[heilyprollecyspor]

Do we have a discussion about this yet?

::

I just learned that there's a cap on how much money oil companies (BP in this case) are obligated to pay when it comes to cleaning up this kind of disaster. $75 million. That's it. $75 million.

Why is there even a cap?

[Ettiominiw]

What more can be said about this, it's really heartbreaking.

[realnilkless]

From what I understand from the BP CEO......they aren't even the ones responsible for the leak. Still....he did say that BP will clean up the mess. He certainly did not say that....BP will assume responsibility UP TO the tune of 75 million.

I certainly hope BP cleans up the mess without regards to the cap

I just looked closely at the map.....that oil slick is mighty close to the wildlife refuge

[Ettiominiw]

.......and these are 1989 dollars. 75M of today's dollars will clean up about 100 yards of coastline probably.

Exxon paid the price for its actions in several different ways. The cleanup effort cost the company $2.5 billion alone, and Exxon was forced to pay out $1.1 billion in various settlements. A 1994 federal jury also fined Exxon an additional $5 billion for its "recklessness," which Exxon later appealed. 17 In addition to the upfront costs of the disaster, Exxon's image was permanently tarnished. Angered customers cut up their Exxon credit cards and mailed them to Rawl, while others boycotted Exxon products. According to a study by Porter/Novelli several years after the accident, 54 percent of the people surveyed said they were still less likely to buy Exxon products.

http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/spri...gue/exxon.html

[heilyprollecyspor]

Tony Hayword, BP CEO, was treading the fine line between taking responsibility for this disaster and passing the buck.

$75 Million will barely cover the cost of morning coffee for the work crews. There's a bill being worked in congress that would raise that cap to $10 Billion, but there's a question of whether or not it could be applied retroactively.

Lisa Jackson, EPA Administrator, got a little snippy with Rachel Maddow tonight, but made an excellent point. She said (paraphrasing), there will be plenty of time to investigate and place blame. Right now, she said, every effort has to be put into stopping this thing.

Rachel continues to make the point that drilling technology is expanding, but safety technology isn't keeping the same pace.

[CedssypeEdids]

The sky is crying.

[Usesdiums]

Rachel continues to make the point that drilling technology is expanding, but safety technology isn't keeping the same pace.

Sadly, I think the same could be said of so many things when it comes to safety.

[realnilkless]

drilling technology is expanding, but safety technology isn't keeping the same pace.

Such an important point......much like how information technology is increasing so rapidly, but our communicaiton laws aren't keeping pace which makes it easy for say.....people to stalk and research victims on the internet etc.....

Also Kirkus....okay...BP is treading a fne line right now.....just in the interest of who is really responsibile for this mess......

Doesn't the company who owned and operated the malfunctioning equipment bear any of the responsibility for this clean up?

And the EPA is right. Clean NOW snipe later.

[casinobonusa]

Tony Hayword, BP CEO, was treading the fine line between taking responsibility for this disaster and passing the buck.

$75 Million will barely cover the cost of morning coffee for the work crews. There's a bill being worked in congress that would raise that cap to $10 Billion, but there's a question of whether or not it could be applied retroactively.

Rachel continues to make the point that drilling technology is expanding, but safety technology isn't keeping the same pace.

Sadly, I think the same could be said of so many things when it comes to safety.

I work in the Safety Sector for the petroleum industry. Or maybe I used to work there, because I have not seen a job in over 4 months (and it was a brief stint). Oil companies will do two things whenever they go into a bit of financial problem: cut down on exploration (why look for more if you can't sell what you already have?) and cut down on safety.
In my experience, I very frequently arrive at projects (I am free lance) and am told "whatever you say, we will do it. We believe safety is very important". Then I propose changes (and sometimes downright shutdown of operations when they are very unsafe) and they tell me "oh, but we can't shut down. We will lose a lot of money. Do the best you can, but let the contractor work".
That is the day I become a Safety Reporter, start covering my lower status equine (this happens so often that we have the acronym CYA as accepted in the industry) and just report what happens (and will happen).
The internal philosophy of ALL companies is that you are responsible for the Safety and Environmental performance of your contractors. I have worked extensively for and with BP, and if they now try to pass the buck, it is a direct violation of their HSE Policy (which I have read, countless time). In fact, BP must have had what is called a CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE (that is what I do) in that rig, and BP is therefore as liable as any other company involved in this incident.
Last: $75 million is a huge, HUGE amount of money safety wise. I am very comfortable to say that it would be at least three times the global safety budget of a company like BP, Shell or EM. Most companies operate their entire safety budget in the mid 7 figures. But now that they have to undertake reparation of all this ecosystem, they will claim they do not have the money, and well, "accidents happen".
Google "Pyper Alpha Oil Rig disaster" for a brief course on improper safety management.

