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

Post Reply New Topic

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gulf_oil_spill
WASHINGTON – Channeling the nation's anger, lawmakers pilloried BP's boss in a withering day of judgment Thursday for the oil company at the center of the Gulf calamity. Unflinching, BP chief executive Tony Hayward said he was out of the loop on decisions at the well and coolly asserted, "I'm not stonewalling."

That infuriated members of Congress even more, Democrats and Republicans alike.

Testifying as oil still surged into the Gulf of Mexico and coated ever more coastal land and marshes, Hayward declared "I am so devastated with this accident," "deeply sorry" and "so distraught."

Yet the oil man disclaimed knowledge of any of the myriad problems on and under the Deepwater Horizon rig before the deadly explosion, telling a congressional hearing he had only heard about the well earlier in April, the month of the accident, when the BP drilling team told him it had found oil.

"With respect, sir, we drill hundreds of wells a year around the world," Hayward told Republican Rep. Michael Burgess of Texas.

"Yes, I know," Burgess shot back. "That's what scaring me right now."

Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., told the CEO: "I think you're copping out. You're the captain of the ship." Democrats were similarly, if more predictably, livid.

"BP blew it," said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., chairman of the House investigations panel that held the hearing. "You cut corners to save money and time."

The verbal onslaught had been anticipated for days and unfolded at a nearly relentless pace. Hayward had one seemingly sympathetic listener, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, who apologized for the pressure President Barack Obama had put on BP to create a compensation fund. Hours later, after criticism from Republicans and Democrats as well as the White House, Barton backed off and apologized for his apology.

With multiple investigations continuing and primary efforts in the Gulf focused on stopping the leak, there was little chance the nation would learn much from Hayward's appearance about what caused the disaster. Yet even modest expectations were not met as the CEO told lawmakers at every turn that he was not tuned in to operations at the well.

He said his underlings made the decisions and federal regulators were responsible for vetting them.

Hayward spoke slowly and calmly in his clipped British accent as he sought to deflect accusations — based on internal BP documents obtained by congressional investigators — that BP chose a particular well design that was riskier but cheaper by at least $7 million.

"I wasn't involved in any of that decision-making," he said.

Were bad decisions made about the cement?

"I wasn't part of the decision-making process," he said. "I'm not a cement engineer, I'm afraid."

Also, "I am not a drilling engineer" and "I'm not an oceanographic scientist."

What about those reports that BP had been experiencing a variety of problems and delays at the well?

"I had no prior knowledge."

At one point a frustrated Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, interrupted the CEO. "You're kicking the can down the road and acting as if you had nothing to do with this company and nothing to do with the decisions. I find that irresponsible."

Hayward quietly insisted: "I'm not stonewalling. I simply was not involved in the decision-making process."

Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., voiced the committee's frustrations as the afternoon wore on. "You're really insulting our intelligence," he said. "I am thoroughly disgusted."

Waxman told the BP executive that in his committee's review of 30,000 items, there was "not a single e-mail or document that you paid even the slightest attention to the dangers at this well."

Burgess slammed both the CEO and the government regulators for a risky drilling plan that he said never should have been brought forward.

"Shame on you, Mr. Hayward, for submitting it," Burgess said, "but shame on us for accepting it, which is simply a rubber stamp."

In a jarring departure that caught fellow Republicans by surprise, Barton, the top GOP member of the panel, used his opening statement to apologize — twice — for the pressure put on the company by President Barack Obama to contribute to a compensation fund for people in the afflicted Gulf of Mexico states.

Barton said the U.S. has "a due process system" to assess such damages, and he decried the $20 billion fund that BP agreed to Wednesday at the White House as a "shakedown" and "slush fund." He told Hayward, "I'm not speaking for anybody else. But I apologize."

He later retracted his apologies to BP, then apologized anew — this time for calling the fund a "shakedown." "BP should bear the full financial responsibility for the accident," he said, and "fully compensate those families and businesses that have been hurt by this accident."

