Matt Simmons “Apparently” Drowned At His Home Sunday Night – Katherine Smith

Headline today (August 8, 2010) [Notice the word “apparently” in the title]

Matt Simmons “apparently” drowned at his home Sunday night

NORTH HAVEN, Maine (NEWS CENTER) – The Knox County Sheriff’s Department says Matthew Simmons, the founder of the Ocean Energy Institute, drowned at his house on North Haven late Sunday night.

Simmons was a leading investment banker for the energy industry and had recently retired to work full time on the new Ocean Energy Institute.

He was a leading proponent of offshore wind power and had started raising money to develop and build offshore turbines.

The news release fails to mention Simmons was the leading proponent of sending a small nuclear bomb down the BP leaking well:

May 29 – Simmons, a “prominent energy expert” and investment banker known for predicting the oil price spike of 2008, tells Bloomberg News on Friday, sending a small nuclear bomb down the leaking well is “probably the only thing we can do” to stop the leak.

I have been working with Dr. Tom Termotto, the National Coordinator of the Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference to ensure that the BP oil spill didn’t become “A radioactive oil spill.”

Below is an expose on Matt Simmons, which was ready for publication when the BP well was finally capped without resorting to a nuclear device.

The material was useful to Dr. Tom Termotto when he was interviewed on Rense Radio July 19 just four days before the BP well was finally capped.

Jeff Rense’ first question was, if Dr. Termotto would consider Matt Simmon’s nuclear option to cap the well? Tom immediately interjected and made it clear that we should never, never ever consider a nuclear option to cap the well, and went on to relentlessly discredit Matt Simmons throughout the interview.

Here is the expose provided to Dr. Termotto:

The Well is Capped, So why is Matt Simmons Still in this Picture?

By Katherine Smith

“The cap on the BP horizon well bore, which on July 15 stopped the crude for the first time since the April 20 explosion unleashed the spill is still holding and the media is reporting the public beach at Gulf Shores, Alabama, had its busiest day in weeks on Saturday [despite oil-stained sand and a dark line of tar balls left by high tide].”

Should we celebrate?

No, not while Matt Simmons is still in the picture.

Something is Wrong Here

A few days ago you couldn’t go to a Gulf Coast beach without getting arrested for a Class D felony and fined $40,000 but today you can go fishing on the pier beside the Grand Isle Bridge and throw a Frisbee on the beach.

We may never know the real story behind the blow out on April 20th that killed 11 people and created an environmental disaster for the U.S. Gulf Coast region. [1] However, it doesn’t matter because as long as Matt Simmons insists that “the only possible solution to capping the well is a small diameter low level nuclear device” we need to remain on guard (vigilant) to ensure that the BP oil spill doesn’t become “A radioactive oil spill.”

Matthew R. Simmons Recent Titles

Prior to May of 2010 –Chairman of Simmons & Company International, the company he founded in 1974.

May 29 – Simmons, a “prominent energy expert” and investment banker known for predicting the oil price spike of 2008, tells Bloomberg News on Friday, sending a small nuclear bomb down the leaking well is “probably the only thing we can do” to stop the leak.

June 21 – Abruptly Retires as Chairman Emeritus of Simmons & Company
International [2]
July 18 – Founder of the Ocean Energy Institute

Matt the “expert” told Ian Masters on KPFK’s Daily Briefing and King World News July 16 that nuking the well is “totally safe” because he is attributing the idea to “all the best scientists” and that we should try it because the Russians did it five times.

Komsomoloskaya Pravda suggested that the United States might as well take a chance with a nuke, based on the historical 20-percent failure rate. Still, the Soviet experience with nuking underground gas wells could prove easier in retrospect than trying to seal the Gulf of Mexico’s oil well disaster that’s taking place 5,000 feet below the surface.

The Russians were using nukes to extinguish gas well fires in natural gas fields, not sealing oil wells gushing liquid, so there are big differences, and this method has never been tested in such conditions, not to mention the risks when dealing with radiation.

Contrary to Matt Simmons’ assertion that he is attributing this idea to “all the best scientists”, the scores of scientists from the Los Alamos National Laboratory and other government labs ridicule the nuke option.

In theory, the nuclear option seems attractive because the extreme heat might create a tough seal. An exploding atom bomb generates temperatures hotter than the surface of the sun and, detonated underground, can turn acres of porous rock into a glassy plug, much like a huge stopper in a leaky bottle.

