This video from London, England says about itself:
Activists set up “rebel exhibition” inside BP-sponsored British Museum
8 April 2016
BP sponsors the British Museum. So we set up our own “rebel exhibition” – without permission – inside the museum, with powerful objects sent by communities affected by BP all over the world.
Will security throw us out? What will the public think? Watch this short film to find out, then head to www.historyofbp.org to experience the exhibition, and learn about the objects from the amazing frontline people who sent them.
“And this year, BP will sponsor the museum’s Sunken Cities exhibition.
“But the bitter irony is that if BP drills four new wells in the Great Australian Bight, Sunken Cities won’t just be a record of the past — it will be a vision of the kind of future we will face with dangerous climate change.”
Artist Raoul Martinez, whose portraits have been featured in the exhibition previously, supported the performance, saying: “I have decided not to submit work to the National Portrait Gallery until they cut their ties with fossil fuel companies, and I hope other artists will join me.”
He said the fossil fuel industry was based on “violence towards nature, violence towards the many communities already being displaced by the effects of climate change” and called on “all institutions to get on the right side of history and cut their ties with these destructive companies.”
Galleries and museums such as the Tate and the British Museum are currently negotiating renewal of their sponsorship deals with BP.
More than 300,000 sea turtles were likely in the region of the Gulf of Mexico affected by the oil spill, according to a new computer simulation. About three-quarters of these marine animals probably came from Mexican nesting populations, the research found. Others hailed from South America, Costa Rica and as far away as western Africa.
On April 20, 2010, an explosion rocked the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, which was operating on a BP-owned well in the Gulf of Mexico. Oil gushed from the well bore at the bottom of the gulf until July 15.
Research in the gulf has found possible long-term impacts on wildlife, including a high mortality rate and a low number of bottlenose dolphin calves in the region. But it was difficult to measure the wildlife impacts, Putman told Live Science, because of the challenge of determining how many animals were passing through at the time of the spill.
Oil can affect sea turtles by coating them with irritating petrochemicals, which can cause inflammation and even organ damage. Oil can also indirectly impact turtles by affecting animals lower in the food chain, making it harder for turtles to find food. Finally, oil slicks can kill the seaweed that tiny baby turtles use to camouflage themselves from predators. According to the National Wildlife Foundation, five times as many sea turtles strandings as usual occurred after the Deepwater Horizon spill. Still, strandings only hint at impacts that might be occurring far from shore, away from easy observation by humans.
“It was largely thought or accepted that there is no real good way to bracket the scope of the potential problem,” Putman said.
He and his colleagues tackled the issue with a simple computer simulation based on ocean currents. They virtually “released” particles, representing turtles, into the Deepwater Horizon-affected region and then backtracked through five years of ocean-current data to see where the turtles would have come from. Depending on species, juvenile turtles spend between two and 10 years or so living in the open ocean, traveling largely with ocean currents. The researchers also took into account potential mortality rates among these traveling turtles.
The real-world estimates, however, suggested there are typically around 217,000 Kemp’s ridley turtles in that area, a big difference from the simulation’s prediction of 3,693. Putman and his team adjusted their model to reflect the notion that Kemp’s ridley turtles might swim against prevailing currents to get to and stay in the area of the gulf affected by the spill. A few simple tweaks brought the model and the real-world estimates in line.
What real-world estimates can’t do is reveal where the turtles came from. That’s where Putman’s model comes in handy. The ocean-current data suggest that turtles in that area in the summer of 2010 likely came from Mexico: Between 43 and 63 percent of greens, 60 and 66 percent of loggerheads, and more than 99 percent of Kemp’s ridleys were from Mexico populations, the researchers report today (Dec. 22) in the journal Biology Letters.
A third of the green turtles in the area likely hailed from Costa Rica, and as many as 16 percent may have come from Suriname in South America, the researchers found. About a third of the loggerheads probably came from the United States. Up to 4 percent of green turtles in the region may have come all the way from Guinea Bissau in West Africa.
To describe these different populations, Putman used the analogy of a bank account. If a bank loses $100,000, he said, it’s important to know which accounts the money was withdrawn from. “It doesn’t matter just that $100,000 got lost,” he said.
