Slashdot Mirror
BP's Gulf Spill Report Shows String of Failures
eldavojohn writes "News is out of
BP's report on the gulf spill that shifts some of the blame on to other companies like Transocean that worked with BP in erecting the Deepwater Horizon rig. If you were affected by the spill, you might find the video, executive summary and 193-page report an interesting read. The summary outlines six or seven major failures in safety and engineering that all built up to the deaths of eleven workers and widespread contamination of the gulf. From incorrectly using seawater instead of drilling fluid to misinterpreting pressure test results, this report is just BP's side of the story as the blowout preventer has been pulled up and is still on its way to NASA where it will be analyzed by government investigators who will be able to compile their own report."
There's something inherently just about a bad summary with a bad link describing the bad behavior of a bad company.
You should turn signatures off.
It is the same with aviation accidents. Sometimes it's just an individual screwing up, but that's the exception. Usually there are multiple causes as well as contributing factors. Unfortunately that doesn't mix well with the mainstream media, which wants a three-word expanation so that they can print in big letters on page one. I have learnt that if I want to know something about a mishap in a complex environment, either I read the whole 196-page document, or it's better if I don't learn anything at all.
The link points directly to an error page. I mean, it actually points to securityerrorpageredirect.jsp!
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9034902&contentId=7064891
Of course it was a string of failures. I don't care if it's an oil rig or a software bug, it usually takes more than one failure before a problem actually surfaces. It's usually a combination of physical defects, human error, and process failures ... but it takes the entire sequence to fail before something goes wrong.
The longer it takes for a problem to be discovered, the more failures probably exist in the chain. Honestly, I'd be more scared if only a couple things went wrong.
Any major disaster is at the end of a long chain of fuckups (this applies to /. stories as well of course). No doubt there's plenty of blame here - many people need to cooperate to keep the chain of fuckups going to where multiple safety and contingency systems fail.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
You know, the sex and other perks that bought off the regulators?
Or the part where they pencilled in the report forms on behalf of the inspectors, who would then trace them over in pen?
I can see how that would slip their minds.
Who lives in a pineapple under the sea
SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS!
Who died in an oil spill because of BP
SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS!
Don't be a moron, libertarians don't support corporations.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
No surprise, Transocean finds fault with the report, as does Halliburton.
The others have already responded to the claims, dumping the fault right back at BP. This is going to be interesting
"But Ma, everybody did it."
BP, you're still getting a spanking. you're supposed to set an example, not lead a gang.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
It's company policy to forgo safety for increased profits. History is full of this. They took a gamble and got beat by a pair of deuces. But they have accountants to take care of it all. The main issue hasn't changed, and we'll be speculating on the the next disaster soon enough.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Summary of the Summary: BP did a bunch of stupid things, but it was TO's (Trans Ocean - the rig owner) responsibility to control the well even if BP purposely designed the rig to fail. They didn't do that. And Boom. IMHO this is not a shot across the bow of Transocean...it's an arrow aimed straight at their heart: "the crew... did not act to control the well".
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Well, at least the summary didn't kill anybody.
TFS: The summary outlines six or seven major failures in safety and engineering
Yet nobody's in prison for negligent manslaughter. But if I'm not paying attention and run over a single person, I go to prison. Must be nice to be so rich you're above the law.
Free Martian Whores!
Until people go to jail for the deaths what point or purpose does any of this mean? Wealth clearly puts a person above the law and above manslaughter charges. It's that simple. Arguing the fingerpointing is wasted energy since, regardless of the fault, no one will be held accountable. The government will take a bribe in the form of a penalty\fine and all the PEOPLE who lead to the deaths will walk free. The only time the wealthy suffer consequences is when they harm other wealthy people.
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
Or to be a corporation that cannot be held liable as a person can.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Since when has ocean drilling even a part of space exploration? Or any drilling for that matter?