[realnilkless]

I
The internal philosophy of ALL companies is that you are responsible for the Safety and Environmental performance of your contractors. I have worked extensively for and with BP, and if they now try to pass the buck, it is a direct violation of their HSE Policy (which I have read, countless time). In fact, BP must have had what is called a CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE (that is what I do) in that rig, and BP is therefore as liable as any other company involved in this incident.
.

So then ponchi....Transocean (the company operating the rig and owner of the rig) ARE liable, just like BP?

But all of the responsibility and cost seems to be on BP's shoulders....shouldn't Transocean be taking a frontseat on this? After all, it was THEIR safety equipment that failed.....

[casinobonusa]

So then ponchi....Transocean (the company operating the rig and owner of the rig) ARE liable, just like BP?

But all of the responsibility and cost seems to be on BP's shoulders....shouldn't Transocean be taking a frontseat on this? After all, it was THEIR safety equipment that failed.....

We go by what is called a "Risk Matrix". The top level is CATASTROPHIC, which is this event: Several Fatalities, World Wide Media coverage, Huge financial implications, Permanent Environmental Damage (or at least, extremely costly remediation) and Severe damage to the company's reputation. TransOcean is small potatoes, therefore the Media have focused on BP (Change BP for Transocean in all the headlines you have read, and see how many fewer people care). The LAWSUITS for the dead will affect BP precisely because they were Transocean client, but the lawsuits will, by law, have to mention both (you could not, for example, bring a lawsuit upon BP by itself here). It was Transocean direct responsibility, but also BP's liability.
Completely speculating here, but it will boil down to: Human error, Human error due to improper system flowchart, Human error due to improper training (wrong kid at the wrong shift), Improper Maintenance, Maintenance Schedule Wrongdoing (i.e. it wasn't done) or, most unlikely, system failure, which brings you back to System Backup. In all, Systemic Faults. And Systemic Faults bear responsibilities.
I mean, my Skype banner reads (for the last week) "Oil rigs are blowing up and I can't find a job?! WTF!!!!"

[heilyprollecyspor]

Well, BP reported first quarter profits (not earnings, profits) of more than $6 billion. So they can piss and moan all they want to about not having the money, if they indeed piss and moan.

So far I haven't seen any indication that they're balking at covering the cost of cleaning this up.

I could be wrong but it would seem to me that BP would pay the clean up cost then go after what every subcontractors they deemed necessary to recoup their money.

[Theariwinna]

BP I think might be in an even tougher position than another company would be because they try harder to built an image of environmental responsibility.


Thanks for the insider info, ponchi

[Ettiominiw]

Ultimately, BP and all the other oil companies will jack up the price of gas, home heating oil etc. and won't end up paying a penny, WE WILL.

[heilyprollecyspor]

Ultimately, BP and all the other oil companies will jack up the price of gas, home heating oil etc. and won't end up paying a penny, WE WILL.

And that is an excellent, and probably very relevant point.

::

The Rachel Maddow Show is appointment TV for me. She's broadcasting from the Gulf Coast and has dedicated much of yesterday's and today's shows to the oil flow.

On tonight's show she interviewed a professor from LSU who is testing and inspecting the oil that's affecting the Gulf of Mexico. He showed a very interesting sample of the oil, the first sample he received. It was very thick; the consistency of tar. The sample was actually mashed out on a piece of foil. Subsequent samples were more like the variety that you'd imagine; more of a liquid. According to the professor these newer samples, kept in jars, were along the lines of what Louisiana oil is like.

The professor said that he still doesn't understand why that first sample was so dense and tar-like.

[heilyprollecyspor]

The LSU professor also suggested that a weak hurricane, one that would not do damage to land or property, would be good for dispersing the surface oil. That surprised me.

[Ettiominiw]

Underwater video of the leak gusher released today.

BP Video Gulf Oil Leak

it's a bit mesmerizing.

[realnilkless]

Oh that is just horrible I'm with you Kirk. They need to call this what it is. Gusher, not leak

[FrassyLap]

Not to make light of the situation, but I found this amusing (starts at about 40 secs in) :

[gimffnfabaykal]

Disaster in pictures..

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/201...ly_in_the.html