A federal judge in New Orleans has granted final approval to an estimated 20 billion US dollar (£14 billion) settlement over the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
The settlement, first announced in July, includes 5.5 billion dollars (£3.85 billion) in civil Clean Water Act penalties and billions more to cover environmental damage and other claims by the five Gulf states and local governments.
The money is to be paid out over a 16-year period.
The US Justice Department has estimated that the settlement will cost the oil giant as much as 20.8 billion dollars, the largest environmental settlement in US history as well as the largest-ever civil settlement with a single entity.
US district judge Carl Barbier, who approved the settlement, had set the stage with an earlier ruling that BP had been "grossly negligent" in the offshore rig explosion that killed 11 workers and caused a 134-million-gallon spill.
In 2012, BP reached a similar settlement agreement with private lawyers for businesses and residents who claim the spill cost them money. That deal, which did not have a cap, led to a protracted court battle over subsequent payouts to businesses. A court-supervised claims administrator is still processing many of these claims.
BP has estimated its costs related to the spill, including its initial clean-up work and the various settlements and criminal and civil penalties, will exceed 53 billion dollars (£37 billion).
David Uhlmann, a University of Michigan law professor and former chief of the Justice Department's environmental crimes section, said the ruling "ends a long sad chapter in American environmental history".
"The question that remains is whether we have learned enough from this tragedy to prevent similar environmental disasters in the future," he said.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here