Kevin Roark, a spokesman for Los Alamos in New Mexico, the birthplace of the atomic bomb, said that despite rumors to the contrary, none of the laboratory’s thousands of experts was devising nuclear options for the gulf.

“Nothing of the sort is going on here,” he said in an interview. “In fact, we’re not working on any intervention ideas at all. We’re providing diagnostics and other support but nothing on the intervention side.”

A senior Los Alamos scientist, speaking on the condition of anonymity because his comments were unauthorized, ridiculed the idea of using a nuclear blast to solve the crisis in the gulf.

“It’s not going to happen,” he said. “Technically, it would be exploring new ground in the midst of a disaster — and you might make it worse.”

President Barack Obama Wants to Kill the Well

Our current president is still making cryptic remarks about this disaster. [3]

On July 16 President Obama called the apparent success of BP’s efforts to cap well good news but underscored the problem would not be resolved until relief wells had been completed and

“We won’t be done until we actually know that we killed the well and that we have a permanent solution in place.”

Relief Wells Won’t Work

Matt Simmons tells Ian Masters (and he is correct) that technically without casing a relief well cannot work, “it’s just a technical fact.”

Ian replies: “Lets look ahead a few weeks for now and we just discount the possibility that the relief well which they will announce in a few weeks has struck, and is not going to work, at what point. “

Simmons Interrupts: “it will be only the 45th announcement that something was going to work…and didn’t. The only possible solution is a small diameter low-level nuclear device. They insert it down the well 18,000 feet, and set it off. It will fuse the rock and glass, and it’s totally safe, three miles under the seabed.”[KPFK’s Daily Briefing ]

No, that isn’t the only possible solution just ask Dr. Tom Termotto, National Coordinator for the Gulf Oil Spill Remediation website.

Simmons the former energy advisor to the President with the worst environmental record in history shouldn’t make such irresponsible statements. [5]

Fortunately Lisa Margonelli (Oil on the Brain) follows Simmons and his nightmare scenario,

“here is the really scary thing, if we basically have a storm let alone a hurricane, what the hurricanes do is the churn up all the cold water from the base of the Gulf of Mexico. This time around it’s not going to be cold water it’s going to be this black poisonous crude and, and it will also shut down their 18 power plants along the gulf coast that will have shut down and create a black out and we’ll have to shut down the refineries so we’ll have trapped 20 million people in harms way.”

When Ian Masters asked for her reaction to the Simmons doomsday scenario, she replies:

“There is a lot we don’t know…some of the things that he says… gosh there is just a lot we don’t know. First of all we need to step back from this nightmare scenario and look at what we know… We have an overwhelming disaster that has changed the whole eco-system of the Gulf which is North Americas most important fishing ground, in the world.. and 40% of our wetlands.

So then to move on to some of the specific points. Let’s just back up.. one thing that I would caution about this sort of information is that I have found people commenting on Mathew’s comments and what he has been saying since May 26th, so this is not the first time he said it.

He told Barons that he hosted Susan Collins and Stephen Chu on June 14th, so he would have been able to talk to them. There is no higher person than Stephen Chu to talk to about this. So this is not the first time he has been saying this stuff. He says he has also been talking to people from Noah, and that is a full month ago.

So presumably those scientists should have felt there was open and enough space to come forward with this, umm, that doesn’t mean that what’s going on down there is something that is easily under control.. I don’t know whether he… I don’t know where he gets his information… we can’t track it down.

Given that he spoke to them more than a month ago, in theory more articles would have shown up. I am not saying some of this isn’t true, I am saying the conspiracy of this doesn’t work out. And there is a lot we just don’t know.”

She finally concludes talking about Boots and Coots, experts in which drill relief wells.

I will say there is an article in Barons… I will say that I have talked to… I will say there is an article in Barons that people may want to read more about from a month ago about him (simmons) talking about the hole… and uh.. I will also say I have spoken with various Oil executives who have been involved in drilling in the Gulf and um who have said and assumed that one way or the other the Relief well will WORK. It may not work on the first try and it may take several months, um but one or the other they expect to be able to get it to work. Uh you know everything in this whole accident has been so completely beyond what people conceived of before it’s totally possible that something else will happen. We don’t know.