One of the anticipated problems of future space missions is that humans will need to find resources outside of the Earth environment. The amount of energy required to lift materials out of the gravity well of our planet is huge, so it makes sense to explore other options. NASA has researched laser drilling, deep drilling Mars for water, Moon drilling, low energy mobile drilling etc. NASA's remit is not just shooting satellites into orbit, it is also to conduct early stage R&D for exactly this kind of stuff.
And why the FUCK is NASA the only expert around to be able to help the stranded miners?
NASA employs many experts with the skills to do detailed drilling, modelling and geologic and seismic analysis.
Why does NASA have not only the desire, expertise, or the capability to test a BOP?
Who would you rather have test it? Deep sea drilling is a tight-knit industry. I would be surprised if there were any independent testing labs for this technology.
The libertarian principle is more like giving the least trust to those with the greatest power. It's not in support of anything except personal freedom. It just happens that you get the worst of both worlds when you introduce regulation as the government selects "qualified" individuals, such as former CEO's of industry leaders, to give regulatory power to in their given field. I wouldn't want them selecting unqualified individuals, but the qualified ones have a history of personal investment and are likely quite partial. They don't make for impartial regulators.
Such as Michael Taylor, former VP of Public Policy at Monsanto Corp. and Monsanto lobbyist, appointed to senior FDA food safety adviser. Or Roger Beachy, former president of the Danforth Plant Science Center, another branch of the Monsanto Corp., is now heading the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
You don't trust corporations, but you refuse to realize that regulation just supports more corporatism?
Your government only gives you the illusion of protection and safety. You are really on your own in this world. We'd just like to have the government acknowledge that fact.
From the Libertarian party's website:
Sure looks to me like they support them.
Free Martian Whores!
Who did what which led up to the leak is not the major issue in most people's minds, I think. Accidents can and will happen. This same type of accident will happen again sooner or later. Whether anyone involved was negligent in the construction or if it was unknown factors leading up to the explosion and leak is immaterial.
What is upsetting about the issue is that the responsibility of the response (or lack thereof) falls into the laps of both BP and the Obama administration. Here is the list of problems I see:
* The rig operator (BP?) is supposed to have rapid response plans and technology in place should an event occur
* BP execs sat with their thumbs up their asses trying to save money by serializing plugging attempts, instead of readying the efforts in parallel so in the event that one attempt fails the next could be engaged within hours rather than weeks
* BP was allowed to use dispersants which take 50,000 years to break down, just to minimize the appearance of the leak. BP took advantage and released tens of thousands more gallons per day than allowed, and refused to cut back even after the EPA told them to cut back. If they had not used dispersants, the oil would have been more likely to form tarballs sooner, and bacteria/fungus that feeds on hyrocarbon compounds would have started to break it down more quickly. They ought to have let nature take its course rather than allow it to disperse and spread much faster. Now the fish in that region are going to be contaminated and who the hell knows what that will do to offspring - and children who eat that fish.
* They fought against press coverage tooth and nail, even though photographic and video footage would help to ascertain the extent of the damage and assist in planning the next response action
* the United States government turned it into a total clusterfuck by refusing help from the Netherlands (who have extensive experience responding rapidly to this sort of thing), refused to proactively clean the spill before it reached shore, and actively blocked the state of Louisiana from taking action. They also did much to shield BP and Haliburton by enforcing no-fly zones and restricting access by boats and to contaminated shoreline
Now, people love to slam Bush for not letting the fed jump in when Katrina hit - what they refuse to accept is that Federal law prohibits the federal government from interfering in such cases unless assistance is first requested and a state of emergency is declared, or the local government becomes incapacitated. Where Louisiana (New Orleans in particular) refused assistance, the Bush administration could hardly be blamed for not interfering. Eventually commons sense overruled the red tape and the feds stepped in even as the mayor and governor insisting they could handle it (uh, right. They blew it.). And yet, Bush is slammed for "hating black people" even though he was paralyzed by federal law and could not legally act even though the fed was mobilized to do so.