There are limitations to the study, the researchers wrote, particularly in that sea turtles don’t have to go with the flow when migrating. But scientists don’t know the extent to which such deliberate swimming affects sea turtles’ routes.
Despite uncertainties, the new simulations could help to inform policy, Putman said. Fishermen, for example, might need to lower their acceptable rate of accidental bycatch of turtles if the impacts of the spill turn out to be great. And the results show that efforts to monitor and repair turtle habitats should reach beyond the gulf, Putman said.
“Turtles aren’t the only dispersive and migratory taxa,” Putman said. “Hopefully, this will push people to consider other animals that might be transient through the gulf.”
“If it was genuinely concerned with the welfare, sovereignty and intellectual knowledge of indigenous nations, at a global level, it would cease its insatiable thirst for extracting fossil fuels from the ground and poisoning our air with them.”
Leaders of the Dja Dja Wurrung people in central Victoria unsuccessfully took legal action against the British Museum in 2005 in a bid to return artefacts belonging to their rare bark art heritage.
Environmental group BP or not BP, which campaigns for an end to the oil group’s sponsorship of art, organised the day’s events.
Spokeswoman Jess Worth said: “It’s hard to imagine a more inappropriate and insensitive sponsor for this exhibition than BP.
“The company is driving the very climate change that is threatening indigenous communities around the world, while pushing to drill four offshore wells in Australia, deeper than Deepwater Horizon.”
The British Museum had not commented at the time of going to press.
HUNDREDS of protesters invaded London’s British Museum yesterday in an anti-oil protest festival, as pressure for the gallery to drop BP’s sponsorship mounts. Arts and environmental groups including Art Not Oil and Liberate Tate hosted a series of performances in many of the museum’s rooms, highlighting the disastrous consequences of fossil fuel extraction: here.
Scotland: EDINBURGH Festival performers joined a group of environmental campaigners yesterday to protest against the event’s most controversial sponsor, oil company BP: here.
In a federal courtroom in New Orleans on Monday, oil giant British Petroleum (BP) finalized a $20.8 billion settlement of a civil suit stemming from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the worst environmental disaster in American history: here.
BP has accused Halliburton of destroying damaging evidence relating to last year’s Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
In a court filing, BP has alleged that the US oil services firm of intentionally destroying evidence about possible problems with its cement slurry poured into the deep-sea Macondo well about 100 miles (160 km) off the Louisiana coast. An oil well must be cemented properly to avoid blowouts.
Also in the documents filed in a New Orleans federal court, BP accuses Halliburton of failing to produce incriminating computer modelling evidence.
BP asked a US judge to penalise Halliburton and order a court-sponsored computer forensic team to recover the modelling results.
Halliburton has told media outlets that the accusations are untrue.
The allegations in the 310-page motion add to a showdown among BP and the contractors Halliburton and Transocean over blame in the Deepwater Horizon blast in April 2010, which killed 11 workers and led to 206m US gallons (780m litres) of crude oil escaping into the Gulf of Mexico. So far, BP, the majority owner of the Macondo well, has footed the bill for the emergency response and cleanup.
The first trial over the disaster is scheduled to start 27 February in New Orleans. It is expected to last three months and determine the liability of each company involved in drilling the Macondo well. There will be other phases over cleanup costs, punitive damages and other claims.
US federal and independent investigations into the disaster have found fault in Halliburton’s cementing because it failed to properly plug the well. The firm used a foamy cement slurry.
In Monday’s court filing, BP alleges that Halliburton employees discarded and destroyed early test results they performed on the same batch of cement slurry used in the Macondo well during an internal investigation into the disaster.
BP said Halliburton’s chief cement mixer for Gulf projects testified in depositions that the cement slurry seemed “thin” to him but that he chose not to write about his findings to his bosses out of fear he would be misinterpreted.
“I didn’t want to put anything on an email that could be twisted, and turned,” Rickey Morgan, the Halliburton cement expert, said in depositions. He worked at a laboratory in Duncan, Oklahoma.
“Upon reviewing these latest testing results, Halliburton employees destroyed records of the testing as well as the physical cement samples used in the testing,” BP alleged.
A Colombian trade union leader is beginning an unprecedented claim for damages against BP in the high court in London, alleging the oil company’s complicity in his kidnap and torture 13 years ago.
