The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

General off-topic debates and discussions forum.
Post Reply
cookie
udonmap.com
Posts: 2235
Joined: September 29, 2006, 8:52 pm

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by cookie » June 24, 2010, 12:46 pm

:confused: :confused: :confused:
:badteeth: :badteeth: :badteeth: :badteeth: :badteeth: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
Tens of thousands of gallons more oil gushed into the Gulf of Mexico on Wednesday after an undersea robot bumped a venting system, forcing BP to remove the cap that had been containing some of the crude.
just to give some update facts so that members can understand the incredible gravity of this unprecedented disaster,
nevertheless people keep on sticking their head in the sand:
what oil,
where is the oil,
no problem,
drill baby drill,
the lost of life is not important,
the ruining of the environment is not important,
the future of our children is not important,
we lose money, that's important !!!! :roll: :roll: :roll:
The current worst-case estimate of what's spewing into the Gulf is about 2.5 million gallons a day. Anywhere from 67 million to 127 million gallons have spilled since the April 20 explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig that killed 11 workers and blew out the well 5,000 feet underwater. BP PLC was leasing the rig from owner Transocean Ltd.
my advise is to take a good look at these numbers and think...... :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:



marshallb66
udonmap.com
Posts: 105
Joined: March 24, 2006, 1:28 pm
Location: Bung Keaw

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by marshallb66 » June 24, 2010, 1:16 pm

What did Obama stop? He stopped any new leases being sold or issued for 6 months in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska.
He stopped any new deep water exploration drilling
He stopped all current deep water drilling immediately. Deep water being defined as 500 feet or more. 33 deep water rigs are affected by this ban.

In the oil drilling contractor industry, even up to 1000 feet of water is considered shallow and a deep water rig semi-submersible or drill ship is not required to drill in water of this depth. So banning 500 feet and over is a knee jerk reaction by ill-informed people.

The directive from the Obama administration to the operators (BP, Shell etc.) of the rigs, is that rigs that are currently drilling must proceed to a safe point in their drilling program, then plug and abandon or suspend the well. In plain language “Stop Drilling”
The drilling contractor’s rigs must then have the newly declared, MMS safety audits and inspections to their BOP’s performed and the certifications issued to the MMS before drilling will be allowed to resume drilling again. This is a huge job and will take months or even years to complete for 33 rigs.

I personally know that there is a huge contractual issue between the drilling contractors and the operators as to who is liable to pay for what. Some operators are claiming “Force Majeure" which takes away their liability to pay the drilling contractor.
There are a number of other safety measures that the operators must comply with that will also stop the drilling.

7000 leases in the Gulf of Mexico there may be, but there are not 7000 Mobile off shore drilling units (MODU) drilling in the Gulf of Mexico
In fact there are only 76 MODU’s remaining under contract in the U.S. Gulf. However, only 48 of the contracted MODU’s are actually working and about 15 more of those MODU’s will stop working once they suspend the current well and operations to comply with the Obama ban.
Up until the blowout on the 20th of April, 79 MODU’s had contracts or contract commitments, and 69 were actually on location and working.

Obama didn’t stop the production coming from previous deep water wells which have a production platform installed around the wells.
However a production platform is not engaged in drilling unless the wells require what is called a “work over”. This could be described as Maintianance in layman’s terms. But no drilling is performed during this work over.
Most people who have no knowledge of these production platforms call them oil rigs. The media do it and so do government spokesmen. The production platforms do produce oil and they could be called a rig by laymen. But a production platform is nothing like a MODU.
Deep water drilling can and is currently being performed safely.
One thing I am sure of is that rest of the world will surely be drilling these wells for many years to come and selling that oil to the US at an ever increasing cost and smiling all the way to the bank due to people like Obama who created this gold mine for them.

