Oil Spill Disaster – July 29 – followup on scientific research

After talking to two officials at the National Science Foundation, it is clear that the federal government is sponsoring essential research regarding the oil spill disaster. For details of their efforts, see the Gulf Oil Spill page on the NSF website. Attached is a recent list of NSF funded project — NSF-Funded Gulf Oil Spill RAPIDs — so that you can see the work that is, or soon will be, underway.  There are more than 40 awards for a total of about $5M.  Note that the NSF gives researchers full latitude to share their results. [Thanks to Dr. Josh Chamot of the NSF for this information.]

One example of an interesting website that provides details on the impacts and consequences of the Gulf Oil Spill is the work of Prof. James Corbett at the Univ. of DE.

Oil Spill Disaster- July 11- Update on Perspectives

Segmant of a post by Bill Cumming on his blog (7/11) federal management of the Oill spill disaster:

We are now witnessing  …the totally inadequate response offered under the National Contingency Plan wherein with the US Coast Guard as Incident Commander it is now increasing faced with issues of on-shore impacts of the BP catastrophe including economic impacts and social and psychological impacts. The NCP is totally inadequate for these concerns and …has already demonstrated that fact as the Administration relies on a BP fund that will really only be fully implemented by the end of 2013 to fund damage and loss claims arising from their negligence. Yet both the Administration and Congress are betting their will be a BP around and that organizations other than FEMA can gear up for this largest environmental disaster in world history other than drought and that reliance is totally appropriate and adquate. I respectfully disagree.

The Gulf Oil Disaster: Three Steps to Federal Leadership; 3 pp. Commentary from the GWU Homeland Security Policy Institute, July 7, 2010. The authors argue for the involvement of DHS and the use of the National Response Framework.

See the Hazards Observer, July 2010, for new article titled The Long, Long Road from Exxon Valdez to Deepwater Horizon; pp. 7-10. This thoughtful article makes many useful points about the similarities and differences of the two events; I suggest you read it all.  One quote worth remembering:

The overarching lesson we can share from our Exxon Valdez research is that the potential for negative, long-term community impacts must not be underestimated.”

Gulf Oil Spill: Scientists Beg For A Chance To Take Basic Measurements, Huffington Post, July 7.

A group of independent scientists, frustrated and dumbfounded by the continued lack of the most basic data about the 77-day-old BP oil disaster, has put together a crash project intended to definitively measure how much oil has spilled and where and how it is spreading throughout the waters of the Gulf of Mexico.

Problems Conducting Research for Oil Spill – shortage of equipment and politics affect choice of researchers

Gulf Disaster Changes Landscape for Scientists Eager to Do Research. ProPublico, June 29.

At a time when some scientists are more eager than ever to gather information on the state of the Gulf, it seems their access to the Gulf is also more limited than ever. That’s because the federal government has swept up the available research vessels and hired consulting firms to do the work, according to Richard Shaw, associate dean of the School of the Coast and Environment at Louisiana State University. As a result, ship time–and direct access to the Gulf to take samples–is nearly impossible for independent scientists to come by.

Other problems include the Gulf State Governors directing research funds to their state institutions.

Emergency Management Higher Education Program – June 13

We just returned from participating in the FEMA Higher Education Conference, where we were involved in sessions on Long-term Recovery from Disasters and also the use of Social Media for emergency management.  More details and some  postings will be provided in the next few days.

If you care to join the new Facebook group, use the search term “Emergency Management Higher Education ” and join the network of interested folks.

Long-Term Recovery from A Catastrophic Disaster- Hurricane Katrina in LA.

The University of New Orleans CHART Center researchers have just posted some excellent papers resulting from their studies over the past five years. These are some of the best research findings on the topic of recovery. Five short papers, and an account of a recent congressional briefing, are available on this site. More details will follow.

In his remarks to the attendees of the briefing on April 13th, Major General Hunter Downer commented that the key determinants of what was accomplished during the recovery period were attitude, policies, and interpretations rather than the laws or lack of laws.

Three Significant New Reports on Federal Recovery Systems

Three new reports out this week (April 13) address some of the fundamental problems of  the current federal recovery system:

(1) Heritage Foundation. Federalizing Disasters Weakens FEMA — and Hurts Americans Hit by Catastrophes. Report # 2398 by M. Mayer and M. DeBosier. This report discusses both response and recovery phase issues.

(2) DHS, Office of the Inspector General. Efficacy of DHS Grant Programs. Criticism of the existing grant programs, attributing some blame to the enabling legislation.

(3) GAO. Disaster Recovery; FEMA’s Long -term Assistance Was Helpful to State and Local Governments but Had Some Limitations. GAO-10-404. March 2010. The full report is 43 pages long. Click here for the one-page summary.

Currently, there is no comprehensive operational coordinating structure to guide the many federal, state, and local entities involved in disaster recovery.”

On a related note, on March 9, 2010 the Congressional Research Service issued a report: FEMA Disaster Cost-Shares: Evolution and Analysis, which discusses the match that state and local governments have to provide when they get a Presidential Disaster Declaration. It covers the history and the reasons for the requirement of matching funds.

The language of the Stafford Act defining cost-shares for the repair, restoration,and replacement of damaged facilities provides that the federal share “shall be not less than 75 percent.”  These provisions have been in effect for over 20 years. While the authority to adjust the cost-share is long standing, the history of FEMA’s administrative adjustments and Congress’legislative actions in this area, are of a more recent vintage.