Another personal piece of writing. How I hate these but they act as a kind of catharsis. While doing a course on religion with the International Centre for Journalists, I realised how divisive religion still is. I also realised that I love my God, adore Him and yet I feel scared talking about religion. Why?
There are a myriad of reasons for this.
As I go through my journey in life I get more and more convinced that religion will be exploited and abused. My fear of religion may have been subconscious so far but now the urgency with which it seeps into my conscious being is perhaps the BP Oil spill rate - perhaps faster.
Why? Im Hindu, I am living in one of the most advanced countries in the west. Why fear? I was brought up in a Catholic environment-having studied all my life in privilaged private Catholic schools run by Irish nuns. I learned catechism and went to the church etc. I know Christianity as much as Hinduism. So why fear? What about the west should or is scaring people?
I can only say its the feeling more than the articulation of facts behind my fear that is important. Somehow we easteners - have an inherent intutive consciousness that could perhaps be a substitute for the over rationalisation in the western culture. I fear in over rationalisation we are either hiding something or are missing the simple links.
I guess being a kashmiri Pandit ( for the less initiated in Hinduism, it is the highest caste in the stratified Hindu world of class and religion ), I have always been more spiritual than religious. Hinduism in any case does talk about the essential spirit of being a Hindu as one who is a good Christian, a good Jew, and all the other religions ). Vivekananda is worth more than a read.
I guess India instead of rising up to its yogic and spiritual leadership potential just sunk into the quagmire of regional politics and the confusion of its own growth run amock. Now in a world dominated by economic and social chaos, religion may find it difficult to speak its own independent language. Religion as practised by some extreme groups from various religions is just helping those that want to create a human divide for specific political reasons. That is why it must be stopped. Protest must be silent as epitomised by Gandhi.
Kashmir, not just now but for ages has been one of the most turbulent places on earth. I guess that has to do with its combination of geopolitical, strategic placement on the physical contours of our earth as also with its breathtaking beauty. Majestic, untrammelled, beckoning, luring. Most of all the intellectual and academic contouring of its human masses.
Nestled deep inside me I guess is the fear of generations of Kashmiri pandits, hunted down and mowed to bare existential proportions as a race. As a child you are conditioned especially if your small dwindling numbers keep coming under attack. But as I grew up and was exposed to this as yet beautiful multicultural world of ours, the fear subsided till one day I paid the heavy price of defying ancestral knowledge and getting lured by all encompassing humanity into believeing that these were just old men's tales.
Being the daughter of a journalist with illustrious credentials, I was always wanting to outshine. I followed in the footsteps of my father and becamse a fearless outspoken critic of vested political, business, social interests. No one told me that journalists can no longer be fearless. I thought as any young journalist that no one could touch me. Uppercaste ruling elite Kashmiri Hindu woman, I tried to keep reaching beyond every limit. Little did I know that as I aimed for the stars in the sky, my gaze fixed upwards, was oblivious to movements on the ground.
As a reporter I started covering my birthplace and though it was business and political journalism, I knew I was a Hindu minority in a muslim state and had to be trail blazingly honest. Like every journalist my dream was to meet and interview all those "Islamic fundamentalists" who wanted complete seperation from India. Along the way I met and interviewed people from the establishment as well.
I cared a damn. It was a story and I had to get to speak to these men and understand their psyche. I interviewed many of them and many times felt the shadow of state presence. I cared a damn - I was a Hindu. I could not go wrong. India is a majority Hindu state. This arrogance cost me. Journalists I realised could no longer claim to be a brand apart from decisive politics practised by governments. They may have their own compulsions but I never understood those. I dont understand them even now.
While covering Kashmir I realised that political uprisings have roots in economic deprivation, marginalisation. Somewhere the political system had gone wrong and now it was all about the rift between Muslims and Hindus. Yet I kept on highlighting the battered state of the economy, the isolation of the government from its people, the casting aside by muslim politicians of their own muslim constituents. At the peak of elections, there was no face to the politician asking for votes. Thousands of expectant voters but politicians too scared to venture out. Yet the elections kept taking place.... and those that were the privelaged ... those that were in with the elite clique..... (nothing unique to India)..... kept winning. And underneath the surface the simmering kept getting intense till it had to burst one day. Perhaps the scenario was more complex as there were outside countries involved as well. Perhaps I'm being too simplistic, perhaps....
The one lesson, journalists themselves must beware of is aspersions being cast on them for reasons far from obvious. This new religious war is far too expensive for media as it is in its present day and form to win....
