Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

If you would like to post a topic on the Beethoven Bulletin Board but you cannot find an appropriate location... post it here!

Moderator: Nicole Marie

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby jamiebk » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:43 pm

Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby lliam » Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:57 am

jamiebk wrote:BP plc is the largest corporation in the UK is it not? I don't really care what anyone calls it.


[1998: BP announces merger with Amoco, new company will operate under the name BP Amoco p.l.c.]

Its true, BP is no longer an exclusively British owned company but a is part owned by, 'Amoco’ a leading USA petroleum company. However, it will have a major impact on Both the USA due to a notable rise in fuel cost etc plus the UK via Pensions due to major pension company shares & stock market investments.
Lliam.

I spent 90% of my money on women and drink. The rest I wasted - George Best
lliam
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1698
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Darlaston - West - Midlands - U.K.

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby lliam » Sat Jun 12, 2010 7:01 am

Further more,

Obama’s threats are a perfectly “despicable” exercise by a president desperately trying to blame someone else for his own helplessness: “The whole might of American wealth and technology is displayed as utterly unable to deal with the disastrous spill – so what more natural than a crude, bigoted, xenophobic display of partisan political presidential petulance against a multinational company?”

Obama has insisted on turning an unhappy accident into an anti-Limey crusade, persistently referring to BP by its old name and making schoolboy threats to kick its well-spoken British chief executive Tony Hayward’s “ass”.

Since the April 20 Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion BP’s share price has lost well over 40 per cent of its value and as City analysts are concernedly noting a sizeable chunk of this loss is the result of the hysterical posturing and cynical grand-standing of President Barack Obama. His repeated promises to punish BP have not only affected its share value but even raised doubts about its ability to pay out its usually generous dividend.

If in doubt blame it on filthy foreign capitalists. While of course we often see this technique being used by barmy Third World despots such as Hugo Chavez, Robert Mugabe and Kim Jong-il we have a right to expect more dignified behaviour from the President of the USA.

Especially when he’s dealing with one of his closest and most loyal allies. Through both Gulf Wars and in Afghanistan, Britain has acted slavishly in compliance with the United States’ needs. While there’s not necessarily anything wrong with acting in concert with the leader of the free world what we surely have a right to expect in return for this “special relationship” is a US president who doesn’t turn round and threaten to “kick” our “ass” whenever the going gets tough.

One of his first moves on entering the White House was to rid himself of a bust of Winston Churchill which had been gracing the Oval Office. Shortly afterwards he compounded this snub to Britain by cold-shouldering our then PM Gordon Brown on his official visit to Washington DC.

Some blame this on pure oversight and insensitivity. Others have put it down to the fact that he has never forgiven Britain for mistreating his Kenyan grandfather during the Fifties Mau Mau uprising. Either way it hardly reflects well on his ability to run the world’s most powerful nation.

Neither petty-mindedness nor incompetence are desirable qualities in a man with his finger on the nuclear button.

Of course oil spills do great environmental damage but, as a more responsible president would have recognised, accidents happen and we still live in a world which depends for its economic survival on cheap, readily available oil.

By stigmatising companies such as BP all President Obama is doing is helping to delay the global economic recovery. It’s not just UK pensioners who are going to be affected by Obama’s silly, petulant mismanagement of this crisis.

He has transformed what could have been merely a little local difficulty into a disaster which will affect the entire world.

That's all I've got to say on this matter.

PS. What I would like to add is, I've been to the States and I liked every minute I spent their. I made a lot of friends and we still keep in touch. I also believe I've got a few friends on the BBB's.
Lliam.

I spent 90% of my money on women and drink. The rest I wasted - George Best
lliam
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1698
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Darlaston - West - Midlands - U.K.

