NOTE:

OUR BLOG MAINLY CONSIST OF A COLLECTION OF BLOGS/ARTICLES TAKEN FROM OTHER SITES. SOMETIMES WE PREFACE AN ARTICLE WITH A SARCASTIC COMMENT & SOMETIMES WE DON'T. WE ALWAYS CREDIT THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR & WEBSITE.
"It is the death of humanity to know the price of everything but the value of nothing." ~Unknown
Bookmark and Share
Showing posts with label BP oil spill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BP oil spill. Show all posts

Saturday, January 8, 2011

Where Is Where Is The Main Stream Media? Gulf Oil Spill Still Fouling Louisiana Marshes

Gulf Oil Spill Still Fouling Louisiana Marshes
January 8, 2011
HARRY R. WEBER | 01/ 7/11 06:50 PM | AP


PORT SULPHUR, La. — Federal and Louisiana officials got into a heated argument Friday over the cleanup of oiled marshes during a tour of an area that remains fouled 8 1/2 months after the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico.
State and Plaquemines Parish officials took media on a boat tour of Barataria Bay, pointing out an area where oil continues to eat away at marshes and protective boom is either absent or has been gobbled up by the oil. The heavily saturated area that reporters saw was 30 feet to 100 feet wide in sections. No cleanup workers were there when reporters toured the area.
The marshes are critical to the Louisiana coast because they protect the shore from hurricanes and serve as a nursery for Gulf sea life.

"This is the biggest cover-up in the history of America," Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser told reporters, gesturing with his gloved right hand, which was covered in oil.
Nungesser was accompanied by Robert Barham, the secretary of Louisiana's Department of Wildlife and Fisheries.

As the two were answering questions from reporters, representatives from the U.S. Coast Guard and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration interrupted to point out that a plan is being developed to clean up the marshes. They also insisted that the government has not abandoned the Gulf, nor has it lost sight of the fact that BP is a responsible party.
"Clearly there is oil here in the marsh but we are working as a team to find a best way to clean it up," said Coast Guard Lt. Cmdr. Dan Lauer. "It's a high priority."

The two sides then got into a heated argument, with Nungesser using profanity.
"It's like you're in bed with BP," Nungesser told the Coast Guard and NOAA officials.
Lauer responded that he understands the frustration, but vowed that the cleanup would continue. "No one has ever said, 'it's over, we're going home,'" he said.
Nungesser has been a frequent and outspoken critic of the cleanup effort ever since oil from the April 20 accident began infiltrating the environmentally delicate Louisiana coast line.
Lauer and the NOAA official who tagged along on the boat tour, Scott Zengel, said a cleanup plan was being developed, though they gave few details. They also couldn't explain why there is no mechanism in place to keep the situation from getting worse nearly six months after the flow of oil to the sea was stopped.
A Coast Guard spokesman, Lionel Bryant, said in a statement e-mailed to The Associated Press that rushing to clean oil from fragile areas can cause more harm than good. He also pointed out that the treatment plan being developed must be approved by federal, state and local officials.

BP spokesman Daren Beaudo said in an e-mail that with the exception of the occasional tar ball, there is no evidence of significant amounts of oil from the blown out well reaching the Louisiana shoreline since the end of August. He also cited a Thursday letter from a BP official to Barham that says tests of 23 plots have been taking place for the past three months to determine a clean-up method that provides the biggest benefit. Cutting, raking, washing and vacuuming the oil-soaked marshes are some of the methods being tested, the letter said.
The explosion that destroyed the BP-leased Deepwater Horizon rig killed 11 workers and, according to government estimates, led to more than 200 million gallons of oil spewing from a hole a mile beneath the Gulf of Mexico. BP PLC disputes the figure, but has yet to provide its own.

Aside from the damage done to tourism when the oil hits Gulf Coast beaches, there are numerous environmental concerns. Among them is the damage done to the delicate reeds and grasses that grow in Louisiana's coastal estuaries. The marshes serve as nurseries for a variety of microscopic sea life – the bottom of the food chain that replenishes abundant Gulf fisheries.
Also, the killing of marsh grasses contributes to a long-standing erosion of Louisiana's coast and barrier islands, the state's first line of protection against hurricanes.
The impact on wildlife also remains a concern. State officials said that in recent days six more birds have been recovered with oil on them. They said that noisemakers used to keep the birds away from the oil haven't been enough in some cases.

