I'd fire BP boss, says Obama

[Sara Jevo]

Good on Obama for having a go at the fat cats who love taking the profits but aren't prepared for the consequences when their pursuit of wealth turns into an environmental disaster.

I'd fire BP boss, says Obama (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37566848/ns/disaster_in_the_gulf/)

[Anfield]

I think that Hayward shot himself in the foot a few weeks ago with his claim that the disaster was quite modest (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/7737805/Gulf-of-Mexico-oil-spill-BP-insists-oil-spill-impact-very-modest.html)

He will be gone before Christmas to be replaced by another corporate clone whose only care is to maintain share price and increase profits

[mrlennie]

He is also quoted as saying "I'd like to get back to my life" in the context of the spill being an inconvenience.

[georgegwf]

He is also quoted as saying "I'd like to get back to my life" in the context of the spill being an inconvenience.
Yep not the most clever thing to say ...........................

[bluechesse]

Good on Obama for having a go at the fat cats who love taking the profits but aren't prepared for the consequences when their pursuit of wealth turns into an environmental disaster.

I'd fire BP boss, says Obama (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37566848/ns/disaster_in_the_gulf/)

Do you think he's actually going after "the fat cats who love taking the profits but aren't prepared for the consequences when their pursuit of wealth turns into an environmental disaster", or do you think he's turning an environmental catastrophe in to a chance to boost his ratings?

Yip, the oil company concerned have made a massive, huge, unearthly mistake, that has not only caused a massive environmental disaster, but lets not forget, lost the lives of 11 men (that fact seems to have been lost in all the reporting of this btw).

BUT, they are clearly doing all that can to stop the leak and put it right. They have promised to foot the bill in its entirety and do everything possible to clean it up and compensate those affected. The bill will run in to billions, and they haven't once suggested that they wont cover this.

So is all the political sniping really doing any good? it should never have happened, but it did and theres nothing anyone can do about it now. I say leave them to do what ever they can to stop the leak and start the clean up. Lets face it, if anyone is going to stop the leak, its going to be the oil company, not the US government.

They responsible for their this, and as far as I can see, they ARE accepting full responsibility and doing all in their power to put it right. I cant see how Obama appearing on TV every 5 mins slating them is helping the situation in the least.

[George Brims]

Shell are saying they will take full responsibility. They also said they were fully prepared for any conceivable leak - wrong - and going back a bit, that they were fully prepared for a tanker from Valdez, Alaska going aground (BP own the major share in the Alaskan Pipeline) - wrong again.

I wouldn't trust them as far as can throw them with oil-covered hands.

[theone]

Do you think he's actually going after "the fat cats who love taking the profits but aren't prepared for the consequences when their pursuit of wealth turns into an environmental disaster", or do you think he's turning an environmental catastrophe in to a chance to boost his ratings?

Yip, the oil company concerned have made a massive, huge, unearthly mistake, that has not only caused a massive environmental disaster, but lets not forget, lost the lives of 11 men (that fact seems to have been lost in all the reporting of this btw).

BUT, they are clearly doing all that can to stop the leak and put it right. They have promised to foot the bill in its entirety and do everything possible to clean it up and compensate those affected. The bill will run in to billions, and they haven't once suggested that they wont cover this.

So is all the political sniping really doing any good? it should never have happened, but it did and theres nothing anyone can do about it now. I say leave them to do what ever they can to stop the leak and start the clean up. Lets face it, if anyone is going to stop the leak, its going to be the oil company, not the US government.

They responsible for their this, and as far as I can see, they ARE accepting full responsibility and doing all in their power to put it right. I cant see how Obama appearing on TV every 5 mins slating them is helping the situation in the least.

Great post.

Obama is making himself look good whilst not insulting any American company. Especially the one that was owned the rig and was doing the drilling.

[Aaldtimer]

Shell are saying they will take full responsibility. They also said they were fully prepared for any conceivable leak - wrong - and going back a bit, that they were fully prepared for a tanker from Valdez, Alaska going aground (BP own the major share in the Alaskan Pipeline) - wrong again.

I wouldn't trust them as far as can throw them with oil-covered hands.

I don't think that BP is any way connected to Exxon, who were responsible for the Canadian oilspill in 1989(?).
http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/about.aspx :confused

[Cattach]

Good on Obama for having a go at the fat cats who love taking the profits but aren't prepared for the consequences when their pursuit of wealth turns into an environmental disaster.

I'd fire BP boss, says Obama (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37566848/ns/disaster_in_the_gulf/)

I am afraid that Obama must first look at the US input or lack of it in this drilling for oil. The US Heath and Saftey and Regulatery bodies failed in their duty too. And why do we need so much oil - because Obama's on country is refusing to give up on its adoration of the motor car and refusing to cut emissions in other areas. Obama has little to be proud of.

[Boozeburglar]

they are clearly doing all that can to stop the leak and put it right. They have promised to foot the bill in its entirety and do everything possible to clean it up and compensate those affected. The bill will run in to billions, and they haven't once suggested that they wont cover this

I am sure if it was just about anywhere else on the planet they wouldn't be putting quite as much effort into dealing with it.

