JRSSEM 2022, Vol. 01, No. 9, 1363 – 1376

E-ISSN: 2807 - 6311, P-ISSN: 2807 - 6494

DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i9.160 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY IN THE STUDY OF

DEEPWATER HORIZON OIL SPILL

Verdinand Robertua

Angel Damayanti

International Relations Study Programme,

Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Jakarta

e-mail: verdinand.robertua@uki.ac.id

, angel.damayanti@uki.ac.id

*Correspondence: verdinand.robertua@uki.ac.id

Submitted: 24 March 2022, Revised: 05 April 2022, Accepted: 16 April 2022

Abstract. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill was the worst environmental disaster in US history. The

oil spill reflects the dependence of the United States on the exploitation of fossil fuels. President

Barack Obama seeks to bring about significant changes in US energy policy by promoting and

expanding clean energy. However, the new policy faced resistance from Congress and the oil

companies. This study aims to determine the impact of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill on US

energy policy using rational choice theory. To achieve the expansion of rational choice theory in

the Deepwater Horizon oil spill study, the researcher used qualitative methodology and case study

method. The result of this study is that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill became a stepping stone

for the transformation of US energy policy. The findings of this study are the linearity of clean

energy development and US political commitment in developing the clean energy industry.

Keywords: deepwater horizon; barrack obama; rational choice theory; clean energy.

Verdinand Robertua,Angel Damayanti                                                                                 
 
| 1364 
 
DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i9.160      https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index 
INTRODUCTION 
 
The  2010  deepwater  Horizon  oil  rig 
tragedy was the largest oil spill in the ocean 
in history. The tragedy resulted from an oil 
rig explosion, which caused the oil spill over 
the  sea.  It  was  called  the  Deepwater 
Horizon oil spill or the Mexican Gulf oil spill. 
Deepwater Horizon is an oil rig owned and 
operated by an offshore drilling company 
and was rented by a British Petroleum (BP) 
oil  company.  The  oil  rig  is  located  in  the 
prospect  of  Macondo  oil  in  Mississippi 
Gorge, clay in the continental shelf. The oil 
well  is  located  on  a  4,993-foot  sea  bed 
(1,522  meters)  subsurface  and  was 
extended  by  18,000  feet  (5,486  meters) 
(Ismail  et  al.,  2014);  (Skogdalen,  Utne,  & 
Vinnem, 2011). As a result of the tragedy, 
11 of its workers were declared dead, and 
17 others were injured.  
Deepwater Horizon oil spill have had a 
significant  impact  in  several  commercial 
fishing  sectors,  tourist  industries,  wildlife, 
natural  environment, and  other economic 
activities  in  areas  around  the  Gulf  of 
Mexico.  The  Gulf  of  Mexico  is  the  most 
productive  fishing  ground  in  the  United 
States. About 40% of the bay waters were 
closed after the incident. It is caused losses 
for anglers in the Gulf waters surrounding 
the  Gulf.  An  estimated  $4.36  billion  in 
losses  was  incurred  by  the  country’s 
fisheries  industry  around  the  Gulf  of 
Mexico.  Deepwater  Horizon’s  oil  spills 
caused a disturbance to Gulf tourists for a 
minimum  of  15  months  with  a  loss  of 
revenue of $7.6 billion to a maximum of 36 
months  with  a  loss  of  revenue  of  $22.7 
billion (Smith, Smith, & Ashcroft, 
 2011); (Huang, Keisler, & Linkov, 2011); 
(Alhashimi & Aktas, 2017). 
The  US  Department  of  Justice  [DOJ] 
sued BP in the New Orleans civilian court in 
December  2010  for  violating  the  Clean 
Water Act and Oil Pollution Act. CWA and 
OPA  are  the  leading federal  legislation in 
the  United  States  regulating  water 
pollution and oil spills. In March 2012, BP 
agreed  to  resolve  claims  made  by  the 
claimant, acting responsibility for victims of 
an  oil  spill  incident  of  $7.8  billion.  In 
November 2012, BP reached an agreement 
with the DOJ to be convicted of 14 criminal 
charges,  including  11  counts  of 
premeditated murder and Clean Water and 
Migratory  Bird  (Britannica  2010).  The 
agreement fines more  than $4.5 billion in 
penalties, in which nearly $1.26 billion will 
be  used  for  the  DOJ-supervised  discredit 
funds.  In  addition,  BP  also  agreed  to  pay 
more than $1.5 billion to the Securities and 
Exchange Commission as a responsibility to 
the  shareholders  resulted  in  an  oil  spill 
(Beyer, Trannum, Bakke, Hodson, & Collier, 
2016); (Barron, 2012). 
The  relevant  international  law  to 
evaluate  the  impact  of  the  Deepwater 
Horizon  disaster  is  the  United  Nations 
Convention  on  the  Law  of  the  Sea 
(UNCLOS).  UNCLOS  directly  regulates 
international rules about fixed and offshore 
drilling  platforms  such  as  the  Deepwater 
Horizon,  but  the  country  has  to  issue 
domestic  legislation  monitoring  pollution 
from the permanent bridge. UNCLOS also 
does  not  have  definite  procedures  for 
application-holding,  guaranteeing 
compensation, and enforcing the adoption 
of international rules. It happens if spilled 
or blasts caused by a country could affect 
another country (Hajdini, 2014). 