Get HuffPost Green On Twitter and Facebook!


Saturday, August 21, 2010

Oil Spill Claims: New Guidelines Could Rule Out Many Gulf Victims

Oil Spill Claims: New Guidelines Could Rule Out Many Gulf Victims
More ways Big Corporations screw The American People with the help of Corporate Owned Politicians. God Bless The Corporate States of America
~Patty


MIAMI (Associated Press) - A flower shop in Florida that saw a drop-off in weddings this summer is probably out of luck. So is a restaurant in Idaho that had to switch seafood suppliers. A hardware store on the Mississippi coast may be left out, too.

The latest guidelines for BP's $20 billion victims compensation fund say the nearer you are geographically to the oil spill and the more closely you depend on the Gulf of Mexico's natural resources, the better chance you have of getting a share of the money.

Also, a second set of rules expected this fall will require that businesses and individuals seeking compensation for long-term losses give up their right to sue BP and other spill-related companies -- something that could save the oil giant billions.

The new rules for the claims process were released Friday by Washington lawyer Kenneth Feinberg, who was picked by President Barack Obama to run the fund and previously oversaw claims for 9/11 victims. Beginning Monday, the claims will be handled by Feinberg rather than BP, which is still footing the entire $20 billion bill.

Who gets paid and who doesn't will depend largely on how much proof there is that losses were caused by the spill and not by something else, such as the recession. Feinberg's guidelines say key factors include a claimant's geographic proximity to the disaster and how much the business or property is linked to "injured natural resources."

Feinberg elaborated on his reasoning during town meetings this week in Louisiana.
"How close are you to the beach? To the Gulf? BP got claims from restaurants in Idaho. Go figure," he said. "How close are you? That's a major factor. How dependent are you, as an individual or a business, on the resources of the Gulf?"

That worries business owners like Susan Mitchell, who runs a flower shop about a mile from Pensacola Beach, Fla., where tarballs from the spill washed up. She said her business was down about $4,000 this year in July from the year before.

"But it is hard to prove exactly why that is and everyone keeps telling us we have to prove that it was because of the oil," she said. "We usually have beach weddings all summer. We deliver to hotels with people having birthday parties and celebrations on the beach."

Jeffrey Breit, a Virginia-based lawyer who represents more than 600 Gulf Coast fishermen, said the geographic limitations will certainly cut out many deserving claimants.

"I think it's unfair to draw arbitrary geographic lines when it is clear that many businesses rely on the natural resources of the Gulf for their livelihoods," Breit said.

The new rules govern emergency claims that can be made between Monday and Nov. 23 at Gulf Coast claims offices, by mail or through the Internet. Feinberg said his goal is to issue emergency checks within 24 hours for individuals and seven days for businesses. Many people have complained about the sluggish BP process.

The attorneys general of Alabama and Florida sent Feinberg letters objecting to many of the new rules. Florida's Bill McCollum said people will face a much heavier burden of proof trying to show the spill caused their losses.

"The current process appears to be even less generous to Floridians than the BP process," McCollum wrote. "Such an outcome is completely unacceptable."

Those seeking emergency payments will not have to give up their right to sue BP and other companies. But the rules for final, long-term settlements will include a waiver of that right.
That drew protests Friday from a leading trial lawyers group, the American Association for Justice, which said the rule could force claimants to decide whether to accept a BP payment or go to court before the full extent of the damage is known. For example, attorneys said, there could be health effects that take years to develop, or environmental damage that might not surface for years.

"BP is trying to cut off damages. They realize that small payments will be grabbed by some, and then in the future they will have no access to justice," said Jere Beasley, a Montgomery, Ala., lawyer who is representing oil spill clients. "Which is sad, but true."

But many people might choose to file a claim because lawsuits can drag on for years and because attorneys often take one-third of any damages as their fee.

Already more than 300 lawsuits have been filed against BP and other companies involved in the disaster, which began April 20 with an explosion aboard an offshore oil rig that killed 11 workers.

