BP chief says he wasn't in loop (no sh*t @_@ )

Post Reply New Topic

So its nationalism to point out that the American government have spent weeks making a point of the "British" part of BP, and failed completely to point out that plenty of American staff were involved all along the chain? Funny that, because it looks more to me like a little thing called "the truth". They have spent most of the period since the accident attacking BP as if the company deliberately and with malice aforethought went out and screwed up that rig JUST to ruin the US seaboard. They have repeatedly failed to mention ANY American involvement in the situation, and seem to be trying to imply that the whole operation is staffed by tea-sipping redcoats. Then they stage that ludicrous "inquiry" which is clearly an attempt by various senators to crowd-please, and is merely a long string of sound-bites and an attempt to capitalize on the fact that a British executive in a court-room-style environment will usually stay calm and collected, rather than bursting into tears or show-boating, neither of which is acceptable behaviour in such a place. (Or at least it wouldn't be in a British one. Apparently the American legal system requires televised histrionics to function. America just isn't happy without a witch to hunt.



Americans in numerous threads here continue to insist on using the term "British Petroleum", as does Obama, despite the fact that it isn't called British Petroleum. The percentages of shareholders have been posted elsewhere in this thread, and are freely available. BP is not a "British" company any more than the other big multinationals, and WHOLLY American companies are deeply involved in the whole mess. So lets leave off with accusations of silly nationalism and conduct an inquiry into why the safety devices built by Haliburton failed to work perhaps? Drag a few of the ex-Amoco staff in front of a panel of hysterics to explain what went wrong? Or maybe just (quite sensibly) ask the questions of people who work on the rigs, have been on the rigs, and who's job is to understand the engineering part of the oil industry instead of a "suit" who has probably never BEEN on a bloody rig? How about not systematically attempting to crush the worth of BP on the international stock-market - an act inherently stupid when you expect that company to pay to sort out the mess. When BP go bankrupt because of American propaganda, who are you going to b***h at to start paying? UK government? The British people? America has been drilling for and shipping oil for a long time, and has managed to kill many more people and spill a great deal of oil in its time, and has been random and lackadaisical about sorting the issue out on numerous times. BP has repeatedly, internationally and openly stated on innumerable occasions that it is happy to pay, fully intends to pay, and is already paying. Obama is so busy making childish threats about "kicking ass" that he seems to have not heard this.

The solution is simple. Stop overacting, stop waging a propaganda war against your allies, and start working together to actually deal with the problem of the contamination of the gulf of Mexico.

Hear! Hear!

British Petroleum in London has been the source of all news releases.

They hold the majority of all stock in BP.

They were the majority investor in the well, and were in direct charge.

Halliburton did not design and operate the blowout preventer.

It was chosen by British Petroleum, who installed it, and it was subject to monthly tests to be done by Minerals Management, Sixteen of twenty-one inspections and tests were not done, we would like to know why.

Tony Hayward said they were drilling hundreds of wells, not in America, so he must have been speaking of worldwide. Lately, the replies have been coming from the Chairman of the Board of British Petroleum, London.

Transocean is Swiss.

Halliburton was the cement contractor on the job, who said it would take 21 seals to hold the pressure, Headquarters only went with six. So where did that order come from? London?

Who gave the order to pump out the mud? London?

So far everyone who has spoken has been employed by British Petroleum, London.

BP North America seems to be a legal fiction. It has no staff and gives no orders.

British Petroleum is raising the $20 billion.

So the first issue, who. Who was in charge, who gave the orders. All reports point to British Petroleum, London.

A second and larger issue, why did Minerals Management fail in their duty to inspect and test the blowout preventer sixteen times?

This is an American problem.

Could it be that the blowout preventer failed sixteen months before and some money changed hands to stop the inspections?

This would reach the standard for criminal negligence and reckless endangerment.

Someone from the rig, and someone from Minerals Management caused eleven deaths, and it seems that bribes were involved.

While the blowout preventer might have saved the rig, the explosion was caused by using six cement seals instead of the engineer recomended 21, and pumping out the mud before the cement had time to cure.

A working blowout preventer would have not worked, there was a production pipe in the well, a working blowout preventer can crush casing, if not on a joint, but not drill string, or production pipe. It is a most dangerous time, switching form the preventer being the safety device, to cement sealing the well.