1365 | Rational Choice Theory in the Study of Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

The United States concluded the

Deepwater Horizon oil spill based on its

national law and does not use UNCLOS

international law as its prejudice. The

decision was made by the United States

indeed based on rational reasons.

According to the rational choice theory,

there are two basic assumptions about the

government’s policy on certain issues

namely the actor and the resources. Actors

in this research are countries with goals and

interests that then act maximally to achieve

those goals and interests. Meanwhile,

resources are something controlled

himself, and it depends on the ability of the

actor to do considerable consideration by

the actors (Arjawa, 2014).

Prior studies are looking into how

UNCLOS regulates oil spills, such as the

Deepwater Horizon incident of an oil rig.

The research is “The Impact of the

Deepwater Horizon: The Evolving

International Legal Regime for Offshore

Accidental Pollution Prevention,

Preparedness, and Response,” written by

Sergei Vinogradov. Under his panel,

Vinogradov said the UNCLOS does not

provide detailed rules about pollution

accidents caused by offshore activities.

However, UNCLOS provides several

guiding principles and emphasizes the

most important issues that the parties

concerned have to deal with. He concluded

that despite the general rules of UNCLOS,

there is no binding global instrument that

defines a minimum standard and

procedure for offshore safety, including

construction, equipment, and operations of

offshore drilling units (Gunter, Hill,

O’Connor, Retzer, & Lincoln, 2013).

Another study, called “Offshore Oil and

Gas Exploitation,” written by Henning

Jessen, also had similar opinions. He said

that Article 208, 214 of UNCLOS maintains

that every country seeks to align their

policies about the likelihood of pollution by

the seabed activity under national

jurisdiction at the international level.

However, the resulting legal situation can

be said to be confusing in various

coordination and discussion forums. No

forum received universally or even

organizations on the regulation on oil and

gas activities offshore (Mäkitie, Normann,

Thune, & Gonzalez, 2019); (Mendes, Hall,

Matos, & Silvestre, 2014).

President Obama was elected in 2008

and confronted with the Deepwater

environmental crisis. President Obama

visited affected areas and met with affected

communities to get accurate data on the

damage inflicted by the Deepwater oil rig

and expressed Obama’s anger over BP Oil.

President Obama’s outrage was seen in

various statements and behaviors that had

requested the BP Oil be fully responsible

for the impact of the Deepwater disaster.

Obama’s role in Deepwater’s handling

raises a question on power centralization in

disaster mitigation in environmental

politics of the United States.

In handling disasters and natural

resource management, the United States

government also has a role in budget

allocations, establishing environmental

standards, and regional spatial. The

environmental politics of the United States

are determined jointly by the President,

Congress, and the Federal Government

(Aklin & Urpelainen, 2014). Still, in some

cases like the Clean Power Plan and

ratification of the Paris Agreement, there

Verdinand Robertua,Angel Damayanti

| 1366

are conflicts between the federal

government and the president of the

United States. President Obama was

ambitious in implementing New Green

Deal by establishing a higher

envirovnmental standard than the US

president had previously and boosting

renewable energy-based industries

(Konisky & Woods, 2016).

President Obama is a Democratic Party

politician who became a senator from Ohio,

the State of Illinois. Through his book

Audacity of Hope, President Obama shares

his incredible struggle for a career in the

political world. Obama stunned the

popularity of minority and young people,

recalling his identity as a black US citizen

and was born out of an African father.

President Obama also was able to be a

professional speaker who lured the

attention of various circles. Obama

campaigned for higher taxes for wealthy

families, universal health insurance,

improved education, and renewable energy

development. Obama and Democrat Party

members were often named the United

States socialist party by a Republican

member.

After President Obama took office for

eight years (2008-16), President Trump

replaced Obama in 2016. Clinton, a

Democrat, is not the president of the

Democratic Party, could not defeat

President Trump. As a result, various

Obama policies were abolished, including

under-sea mine supervision policy (The

Washington Post 2020). Mr. Trump fully

supports the exploration and exploitation

of oil in the United States, included in the

deep-sea area in the Gulf of Mexico. The

difference in oil mining management

policies between Obama and Trump

reflected the difference in the political

environment of the United States. Obama

emphasized government regulations,

surveillance, and oversight, while Trump

believes in private initiatives to manage

haul resources.

Through this research on Deepwater

Horizon’s handling, the regulation-based

Obama strategy is becoming more evident.