That breaks my heart. Nothing breaks my heart more than innocent victimisation. The machinery of journalism is worn and itself in the hands of those that run the other machinery. Im scared for journalism and I'm scared for democracy. That is why now more than ever we as journalists need to be cautious in reporting Islam or any other religious issue. Most of all we need to fight for openess.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Sunday, June 6, 2010
A leaky dilemna
What is playing out in the Gulf Of Mexico had been envisaged in a 2008 CRS report for members of the U.S congress. Titled 'Oil spills in U.S coastal waters, background governance and issues for Congress', the report warns that America may have lost its expertise and institutional knowledge to effectively respond to a major oil spill.
One of the sources of this conclusion perhaps was the 'After Action Report' by the U.S coast guard after completion of its 2004 Spill of National Significance (SONS) exercise. Here are some extracts from the report: 'Oil spill response personnel did not appear to have even a basic knowledge of the equipment required to support salvage or spill clean up operations.There was a shortgae of personnel with experience to fill key positions. Many middle level spill management staff had never worked a large spill and some had never been involved in an exercise. As a result some issues and complex processes unique to spill response were not effectively addressed."
The 2008 CRS report expresses concern about a possible increase in oil spills considering that oil production and import are expected to rise and with this the transportation of oil domestic or international to refineries and ultimately to the consumer. The report states that American pipelines remain a major source of worry. "American oil pipleine infrastructure is old and in some areas pipleines are operating well beyond their intended service life". Most of the U.S oil imports (55%) arrive via the Gulf Coast. Of the oil spills within the coast guard jurisdiction (marine and coastal area) nearly 50 per cet of the incidents and the volume spilled have been in the Gulf Of Mexico and its shoreline states. The Gulf must surely remain an area of special attention.
What is worrisome is the fact that coast guard data on recorded spills from facilities and pipelines does not match the actual numbers happening out there both on land and at sea.
The BP blow out must shine the spotlight on other seepages minor or major offshore or onshore like those from abandoned or orphan wells.Reports clearly indicate that operators may not have the required funds to properly shut down offshore oil platforms at the end of the facilities operating life or while idling. As with many onshore wells, this potential problem is exacerbated by the steady transfer of offshore leases from major oil companies to independents as production declines. Despite bonding requirements, public liability remains a concern.The General Accounting Office conducted a detailed study in 1993 examining offshore drilling platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. GAO’s estimates for the full cost of dismantling platforms and plugging wells under the OCS program ranged from $4.2 to $4.4 billion. Yet, surety bonds in place covered only 1.6 percent of this prospective liability. According to MMS, total offshore liability has since risen to approximately $5.5 billion, of which approximately $1 billion is covered by surety bonds.Although the coverage ratio has risen from 1.6 to 18 percent over the past years, the potential public exposure tops $4.5 billion.
The cost of coverage ranges from one to four percent of the bonded amount depending on factors like drilling equipment reseves left underneath the well, amount of collateral. However, the one percent cost applies only to financially strong operators with full collateral for the coverage. A two percent rate is the realistic minimum for the independents. There are fears that these firms will make up the bulk of the unfunded liability in the Gulf. Based on a premium rate of two to four percent, addressing the liability shortfall would cost existing producers $53 to $106 million per year.Currently, the federal taxpayer bears this liability.
How many of the existing abandoned/orphaned oil facilities are leaking oil into the water?
Some may argue smaller amounts of oil leaking into the Gulf should not be a cause of concern. Chronic low level exposure to oil contaminants can significantly affect the survival and reproductive success of marine birds and mammals. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) have confirmed that oil pollution concentrates of as low as one part per billion could stunt pink salmon growth and cause other chronic health problems for the fish. The NMFS has also confirmed that the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill will continue to kill or damage future generations of pink salmon
Clearly government needs to have a fresh look at these and other related issues keeping in mind that even an international oil company like BP underplayed the possibility of an under water blow out,though such occurances are not out of the ordinary. More surprising that despite the oil pollution act of 1990 BP had no plans on how to respond to a worst case scenario though the act clearly states that the owner or operator of a vessel or facility must have these plans. Congress did not intend for every vessel to have on board all the personnel and equipment needed to respond to a worst case spill but vessels must have a plan and procedures to call upon, typically through a contractual relationship, the necessary equipment and personnel for reponding to a wrost case spill.
The act extended the role and scope of the National Contingency Plan, establishing a multi layered planning and response system to improve preparedness and response to spills in marine environments. Among other things the act also requred the President to establish procedures and standards for responsing to worst case oil spill scenarios.
Clearly there has been failure at more than one level.
Add to this the statistical knowledge sitting with government departments that in recent years annual spill volumes from offshore facilities in federal waters have increased and a vast majority of these spills have taken place in the Gulf Of Mexico.
