Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
White House Briefing on Status of Gulf Oil Spill; Day 107: Well is Plugged; Proposition 8 and Same-Sex Marriage Await Judgment in California; Was There an Attempt on Ahmadinejad's Life?; Recording Life in 3-D
Aired August 04, 2010 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: It's been a very busy morning. Thanks for sticking with us. Now it's afternoon, and the news continues right now with T.J. Holmes in for Ali Velshi. Take it away, sir.
T.J. HOLMES, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you, kind sir.
I'm the afternoon guy. Hello to you all. I'm T.J. Holmes sitting in today for Ali Velshi. Let me tell you what we have got on the rundown for you now.
Millions of gallons spewed into the Gulf. Now the federal government says most of it, the overwhelming majority of it, gone. How in the world can that be? And how can they be sure? We're standing by for a White House briefing for am answers possibly at any moment.
Also we're waiting for, also at any moment, the verdict on whether California voters have the right to ban same-sex marriages.
Also, how one company is making it possible for you to make your own 3-d movie from the comfort of your own home. We'll get into that today, as well.
But let's start right now with day 107 now of this Gulf oil disaster. And hope is on the horizon. Hope, because we are told this effort, this static kill, is working. We'll get some more explanation of exactly what this static kill is.
But take a look behind me. This is the picture. Not much going on, and thank goodness for that. This is that live camera we have been seeing for quite some time now. The only difference over the past couple weeks, not a lot is going on. You don't see oil spewing out. That is a good thing. The oil is right now holding.
Static kill, that operation to kill the well. This first -- it's kind of a two-step operation. A static kill operation and then the other bottom kill. But right now, as you see, we're just kind of giving you an example. They're pushing this mud down into the well. It's holding right now and might follow up with cement. This process, the static kill, will continue probably for the next several days.
But on top of this, we're also getting word today that, in fact, of all this oil, the new numbers we got, about 5 million barrels spilling into the Gulf. We're told now about 75 percent of the oil, that oil that spilled is now gone by some way, form or fashion. It has been skimmed, some would say, but only about 26 percent of it is still out there, this residual oil that's still out there.
I want you to know, we are standing by. At any moment we'll take you live when it does happen. But we're waiting for a briefing from the White House. The daily briefing is going to include Thad Allen today, the incident commander. You see the reporters there getting ready right now. But the incident commander for the Gulf, he is going to be a part of the briefing, and also the administrator of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, who has also been a big part of this effort, will be there.
So we will get some kind of an update. But the president himself was speaking today and saying we are now moving to the next phase, really looking at the end of this whole Gulf oil disaster. So when that happens, we will take you back there live.
But where I want to take you right now is live to New Orleans. Our David Mattingly is standing by for us there. David, hello to you once again. Static kill is working. That's good news. But where do we go from here?
DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, T.J., for all practical purposes now, this well is dead. For eight hours, BP was pumping mud into this well. It took them just eight hours to figure out that that well was no longer going to be able to push back. They were able to push that oil back down into the reservoir that erupted out back in April and started this disaster. So for all practical purposes right now, this well is dead.
What they're going to do now is look at how they're going to cap this well. They're talking about applying cement from the top now to create a plug at the top with cement. This will augment the plans they already have in motion to finish that relief well, to intersect the BP well sometime later this month and fill it up with cement, creating a cement plug down below, as well.
So now at this point, the well, for all practical purposes, has been killed. And now they're just sealing it off so it will never, ever be a problem again.
HOLMES: And I know you keep saying all intents and purposes, it's killed, because many in the administration, they still say, until they have that relief well done, that's the permanent solution. Again, we'll be getting an update any moment when we expect that briefing to start.
But David, one more question to you. If you can address this issue of these 5 million barrels that we're told that spilled for the government, now saying about 75 percent of that oil is gone?
MATTINGLY: That's not exactly what this report is saying. They're saying that a 25 percent of this oil naturally evaporated and biodegraded. So that is a good thing. We're talking about more than 1.2 million barrels just evaporating naturally. Twenty-five percent of it was recovered by the different efforts of -- at the site and with the skimming and the operations they had going on. So that's half of the oil right there.
But 24 percent of this was dispersed. And when they talk about dispersement, they're talking about how a lot of this oil, when it erupted from that well, just created a spray down there thousands of feet below the surface of the water, and created sort of a cloud. And they're talking about particles of oil that are smaller in diameter than a human hair. And this created sort of a fog or mist of oil that is still in the water, moving along with the currents and continuing to disperse as time goes by. But that is still in the water.
