• 4 hours OPEC, Russia Said To Announce Oil Pact Extension On Nov 30
  • 7 hours Wintershall And LetterOne In Talks For $12B Oil, Gas Merger
  • 9 hours India Exempts State Oil Firms Mergers From Competition Approval
  • 11 hours Turkey Targets $5B Investment In Wind Energy By End-2017
  • 13 hours Weatherford Looks To Sell Assets To Ease Some Of $8B Debt
  • 14 hours OPEC Set To Move Fast On Cut Extension Decision
  • 16 hours Nigeria Makes First Step Away From Oil
  • 1 day Russia Approves Profit-Based Oil Tax For 2019
  • 1 day French Strike Disrupts Exxon And Total’s Oil Product Shipments
  • 1 day Kurdistan’s Oil Exports Still Below Pre-Conflict Levels
  • 1 day Oil Production Cuts Taking A Toll On Russia’s Economy
  • 2 days Aramco In Talks With Chinese Petrochemical Producers
  • 2 days Federal Judge Grants Go-Ahead On Keystone XL Lawsuit
  • 2 days Maduro Names Chavez’ Cousin As Citgo Boss
  • 2 days Bidding Action Heats Up In UK’s Continental Shelf
  • 2 days Keystone Pipeline Restart Still Unknown
  • 2 days UK Offers North Sea Oil Producers Tax Relief To Boost Investment
  • 2 days Iraq Wants To Build Gas Pipeline To Kuwait In Blow To Shell
  • 2 days Trader Trafigura Raises Share Of Oil Purchases From State Firms
  • 3 days German Energy Group Uniper Rejects $9B Finnish Takeover Bid
  • 3 days Total Could Lose Big If It Pulls Out Of South Pars Deal
  • 3 days Dakota Watchdog Warns It Could Revoke Keystone XL Approval
  • 3 days Oil Prices Rise After API Reports Major Crude Draw
  • 3 days Citgo President And 5 VPs Arrested On Embezzlement Charges
  • 3 days Gazprom Speaks Out Against OPEC Production Cut Extension
  • 3 days Statoil Looks To Lighter Oil To Boost Profitability
  • 4 days Oil Billionaire Becomes Wind Energy’s Top Influencer
  • 4 days Transneft Warns Urals Oil Quality Reaching Critical Levels
  • 4 days Whitefish Energy Suspends Work In Puerto Rico
  • 4 days U.S. Authorities Arrest Two On Major Energy Corruption Scheme
  • 4 days Thanksgiving Gas Prices At 3-Year High
  • 4 days Iraq’s Giant Majnoon Oilfield Attracts Attention Of Supermajors
  • 4 days South Iraq Oil Exports Close To Record High To Offset Kirkuk Drop
  • 5 days Iraqi Forces Find Mass Graves In Oil Wells Near Kirkuk
  • 5 days Chevron Joint Venture Signs $1.7B Oil, Gas Deal In Nigeria
  • 5 days Iraq Steps In To Offset Falling Venezuela Oil Production
  • 5 days ConocoPhillips Sets Price Ceiling For New Projects
  • 7 days Shell Oil Trading Head Steps Down After 29 Years
  • 7 days Higher Oil Prices Reduce North American Oil Bankruptcies
  • 7 days Statoil To Boost Exploration Drilling Offshore Norway In 2018
Alt Text

Are Electric Cars As Clean As They Seem?

Electric cars are set to…

Alt Text

Is U.S. Energy Independence Realistic?

The recent IEA report shocked…

Nick Cunningham

Nick Cunningham

Nick Cunningham is a freelance writer on oil and gas, renewable energy, climate change, energy policy and geopolitics. He is based in Pittsburgh, PA.

More Info

Obama Admin Raises Liability Cap for Oil Spills

Obama Admin Raises Liability Cap for Oil Spills

On February 21, the U.S. Department of Interior proposed raising the cap on liabilities that oil companies are forced to pay in the event of an oil spill. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) – the environmental regulator for offshore oil and gas drilling – moved to raise the oil spill liability cap from $75 million to $134 million.

Under the U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990, companies responsible for an oil spill only have to pay up to $75 million in damages for economic losses resulting from the incident. That cap is waved if there is proof of gross negligence. The company still would have to pay for the cleanup and liabilities for violations of environmental laws.  

BOEM Director Tommy Boudreau argues that raising the cap is necessary to merely keep up with inflation. “This proposed change is the first administrative increase to the liability cap since the Oil Pollution Act came into effect twenty-four years ago and is necessary to keep pace with the 78 percent increase in inflation since 1990,” he said in a press release. “This adjustment helps to preserve the deterrent effect and the ‘polluter pays’ principle embodied in the law.”

The cap is absurdly low given that economic damages stemming from an oil spill can reach many multiples of even the higher BOEM figure. BP is still sorting out its liabilities from the 2010 Macondo well blow out, which could eventually reach a cumulative total of $70 billion. That figure includes other penalties, but the economic damages alone are billions of dollars.

Related Article: Is it Time to Let BP back in the U.S. Oil Game?

There was some political movement to raise the cap following the BP disaster in 2010. Senators Bill Nelson (D-FL), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and the late Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) cosponsored legislation that would have raised the liability cap to $10 billion. Even some oil industry allies supported some sort of reform, but disagreement over how high to raise the cap led to inaction. After months of haggling, nothing was passed and momentum flamed out. The political winds shifted from calling for tough action against BP to criticizing the government’s moratorium on drilling. So nothing changed despite the worst environmental disaster in the nation’s history.

The oil and gas industry warned against the latest move by BOEM to raise the liability cap, arguing that raising the cap would lead to higher insurance premiums, a cost that small companies cannot bear. Still, the reaction was pretty muted from the industry, and the move by BOEM to raise the cap didn’t exactly make front page headlines. And BOEM knew it wasn’t making a huge move – it only allowed the public comment period to be 30 days because didn’t anticipate much opposition. But BOEM couldn’t raise the cap any further than the $134 million level without further action from Congress.

So, make no mistake – this is a small move. It does highlight a pretty absurd policy though. The National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Spill argued for “significantly increasing the liability cap” to not only make sure offenders adequately compensate victims, but also to preserve the right safety incentives. Companies may be less inclined to invest in safety equipment and procedures if their ultimate liability has a ceiling.

To take the point further, why is it that the damages of an oil spill are socialized and picked up by taxpayers, as they are under a liability cap? The industry argues insurance rates would be too high. But if a company cannot afford to pay the insurance, maybe they should not be operating in the Gulf of Mexico anyways. Or put another way, if the entire business of offshore oil drilling is so risky as to be privately uninsurable, then there is something wrong with the way the business is being conducted.

By Nicholas Cunningham of Oilprice.com




Back to homepage


Leave a comment

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News