The deep water environmental disaster is a

disaster for BP and a political disaster for

the Republican Party, which has been

reliant on corporate freedom in its business

activities. Obama did not use the

International Court of Justice because it did

not significantly influence the Obama

political strategy and the Democrat Party.

Through Obama’s various policies,

Democratic Party’s aggression in

organizing corporations, especially the oil

industry, became apparent.

LITERATURE REVIEW

To understand the role of governments

in environmental disasters, the authors

reviewed four highlighting the role of

political leaders in changing the landscape

of the environmental politics. The first

article highlights the conflict between the

European governments and Indonesia.

Kurniaty (2020) argued that Presiden of the

Republic of Indonesia played unique role in

fighting the EU’s restriction on the

Indonesia palm oil. By establishing the

concept of Indonesia sustainable palm oil,

President Joko Widodo argued that the

EU’s restriction is an act of discrimination.

In Japan, Ministry of Trade and Industry

and Keidanren dominated the decision-

making process of environmental policies.

1367 | Rational Choice Theory in the Study of Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

Pajon (2010) showed the stark comparison

between the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP)

and the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ)

government on climate changes issues.

LDP consistently emphasized the

traditional approach in pursuing climate

change mitigation meanwhile DPJ

government showed its ambition to cut

national emissions significantly.

Obama’s policy on energy supply

shows a contradiction. In one hand, Obama

wanted to increase the production of clean

energy but in other hand, Obama provided

bigger opportunities for fossil fuels

expansion. Lin (2014) argued that the

Obama’s ”All-of-the-Above” energy

approach didn’t provide clear transition to

clean energy and didn’t engage with the

public adequately. Climate change priority

is not clearly reflected in the Obama’s

policy.

There is a different interpretation of

Obama’s energy policy. According to

Nyman (2018), Obama has pushed the

Congress to end tax breaks and subsidies

for oil companies. Not only that, Obama

has linked energy security and climate

change. By keeping the oil consumption

high, the greater security of the United

States is at stake. Nyman highlighted the

significant change between Obama and his

predecessors and successors.

To understand Obama’s policy, the

researchers used Rational Choice Theory.

According to James Coleman, the Rational

Choice Theory holds two basic assumptions

for actors and resources. Coleman

explained that actors were seen as rational

actors who had the purposes and interests

to be attained. Actors are doing their best

to reach their goals and their interests

(Arjawa 2014). According to Diekmann in

Gross and Heinrichs, actors can choose

between at least two alternatives. In

addition, the theory contains a rule of

decree stating which actions (Liebe dan

Preisendörfer 2010) were selected.

The second basic assumption is the

resource. Coleman said resources were

something the actor could control. Control

of resources is highly dependent on the

actor's ability, based on considerable

considerations. In this case, the

government is the absolute decision-

making actor (Arjawa 2014).

Concerning this research, a rational

actor playing the Deepwater Horizon case

study is the United States Government led

by Barack Obama. The United States

government is sensible in response to the

Deepwater Horizon oil rig accident. This

rational attitude was indicated by using

valid national law in the United States, such

as the Clean Water Act and Oil Pollution

Act, to impair British Petroleum. The United

States also did not ratify the 1982 United

Nations Convention on Law Sea [UNCLOS]

but only established it as a law of habit.

Consideration - the United States'

consideration to settle the Deepwater

Horizon incident by attaining the national

interest of the United States. The United

States has full power to control the sea

resources established in the Gulf of Mexico

and the surrounding states. Also, if their

problems or conflicts in the Gulf of Mexico,

the United States is entitled to act as a

nation with national law enforcement in its

country. Violations of the worker's safety

regulations, the rules of exploitation of sea

mines, and compensation by British

Petroleum have been charged by a high

Verdinand Robertua,Angel Damayanti

| 1368

court in the United States. This sentence

also has to look at the national interest of

the United States as it recovers the coastal

area and around the Gulf of Mexico.

According to Graciela Kincaid and

Rober Timmon (2013) President Obama

conducts transformative leadership within

the second term of his government and the

global leadership within the first period of

her government. It was apparent from the

funding of climate change issues coming

out of the two governments. In the first

period of Obama, Kincaid and Roberts

produced a label "talk the talk" and, over

the second period, Kincaid and Roberts,

labeled "walk the walk."

The president is a leader who is capable

of transforming into the management of

natural resources. In environmental politics,

a president can carry out transformative

leadership or transactional leadership.

Transformative leadership generates

awareness of joint responsibility and

urgency of cooperation in creating a

conservation culture and environmental

protection. The transactional leadership

focused on protecting the status quo and

did not implement ambitious commitments

that had already been agreed upon about

joint responsibility.

President Obama is trying to direct the

United States was moving from fossil

energy use to renewable energy. This

transformation can be explained by using a

derivative of the RCT, which is called game

theory. The game theory demonstrates the

four choices that a specific person or

institution can choose from in dealing with

a problem or phenomenon. These four

choices range from choices that benefit all

parties to choices that hurt all parties. Liebe

and Preisferendor (2010) gave an example

of games theory.

