By Maryann Palazzolo
Intern, Disaster Accountability Project

(Maryann attends Warren Wilson College, Environmental Studies Major, Class of 2011)

The procession of missteps and catastrophes that led up to, and have followed from, the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Platform on April 22 reveal that the companies involved - BP, Transocean, and Halliburton - were unprepared and careless. Once the blowout preventor failed to activate, the drilling rig exploded and sank a mile down to the bottom of the Gulf, where cleanup teams have struggled to find solutions that will work given the high pressures and below-freezing temperatures.

Methods that proved successful for previous oil spills have failed to work for the Deepwater Horizon leak. The solutions gathered by experts have either failed, fallen short, or risk causing permanent ecological damage: the containment dome froze over, the top kill method was unsuccessful, and dispersants are highly toxic to marine life. Oil is still gushing from the earth at a frightening pace and is affecting coastal areas between Louisiana and Florida.

At this point, we need more than expertise; we need revolutionary innovation.

While experts are rolling out the same technologies that were used during the 1970s, everyday concerned citizens are volunteering their own innovative ideas. By June 17, BP had already received over 35,000 suggestions from the public. The public submitted their ideas by calling BP’s hotline, sending a text (picture texts are accepted), emailing, or sending a letter in the mail.  The U.S. Coast Guard is also collecting suggestions.

With the ecological devastation mounting, BP should be inviting all of the help they can get. Unexplored solutions from concerned citizens could be the answer.

Historically, cash prizes have proven to be indispensable way of driving innovation. For example, in 1714 the British Parliament offered a prize of ₤14,315 to the first person who could provide a ship’s precise longitude measurements while at sea. This legendary contest, which would come to revolutionize sea navigation, was won by a clockmaker named John Harrison. More recently, cash-prizes have given us Charles Lindbergh’s solo flight across the Atlantic and the first private, re-usable spacecraft.

In his book Crowdsourcing: Why the Power of the Crowd Is Driving the Future of Business, Wired’s Jeff Howe calls this kind of problem-solving “crowdsourcing.” Crowdsourcing has the great advantage of being able to bring in ideas from a wider audience than would usually be consulted. However, it can sometimes be expensive and time-consuming to weed out the good ideas from the crazy.

Considering the current rate of oil leakage, BP should be encouraging all available resources, including “interested amateurs,” a term used by BBC news.  In many incidences, scientific breakthroughs are unearthed by minds that can pull in knowledge from unconventional branches of learning (remember that Albert Einstein was a patent clerk); minds that can think outside the box.  A cash prize could encourage these once-quiet minds to submit their innovative ideas. Perhaps a self-educated genius or a young engineering graduate student is holding the winning solution.

InnoCentive, a company that employs crowdsourcing to solve an array of problems, has called on citizens to submit their solutions pro-bono. In an interview with Dwyane Spradlin, the CEO of InnoCentive, Spradlin explains that the company has been working with the government and other organizations for weeks attempting to contact BP about joining forces. According to Spradlin’s blog post, BP responded to Innocentive on June 5th with a “positive tone and apparent eagerness to work together.” BP proposed that the challenge should focus on clean up solutions rather than ideas to plug the leak. However, on June 19th, BP wrote to Innocentive: “the agreements BP would have to enter into with Innocentive are too complex and burdensome to add to already overstretched workdays.”

Still, Spradlin is confident that there are some proposals that could be successful if implemented. Solutions are currently being proposed for not only how to plug the well, but also for how to reduce the oil slicks already in the Gulf. Some of the promising solutions proposed to InnoCentive include placing powerful magnets around piping area to lessen the flow of oil surging out or explosive hyrdo-forming to pinch the broken tubing shut.  BBC news also asked their readers to submit ideas. The ideas were reviewed by Prof. Iraj Ershaghi, Director of Petroleum Engineering at the University of Southern California.

In an effort to review proposals more efficiently, the National Incident Commander established the Interagency Alternative Technology Assessment Program (IATAP) work-group, a cross government collaboration, which became effective June 21st.  IATAP is comprised of representatives from the EPA, USCG RDC, Minerals Management Services (MMS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Maritime Administration (MARAD), and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The purpose of this group is to “ensure fair, systematic, responsive, and accountable review of alternative response technologies by interagency experts.”  This inter-agency collaboration can improve efficiency because it streamlines communication and information by reducing repeat tests, designating information to the appropriate agency quicker, and increasing the number of experts involved in this process.

Still, United States Senator Mary L. Landrieu, D-La., Chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, held a hearing on June 17 to discuss evaluation process effectiveness and efficiency. Representatives from the EPA and the U.S. Coastal Guard were present at the hearing entitled, “Harnessing Small Business Innovation: Navigating the Evaluation Process for Gulf Coast Oil Cleanup Proposals.” Sen. Landrieu urged the EPA and U.S. Coast Guard to make the evaluation process more transparent and improve communication with companies, citizens, and local Gulf Coast officials on probable solutions.

Citizen environmental, engineering, watchdog, and Gulf-based groups should be invited to participate in the evaluation process.

In the beginning weeks of the spill, important information such as temperature, flow rates, and pipe size was not being released by BP. However, in an attempt to improve transparency and scientific progress, The U.S. Department of Energy has released such information including pressure tests, oil spill footage, details about the failure of the blowout preventor, and descriptions of the well’s construction.

Publicizing information that was once only accessible to BP and governmental officials empowers all concerned citizens, especially those apt to contribute solutions, allowing them to stay informed.  While these developments show an improvement in transparency, there are still areas that lack open communication and access to information.

The agencies collecting the proposals could improve efficiency and transparency, as Senator Landrieu proposed, by opening communication, listening to suggestions, and releasing more details on solutions currently being tested.

In the face of this growing catastrophe, no time or resources should be wasted and the companies responsible for the spill should provide the fiscal means for this project.  As history has demonstrated, a cash-prize for the “winning” solution(s), could mitigate the devastation of the spill.  The White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation could also participate in this multidisciplinary effort. Perhaps a modern day John Harrison can succeed where others have failed and come up with a radically new solution to our country’s worst environmental disaster.