[George Brims]

I don't think that BP is any way connected to Exxon, who were responsible for the Canadian oilspill in 1989(?).
http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/about.aspx :confused
The oil spill in 1989 was in Alaska, not Canada. As BP (mostly) own the pipeline they promised to take responsibility for cleanup of any spills of oil from tankers pulling oil from it. They made a big show when the pipeline opened of a whole bunch of local guys they had hired to use all sorts of fancy equipment including boats deploying booms, and others spraying dispersants. By the time the actual spill occurred, the locals were all back on the dole, and the boats were rusting away in some harbour somewhere. The bay has still not been properly cleaned up, and 1,300 miles of coastline still have oil contamination.

As for "connected in any way" to Exxon, when it comes to big projects like the Alaska pipeline, they're all connected somehow, even if it's just selling each other the oil.

[mrlennie]

Have you heard about the dispersant's they are using to clear the oil up in the gulf?

There are 12 other dispersant that are less toxic and better at cleaning up the oil but BP refuse to say why they are using whatever brand it is.

[George Brims]

I can tell you why they're using it. It has been all over the news over here. It's because it's made by one of their subsidiaries.

[mrlennie]

I can tell you why they're using it. It has been all over the news over here. It's because it's made by one of their subsidiaries.

You couldn't write this stuff.

[ducati]

Mmm. here is an idea for future reference. Why don't the tankers carry half oil and half dispersent. That way, when they run aground, sink, colide etc. they automatically clean up their own spill-simples ;)

[Amy-Winehouse]

I think that Hayward shot himself in the foot a few weeks ago with his claim that the disaster was quite modest (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/7737805/Gulf-of-Mexico-oil-spill-BP-insists-oil-spill-impact-very-modest.html)

He will be gone before Christmas to be replaced by another corporate clone whose only care is to maintain share price and increase profits

Sadly, this is the truest word Ive seen on this disaster yet. What irks me is 11 men lost their lives & it has been totally disreguarded , I am disgusted with BP & the way they try to palm the blame off to everyone else, their Company man said no to Schlumberger`s plea to shut the well in after several Kicks.
Their Company man said no , get on with it. Schlumberger guys got in contact with their own people & were off the rig 6 hours before it went boom, This catastrophe should & could have been prevented.

BP werent wrong, their slogan was `bringing oil to American Shores` How sorry are they now ????

[ducati]

OK it is time for the the tide of opinion to reverse flow.

This disaster was actually caused by an American sub contractor. Why should the British-ish company BP foot the bill? This is costing us all. In our pensions, in the reduced dividend (eventually) and more important in the short term, loss of tax revenue (in the billions eventually).

I say it is about time for BP to tell Obama to stick his oil contracts where the sun don't shine.

British Companies would not be in the Gulf of Mexico if the US had comparable deep water technology. Once they catch up, you can be sure they won't be :mad:

[Sara Jevo]

OK it is time for the the tide of opinion to reverse flow.

This disaster was actually caused by an American sub contractor. Why should the British-ish company BP foot the bill? This is costing us all. In our pensions, in the reduced dividend (eventually) and more important in the short term, loss of tax revenue (in the billions eventually).

I say it is about time for BP to tell Obama to stick his oil contracts where the sun don't shine.

British Companies would not be in the Gulf of Mexico if the US had comparable deep water technology. Once they catch up, you can be sure they won't be :mad:

Is this really a British company? Or a simply a corporation whose share-holders are financial institutions based all around the world?

If this episode brings "peak oil" into focus in the United States and the West, it will have a silver lining.

But I doubt it.

So long as the resources of the planet are priced by market demand rather than sustainability of supply, we'll continue to see the environment raped in the pursuit of piles of bank notes and numbers on balance sheets.

Only when the last river has been polluted,

And the last tree been cut down,

And the last fish been caught,

Only then will we realise money cannot be eaten.

Cree Indian saying

[Amy-Winehouse]

OK it is time for the the tide of opinion to reverse flow.

This disaster was actually caused by an American sub contractor. Why should the British-ish company BP foot the bill? This is costing us all. In our pensions, in the reduced dividend (eventually) and more important in the short term, loss of tax revenue (in the billions eventually).

I say it is about time for BP to tell Obama to stick his oil contracts where the sun don't shine.

British Companies would not be in the Gulf of Mexico if the US had comparable deep water technology. Once they catch up, you can be sure they won't be :mad:


The drilling contractor (Transocean) only does what its told to do from the operators- who were BP- Transocean only drill by the work instructions handed to them by the BP company rep & by someone in an office(BP).

BP= Guilty as charged m`lud

[ducati]

Subcontractors are always responsible for the safety of their operations.

Chucked out on appeal :lol:

[The Drunken Duck]

The drilling contractor (Transocean) only does what its told to do from the operators- who were BP- Transocean only drill by the work instructions handed to them by the BP company rep & by someone in an office(BP).

BP= Guilty as charged m`lud

Nope.

BP are the Contractors, Transocean are the Rig Operators. BP contracted the Deepwater Horizon from Transocean, the rig Operators. The drill floor is staffed by Transocean, not BP. And if, and its a speculative if, Transocean felt that the BP Company Man was giving unworkable instructions or applying pressure the Operator has an obligation to contest that. Anyone who sets foot on a rig will know the Safety Inductions and STOP briefings are the first things you get. I have been working rigs for eight years and ANYONE can stop a job if they feel it is unsafe. In fact they have a duty to do so, blindly following instructions is no excuse.