The game theory can explain the

Obama policy that pushed the

transformation of the U.S. energy use from

fossil energy to clean energy. In a question

on the media, executive director of Sierra

Club Michael Brune said, "This disaster

changes everything. We have hit rock-

bottom in our fossil fuel addiction. This

should be a wake-up call" (Merry 2014).

This assertion is a manifestation of the

worst situation in games theory. Obama

delivered his vision that clean energy was

the best situation in the United States

would have an incredible investment shot

and increase the number of jobs in the

clean energy industry. Obama believed that

oil mining would reach a saturation point,

and the United States had to focus on

developing clean energy.

Obama provided a successful example

of China's successful transformation in

clean energy use. China is the most

advanced country in the use of clean

energy. Through the Paris Agreement, the

United States cooperates with developed

countries and develops clean energy

technology. Obama had the vision of

making the United States a frontline

country in the utilization of clean energy.

This transformation certainly caused a

rivalry with the fossil energy industry, which

has a significant influence on the domestic

politics of the United States. The dewater

horizon disaster became momentum for

Obama in transforming the political

environment of the United States by

focusing on developing clean energy.

1369 | Rational Choice Theory in the Study of Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

METHODS

The researchers used qualitative

methodology and case-study research

method to understand the implementation

of rational choice theory in the case of

Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The problem of

Deepwater Horizon oil spill has impacted

various dimensions including theoretical

development. The focus of this research is

to understand the development of rational

choice theory.

There are various data to be used in this

research. Firstly, the researchers used

President Obama’s speech regarding clean

energy and Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The

researchers also used public reports

regarding the impact of Deepwater

Horizon oil spill. The researchers also joined

a couple of webinars including the webinar

held on August 18, 2020, regarding marine

pollution by ships loaded with crude oil in

Mauritania. In this webinar, Donald Boesch

from the University of Maryland presented

his views on BP's handling of Gulf of Mexico

pollution. The last component of data is the

academic journals and books to

understand the complexity of Rational

Choice Theory.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

After an oil spill incident in Mexico,

Obama responded by forming the Initial

Comprehensive Plan. The bill imposes a

one-year schedule to develop a

comprehensive plan to illustrate how the

Board will restore the Gulf Coast's

ecosystem and economy. The purpose of

the Initial Comprehensive Plan, among

others, is to recover and preserve habitat,

restore water quality, restore and protect

the lives of coastal and sea resources,

improve community resilience, and

revitalize the Bay area economy (Varughese

& Shin, 2010).

Obama's desire to convert to clean

energy use of fossil energy has

strengthened after the explosion of an oil

rig in the Gulf of Mexico. He wanted to be

made by Obama through his June 15, 2010

speech. He said the United States would

switch to clean energy use when a

recession was successfully handled in his

remarks. He said by turning to the use of

clean energy, US would potentially grow his

country's economy and create jobs for the

middle class (Kessler, Mahoney, Randolph-

Seng, Martinko, & Spector, 2019).

President Barack Obama's desire to

push for real-life energy use was in his

office as President of the United States in

2009. President Obama and Congress are

working together to combat a severe

economic recession by bringing out a full-

scale stimulus plan (Johnston & Goggin,

2015); (Hashemi Shahraki, 2020). This is

shown by the signing of The American

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

The signing of the ARRA occurred to

improve the significant recession occurring

in 2008. Seven components focus on

discussion inside the ARRA, namely

financial assistance for family,

infrastructure, alternative energy sources,

health care, education, small business, and

scientific research and development

(Somwanshi et al., 2016)

ARRA not only saved the U.S. from

recession, but it also helped drive the clean

energy revolution from technological

innovation and market power. With the

Verdinand Robertua,Angel Damayanti

| 1370

signing of the ARRA, private entrepreneurs

have also obtained capital to bring

competitive new technologies to the

market and help reduce carbon emissions

and promote sustained economic growth.

Critically, the main reason for extending

public money in the energy sector is to

boost investment change. The business has

had a lot of incentive to invest in energy,

and its challenge is to make them invest in

a socially likable area, such as low carbon

energy.

ARRA upgrades the country's capacity

to domestically produce wind turbines,

electric vehicles, batteries, and other clean

energy components. The ARRA has

authorized its 30% tax credit for investment

in more than 180 advanced energy

manufacturing projects and provided $2.3

billion for renewable energy plants, energy

storage, progressive transmission, energy

conservation, renewable fuel refinement or

mixing plug-in vehicles, and carbon and

storage capture. In addition, the funding

helped in supporting dramatic increases in

the wind turbine components produced in

the U.S. from 25% in 2006-2007 to 72% in

2012.

Before President Obama took office,

there was no single photovoltaic solar

power plant (P.V.) on a utility scale in the

United States more prominent than 100

megawatts. The utility-scale generates

enough electricity to power an average of

100,000 American homes.

