Does anyone else feel like people are being too hard on BP?

[werepossum]

when all is said and done, there needs to be an unemotional examination of everything that went wrong to determine who is at fault and for what and what we need to do differently going forward.

I hold all judgment against BP in check until then.

I tend to agree except that BP assured the even more disfunctional government that it could contain a spill even larger than this one. As we have seen, BP was totally unprepared to handle such a spill, so I'm not sure it is possible to be too hard on them. I have no particular hate toward them, but they have done a huge amount of environmental and economic damage by being unprepared.

I don't think we can ignore the depth of the water as a basic part of the problem. A mile down there is huge pressure and terrible cold. Once you drill a hole and sink a shaft you have a hollow pipe surrounded by the pressure of a mile of water; throw in the greater than expected gas pressure (no doubt helped by the heat of drilling melting frozen hydrates) and you get a failure that likely would never have happened in shallow water. As far as the eco kooks, there's a measure of truth to that, but a vast field so close to such a large demand was going to be tapped sooner or later, and since more shallow water and/or land drilling doesn't build expertise in deep water drilling the risks were probably the same. And although the eco kooks definitely constricted the areas where BP is allowed to drill, the decision to drill there was BP's alone. If I screw my neighbor, my wife is not to blame even if she furnished me a, umm, very narrow list of choices in sexual partners. As with all entities, BP is responsible for its own choices.

 

[Acanthus]

They wont even lose a years profit when all is said and done.

 

[Darwin333]

I think that is a possible outcome, but at the same time the states are already complaining about the jobs issue if offshore is shut down. That is going to be very hard to shut down those jobs with unemployment the way it is now.

It is already taking place. Many 10's of thousands of high paying jobs are pretty much already gone at this point unless there is a major reversal on the moratorium which I don't see happening.

We will be stuck competing for increased exports from countries that don't like us very much (the "bribes" aren't included in the gas price but costs us all the same). We will also lose any chance we had at drawing down military presence in the mid east (gotta protect the supply from unstable places/regions) and last I read one of our biggest suppliers will not be able to keep up with past deliveries.

Oh yeah, all that extra oil we will be importing gets here in big ass tanker ships. They offload mere miles from the current oil spill. We have traded one risk for another at significant cost to our economy and national security.

I am hoping that the LA legislature shuts down the LOOP (if the shrimpers don't blockade it first). If its worth killing whats left of the Louisiana economy to study oil drilling I think it would also be prudent to shut down all oil tankers in the gulf for 6 months to ensure they are safe as well. Like Obama said, we can not risk another major spill in the Gulf and those supertankers carry a whole lotta oil.

 

[JSt0rm]

It is already taking place. Many 10's of thousands of high paying jobs are pretty much already gone at this point unless there is a major reversal on the moratorium which I don't see happening.

We will be stuck competing for increased exports from countries that don't like us very much (the "bribes" aren't included in the gas price but costs us all the same). We will also lose any chance we had at drawing down military presence in the mid east (gotta protect the supply from unstable places/regions) and last I read one of our biggest suppliers will not be able to keep up with past deliveries.

Oh yeah, all that extra oil we will be importing gets here in big ass tanker ships. They offload mere miles from the current oil spill. We have traded one risk for another at significant cost to our economy and national security.

I am hoping that the LA legislature shuts down the LOOP (if the shrimpers don't blockade it first). If its worth killing whats left of the Louisiana economy to study oil drilling I think it would also be prudent to shut down all oil tankers in the gulf for 6 months to ensure they are safe as well. Like Obama said, we can not risk another major spill in the Gulf and those supertankers carry a whole lotta oil.

So basically you want to nuke the economy until you get to drill willy nilly again?

 

[bamacre]

Rave on, blame anybody other than your free-market corporate hero/whores...

It's not like anybody "forced" BP to drill anywhere... or was there a super-sekrit muslim conspiracy where they held the families of BP execs hostage, mailed the execs ears and fingers to make their point?

How does BP operate under anything resembling a "free market?"

Or perhaps when you say "free market," you mean like our "free market" health care system, or like our "free market" financial industry.

