[QUOTE=OneEyedMan;37790] [1]…Did managers at BP make a cold-blooded calculation that they could save millions on each well by cutting corners, and the worst case would be the loss of well control on a single well? That the savings would pay for getting that one well back under control and still leave them a profit? I don’t think so. Some people here probably disagree. But if BP did that, I’d file it under “intentionally”.
[2] Did BP just keep grinding down the margin of safety until there was no margin of safety? Maybe. And if they did, they are morally, and possibly legally liable. Criminal negligence does not require intent…[/QUOTE]
1 & 2 are the same as far as I’m concerned, and that is exactly what seems to have happened in this case, though “intentional” will never fly in court. “Look at efforts to save money” can have the same meaning as the saying “follow the money”, and it’s very applicable here, so it will be very interesting to see how high the pressure was applied.
FWIW, though we may disagree with the moratorium on drilling, they can always fall back on the argument that all experienced drillers have had close calls (as you all have admitted in this thread). If there’s no risk if you do it right, then why have you all had your sphincters pucker up on occasion? AFAIC I believe the risks are low enough and the damage has already been done anyway, so let you guys get back to work and develop the new rules while drilling is going on, but there are few things the current admin and I see eye-to-eye about.
On a separate subject, all I really care about right now is stopping the leak. Even if the 2 relief wells together have an 80% chance of success (probably far too generous odds), I find that unacceptable. Why aren’t there a multitude of relief wells in progress, not necessarily to tap into the bore, but to either relieve pressure or in a worst case scenario to extract most of the oil via controlled wells? The oil has to be flowing from a great distance now, so wells to relieve the pressure to ensure success of the bottom kill makes a lot of sense, since they don’t need to be very close to the bad well. I’m very uncomfortable having all the GOM’s eggs in one basket even if it is a double-wide. We need a backup plan in progress already.
I have been following this thread from the beginning and there are a lot of good posts and a lot of crap, let me add my comments. I dont comment often - but I have had a few beers and I am goint to give you the whole shebang.
When I was on the Horizon - several years ago - the company man - Bp - did not take a crap without approval from shore. in one minor well issue it took three days before we got it! This does not train or encourage the rig people to act fast in an emergency. My overal impression of the rig was that everbody did their own job - minimum effort - and did not give a damn what anybody else was doing. Check out the transcripts from the Kenner hearing and it does not seem like anything changed It was the only deepwater rig I have been on where I felt at risk.
Second point is that as blowouts continue theyeither bridge off or they wear a bigger hole to escape - so maybe the starting volume was 5000bbl/day and now its a lot more. It seems to me it increased significantly after they removed the riser kink. Perhaps that was a mistake.
Now to the political stuff - which I do’nt care for, but it seems to me if you are a big bank and bring the US economy to the brink with your gambling you get Government (our) money to bail you out. If you volounteer and fund an account to pay for any damage you get chewed out and denigrated in the press and by the government. Where is the $200 billion bank fund that I can tap so I can retire at some point? Incidentaly have you looked at the profits the ‘too big to fail’ banks are making these days? Second point on this issue is that a good chunk of the money the government is shelling out to AIG, and the Fannie xx’s actually goes straight to the banks that are too big to fail. That is taking it up the butt for the US taxpayor.
Now my solution to the blowout - everybody has a solution - some of you technical types explain to me what is wrong with this.
Instead of drilling a relief well all the way to the bottom, why not find a suitable thief zone and establish communication between the well bore and it. Creat an underground blowout - this would relieve the pressure at the well head and allow a possible top kill to work or at least stop the limit the flow into the gulf.
Pardon the Interuption all;… May God Bless SWP 812 who was found dead at home this Morning. Atleast he was in his home instead of the tower @ S.W.P., you guys and this Blog was how he spent many hours in the past few months. R.I.P. Billy Boy !
[QUOTE=alcor;37970]The rig personnel are in charge regards well control and volume/pressure anomalies. In other words, the first sign of pressure inconsistency or volume gain, we shut the well in at the BOP. That, is our duty. we never seek consent from the Operator. We shut in straight away.[/QUOTE]
How do you know it wasn’t Vidrine instead of Harrell on the bridge of the boat that night screaming into the phone? How do you know Vidrine wasn’t talking to one of his bosses on the beach asking him about the F…ing rig burning? Do you think Vidrine didn’t inform his boss of his findings? I have that job. I know he did. The only difference is I would have told his boss F U I aint doin it. I aint takin a chance on killing 126 people because you are saying it’s gonna be all right, because it aint allright. When you work for an organization that demeans its employees the way BP’s management has a track record of doing, then they either go along out of fear or they’re out of work. You will never win this argument. You will only cause everyone to see that BP is even worse than they expected.
[QUOTE=scotty50;37978]
When I was on the Horizon - several years ago - the company man - Bp - did not take a crap without approval from shore. in one minor well issue it took three days before we got it! This does not train or encourage the rig people to act fast in an emergency. My overal impression of the rig was that everbody did their own job - minimum effort - and did not give a damn what anybody else was doing. Check out the transcripts from the Kenner hearing and it does not seem like anything changed [U][B]It was the only deepwater rig I have been on where I felt at risk[/B][/U].
[/QUOTE]
ME TOO Scotty, and couldn’t get my work done, let the Drives burn if BP had to take downtime.