Starting in 2009, when funding was

unavailable, the U.S. Department of Energy

Loan Office spent more than $4.6 billion on

loan guarantees from ARRA funding to help

build five of the first utility-scale P.V. solar

facilities in the United States. Over the next

five years, the loan guarantees help reform

the production of U.S. energy and pave the

way for the fastest-growing solar industry.

In 2016, 28 utility-scale P.V. power plants

across the United States were privately

funded, producing more than 6,870 MW.

In 2015 Obama announced The Clean

Power Plan, which aims to reduce carbon

pollution from U.S. power plants. Power

plants that were still used are considered

the most significant pollution contributor in

the U.S. The U.S. The Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) then issued Clear

Power Plan finals under the Clean Air Act

that is a U.S. fundamental air pollution law.

The EPA adopted Clean Power Plan under

Clean Air Act which, according to the

Supreme Court's decision in 2011, gives the

legal authority to control carbon pollution.

According to the independent Solar

Foundation, global solar jobs double in the

last five years (Hirtenstein 2016).

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico at the

Deepwater Horizon incident affected

various aspects and subjects. Whether it's

from the environmental part — especially

to the animals and the water habitat there

and the economy-directly impact the U.S.

government, even to people located on the

shores of the Gulf of Mexico. The

immediate effect is the environmental

impact. Further, a large amount of oil

polluting the sea and its coastal beaches

has made a significant change that will

eventually affect the economic growth of

many countries on the northern shores of

the Gulf of Mexico.

Previously, the Gulf of Mexico was the

ninth-largest body of water globally and

the region rich with its marine biodiversity.

Chen (2017, 869) said various demersal fish,

1371 | Rational Choice Theory in the Study of Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

server, sharks, and coral reefs in the Gulf are

large. Geographically, the seat of the Gulf is

a strategic place because it's a migratory

route for various fish. The marine

ecosystem food chain wheel continues to

turn here and add to the dynamics in the

Gulf of Mexico. About 4.6% of flaps in the

Gulf of Mexico are endemic fish there (Ibid.,

1004). In addition to its biodiversity wealth,

the Gulf is home to a vast water body by

extensively receiving river drainage from

five countries, namely Canada, Cuba,

Guatemala, Mexico, and the United States-

including two-thirds of the United States.

The water stream being delivered is from

more than 150 rivers. Including 20 is the

primary river system, like the Mississippi

River. And so, the function of the Gulf of

Mexico is a productive fishery, storm

protection, flood risk reduction, carbon

absorption, water quality improvement

from its wet lands, and the places of the sea

habitat. For the U.S. people themselves, the

Gulf is the economic wheel of their

economy because it is a livelihood for 20

million people and gives its annual revenue

of $234 billion.

These make the Gulf a significant role

because it has a diverse wealth of

biodiversity, both fauna and flora at sea,

and land on the shores of the Gulf of

Mexico. It is one of the world's world's most

productive maritime, maritime ecosystems.

However, since the leaks have occurred in

the Gulf of Deepwater Horizon, many

changes have occurred. They have

impacted several U.S. states (such as

Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi,

and Texas) that have been on the shores:

First, the change in the quality of the

environment in the United States — mainly

the coastal of the Gulf of Mexico that is

seen in the quality of life of the animals and

habitat of those waters, the attitude of

communities down the coast of the Gulf of

Mexico and the general public of the

United States and health. Pollution is an

immediate effect, which has been

geographically eroding, the quality of water

in both the surface and the terrain, the

quality of air is tainted. The emission

generated from an explosion in an oil rig is

air pollution in the atmosphere. The

leakage and burning of oil from the above

scale caused an estimated 0.63 to 2.07

million kilograms of black carbon to be

evacuated to the atmosphere. Lots of

Hydrocarbons (H.C.) evaporates from oil

that surfaces. H.C. is polluting the air quality

because it consists of compounds

measured in it are dangerous pollutants

and can poison ocean habitat and

atmosphere. This erosion, which is one of

the impacts of the leakage, is caused by a

lack of oil deposits in wet areas off the

coast. So this has made it easy for the high

tide, and it's also hard to produce oxygen.

Biological, The impact of this pollution

causes many animal habitats to be polluted

and died. The National Wildlife Federation

report of the United States (2015, 3)

reported in 2010 that 27,000-65,000 Kemp

sea turtles died, and their number is

declining every year. About 12% of the

Brown Pelican Birds and 32% of the seals in

the North Bay of Mexico are considered

dead. Then, the mortality rate of dolphins

and whales in Lusiana increased four times

larger than its standard rate.

Because of changing the quality of the

environment, human health-the workers

who serve clean oil at sea-were also

Verdinand Robertua,Angel Damayanti

| 1372

affected by the events. The long-term

effects of exposure to oil leaks for workers

are symptoms of long-term illness in lung

and heart functions. D'Andrea and Reddy

(2018, 7) researched workers who worked

directly to clear oil in the sea. Research

results showed a majority of workers

having chronic details and respiratory

channel dysfunctionality, even heart

disease. Apart from health-affected

workers, children were affected by the

health of the oil leaks.