 

[rudder]

People are not being to hard on BP. The $&#*$#^ up. Prior to the leak, they ignored problems. This on top of making sure government regulators were not looking so closely at the operation. Now congress is proposing to raise taxes to clean up this mess. I say BP spend some of those profits instead.

 

[bob4432]

People are not being to hard on BP. The $&#*$#^ up. Prior to the leak, they ignored problems. This on top of making sure government regulators were not looking so closely at the operation. Now congress is proposing to raise taxes to clean up this mess. I say BP spend some of those profits instead.

but, but, but the administration said bp would pay....

seriously, where did you see congress proposing raising taxes?

 

[Danube]

The New York Fire Dept was unprepared to handle a fire way high up in a high rise on 9-11 - and that was known for years and nothing was done about it because not much could be done about it.

BP's record isn't that bad over last years and in fact the Department of the Interior's Minerals Management Service had them nominated for safety award.

Now Obama and Dems have shown no enthusiasm to help states with the spill but have moved full on to demonize BP and to push the alternate green economy rubbish (and many of Obama's corporate buddies like GE are in line to make a killing off that) and make a move to regulate if not take over oil drilling.

Of course the Dems have to go after the profit motive like the corrupt, power hungry socialists they are.


Senators Charles Schumer (he who the feds said caused a run on Indy Mac bank in fall 08 licking off crisis) of New York and Ron Wyden of Oregon said "We find it unfathomable that BP would pay out a dividend to shareholders before the total cost of BP’s oil spill clean-up is estimated,” the senators wrote. Victims’ families and businesses damaged by the oil “deserve to know that BP will fulfill its obligations to them before its shareholders.”

Demonize, demonize, demonize - these nitwits are sitting on their hands concerning the actual damage while getting on their high horse about "dividends ".

Now the Dems are little busy bees "crafting" a "spill bill" that merges the spill crisis (the one they are ignoring) with the climate bill.

Dems love crisis/failure like vultures like road kill

 

[JSt0rm]

Now Obama and Dems have shown no enthusiasm to help states with the spill but have moved full on to demonize BP and to push the alternate green economy rubbish (and many of Obama's corporate buddies like GE are in line to make a killing off that) and make a move to regulate if not take over oil drilling.

you are an amazing hack... If you really believe all you type I would be amazed at your paranoia and cognitive dissonance

 

[Balt]

I dont think he is blaming the depth of the water for the accident. But clearly the despth of the water is hampering efforts to fix the problem.

I have no doubt that a fix would be easier at shallower depths, but I don't believe they would be guaranteed to succeed. The freezing or crystallization (whatever the proper term for it is) that has taken place when they tried earlier methods to contain the spill has definitely hampered things, but that doesn't mean that they would have worked even without those obstacles. Looking at the Ixtoc spill in '79, they tried the same things at much shallower depths than they are trying now and they still failed.

Of course technology is better today, so maybe they would have succeeded today where they failed in '79. But along those same lines of thinking, if the technology has improved then why did the accident occur in the first place? It seems it isn't because the technology is lacking, but because the necessary tech to prevent the accident was deemed too expensive relative to the risk. They gambled and lost in this instance. Their gamble, their responsibility IMO. Make them pay for it.

 

[ebaycj]

I dont think he is blaming the depth of the water for the accident. But clearly the despth of the water is hampering efforts to fix the problem.

Was it not BP's "personal responsibility" to plan / design it's rigs with this in mind ?

They should have designed their deep water rigs similar to how nuclear facilities are designed, everything is WAY WAY overengineered / ultra sturdy, with many many levels of redundant failsafes / cutoff valves.

I understand this would add to costs, and therefore would affect profitability of deep water rigs, but that is a business decision for BP to make.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Was it not BP's "personal responsibility" to plan / design it's rigs with this in mind ?
They should have designed their deep water rigs similar to how nuclear facilities are designed, everything is WAY WAY overengineered / ultra sturdy, with many many levels of redundant failsafes / cutoff valves.
I understand this would add to costs, and therefore would affect profitability of deep water rigs, but that is a business decision for BP to make.

They would have been required to drill a relief well had they been working in Canadian waters.

 

[sandorski]

There should be no Limitations on their liabilities/damages caused by this. Even if that means Decades worth of Reparations for lost Fishing Industry or other potential long term affects.

