BP based spill plans on flawed US data

BP and other oil companies based their spill contingency plans on faulty government data, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.

The newspaper said US government reports gave very low odds of oil hitting shore, even in the case of a spill much larger than the one from BP's Deepwater Horizon well in the Gulf of Mexico.

The news comes as oil from the well has now reached 171 miles of shoreline across four US states.

This morning BP said it had continued to capture oil from the well overnight despite temporarily removing the cap it had in place to capture the spill after an accident yesterday.

The government models, which oil companies are required to use but have not been updated since 2004, assumed that most of the oil would rapidly evaporate or get broken up by waves or weather, the newspaper said.

BP's contingency report has received widespread criticism as analysis suggests BP was cutting and pasting information from previous reports, citing dead experts, mis-naming other experts, understating the dangers from a leak and overstating the company’s ability to cope in the event of a crisis.

One of the most glaring pieces of evidence suggesting that a proper assessment was not made is the mention of walruses, sea otters, sea lions and seals as animals that may be at risk if there was a spill even though none of these mammals live anywhere near the well.

BP shares were down 0.7p, or 0.21%, at 322.8p - outperforming a downbeat market.