And there's also 26 percent of this oil, which is over -- over 1.2 million barrels of oil, again that they're accounting for as still in the environment. That this is residual oil that's still on the top, in the form of a sheen, still near surface of the water in the form of tar balls. Also oil that has come ashore that might be in the sediment, that might be in the sand, that has yet to be uncovered.
The big question here is, what will this oil that is still in the environment do to the environment? That's one of the big questions they cannot answer right now. But it is very encouraging to see that a quarter of this oil, of this massive oil spill, is apparently taking care of itself naturally, by natural means, by dissipating and by evaporating, and then 25 percent of it by manual means, being collected either at the site or by these skimmers.
So we're going to get more explanation when we hear from Thad Allen and from the head of NOAA. But again, this is the first step we've seen coming from the government to actually quantify how much oil is still in the environment, and we're still talking probably over at least a million barrels of oil to be accounted for here, T.J.
HOLMES: All right. David Mattingly for us in New Orleans. David, we appreciate you as always.
And as David just said, we are standing by for that briefing, expected to start at any moment. Again, we are going to see the incident commander, Thad Allen, also the head of NOAA, who will be a part of this. So certainly a lot of questions, certainly about some of the new numbers we're seeing today coming up. At any moment, you'll see that live when it does happen.
Also want to turn to another big story of the day. And that is our sound bite that could maybe sum it all up for you, and it's today's "Sound Effect." Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAYOR GAVIN NEWSOM, SAN FRANCISCO: And by the way, as California goes, so goes the rest of the nation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HOLMES: So goes the rest of the nation. That is Mayor Gavin Newsom back in 2008. He was speaking there not long after we saw the California state supreme court take up a case. Essentially, the California state supreme court did away with a ban on same-sex marriage in California.
Well, fast forward. The voters decided to do something about that. They put a proposition on the ballot that they voted on in November of 2008. That was Proposition 8. Proposition 8 then defined -- that was in November of '08, defined marriage in the state of California as between one man and one woman.
Well, that set off several other legal challenges. And it has made its way through the court now, and what we're waiting on today -- this could come for us at any moment, as well. We're waiting on the result of the latest challenge to find out if Proposition 8 is, in fact, constitutional. Will the ban on gay marriage in California stand?
Again, we're expecting to see that ruling sometime this afternoon. We're told sometime between 4 and 6 p.m. Eastern Time. But, again, it could come at any moment. When it does come, we will certainly bring that to you, live.
Also, we are going to be talking to our Jeffrey Toobin, our legal analyst, next hour, about all the legal wranglings in this case, and also going to be talking to, in just a few minutes, our Gloria Borger, of course, our political analyst, who will break down the political side of the results we're going to see in the hearing today.
Coming up, the government's view of the oil. NOAA putting out their new reports on how much is left in the Gulf. We're going to dig more into that. That is coming your way next. Stay right here.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: We are hanging tight, folks, waiting for this White House briefing to start. A significant White House briefing, not that they all aren't day in, day out.
But the daily briefing taking on some new significance today, because along with Robert Gibbs at the daily White House briefing, it's going to be the incident commander, Thad Allen, for the Gulf oil response and also the head of NOAA. Going to be giving us an update on some new information we got today.
Certainly they're going to be peppered with a lot of questions, certainly about the static kill, which is going on right now, and evidenced behind me that nothing is happening. Right now, the static kill method, one of two options they're using to try to kill this well. For all intents and purposes, it's killed right now, but still, the government wants to -- everybody to know, we're waiting on the relief well still. That's going to be the final solution to this.
So an update on static kill, but also an update on some numbers we got today. Got a look at a government report. Government scientists telling us, yes, some 5 million barrels of oil have spilled out into the Gulf. But, they say, about 75 percent of that oil is now gone through some way, form or fashion, either it has been skimmed, it has been evaporated, it has been burned off.
But they break this down. You see the numbers here behind me. But go through. You see the 26 percent at the top you see there, the residual. They say that's what's left either in sheen, on the surface of the water or just below. But the numbers under that, you see 25 percent of the oil has been evaporated or dissolved, 16 percent naturally dispersed. 17 percent siphoned. 18 percent burned off, skimmed.
So you see the breakdown there. So they're telling us essentially that there's only about a quarter of the oil left out there in some way, form or fashion. So a lot of questions we're expecting them to get about that.
But, again, the static kill option will go on for the next couple of days. The success of that, they say, will then help us understand how well the other option is going to be. That is the bottom kill, which we're told could be wrapped up sometime in the next two weeks. So for all intents and purposes, it is sealed right now. But the permanent solution we're told still two weeks away.