User avatar
arjay
udonmap.com
Posts: 8278
Joined: October 2, 2005, 12:19 pm
Location: Gone to get a life, "troll free"

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by arjay » June 24, 2010, 1:27 pm

What I thought was particularly "galling" was the fact that Obama, having himself "arbitrarily" introduced the moratorium (as detailed by Marshall66 above) on further deep sea drilling, (presumably because he wanted the safety aspects/legislation reviewing), then felt that BP should compensate those workers affected by his moratorium, i.e. knee jerk reaction, and (perceived) inadequate safety legislation. [-X

I am please to note that BP have since asserted that they see no reason for them to cover those costs. =D> =D>

UMSTB

cookie
udonmap.com
Posts: 2235
Joined: September 29, 2006, 8:52 pm

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by cookie » June 24, 2010, 3:26 pm

let's try to explain it with the words of the DOI
perhaps this way people will understand that there are moments in life where safety is more important than money =D> =D> =D>
Secretary Salazar’s Statement Regarding the Moratorium on Deepwater Drilling

06/22/2010

Contact: Kendra Barkoff, DOI (202) 208-6416


WASHINGTON, DC – Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar issued the following statement regarding a decision today in U.S. District Court regarding the deepwater drilling moratorium:

“The decision to impose a moratorium on deepwater drilling was and is the right decision. The moratorium is needed to protect the communities and the environment of the Gulf Coast, and DOJ is therefore appealing today’s court ruling.

We see clear evidence every day, as oil spills from BP's well, of the need for a pause on deepwater drilling. That evidence mounts as BP continues to be unable to stop its blowout, notwithstanding the huge efforts and help from the federal scientific team and most major oil companies operating in the Gulf of Mexico. The evidence also continues to mount that industry needs to raise the bar on blowout prevention, containment, and response planning before deepwater drilling should continue.

Based on this ever-growing evidence, I will issue a new order in the coming days that eliminates any doubt that a moratorium is needed, appropriate, and within our authorities.
http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/S ... illing.cfm

User avatar
arjay
udonmap.com
Posts: 8278
Joined: October 2, 2005, 12:19 pm
Location: Gone to get a life, "troll free"

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by arjay » June 24, 2010, 3:42 pm

Cookie, there is still no reason whatsoever why BP should be expected to pay the lost wages of those affected by Obama's self imposed moratorium!

Please don't post large sized text. I think we can all read normal text OK. If you want to highlight something, there is a bold function. ;)

UMSTB

User avatar
WBU ALUM
udonmap.com
Posts: 3240
Joined: July 29, 2008, 11:40 pm
Location: When I'm logged in, UdonMap

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by WBU ALUM » June 24, 2010, 4:09 pm

arjay wrote:What I thought was particularly "galling" was the fact that Obama, having himself "arbitrarily" introduced the moratorium (as detailed by Marshall66 above) on further deep sea drilling, (presumably because he wanted the safety aspects/legislation reviewing), then felt that BP should compensate those workers affected by his moratorium, i.e. knee jerk reaction, and (perceived) inadequate safety legislation. [-X

I am please to note that BP have since asserted that they see no reason for them to cover those costs.
Pushback against tyranny is always good. =D>

cookie
udonmap.com
Posts: 2235
Joined: September 29, 2006, 8:52 pm

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by cookie » June 26, 2010, 11:36 am

"There comes a point in time where we say enough is enough,"

after looking at the shocking record of BP, perhaps it should indeed be enough!!!!!!!

Is it time to consider barring BP from federal oil leases?
ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The federal government should consider barring oil giant BP from drilling on federal land or holding onto its existing leases, says a recently retired federal attorney who spent years dogging BP's operations in Alaska.

"There comes a point in time where we say enough is enough," said Jeanne Pascal, who worked for 18 years as a Seattle-based attorney for the Environmental Protection Agency. "Because BP has definitely turned into a major serial environmental criminal."

Pascal said that BP has been convicted of environmental violations three times since 2000 — twice in Alaska — and that the April 20 Deepwater Horizon blowout in the Gulf of Mexico that sparked what President Barack Obama calls the biggest environmental disaster in the nation's history fits a pattern of behavior. She said BP got off too easy when it was allowed to plead guilty in 2007 to a misdemeanor for a record North Slope spill in 2006. No individual was charged.
"BP keeps saying that they follow safety protocols and safety is their goal and health is their goal and the environment is their goal," Pascal said. "But look at their record."