Never Again (September 2008)

We must not allow our frustration with any of BP’s failed attempts to manipulate us into giving the green light for a Nuclear option to cap the well.

This reminds me of September 2008, when the American people against all logic, (according to the EIA) agreed to drill for oil in the ANWR because they couldn’t tolerate $4.55 a gallon gasoline. [Appendix B]

NPR reports (date):

“This scares everybody — the fact that we cannot make this well stop flowing,” Suttles and BP CEO and chief spinmeister Tony Hayward is lowering expectations. This mess is officially out of control.

One listener called in with a “suggestion”

“The environmental effects of all this oil spewing out are pretty bad,” he says. “Could it be that worse if we knew that a small bomb would plug the hole? I say explode it.”

On CNN, reporter John Roberts suggested last month, “Drill a hole, drop a nuke in and seal up the well.”

There are solutions to this crisis, but inexplicably our elected officials are not listening, and I am concerned that when our frustration reaches a critical threshold (as it did in September 08, See Appendix B) we will demand they do something… anything… and that will give them an excuse to nuke the well.

Let’s not fall for this ruse a second time. Appendix C has the information for you to send a message to everyone you know to raise awareness about this very important issue.

Drilling offshore & in the ANWR, are there benefits? (reprinted below) is my attempt at humor and an explanation of why Matt Simmons was able to predict the oil price spike of 2008.

Don’t let him con us into turning an oil spill into a “A radioactive oil spill.”

Katherine Smith, PhD

Drilling offshore & in the ANWR, are there benefits?

Why did President Bush and his buddies want to drill, drill, and drill (in 2008)? Hot, Flat Friedman wonders, “what planet are they on?” Vote for the best explanation or post your own in comments.

President Bush was concerned about American families,

The President cites tough times for families in urging lawmakers to allow a vote on the bill to open ocean drilling: “American drivers are counting on Congress to lift the ban and so are American workers.” Bush said that high gas prices are cutting into consumers’ food and housing budgets. “The time for action is now, this is a difficult period for millions of American families,” July 30, 2008 [Gasoline $4.32, Oil $122.46]

Psychological affect on speculators

Even though the drilling would not produce results, “It Would Help America Now!”

Oil prices are high now because of the speculators. From a psychological point of view, if news came out that we were going to open up offshore drilling or even ANWR, prices would start to drop because the speculators would have to start selling off their position because they would know the prices wouldn’t be able to go much higher. I think we would start to see a decrease within weeks of an announcement.

Psychological affect on Bush’s buddies

So, the thinking goes if we relax federal prohibitions against drilling offshore and in the ANWR, knowledge of this fact will cause Bush’s Oil buddies to change their pumping decisions today. Though the additional barrels from ANWR wouldn’t physically hit the market for years, it will lead to immediate relief at the pump. Beyond that, the ideal solution would be to completely privatize federal lands.


The members of a club were getting bored and thought it would be interesting to see how high the price of gasoline would have to go to get Americans to give up their last Arctic wilderness, a 1.5 million-acre habitat for seabirds, caribou, and polar bears. The winning ticket had $4.79 a gallon. In 1973 (the Oil Embargo) the same members of the club had a bet to see if long gas lines would get the public to agree to the Alaskan Pipeline, Within weeks of the Arab oil embargo, President Nixon signed into law the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act, which authorized the completion of 800 miles of pipeline through the frozen passes of the Brooks Range, and through some of the most pristine country in North.

[Today they are betting on how many times they have to fail to cap the well]

Local control and Jobs in Alaska

Governor Palin stressed the need (in 2008) to enact an energy policy that includes oil and gas production from domestic sources, since failure to enact a sound energy policy is having real-life consequences. Alaskan residents pay higher prices for their gas than residents in other states do, and everything is far away. The state is as big as a third of the continental US, which means Alaskans have to drive further to get their gas than most people do in other states. Finally, because of the rugged terrain up there, everybody has big cars. If ANWR were opened for business, Alaskans might see a decrease in oil and gas prices or, at the very least, receive reimbursements because of the stipends. The people in Alaska overwhelmingly want it. “In my opinion, if they want to look at an oil well outside their back door, that’s their decision, not mine. I find that part of this argument persuasive.”