As for Transocean, they are the worst company I ever worked for. They binned me from a rig because I wouldn't give a weather forecast to the beach within limits the Helo pilots would launch on. The weather was still out of limits after two days of non flying and this was not acceptable apparently. I am qualified to make weather obsverations, the OIM wasn't but he told me to "gloss it up" a bit to get the choppers in the air. I refused. I was told that I would not be required next trip. Sure enough I wasn't. Saw more of the same on other Transocean rigs. So I am am well aware of Transocean's willingness to bend rules when it suits.

BP have already taken responsibility for the accident, the spill and the clear up. What else can they do ??, Transocean will be well aware that BP wont be taking the hit alone and will hit them for their share. It was their BOP that caused the accident and a mate who is an Asst Driller tells me they have had similar BOP problems in India since the GOM accident.

[Amy-Winehouse]

Nope.

BP are the Contractors, Transocean are the Rig Operators. BP contracted the Deepwater Horizon from Transocean, the rig Operators. The drill floor is staffed by Transocean, not BP. And if, and its a speculative if, Transocean felt that the BP Company Man was giving unworkable instructions or applying pressure the Operator has an obligation to contest that. Anyone who sets foot on a rig will know the Safety Inductions and STOP briefings are the first things you get. I have been working rigs for eight years and ANYONE can stop a job if they feel it is unsafe. In fact they have a duty to do so, blindly following instructions is no excuse.

As for Transocean, they are the worst company I ever worked for. They binned me from a rig because I wouldn't give a weather forecast to the beach within limits the Helo pilots would launch on. The weather was still out of limits after two days of non flying and this was not acceptable apparently. I am qualified to make weather obsverations, the OIM wasn't but he told me to "gloss it up" a bit to get the choppers in the air. I refused. I was told that I would not be required next trip. Sure enough I wasn't. Saw more of the same on other Transocean rigs. So I am am well aware of Transocean's willingness to bend rules when it suits.

BP have already taken responsibility for the accident, the spill and the clear up. What else can they do ??, Transocean will be well aware that BP wont be taking the hit alone and will hit them for their share. It was their BOP that caused the accident and a mate who is an Asst Driller tells me they have had similar BOP problems in India since the GOM accident.

I think yer missing the point Im putting across, Transocean drill the well to the spec that BP ask for. you should know , in fact I think you well know that if you stop the job , it had better be a good reason.

BP company man is more or less the most important man on the rig after the OIM(sometimes before him) & as he knew they were taking Kicks he shouldve used kill mud & the well shouldve been shut in.

I havent worked in the Gulf but the guys I know who have will tell you that the safety is maybe not as stringent down there as it is up here

[The Drunken Duck]

I think yer missing the point Im putting across, Transocean drill the well to the spec that BP ask for. you should know , in fact I think you well know that if you stop the job , it had better be a good reason.

BP company man is more or less the most important man on the rig after the OIM(sometimes before him) & as he knew they were taking Kicks he shouldve used kill mud & the well shouldve been shut in.

I havent worked in the Gulf but the guys I know who have will tell you that the safety is maybe not as stringent down there as it is up here

I do see your point Amy, not disagreeing that Transocean drill the well the way BP want it, but they are contracted to do that safely. If what they are being requested, or even told, to do is unsafe in their view then they have an obligation to stop. The actual drilling is Transocean's responsibility and they have been very quiet since this accident and have let BP take the full rap. As for stopping the job for a good reason, I can only speak from my experience when I used to work outside and I called a few "time out's" to re-evaluate what was being done just because it didn't feel right. Not once was I ever penalised for it, never heard of anyone being penalised for doing so either. I am not a Drilling guy but some mates who are tell me the Drill crew either bowed to BP pressure and/or didn't take heed of the warning signs and act quickly enough. Either way it would seem they should shoulder some responsibility.

But then that's just my view from mainly working in the UK, Dutch and Danish Sectors. Like you say maybe its a different culture out there, like you I have never worked the place myself. The Caspian was a real safety eye opener though (Smoking area was an open air area painted on the main deck !!) and I have heard horror stories about the Gulf of Mexico (Heli Deck crews landing Helo's with no fire proof gear on for instance, flights not being manifested etc) so maybe the safety culture was a factor here ??, Yanks are a bit more "press on" than most.

What WAS worrying about this incident was the apparent complete failure of the muster procedures, survivors tell of lifeboats leaving the rig without them and them having to go into the water. Not good.

[Amy-Winehouse]

I do see your point Amy, not disagreeing that Transocean drill the well the way BP want it, but they are contracted to do that safely. If what they are being requested, or even told, to do is unsafe in their view then they have an obligation to stop. The actual drilling is Transocean's responsibility and they have been very quiet since this accident and have let BP take the full rap. As for stopping the job for a good reason, I can only speak from my experience when I used to work outside and I called a few "time out's" to re-evaluate what was being done just because it didn't feel right. Not once was I ever penalised for it, never heard of anyone being penalised for doing so either. I am not a Drilling guy but some mates who are tell me the Drill crew either bowed to BP pressure and/or didn't take heed of the warning signs and act quickly enough. Either way it would seem they should shoulder some responsibility.

