Hacker News Reader

Comment by ceejayoz | Hacker News Reader

Reporting it as a ten gallon spill isn't mere incompetence.

> Suess readily acknowledged that the officially listed spill size was too low. “We know it is significantly bigger than 10 gallons. We have known that since Day One,” Suess continued. Yet he defended the state’s decision to continue to list the spill as just 10 gallons.

View on HN

As someone that is familiar with the software which powers a lot of the Oil and gas regulatory bodies in the US, this is not uncommon. It is basically all up to inspectors and regulators to determine and enter this data, with no tie back to actual measurements or integration to sensors that track well output or detect leaks/spills. Inspectors are typically former industry workers and may have perverse reporting incentives. Places like ND and WV are rife with corruption between wealthy drilling corps and regulatory bodies.

> Inspectors are typically former industry workers and may have perverse reporting incentives. Places like ND and WV are rife with corruption between wealthy drilling corps and regulatory bodies.

This is a major part of the wider issue. Regulatory bodies are financially incentivized to not work as intended. There needs to be a restructuring of the current incentives, so as to balance the priorities of the people and the planet.

Unfortunately, the rule makers are the profit takers, so don’t expect them to self regulate..

"... but it would be deception if I listed it as larger than 10 gallons because I don't know _how much_ larger than 10 gallons it is!"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com