Reduce our dependence on foreign oil

The oil companies and the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), an independent statistical agency within the Department of Energy, estimate that new oil from ANWR could lower the world price of oil by a minimum of .44 cents and as much as a whopping $1.44 per barrel but, that won’t take effect for 20 years. The EIA projection for oil production in the ANWR is 0.4 to 1.2 percent of total world oil consumption in 2030 and that amount would reduce our foreign oil dependence.

Oil companies are greedy and hoarding

Oil companies only have 70 million “offshore acres leases” remaining from a total 90 million; they are concerned they will run out of places to drill for oil in 3030 (yes, I meant 3030). Some Democrats also charge that oil companies are deliberately not drilling on the land to limit supply and drive up oil prices.

Oil companies prefer to drill in cold climates.


I don’t have an answer but neither does Hot Flat Friedman

Thomas Friedman author of Hot Flat and Crowded doesn’t know about any wager because when interviewed on NPR about drilling in the North Slope to promote the burning of coal, oil and gas exclaimed loudly:

drill, drill – what am I missing here

drill, drill – what planet are they on?

it’s crazy, the Ohio senator actually voted against it (tax credits)


Maybe President Bush wasn’t joking when, after rejecting the global climate change targets of the July 2008 G8 summit, he said, “Goodbye, from the world’s biggest polluter.” Maybe he covets and wants to retain that title?

“Give Us the ANWAR and Keep Shopping”-They Found They Can’t Have Both

[Essay at OpedNews in 2008]

Associated Press (AP) reported on September 13th, 2008 that the unprecedented rise in gas prices had brought a change to the American way of life that even a drop in oil prices below $100/barrel won’t erase. As AP put it, “Public transportation is in. Hummers are out. Frugality is in. Wastefulness is out.”

Apparently, the worst gas price hike has produced the worst-case scenario for the select group of people who raised the price of gasoline to almost $5.00/gallon, smug in their belief they could get Americans to give up their last Arctic wilderness while continuing to buy useless, wasteful consumer goods.

Two significant things happened recently after gas approached $5 a gallon and oil was selling for $142 a barrel:

• Retail sales fell in July as shoppers shunned autos and other big-ticket items. In spite of government stimulus payments to U.S. households, retail sales dipped 0.1 percent last month when a variety of economic woes including skyrocketing gas prices combined to blunt America’s shopping habits—habits which wreak havoc on the environment.

• August 14, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) signaled her willingness to consider opening up more coastal areas to oil and gas exploration. Just weeks before, Pelosi was resolved to block any votes to allow offshore drilling.

Once the environment’s last bastion of defense (Congress) had fallen, and gasoline prices rose so high, it tremendously curbed American buying habits, gasoline prices mysteriously came down almost a dollar and oil is now under $100 a barrel.

Really? Solely because a month ago we agreed to consider more drilling, oil drops by $45 a barrel? Is that possible?

No. It appears the price of gasoline stayed high too long. A $45/barrel drop in oil isn’t enough to fool anyone into thinking the “economy” is back to normal. You can’t cover up bank failures, home foreclosures, high unemployment and experts like Warren Buffett predicting major disruptions in financial markets.

Even with the recent drop in gas prices, Americans seem to have realized they can live comfortable lives by returning to a time when they valued stewardship, resourcefulness, and thrift…and that just might be good for everyone who has to live on this planet.

So the same select group of people who were betting on trashing the ANWR and the planet by getting the public to shop for billions of dollars of useless, non-recyclable consumer goods appear to be losing. As the AP press said, “Americans have changed; being frugal is the thing.” And that makes winners of the rest of us, for now. [End of my attempt at humor. (The same group are betting we will agree to nuke the well. Don’t let them!)]