That record includes:

* A felony conviction in 2000 for failing to report immediately illegal dumping of hazardous waste by a contractor at its Endicott oil field in Alaska's Beaufort Sea. The punishment: Five years probation, $7 million in fines and civil penalties and another $15 million to create an environmental management system.

* A misdemeanor conviction in 2007 stemming from the biggest oil spill ever on Alaska's North Slope. In March 2006, a BP worker discovered crude leaking from a corroded Prudhoe Bay transit pipeline — 200,000 gallons in all. BP, which admitted that its system for monitoring and preventing corrosion was inadequate, was put on three more years probation and ordered to pay $20 million in fines and penalties.

* A felony conviction last year for a 2005 Texas City, Texas, refinery explosion that killed 15 people, injured another 170 and devastated a community. BP Products North America Inc. was fined $50 million and put on three years' probation.

Pascal said there were other ruptures, explosions and near misses over the years, plus a propane price-fixing case in the Midwest that BP settled with a deferred prosecution.

West said he thinks that BP made a conscious decision not to invest in aging infrastructure for North Slope fields with declining oil production.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/25/9 ... rring.html

User avatar
arjay
udonmap.com
Posts: 8278
Joined: October 2, 2005, 12:19 pm
Location: Gone to get a life, "troll free"

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by arjay » June 26, 2010, 4:24 pm

Cookie, I see you are continuing to focus on BP rather than Obama's shortcomings, contrary to the intention of my OP.
Presumably that was your intention, to deflect just criticism of Obama. ;)

You know us Brits will get our own back on the US, one way or another.
The first move seems to be here:

http://tennis.fanhouse.com/2010/06/23/w ... s_ss=email
;)

User avatar
Farang1
udonmap.com
Posts: 547
Joined: September 7, 2006, 8:48 pm
Location: Just around the corner...
Contact:

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by Farang1 » June 27, 2010, 6:46 am

It's politics as usual.

What does it say in Ecclesiastes? There is nothing new under the sun.

http://politics.usnews.com/news/slidesh ... h-clinton/

User avatar
UdonExpat
udonmap.com
Posts: 1428
Joined: June 9, 2007, 10:30 am
Location: 3rd rock from the sun

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by UdonExpat » June 27, 2010, 8:34 am

I agree that we should get back to Obama's weak response to BP's negiligence. He's been much too lenient with them.

Since he seems to be stuck with letting the fox repair the hen house, perhaps he's pulling his punches. On the other hand, some actions take longer to analyse and accomplish.

There has been talk of putting BP's US operations in temporary receivership. Taking over a company's unsafe operations is probably not a good idea. Perhaps forcing them to sell their US assets to other companies would be better.
Seize BP! No, wait...

A grassroots campaign dubbed Seize BP is holding demonstrations in more than 50 cities from June 3 through June 5.

The movement got a big shot in the arm earlier this week after former Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote on his blog that "it's time for the federal government to put BP under temporary receivership." (Reich is now a professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley.)

http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/02/markets ... /index.htm
There has also been talk of banning BP from any US contracts and leases. This seems to be a prudent approach to dealing with a company with such a well documented atmosphere of sacrificing safety for profits.
BP faces ban on future American operations

AMERICAN legislators are examining plans to “debar” BP from government contracts and oil exploration deals as punishment for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

The proposal comes amid frantic attempts by the Obama administration to quell public anger over the British company’s role in the worst oil spill in the country’s history.

The administration is understood to be weighing the legality of a process called debarment. It would stop BP from being awarded new fuel supply contracts by government clients and ban it from being granted new oil drilling leases.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/b ... 144839.ece

User avatar
arjay
udonmap.com
Posts: 8278
Joined: October 2, 2005, 12:19 pm
Location: Gone to get a life, "troll free"

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by arjay » June 27, 2010, 9:21 am

UdonExpat, besides being 3 weeks old, the article provides yet another illustration how the US Admin is prepared to act as Judge, Jury and Executioner, BEFORE any trial or investigation has taken place (or been completed). [-X Not to mention being yet another knee jerk reaction. ;)

..Maybe he should be getting on with reviewing the MMS safety regulations and eliminating the cozy incestuous relationship there. ;)

User avatar
arjay
udonmap.com
Posts: 8278
Joined: October 2, 2005, 12:19 pm
Location: Gone to get a life, "troll free"

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by arjay » June 27, 2010, 10:34 am

Here is an extract from a BBC News article about BP which refers to "quiet diplomacy", a skill which seemingly Obama has yet to display, though I may be wrong:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10414529.stm

UK Prime Minister David Cameron is expected to discuss BP with President Barack Obama at the G20 summit in Canada this weekend.

