BP

cookie as you somehow missed it I will repeat the words of the Inquiry's investigator.
One has to assume that this man knows what he is doing as he has a good reputation in investigating oil related disasters.

"We see no instance where a decision-making person or group of people sat there aware of safety risks, aware of costs, and opted to give up safety for costs."

Your request is being processed...

BP Fights Court Bid To Lift Oil Spill Damages Limit

as predicted:
here are the first signs of BP breaking the promises they made....

NEW YORK, Nov 19 (Moira Herbst) - BP Plc (BP.L) had said for months it would pay all legitimate damages for the largest oil spill in U.S. history, but now it's fighting a bid to legally force it to waive a $75 million statutory cap.

as I wrote before,
one wonders how some people still keep on believing in the promises made by some of these corporations
It will be very interesting to see how it plays out.

But it was never clear whether BP's pledge was legally binding, and signals from the company were mixed. During a court hearing last month, BP's lawyers did not commit to waiving the OPA cap, which they called "not relevant." After Barbier asked the company to clarify, it filed a statement with the court saying it was committed to waiving the cap.

A BP spokeswoman said on Friday that the company's opposition to the plaintiffs' motion "was not an indication that BP was wavering at all on its previous promises and commitments," but rather, was "simply based on the legal deficiencies" in the motion.

Howard M. Erichson, a professor at Fordham University School of Law and an expert in mass torts, said plaintiffs' lawyers now appear to be engaging in "a bit of litigation gamesmanship."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/19/bp-fights-court-bid-to-li_n_786235.html

While I am happy to see that you think this is

here are the first signs of BP breaking the promises they made

I am not sure that your analysis of the situation is correct.

On November 2, BP raised its estimated cost of cleaning up the Macondo disaster by $7.7 billion to $40 billion.

So even the latest estimate of cost is only 50% of the cap value. The cap, at the moment, is an academic & theoretical figure 'hard wired' into a piece of American legislation.
I suspect that BPs partners & contractors who are also liable for a large percentage of these clean up costs are going to put up far greater legal defences than BP have. How much have Anadarko Petroleum Corp (APC.N) and MOEX Offshore 2007 LLC and Halliburton put up so far - NOTHING.

Cookie

focus now on Halliburton as i said from the begining in all this mess.

The cementing job was what caused the issue and those of us in the industry saw the reports where Halliburton stuffed up. They were all out there for all the O&G industry to see, leaked by the employees.

BP will pay up, as the head of the consortium and their insurance companies and lawyers will then take Halliburton to the cleaners later.

Wazza,
the title of this topic is BP,
I invited Bob in the past to open a new topic on Halliburton (and other criminal corporations.... )
By this, I invite you to do the same

Concerning BP, there seems to come no end to the BP saga.....

BP has just been accused by US officials of Criminal Negligence.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704170404575624332712843478.html

A federal officer asked a judge to revoke BP PLC's criminal probation stemming from a Prudhoe Bay oil spill in 2006, a move that could lay BP open to new penalties in addition to the conviction it received after the incident.

In a petition filed Wednesday in a U.S. District Court, Anchorage, federal probation officer Mary Frances Barnes accused BP of criminal negligence in its conduct prior to a North Slope oil spill in November 2009. The conduct constituted a violation of its probation, Ms. Barnes said.

Ms. Barnes' petition referred to an incident in Nov. 2009 when a pipeline at the BP-operated Lisburne oil field burst, spewing nearly 46,000 gallons of crude and oily water onto the snow-covered tundra near Prudhoe Bay. The pipeline rupture and spill violated the Clean Water Act, which was a breach of the terms of BP's plea agreement, Ms. Barnes said.

The petition said starting in June 2009, warning alarms showed low temperatures in the pipeline but BP operators failed to respond or investigate the problem. That inaction, Ms. Barnes said, allowed an "ice plug" to form in the pipeline on or about Nov. 14, 2009, which led to the rupture.

pattern of behavior.....I told you so????.....

BP experienced a similar pipeline breach in 2001, after which it recommended a series of reforms such as relocating surface-mounted temperature sensors. However, the company "failed to implement these preventative measures," Ms. Barnes said, paving the way for the 2009 incident.

Cookie

BP as the head / lead in this rig , takes the blame as per the contracts and cooridinates the payouts on behalf of the others , but as they are only 1 of many players , then how can u possible NOT exclude the other minor partners and associated players, all who will be required to pay their % of the outcome etc. The law firms involved in this incident are huge and as we have seen, 1 partner has said they wont pay 1 cent, as per their legal teams assessment as, any payment would be seen as accepting guilt.

