coasties into Hurricane Ike in Texas. Nor has there been any talk of the persistent leaks and pollution that comes from the rigs I've visited in the Gulf or of the spills that drift down the Mississippi from upriver refineries and barge traffic -- like the more than 60,000 gallon spill last year that hardly made the news outside southern Louisiana.

Of course, for a disaster on the scale of what we're now seeing, you'd either have to go back to the 2009 blow-out in the Timor Sea off Australia that took months to get under control but was largely ignored by the U.S. media or, if you want a Gulf of Mexico precedent you'd have to go back to 1979 when the Mexican-owned and U.S.-operated Ixtoc platform exploded, gushing 150 million gallons of oil in a fiery uncontrolled spill that lasted ten months and fouled the beaches of Texas, including the Los Padres National Seashore. (Several men died trying to control it.) Although some coastal communities were up in arms, the oil-dependent state government kept notably silent during that ongoing eco-disaster.

But of course, the history of offshore oil and gas development has always seen industry moving rapidly into new frontier waters and then trying to develop "safer drilling technologies" only after disaster strikes, whether you're talking about the oil-slimed drilling piers and gushers of Summerland California in the late 19th century, the Union blow-out in Santa Barbara in 1969, the Deep Waters of the oil fouled Gulf today or the Arctic Ocean of tomorrow where the industry doesn't even pretend to have technology capable of cleaning up a spill on or under sea ice.

I once asked the former chief of the environmental division of the Mineral Management Service why the agency has never canceled an oil lease sale based on its own oil-spill risk assessments. His response: "It's hard to make or break something as big as a lease on one issue."

The debate used to be between marine pollution and energy. Today it's no longer just about the loss of lives and livelihoods, destruction of America's wetlands or America's most productive coastline that we're seeing. It's also a product liability issue. This product, used as directed, overheats our planet. Among other actions needed, it's time to re-establish the moratorium on any new offshore drilling that was abolished in the waning days of the Bush Administration and also for the Obama administration to stop pretending we can drill our way to clean energy and start making a more serious commitment to offshore wind and wave energy, ocean thermal, algae-fuels and other carbon free possibilities. After all, no ecosystem has ever been destroyed by a wind spill.

I've been on BP deepwater rigs in the Gulf of Mexico and I mourn the loss of their people killed and injured along with the tens of thousands of other people now being affected. I respect the roughnecks and roustabouts I met on the drill decks working the hydraulic tongs and the derrick men above them leaning out from their monkey boards like trapeze artists to grasp the pipe tops and line them up with the rubber mud hoses dropping down from above. They all worked together in a loud, clattering, steel-toed ballet to move those pipe strings down through thousands of feet of seawater and tens of thousands of feet of rock knowing the risks. Some wore T-shrits reading, "New Rig, New People, New Records." They showed the same professional pride as America's 19th-century whalers with their harpoons and try pots, who, by extracting leviathans' living oil, lit and lubricated an earlier industrial age until they too passed into history. I've also seen enough oiled birds up close and personal. It's all too awful and it's time to move on.

*David Helvarg is President of the Blue Frontier Campaign (www.bluefront.org) and author of The War Against the Greens, Blue Frontier, 50 Ways to Save the Ocean and Rescue Warriors - The U.S. Coast Guard, America's Forgotten Heroes. He's editor of the Ocean and Coastal Conservation Guide, organizer of several ‘Blue Vision' Summits for ocean activists, and winner of Coastal Living Magazine's 2005 Leadership Award and the 2007 Herman Melville literary Award.

Copyright © 2010 HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.



To: coug who wrote (79889)5/2/2010 5:12:42 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
Lessons from the Exxon Valdez spill

blogs.reuters.com



To: coug who wrote (79889)5/4/2010 6:08:42 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Is Obama blowing his best chance to shift the debate from the dirty, unsafe energy of the 19th century to the clean, safe energy of the 21st century?

climateprogress.org



To: coug who wrote (79889)5/4/2010 7:40:42 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Don't-Drill-Baby-Don't-Drill...

Schwarzenegger Abandons Offshore Plan; So Should Obama
by John Nichols
Published on Tuesday, May 4, 2010 by The Nation

It is not often that a politician is confronted by reality and does the right thing.