[QUOTE=company man 1;37980]How do you know it wasn’t Vidrine instead of Harrell on the bridge of the boat that night screaming into the phone? How do you know Vidrine wasn’t talking to one of his bosses on the beach asking him about the F…ing rig burning? Do you think Vidrine didn’t inform his boss of his findings? I have that job. I know he did. The only difference is I would have told his boss F U I aint doin it. I aint takin a chance on killing 126 people because you are saying it’s gonna be all right, because it aint allright. When you work for an organization that demeans its employees the way BP’s management has a track record of doing, then they either go along out of fear or they’re out of work. You will never win this argument. You will only cause everyone to see that BP is even worse than they expected.[/QUOTE]
These are your words and not mine. Vidrine, was the most senior BP rep on the rig. He is capable of making decisions based on facts. He refused to accept input from TO colleagues advising him not to displace the well. If, he was ordered to displace, then they’ll also be held to account. But, he is a competent person who can interpret pressure and volume anomalies. These anomalies existed and were highlighted by the TO OIM. If he communicated these facts to town they’ll go down with him.
The OIM still had the power to overrule his judgement in the interests of the rig and crew. He did not.
[QUOTE=company man 1;37980]How do you know it wasn’t Vidrine instead of Harrell on the bridge of the boat that night screaming into the phone? How do you know Vidrine wasn’t talking to one of his bosses on the beach asking him about the F…ing rig burning? Do you think Vidrine didn’t inform his boss of his findings? I have that job. I know he did. The only difference is I would have told his boss F U I aint doin it. I aint takin a chance on killing 126 people because you are saying it’s gonna be all right, because it aint allright. When you work for an organization that demeans its employees the way BP’s management has a track record of doing, then they either go along out of fear or they’re out of work. You will never win this argument. You will only cause everyone to see that BP is even worse than they expected.[/QUOTE]
I haven’t mentioned anything in any posting concerning Vidrine or Harrell. I’ve never suggested one or the other anything. These are your words.
Do you have a question you’d like me to answer?
We need to hear from TO whether their employees are trained to take action on the first sign of pressure/volume inconsistency.
I know my subject.
[QUOTE=MichaelWSmith;37814]Good question. I’d say it becomes premeditation when you can identify and prove that the drunk had a motive for the murders of the individuals who were killed, though even then, I’d wonder at the choice of method if the motive was simply to end their lives.
So, are you saying that BP had a motive for killing the 11 who died on DWH and for massively damaging the property rights of tens of thousands of individuals?[/QUOTE]
Although I am sure you are nice person, you really have no idea what the hell “negligent homicide” means.
[QUOTE=MichaelWSmith;37815]Forgive my asking, but can you supply some examples of this lying?
For weeks I’ve heard the accusation that BP lied about the magnitude of the leak – that its estimate of 5000 bpd was such a lie. But then I heard the Coast Guard guy point out that the 5000 bpd estimate came from them, not BP.
So I’d be interested in knowing how it is that you know everything BP says is a lie.[/QUOTE]
Although I am sure you are a very intelligent man, you clearly haven’t been reading any of the volumes of materials posted in this thread.
CM1, based on all your commentary throughout the ‘investigations’, and your hostile attitude to the whole truth of the investigation I find you lacking in coherent judgement. Damn the day that you lead a rig’s personnel with such poor judgement.
[QUOTE=CPTdrillersails;37986]Although I am sure you are a very intelligent man, you clearly haven’t been reading any of the volumes of materials posted in this thread.[/QUOTE]
Has anyone bothered to look at the stack lately? Is it my imagination, or does it look like it’s leaning even more now?
[QUOTE=MichaelWSmith;37816]Really? Why not? Because you say so?
It is ludicrous to suggest that responsibility for the actions of all 80,000 BP employees rests to no extent at all with the individuals themselves, but instead somehow accrues only to the man at the top.[/QUOTE]
Although I am sure that in your limited fields of endeavor, you are regarded well, you clearly have no freaking idea whatsoever on the topic of overall responsibility for a corporation’s actions in the context of an event as immensely damaging as this.
I sincerely appreciate the former BP employees, stepping out in the open, here, as we try to untangle this WEB of LIES. I am reading everything you say, so that , we can be objective, and have in put from both sides.
[QUOTE=MichaelWSmith;37822]So you think that Tony Hayward was actually the one making the decisions you claim caused this accident – he was the one actually “holding the gun and pulling the trigger” to use your example – and when it all went sour he just disappeared and claimed to be elsewhere?
Funny, you’d think if that were the case someone would have seen him.
But seriously, people, the notion that you cannot delegate or assign responsibility is utter nonsense conjured up here simply as an excuse to vent hate at BP. Every job carries responsibilities and every employee knows it. You think the responsibility for the safety of airline passengers rests only with the CEO of the company, and not with the pilots and maintenance personnel? Is the responsibility for your life purely in the hands of the Hospital director and not in the hands of the doctors and nurses performing your surgery?[/QUOTE]
Again, and with all due respect, these strawmen arguments are a pointless waste of everyone’s time. If the gross negligence of a hospital, after repeated instances of gross negligence and poor standard practices, allowed ebola to spread throughout the midwest, we would certainly blame the CEO of that company as well as management from top to bottom, if we found they did not follow the most rigorous safety protocols just to save a dime.
At least, any sensible person would, I can’t speak for yourself.
[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;37990]I sincerely appreciate the former BP employees, stepping out in the open, here, as we try to untangle this WEB of LIES. I am reading everything you say, so that , we can be objective, and have in put from both sides.[/QUOTE]
I don’t believe any lies exist. Documents are out in the open to read and evaluate. All communication from BP is being directed to the Gov’t. Are they holding back? I don’t know.
[QUOTE=New Orleans Lady;37994]Alcor , where is the recordings of the conversations, between, the houston, base, and the horizon.Are, there not any???[/QUOTE]
I believe it’s all hearsay. Witnesses have testified to the OIM, I believe, shouting obscenities over the phone at someone in town. I’ll see if I can find this information. But, I didn’t bring it up. CM1, was in counsel with his other cronies regarding this input.