Gilberto Torres, 52, was abducted in February 2002 while driving home from an oil-pumping station in Casanare, eastern Colombia, and was released after 42 days, only after workers threatened a national oil strike. The case, which begins on Friday, will throw a spotlight on one of the murkiest periods in Colombia’s history, and the role of big business in it.
His lawyers say that it is the first time a union leader has been able to lodge a claim for human rights abuses against a multinational oil company in the high court. They believe his claim could pave the way for scores more similar actions. …
Torres tells his story for the first time in a Guardian online documentary. The film includes the extraordinary testimony of his kidnappers when they finally faced trial.
The UN estimates that 3,000 union activists were murdered and 6,000 more disappeared in the Casanare region in the last 30 years. The targeting of them by pro-government paramilitaries went largely unnoticed outside Colombia because of the civil war raging between the Colombian government and Farc, the leftwing guerrilla group.
Torres was abducted at gunpoint shortly after he organised a strike in protest over the murder of another union leader. He had received increased threats in the days leading up to him being taken.
He tells the Guardian how he watched as his captors, who later claimed they were paid to protect the pipeline by the oil companies, questioned a suspected Farc rebel. “They hit him. They insulted him. They spat on him. They battered him, until he confessed that he was part of Farc. With that admission, he signed his death warrant.
“They shot him twice in the neck. They cut his head, his legs and his arms off. And at the end the commander with a machete started to puncture his corpse. I understood then that this was going to happen to me.”
After six weeks in captivity, 10 days in a flooded outdoor pit infested with red ants, and days of interrogation aimed at getting him to confess to being a member of a leftwing guerrilla movement, Torres was unexpectedly handed over to the Red Cross. He is only the second trade union leader in the history of 40 years of conflict in Colombia to have survived an abduction.
Torres worked for the oil workers’ union USO, representing 400 members working on the 515-mile (830km) Ocensa pipeline, which carried crude from Casanare to the Caribbean Sea.
Ocensa was set up by major oil companies including BP, Colombia’s state-owned enterprise Ecopetrol, and four other multinational companies, to build and own the pipeline.
It was pumping $7m (£4.5m) worth of crude oil every day. BP was the biggest oil producer in the area.
Union protests sanctioned by Torres were disrupting production. He wanted to draw attention to the disappearance of union colleagues and had been highly vocal the previous week about members of an army brigade, charged with protecting the pipeline, training on company grounds.
BP, like other oil companies operating in Colombia at the time, paid a government tax of $1 a barrel to help finance army and police protection of oil facilities. According to journalists who carried out an investigation into BP’s security provision in 1995, the company signed a three-year collaborative agreement with the Colombia defence ministry worth $11.6m, of which BP would provide $2.2m.
Much of that was spent on the 16th Brigade, an army unit assigned specifically to protect the company’s oil installations. The army is accused of contracting out that work to local pro-government paramilitaries – with often lethal results.
In the wake of the oil boom, the Colombian army and paramilitaries brought to Casanare a US-designed counter-insurgency strategy of dirty war, known locally as “quitarle agua al pez” or “draining the fish tank”. Instead of fighting the guerrillas, they would target people they considered sympathisers.
Sue Willman, partner in Deighton Pierce Glynn, the London firm representing Torres, said there would be no accusation that BP was directly involved in his abduction. But the company had failed to take action to halt paramilitary activity.
Willman said: “Amnesty International went to BP a number of times warning them about the murders and disappearances. But BP failed to act effectively on the warnings.”
Pro-government paramilitaries who were convicted in Bogotá of kidnapping Torres claimed that Ocensa had paid for the murder. As well as its arrangements over the pipeline, BP had a 15.2% stake in Ocensa. Their testimony is heard in the Guardian documentary for the first time outside Colombia.
BP, Ocensa and Ecopetrol all deny they paid paramilitaries to guard the pipeline.
Energy giant BP has agreed to settle outstanding state and federal claims against it relating to the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil disaster for $18.7 billion. The fines, to be paid over 18 years, are a small fraction of the damages caused by the largest offshore oil spill in US history and minor in relation to the immense profits of the transnational oil company: here.