BP managed to secure the containment dome over the leaking well last night, but that has not yet resulted in the capture of much oil. Black stuff continued to gush out of the sides beyond the dome, and while some oil may be flowing up the dome to a waiting tanker, it’s unclear how much good this technique has done, at least in the near term. BP plans to close some more valves on the dome in an attempt to capture more oil.
Of course, even if the dome succeeded in completely stopping the leak, the devastation of 45 days of uninterrupted flow remains. And the oil is having a terrible impact, with some of the worst pictures coming out yesterday.
As the emergency management continues, the feds have begun to charge BP for their cleanup costs. The first $69 million dollar bill went in the mail yesterday. But while BP could easily make up for that by selling the oil they capture in the containment dome (they could raise as much as $85 million in the next two months off of it), there’s one lingering cost out there, unremarked upon until just now by House Natural Resources Committee chair Nick Rahall, which really would create a terrible financial blow for BP:
The top Democrat on the House Natural Resources committee wants Attorney General Eric Holder to force BP to pay back oil drilling royalties that the government is losing as a result of the massive oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico.
West Virginia Democrat Nick Rahall, in a letter to Holder this week, asked that the Justice department take “legal action to recover damages owed to the United States for lost royalties.”
The issue of royalties has largely been left aside in the flurry of congressional action since the spill. When a company drills in U.S. waters, it signs a lease with the government and pays royalties for the oil it draws from the ground. Rahall says that the government’s lease with BP stipulates an 18.75% royalty.
So BP would have to pay, if Rahall’s suggestion is taken up, an 18.75% royalty on hundreds of thousands if not millions of barrels of oil which they will never be able to sell. Obviously measuring just how much oil has been spilled is the key here. And it makes sense – the royalty is on the oil extracted, what you do with it afterwards is really not the problem of the United States.
When you start combining that expense with the potential $4,300 a barrel fine under the Clean Water Act, and the liabilities which could be raised to an unlimited amount if the cap is removed by Congress, and other expenses, then you start to understand why Moody’s and Fitch downgraded BP yesterday.




19 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Great catch; please follow this story.
I hope they are downgraded to ZERO. What an awful company.
Off topic:
Fracking is not just a curse substitute for SciFi shows. Now we get a natural gas rupture in the Marcellus Shale in PA which brings all of that fracking goodness back to the surface without using the aquifers to make the round trip. Hard so say who’s worse – the drillers or the frackers. Maybe EOG Resources will follow BP.
And whose numbers are they required to use? Didn’t BP say it was 5,000 gallons a day for the first few weeks? :^)
If we estimate 50,000 bbl/day (estimates range from 12,000 bbl/day to over 100,000 bbl/day, with the NOAA now saying a lower bound of 12,000-19,000 and no upper bound on the flow – I’m using 50,000 as a “mid-range” on the rate based primarily on info from SkyTruth) over the last 45 days, the fines alone total $9.75 trillion…
That’s gonna hurt!
No wonder BP has been blowing smoke about the REAL rate of flow.
That’s about 2,250,000 bbl total (so far), or 94,500,000 gallons of oil. The royalties (calculated at $85/bbl) are a mere $35,859,375.
Well, do the drillers just drill down in the Gulf – or do they explode sideways, too in the undersea formations?
Even though dollars deal a blow to the greed heart of the Corporations – but I am betting not a lethal blow, this is more about breaking the ecological hearts and minds of the public. And we have the Obama Admin. with its hacks aiding and abetting it.
funny, I suggested that the very first week of the leak
I have another suggestion
we could also claim the lost revenue for all taxes we would have lost by that oil not making it to market, I know it’s auctioned on the global market but the formula is there for what makes it here and what does not
we could also sue for the price differance the lost oil would make in a “supply demand” increase in pricing
Why would they not have to pay royalties on this oil? Their actions “extracted” the oil–even if they can’t convert it into a mechantable product, therefore they owe all royalties for it.
Why would the Govt have to sue to get it? Another example of how corporations screw the US taxpayer.
I posted this on the previous BP thread but I doubt anyone will read it. Out west here, BP changed their name to 76 maybe 5 or more years ago. I think they wanted it to sound more American.
To people that care about the natural world, the oiled seabird images from Huffington Post yesterday are the equivalent of the Abu Ghraib atrocity images. Money can’t make up for these atrocities. Ending the ability of BP and the rest of the lot to operate as ecological rogues must be the goal, and is what Nick Rahall should be laying out.
x2
Thanks DDay.
A strategy that Obama could use is to force BP to commander as many freighters and pumps as possible to shop vac oil and seawater into separators which capture some of the oil. This option might unite the carbon kings (who could not say no to the recovery of black gold) and everyone else who just wants it out of the Gulf and the Atlantic.
I understand the best tools for such an operation, ultra large crude carriers, (2,000,000,000 metric tons) are all filled, but that is BPs problem. I see this as a strategy to bankrupt BP and therein send a message to the rest of Big Oil that would drive up the price. I see that as creating breathing space for renewables.
I am not doubting you, but do you have a link?
Back in 2000, they dropped Amoco from BP Amoco. I could not find a record of any other name changes.
I thought 76 stations were part of the ConoccoPhillips company.
I don’t know how it works out there, but here on the east coast sometimes two companies make arragements with each other to “trade territories.”
Here, for example, Chevron used to be big. But they made an agreement with BP that Chevron would no longer market here, and BP would presumably no longer market in some area that Chevron was interested in. So all of our Chevron stations became BP stations.
Is it possible something similar occurred between ConoccoPhillips and BP??
After doing the proper investigation, I found out that 76 is owned by conoco phillips. The reason why I thought BP owned them is because every BP station here changed their name to 76 without doing much more changing than making the station colors red, white and blue and changing the name. I assumed that BP just changed the name of their stations. But, they must have actually sold them to conoco phillips. My bad.
Here is a list of automotive fuel brands. On the list, 76 is part of ConocoPhilips, not BP.
Union 76 stations, weren’t they, at some time in the distant past?
I believe that one of our local chains in the SF Bay Area, ARCO, is affiliated with BP. I don’t know that they’re a subsidiary. I just know there was a BP logo on my ARCO gas card. So I got rid of it last month :)
I know it’s auctioned on the global market but the formula is there for what makes it here and what does not. I see this as a strategy to bankrupt BP and therein send a message to the rest of Big Oil that would drive up the price thanks for shearing this great posting to me student aid.
Yeah, they were Union 76 stations, and Phillips marketed under Phillips 66 stations, IIRC.
Also the one I used to frequent was our Gulf station. Don’t know why, I think it was the Gulf logo I always liked. :)
But no more of those either (I think).
It’s hard to keep up with the all the mergers and takeovers. BP merged with Amocco, and it was for awhile known as BP/Amocco I think. Conocco-Phillips is another merger.
IF there’s one thing in life that’s a constant, it’s change.