Again, one more live picture at the White House. We're waiting on the briefing to start at any moment. Thad Allen, the incident commander, and also the head of NOAA, will join Roberts Gibbs today in the first part of that briefing. You can rest assured it's going to be spent on talking about the oil.
Also, the president made some comments today, he himself out of his own mouth saying, yes, we are now finally starting to look at the end of this whole Gulf oil disaster. At least this segment of it.
Quick break here. We're standing by for that briefing. You won't miss a moment of it. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: All right. We're expecting this to start at any moment. Just got a head's up that this was going to take place, kind of a two- minute warning, and also looking at the picture here, you see all the reporters kind of getting in their spots. This is at the White House. The daily briefing about to take place.
But a significance or taking on a little more significance because of what's happening in the Gulf and also because of who's going to be at this briefing, not just Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman, but also Thad Allen, the incident commander, and also the head of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association.
Going to be giving an update about what's happening in the Gulf. And the update today is significant. It's significant because the static kill effort is working. For all intents and purposes right now, according to our David Mattingly -- you just heard from him in New Orleans, this well is dead. No more oil is going to come out of it.
Now, we know this now. We're being told this now because the static kill, this new option, is now working, pumping mud down into the top of this well to try to seal it. Relief wells you've been hearing so much about, that were the permanent solution, that still has to come in a couple of weeks. Everything seems to be on schedule.
So one part of the disaster seems to be wrapping up. Still so many other implications for the people of the Gulf, for the wildlife in the Gulf, for the fishermen, the shrimpers, the oystermen. All of those folks still have some issues to deal with, but still, this is good news to have this part out of the way.
Now, several questions and things are going to address about the static kill operation, which, again, we're told the briefing is going to start at any moment. We'll take you there when it happens.
But also, significant in and some questions certainly going to be peppered their way because of the numbers we just got from the government today. A new report saying that about 75 percent -- three quarters of all that oil that spilled is now gone bye-bye in some way, form or fashion in one way or another.
You see some of the numbers up there. That top number, just 26 percent, that's the residual that's left over, that we're told. But the other numbers you see under there, kind of a breakdown of where this oil has gone. Some of it has naturally dispersed. Some of it has been chemically dispersed. Some of it has been skimmed. But kind of an amazing figure to get from the government today in that 5 million barrels, we are told, hundreds of millions of gallons have spilled into the Gulf. But now we're told that three quarters of that has gone away in some form or fashion.
Had a lot of people scratching their heads: how could this be possible? But the government saying, yes, in fact, that's the case. So it leaves a lot of people wondering about, did we know, or were the predictions about just how bad this disaster was, were they accurate? Of course, yes, the numbers are huge in had how much oil spilled out, but the impacts. Did we really overestimate the impacts? A lot of questions being thrown about today about that.
But also, a lot of questions going to be going towards Thad Allen and also Robert Gibbs and the head of NOAA when they come out.
But again, the static kill operation, I want to go back to that in a moment, while we're waiting on them to step out. This animation kind of gives you an idea -- try to follow it here for a second. But you see that red dot. That's an illustration of this mud, the things they are pumping down into this well. They pump it down as far as they can get it to essentially plug this thing from the top.
Now, the relief well still going on, being dug from the angles, trying to intercept the well. But for right now, getting this mud down, the pressure is holding, things are working. Static kill is working.
We have been disappointed so many times in the past about thinking things might work, would work, and they didn't work. But right now, there is a lot of optimism about this effort. Again, it's hard to get kind of mixed up in the static kill, bottom kill, what's the difference? Well, they're essentially the same thing, but the more permanent option, we're told, is the bottom kill that still is about two weeks away from happening. We're going to get many more updates or many more questions to our -- or answers to our questions here in just a moment when Robert Gibbs steps out.
Also, we saw our Ed Henry in that room in a second and we're going to talk to him in just a bit, as well. He sat down.
But something else that was significant that a lot of people are pointing today to, is that President Obama himself, he was speaking today, and he made comments that, in fact, we are looking at maybe a light at the end of the tunnel, if you will. Maybe we are about to wrap up this part of the disaster, at least.
And if you'll excuse me as I keep my eye on the White House briefing room right now.
But -- and, again, the 75 percent number -- you can be rest assured, they're going to get a lot of questions about today. Because, in fact, a lot of people wondering, how in the world can all of that oil be gone?
Now, some of it has been dispersed. It's been little droplets. Doesn't mean it's completely gone. But it's a very small number. Michael, if you have it for me again, put that graphic up that breaks down where this oil went, because we had so many of those skimmer ships that were out there working, those skimmer boats.