And despite all the noise by the U.S state governors in the wake of the recent deep water spill, the precise volume and incident frequency in state waters is difficult to determine. Reportedly oil spills in state waters account for twice the oil discharges of activities in federal waters. Majority of the oil extraction operations are located in state waters off the coast of Louisiana and Texas.
One of the sources of this conclusion perhaps was the 'After Action Report' by the U.S coast guard after completion of its 2004 Spill of National Significance (SONS) exercise. Here are some extracts from the report: 'Oil spill response personnel did not appear to have even a basic knowledge of the equipment required to support salvage or spill clean up operations.There was a shortgae of personnel with experience to fill key positions. Many middle level spill management staff had never worked a large spill and some had never been involved in an exercise. As a result some issues and complex processes unique to spill response were not effectively addressed."
The 2008 CRS report expresses concern about a possible increase in oil spills considering that oil production and import are expected to rise and with this the transportation of oil domestic or international to refineries and ultimately to the consumer. The report states that American pipelines remain a major source of worry. "American oil pipleine infrastructure is old and in some areas pipleines are operating well beyond their intended service life". Most of the U.S oil imports (55%) arrive via the Gulf Coast. Of the oil spills within the coast guard jurisdiction (marine and coastal area) nearly 50 per cet of the incidents and the volume spilled have been in the Gulf Of Mexico and its shoreline states. The Gulf must surely remain an area of special attention.
What is worrisome is the fact that coast guard data on recorded spills from facilities and pipelines does not match the actual numbers happening out there both on land and at sea.
The BP blow out must shine the spotlight on other seepages minor or major offshore or onshore like those from abandoned or orphan wells.Reports clearly indicate that operators may not have the required funds to properly shut down offshore oil platforms at the end of the facilities operating life or while idling. As with many onshore wells, this potential problem is exacerbated by the steady transfer of offshore leases from major oil companies to independents as production declines. Despite bonding requirements, public liability remains a concern.The General Accounting Office conducted a detailed study in 1993 examining offshore drilling platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. GAO’s estimates for the full cost of dismantling platforms and plugging wells under the OCS program ranged from $4.2 to $4.4 billion. Yet, surety bonds in place covered only 1.6 percent of this prospective liability. According to MMS, total offshore liability has since risen to approximately $5.5 billion, of which approximately $1 billion is covered by surety bonds.Although the coverage ratio has risen from 1.6 to 18 percent over the past years, the potential public exposure tops $4.5 billion.
The cost of coverage ranges from one to four percent of the bonded amount depending on factors like drilling equipment reseves left underneath the well, amount of collateral. However, the one percent cost applies only to financially strong operators with full collateral for the coverage. A two percent rate is the realistic minimum for the independents. There are fears that these firms will make up the bulk of the unfunded liability in the Gulf. Based on a premium rate of two to four percent, addressing the liability shortfall would cost existing producers $53 to $106 million per year.Currently, the federal taxpayer bears this liability.
How many of the existing abandoned/orphaned oil facilities are leaking oil into the water?
Some may argue smaller amounts of oil leaking into the Gulf should not be a cause of concern. Chronic low level exposure to oil contaminants can significantly affect the survival and reproductive success of marine birds and mammals. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) have confirmed that oil pollution concentrates of as low as one part per billion could stunt pink salmon growth and cause other chronic health problems for the fish. The NMFS has also confirmed that the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill will continue to kill or damage future generations of pink salmon
Clearly government needs to have a fresh look at these and other related issues keeping in mind that even an international oil company like BP underplayed the possibility of an under water blow out,though such occurances are not out of the ordinary. More surprising that despite the oil pollution act of 1990 BP had no plans on how to respond to a worst case scenario though the act clearly states that the owner or operator of a vessel or facility must have these plans. Congress did not intend for every vessel to have on board all the personnel and equipment needed to respond to a worst case spill but vessels must have a plan and procedures to call upon, typically through a contractual relationship, the necessary equipment and personnel for reponding to a wrost case spill.
The act extended the role and scope of the National Contingency Plan, establishing a multi layered planning and response system to improve preparedness and response to spills in marine environments. Among other things the act also requred the President to establish procedures and standards for responsing to worst case oil spill scenarios.
Clearly there has been failure at more than one level.
Add to this the statistical knowledge sitting with government departments that in recent years annual spill volumes from offshore facilities in federal waters have increased and a vast majority of these spills have taken place in the Gulf Of Mexico.
And despite all the noise by the U.S state governors in the wake of the recent deep water spill, the precise volume and incident frequency in state waters is difficult to determine. Reportedly oil spills in state waters account for twice the oil discharges of activities in federal waters. Majority of the oil extraction operations are located in state waters off the coast of Louisiana and Texas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)