2010年4月20日发生在美国墨西哥湾的石油钻井平台爆炸及随后的石油泄漏给美国乃至地球带来了严重的灾难。这其中最引人关注的就是赔偿责任的承担问题，案件一发生，美国民众的激烈反应决定了政府方面对待这个问题的慎重程度，美国纳税人是不能容忍用他们的钱来为这场灾难买单的，即使不得不这样做，也是越少越好。而该案的民事责任的承担又非常复杂，不论是责任主体，索赔者，还是赔偿方式都和以往的案件有着很大的不同。就责任承担来说，其中涉及保险责任，以及依据美国《石油污染法》、《侵权法》等法律规定，由英国石油公司等责任方承担的责任，还有依据美国法律规定的，特有的石油泄漏责任信托基金和超级基金的补充责任问题。 本文直接从案件本身入手，第一章介绍了墨西哥湾石油泄漏案件的经过，起因和后续发展，以此引出案件的责任承担问题。第二章则结合美国法律着重分析该案的民事责任承担。首先简要介绍美国环境法和环境诉讼概要、美国环境行政体制的规定，为下文的分析提供基本的理论依据。然后结合美国法律分析案件，美国针对石油污染有专门的成文法——《石油污染法》，其中对于石油污染的赔偿责任主体，赔偿数额等都有详细的规定。根据该法本文得出主要损失的赔偿责任承担：在人身伤亡、油污清理、自然资源及个人财产的损害上，由主要的责任主体英国石油公司承担责任，本案中涉案的该公司的合作伙伴也要依法承担责任，而为这些公司担保的保险公司须依法赔偿。另外本文也谈及依据美国《侵权法》等相关法律，本案的赔偿责任问题。至于美国的两个基金制度——超级基金和石油泄漏责任信托基金，则更可能在清理中承担一些补充责任。最后，本文在第三章论述美国法律在石油污染赔偿责任上对中国的借鉴意义。我国法律和制度在石油污染的责任承担上存在很大的问题，比如我国对石油泄漏赔偿责任的规定赔偿数额过少，我国在石油泄漏污染上缺少完善的保险机制和基金制度，环境应急机制不完备等。在吸取美国墨西哥湾石油泄漏案和大连的石油管道爆炸案的经验中，我国在石油污染责任承担上的法律规定及石油污染行政执法方面尚需完善。

On April 20th. 2010, the oil rig explosion and the subsequent oil spill in the Gulf brought to the United States and the planet a serious disaster, then the liability of compensation becomes the most important thing. Suddenly after this accident occurred, the American people's violent reaction influenced how seriously the American government treat this problem. Obviously, the U.S. taxpayer is intolerable to use their money to pay for this disaster, even if they have to, less payment is better. Since the Civil Liability of this case is very complex, the liability holders, the claimant, and the mode of compensation are much different from the prior cases. This case involves insurance, responsible party in accordance of the U.S. "Oil Pollution Act, " "Tort Law" , as well as Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and the Superfund. This paper starts from the case itself, in the first chapter, I introduce the process, causes and subsequent process. In the second chapter, I analyze the civil liability according to American law. Firstly, this paper briefly introduces the summery of American environmental law and environmental litigation, as well as the provision of environmental administrative system, which provides the theoretical basis for the below analyzing. Then, according to the American statute on oil pollution——"Oil Pollution Act ", I got the conclusion that, compensation liability of personal death and injury, oil pollution removal, natural resources and private damages should be taken by BP, the main responsibility party. While some other companies, who are the BP's cooperators in this case also have to bear the responsibility according to law. Those insurance companies will compensate according to the insurance contract and law. This paper also mentioned the liability in accordance of the "Tort Law". The two funds mentioned above (the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and the Superfund)are more likely to take on some additional responsibility for oil removal. Furthermore, in the third chapter, this paper briefly discusses the liability of oil pollution in the U.S. which can be referenced by China. In our law, the amount of compensation on oil spill liability is too low, we lack sound insurance mechanisms and fund system, Environmental emergency response mechanism is not complete enough. Drawing the experience of Gulf of Mexico oil spill case and the oil pipeline explosion in Dalian, we find in the oil pollution, our country need improvement both on the law and law enforcement.