At Diamondhead, Miss., along the Gulf Coast, Don Farrar, owner of Diamond Ace Hardware and Diamondhead Florist, said he has received two checks from BP for thousands of dollars but is worried what will happen when the claims process changes hands. He said the spill's economic toll has reached far beyond fishermen and tourist businesses.

"I have a hardware store and a florist. Even my florist is down," he said. "When a fishermen is not making money, he's not going to be buying a house, he's not going to be painting his house, and he's not going to be buying paint from me."
Get HuffPost Business On Twitter, Facebook, and Google Buzz! Know something we don't? E-mail us at huffpostbiz@gmail.com



Saturday, June 5, 2010

BP Bans Workers From Sharing Photos of Animals Killed By the Oil Spill

BP Bans Workers From Sharing Photos of Animals Killed by the Oil Spill : TreeHugger

 


Boycott BP

BP Buys 'Oil' Search Terms to Redirect Users to Official Company Website

BP's Deceit and Deception and Spin that only money can buy.



BP Spokesman Acknowledges Purchase 'To Make It Easier for People to Find Out More About Our Efforts in the Gulf' and Other Ways to Help

By EMILY FRIEDMAN

VENICE, La., June 5, 2010 —

Be careful where you click, especially if you're looking for news on the BP oil spill. 

BP, the very company responsible for the oil spill that is already the worst in U.S. history, has purchased several phrases on search engines such as Google and Yahoo so that the first result that shows up directs information seekers to the company's official website. 

A simple Google search of "oil spill" turns up several thousand news results, but the first link, highlighted at the very top of the page, is from BP. "Learn more about how BP is helping," the link's tagline reads

A spokesman for the company confirmed to ABC News that it had, in fact, bought these search terms to make information on the spill more accessible to the public. 

"We have bought search terms on search engines like Google to make it easier for people to find out more about our efforts in the Gulf and make it easier for people to find key links to information on filing claims, reporting oil on the beach and signing up to volunteer," BP spokesman Toby Odone told ABC News. 

But several search engine marketing experts are questioning BP's intentions, suggesting that controlling what the public finds when they look online for oil spill information is just another way for the company to try and rebuild the company's suffering public image. 

According to Kevin Ryan, the CEO of California-based Motivity Marketing, research shows that most people can't tell the difference between a paid result pages, like the ones BP have, and actual news pages. 

"If you look at it from BP's perspective it's a brilliant move," Ryan said. "The other option BP had was to just not do this and let the news interpret what's going on. 

"But they're getting so much bad press that directing traffic to their own site is a great PR strategy," he said. 

Terms related to the spill, from "oil spill" to "gulf disaster" to "BP," have consistently remained in the list of most-searched terms on Google since the spill began in April. 

"If they're not buying that link that goes back to their message, they're kind of leaving the universe to kind of decide for itself," Ryan said. "It's actually pretty proactive for the brand."

BP Paid Search Engine Companies Billions to Secure First Position on Searches

On Google, paid results are awarded to the highest bidder.
Scott Slatin, an analyst who runs search engine marketing company Rivington in New York, estimates the company is paying upwards of $10,000 per day to maintain the various search terms. 

"They paid to lock themselves into the first position against the oil spill terms, essentially putting a positive message on top of the news," Slatin said. 

But for BP, who some have estimated will spend billions on cleanup from the spill, paying for these search terms is hardly significant. 

"In the grand scheme of doing damage control in a negative situation like this, keyword costs are very marginal," Ryan said. 

Still, Ryan notes that no other companies that have gone through public relations nightmares, such as BP's, have thought to do anything similar.

Toyota Used Similar Strategy for Online After Faulty Breaks Disclosure

Toyota, for example, did not buy terms related to faulty brakes earlier this year. Instead, when users search "Toyota breaks" car dealerships pop up as well as other news results.
In addition to purchasing the search terms, BP also released a television ad earlier this week featuring CEO Tony Hayward. 

In it, Hayward stares directly into the camera and explicitly apologizes for the spill, saying, "BP has taken full responsibility for cleaning up the spill in the gulf."
"I'm deeply sorry," Hayward says. 

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal slammed BP for its PR efforts, saying in a statement, "Instead of BP shelling out $50 million on an ad campaign that promises to do good work in responding to this spill, BP should just focus on actually doing a good job and spend the $50 million on assistance to our people, our industries and our communities that are suffering as a result of this ongoing spill." 