Mr Cameron told Canadian broadcaster CBC that he would use "quiet diplomacy" to make the case for BP.

He said: "This is an environmental catastrophe and we should feel sympathy and understanding for people who are suffering in that way.

"I know that BP feel like that too. They want to pay out money, they are setting aside money.

"But I think it is also in all our long-term interests that there is some clarity, some finality, to all of this, so that we don't at the same time see the destruction of a company that is important for all our interests," Mr Cameron said.
Diplomatic communication is after all surely, by definition, the appropriate form of communication for a "diplomat", .......... aah, ...wherein perhaps lies the key. :-k ;)

User avatar
NOLA
udonmap.com
Posts: 170
Joined: February 24, 2008, 10:45 am
Location: Udonthani
Contact:

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by NOLA » June 27, 2010, 11:21 am

Obama is going over and above with trying to get this problem resolved...He has assembled scientists and engineers from all over the world to seek input on the resolution of this problem...And if you think BP is not totally responsible for repairs and restitution, then you are wrong. BP is now assembling an army of bankruptcy lawyers to see how they can get out of paying and they have also hired an insurance company that specializes in getting companies off the hook or getting them settlements where they have to pay pennies on the dollar...Wait until the Gulf Stream carries this mess to the shores of England and will see how Mr. Cameron's quiet diplomacy holds up...You are either Brits or Republicans with no clue on what to do or how to do it...Neither do I, but I'll leave that to the scientific minds that Obama has assembled to figure that out and hope that maybe one of you has the solution and will pass it on, but I seriously doubt it....I guess that's the support and respect our country and our president get from bailing the Brits out of two world wars...God bless America.

Nola, I edited the post above because I felt it was disrespectful to other members which is against the forum rules.

Cheers, Lee

User avatar
arjay
udonmap.com
Posts: 8278
Joined: October 2, 2005, 12:19 pm
Location: Gone to get a life, "troll free"

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by arjay » June 27, 2010, 1:00 pm

Nola, if I were to reply to you in kind, I would be breaking forum rules. The Forum rules don't allow rude comments, insults or personal attacks, (calling people idiots or arseholes), nor is it my style.

Needless to say your language, assertions and rhetoric are similar to the those displayed by Obama, about which my OP was complaining, and do you no credit either.. [-X

As you might say "Go figure"! :-k

PS. In your defence I appreciate it is clear that YOU are NOT claiming to be a statesman!! ;)

PPS. I'll leave your post for others to judge for themselves. :-"

Arjay "pushing back against tyranny", I think.

User avatar
UdonExpat
udonmap.com
Posts: 1428
Joined: June 9, 2007, 10:30 am
Location: 3rd rock from the sun

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by UdonExpat » June 27, 2010, 3:16 pm

My judgement on NOLA's post: Guilty of being what he accused Arjay and me of being. Although I don't see why I have to be lumped in with Arjay.

Go figure!

User avatar
macduff
udonmap.com
Posts: 197
Joined: October 17, 2006, 9:21 pm
Location: england

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by macduff » June 27, 2010, 3:32 pm

I know this is a serious issue but i'm sure the americans will make a film of this and all the procedes of the blockbuster will go towards the cleaning up process.