 

[Darwin333]

So basically you want to nuke the economy until you get to drill willy nilly again?

So basically its only the risk of a huge oil spill from drilling in the gulf that you are concerned about. Another oil spill in the gulf from a supertanker doesn't concern you enough to risk YOUR economy?

I am advocating that if we are to shut done oil production in the Gulf due to the risk of another spill that the Gulf can not handle we should do the same for tankers that pose the exact same risk. Sounds reasonable to me.

 

[brencat]

Yes, in some ways I DO believe certain people -- especially our current political hacks are demonizing BP when they and everyone else knows they need their expertise to fix this problem. Seriously, who launches a "criminal" investigation of a company, then allows said company to continue with the repair effort? Does that make any fvcking sense? As soon as you mention "criminal" which carries with it the possibility the company's very survival is at stake legally, now you've distracted them when we need them focusing 100% on fixing this disaster and nothing else. This is all political theatre as far as I'm concerned from this administration. They don't know their ass from their elbow.

I believe BP is doing as well as Exxon, Shell, Total, Chevron, or any other major would have done in terms of their efforts to fix this thing. Someone in this thread mentioned over-engineering the rigs with multiple redundancies. Remember there are only 2 or 3 companies that manufacture deepwater drilling rigs...Transocean and Diamond Offshore are the only ones I can remember at this time. BP leases these rigs. And yes, there were redundancies...the battery to the sheer rams was tested and found to EXCEED the amps/volts needed for operation, but it didn't activate. And the gas bubble or whatever caused the explosion blew through at least 4 seals along the way that could have stopped it. Under engineered? Maybe. Not likely though...more like sometimes shit happens. Are accidents not allowed to happen nor people suffer in the 21st century?

And that's the point...this is NOT a perfect world, and accidents will happen. It's a tragic shame -- as much for the wildlife that will die as it is for the industry's hopes of expanding offshore drilling. This probably set us back 20 years. But...we NEED this oil. We have more illegals...err, people coming to our country every day and being born that will eventually want cars, air conditioning, and to open businesses. And we're still in a recession. When/if we ever come out of it, energy usage will rise at least 10+%. Where the fvck is that going to come from? Russia? Venezuela?? No thanks. Let's drill smarter, but by all means keep drilling. There is no cost effective alternative energy that will replace fossil fuels in the foreseeable future, so all you green eco-kooks can go pound salt right up your asses. Because I'm not about to give up my 22 mpg SUV to drive a Stupid...err, 2 seater Smart car.

BP will pay their share as they should...but they shouldn't be driven out of business by our govt demonizing them, nor have leeches and ambulance chasing scumbag lawyers on their ass for 20+ years afterward either. No company deserves that.

 

[umbrella39]

I blame the eco-KOOKS for the spill...

and that would make you a bigger idiot than when you use this tired bullshit line on GW topics.

GAFL

 

[werepossum]

So basically you want to nuke the economy until you get to drill willy nilly again?

Moron. I support the moratorium for environmental reasons, but only an idiot thinks that this is not going to hurt our economy. Darwin's point is perfectly valid, as tankers are historically less secure than are offshore rigs. Not to mention making us less secure. Being willing to shut down our economy long term by prohibiting us from drilling our own oil (and therefore increasing our already unsustainable and probably irreversible debt) is neither better nor worse than shutting down our economy short term by stopping oil tankers.

As I said, I (tentatively at least) support shutting down new drilling until the government gets its act together and new deep water drilling until the government is in a position to make sure the oil companies their acts together. But the argument on the other side has nothing to do with a desire to "drill willy nilly" (as if one of the most heavily regulated industries could do that two months ago. Instead it's a realistic view that oil is the life's blood of our economy and that, until we find alternative energies with similar costs, it's accept these kinds of risks or adopt a third world lifestyle. The only valid question is how much of a hit (both to our economy and to our national debt) we are willing to accept to minimize the chances of this happening again.

 

[Daedalus685]

I know that working in the nuclear industry probably gives me a bias to the matter... but we really don't need oil anymore.

There is no technical reason to keep using it. Granted it would take years (perhaps decades to do it without collapsing the economy) to ween off of it but there is no real reason we can't start doing this today. Best to start while we can safely and effectively get off of the stuff than to be forced by lack of supply or some such.