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby jamiebk » Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:09 pm

lliam wrote:He has transformed what could have been merely a little local difficulty into a disaster which will affect the entire world.
:lol: :rofl: :crazy: :lol: :rofl: :crazy:

What drugs are you taking man??? 100,000,000 gallons of oil that is affecting multiple states, the UK economy, Pensioners, the very livelihood of hundreds (thousands) of people already battered by Katrina, in a disaster that will take decades from which to recover...is
"merely a little local difficulty"....It never was a "little local difficulty". It is a msaaive problem made worse by an inept corporation who promised us safety, and the ability to deal with spills if they happened. This is not Obama's problem. The spill was not of his making and it's not his repsonsibility to clean it up. It's his repsonsibilty to see that the perpetrators (BP) do.
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby dai bread » Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:57 pm

Every report I read increases the amount of oil spilled. Now, it's about an "Exxon Valdez" every few days.

Apparently there's not much oil getting to Florida yet, but nobody has said anything about what happens when the oil turns the corner and crosses the Atlantic on the Gulf Stream. That seems almost certain, given the failure of all containment measures to date.
We have no money; we must use our brains. -Ernest Rutherford.
dai bread
1st Chair
 
Posts: 3020
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby analog » Sat Jun 12, 2010 7:34 pm

It's his repsonsibilty to see that the perpetrators (BP) do


it's so easy to be angry.

For some refreshing TV coverage take in the re-run of tonight's Mike Huckabee show on Fox.
He shows some folks who actually did something.

a.
Cogito ergo doleo.
analog
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 12:01 am
Location: arkansas ozarks

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby jamiebk » Tue Jun 15, 2010 8:38 am

Analog...people have a right to be angry when facts like these are revealed:
Accidents DO happen. It's frustrating when they happen because people cut corners to save a few bucks...especially when people die because of it.
##########################################
Documents: BP Cut Corners in Days Before Blowout
06/15/2010
Associated Press/AP Online By MATTHEW DALY and RAY HENRY

NEW ORLEANS - BP made a series of money-saving shortcuts and blunders that dramatically increased the danger of a destructive oil spill in a well that an engineer ominously described as a "nightmare" just six days before the blowout, according to documents released Monday that provide new insight into the causes of the disaster.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee released dozens of internal documents that outline several problems on the deepsea rig in the days and weeks before the April 20 explosion that set in motion the largest environmental disaster in U.S. history. Investigators found that BP was badly behind schedule on the project and losing hundreds of thousands of dollars with each passing day, and responded by cutting corners in the well design, cementing and drilling mud efforts and the installation of key safety devices.

"Time after time, it appears that BP made decisions that increased the risk of a blowout to save the company time or expense. If this is what happened, BP's carelessness and complacency have inflicted a heavy toll on the Gulf, its inhabitants, and the workers on the rig," said Democratic Reps. Henry A. Waxman and Bart Stupak.

The missteps emerged on the same day that President Barack Obama made his fourth visit to the Gulf, where he sought to assure beleaguered residents that the government will "leave the Gulf Coast in better shape than it was before."

Obama's two-day trip to Mississippi, Alabama and Florida represents his latest attempt to persevere through a crisis that has served as an important early test of his presidency. The visit coincides with a national address from the Oval Office on Tuesday night in which he will announce new steps to restore the Gulf Coast ecosystem, according to a senior administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity so as not to upstage the president's announcements.

"I can't promise folks ... that the oil will be cleaned up overnight. It will not be," Obama said after encouraging workers in hard hats as they hosed off and repaired oil-blocking boom. "It's going to be painful for a lot of folks."

But, he said, "things are going to return to normal."

The breached well has dumped as much as 114 million gallons of oil into the Gulf under the worst-case scenario described by scientists - a rate of more than 2 million a day. BP has collected 5.6 million gallons of oil through its latest containment cap on top of the well, or about 630,000 gallons per day.

But BP believes it will see considerable improvements in the next two weeks. The company said Monday that it could trap a maximum of roughly 2.2 million gallons of oil each day by the end of June as it deploys additional containment efforts, including a system that could start burning off vast quantities as early as Tuesday. That would more than triple the amount of oil it is currently capturing - and be a huge relief for those trying to keep it from hitting the shore.

"It would be a game changer," said Coast Guard Chief Petty Officer Mark Boivin, deputy director for near-shore operations at a command center in Mobile. He works with a team that coordinates the efforts of roughly 80 skimming boats gathering oil off the coast.

Still, BP warned its containment efforts could face problems if hoses or pipes clog and engineers struggle to run the complicated collection system. Early efforts at the bottom of the Gulf failed to capture oil.