But if you look here, it says only 3 percent of the oil that's gone has actually been skimmed, has actually been scooped up. So not a significant -- as massive as we were told that effort was to skim the oil, and we thought that had so much to do with so much of it being gone. In fact, only 3 percent of oil that's gone has been skimmed. We saw more has been burned off.
The chemical dispersants, something else you heard so much about, and so much of it being dumped into the Gulf, this they were doing their job. Actually we're told now from the government only 8 percent of the oil was dispersed because of those chemicals. The rest of it -- 16 percent. Look at that number there.
We heard so many scientists say, "Hey, this is the Gulf, a resilient body of water here that can fight off a lot of stuff, and if you just don't put the chemicals in there, it will handle it on its own, naturally." And according to some of the numbers, maybe, in fact, the 25 percent that was evaporated or dissolved and the 16 percent naturally dispersed, possibly the Gulf did a lot of this on its own without a lot of help.
So I'm listening to you, Kelly, and it sounds like they are stepping out. There he is, Robert Gibbs stepping out, and you see the other two, as well. Let's listen to today's briefing. A lot of questions about the Gulf.
ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Will you put the gizmo up?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'll bring it up.
GIBBS: Good. Scientific term, right. Good afternoon.
Joining us in today's briefing, the walk-through of the developments of the last sort of 24 to 48 hours down in the Gulf are some familiar faces to you all by now. Carol Browner, Admiral Thad Allen, retired Admiral Thad Allen, as well as NOAA administrator, Dr. Jane Lubchenco, who will walk us through and update us on where we are in the federal response, walk through an inner agency scientific report on where the oil is and the process that it's gone through.
I think you all heard the president discuss today that -- and I'll have these guys discuss sort of where we are in the static kill. Which is -- which is good news, and it is sort of the beginning of the end of the sealing and containment phase of this operation.
I want to be, though, very clear, as the president was, that our commitment to those families, to those communities, in and along the Gulf Coast, remains same as it always has been. We are transitioning and will transition to a greater focus on clean-up and damage assessment.
There is still lots of work to do. And this government will be here every step of the way to do that work. That's an important message from the president. It's important that it is heard here. And as importantly, if not more so, heard in the Gulf.
So this gives us a chance to look back at what has happened, where we are, as well as to discuss with you guys where we are heading. And with that, I will turn this over to Dr. Lubchenco if I can get -- oh, look that, the gizmo worked.
DR. JANE LUBCHENCO, NOAA ADMINISTRATOR: Hello, everyone. Today the federal government is releasing a new scientific analysis that addresses the question, where did the oil go?
This analysis uses the recently released calculation of 4.9 million barrels, plus or minus 10 percent, and includes both direct measurements, as well as the best estimates where direct measurements were not possible. The report was produced by scientific experts from a number of different agencies. Federal agencies, with peer review of the calculations that went into this by both other federal and nonfederal scientists.
The conclusions -- key conclusions of the report is that the vast majority of the oil has either evaporated or been burned, skimmed and recovered from the well head, or dispersed. And much of the dispersed oil is in the process of relatively rapid degradation.
A significant amount of this is a direct result of the very robust federal response efforts. What I'd like to do is just walk you through the pie chart that you see behind us, and illustrate what's in each of these different categories.
A quarter of the oil, about 1.2 -- somebody want to point while I do this? Or I can point up here.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'll be your professional pointer, and you can...
LUBCHENCO: OK, thank you.
GIBBS: I'll be Vanna White.
LUBCHENCO: OK, Vanna. About a quarter of the oil has been evaporated or dissolved. This is about 1.2 million barrels. That happens naturally. That's a natural process. And much of that happened as the oil was being released day to day.
Moving around -- let's go to the upper right, Robert. About 17 percent, or 87 -- I mean, I'm sorry, 827,000 barrels were recovered directly from the well site. So we know -- we've got that number measured directly. An additional 5 percent was burned. Another 3 percent was skimmed. In addition to that, 8 percent of the oil that was released has been chemically dispersed, both with dispersants at the surface, as well as subsea.
And so if you total up those five pie charts -- direct recovery, burned, skimmed and chemically dispersed -- that gives you a sense of what the results of the federal effort have been. And it totals about a third of the total amount of oil that has been released.
Naturally dispersed oil is also -- accounts for 16 percent. As oil is being -- was being released from the well head, or from the riser pipe, it naturally becomes mixed in turbulent conditions, and broken up into small, microscopic droplets that remain -- if they are small enough, they remain below the surface of the water. And so 16 percent naturally dispersed, 8 percent chemically dispersed. That oil is in very, very dilute clouds of microscopic droplets beneath the surface. That is in the process of being very rapidly degraded naturally. And so mother nature is assisting here, considerably.