User avatar
WBU ALUM
udonmap.com
Posts: 3240
Joined: July 29, 2008, 11:40 pm
Location: When I'm logged in, UdonMap

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by WBU ALUM » June 27, 2010, 3:47 pm

NOLA pitched a similar fit back on page 7 of this thread.
NOLA wrote:Those who bash Obama, due it out of hatred and bigotry, and for no other reason. Naturally they will deny this, but they are lying to the world and themselves when they do deny it. They would much prefer a Texas outlaw and his posse, who did things outside constitutional law and Geneva commitments.
WBU ALUM wrote:. . . NOLA, you really need to learn some etiquette. Your personal attacks have really gone beyond all reality and reason. For you to paint everyone who criticizes the president as a bigot and racist is pretty foolish because it makes you prejudiced and bigoted for thinking so.
I guess he thinks that if he continues to repeat insults, they'll be true. Unfortunately, he keeps digging a deeper hole for himself.

User avatar
WBU ALUM
udonmap.com
Posts: 3240
Joined: July 29, 2008, 11:40 pm
Location: When I'm logged in, UdonMap

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by WBU ALUM » June 27, 2010, 3:51 pm

macduff wrote:I know this is a serious issue but i'm sure the americans will make a film of this and all the procedes of the blockbuster will go towards the cleaning up process.
I would like to add that if that happens, it will be "some" Americans.

Many of us realize that much of big government's meddling in things -- over the course of many years -- has been partially to blame for where drilling is being forced to take place and that government agencies approved of BP's operation. That doesn't get BP off the hook for their role in this, but not all Americans are running around with their hair on fire over BP.

User avatar
Texpat
udonmap.com
Posts: 1324
Joined: July 21, 2007, 1:43 am

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by Texpat » June 27, 2010, 6:14 pm

British Petroleum should pay heavily for this ecological catastrophe.
The Bobo administration should, likewise, be punished heavily.

It's a collusion of shady, dodgy criminals seeking to maximize profits and minimize liability -- all in the name of greed and gluttony and in the deepest belief American Joes will absorb the results of their collective irresponsibility.

I wouldn't be opposed if Americans never bought a single cent of British Petroleum product again? Do you see now how ridiculous this sounds... Cadbury supporters?

Yes, this is a parody of hair-on-fire boycotters, many in the UK vowed to boycott Cadbury when they were bought by Kraft a few months ago.

User avatar
Farang1
udonmap.com
Posts: 547
Joined: September 7, 2006, 8:48 pm
Location: Just around the corner...
Contact:

Re: The vilification of BP (by Obama) due to oil well leak

Post by Farang1 » June 28, 2010, 6:37 am

UdonExpat wrote:Since he seems to be stuck with letting the fox repair the hen house
Maybe the government shuld be the ones to figure out how to plug the leak. Obama has enough committees to work on the problem.
Here is the Obama Disaster Management Theory: In times of crisis, you can never have enough unelected, un-vetted political appointees hanging around. Nearly two months after the BP oil spill, the White House will now name an oil spill restoration point person to oversee recovery efforts in the Gulf of Mexico. Too many czars have already spoiled this administration's credibility. Might as well pile on another
Fifty-six days later, President Obama has deemed the leadership skills of Allen, Napolitano, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, environmental czar Carol Browner, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and the rest of his self-declared "all hands on deck" crew insufficient. The new disaster czar also comes on top of the "National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling," created by executive order on May 22 and "tasked with providing recommendations on how we can prevent and mitigate the impact of any future spills that result from offshore drilling."
As I've noted before regarding Obama's czar-mania, this White House has bypassed the Senate advise-and-consent role and unilaterally created a two-tiered government. It's fronted by cabinet secretaries able to withstand public scrutiny (some of them just barely) and then managed behind the scenes by shadow secretaries with broad powers beyond congressional reach. Bureaucratic chaos serves as a useful smokescreen to obscure the true source of policy decision-making. While past administrations dating back to the Nixon era have designated such "superaides," none has exploited and extended the concept as widely as Obama has (we're up to the 40th appointed czar, by Washington-based watchdog group Judicial Watch's count).

It's government by proxy and government by press release all rolled into one.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20100616/cm_ ... op_1914386
Attachments
Built by commitee.jpg
Built by commitee.jpg (144.23 KiB) Viewed 708 times

Post Reply

Return to “General Debates & Discussions”