But then that's just my view from mainly working in the UK, Dutch and Danish Sectors. Like you say maybe its a different culture out there, like you I have never worked the place myself. The Caspian was a real safety eye opener though (Smoking area was an open air area painted on the main deck !!) and I have heard horror stories about the Gulf of Mexico (Heli Deck crews landing Helo's with no fire proof gear on for instance, flights not being manifested etc) so maybe the safety culture was a factor here ??, Yanks are a bit more "press on" than most.

What WAS worrying about this incident was the apparent complete failure of the muster procedures, survivors tell of lifeboats leaving the rig without them and them having to go into the water. Not good.

You are not a drilling guy, I am, & safety does go out the window on occasions, crane lifts over 40 knots is 1 example- BP proclaim they do everything safely & by the book which 80% of the time they do & then some... Overkill at times but then in the next instance they do something really dumb.
I was on a BP platform last year & there was one company man(not a local man ;)) who was going to give the ok to use lifting equipment that had been tampered with, grinded at the edges(which would reduce its strength on the welds) We all said No way are we going to work unsafe & town were on the phone getting a bit agititated. We stood our ground & they relented & sent another bit of kit out on the next boat but they wanted us to get on with it & ignore the lifting rules.

As fa ras I was lead to believe, they wernt drilling at that time, they were pressure testing & not getting good results , also they had displaced the well with sea water when it was taking kicks, surely that is a really bad idea not having mud in there ??

I didnt know about the lifeboats tho, that sounds like poor management & panic had set in but what would you be like in that situation ? Id be burnt I think, as the fire went through the pump room & drill floor & that is where Id probably be

[bluechesse]

In my experience your both right to an extent. Transocean do drill the well to BP's spec, and the company man is in charge overall. But anyone is entitled to stop a job at any point if they feel it's unsafe. Unfortunately I dont have any drilling experience, but I have worked on BP production platforms where drilling has been taking place, and below the company man theres the rig manager, the tool pusher, and the driller. Any of these people should have been in a position to stop the job. Ive worked for BP in the caspian, and I have always found their attitude towards health and safety to be second to none. Indeed, coming from North Sea platforms operated by other smaller companies, I would go as far as to say I found it over the top at first!

But all that aside, the original topic was Obama and his utilisation of the incident for point scoring (in my opinion). Big deal being made in the states just now of the fact thats its a British company who are responsible for the polution of American shores. Also I see the American Press are reverting back to calling them British Petroleum. BP dropped the British Petroleum tag about 12 years ago and have never been refered to as such since then. It's only now that they have made an admittedly very large mistake in the Gulf that this name has been resurected by the press. Whats not being mentioned is the fact that, although they ARE a British company, their operations and their staff are international. They use local staff where ever possible, and in the states the large majority of their employees are Americans. Might be a British company, but you can bet your bottom dollar it was the decisions made by Americans on the rig that caused the incident in the first place.

And once again, old Barrack seems much keener on aportioning blame and trying to stop BP paying dividends to their share holders than actually focusing helping to clean up the mess or mention the 11 lives that have undoubedly been lost.

Original post was "Good on Obama for having a go at the fat cats who love taking the profits but aren't prepared for the consequences when their pursuit of wealth turns into an environmental disaster."

Persoanlly I think his reaction to the whole thing has been totally wrong. All he's trying to do now score points. And lets remember hes doing so off an oil company he was more than happy with while they were pouring millions of dollars in to the American economy, something they have been doing for the last 10 years or more. Its not just their own pockets they have been lining. The persuit of wealth it may be, but the American economy (and the British economy, and many more around the globe) would be an a much worse state were it not for the wealth being made from the oil industry.

As I said previousley, it's BP fault and they have accepted that and are doing all they can to make ammends. Lets see more cooperation from the American government in trying to save their shorelines and ecosystem, and less fingerpointing sniping. All thats doing is having a negative effect on British business as a whole, and, ultimately, on all of us!

[The Drunken Duck]

You are not a drilling guy, I am, & safety does go out the window on occasions, crane lifts over 40 knots is 1 example- BP proclaim they do everything safely & by the book which 80% of the time they do & then some... Overkill at times but then in the next instance they do something really dumb.
I was on a BP platform last year & there was one company man(not a local man ;)) who was going to give the ok to use lifting equipment that had been tampered with, grinded at the edges(which would reduce its strength on the welds) We all said No way are we going to work unsafe & town were on the phone getting a bit agititated. We stood our ground & they relented & sent another bit of kit out on the next boat but they wanted us to get on with it & ignore the lifting rules.

As fa ras I was lead to believe, they wernt drilling at that time, they were pressure testing & not getting good results , also they had displaced the well with sea water when it was taking kicks, surely that is a really bad idea not having mud in there ??

I didnt know about the lifeboats tho, that sounds like poor management & panic had set in but what would you be like in that situation ? Id be burnt I think, as the fire went through the pump room & drill floor & that is where Id probably be

Fair enough bloke, like you say I am not a Drilling guy. The only other point I would like to make is that we should take drills seriously, I see a lot of guys who don't. I often stand in the Radio Room waiting for someone to meander their way down to muster, or they don't turn their t-card, or even take it away with them after the drill. I regularly have to replace t-cards that go missing after drills. I always now do a 100% check after a drill or alarm. In my early years Offshore I worked with a Supervisor who was a fanatic about us getting to our muster point and always knowing our escape routes. I found out why when I read "Fire in the Night" about Piper years later and saw his name in it and the penny dropped.