The next test was of well pressure, and having failed twice, a third test was claimed, but no one from the rig said it happened, then the order to pump out the mud was given, and Bang!

More criminal negligence and reckless endangerment.

This moves the case from Civil to Criminal, and the spill damages from $1,000 per barrel to $4,300. A million barrels so far. $4.3 billion.That is likely to triple if this can be controlled in six months.

It also blows away the Corporate Defense, "I was only following orders."

Your insistence on calling the company British Petroleum is not only incredibly ignorant but also unlawful.

The full and legal name of the company responsible for the spill is BP plc. Company number 00102498. Registered address 1 St James Square, London, SW1 4PD. A publicly owned company, established on 14th April 1909, with shareholders accross the globe.

Contrary to the belief of the ill informed, this company is NOT the same as the company legally called British Petroleum. Company number 00453614. Registered address Chertsey Road, Sunbury on Thames, Middlesex, TW16 7BP. A privately owned company, established on 4 May 1948.

http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/

Every time someone refers to BP plc as British Petroleum, they are commiting libel against an innocent party.

With this in mind, the only reason I can see for repeatly calling them British Petroleum is to get a kick out of venting anti British sentiments and/or because it is known to cause offense to British people. Either way, it stinks.

Are you just inventing facts now? Transocean is not Swiss. It is merely based in Switzerland as a tax dodge to lower its income tax. Its still as American as hyperbole, apple pie and hysteria. Likewise, Haliburton is currently being investigated for shoddy cementing at other sites. As stated elsewhere, BP and British Petroleum are two distinct entities. BP North America is AMOCO to all intents and purposes. Besides that the country of origin of the parent company should have no relevance at all, because BP is a multinational corporation. Pull your collective heads out of the tea case and realise that this isn't some sort of 9/11-style assault on America by the "brits", or even deliberate at all. NO company WANTS to lose so many millions of gallons of saleable oil, or to be saddled with the subsequent clean-up costs. Just fix the BLOODY LEAK.

I will concur, BP and British Petroleum are INDEED spelled differently.
One has a couple of letters, and the other has a couple more.
Assuming that they are the same entity just for dodging loopholes,
would be like assuming the Deep Water event Horizon was conveniently Flagged
so that the Primary responsibility for safety and other inspections rested not with the U.S. government
but with the Republic of the Marshall Islands — a very small, impoverished nation in the Pacific Ocean.

Such loopholes have become common place internally as well as internationally in the corporate world we live in.
Such loopholes have caused this mess and they will continue to make it worse.
The FACT that so many loopholes and short-cuts had become the normal operating procedure, the Standard Operating Procedures became non-existent.

This entire thing has nothing to do with Countries pointing fingers, if that were the case, The Marshall Islands would be solely responsible for it's ship causing the disaster we now face.

As for the BP / British Petroleum points made, I would like to point to an advertisement made by BP in 1922.



Seems that they were not using another Flag at that time.

BP - A Greed Too Safety

I also didn't know BP and British Petroleum are two different companies! Thanks for that! I thought BP did what Kentucky Fried Chicken, did, went to initials only in response to globalization.

Does anyone know what BP's "BP" stands for?


Also, what does that flag have BP in the middle and British Petroleum underneath?

When it comes down to it, Tony Hayward is British and he is the CEO of BP, so people just see the face of Britain on the company. They were in charge of the lease...it means BP is in charge of that rig. They have leased the rig from Transocean. When an oil company leases property, they maintain it for the owner.

via Wikipedia
British Petroleum merged with Amoco (formerly Standard Oil of Indiana) in December 1998,[30] becoming BP Amoco plc.[31] In 2000, BP Amoco acquired Arco (Atlantic Richfield Co.)[32] and Burmah Castrol plc.[33] In 2001 the company formally renamed itself as BP plc[31] and adopted the tagline "Beyond Petroleum," which remains in use today.

I was working at the Amoco / BP refinery in Texas City (migrating from W95 < W2k) during the take-over.
The BP (British Petroleum) LOGO was replacing Amoco(American Oil Company) Logo, and all fine print stated British Petroleum.