So the pieces of the pipe chart that we have looked at directly now account for those things that we can measure directly or have very good estimates for. The residual, which is the upper left part of the pie chart, is 26 percent. And that's a combination of oil that is in light sheen at the surface, or in tar balls or has been washed ashore, and much of that has been recovered by federal clean-up efforts and state clean-up efforts.
About 37,000 tons of material have been removed from the beaches already. And will continue to do so.
So I think the bottom line here is that the -- we can account for all but about 26 percent. And of that, much of that is being -- in the process of being degraded and cleaned up on the shore.
The -- I think it's important to point out that at least 50 percent of the oil that was released is now completely gone from the system. And most of the remainder is degrading rapidly, or is being removed from the beaches. The -- I want to also point out simply that we continue to have a very aggressive effort to understand more about where the oil was and what its fate has been. A large number of research vessels continue to be active in the Gulf, and are under way to understand the concentrations of subsurface oil, and exactly what rate at which it is being biodegraded. We'll continue to monitor and sample this oil, and report new results as they emerge.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you.
ADMIRAL THAD ALLEN, NATIONAL INCIDENT COMMANDER: Good afternoon. The last 24 hours have been fairly consequential in the life cycle of this response. I'd like to go over a couple of things that have transpired. After a successful injection test yesterday allowed us to understand the path at which liquids would go down the well, the amount of volume we could put in the well, and the pressure readings that we could take at the various places where the gauges were placed, gave us confidence we could go ahead. And we directed BP to proceed with the static kill.
That began yesterday afternoon, went on throughout the evening and into the night, and resulted in the well being filled with mud. We now have equalized the pressure -- the hydro static pressure of the sea water with the pressure inside the capping stack. And basically have reached a static condition in the well that allows us to have high confidence that there will be no oil leaking into the environment, and we have significantly improved our chances to finally kill the well with the relief wells when that does occur.
The discussions that are going on today between the science team down in Houston and the BP engineers are regarding whether or not we should follow up the mud that has been put into the well bore with actual cement. And the discussion around that revolves around what we think the status of the drill pipe is. Is it still where we thought it was? Because where that drill pipe is, is consequential in how you will put the cement in and the success of the cement. Those discussions are ongoing and we will not make a decision on that until we've reached the resolution on our best estimate of what the condition of the drill pipe is inside the casing.
Once the decision has been made on cementing, whether to cement or the not, then the next step will be to finish off the relief well. As you know, we are about 100 feet away from where we would intersect the well, and about four and a half feet horizontally away from it.
We would proceed forward in anywhere between 10 and 20-foot increments, drilling and then backing out and putting what we call a ranging tool in that would allow us to understand and to exact detail through measurement of the magnetic feel of the casing how close we were coming. We will continue to do that. This job will not be complete until we finish the relief well and have pumped the mud in and cemented it in from the bottom, or the bottom kill, if you will.
So this is a very significant step. It's told us a lot more about the well itself. We will learn more in the discussions today about whether or not we need to move to have cementing as the final portion of the static kill. But the static kill is only the preliminary portion to what will ultimately be the bottom kill.
Regarding response operations, we continue to aggressively pursue the oil that's on shore and in the marsh areas. Some of the more heavily impacted areas around Barataria Bay, to the west of the Mississippi River, the (INAUDIBLE) Islands, Brenton Sound (ph), Passalutre (ph), some areas in the Mississippi Sound. We are resoluting in our commitment to continue that response and clean-up. Our forces are standing by.
While we look to have an end to the source of the oil and containment, we're redoubling our efforts to make sure that the oil that's out there is being cleaned up and being disposed of as effectively as possible. We will continue to do that and we will resolutely hold BP accountable until all the oil is cleaned up and we start moving into the recovery phase and the assessment of damage to the environment.
Carol?
CAROL BROWNER, PRESIDENTIAL ADVISOR ON ENERGY & CLIMATE CHANGE: You know, as you have heard, it's been an interesting 24 hours. I think making real progress in terms of getting this well finally closed. The fact that we are not going to have anymore leaking in the near-term is certainly good news to the Gulf of Mexico and the communities.
I think we also have good information now from our scientists in terms of where the oil went, how the oil is behaving. But we want to be very, very clear that this does not mean there isn't more to be done. There remains a lot to be done while sort of the first phase of closing the well may be coming to an end, there's another phase, which is the restoration. It's making sure that these communities, the individuals in these communities, are made whole.