Obviously there are practical reasons as we can't simply spend tax dollars on a new Tesla for everyone... but if I were able to wave a magic money wand around and replace all of our oil/coal with nuclear and all of the cars with electric no one in the public would notice but for the very few that have to travel more than 300 miles in a day in a sedan.. (the range and speed of refill of electric is still not on par with fossil fuels, but it is getting there)

I must add that to blame environmentalists is also insane... Those of us who hate drilling for oil in wild life reserves hate it equally as much in the gulf.. We don't want it to be moved out to see, we want new well tapping stopped, period.

Note that I don't like nuclear as a long term power supply as it is too centralized and our ability to safely deal with the by products has a terrible track record (it is all usable fuel we store away in places like Colorado, but for economic and political reasons we just throw it in a whole where it will be nearly impossible to access regardless of our technological advancement... this is something we desperately need to get better at before we start building more reactors.). But it can be done well, and is the best centralized augmentation to the grid we have at the moment. I'm glad to see the move towards growing alternative decentralized means here in Canada but it still isn't where it needs to be for future energy independence and sustainability.

 

[nageov3t]

electric cars always seemed curious to me... the seem like they would work best in an urban area, but in an urban area, most people don't have places to charge them (ie: no one has garages and everyone parks on the street in parking spaces of questionable legality).

in any event, they don't seem like they'd be a viable replacement for our trucking industry.

 

[JSt0rm]

Moron. I support the moratorium for environmental reasons, but only an idiot thinks that this is not going to hurt our economy.

Did I say the moratorium wasn't going to hurt our economy? No I didn't. So then I ask you why you are calling me a moron?

Hell this entire oil spill is going to hurt our economy. .. Everyone can see this. His point was to stop the tankers along with drilling and that would be a nuke to our economy. Thats what I was saying. Dense ass mofo. ^_^

 

[JSt0rm]

So basically its only the risk of a huge oil spill from drilling in the gulf that you are concerned about. Another oil spill in the gulf from a supertanker doesn't concern you enough to risk YOUR economy?

I am advocating that if we are to shut done oil production in the Gulf due to the risk of another spill that the Gulf can not handle we should do the same for tankers that pose the exact same risk. Sounds reasonable to me.

I dont think they pose the exact same risk as this thing left unchecked would pump oil for 30 years! A oil tanker would not do that. Plus we have new safety regulations for tankers from the 89 exxon spill. Is it something to look into? Absolutely. The entire regulatory system in this country from apples to oil to coal to gold to nuclear to banking to housing needs a looking at. It's all a big shitty fucking mess. But really only nuclear and oil could ever dream of fucking shit up this bad.

 

[StageLeft]

Shallow drilling has no relevance to this _at all_. They were allowed to drill at 5000 feet, they went ahead with that clearly unprepared for reasonable problems, and now we have what we have. They are the ones who pushed ahead with the drilling. If they didn't think it was safe enough they shouldn't have done it.

The real question is, though: Did experts in the field also think they were probably unprepared? If so, then they should go down in flames, if not, this is just human error and hindsight 20/20. Also need to look at the role government regulation or lack there of played here. Did their lobbyists buy out a few million in savings per well at the risk of decreased safety?

If a kid asks his parents if he can play in the pool and they say no it's too dangerous and instead he walks down to the street to the beach, swims out to sea, and drowns, it's hardly his parents' fault for saying he couldn't swim in the pool. He's the stupid ass who decided instead to go swimming in the sea.

 

[Xellos2099]

I believe it is both the fault of the government and BP. For BP, they were being stupid for keep drilling while there was natural gas detected in the oil pocket and not having fail safe in place. As I heard, other company have technology that would allow remote shutdown in case of accident like this.

As for government, damn their inspector and for not requiring fail safe for deep sea drilling. I am all for regulation for stuff that can cause harm to other like this one.

 

[Tom]

I've heard via the news that BP has tried to keep coverage of damage to shorelines and animals to a minimum.

I don't think that's proper if its true.

 

[Xellos2099]

Well, you got to admit, the media is trying to made BP as a demon who is doing nothing o drop the spill. They are far from it, they just made some human error.