B.P. = Bit of Perspective?

[merrylander]

According to the economists BP has enough cash flow to cover their but and if they do not pay the dividend that's another 10 billion - yes 10 billion with a b. What that will do to a lot of pensions I won't even hazard a guess.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Boreas

So, what's your solution?

John

Drop the blame blame and proceed in a responsible manner.

Of course, perception once again trumps reality, and this has become a media driven event.

I have no idea what is being done, or not. But I do assume that folks are doing the best they can, all things considered.

A little less rhetoric is in order, IMHO.

Chas

[merrylander]

The one thing that concerns me is the Gulf Coast fishery. I imagine that many of the fishermen have loans on their boats. Now are the loan companies going to wait until BP comes up with compensation? It would be no advantage to call the loan because fishing boats are probably a dead loss on the market just now.

I did write to the Pres suggesting that the goverment should take some of the left over stimulus funds and pay off any such loans and settle with BP later. I mean what earthly good would it be if the fishing grounds re-open and no one has a boat?

I understand that some fishermen have headed for the Texas coast where the fishing is still open but can that area accomodate all of them?

A few thoughts that occured;

Blow out preventers - had they ever been tested in a pressure chamber to determine they would operate at one mile down, pretty high pressure down that far.

Has anyone developed an automated fail-safe system to set off the BOP valve in the event there is no human around?

Have the 'skimmers' been tested in rough water? I hear stories of skimmers sitting at the dock, if so why?

Recent adverts suggets that rough seas in Alaska's north slope see twenty foot waves in winter - you can't guarantee squat in those conditions.

Decisions regarding off shore drilling should be left to coastal states, this because I saw a Senator from Wyoming suggesting the ban of deep water drilling should be lifted. I am not aware of any deep water in Wyoming.

[davidb]

I'm no expert on offshore drilling but it is my understanding that here in Ms. they cannot drill close to shore. It has been claimed that there is just as much oil closer to shore but regulations by our all kowing government prevent this. I'm with Charles. Stop the politics and focus on the problem. There is no such thing in fail safe when your doing something like this. Everyone knew there are very real risks in these kind of operations. Did we stop shipping oil when the Exxon had it's accident? It seems like everytime there is an accident here in the US the only thing that matters is who to blame it on.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by davidb

I'm no expert on offshore drilling but it is my understanding that here in Ms. they cannot drill close to shore. It has been claimed that there is just as much oil closer to shore but regulations by our all kowing government prevent this.

There has been some confusion about a brand new ban on shallow water drilling but it's apparently not true.

I'm with Charles. Stop the politics and focus on the problem. There is no such thing in fail safe when your doing something like this. Everyone knew there are very real risks in these kind of operations.

Everyone knew so the government asked for assurances from the industry that deep water drilling could be done safely. The industry said not to worry because the methodology was fool-proof and, in any event, they had the means to stop leaks at that depth. They lied.

It seems like everytime there is an accident here in the US the only thing that matters is who to blame it on.

That must be why everyone on the right is trying to figure out a way to blame Obama.

John

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by Boreas

I have a hard time viewing the original post as little more than jingoistic America bashing. It would seem that Combwork is equating anti-BP sentiment with anti-British sentiment. I think that conclusion is entirely unjustified.

As a result, I'll try very hard not to draw similar conclusions about his litany of catastrophes perpetrated by US companies. Rather, I'll limit myself to some of the specifics in his post.

Let me begin by saying that I agree that US companies have indeed acted in horrifyingly irresponsible ways in the past. That they did doesn't somehow disqualify us as US citizens from criticizing non-US corporations when they commit similar outrages.

Combwork's list of offenses includes the Liberian tanker, the Torrey Canyon. The Torrey Canyon ran aground off the Cornish coast and broke up. The disaster was largely the result of human error. The cleanup, which was largely unsuccessful, was conducted by the Royal Navy.

He is correct, by the way, that the Torrey Canyon was owned by a Union Oil subsidiary. Guess who it was leased to though.

That's right! BP!

Now, let's move on to the Exxon Valdez. Again, a case of human error on the part of the tanker crew and again a tanker running aground and leaking. There was also the matter of a broken radar system that Exxon knew about and failed to repair.

That being said, the real problems came from the botched cleanup effort. Guess who was in charge of that!

Aw, you peeked!

Now, the matter of who's to blame for the current catastrophe. True, the investigation is yet to come but the press reporting all seems to point to BP ordering that the drilling be sped up and that drill mud be replaced with sea water. The operation was behind schedule and over budget and BP wanted to cut its losses. The operators objected to this but, since BP was paying the bills, their decision carried the day.

As to BP trying to "fix the problem", I'd have to say that their idea of that was to conceal the magnitude of the problem by barring "outsiders" and media from the area, requiring cleanup workers to sign a contract forbidding them from talking to the media and using dispersants (despite being told not to by the EPA) to make it impossible to quantify the amount of leakage (and therefore their liability). And you don't think the first thing they did was run to their lawyers?

Finally, Combwork claims that it appears BP is succeeding in stopping the leak. All one need do is look at the live video feed to see just how absurd that notion is.

Anyone want me to go through the list of other disasters that BP has been responsible for?

John

You, Sir, are a machine. Awesome post.

Dave

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Everyone knew so the government asked for assurances from the industry that deep water drilling could be done safely. The industry said not to worry because the methodology was fool-proof and, in any event, they had the means to stop leaks at that depth. They lied.

Of course. Expecting corporate bosses to be honest is like expecting ice to be hot, or the sun to turn purple. It's an absurdity.

That must be why everyone on the right is trying to figure out a way to blame Obama.

John

Bingo! We have a winner!

Dave

[Grumpy]

BP is only getting what they deserve. 50 days of sitting on their hands was a crock of crap.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by Grumpy

BP is only getting what they deserve. 50 days of sitting on their hands was a crock of crap.

Sometimes covering your ass can resemble sitting on your hands. Covering their asses has been BP's sole objective since day one.

John

[BlueStreak]

For your perusal;

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...RS_show_page=1

Admittedly, I haven't read the whole thing just yet. But it actually seems to be the most realistic, unbiased article I've seen yet.

Enjoy,
Dave