We are going to continue to ensure that BP is held accountable for the damage that they did, for the economic losses, and ultimately for the natural resource damages and all of the restoration that will take place in the Gulf communities and in the Gulf at large.
QUESTION: Yes, this would be I guess for both Carol and Dr. (INAUDIBLE).
So I understand that some outside scientists have some concerns about such a sort of neat and tidy conclusion to where the oil has gone. And I'm wondering whether it's that definitive of a conclusion is really more to do with science and why you would release the pages of scientific back-up to show how it was arrived at?
LUBCHENKO: We believe that these are the best direct measurements or estimates that we have at the moment. We have high degree of confidence in them. If new information comes to light, we will continue to upgrade the estimates as is always the case in science.
The numbers that went into calculations are posted on the web site. Anyone can readily see how the budget calculator - how the tool was developed, what's in it, what went into each of those different categories, how they are defined, how it was calculated. So we would certainly welcome others using that tool, fact-checking, running the numbers and I'm pretty sure they'll come up with the same estimates.
QUESTION: Will you seek new estimates, or is this sort of your last attempt to look at where the oil has gone?
LUBCHENKO: Well, some of the numbers are clearly not going to change. The amount of oil that was captured from the well head, we know. The amount that has been skimmed and burned is not likely to change. There's just very little oil on the surface now. There's not much oil that is visible, other than right along the shore, and on some of the beaches. So those numbers are not going to change.
The amount that was chemically dispersed is not likely to change. We're not using dispersants anymore. The amount that was naturally dispersed as a result of direct calculations of how much turbulence there was and what we know about how oil behaves at different depths under pressure. The amount that was evaporated or dissolved is I think a pretty good estimate.
So the one piece of the pie that is left after you sum all those others is what we're calling the residual. And that's a combination of things that we cannot measure directly or estimate with confidence.
ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: And just to add to that -- to mention this, as Dr. (INAUDIBLE) just mentioned on the residual, some of this is oil that in tar balls has, as she said earlier, washed up on the beach. It's been removed, but isn't measurable because you're removing it -- you may remove this with sand. That's what the 37,000 tons. So some of the 26 is immeasurable or unknown.
QUESTION: Right.
LUBCHENKO: I also want to point out one thing and that is that there are three categories on your pie chart that have an asterisk by them. Residual, naturally, and chemically dispersed.
It's important to recognize that each of those categories is being -- the oil in those categories is being degraded, naturally degraded. And so some of the residual that might be in marshes, for example, or tar balls, is being biodegraded. The oil that is beneath the surface as a result of dispersion and these microscopic droplets is in the process of rapid degradation.
And so what you see on the pie chart, as Robert indicated, is a sum total of where the oil went over time. But it doesn't necessarily represent what's there at this moment.
QUESTION: All right. And just to follow up really quickly. --
(END OF COVERAGE)
HOLMES: All right, folks. We're listening in here. And we'll continue to monitor this. But we're going to get out now. But it leaves you kind of scratching your head. I mean, it's good news, if it's all true. But we were just told, and have been told for quite some time, this is the biggest environmental disaster we have ever seen in this country, and you're hearing the officials now tell us that, in fact, 50 percent of all that oil that spilled out directly quoting Dr. Lubchenko there, the NOAA saying it is completely gone. 50 percent of it is completely gone. We're talking about it was gone through some natural dispersant that's being burned or something in some way, form or fashion. Says only 26 percent they can't account for.
Now, it leaves a lot of people possibly scratching their heads. And you heard the first question there, and I'm sure she's going to get peppered with more -- there's the breakdown for you once again on your screen -- about where this oil went.
And you've seen the pictures over months now. You have seen the dead animals. You have seen the oil-soaked animals. You have seen the coast that has oil all over it. But now we're told that 50 percent is completely gone of that oil.
Now, the first question was about how can you be so sure? There is criticism out there that the government shouldn't put these kinds of numbers out because there is no way to know. Dr. Lubchenko there says some of this is numbers they can make, the rest of it quite frankly were just estimates.
But we are told by the government that 50 percent of all the oil that spilled on the 90-plus, the 100 days of this oil disaster, completely gone from the Gulf now. If that is the case, hallelujah, and it's a great thing, and we're happy to hear it. But a lot of people have a lot of questions about is that actually true? And how do you come up with that number?
We'll continue to monitor the White House briefing and certainly CNN will continue to follow the Gulf oil disaster. Just because it's capped and they tell us that the oil pretty much is gone doesn't mean the disaster is over any time soon.