The Obama administration had jurisdiction to handle anything offshore and could have taken many steps to protect the shoreline: accept help from European nations, immediately order BP to commission more ships, at BP cost, to deploy booms and to hire skimmers, and to allow the Louisiana government to act since they were prepared to mobilize to protect their own interests. They failed at every turn and it was not a case of nonfeasance, or failing to act as the law requires, but malfeasance. The Fed went out of its way to slow down response, seemingly to protect BP and Haliburton, which greatly increased contamination. The Obama administration actively blocked action at every turn, and yet is praised for how it handled/is handling the situation? Had we accepted help from European nations, and had we allowed Louisiana to act locally, much of the shallow water marine life would have been spared this contamination.
I don't take issue with the accident, although if it is due to negligence I believe
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Huge crime organizations exist because they take advantage of government interference. The Prohibition effectively created the market Al Capone made millions serving.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
It always devolves into he said she said. Phrases come up like "that's not what I meant", "I never said that, I said...", "that's not what I heard...". It's always "nobody's fault". If you try to hold a single person responsible, it'll inevitably be the poor schlep with no actual authority who did what he was told without having enough authority to know about the other things that were don so that the action became dangerous.
The corporation, however, can be held responsible. Anywhere from surrendering years worth of profits in lieu of jail time and a supervised parole process where their internal documents are an open book to relevant watchdogs. As you point out, breakup and sell-off as substitutes for the death penalty. Needless to say, executive bonuses should be suspended for the period of any sentence. How well could they have performed if they allowed a corporate culture that lead to committing felonies?
Summary^3: BP's report says "That sucked. But it was mostly someone else's fault."
Big surprise.
They didn't do that. And Boom. IMHO this is not a shot across the bow of Transocean...it's an arrow aimed straight at their heart: "the crew... did not act to control the well".
This is how all these investigations work. Nearly every major incident has such a multitude of failures in defence mechanisms leading up to it that it is actually quite easily to say "It's not my responsibility because if X happened then the entire situation could have been avoided." For example:
The Texas City incident could have been avoided by operations not overfilling the column. Damn operations. Or it could have been avoided if the high level switches in the column worked. Damn maintenance. Or it could have been avoided by the blowdown stack being connected to the flare relief line (the piping ran very close so this wasn't an expensive option). Damn engineers. How about a culture of routine complacency in the workplace? Damn Management!
Could apply the same thing to Three Mile Island. Operators should have realised there was no water in the cooling system and not cut the feed. Damn Operations. The PORV should have properly autoreclosed and not jammed open. Damn Maintenance. etc etc.
Chernobyl? Operators should not have shutdown the SCRAM shutdown system, engineering should have an interlock that prevents the removal of control rods so far out of the reactor and the sudden re-insertion etc. etc. etc.
This was Transocean's fault. It was Haliburton's fault. It was definitely BP's fault too.
Summary of the Summary: BP did a bunch of stupid things, but it was TO's (Trans Ocean - the rig owner) responsibility to control the well even if BP purposely designed the rig to fail. They didn't do that. And Boom. IMHO this is not a shot across the bow of Transocean...it's an arrow aimed straight at their heart: "the crew... did not act to control the well".
That's not how it works in the oil and gas business and I have many friends in the industry. The ultimate responsibility is in the hands of the well owner, not the rig owner. In this case that is BP because BP called all the shots. And that is the company people will sue. There are a number of things that BP did to bypass Transocean's safety protocols. While it appears that Transocean may have damaged the BOP before handling control to BP, you don't know if BP knew that. There is evidence BP pressured Transocean to finish off the well their way. Transocean wanted 3 concrete plugs with finishing mud in between. In order to save time, BP did not want the finishing mud. Professor Robert Bea who was asked to investigate the incident by the White House says if the mud had been left, there may have not been a blowout even if the BOP was damaged.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.