But BP's PR campaign doesn't seem to be slowing. They've hired the help of a high-profile agency, the Brunswick Group, as well as Purple Strategies, led by political consultant Steve McMahon and Republican political consultant Alex Castellanos.

Questions Arise About BP Purchasing Search Words and Phrases

Despite the criticism, Kevin Ryan, the CEO of California-based Motivity Marketing, says that BP's fierce PR campaign is smart.
"The search terms, everything, it's probably not a bad idea for the company to do," he said. "Is it right? Is buying these terms ethical? That's another question." 

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Broadcast/bp-buys-search-engine-phrases-redirecting-users/story?id=10835618

TRUTH: What the Spill Will Kill -and- SPIN: Jane Lubchenco: "There are no plumes, only "anomalies"

 Are We The American People,  just going to sit back and  accept the rewriting of the Constitution from,  'We The People by The People' -to- 'We The Corporations By The Corporation'?   Wake Up America - GET CORPORATE INFLUENCE OUT OF WASHINGTON!

What the Spill Will Kill

Giant plumes of crude oil mixed with methane are sweeping the ocean depths with devastating consequences. 'I'm not too worried about oil on the surface,' says one scientist. 'It's the things we don't see that worry me the most.' 
Published Jun 4, 2010

It was in mid-May that independent scientists—not any of the officials or researchers working for any of the government agencies on scene at the Deepwater Horizon disaster, let alone BP—first detected the vast underwater plumes of crude oil spreading like Medusa's locks from the out-of-control gusher in the Gulf of Mexico.    ~    BP immediately dismissed the reports, and in late May CEO Tony Hayward flatly declared "there aren't any plumes," stopping just short of accusing the scientists of misconduct. Federal officials called the scientists' claim "misleading, premature and, in some cases, inaccurate." Moreover, continued a statement from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, any oxygen depletion in the surrounding waters due to plumes is not "a source of concern at this time," and critics blaming dispersants for the plumes had "no information" to stand on. NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco, a respected oceanographer when President Obama tapped her to lead the agency, insists there are no plumes, only "anomalies"—though last week she acknowledged the possibility of oil beneath the surface.

Now it is increasingly clear that the initial reports of undersea oil were right, that life-giving oxygen in the water column is indeed being depleted, and that unless the laws of chemistry have been repealed, dispersants are likely worsening the tentacles of undersea crude. What might have been just another oil spill—albeit a bad one—has been transformed into something unprecedented. Even if the containment dome lowered into place late last week continues to siphon off some of the leaking crude, the Deepwater Horizon disaster will enter the record books not for how much but for where: an enormous release of crude oil not only onto vulnerable shorelines and fragile marshes but into the largely unexplored depths of the sea. The consequences for the delicate balance of existence in the vulnerable ecosystems of the gulf, and for the vast cycles of nature that sustain life there and beyond, are as incalculable as they are potentially devastating.

"I'm not too worried about oil on the surface," says chemist Ed Overton of Louisiana State University. "It's going to cause very substantial and noticeable damage—marsh loss and coastal erosion and impact on fisheries, dead birds, dead turtles—but we'll know what that is. It's the things we don't see that worry me the most. What happens if you wipe out all those jellyfish down there? We don't know what their role is in the environment. But Mother Nature put them there for a reason," and many are in the plumes' paths.

Their presence has blown to smithereens the cliché that oil floats on water. That correctly describes what happens when pure crude spills into the sea from a well in shallow water or a tanker at the surface, as happened with the Exxon Valdez. But when a gusher is 5,000 feet down, consists of a mix of crude oil and dissolved methane, and is being disgorged under tremendous pressure and temperature, studies predict that the physical and chemical properties of the spill will undergo an ugly alchemy. "The dispersants are changing the chemistry and physics of the oil," says biological oceanographer Ajit Subramaniam of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. "They are creating microlayers of oil that are being carried by the deep currents." Even without dispersants, the crude gets broken into zillions of droplets suspended in the water column and corralled there, prevented from rising to the surface. The result is the undersea plumes that oceanographer Samantha Joye of the University of Georgia and colleagues first detected from the research vessel Pelican three weeks after the blowout. Despite years of research showing that undersea oil might form such plumes, BP's Hayward insists it cannot. "Oil floats!" he repeatedly says.