Katherine Smith, PhD


[1] Thank God the devastating 2010 Deepwater Horizon Spill has finally been capped. While the media focuses our attention on cleanup of 219 million gallons of crude oil the real doomsday trigger was that unleashed with the oil goes largely unnoticed. A catastrophic legacy that we leave behind for future generations, with far greater long term danger to life on Earth than the leaked oil, is the impacts of the leaked methane from the failed 2010 Deepwater Horizon Spill. Doomsday: How BP Gulf disaster may have triggered a ‘world-killing’ event by Dave Nocera

[2] I think it’s VERY important to compare what [Chairman Emeritus] Simmons is saying in the last video at this link with what Michio Kaku, theoretical physicist and host of Sci-Fi Science, is saying in the video at this link. It’s really not that hard to imagine what these lunatic oil people might end up doing especially if what Simmons is postulating is decided to be the only viable option to halt this out-of-control oil volcano! THIS IS TOTAL MADNESS!! Editorials : Those Crazy Cassiopaean’s

Steven Earl Jones is an American physicist. For most of his career, Jones was known mainly for his work on muon-catalyzed fusion. In the fall of 2006, amid controversy surrounding his work on the collapse of the World Trade Center (which Jones believes was as destroyed by controlled demolition during the September 11 attacks), he was relieved of his teaching duties and placed on paid leave from Brigham Young University. He retired on October 20, 2006 with the status of Professor Emeritus.

[3] On June 15, 2010, Barack Obama addresses the nation on the BP Oil Spill:

“The millions of gallons of oil that have spilled into the Gulf of Mexico are more like an epidemic, one that we will be fighting for months and even years. But make no mistake: we will fight this spill with everything we’ve got for as long it takes. Tonight I’d like to lay out for you what our battle plan is going forward: what we’re doing to clean up the oil, what we’re doing to help our neighbors in the Gulf, and what we’re doing to make sure that a catastrophe like this never happens again.”

[4] Gulf Oil Spill Remediation website

[5] If “trashing the planet” was his military objective, our last President Bush was not stupid, but a brilliant commander-in-chief waging an all-out war on biodiversity, animals and rainforests. He wanted to drill in the ANWR to trash America’s last Arctic Wilderness. Sonar Testing is about torturing whales and dolphins. And the Border Fence that keeps everything out but illegal’s will disrupt an extraordinary source of biological diversity along the 2,000-mile long region.

Appendix B

The oil companies and the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), an independent statistical agency within the Department of Energy, estimate that new oil from ANWR could lower the world price of oil by a minimum of .44 cents and as much as a whopping $1.44 per barrel but, that won’t take effect for 20 years. The EIA projection for oil production in the ANWR is 0.4 to 1.2 percent of total world oil consumption in 2030 and that amount would reduce our foreign oil dependence.

Chronology of the price of Gasoline and Oil

April 29, 2008 [Gasoline $3.89, Oil $113.86] (Gasoline is average regular gasoline in California (Consumer Reports), Oil is Spot Brent Crude (Energy Information Administration, official statistics from the U.S. Government))

President George W. Bush in his speech in the Rose garden

“Americans are concerned about energy prices, and I can understand why. The past 18 months, gas prices have gone up by $1.40 per gallon. I’ve repeatedly submitted proposals to help address these problems. Yet time after time, Congress chose to block them. They repeatedly blocked environmentally safe exploration in Alaska National Wildlife Reserve ANWR.” Later the president says, “If you mention ANWR it means you don’t care about the environment. Well, I’m hoping now people, when they say “ANWR,” means you don’t care about the gasoline prices that people are paying”.

June 12-14 [Gasoline $4.43, Oil $132.11]

Zogy takes a poll about drilling offshore and the ANWR

June 26 [Gasoline $4.59, Oil $136.82]

Zogby poll Released. Three in four likely voters – 74 percent – support offshore drilling for oil in U.S. coastal waters and more than half (59 percent) also favor drilling for oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge

July 3 [Gasoline $4.55, Oil $143.95]

Makes for a depressing July 4th

July 14 [Gasoline $4.49, Oil $142.43]

Bush lifted a presidential moratorium on drilling for oil and natural gas on the Outer Continental Shelf

July 16, 2008 [Gasoline $4.52, Oil $133.11]

the Federal Reserve reported holding $2,349 billion of US government paper in custody for central banks.

July 30, 2008 [Gasoline $4.32, Oil $122.46]

NEW YORK ( — President Bush called Wednesday for Congress to allow offshore oil drilling, citing an “urgent” need to reduce pressure on crude and gas prices.