What you are saying is that every joint venture partner must have its own thread then ? or would the Mods agree that its comes under 1 thread - BP and asscociated partners etc.

BP would have already written to all the joint venture partners asking for contributions, as per the agreements.

There will be civil suits agaist the cementing contractor, and thats on behalf of BP and its partners.

The title of this thread is BP, so anything whatsoever about BP can be posted. Cookie however uses it to pursue BP over safety matters mainly related to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and some related overly cozy relationships between big business and government agencies in the US.

If his intention is to identify corruption between big business and government agencies, than that might well have been a better title for the thread. Similarly if his intention is solely to pursue and condemn BP for its part in Gulf of Mexico oil spill, to the exclusion of all other companies/parties involved, no matter how implicated they were, then maybe he should have made that clear in the topic title too.

cookie wrote:more and more investigations come to the same conclusions that I posted here months ago:
these Big Oil corporation clearly have a bad history and many times a criminal behavior but they can always buy themselves out of problems.
This has to end now !!!!! they have to be accountable for the killing and the damage that has been done

Investigators see 'culture of complacency' behind gulf oil spill
BP, Halliburton and Transocean need 'top to bottom' reform, leaders of a presidential commission contend.

A stream of evidence shows that “a culture of complacency” rather than a “culture of safety” prevailed at BP, Transocean Ltd. and Halliburton as they worked on the ill-fated Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, according to the chairmen of the presidential commission investigating the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

these conclusions seem rather convincing to me !!!!!!!
of course you will have the deniers as ever....
according to the chairman: "a stream of evidence"!!!!!!!this sounds a lot stronger to me than some baseless rhetoric ....

The panel’s investigators uncovered “a suite of bad decisions,” many still inexplicable, involving tests that were poorly run, alarming results that were ignored, proper equipment that was sidelined and safety barriers that were removed prematurely at the high-pressure well, said William K. Reilly, who is co-chairman of the commission with former Democratic Sen. Bob Graham of Florida.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-oil-spill-commission-20101110,0,7355018.story

shame on them

and our little Arjay still can't stop spinning and has to start trolling again:
this quote clearly proves that I condemn not only BP, but Big oil in general, Halliburton and transocean included,
but of course Arjay has to spin and troll again by trying to put some words in my mouth.

poor little troll,

Cookie wrote:and our little Arjay still can't stop spinning and has to start trolling again:
this quote clearly proves that I condemn not only BP, but Big oil in general, Halliburton and transocean included,
but of course Arjay has to spin and troll again by trying to put some words in my mouth.

This is what I actually said:

Arjay wrote:The title of this thread is BP, so anything whatsoever about BP can be posted...........
If his (Cookie's) intention is to identify corruption between big business and government agencies, than that might well have been a better title for the thread. Similarly if his intention is solely to pursue and condemn BP for its part in Gulf of Mexico oil spill, to the exclusion of all other companies/parties involved, no matter how implicated they were, then maybe he should have made that clear in the topic title too.

That seems pretty clear and straight forward to me. I see no spin or trolling there, nor any attempt to put words into your mouth, simply an attempt to get you to match your topic title to the topic content, (as per the forum rules), which was the point I was making, and which you might have realised had you stopped to read and think about my post, rather than leaping to throw in your jibes!

I am still at a loss to determine your intentions regarding the title and content of this topic.

Try reading these 2 quotes:

Cookie wrote:Wazza,
the title of this topic is BP,
I invited Bob in the past to open a new topic on Halliburton (and other criminal corporations..... )
By this, I invite you to do the same

Concerning BP, there seems to come no end to the BP saga.....

Cookie wrote:this quote clearly proves that I condemn not only BP, but Big oil in general, Halliburton and transocean included,

Do you not see something of a glaring inconsistency there?!

You attack BP. Several posters including Wazza point out that other companies were involved - including Halliburton, .... you then point out that the topic is BP..... (apparently inferring that Wazza and Bob should keep to the topic [BP] or start a new one about Halliburton) and then YOU go on to talk about those very same other companies on this same thread, saying that you condemned Halliburton and Transocean as well as BP. There seems to be something of a pronounced inconsistency in your logic there.

Perhaps you could clarify what topic title you intended here, so that others, including yourself may keep to it.

If you would like the topic title amending to better reflect your intentions, - just say the word and it can be done.