Also, another big story we could get breaking news on in at any moment -- same-sex marriage here in this country. The first federal court ruling due at any moment. We're expecting in the next couple of hours, but still, we could get something early. After the break, though, we're not just talking about that ruling, we're talking about the politics of it. Stay here.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: We are awaiting big decision today in California's same-sex marriage. We're waiting to see if a court -- a judge out there will uphold Proposition 8. Proposition 8, the people of California voted on that back in 2008. And essentially said that marriage was between a man and a woman.
We'll give you a background here. It was back in 2008 when, in fact, courts got involved in this case. So, they said that the -- actually, the voters need to figure this out. So, Proposition 8 was put on the ballot in November of 2008. Proposition 8 said marriage was between a man and a woman. That, of course, has gone, has through a long line now of legal challenges.
But we're not going to talk about the legal side of it right now. We're going to talk about the political side of it. And Gloria Borger can handle that for us.
We don't have our Jeffrey Toobin. I know you deal with him a lot on the legal side. But we're going to leave the legal side as we wait for this verdict to come. We'll leave it alone for now. What does this mean, though, to be talking about this once again during an election year? Just to have -- just to have same-sex marriage on the minds of voters? What could this mean?
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, you know, it's interesting, T.J., because I would say that gay marriage was a real wedge issue, dividing political parties a long time ago. Dividing conservatives, dividing liberals. And I would have to say that we have come a long way from that.
If you look at the two folks who are the lawyers in this case against Proposition 8, you've got Ted Olson, who is iconic in the conservative legal community, who was George W. Bush's lawyer in Bush v. Gore, on the same side as David Boyce, who opposed him in that case and is a champion of the left. And these two folks -- you see them there -- these two folks are now on the same side of the gay marriage issue, because they look at it as a Constitution -- as a constitutional issue and say that outlawing gay marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
HOLMES: All right. And remember (INAUDIBLE) a lot of people say that's just an odd couple to see those two guys together and certainly working together on such a big issue.
But we're talking about in California, even though we have five other states right now that recognize same-sex marriage, including District of Columbia, as well. So, why is California -- why is what's happening in California, and also the fact of where it is in the courts in California, why is that significant?
BORGER: Well, it's very important. And as you point out, you're right. Only a handful of states have said that gay marriage is okay. Popular opinion is against gay marriage. Over 40 states have said you can't have gay marriage.
That's why Boyce and Olson decided to make this challenge on behalf of two gay couples in the state of California, because they know that whether they win or lose today, it's going to go up to the Ninth Circuit, and whether they win or lose in the Ninth circuit, then it is going to head to the Supreme Court. And they believe, quite strongly, some disagree, that the Supreme Court is where this case ought to be decided, just like it decided Brown v. Board of Education. Just like it decided the question of whether blacks and whites ought to be able to get married over 40 years ago. So that's why this is very, very important. BORGER: All right. Gloria, always good to see you. I'm going have to leave it there for now. Chatting with you at some point about what we saw happen in Missouri on their Proposition C, as well on health care. But hope to catch up again soon.
Gloria, always good to see you. Thanks so much.
BORGER: Any time.
HOLMES: All right, getting close to the top of the hour here now. And a grenade attack aimed at Iran's president. Or was it just fireworks? Today's incident comes just two days after President Ahmadinejad accused Israel of hiring mercenaries to assassinate him. We are "Globe Trekking," next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: And our "Globe Trekking" segment today. We are going to talk about Iran, and a possible assassination attempt on the Iranian president, or was it just fireworks? Our Ivan Watson covering this story for us from Istanbul, Turkey.
Ivan, did somebody try to kill the president of Iran or not?
IVAN WATSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good question here, T.J. Basically, there have been conflicting reports about what exactly happened, so we're all kind of scratching our heads right now.
What happened is, the Iranian president was touring the city in western Iran called Hamadan. He frequently makes these provincial visits around the country. And initially, a number of pro-government Iranian Web sites, including the Farsi News Agency that's closely tied to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps started reporting that somebody had thrown a homemade hand grenade at the Iranian president's convoy as it was driving through town, and somebody had been detained in connection with what appeared to be an attack.
Within a matter of hours, T.J., we started hearing from members of Ahmadinejad's team that no attack had taken place. In fact, his media adviser, Alli-Aqa Javanfare (ph), he said that this was really a toy firecracker, the kind that children play with, that some overenthusiastic supporter threw near the convoy, that nobody had been injured. And he accused the Western media of blowing this all out of proportion.
Part of the problem here is foreign journalists like myself are barred from traveling into Iran, and dozens of Iranian journalists have been detained as part of a government crackdown over the last year. So, it's very hard to get any transparent account of what actually happened transparent account of what actually happened today in Hamandan in Iran, T.J.