Making matters more interesting, the chemical dispersants that work fairly well on surface spills, breaking apart oil slicks into droplets that degrade more quickly than a contiguous layer, may be exacerbating the undersea-oil problem. A 2007 report by the Minerals Management Service—which OK's oil and gas leases—on the environmental consequences of oil and gas drilling on the outer continental shelf concluded that an underwater plume is a real possibility: "The use of dispersants on oil spills … could cause these compounds to reach the deeper water reef areas." BP has pumped 185,000 gallons of dispersant onto the out-of-control wellhead (plus 800,000 on the surface). That is causing more of the gushing crude to break up into the very form unlikely to rise to the surface. There have been no suggestions that BP intended to keep the worst of the spill out of sight.

After NOAA questioned the finding of deepwater oil plumes (but now has two boats using sonar to look for plumes), the National Science Foundation stepped in with the kind of support that matters: cash. With "rapid response" grants from the foundation, scientists are searching for plumes and trying to assess their impact. As far as scientists can tell, the undersea oil is actually a witch's brew of crude mixed with dissolved methane, stretching 15 miles long, 5 miles wide, and 300 feet thick in the case of one plume detected by the Pelican, and 22 miles long, 6 miles wide, and 3,000 feet thick in the case of a plume found by University of South Florida researchers aboard the WeatherBird II last week. The latter plume reaches all the way to the surface.

NOAA's skepticism about plumes is correct on one point. Contrary to what the phrase conjures up, oil plumes are not black serpentines. The USF researchers caught one on camera last week, but in general they can be detected only by sophisticated instruments lowered into the depths. Samples hauled up do not even look black, though when they are run through a filter, black specks are revealed.
These undersea rivers of oil, though not nearly as concentrated as oil at the surface, are likely to affect the gulf through two mechanisms. The first is oxygen depletion, which has been estimated at 30 percent in the plumes. The other will be direct toxic effects of the oil and methane. Leatherback turtles and sperm whales dive to the 3,200-foot depths where plumes have now been detected, and aren't smart enough to take evasive action. "They don't necessarily recognize the plumes as something dangerous," says marine scientist Ellycia Harrould-Kolieb, who works with the green group Oceana. Sharks, shrimp, and squid are all inhabitants of the deep, which would protect them from a Valdez-type spill on the surface, but now puts them in the crosshairs. Marlin, snapper, and grouper swim hundreds of feet down. One of the biggest losses may be bluefin tuna. Already imperiled from overfishing, the species breeds only in the Mediterranean Sea and the gulf. "This could spell the end to bluefin," says Harrould-Kolieb. Even small bits of crude, like those in the plumes, can suffocate fish by gunking up their gills.

Other species imperiled by the deep-sea plumes include those that migrate down from the surface and others that make the reverse commute. "There are plankton that go from the surface to the middle of the water column, and other things eat them and go down deeper, and other things eat them and go to the bottom," says oceanographer Lisa Levin of Scripps Institution of Oceanography. "All the zones of life interact, and now they're probably all being hammered."

The worst effect of large-scale death on the gulf floor is nothing as photogenic as dead pelicans, but much more pernicious. "The organisms most likely to be harmed by the oil plumes are those at the base of the food chain," says biological oceanographer Andrew Juhl of Lamont-Doherty. "Most of the primary producers, such as phytoplankton, live throughout the water column. Effects on them would cascade to the larger species we care about."

The deep-sea communities are also linchpins of the global carbon cycle—the ocean's garbage men and recycling centers. They eat the waste and carcasses of creatures that lived and died in higher layers of the sea, and whose bodies drift to the sea floor. "The biggest biological component of the global carbon cycle is in the deep sea," says marine biologist Jeffrey Baguley of the University of Nevada; without deep-sea organisms, dead marine creatures would accumulate like bottles and cans in places without deposit laws. That would deprive the rest of the living seas of the nutrients they need to keep life going. If a large enough area in the depths of the gulf becomes a kill zone, organic matter would accumulate in the sediment and be cut off from the rest of the ecosystem, says marine scientist Mahlon Kennicutt of Texas A&M.