Barton's earlier remarks were clearly an embarrassment for the party. House Republican leaders John Boehner, Eric Cantor and Mike Pence issued a statement asserting: "Congressman Barton's statements this morning were wrong. BP itself has acknowledged that responsibility for the economic damages lies with them and has offered an initial pledge of $20 billion dollars for that purpose."

Since 1990, oil and gas industry political action committees and employees have given more than $1.4 million to Barton's campaigns, the most of any House member during that period, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

As Hayward began to testify, a protester disrupted the hearing and was forcibly removed from the room by Capitol police. The woman was identified as Diane Wilson, 61, a shrimper from Seadrift, Texas, near the Gulf Coast. Her hands stained black, she shouted to Hayward from the back of the room: "You need to be charged with a crime."

Stupak, the subcommittee chairman and a former Michigan state trooper, noted that over the past five years, 26 people have died and 700 have been injured in BP accidents — including the Gulf spill, a pipeline spill in Alaska and a refinery explosion in Texas.

Hayward argued that safety had always been his top priority and "that is why I am so devastated with this accident." When he became CEO in 2007, Hayward said he would focus "like a laser" on safety, a phrase he repeated on Thursday.

Rep. John Sullivan, R-Okla., questioned BP's commitment to safety.

BP had 760 safety violations in the past five years and paid $373 million in fines, Sullivan said. By contrast, Sunoco and ConocoPhillips each had eight safety violations and ExxonMobil just one, Sullivan said.

"How in the heck do you explain that?" he asked Hayward. Hayward said most of those violations predated his tenure as CEO. "We have made major changes in the company over the last three to four years," he said.

An estimated 73.5 million to 126 million gallons of oil has come out of the breached wellhead, whether into the water or captured.

The reservoir that feeds the well still holds about 2 billion gallons of oil, according to the first public estimate Hayward has given of the size of the undersea oil field.

That means the reservoir is believed to still hold 94 percent to 97 percent of its oil. At the current flow rate, it would take from two years to nearly four years for all the oil to be drained from it.

I watched a good part of the show-trial on TV and it confirmed my opinion that politicians are especially unpleasant people and that if some kind of genetic screening could be developed it would benefit us all if they were smothered at birth. Their questioning clearly played to an audience, was sickeningly emotive, and contained more logical fallacies than you could shake a stick at. One of the interrogators even reminded me of a Nazi lawyer at the trial of some of the individuals who tried to assassinate Hitler -- I saw some old footage of this on a TV documentary recently.

Some say this was anti-British, but I also watched those finance people getting similar treatment a year or so back, and most were American.

Part of what made me laugh watching the whole affair was that the BP fella was not able to answer half their questions. This was not through lack of ability to answer the congress men seemed to be unaware that due to an investigation taking place he is unable to answer them

Deepwater Horizon was designed and built by the South Koreans, owned by Transocean, an American company. BP North America used to be AMOCO (Which would stand for AMerican Oil COmpany to hazard a guess.) , and is still staffed by Americans, who worked on the South Korean-built, American-owned Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico (which mostly isn't Mexican funnily enough). The failed shutoff valve was built and operated by its designers, the American company Haliburton Inc, who are also staffed by Americans, just like the Asian rig with the yank crew in the un-mexican gulf. BP itself is a multinational corporation with many shareholders who are American, which is the country of origin for the people who designed and installed the faulty American shut-off valve that was attached to the South Korean-built oil rig crewed by Americans from the American company Transocean working in conjunction with what used to be AMOCO. Remember the AMOCO Cadiz? I imagine that many of the French do.

So far the greatest British involvement in this mess has been pretty much exclusively the "B" part of BP. How about some AMERICANS stand up and accept some blame for their parts in this disaster, because they were clearly THERE?

An internet story, Russians used nukes several times, short on details.

Like most of our news, or lack of, if it worked somewhere else, "North Koreans turn sea water into fresh water and generate clean power." We would hear that the startving commies are spewing lies about science they do not understand.

Perhaps Congress does not know anything, "Retired State Trooper turned Statesman," but we do know our Geology, and oil field engineering.