Indeed, if there is a pattern of late it has been that, when confronted with evidence that they are wrong, most elected officials claim that they are victims of partisan attacks on their integrity or, in the case of Sarah Palin, simply quit.

But the scope of the environmental, economic and social catastrophe caused by the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is proving to be so immense that some politicians are breaking pattern.

While President Obama has yet to do the right thing and admit that he was wrong to buy into Palin’s “drill-baby-drill” fantasy and bend on the question of whether to permit more offshore drilling, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is going green on this one.

The Republican governor abruptly abandoned his support for the controversial Tranquillon Ridge drilling project off the coast of California’s Santa Barbara County Monday.

Schwarzenegger says he was convinced to do so by the images of the disaster off Louisiana.

"All of you have seen, when you turn on the television, the devastation in the Gulf, and I'm sure that they also were assured that it was safe to drill," he explained at a press conference. "I see on TV the birds drenched in oil, the fisherman out of work, the massive oil spill and oil slick destroying our precious ecosystem. That will not happen here in California, and this is why I am withdrawing my support for the T-Ridge project."

The truly remarkable thing about Schwarzenegger’s response – which effectively kills the California project he had championed – is that he acted as a human being, not a political machine repeating talking points even after they have been disproven.

No rational human being could consider the nightmare scenario that is playing out in the Gulf and not be moved to assure that it will not be repeated.

Yet, most politicians who depend for the livelihoods on campaign contributions from big oil – and friendly coverage from media outlets that preach the energy-corporation mantra – are still waiting to see whether the latest coastal crisis will shift public sentiment so firmly against dangerous drilling that they must finally abandon what was always a fool’s mission.

Schwarzenegger said he had been convinced of the safety of the California drilling initiative when he championed it. That was always a dubious claim. Even if the governor has established a reasonable record on environmental issues, at least as compared to other prominent Republicans in recent years, the arguments against the T-Ridge project were always strong.

This led Schwarzenegger critics to suggest that he was influenced less by safety studies than by the prospect that the project would pump as much as $100 million a year in new revenue into the coffers of his cash-strapped state.

The images of environmental devastation along the coast of Louisiana tipped the scales toward realism, however.

"If I have a choice between $100 million and what you area see in the Gulf of Mexico, I'd rather just find out a way to make up for that $100 million," said Schwarzenegger. "(When) you turn on television and see the enormous disaster, you say to yourself, why would we want to take that risk? The risk is just much greater than the money is worth, and so we will figure out how to deal with the extra $100 million problem."

It is not necessary to make a hero of Schwarzenegger.

Indeed, as Congressman John Garamendi, D-California, says: “It’s unfortunate it took one of the worst ecological disasters in U.S. history for Governor Schwarzenegger to come to his senses, but today, friends of California’s coastline can breathe a sigh of relief. There will be no more new leases for oil drilling from platforms off the coast of Santa Barbara.”

When Garamendi, a former California lieutenant governor, chaired the State Lands Commission -- the independent commission responsible for approving oil leases in California – he aggressively opposed permitting new drilling from platforms off the California coast, arguing tha such projects raised the risk of ecological and economic disaster.

“The Gulf Coast oil spill – which threatens 40 percent of U.S. wetlands and will cost fishing and tourism industries billions of dollars – proves my point,” said Garamendi, who noted that the point was proven not just for one state or region.

Echoing a call from MoveOn for Obama to go all the way and reinstate the historic ban on new offshore drilling projects, the congressman concluded: “President Obama has proposed a temporary presidential moratorium on new offshore oil drilling, and that’s a good start, but Congress plays an important role as well. Our coast is best protected when both the President and Congress make it clear that new offshore drilling is not an option."

Garamendi is right.

But he could say it another way.

Governor Schwarzenegger responded in the appropriate way to the evidence that he was wrong about offshore drilling.

President Obama should do the same.

© 2010 The Nation

*John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor of The Capital Times in Madison, Wisconsin. A co-founder of the media reform organization Free Press, Nichols is is co-author with Robert W. McChesney of The Death and Life of American Journalism: The Media Revolution that Will Begin the World Again and Tragedy & Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy.