Document: BP didn't plan for major oil spill

[seafan]

Source: Houston Chronicle

MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER — British Petroleum downplayed the possibility of a catastrophic accident at an offshore rig that exploded, causing the worst U.S. spill in decades along the Gulf coast and endangering shoreline habitat.

In the 52-page exploration plan and environmental impact analysis, BP repeatedly suggested it was unlikely, or virtually impossible, for an accident to occur that would lead to a giant crude oil spill and serious damage to beaches, fish, mammals and fisheries.
BP's plan filed with the federal Minerals Management Service for the Deepwater Horizon well, dated February 2009, says repeatedly that it was "unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."

And while the company conceded that a spill would "cause impacts" to beaches, wildlife refuges and wilderness areas, it argued that "due to the distance to shore (48 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected."

.....

Robert Wiygul, an Ocean Springs, Miss.-based environmental lawyer and board member for the Gulf Restoration Network, said he doesn't see anything in the document that suggests BP addressed the kind of technology needed to control a spill at that depth of water.
"The point is, if you're going to be drilling in 5,000 feet of water for oil, you should have the ability to control what you're doing," he said.

Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/6984458.html

[Xipe Totec]

1. Oil and Water. Don't Mix. nt

[matt819]

2. Of course they didn't

And even if the subject came up internally, and I'm sure it did, it was undoubtedly dismissed as insignificant. That is what most corporations do. They pass off the costs of their dangerous practices to the government. Happens all the time, and we allow it, time and time and time again. We make all sorts of excuses, but we do it all the time. Okay, they'll take a hit in the market for a bit, and then resume these practices, and we, the chumps, will pay the price.

How about the mall builder who has the state build the on-ramps and off-ramps and traffic circles to allow access. Sometimes the developer picks up the tab, but more often than not it's the state or local governments.

Or what about the environmental impact of manure lagoons in factory farms. Again, the cost - fouled rivers, tainted water supplies - are passed along. Or the EPA slaps a minuscule fine, which the operators pay happily while laughing all the way to the bank.

Or the mountaintop mining operations that pour millions of tons of slag into valleys, polluting water supplies and more.

Or even the folks like Massey Mining. Sure, they have some bad press, and maybe the recent tragedy will cost a few million, but they figure, wtf, it's a cost of doing business. We'll get 29 more miners to fill the slots of the ones who died, up the bribes to government officials, and a few years from now no one will remember. Speaking of which, quick, name the last three major mining tragedies that generated this sort of outrage. Yeah, you can't. We seem to have timed out on the outrage.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. No shit.

[tomm2thumbs]

4. no one ever expects the unexpected - and profits mean they don't care to plan for it either

I hope Florida and California officials are seeing what happens when they are short-sighted about profits over common sense

[scentopine]

5. If a BP employee had written that there was a high risk and...

that disaster plans were inadequate, they would have been fired on the spot.

Just like the Wall Street rating agencies, no corporate consortium can be trusted to regulate itself. It is impossible no matter what the neo-libs, centrists, moderates and other conservatives say.

[unkachuck]

6. "...no significant adverse impacts are expected."

....more corporate mumbo-jumbo to enable profits as they irresponsibly played with the environment....and don't tell me the money or technology wasn't available for BP to do it responsibly....

....send the BP top officials, repugs and corporate Dems who supported off-shore drilling down to the Gulf with soda straws and have them all slurp-up the oil as it comes ashore....

....or in lieu of that, send them all to prison for life....assults against the environment and humanity should not be taken lightly....unless the oil companies can assure us 100% that this can never happen again, then they shouldn't be drilling off-shore....

....I'm waiting for our imminent corporate nuclear catastrophe to unfold....

[jtrockville]

7. Neither did Exxon (Valdez). Exxon's strategy was successful for them.

BP learned the lesson well.

[NBachers]

8. "the response capabilities that would be implemented"

So are they implying that their own "response capabilities" would be up to the task of cleaning up a catastrophic oil spill?

It sounds like they're passing the ball to whoever has the capability to respond- you know, the United Soviet Socialists of America.

[wordpix]

9. EIE's are just a way to get your way if you're a developer or oil baron

I had a local situation here in CT (under a repug governor who later went to jail) where the EIE was written by the state's contractor, an engineering firm. The state wanted to locate a large project in a state-designated Conservation Area, but the EIE stated it was the perfect place to build, with only a passing mention to the CA. A group of citizens, self included, actually stopped the project. The state then turned to site #2, which they had previously dissed due to extensive wetlands in EIE #1. The EIE on site #2, however, stated it was a perfect site.

EIE's mean nothing anymore, they're just a PR piece for the developer to get his way with the state's backing.

[kiers]

10. excellent explanation of drilling here

http://www.pe.tamu.edu/schubert/public_html/Pemex%20Offshore%20Drilling/

and here:

http://www.pe.tamu.edu/schubert/public_html/Blowout/

SO FAR...NO ELUCIDATION FROM MSM yet.

[slutticus]

11. In order for a risk assessment to be effective, the severity scores need to be realistic

I suspect that BP didn't consider a massive spill as a severe enough event, thus this event didn't pop up as a risk even if the probability of failure was there.

They just don't give a fuck.