The regulations do exist, they are supposed to be enforced by Minerals Management, but they do add to the cost of a well, so Minerals Management can exempt companies from the rules, even if their own science and engineering staffs object.

It comes down to politically connected people being appointed to head Minerals Management, and wells costing a lot less. Like Wall Street, less regulation, in this case exemption from existing regulation, in return for gifts to Congress. Wall Street paid more, bought some deregulation, but the SEC never gave anyone a pass on complying with the existing rules. Minerals Management did.

CDS were never regulated, and bought down the economy, oil drilling has always been regulated, and these exemptions brought down the Gulf.

Compliance is local, of the 21 inspections mandated by law, by Minerals Management, only six were performed. This is on top of exemptions, this is what we do not see becomes legal. British Petroleum can not stop Coast Guard, Minerals Management, OHSA, inspections, that can only come from higherups in the Agencys. They were paid to look the other way.

The higher ups would not dare work alone, as they are appointed, by Congress. Money flows to the Hill.

Worldcom was classic, A Mississippi Congressman get the Pentagon contract for phone and email, and forms a company around Bernie Ebbers, who had a background as a nightclub bouncer, and did stuff for the Congressman. $13 Billion dollars vanishes, the Congressman retires, Ebbers takes the fall, and there is no record of where the $13 billion went. As fast as money came in it vanished.

Brownie at FEMA was once President of a horse breeders group, as billions were laundered through FEMA. When there was an emergency, there was no plan, no supplies, and Brownie retired.

The head of Minerals Management just retired, and Congress is not asking him questions.

It was his job to see that the well was correctly designed and drilled, and mandatory inspections were carried out. His malfeasence caused this, but he was the bag man of Congress.

Tony Hayward is a suit, his job is to make nice with the money, important Nigerians, and line up permissions and funds across the top. He does not deliver the bribes, agree on how much is kicked back in return for lax regulation, it is his job to keep his hands clean.

From his testamony, he knows next to nothing about drilling. His main job would be seeing to it that investors are happy.

Paying off locals is done worldwide, Congress passed a law that we could not use bribes to get international contracts, and said nothing about American contracts, Government contracts.

For every dollar that goes over the table to Congress, a lot more goes under the table.

It is the job of Congress to run Federal Agencies, so the Head of Minerals Management was their chose one. All of the questions thrown at Tony should be directed at the recently retired head of Minerals Management. The entire chain of Federal Agencies involved should be in the witness chair. Not performing required inspections lead to the death of eleven men, and the worst disaster of moden times, By Act of Congress.

So Congress should not be running the hearings, but they control all others. The Department of Justice?

Minerals Management Science and Engineering warned of the dangers of gas in this field. This was public knowledge before the lease. The whole problem comes from lack of inspection, and exemption from regulations, which had to come from the top of Minerals Management.

In a place that could be drilled with extra caution, they went for the kick back.

British Petroluem got the lease for everyone else was bidding with the idea that this was going to be an expenseive well. British Petroleum went cheap, even the well casing was substandard. Double casings are common, they skipped that, and they put in six cement seals when the contractor said twenty-one.

I think there was a known problem with the blowout preventer, Minerals Management is supposed to test that once a month, for some reason they stopped the inspections, missing sixteen required tests of the blowout preventor. This was long before they hit oil. The well should have been stopped, the blowout preventor replaced, or the well filled with cement.

British Petroleum would have lost millions, ten of million, perhaps a hundred million, so a deal was made with Minerals Management, and the drilling continued.

So would they tell Tony Hayward? Never! This is what Lobbiests do, send in the "K" Street lawyers with connections on The Hill. All it took was not inspecting the rig till the well was finished.

Second problem, time was running out, it was a slow well with problems, Transocean was doing right, British Petroleum sent a fixer to get the well finished, and it was on his order that the well blew up. I think he is the one that died, but he did not know drilling, only cost, and being the tough fixer.

British Petroleum ordered six cement seals, saved a couple of days, at a million a day, then ordered the mud pumped out, saving another million.

