ConocoPhillips's (COP) explanation about the oil spill accident in Bohai Bay
Print View | Html View
Written by: usergirl
Total views: 34 |
Word Count: 864 |
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 |
0 comments
A foreign report on the ConocoPhillips's (COP) explanation about the oil spill accident in Bohai Bay is rapidly spreading on the internet. In the report, the COP’s declaration that there is basically no evident showing the oil spill causes influence on the local environment is extremely shocking.
Yesterday, COPC (ConocoPhillips in China) explains on this matter that the original intention of the company is to say that the leakage has a very small lasting influence on the environment. Till the release of this news, there is still no statement from the State Oceanic Administration.
COP: There is small influence according to investigation of the third party.
COP declared last Friday that, there is no evidence showing that the oil spill accident on this June in Penglai 19-3 oilfield at Bohai Bay causes influence on the local environment, reported by the Wall Street Journal. The release of this report has immediately caused heat to discuss on the internet.
Yesterday, COPC explained to the reporter that the statement above came from the communication between COP and the Wall Street Journal and other presses. "We didn't deny the pollution. Our intention is to say that comprehensive investigation and analysis has been conducted by COPC and the specialists of the third party. The current result shows that the leakage of oil has a very small lasting influence on the environment."
COPC declares that the judgment above is supported by evidence. The company has examined the water quality around the drilling platform of Penglai 19-3 oilfield. They also conducted investigation and researches along the coast and sent the data and samples to the independent third party for further examination and stimulation. However, COPC also shows that this is only the judgment of the company. "We are making further examination to the information, and we also welcome the relevant information offered by Chinese specialists. But this does not mean that other results from other companies are definitely wrong."
Question: Is the third party authorized?
The reporter has learned that, the third party declared by COP includes many organizations and they are mainly led by two foreign organizations, DNV (DET NORSKE VERITAS) and ASA of America. DNV is a global service organization specializing in risk management. ASA is a stimulation company, whose headquarter is located in America. It can stimulate the influence of oil spill upon the environment according to leakage oil, wind direction and other various data.
Why is an oil spill accident happened in China sent to a third party which is led by foreign organizations for investigation and stimulation? COP fails to give an answer to this question. (I think they need a ion stick Water Treatment Equipment to solve this problem)
Well, will the investigation result of the third party influent the final judgment of this accident? On this matter, leader of the public participation program "Friend of Nature", Chang Cheng gave a statement when he was interviewed by the reporter yesterday. According to him, the investigation result of relevant state departments is the most authorized one in terms of legal effects. If COP agrees with this investigation result, the investigation result of relevant state departments will be taken finally. If there is disagreement, it can be reinvestigated by a third party authorized by the relevant state departments. Associate professor Wang Yamin from Ocean Institute of Shandong University at Weihai also showed that the evidence without the identification of the governmental departments is never valid.
Yesterday, concerning the "small influence on environment" statement of COP, the reporter tried to connect with the State Oceanic Administration and submitted an interview letter according to the requirement. However, no reply has been received from the State Oceanic Administration until the release of this news.
Specialists: COP is challenging common sense.
Regarding the statement of COP, the reporter has interviewed some specialists in ocean, lawyers and the environmental protection organization. They gave comments like "You're kidding", "ridiculous", "sophistry" and "This is challenging common sense."
Associate professor Wang Yamin from Ocean Institute of Shandong University at Weihai states that, theoretically speaking, crude oil (94.41, 0.53, 0.56%) entering the ocean as foreign substance will definitely cause influence on the marine environment. The influence of oil spill can be affected by the following factors, spill volume, speed of electronic water treatment diffusion, size of water body, self-purification ability of the ocean and the ecological vulnerability index. Specific influence degree has to be identified by the State Oceanic Administration and the Ministry of Agriculture.
With respect to the recovery time of the marine environment, Wang Yamin said it should be determined by the degree of influence. Specific evaluation report should be presented by the governmental departments like the State Oceanic Administration and the Ministry of Agriculture. However, generally speaking, the recovery of fishery resources takes about five to ten years. Relevant economic claims should be closely related with the following factors, public benefit like the cost of recovery of ecological system, loss of fisherman and influences on relevant industries, etc.
I studied Water Treatment for many years, manufactured sand filter. Now focused on self cleaning filter research.
Source: ConocoPhillips's (COP) explanation about the oil spill accident in Bohai Bay
http://www.financebusinessarticles.com
Rating: Not yet rated