The change in the quality of the

environment is a change in people's

attitude in response to the pollution of the

domain. In a study carried out by

Bergstrand and Mayer (2017, 4), 45% of the

people have changed behavior to help

reduce pollution there. Of that percentage,

16% reduced driving vehicles, 30% reduced

their total amount of energy and fuel in

their homes, and another 30% saved their

water.

Second, the change in U.S. income-

both locally and federal income. The Gulf

of Mexico has been one of the most

productive places in the United States,

serve a lot of ocean wealth that has become

the American economy. It was estimated

that tourist losses incurred in 2013 were

about $22.7 billion. Biological wealth in the

Gulf of Mexico, a source of local livelihoods,

had to stop and lose because of oil leaks.

The fisheries industry has suffered a loss of

about $247 million (Ibid). The failure to the

fisheries industry sector from 2011 to 2013

ranged from $285 to $428 million in full

time the workers were working (Bureau of

Ocean Energy Management 2016, 157).

Any condition change described above,

one of Obama's existing visions as

President is an effective use of clean energy

in the United States to reduce the

likelihood of damage such as the

Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico.

Any carbon emission resulting from fires

and oil leaks on these events gives a

distinct blow to the public and government

of the United States of America. Reflecting

on the Deepwater Horizon oil leaks in the

Gulf of Mexico, using clean energy could

reduce air pollution caused by excess

carbon evaluation, improve the quality of

public health, and minimize the impact of

climate change. So in his speech, Obama

had the ambition to change the

dependency of the United States from fossil

energy to equally clean energy by 69% in

2035 (Gimon 2020). (Gimon 2020) Through

the ARRA, some of the achievements

Obama had made through clean energy

were stabilizing the economy, preserving

and recovering work, and assisting suffered

(Executive Office of the President of the

United States 2016, 7) industry.

Additionally, Obama's ambition to drive the

United States to use clean energy is to

achieve energy independence and

unreliance on other countries in energy

sources, which the United States of fossil

energy has relied on Middle Eastern

countries.

Deepwater Horizon contributed so

much to the environment as the total loss

was estimated at US$36.9 billion. The

Deepwater Horizon incident's

environmental impact also had an

economic impact on states around the Gulf

of Mexico. About 40% of the Gulf waters

were closed due to the 2017 Deepwater

Horizon (Simon and Hayes 2017) spill. This

impacted the economy of the United States

1373 | Rational Choice Theory in the Study of Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

at the time; based on World Bank data,

2010 GDP of the United States was 2.6%,

the year after the Deepwater Horizon GDP

incident in the United States declined to

1.6% (World Bank 2021). In addition, the

U.S. Travel Association predicts that the

economic impact of this incident would

exceed 2.3 billion on tour pari sector and

would last three years later.

Obama, in his speech, delivered that the

Deepwater Horizon oil spill was hit by an

economic disaster and environmental

degradation, which caused the loss of wet

and habitat land. The Deepwater Horizon

incident has been one of Obama's primary

momentum in visioning his vision of clean

energy use, Clean Energy Savings for All

Americans to an American environment.

Obama designated the American Recovery

and Reinvestment Act as one of the efforts

to promote clean energy. ARRA has

created the application of low-carbon

technology and utilized about $150 billion

for clean energy investment.

Quoting Obama's speech on the

Deepwater Horizon incident, he said half a

year of his tenure focused on the clean

energy industry. The United States is

beginning to experience a significant

transition. The use of clean energy and

energy efficiency conserves consumers'

money, improves the energy sector's

performance, and creates new job

opportunities. Defunct factories opened to

produce wind turbines and energy-efficient

windows and solar panels.

The use of alternative energy has been

a wrong attempt by Obama in running

Clean Energy Savings for All Americans.

This has been shown by the increasing use

of wind and solar power since Obama took

office. Together with Congress, Obama

provides tax loans for investment and

production of renewable energy,

Investment Tax Credit (ITC) for solar, and a

production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind and

other alternative energy. It reduces the cost

of electricity used for new wind and solar

power generation projects. The Obama

government also promoted the research

and development of clean energy

technology. The U.S. Department of Energy

expenditures from the 2008 budget year to

about US$1.24 billion in 2016 were

specified for energy efficiency. Of the total

costs above, there was a 57% increase or

about 337 million by 2016 used for solar

and wind efficiency. By 2008 only about 215

million was used for the efficiency of solar

and wind.

The graph below shows a significant

increase in the amount of electricity

generated by the wind compared to the

water power (Simon dan Hayes 2017).

That's a four-fold increase from 2008 to

2016 at wind power stations—the United

States as a whole, from 55.4 million

megawatt-hours to 226.9 million

megawatt-hours. The growth puts wind

power plants as the resources used after

water power stations.