Uniquely in the crosshairs are creatures living at or near the sea floor: deep-sea corals, jellyfish, and soft-bottom fish such as Atlantic croaker, sand sea trout, Atlantic bumper, sea robin, and sand perch. Three coral reefs live in the area under the surface slick, and two are close to one plume that scientists tracked last week. Oil could be lethal to a reef. The Minerals Management Service's 2007 report concluded that "in the extremely unlikely event that oil from a subsurface spill were to reach a coral reef…in lethal concentrations," recovery could take as long as "10-20 years." "In the time scale of man, this will be a catastrophic event," says Baguley.

Of special concern are the hundreds of "seep" communities in the gulf, enclaves of crustaceans, weird tube worms, tiny fish, mussels, and crabs that live near natural gashes in the sea floor. These seeps release hydrocarbons, which might suggest that the oil-and-methane plumes are good for these creatures. Unfortunately, the profusion of hydrocarbons is likely to be less like sitting down to a Thanksgiving feast than like being encased in marshmallowed sweet potatoes: deadly. Like Yellowstone's geysers, they support unique organisms that may have scientific and commercial uses. Bacteria from a Yellowstone geyser are the source of enzymes that power a biochemical reaction called PCR, a workhorse of the genome revolution. Marine scientists have high hopes for finding similarly valuable microbes at the seeps. Some even talk of compounds that might fight cancer, much as extracts of the rosy periwinkle fight Hodgkin's disease and childhood leukemias.

Oil on the ocean surface eventually evaporates, is degraded by sunlight, gets consumed by microbes, or washes up on beaches, where it can be collected. The fate and effects of the undersea oil are largely unknown. The Deepwater Horizon disaster is thus one big unplanned experiment. If the oil industry has its way—and with an estimated 30 billion barrels of crude-oil equivalent beneath the gulf's ultra-deep (greater than 6,000 feet) waters, it's hard to see how it won't—we may have more such unplanned experiments. In 2008 Shell finished drilling an oil well 9,000 feet under the gulf, and BP has another well 7,000 feet down. The gulf has hundreds of other deepwater wells. In every case, the companies assured regulators, and the government agreed, that a deepwater accident that released oil onto the sea floor was exceedingly unlikely.


Sunday, May 30, 2010

BP Oilpocalypse Creates Underwater Nightmare - WHAT BP DOES NOT WANT YOU TO SEE

Philippe Cousteau, Jr., the grandson of the famous ocean explorer Jacques Cousteau, to film what the spill looks like underwater. Cousteau observed, "This is a nightmare," and "one of the most horrible things I've seen under water."


Wednesday, May 26, 2010

America, from Sea to Corporate Owned Sea

 I find it incredulous that this Brit who's corporation is responsible for  the death of 11 people (who we hear nothing about because in Corporate America 'life' is cheap and meant to be exploited).  This Brit who's corporation (with the help of deregulation and The MMS)  is responsible for a polluted and dying Golf is on US land bullying The American Media (what little media that's not corporate owned).  America, from Sea to Corporate Owned Sea.

Patty
BP Is 'Big And Important': BP Chairman Strikes Out At Critics, CEO Scolds Photographer At Oil Spill Site (VIDEO)

Carl-Henric Svanberg, the chairman of BP, has struck out at critics of his company's response to the Gulf oil spill and told The Financial Times that BP is "big and important."

In an interview published Tuesday by FT, Svanberg painted the oil company's relationship with the U.S. as one that was mutually beneficial to both parties. "The US is a big and important market for BP, and BP is also a big and important company for the US, with its contribution to drilling and oil and gas production," Svanberg said. "So the position goes both ways."

Svanberg dismissed calls for a government takeover of the effort to plug the well and said that "if we do the right thing," BP's reputation may not suffer long-term damage.

The chairman's "big and important" assertions about his company came shortly after BP CEO Tony Hayward was recorded acting big and important around photographers covering the spill. 

While observing a beach covered in crude, Hayward took it upon himself to scold a photographer whom he thought was too close to the spill. 

"Hey, get outta there. Get outta there," Hayward barked to the photographer. "Get him out. Get him out." 

Hayward's orders came just before a BP press conference.


Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Censorship?

Mother Jones

“It’s BP’s Oil”

Running the corporate blockade at Louisiana's crude-covered beaches.