Like I've said before, I have seen live video of the ocean floor and there are no cracks in the ocean floor leaking oil. You need to either double check your information or show your sources. Is it possible you are thinking of the natural process of traces of oil that constantly seeping through the rock strata under the gulf of Mexico? Because that is unrelated to the leak.


I have seen other video footage of the sea floor in the area surrounding the blowout preventer too. I'm not sure what they were doing, but there were no oil leaks in the ground and the water was clear down there. Plus, all dispersant ops have only been done at the top of the blowout preventer. Half their ROVs are sitting idle so if there were "rivers" of oil pouring out of the ocean floor around the blowout preventer they would have the means to spray dispersant into them.


Your math is only valid for calculating the weight of the sum of the oil that escapes each day, not the force being exerted by the pressure inside the well. The fact of the matter is that the well held before the blowout preventer broke.


You just said the pressure is too much to put backpressure on the oil in the pipe without it blowing out. Which is it?

Really
According to all the records, the BOP hasn't known to have worked in the last 16 month's of the rig's operation.
The only official proof that it might have worked at all, lies within BP's assumption's that it might not be needed.
Outer Continental Shelf Drilling safety standards requires the BOP to be inspected and tested once a month.
There has not been an inspection performed by the regulating body (MMS) in the last 16 months.
Therefore it's only a coincidence that Chris Oynes, who oversees offshore drilling programs at
the Minerals Management Service,
has conveniently retired.

One of the drilling rig crewmen went on record on the radio (the station got his number off the caller ID and verified he was for real) and said it was tested right before they pumped out the drilling mud. Assuming they had time to put that in a record, it probably sunk with the rig.

So British Petroleum, a private company, bought assets, and formed a public division, called BP.

BP did not create it's self, and while Public and Private Companies do have different tax laws, it was British Petrolum that did the buying, made the investment, and set up the Public Corporation.

As the acting party, with the money and the knowledge, and as far as we can see the control, voting stock, BP is still a branch of British Petroleum.

I too say stop the oil. This 1,000 barrel a day leak has turned out to be something else, So perhaps the lack of truth has something to do with the American view? A leak in the Gulf belongs to us all, yet it took an Act of Congress to get video. It was soon discovered it was a bit more than 1,000 barrels a day.

So we were lied to from day one.

The President of BP North America was questioned, he said he knew nothing, all that drilling stuff was done from London.

Of the three BP employees on the rig that were called for questioning, two took the 5th, one was in Britian and said he was too sick to come back.

We do have a right to investigate the worst disaster to ever happen in our waters, BP says they will investigate, and maybe tell us something later.

BP took the rig workers to a hotel and demanded the sign a paper saying they would not speak of what happened. In the investigation into the deaths of eleven, this is called Witness Tampering.

BP used the Coast Guard to keep reporters away, even threating arrest of people photographing oil on the beach.

From trying to activate the blowout preventer, to Top Kill and Junk Shot, they just went through the motions, knowing all along that the preventer was dead, would not work with a production pipe in the well, and knowing the true extent of the flow.

43,000 gallons has been replaced by 60,000 barrels. We were lied to.

The oil is still flowing, at least half into the Gulf, and it is hurricane season. All work will stop, the oil will flow, we are very close, and about to get covered in oil.

In answer to John Browning, the relief well if it works, will pump mud into the oil stream, slowly, which will mix with oil and flow up the pipe into the Gulf. This will add to the resistance, but the Mexican well took two months to stop the flow. There is also the loss of a mile of the casing which means it will be harder to create back pressure and reduce the flow. The relief well is a maybe, not a sure thing. The flow from below, oil, must be tamed before the pipe can be filled with mud till motion stops, then cement to seal.

November seems the soonest this could stop, the end of huricane season, and we are expecting a very bad year, and all work will stop, and the million barrels is in the Gulf right up to our shore, and our shore floods during huricanes. The well will be left to flow freely durning the storm, only 48 miles from our shore.

We expect dead marshes, black beaches, and our whole way of life to vanish forever. 17,000 National Guard have been activated, not for cleanup, but for moving everyone away from the coast, and we think we will never be allowed to return.

So we are looking at the next storm, then being moved to camps. $20 Billion is being paid to the Government to relocate us.

We do not trust Washington or London when it comes to oil, we are the next Iraq, Afganistan.