Bluecheese hit the nail on the had in his post though, BP is a multinational company that is 35% owned by American shareholders. Obama is grinding an axe for political gain and I think it will come back to bite him. He has a poor approval rating and seems to be seizing the chance for a scapegoat. His "Did you plug the leak Daddy" speech was cringeworthy. I spoke to a mate in the states last week and he says most Americans realise that is what Obama is doing. BP have stepped up and said they will pay for the cleanup and compensation, I don't see what else they can do. Or is this a ploy to break a company so that other American companies can move in and fill the void ??

THAT wouldn't surprise me.

[John Little]

I know little of oil and the industry - but there is one name missing here.

I heard on Radio 4 that the concrete work round the top of the well was done by Halliburton.

They also said that Halliburton had done the concrete for another well which blew out off Indonesia two years ago.

That company has a lot of fingers in a lot of pies in Washington.

I would not presume to say more - just throw it in as heard.

But I'd be interested to know more....

[George Brims]

Bluecheese hit the nail on the had in his post though, BP is a multinational company that is 35% owned by American shareholders.
Exactly. BP is no more a British company than Shell or Occidental. Multinationals like that have bigger economies than many small countries.


Obama is grinding an axe for political gain and I think it will come back to bite him. He has a poor approval rating and seems to be seizing the chance for a scapegoat.
Hmm. An approval rating above 50% is not "poor". It's less than it was right after he was elected, sure, but currently about 2.5 times higher than Dubya had for most of his presidency. I don't think he's scapegoating. It's clear who has the responsibility, and he's holding their feet to the fire to get them to cough up. Exxon still haven't paid for the mess they made in Alaska.

[The Drunken Duck]

Fair comment on Obama's approval rating George I was going off a news report and should have done my homework on that one.

BP have openly said they will waive the limit on damages and pay for the clean up and compensation in full. Obama was saying not that long ago that BP "had taken the heat", which they have. We now though have the US House Speaker saying that the company has a "lack of integrity" and they insist on calling the company "British Petroleum", a name it hasn't used in a decade. With talk of retrospective laws and the current halving of BP's value his actions make no sense. Why repeatedly attack a company that is a third owned by Americans, employs lots of Americans and was invited to drill in the Gulf by the Americans and has made them buckets of cash. The current position of BP could leave them open to a Chapter 11 takeover, is this what he wants ??

Instead of agreeing with him Cameron should have told him to wind his neck in today. Obama clearly has no love for us Brits, first he snubbed Brown when he was PM and then he stuck his nose into a sovereignty issue when it was neither wanted, needed or asked for. As for him saying that the CEO of BP wouldn't be working for him .. he can talk, because almost 50% of Americans don't want HIM working for THEM.

[bluechesse]

I don't think he's scapegoating. It's clear who has the responsibility, and he's holding their feet to the fire to get them to cough up. Exxon still haven't paid for the mess they made in Alaska.

But thats the point. At this junction there is no need to "hold their feet to the fire". They ARE coughing up. If at some point down the road, BP start to back off and tighten their purse strings as regards paying to clean up the mess, that would be the time to stand up and say the things we hear coming from Obama every day. If you listened to him, and only him, you'd be left under the impression that they had rode off in to the sun set and refused to take responsibility. But as we all know, thats not the case.

[Phill]

The rhetoric of this situation does seem to becoming anti British.

BP said they would cough up from an early stage, Obama is now making noises that he will force 'British Petroleum' to pay as if they have been denying the issue.

If the Yanks no longer need their 'Special' relationship with the UK then we can leave them to sort out Afghanistan & Iraq on their own and we should sling them out of Fylingdales, Lakenheath & Mildenhall.

Or is it all political BS to get a few votes come November?!

And that spineless cretin Cameron should tell them to wind their neck in.

[George Brims]

bluecheese, the US media today are full of examples of BP NOT paying up. Shrimp boats that have documentation of how much they caught and the profit they made last year being paid 20% of their profit in compensation (and what about next year and the next and perhaps 20 years down the line?).
Phill the sentiment in the US press is not that much anti-British, but definitely anti-BP. Now admittedly I'm averse to the Faux News crowd and their jingoism so I don't know how it is over there, but most news outlets are doing a decent job so far of explaining it's a multi-national and well embedded in the US economy. An awful lot of the debate is about how this is just the most pointed example of how we should be getting away from using oil at all. Somewhere a Mr J Carter is screaming "See? See? You said I was nuts when I said that in the 70s!"

[Boozeburglar]

That mirrors what my brother on the East coast is saying.

Good to have a first hand perspective.

:)

[The Drunken Duck]

bluecheese, the US media today are full of examples of BP NOT paying up. Shrimp boats that have documentation of how much they caught and the profit they made last year being paid 20% of their profit in compensation (and what about next year and the next and perhaps 20 years down the line?).
Phill the sentiment in the US press is not that much anti-British, but definitely anti-BP. Now admittedly I'm averse to the Faux News crowd and their jingoism so I don't know how it is over there, but most news outlets are doing a decent job so far of explaining it's a multi-national and well embedded in the US economy. An awful lot of the debate is about how this is just the most pointed example of how we should be getting away from using oil at all. Somewhere a Mr J Carter is screaming "See? See? You said I was nuts when I said that in the 70s!"

So the US media are not happy that people have been paid already ?? .. give them a chance. At least BP have openly admitted that they will, which is more than some US Companies have done in the past.

The US media should have a look at the way that Union Carbide behaved after the Bhopal disaster. Or Occidental after Piper Alpha where 167 people were killed directly due to Occidental's flawed Permit to Work system. Those payments took years to come through and attempts were made to lower them on many occasions. The families there got a one off payment for the death of the main breadwinner so why should Americans in Louisiana expect years of support for their livelihood ??, here's a thought .. go do something else !!, The Gulf has states have made a good living from Oil. Are they so naive that they expected none of the hazards ??, Before Americans start getting self righteous they should look back and consider their own actions in the past. Maybe if their President did that, and could actually remember to use the proper name of the Company he was on a witch hunt against, he wouldn't look such a pillock.

I like Americans, I like America. But frankly they can now kiss my hoop. I am tired of their double standards with the world. And I say that as someone who has fought alongside them. This is a nation that expected our backing in a "War on Terror" because they got attacked by Terrorism. Yet they allowed the IRA to fundraise there for years. When their aircraft kill our troops they refuse to comply with the Inquiry yet they expect us to extradite people whenever they want it. I am with Phill, after seeing Obama's attitude I say lets pull out of Afghan today and let them get on with it, give them a chance to win a war on their own that doesn't have the word "civil" in it. Vietnam II anyone ??

George, I know LOTS of people over here who feel like that because of Obama's anti British stance. Not anti BP, anti British. People are starting to realise that America is only our friend when it suits them. The way Obama is going they aren't going to have many friends left.

[Phill]

Phill the sentiment in the US press is not that much anti-British, but definitely anti-BP. Now admittedly I'm averse to the Faux News crowd and their jingoism so I don't know how it is over there, but most news outlets are doing a decent job so far of explaining it's a multi-national and well embedded in the US economy.

But the noises coming from the Whitehouse are extremely damaging, and all to deflect some criticism(?). It's no secret Obama is no fan of the British but to keep berating the company over the same issue (we know they screwed up and yes they should pay every penny / dime to make amends) is only damaging the company to the point of bankruptcy when it folds and someone else will have to step in to clean up......cue exxonmobil to takeover BP.
An FBI investigation (?), did the US co' (Exxon) get that in Alaska?
As someone pointed out last night on Question Time, did the US extradite those responsible for Union Carbide in Bhopal!

[ducati]

Here is an idea.

The UK is skint right?

We can do what lots of other countrys in history have done and the yanks still haven't sussed it. :confused

Right we declare war on America and to make it look good we annex Disneyland Paris. So then the Marines come screaming in and kick the tar out of us for a couple of months and we surrender (prob. need to take some advice from the French or Italians on that).

Then, once the Yanks realise what a mess they have made they wade in with all the cash to rebuild our infrastructure an that.

Result! :cool:

........au haud on, what if we win? :eek:

[bluechesse]

bluecheese, the US media today are full of examples of BP NOT paying up. Shrimp boats that have documentation of how much they caught and the profit they made last year being paid 20% of their profit in compensation (and what about next year and the next and perhaps 20 years down the line?).


Perhaps I am misunderstanding this, but are you saying that they have documentation to prove what they made last year, and now, less than 2 months in to the spill, they expect to be compensated 100% of that, right away, on the basis that they might have made that this year?

Would the normal protocol in a situation like this not be to wait till the end of the year to see what you have ACTUALLY lost, the try to claim that amount back? I think the fact that have actually got anything at this stage is pretty good going. If their shrimp boat was sunk in a storm, I cant imagine their insurance company paying anything out this quick.

[The Drunken Duck]

Found this story from the Daily Mail from June 6th .. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1284334/I-lucky-I-1-000-month-spill-Now-BP-pay-1-200-day-Fishermen-make-Gulf-oil-disaster.html

Apparently these Fishermen are submitting claims for compensation monthly and, as it says in the article, he had already received his first cheque by June 6th.

[achingale]

I have a bit of insider info on the rig itself. Some of the workers reported a problem to the head of the rig a few days before the explosion but he told them to stop work costs money. In the end it cost lives and it is this man who should be held accountable. BP is really a bit of a side issue and I am fed up with Obama's rhetoric. He needs to look closer to home.

[Fly]

Obama is only trying to boost his own falling rating, or is he trying to get back at Britain on a personal level as either his father or grandfather had something to do with the Mau Mau in Kenya. He seems to be on the side of the Argentinians as regards the Falkland Islands, so next time he wants help from the British army we should stay neutral. Apologies for getting so far from the original post.

[glaikit]

I know little of oil and the industry - but there is one name missing here.
I heard on Radio 4 that the concrete work round the top of the well was done by Halliburton.
They also said that Halliburton had done the concrete for another well which blew out off Indonesia two years ago.
That company has a lot of fingers in a lot of pies in Washington.
I would not presume to say more - just throw it in as heard.
But I'd be interested to know more....