President cites tough times for families in urging lawmakers to allow vote on bill to open ocean drilling. “American drivers are counting on Congress to lift the ban and so are American workers,” “I’ve lifted the ban, I’ve done my part,” Bush said. Bush said that high gas prices are cutting into consumers’ food and housing budgets. “The time for action is now, this is a difficult period for millions of American families,”

July 30, 2008 [Gasoline $4.32, Oil $122.46]

NEW YORK ( — As the nation struggles to meet its energy needs, a majority of Americans think offshore drilling for oil and natural gas is a good idea, according to according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Wednesday. The debate over offshore drilling has become an increasingly important political issue in the era of $4 a gallon gas. The bans prohibiting offshore drilling, which were put in place decades ago, are outdated and should be lifted, proponents say. But opponents argue that more drilling offshore could damage sensitive ecosystems.

Lifting the ban would send a “strong signal” to the oil futures market, which could help bring the price of crude down immediately, she said. (Is this possible, lifting a ban on drilling oil that would take 15 years to access could affect the price of oil in the next 7 days?)

August 1, 2008 [$4.36, Oil $124.16]

In some key battleground states, (like Florida) voters are shifting toward support of offshore drilling to reduce dependence on foreign oil and to ease those bug-eyed shocks at the pumps as the numbers keep moving upward,

August 5 [$4.21, Oil $116.50]

During his speech, Obama admitted he is no longer opposed to expanding offshore oil drilling if it is part of a broader energy plan. Sen. John McCain: “I call on Senator Obama to call on Congress to come back into town and come back to work. Democrat joining together: And a very vital part of that is nuclear power, and another vital part of that is offshore drilling. We have to drill here and drill now.”

August 7 [$4.23, Oil $116.94]

the Federal Reserve reported holding $2,401 billion, a 38.4% annual rate of growth.

August 12 [$4.16, Oil $108.98]

Democrats’ stance against offshore drilling has shifted more.

Pelosi’s radio remarks were the latest to hint that the energy debate in Congress is still evolving, and that Democrats are budging on the issue.

August 13 2008 [$4.22, Oil $111.33]

Retail sales fell in July, the weakest performance in five months, as shoppers shunned autos and other big-ticket items. The Commerce Department reported Wednesday that retail sales dipped 0.1 percent last month when a variety of economic woes combined to blunt the impact of billions of dollars in government stimulus payments to U.S. households. “Cautious and uncertain consumers are watching their wallets and with the back-to-school shopping season under way, that does not bode well for retailers,” said Joel Naroff, chief economist for Naroff Economic Advisors.

August 14, 2008 [$4.20, Oil $110.16]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signaling her willingness to consider opening up more coastal areas to oil and gas exploration. Just weeks ago Pelosi seemed resolved to block any votes to allow offshore drilling.


Once the last holdout Pelosi signaled her willingness to drill the markets responded. The U.S. Energy Information Administration says it would take about 20 years for increased offshore drilling to have an effect on world oil prices, and even then it would be a small one. To step up domestic drilling now when we wouldn’t see the results until 2030 would be like investing in steamboats after the invention of the nuclear submarine. Therefore there is no other conclusion other than the Administration wants to drill in the most environmentally sensitive places on the planet. [End of Appendix B]

Appendix C

Normally I don’t recommend those “take action”- campaigns: the ones that tell us, it’s not too late, click-here to importune our “elected”- representatives with emails and faxes.

But the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf is different.

The inconvenient truth for our elected representatives, their families and staff who live in the Gulf states is that this disaster will affect them, they need a fighting chance to know if and when this perfect storm will hit and can get out of the way.

And for those of us who don’t live in the path of this disaster we will be affected as well.

A disaster of this magnitude will have an impact on everything we take for granted on a daily basis, food, shelter, energy and social order.

So go ahead and email, fax and phone, this is one email campaign that might just work.

Here is a sample draft that you can customize with your personal concerns.

President Obama: The BP Oil disaster in the Gulf has the makings of a perfect storm.

The time for bold, decisive leadership is now.

  1. We will not tolerate any nuclear option to cap the Oil spill in the gulf.
  2. Demand BP release the Mud Log Data.
  3. Begin to implement proven mitigation technology NOW.

Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] [City, State ZIP]

Start with the website on How to Answer President Obama’s Call to Action to Fix the Gulf Coast Spill and then Contact The U.S. Department of Energy

The Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, By Email:

By Phone: 202-586-5000, By Fax 202-586-4403

By the Website contact form

Follow up by Contacting the Elected Officials where you live

If we work together we can make a difference in the lives of millions of Americans.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s