HOLMES: Like you said at the top, Ivan, a lot of us scratching our heads. Did it or did it not happen? Ivan Watson for us in Istanbul. We appreciate you as always.
Quick break here. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: Got some news from medicine for you here now. The National Collegiate Athletic Association or NCAA has implemented a controversial rule requiring all Division I athletes to be screened for a genetic sickle cell trait.
It's part of a settlement between Rice University and the family of a college football player who died in 2006 during a workout. He carried the trait. Critics argue, though, the new rule could expose players, mainly African-Americans, to genetic discrimination.
Well, coming up here, 3-D technology in your hands. More and more companies out there making the TVs, but now you can shoot your own home movie in 3-D. That's "The Big Idea." Stay here.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: We've got a big idea for you today and it's our "Edge of Discovery" as well. The first possible 3-D camcorder for home use. Yes, you can shoot your own stuff in 3-D. Course, you've been seeing more and more about 3-D televisions and whatnot.
Let's bring in the guy who's with the company who's trying to bring these 3-D cameras to you, Mr. Peter Fannon is with Panasonic. He's the director of technology policy.
Sir, thank you for being here. And I guess this was the natural next step, right? We have the 3-D TVs, we have got to shoot something in 3-D now, right?
PETER FANNON, DIRECTOR OF TECHNOLOGY, PANASONIC: It is, indeed, T.J. In fact, this puts you right in the middle of the action. Instead of just watching 3-D TV on your new 3-D TV at home, you now can now actually shoot it with Panasonic's 3-D HD camcorder.
HOLMES: And I see it you have it there in your hand. Help us understand the technology a bit. Was the trick trying to -- other cameras and professionals have these 3-D cameras. Is it tricky trying to get it down to a price point to make it affordable for people for home use?
FANNON: Well, it is indeed, but the great news is all of this is built on the digital and HD technology that's now very well- established and Panasonic was a leader in that, so we've been able to produce this very small consumer camcorder to be available in October here in the U.S.
But it actually looks like a regular camcorder but with the attachment of this 3-D lens which has two eyes just like we do or like our animated friend WALL-E has. You have the ability to actually shoot 3-D in full HD. A piece for the left eye, a piece for the right eye.
HOLMES: OK, now is it possible to just buy the lens without having to buy the whole camera or right now it's a whole package deal?
FANNON: No, it's a whole package deal. In the U.S., this will retail in October for $1,400, suggested retail.
And you can shoot onto both embedded memory for short shots or onto SD memory cards. So you can hold hours of full HD on this camcorder.
When you detach the lens, you can actually use it as a regular full HD 1080p camcorder as well.
HOLMES: Now help people out there understand. I enjoyed "Avatar" in 3-D, but if I would have seen it in regular just 2- Dimensional, I would have enjoyed the movie all the same.
Now -- so at your home movies, what is your market for these things? Who out there really wants to shoot the family picnic or whatever and enjoy that in 3-D later?
FANNON: Well, I think it's just like the full-time, big-time producers and directors. Any time you can add another dimension, literally in this case depth, to the content they're shooting, that adds to the storytelling capability. It gives you a powerful additional tool to be able to tell your story in a way that is both compelling and engaging. It really literally 3-D draws you into the imagery.
You may have noticed in "Avatar" Mr. Cameron actually shot depth images, not so many things coming out of the screen at you, but actually pulled you in as if you were part of the action right there on the scene.
And you'll do that at home, too, whether it's birthdays or special events, weddings, or whether you're just shooting your own home movies.
HOLMES: Well, tell me what's next? Just to wrap it up, what's next for you all in this technology. It looks like you've gone so far.
Now we have got 3-D cameras everybody can have at home, what are you going to do with 3-D next?
FANNON: Well, in 3-D's case, it's an end-to-end situation for us. From the camera to the couch, you can shoot it professionally and display it in the theaters, you can display it on our new 3-D TVs at home. You can get the camcorder, you can show movies off your Blu-ray 3-D player. And in fact, you can show the movies you shoot on this camcorder on your 3-D Blu-ray player from Panasonic as well.
So you have a whole slew of options. 3-D just becomes the norm for those who start for those who start to use it soon.
HOLMES: You know it absolutely will just be normal. It's cool and new and different now but like you said, down the road this will just be the norm. Mr. Fannon we appreciate you coming in, showing us that. We look forward to it on the market in October. We can all shoot in 3-D.
Sir, thank you so much. You enjoy the rest of your day.
FANNON: Thank you, T.J.