That's a really interesting point John. It's common knowledge that the US government is heavily influenced, or dictated to depending on your point of view, by big business hence their drive to be perpetually in conflict with someone. Anyone have any comments about this Halliburton thing? Could it all be smoke and mirrors to divert attention away from the real cause?

[Amy-Winehouse]

Haliburton did the cement job on the well. It didnt work.

[The Drunken Duck]

Worth a read when you consider that Obama seems to be ignoring Transocean and Halliburtons part in the Deepwater Horizon incident, is this why Obama is avoiding the issue ?? .. to ensure support from Transocean lobbyists ??

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1286197/Oil-spill-How-Blue-Dog-Boys-kept-Obama-s-boot-neck-BP-s-US-partner.html

[Tubthumper]

This public reaming of BP sets a very interesting precedent. I don't know if the 'reamers', the US Senate or the big businesses have actually realised it yet but from the moment that well blew, the gloves came off in the quest to have multinational business brought to heel. That means that US or US-led companies (like all other entities) that screw up, kill people and/or pollute will be brought to book by the relevant government, made to pay and publicly reamed as well.
BP is having to place £14bn in a pot. But as soon as a US company makes a boo-boo (which they surely will, being some of the most cavalier and careless cowboys on the planet when in pursuit of a buck) the precendent says that they will be held to account. And we can all have a laugh watching them squirm. Good-oh!

[Tubthumper]

Worth a read when you consider that Obama seems to be ignoring Transocean and Halliburtons part in the Deepwater Horizon incident, is this why Obama is avoiding the issue ?? .. to ensure support from Transocean lobbyists ??http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1286197/Oil-spill-How-Blue-Dog-Boys-kept-Obama-s-boot-neck-BP-s-US-partner.html
Duck, you're not suggesting a conspiracy are you??;)

[The Drunken Duck]

Duck, you're not suggesting a conspiracy are you??;)

Fell right into that one didn't I ?? .. :D

I just think the silence from Transocean and Halliburton is deafening, after all they were the ones working that well. The Drill Crew and Cementers were from their Companies. Having worked Offshore I know that the Client, BP in this case, pay the bills and foot the responsibility but others like Transocean and Halliburton are responsible for the actual Drilling and Cementing of the Well. Now they can say that BP told them to do this or ordered them to do that but that's a bit of a cop out as every Safety Meeting I have been at on a rig emphasises the "We are a Team" ethos. And everyone has an obligation to work safely and stop the job if not getting a warm fuzzy feeling.

I just think its unfair that it is being sold by Obama as BP's fault alone, I don't think that is the full story and I suspect there is a lot of revealing information about what happened on that rig to come out yet.

Plus I have worked for Transocean as an Agency employee and seen them push and even break reg's more than once. Got NRB'd once for refusing to break the rules.

[ducati]

BP are invoicing Haliburton and Transocean for their share of the 14 Billion fund and subsequent payments apparently. Not being headlined in the same way though! :roll:

[bekisman]

Has anyone else been watching the US Congressional panel hearing? I think Tony Hayward has shown considerable patience with the morons that are attempting to ask him questions (One of em looking like he'd been dug up).. They are asking questions that in no way could Hayward answer, there are investigations going on which he must have the results of, before he can obviously answer.. the chairman stupidly said that the BP chief executive was "stonewalling".! Uhh?

Then an hysterical woman starts bawling until she's ejected..

These Congress folk need to observe how to do it by watching a select meeting in the House of Commons.. oh well back to the box

[The Drunken Duck]

Has anyone else been watching the US Congressional panel hearing? I think Tony Hayward has shown considerable patience with the morons that are attempting to ask him questions (One of em looking like he'd been dug up).. They are asking questions that in no way could Hayward answer, there are investigations going on which he must have the results of, before he can obviously answer.. the chairman stupidly said that the BP chief executive was "stonewalling".! Uhh?

Then an hysterical woman starts bawling until she's ejected..

These Congress folk need to observe how to do it by watching a select meeting in the House of Commons.. oh well back to the box

Its quite funny actually, just listened to a Congresswoman asking him if he was personally involved in the decisions taken in working this well. As if the CEO of BP personally authorises the work on every well BP have, and THEY accuse HIM of not having researched what the meeting would cover.

Where are the BP Company man, Transocean OIM, Transocean Toolpusher and Halliburton Cementing Supervisor who WOULD have been involved in the working of the Well ?? .. are they not present because this meeting is nothing but a hatchet job and having Americans sitting there looking responsible for it would not go down well ?? .. what an utter farce.

From the look on his face Hayward is dying to tell them to cram it and just go home !!

[John Little]

He could take lessons from George Galloway.... [lol]

[glaikit]

Imagine the pressure the BP guy's under. He'll end up dribbling and making mosaics on some island some where at this rate: possibly with a black beach...

[annthracks]

Great post.

Obama is making himself look good whilst not insulting any American company. Especially the one that was owned the rig and was doing the drilling.

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico follows an explosion and fire aboard Transocean's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig on Tuesday 20 April at approximately 10:00 pm US central time. The rig was drilling 130 miles south east of New Orleans.
...At the time of the incident, the contractor Transocean Ltd was drilling an exploration well on Mississippi Canyon Block 252. BP has a 65% interest in MC252.
The rig subsequently sank on Thursday 22 April and an extensive spill response operation was activated, involving more than 2500 people, a fleet of vessels, aircraft, dispersants and booms.