Meanwhile, congressional investigators have identified several mistakes by BP in the weeks leading up to the disaster as it fell way behind on drilling the well.

BP started drilling in October, only to have the rig damaged by Hurricane Ida in early November. The company switched to a new rig, the Deepwater Horizon, and resumed drilling on Feb. 6. The rig was 43 days late for its next drilling location by the time it exploded April 20, costing BP at least $500,000 each day it was overdue, congressional documents show.

As BP found itself in a frantic race against time to get the job done, engineers took several time-saving measures, according to congressional investigators.

In the design of the well, the company apparently chose a riskier option among two possibilities to provide a barrier to the flow of gas in space surrounding steel tubes in the well, documents and internal e-mails show. The decision saved BP $7 million to $10 million; the original cost estimate for the well was about $96 million.

In an e-mail, BP engineer Brian Morel told a fellow employee that the company is likely to make last-minute changes in the well.

"We could be running it in 2-3 days, so need a relative quick response. Sorry for the late notice, this has been nightmare well which has everyone all over the place," Morel wrote.

The e-mail chain culminated with the following message by another worker: "This has been a crazy well for sure."

BP also apparently rejected advice of a subcontractor, Halliburton Inc., in preparing for a cementing job to close up the well. BP rejected Halliburton's recommendation to use 21 "centralizers" to make sure the casing ran down the center of the well bore. Instead, BP used six centralizers.

In an e-mail on April 16, a BP official involved in the decision explained: "It will take 10 hours to install them. I do not like this." Later that day, another official recognized the risks of proceeding with insufficient centralizers but commented: "Who cares, it's done, end of story, will probably be fine."

In an earlier post, Lliam criticized the "quality" of BP's subcontractors as a reason for the escalation of the problem...However, it is clear that BP's (American) subs were giving sound advise...BP chose not to listem to them.


The lawmakers also said BP also decided against a nine- to 12-hour procedure known as a "cement bond log" that would have tested the integrity of the cement. A team from Schlumberger, an oil services firm, was on board the rig, but BP sent the team home on a regularly scheduled helicopter flight the morning of April 20.
again ignoring their subcontractor advise


Less than 12 hours later, the rig exploded.

BP also failed to fully circulate drilling mud, a 12-hour procedure that could have helped detect gas pockets that later shot up the well and exploded on the drilling rig.

Asked about the details disclosed from the investigation, BP spokesman Mark Proegler said the company's main focus right now is on the response and stopping the flow of oil. "It would be inappropriate for us to comment while an investigation is ongoing," Proegler told AP. BP executives including CEO Tony Hayward will be questioned by Congress on Thursday.

The letter from Waxman and Stupak noted at least five questionable decisions BP made before the explosion, and was supplemented by 61 footnotes and dozens of documents.

"The common feature of these five decisions is that they posed a trade-off between cost and well safety," said Waxman and Stupak. Waxman, D-Calif., chairs the energy panel while Stupak, D-Mich., heads a subcommittee on oversight and investigations.

---

Associated Press Writers Erica Werner in Gulfport, Miss., and Harry R. Weber in Houston contributed to this report. Daly contributed from Washington, D.C.
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby analog » Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:21 pm

No offense meant, Jamie. Thanks for that article...

from a April post:
a friend who used to roughneck in oil many years ago suggested perhaps somebody took a shortcut and didn't install the shutoff... i'd hate to think that... is it possible ?


looks like there were several shortcuts taken. That's a damning article for BP. I hope it's accurate for it points at a few cavalier individuals and not a systemic problem with the whole industry.. but when it hits the fan everybody gets spattered.
I note Halliburton and Schlumberger sorta portrayed as the old sages whose advice was ignored. I trust it wasn't them wrote the article for AP.

This is oil industry's Chernobyl. You can bet operations will tighten up hereafter...

In a way i'm relieved it was higher level tinkering with drilling procedures that made this mess.
Had it been caused by one guy in a hardhat leaving out a lockwasher i'd be worried about the whole process.
Sounds like BP's HR folks need some 'toxic manager awareness training'. Nuke industry is well aware of the phenomenon.
As to regulators - NRC got restructured after Three Mile Island which was a non-event compared to this.

