$500,000 could have prevented Spill Baby Spill.

[TheBigotBasher]

Half a million dollars or £300 thousand pounds. A few days worth of BP profits.

Almost every single Nation in the World requires by law a remote shut off facility to ensure that oil rig accidents like this do not cause the level of damage that this is causing and will cause.

$500,000.

The US does not require that unnecessary burden on business.

At the same time, conservatives — who were chanting "Drill, baby, drill" two years ago — reacted cautiously, displeased with Obama's declaration that some coastal territory would remain untouched. In addition to Bristol Bay, the Atlantic coast from New Jersey northward would be closed to exploration, as would the entire Pacific coastline. The proposal is a "step in the right direction," said Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell in a statement, "but a small one that leaves enormous amounts of American energy off-limits."

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1976928,00.html#ixzz0mcIm36e3

[aquart]

1. Are we going to require one now?

She asked, sweetly.

[icnorth]

2. I would only quibble with one of your comments

"Half a million dollars or £300 thousand pounds. A few days worth of BP profits."

Because their profits are so huge we tend to overlook the enormity of the numbers. According to the Independent, in the first 90 days of 2010, BP's profit was 5.6 billion dollars. Broken down that equates to something like 2.6 million dollars per hour or roughly 11 1/2 minutes to pay off the half million dollar prevention measures if I did the math right. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I've done it wrong.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/bp-profits-more-than-double-thanks-to-rising-global-oil-prices-1956204.html

[Junkdrawer]

8. I think you're right. 11 1/2 minutes of profit.

Obama had better be able to dig up a document where he recommended that this safety measure be mandatory.

[TheBigotBasher]

9. Doesn't this oil rig pre date this President?

[Junkdrawer]

14. this President is in political trouble because he announced the opening...

of more border waters to drilling.



If he could show that he proposed before the accident safety measures that could have prevented or mitigated the accident, it would help.

[Tx4obama]

17. Obama is NOT in trouble over this. He only called for STUDIES.

then after the studies the drilling would have had to have been approved.

[Junkdrawer]

25. I know that's the new talking point, but here's his announcement....

(Washington/AP) Reversing a ban on oil drilling off most U.S. shores, President Barack Obama on Wednesday announced an expansive new policy that could put oil and natural gas platforms in waters along the southern Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and part of Alaska.

Speaking at Andrews air base outside Washington, Obama said, "This is not a decision that I've made lightly." He addressed the expected outcry from disappointed environmentalists by saying he had studied the issue for more than a year and concluded it was the right call given the nation's voracious thirst for energy and the need to produce jobs and keep American businesses competitive.

"We're announcing the expansion of offshore oil and gas exploration but in ways that balance the need to harness domestic energy resources and the need to protect America's natural resources," Obama said, according to his prepared remarks released in advance by the White House. "This announcement is part of a broader strategy that will move us from an economy that runs on fossil fuels and foreign oil to one that relies more on homegrown fuels and clean energy. And the only way this transition will succeed is if it strengthens our economy in the short term and long term."

...

Obama made no secret of the fact that one factor in his decision was securing Republican support for a sweeping climate change bill that has languished in Congress. But Obama has long stated his support in favor of the "tough decision" to expand offshore drilling

....


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/31/obama-oil-drilling-plan-e_n_519553.html

Yet another successful, "reach across the aisle"... :sarcasm:

[Tx4obama]

16. Yep.

It was the Bush Cheney folks that deregulated the oil industry which allowed the oil assholes to not put the proper cut off system on the rigs that the rest of the world has.

[greencharlie]

3. I'm quite surprised they're NOT required here... nt

[truebrit71]

4. You are? I'm not...

..why on earth would you think that big business needs all of those regulations? Drill baby Drill!!! :sarcasm:

[BrklynLiberal]

20. The govt has been run by oil men for the last two Bush administrations....

Why in the world would it ever occur to anyone that they would try to do any regulation of the gas and oil corporations???

[Union Yes]

5. This is evidence if there is ever a criminal probe, which I have little hope. knr

[BrklynLiberal]

6. CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE!!!

[ladjf]

11. Without a doubt ! nt

[lifesbeautifulmagic]

7. not sure how to answer, but I love that the name Spill Baby Spill

for this disaster.... perfect.

i hope all the usual suspects (Rachel, Keith, Ed and so forth) pick up on that.....

[ladjf]

10. The fact that you just stated is the crux of this entire tragedy.

My guess is that fewer than a dozen BP officials were involved in the decision to use an inadequate
shutoff valve rather than springing for the best technology available. Probe that decision and you will have the answer. Then apply that type of management to all big business. There will be the same pattern repeated over and over. Profit, profit, profit is all that matters.

[BrklynLiberal]

19. Halliburton was involved in this .. Anyone surprised?

[ladjf]

26. It was a poorly calculated risk. They gambled, all lost. nt

[underpants]

12. Wow

so sad

thanks for the info. I saw the lack of remote cutoff (doesn't every gas station have one?) a couple of days ago and was wondering how and if that was mentioned on DU.

[Kitty Herder]

13. That makes this seem even more tragic.

:banghead: :banghead:

[G_j]

15. environmental lawyer on the Ed Show just said this is due to Bush deregulation nt

[amborin]

18. such a tragedy not to have had this requirement in place

[TheBigotBasher]

21. Everyone who voted for this idiot

and shouted her stupid chant as if it were some biblical truth should be at the beaches doing enforced clean ups.

[Overseas]

22. K&R. Disgusting deregulation or do we call it "voluntary regulation" ? //eom

[Igel]

23. Strange.

Most nations in the world don't drill for oil in the seabed. It would be very strange for, say, Uganda, Kazakhstan, or Bolivia to have such a requirement. A lot of others don't drill for oil anywhere. Some of the largest ocean-drilling nations do require a specific kind of switch, one that coincidentally costs about $500k.

That would be acoustic cut-off switches (that's the name for them or at least not too far off base).

But the rig in question had a deadman's switch and a remote cutoff switch. Both failed because when the rig collapsed it damaged the switches. Nobody knows if the acoustic switch would have functioned were it there as a *third* level of protection.

Moreover, it would have cost $500k and a dram of hindsight. Hindsight is dreadfully expensive, even in small quantities, and seldom available on the open market.

Without the hindsight, it would cost $500k for each and every hole they drilled--whether a few or hundreds or more, I don't know. Without hindsight there's also know way of knowing if the many millions of dollars would ever save an anchovy, depending upon whether there was a catastrophe, whether it worked, and whether or not the other two shut-off mechanisms worked. And nobody would care: I mean, until there's a disaster you simply don't know about what equipment is in use.

Even afterwards people don't necessarily know what's in use. For example, the deadman and remote cutoffs that were in place seem to have escaped sufficiently wide notice.

[AnArmyVeteran]

24. $8 BILLION is LESS than $500,000 isn't it? Isn't that the new BP math???

Corporate math is always screwed up. They would always rather save pennies to maximize profits today, without caring that if they spent those pennies they would make a lot more money in the future if they acted responsibly. Corporations hate regulations, but regulations save them money in the long run. But getting a quick buck is always more important than doing what is right or responsible. At least President Obama said BP was going to pay. But there is no way BP will ever pay for all the creatures it killed or for the loss in revenue to the shrimpers and fishermen who might lose their livelihoods. BP couldn't care less about them. BP and other corporations are always too busy praying to their bottom lines to worry about anything bothersome, like being responsible.