Tony Hayward ws never on the rig, never bribed anyone, so he was safe to bring in for questioning.

The Head of Minerals Management charged with Malfeasence, and eleven counts of murder, should be made to explain why the inspections stopped. He was the one person that was charged with seeing that wells are drilled in a safe manner.

So here we have Congress, all taking oil money, questioning the one person who was not involved?

British Petroleum is guilty. It does not stop there.

In a better report they have been reading my posts, and instead of hitting the pipe 8,000 down are going to the bottom, 18,000 feet, and it is still doubtful. The oil blew out 23,000 foot of water, when the oil was not in motion. Other bottom kills have taken months, it is still a matter of pressure, and pumping down mud is going to cause a pressure surge.

The good news is if this is still flowing come the Fall elections, we might get rid of a lot of Congress.

What we need is a John Dean, someone on the inside to tell all.

If British Petroleum are the guilty party, why are they questioning the head of BP?

Because the three from British Petroleum who were on the rig, were in the loop, gave the orders, two plead the 5th, the right to not incriminate themselves, and the third was in England and said he was sick.

The deaths of eleven men are being investigated by British Petroleum, and they will not say anything till they finish their investigation. It worked when they killed fifteen at Texas City.

Little people, Natives, and Post Colonials do not understand how the world runs.

In todays New Orleans paper, there are problems with the casing, which was substandard, and blowouts on the sea floor are the reason the Top Kill was stopped three days early. Now the oil is finding other paths.

This same problem faces the Bottom Kill, increasing pressure speeds up leaks, and opens a path from the bottom up. There is no seal on the outside of the casing, the oil is at 10,000 psi, shooting in mud, whch is twice as dense as water, will cause the pressure to spike, perhaps 50,000 psi, and the damaged casing was never designed to hold any pressure in that range. Every leak will blowout into the outside of the casing, and that gives it a path to the surface.

The article pointed out that only 1% has leaked so far.

The only answer is to drill a dozen wells, and fill the producing strata from the bottom, then pump oil like mad to reduce the pressure, after it blows is too late.

It will cost several Billion, and take six months, and should have been started from day one.

We Little People in Louisiana do know Oil Geology, Drilling, and what to do.

The problem is not in the Gulf, it is in Washington.

Mud held the pressure when the oil was not moving, and the casing was a mile longer.

Top Kill was stopped because the pressure was rising to the danger point, what would blow out the casing.

The top of wells are cemented, the support for the blowout preventer, video of the casing does not show what is going on behind the camera.

What is going on is with 60,000 barrels a day coming out the top, it is blasting rivers through the strata at the bottom. Pumping mud in at the same pressure will mix with the oil, and go up the pipe.

It took two months of pumping mud to stop the Mexican blowout. That was only 150 foot of water, so they had most of the pipe, Deepwater Horizon lost a mile of pipe.

It is still that mass in motion thing, 60,000 barrels times 300 pounds per barrel.

Mass times the speed of flow equals the force to be overcome. MxV=I

Blowout preventers are to prevent this situation.

Shutting off this well with a valve, all of "I" happens in a moment, and "I" is a very large number.

A rough guess, 18 million pounds for the Mass, the speed is unknown, no valve or casing would hold "I".

It will have to be slowed from the bottom, slowly, months, and I doubt if British Petroleum would have a market for half mud, half oil. I doubt if it would burn.

Once they start pumping mud they can never stop till the pressure falls, and the flow stops. Then cement can be pumped in. That may never happen.

British Petroleum is calling all of the shots from London, they gave the orders that lead to this, they are fully responsable under the law.

This is a 100% British operation, "He who calls the tune pays the piper."

They went in cheap, have played cheap at every step, and the only real answer is drilling a dozen wells around the blowout, and reducing the field pressure.

Obama shut down over a dozen deep water rigs in the Gulf, laid off the crews, we have the assets in place.

Time to invoke the Jones Act, only American owned, American built ships, with American crews, can work in American waters.

British Petroleum does not have the assets to cover the damages, they are subject to US law, they killed eleven people.