Were NOAA Spill-Numbers Rushed?
A lead NOAA scientist responsible for the agency’s report suggesting that “74 percent of the oil” spewed by the BP gusher had already disappeared is now suggesting the numbers in the government-released document were drawn from incomplete science.
Few in Washington and certainly no one in the Gulf believed the account when it was first leaked to the New York Times on August 5, for simple reasons: There’s still lots of oil visible on beaches, in marshes, on the surface and below. And there are increasing numbers of scientific studies that immediately call into question NOAA’s clearly optimistic numbers.
Last week a University of Georgia report claimed “70 to 79 percent of the oil is still in the Gulf,” based on 57,000 readings taken during a recent 10-day voyage. Scientists from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute report identifying a 22-mile long plume of hydrocarbons spanning 3,000 feet below the surface of the Gulf.
It seems that Bill Lehr, senior scientist with NOAA, may actually agree more with those statistics than the NOAA report he helped write.
Late last week Lehr told a Congressional hearing that the optimistic report from his agency was rushed and never intended to be released to the public. He said the report was intended to inform “the emergency response, not the general public.”
“I would say most of (the oil) is still in the environment,” Lehr told the house energy and commerce committee. In a conference call with congressional investigators, Lehr reportedly said some scientists had concerns with the report and that it was the White House that decided to release the stats, not the agency. A NOAA spokesman later said Lehr’s comments were “false.”
Massachusetts congressman Ed Markey, who has been the BP gusher’s sharpest critic in Washington, railed against Lehr, suggesting NOAA’s report had given people “a false sense of confidence” and wondered why the agency had released any numbers when Lehr admitted the research was not complete. Lehr’s boss, respected ocean scientist Jane Lubchenco, continues to stand behind the sunny statistics while admitting the agency’s “comprehensive report” would not be delivered for another two months.
Markey is calling on NOAA to share the data it based its report on so that independent scientists can assess its credibility.
Leave a comment