PS. The BP share price today is currently 436p.

and it seems that Reuters agrees with my so called "obsession":

yesterday, Reuters printed this new article about BP.

the title of their article says it all, but don't worry, they also question Halliburton and Transocean (though I wonder why they didn't mention this in the title... Could it be that Reuters is obsessed???? )

or could it be that some members (even moderators !!!!! - which makes it in my eyes even more worse-);
have big problems with respecting other members points of view
and accepting that even if opposite to theirs,
they may be equally 'right'

BP made risky decisions before spill-panel document

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AN4VX20101124

(Reuters) - BP (BP.L) made a series of decisions while drilling its doomed Macondo well that saved time but added risks prior to its massive Gulf spill, according to a White House oil spill commission document leaked by a media outlet.

BP workers on shore made most of these risky decisions, such as not waiting for more centralizers (devices used to ensure the cement casing is applied evenly around the well) and not installing additional plugs and barriers, the commission document said.

The chart stands in contrast to some comments made by the commission's investigators during that hearing that BP workers did not cut corners on safety to save money.

In addition to BP, the document said BP's contractors Halliburton (HAL.N) and Transocean (RIG.N) also made some time-saving decisions that increased safety risks.

Halliburton, which did the cementing for the BP well, is charged with not re-evaluating its cement slurry design and not waiting for results of some stability tests on its foam cement formula.

The document also blames Transocean, the owner of the Deepwater Horizon rig, for undertaking simultaneous operations during the abandonment of the well.

The Associated Press

HOUSTON – Workers on the doomed Gulf of Mexico oil rig were distracted by multiple activities going on simultaneously and didn't try to shut the well until 49 minutes after potentially explosive gas particles began flowing in, a BP vice president told a federal investigative panel Wednesday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/08/AR2010120802307.html

This was the fuller and more balanced context of the Reuters article, in terms of blame being attributed to several companies:

Charged with guiding the future of offshore drilling, the seven-member presidential commission is scheduled to release its final recommendations by January.

In addition to BP, the document said BP's contractors Halliburton (HAL.N) and Transocean (RIG.N) also made some time-saving decisions that increased safety risks.

Halliburton, which did the cementing for the BP well, is charged with not re-evaluating its cement slurry design and not waiting for results of some stability tests on its foam cement formula.

The document also blames Transocean, the owner of the Deepwater Horizon rig, for undertaking simultaneous operations during the abandonment of the well.

the words of the BP vice president:

The Associated Press

HOUSTON – Workers on the doomed Gulf of Mexico oil rig were distracted by multiple activities going on simultaneously and didn't try to shut the well until 49 minutes after potentially explosive gas particles began flowing in, a BP vice president told a federal investigative panel Wednesday.

who am I to ........????????

the truth will .../..

On the day the rig exploded, 79 of the 126 people on the rig were Transocean employees.[26]

A sensible fact based (as far as they are know at the moment) analysis of the actual explosion here on Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_ ... _explosion

No 'startling new discoveries' or opinions just some good old fashioned honest reporting of the facts...

you really got to stay calm with these guys and accept:

1) there used to be a time when the moderators specifically asked to provide the link of a quote.
it seems to be that arjay (by accident of course) forgot this.... I wonder why
I wonder what the title of the article of his quote of Reuters was......


2) Bobhelm is using wikipedia to give "just some good old fashioned honest reporting of the facts..."
I on the other hand gave an article in the Washington post from the Associated Press from 3 days ago:

a BP vice president told a federal investigative panel Wednesday.

I am sure that Bob can check the date on the link....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/08/AR2010120802307.html

but who am I,
a normal member that tries to make his point against some tyrannic moderators, that will continue to spin and....

in any case,
as I predicted, the truth will prevail,
it just takes some time.....
the fact that a vice president of BP just declared this in front of a federal investigative panel says enough,....... but some will still stick their head in the ground...

and some more reporting ( the link included!!!!):

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - BP and its contractors made a series of decisions that were "breathtakingly inept" ahead of the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history, a co-chair of the White House oil spill commission said on Wednesday.

In order to prevail more spin again:
( just for Bob: notice: BP and its contractors....)... all of them, as I mentioned before.....!!!!!!

[quote]Bill Reilly, who co-chairs the presidential commission set up after the BP spill, blasted the conduct of the oil giant and its partners, Transocean and Halliburton (NYSE: HAL ), in drilling the doomed Macondo well, .[/quote]

"There is virtual consensus among all the sophisticated observers of this debacle that three of the leading players in the industry made a series of missteps, miscalculations and miscommunications that were breathtakingly inept and largely preventable," Reilly said in a prepared remarks for an oil and gas conference in New Orleans, Louisiana.

and for arjay the link:
http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/-Inept-moves-preceded-BP-rsg-1297507199.html?x=0&.v=4