Underwater oil gusher a crisis no one imagined

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico presents British Petroleum with a problem of unprecedented severity — a limitless gush in deep waters — forcing the company to grasp for fixes to a problem that it never envisioned.

The problem with the spill that followed the Deepwater Horizon explosion is that it isn't a spill: It's a gush, like an underwater oil volcano. A hot column of oil and gas is spurting into freezing black waters nearly a mile down, where the pressure nears a ton per inch — impossible for divers to endure. Experts call it a continuous, round-the-clock calamity, unlike a leaking tanker, which might empty in hours or days.

"Everything about it is unprecedented," said geochemist Christopher Reddy, an oil-spill expert and head of the Coastal Ocean Institute at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts. "All our knowledge is based on a one-shot event. ... With this, we don't know when it's going to stop."

It was revealed Friday that British Petroleum (BP) had downplayed the possibility of a catastrophic accident at the oil rig. In its 2009 exploration plan and environmental-impact analysis for the well, BP suggested it was unlikely, or virtually impossible, for an accident to occur that would lead to a giant crude-oil spill and serious damage to beaches, fish and mammals.

At least 1.6 million gallons of oil have spilled since the April 20 explosion that caused the rig to sink and left 11 workers missing and presumed dead, according to the Coast Guard. Fears continued to grow that the leak could get worse. One official at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in a widely distributed warning on Friday, said the oil flow could grow from the current estimate of 5,000 barrels a day to "an order of magnitude higher than that."

The increased level of concern was reflected in the criticism by federal officials of BP for not stopping the leak and cleaning up the spill before it reached land, something the company's officials had said was possible earlier in the week.

"It is clear that after several unsuccessful attempts to secure the source of the leak, it is time for BP to supplement their current mobilization as the slick of oil moves toward shore," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Friday.

President Obama, meanwhile, halted any new offshore-drilling projects unless rigs have new safeguards to prevent another disaster.

The seas were too rough and the winds too strong to burn off the oil, suck it up effectively with skimmer vessels or hold it in check with the miles of inflatable booms strung along the coast. The floating barriers broke loose in the choppy water, and waves sent oily water lapping over them.

The spill — more than 130 miles long and 70 miles wide — threatens hundreds of species of wildlife, including birds, dolphins and the fish, shrimp, oysters and crabs that make the Gulf Coast a leading U.S. source of seafood.

Animal-rescue operations ramped up, including one at Fort Jackson, about 70 miles southeast of New Orleans. That rescue crew had its first patient Friday, a young northern gannet found offshore covered in thick oil.

Louisiana closed some fishing grounds and oyster beds because of the risk of contamination. In a twist, about 1,000 angry fishermen packed an elementary school gymnasium in Venice, La., on Friday, seeking employment with BP to help clean up the spill that may wipe out their livelihoods this year and perhaps beyond.

"Either the seafood industry or the oil industry — that's the only jobs down here, so I guess I'm trying to move from seafood to oil today," said Bernel Prout, 55, a Venice fisherman.

BP has said it will hire as many local residents as possible to clean the beaches and distribute booms through the surrounding marshes and waterways. Fishermen said they were struggling with the loss of revenue. But they were not told how many would be hired, at what wages, or when. "This is not our fault," Prout said. "It's the fault of the oil company."

BP's 52-page exploration plan for the Deepwater Horizon well, filed with the federal Minerals Management Service, says repeatedly that it was "unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."

And while the company conceded a spill would impact beaches, wildlife refuges and wilderness areas, it argued that "due to the distance to shore (48 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected."

Robert Wiygul, an environmental lawyer and board member for the Gulf Restoration Network, said he doesn't see anything in the document that suggests BP addressed the kind of technology needed to control a spill at that depth. "The point is, if you're going to be drilling in 5,000 feet of water for oil, you should have the ability to control what you're doing," he said.

Although the accident was under investigation, many of the more than two dozen lawsuits filed since the explosion claim it was caused when workers for oil-services contractor Halliburton improperly capped the well, a process known as cementing. Halliburton denied it.

Compiled from The Associated Press, the Los Angeles Times and The New York Times