In addition to the use of wind energy,

the Obama administration also focuses on

solar energy. Solar power in the United

States increased more than 40 times by

2008 to 2016 from 864,000 megawatt-

hours to 36,754,000 megawatt-hours.

That's comparable to the pre-Obama

administration, not solar plants more

prominent than 110 megawatts are in

operation.

Obama also focused on reducing

Verdinand Robertua,Angel Damayanti

| 1374

carbon emissions, which is one of the

biggest problems in the neighborhood of

the United States. Electricity use from 2008

to 2016 has had a significant effect on the

production of carbon dioxide emissions.

The source of the carbon emission from

power plants contributes about 35% of U.S.

carbon emissions. With wind and solar

power usage over the past eight years, the

carbon emissions produced by the power

plant in 2008 were about 2.373 million

metric tons, down 23% to 1.821 million

metrics by 2016. The Obama government

earned $4 billion in commitment and

private action in using technology to

reduce carbon emissions.

Enhancing clean energy and energy

efficiency saves consumers money,

improves the energy sector's

environmental performance, and creates

new job opportunities. The upgrade was

estimated at 2.2 million jobs in the first

quarter of 2016 and then increased to 7%

in 2017. In the first quarter of 2016, of the

6.5 million construction workers of the

United States, some 21% are working to

construct or install energy-efficient

technologies. Solar power contributed to

the second largest category of clean energy

jobs, with a 24.5% increase between 2015

and 2016. wind power stations contributed

slightly more than 77,000 workers in 2015

and rose in 2016 to 102,000 workers. The

boosting job opportunities in the wind and

solar sector became evidence of the

effectiveness of clean energy in the

industrial sector. The Obama

administration also launched Solar Ready

Vets, an initiative to serve its transitional

veterans to enter the solar-based

workforce.

With the Deepwater Horizon incident,

Obama noted the seriousness to which

such an incident has occurred, which could

impact the environment and the economy

of the United States. With his

aggressiveness, Obama made a clean

energy response to facing environmental

problems in the United States. Over the two

periods of Obama's tenure, the United

States succeeded in making use of existing

opportunities and innovations with public

desire to reduce carbon emissions and

improve renewable energy efficiency and

its technology, Skeptical which is emerging

concerning clean energy changing when

Obama with clean energy projects changes

the skepticism into a crucial phase, which

then becomes the fundamental element of

the energy system in the United States.

CONCLUSIONS

Deepwater Horizon oil spill is the worst

environmental disaster in the United States’

history. The disaster attraced a worldwide

attention due to the scale of the impact and

the involvement of global oil corporation,

the BP Oil Corporation.

The problem of Deepwater Horizon oil

spill reflected the dependency of the US on

the oil mining. The US is still the biggest oil

miner in the world. However, the Obama

administration attempted to bring new

changes in the US’ environmental policy.

Clean energy is the main priority for Obama

and the Democrat Party. To understand the

impact of Obama’s policy on clean energy

expansion, the researchers analyzed the

President’s speech, official reports, and

experts’ opinion.

Based on the analysis of Obama’s policy

1375 | Rational Choice Theory in the Study of Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill 
 
and  responses  toward  the  Deepwater 
Horizon oil spill, the researchers concluded 
that  the  Deepwater  Horizon  oil  spill 
became  the  stepping  stone  for  the 
transformation  of  the  US’  energy  policy.  
The American Recovery and Reinvestment 
Act of 2009 became more effective after the 
public responses toward the oil spill.  
 
REFERENCES 
 
Aklin,  Michaël,  &  Urpelainen,  Johannes. 
(2014). Perceptions of scientific dissent 
undermine  public  support  for 
environmental  policy.  Environmental 
Science  &  Policy,  3(8),  173–177. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.1
0.006 
 
Alhashimi,  Hashim  A.,  &  Aktas,  Can  B. 
(2017).  Life  cycle  environmental  and 
economic  performance  of  biochar 
compared  with  activated  carbon:  a 
meta-analysis.  Resources,  Conservation 
and  Recycling,  8(10),  13–26. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.201
6.11.016 
 
Arjawa, G. S. (2014). Pilihan Rasional di Balik 
Pembebasan Corby. Jurnal Global Dan 
Strategis, 8(1), 49–62. 
 
Barron, Mace G. (2012). Ecological impacts 
of  the  Deepwater  Horizon  oil  spill: 
implications  for  immunotoxicity. 
Toxicologic  Pathology,  4(2),  315–320. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/019262331142
8474 
 
Beyer,  Jonny,  Trannum,  Hilde  C.,  Bakke, 
Torgeir,  Hodson,  Peter  V,  &  Collier, 
Tracy K. (2016). Environmental effects of 
the  Deepwater  Horizon  oil  spill:  a 
review. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 8(10), 
28–51. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.20
16.06.027 
 
Gunter, Matthew M., Hill, Ryan, O’Connor, 
Mary  B.,  Retzer,  Kyla  D.,  &  Lincoln, 
Jennifer  M.  (2013).  Fatal  injuries  in 
offshore  oil  and  gas  operations—
United  States,  2003–2010.  MMWR. 
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 
6(2), 301. 
 