Oils spills and disasters (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001451.html)


What's the betting that when the yanks have destroyed bp, they'll "discover" oil in the Falkland Isles, and they'll be the ones to drill and produce it...for Argentina!

[The Drunken Duck]

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico follows an explosion and fire aboard Transocean's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig on Tuesday 20 April at approximately 10:00 pm US central time. The rig was drilling 130 miles south east of New Orleans.
...At the time of the incident, the contractor Transocean Ltd was drilling an exploration well on Mississippi Canyon Block 252. BP has a 65% interest in MC252.
The rig subsequently sank on Thursday 22 April and an extensive spill response operation was activated, involving more than 2500 people, a fleet of vessels, aircraft, dispersants and booms.

Oils spills and disasters (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001451.html)


What's the betting that when the yanks have destroyed bp, they'll "discover" oil in the Falkland Isles, and they'll be the ones to drill and produce it...for Argentina!

Well if they want to it will be the Falklands Government which will be dishing out the Drilling Licences, maybe time for a little payback ?? .. But the Ocean Guardian is down there already and has struck Oil for Desire Petroleum which is a British Company.

We beat them to it !! .. its just like WW2 again, it'll be two years after it kicked off before they turn up !! .. ;)

[annthracks]

Great post.

Obama is making himself look good whilst not insulting any American company. Especially the one that was owned the rig and was doing the drilling.


Well if they want to it will be the Falklands Government which will be dishing out the Drilling Licences, maybe time for a little payback ?? .. But the Ocean Guardian is down there already and has struck Oil for Desire Petroleum which is a British Company.

We beat them to it !! .. its just like WW2 again, it'll be two years after it kicked off before they turn up !! .. ;)

I was going to invest in Desire Pet. but didn't have enough money that I could afford to lose at the time :( and then bp sh1t on us after 28yrs by giving us away to bg so I've no feelings of loyalty towards them, but I find what the US government is doing is extremely disturbing.

you might want to explain to people what Not Required Back means :) oh, I just did it.
We had a rigger who "failed" the simplest safety questions during a TAR (TurnARound - stupid acronym, it's always been a shutdown onshore), he was sent off on the next chopper NRB, so some of us do tow the line with regards to safety and the environment.

[The Drunken Duck]

I was going to invest in Desire Pet. but didn't have enough money that I could afford to lose at the time :( and then bp sh1t on us after 28yrs by giving us away to bg so I've no feelings of loyalty towards them, but I find what the US government is doing is extremely disturbing.

you might want to explain to people what Not Required Back means :) oh, I just did it.
We had a rigger who "failed" the simplest safety questions during a TAR (TurnARound - stupid acronym, it's always been a shutdown onshore), he was sent off on the next chopper NRB, so some of us do tow the line with regards to safety and the environment.

Most do, its just a few who think they are bigger than the system in my experience. Like the Supervisor on a Drillship who gave a Safety Talk on the importance of procedures at the Weekly Safety meet and then appeared a couple of days later in the Radio Room telling me he didn't need to check in for his flight home like everyone else as "I could just use the weights he came out with", "sorry mate" says I, "Not when I sign the manifest, its a full 19 on the Chopper and I need you to check in as per standard procedure" .. He wasn't happy but sussed out where the conversation was going .. :D

[annthracks]

Most do, its just a few who think they are bigger than the system in my experience. Like the Supervisor on a Drillship who gave a Safety Talk on the importance of procedures at the Weekly Safety meet and then appeared a couple of days later in the Radio Room telling me he didn't need to check in for his flight home like everyone else as "I could just use the weights he came out with" .. :D

LOL, yeah, chopper flight range aside, I wonder what he was "borrowing" (it's how they caught someone thieving from our platform - always going home with more than he brought out)...he was a pretty good chef too... when I say "pretty good", I mean average... well "average" if your definition of average means tons of pepper in everything and so much salt that if the pepper didn't burn your mouth, the salt would. serves him right, we should have been getting the fillet steaks he was lifting.

[The Drunken Duck]

LOL, yeah, chopper flight range aside, I wonder what he was "borrowing" (it's how they caught someone thieving from our platform - always going home with more than he brought out)...he was a pretty good chef too... when I say "pretty good", I mean average... well "average" if your definition of average means tons of pepper in everything and so much salt that if the pepper didn't burn your mouth, the salt would. serves him right, we should have been getting the fillet steaks he was lifting.

Exactly !! .. I checked a guys bag in one day and it was WELL overweight from what he brought out. When I got him to swap stuff between the bags to even them out he had a laminator in his bag that was clearly stamped as being property of the Client. And there were two or three staplers in there as well. Unluckily for him the OIM was there and we found out later he was sacked.

And then there was the guy who went off with a bag jam packed with toilet rolls !! .. :D

[Tubthumper]

Back on topic: Now the septics are on the BP Chief Exec's case for going sailing with his son during the leak. :eek:

But wait... I heard there's been a kind of war going on in the Middle East for the last few years, with people dying and stuff. That's worse than an oil leak, so it must mean that the children of the White House staff never see their parents at all!

Oh America, just you wait!;)