The proper target for that anger may soon come into focus.

a
Cogito ergo doleo.
analog
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 12:01 am
Location: arkansas ozarks

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby Shapley » Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:05 pm

I'm not sure how BP pulled rank and won out over those whose job it was to see that such corners were not cut. Mining and Minerals Service comes across as being impotent. Transocean appears at best to be have been complacent, at worst complicit, in the corner-cutting.

As I said long ago, much of what we're getting is hearsay at this point. Reporters are willing to rush to press any story that harms BP. I don't even bother with reports that tell us the spill "may" or "might" or "could", as that means they are reporting on speculation on someone's part.

The fact is, they really have no clue how much oil is leaking, and they really do not know all the details on what happened. The people most likely to know went down with the Deepwater Explorer. The next most likely are the survivors, and we haven't heard all of their stories yet. Everything else is speculation on the part of the press and their band of 'experts'.

I'll wait until all the facts are in before passing judgement.
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby jamiebk » Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:22 pm

analog wrote:No offense meant, Jamie. Thanks for that article... a
None taken :D
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby analog » Wed Jun 16, 2010 9:41 am

here's a video by that Matt Simmons fellow, to me a credible source.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb2u4_QS ... r_embedded

last two minutes are real worrisome. Last thirty seconds agree with Jamie's AP article, half-assedbess in the operation.

The nuke option he mentions was also part of the earliest conspiracy theories that said N Korea torpedoed the rig... i recoiled at the time, wouldn't even post 'em for a joke....

To the reason for North Korea attacking the Deepwater Horizon, these reports say, was to present US President Obama with an “impossible dilemma” prior to the opening of the United Nations Review Conference of the Parties to the Treat on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) set to begin May 3rd in New York.

This “impossible dilemma” facing Obama is indeed real as the decision he is faced with is either to allow the continuation of this massive oil leak catastrophe to continue for months, or immediately stop it by the only known and proven means possible, the detonation of a thermonuclear device.
:crazy:
http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/7523004/

a.
Cogito ergo doleo.
analog
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 12:01 am
Location: arkansas ozarks

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby dai bread » Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:38 pm

Why would a thermonuclear explosion shut off the leaking well rather than making it bigger and better?
We have no money; we must use our brains. -Ernest Rutherford.
dai bread
1st Chair
 
Posts: 3020
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby jamiebk » Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:57 pm

dai bread wrote:Why would a thermonuclear explosion shut off the leaking well rather than making it bigger and better?


I believe that it "melts" i.e. seals, the hole and shuts off the flow. Seems pretty extreme. Probably more environmental damage than the oil.
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby dai bread » Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:40 pm

Reports I've seen about Bikini and Mururoa say there is a lot of shattered rock in those islands as a result of atomic bomb testing. Maybe a bomb would fuse the Gulf well shut; maybe it wouldn't. If it shattered the rock, you'd write off the entire Gulf through leaks nobody could ever plug.
We have no money; we must use our brains. -Ernest Rutherford.
dai bread
1st Chair
 
Posts: 3020
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby GreatCarouser » Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:05 pm

'Our' spill, bad as it is, is literally just a drop in the bucket compared to the Niger Delta spill that has been 'ignored' by the rest of the world for half a century. Glad to see it getting some press now.... More oil folks?
Sacred cows make the best hamburger.
Mark Twain
GreatCarouser
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 12:01 am
Location: Semi-permanent Vacation CA

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby Giant Communist Robot » Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:46 pm

The biodegradability of oil.

Uh oh, wrong thread. Sorry.
Thinking is overrated
Giant Communist Robot
1st Chair
 
Posts: 3236
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 12:01 am
Location: Waiau, Hawaii

Re: Life on an Oil Platform in the Gulf of Mexico

Postby Trumpetmaster » Thu Sep 16, 2010 11:16 am

3,634 dead birds collected in Gulf, wildlife service says

Image

Tragic.

:cry:
Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it.
Trumpetmaster
Patron
 
Posts: 11557
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:01 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Previous

Return to Culture Connections

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot]

cron