Hajdini,  Bojana.  (2014).  The  Albanian 
mechanism for  guaranteeing  the  right 
to  compensation  for  unjust 
imprisonment and wrongful conviction. 
Academicus  International  Scientific 
Journal, 4(10), 226–241. 
 
Hashemi  Shahraki,  Sara.  (2020). 
Manipulation  of  Realities  through 
Euphemistic and Derogatory Terms and 
Phrases  in  Political  Texts:  Obama’s 
actions  regarding  American  Gulf  Oil 
Spill. Journal of Language and Discourse 
Practice,  2(2),  61–79. 
680793/jldp.2020.132973 
 
Huang, Ivy B., Keisler, Jeffrey, & Linkov, Igor. 
(2011).  Multi-criteria  decision  analysis 
in environmental sciences: Ten years of 
applications and trends. Science of the 
Total  Environment,  4(9),  3578–3594. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.201
1.06.022 
 
Ismail,  Zubaidah,  Kong,  Keen  Kuan, 
Othman,  Siti  Zulaikha,  Law,  Kim  Hing, 
Khoo,  Shin  Yee,  Ong,  Zhi  Chao,  & 
Shirazi,  Sharif  Muniruzzaman.  (2014). 
Evaluating  accidents  in  the  offshore 
drilling of  petroleum:  Regional picture 
and  reducing  impact.  Measurement, 
5(2),  18–33. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement
.2014.01.027 
 
Johnston, Travis M., & Goggin, Stephen N. 
(2015). Presidential confidence in crisis: 

Verdinand Robertua,Angel Damayanti                                                                                 
 
| 1376 
blame,  media,  and  the  BP  oil  spill. 
Presidential  Studies  Quarterly,  4(3), 
467–489.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/psq.12206 
 
Kessler Kessler, Stacey R., Mahoney, Kevin 
T., Randolph-Seng, Brandon, Martinko, 
Mark J., & Spector, Paul E. (2019). The 
effects  of  attribution  style  and 
stakeholder  role  on  blame  for  the 
deepwater horizon oil spill. Business & 
Society,  5(8),  1572–1598.  
https://doi.org/10.1177/000765031771
7495 
 
Konisky, David M., & Woods, Neal D. (2016). 
Environmental  policy,  federalism,  and 
the  Obama  presidency.  Publius:  The 
Journal  of  Federalism,  4(3),  366–391. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjw00
4 
 
Mäkitie,  Tuukka,  Normann,  Håkon  E., 
Thune,  Taran  M.,  &  Gonzalez,  Jakoba 
Sraml.  (2019).  The  green  flings: 
Norwegian  oil  and  gas  industry’s 
engagement  in  offshore  wind  power. 
Energy  Policy,  7(12),  269–279. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.1
2.015 
 
Mendes, Pietro  A. S.,  Hall,  Jeremy,  Matos, 
Stelvia,  &  Silvestre,  Bruno.  (2014). 
Reforming Brazil׳ s offshore oil and gas 
safety  regulatory  framework:  Lessons 
from Norway, the United Kingdom and 
the  United  States.  Energy  Policy,  7(4), 
443–453. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.0
8.014 
 
Skogdalen,  Jon  Espen,  Utne,  Ingrid  B.,  & 
Vinnem,  Jan  Erik.  (2011).  Developing 
safety  indicators  for  preventing 
offshore oil and gas deepwater drilling 
blowouts.  Safety  Science,  9(8),  1187–
1199. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.03.0
12 
 
Smith,  Lawrence  C.,  Smith,  Murphy,  & 
Ashcroft,  Paul.  (2011).  Analysis  of 
environmental and economic damages 
from  British  Petroleum’s  Deepwater 
Horizon  oil  spill.  Albany  Law  Review, 
7(4), 563–585. 
 
Somwanshi,  Rutuja,  Shindepatil,  Utkarsha, 
Tule,  Deepali,  Mankar,  Archana,  Ingle, 
Namdev,  Rajamanya,  GBDV,  & 
Deshmukh,  A.  (2016).  Study  and 
development  of  village  as  a  smart 
village. International Journal of Scientific 
& Engineering Research, 7(6), 395–408. 
 
Varughese,  Heather,  &  Shin,  Paul.  (2010). 
The  Flexner  Report:  Commemoration 
and  Reconsideration.  The  Yale  Journal 
of Biology and Medicine, 8(3), 149. 
 
 
© 2022 by the authors. Submitted  
for possible open access publication  
under  the  terms  and  conditions  of  the  Creative 
Commons  Attribution  (CC  BY  SA)  license 
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). 
 