What we would like to know is a day by day report of what happened on the rig and who gave what orders, BP could supply that, but will not. We would also like to know why Minerals Management stopped inspecting the blowout preventor, for sixteen months.

Our damages, lost income, fisheries, tourism, the cost of restoring the Gulf and the shore, seem to run to some very large numbers, $100 Billion, in the short term. Just in Florida tourism is $60 billion a year.

Restoring the Gulf is long term, and just fisheries were $3.5 Billion a year.

All we hear is that London is thinking of the Little People. We are thinking of you also.

I haven't heard about that. Do you have a link where I can read more?

Obama activated the Guard on one of his last trips down. I do not keep links. 17,000 is a lot, and they have no spill duties that I know of.

In the last use of the Guard they put New Orleans on busses to FEMA camps.

What is not being said, the maps of the spread of oil vanished from AOL just as it neared the coast of Florida and the Gulf Stream. That, while estimates went up to there being a million barrels in the Gulf, at least 40,000 a day being added. Suddenly, this is no longer news?

During Katrina the Red Cross refused to send anyone south of I-12, which runs from Baton Rouge to the Mississippi coast. Everything below that line is less than ten foot above sea level. The Katrina surge went eleven miles inland in Mississippi.

That took out houses, but left only dead crabs. We will have a Gulf hurricane, there will be a storm surge, and it will leave everything covered in oil.

When it comes, there is no choice but leave, and there will be no coming back.

Oil in the Gulf is a disaster, oil on land is going to be much worse.

There is a lot of "Never Before" to this, but giving the Government $20 Billion to cover private damages, is a real big one.

There are lots of laws covering not allowing people into oil soaked lands.

17,000 National Guard with no assigned duty, $20 Billion turned over to the Government, and what seems a news blackout.

BP did try to consolidate all the legal cases, and failed, this makes all claims the choice of the Government. The Legal System has just been gutted.

Next, my house is oiled, total disaster, so I file with my insurance company, and am told, sorry, the Government is doing all damage claims?

If your house washes away they pay for the building, for the land is still there, what if the land is now brown and the oil has soaked in a foot down?

What if the government says no one can live there, nor will you be allowed to clean it up?

Area cleanup, thousands of square miles, calls for Eminent Domain, and since BP paid all damages, it becomes BP Land?

Meanwhile the people are in FEMA camps, and are given a take it or leave deal, with no legal recourse.

I smell more than oil.

Demands for compensation are hardly going to help the clean-up or repair work. Maybe the "victims" should hang fire until that is paid for? After all, whilst they may be losing money now, they will be permanently out of work if the clean-up isn't as effective as possible.

I agree. The first to lose their livelyhood were fishermen, who are all working for BP now, making good money, there wil be not lost earnings claims. The largest osyter packing company shut down, there are still plenty of oysters, but no one to harvest them, they are all working for BP.

It still leaves truckers and shuckers out of work, but the watermen are working. Beach motels are filled with cleanup crews, who eat out local.

That someone in New York who was a Lehman lawyer, did the payouts for 9/11, is getting $20 Billion does not seem right. They have no local offices, will create jobs in New York, and will skim as much as possible.

It seems to be Obama claiming, we did something! With elections coming up, I am sure the Democratic Party will get the payout jobs.

Louisiana and Texas are the oil coast. It pays well, and except for BP, most companies are safe. To us this is just another problem in the oil patch, and we fix problems.

BP has gone through it's public relations checklist, none of the fixes have worked, and the relief wells are not a sure thing, they are a last hope backup. We need a backup plan beyond that. We should be drilling a dozen wells into the field, if the relief well does work, fine, if not, another plan is in action.

They too will be "Hell Wells." They need double casing, and a double sheer blowout preventers.

This is our back yard, this is a technology that was developed in the Gulf, we have the rigs and crews, and Obama wants BP to pay for them not working. Better jobs than unemployment, better working rigs than having them move to Brazil.

Even killing the Deepwater Horizon well does not end the danger, long term only pumping out the field and reducing pressure will.

That is the one and only main problem, and waiting to see if the relief well works is taking a much bigger risk.

Killing the well, there is still all the oil, we know it is there, and a few billion spent would keep it underground, and produce it later.

Cleanup and damages come after ending the problem.