BP, firms did not shirk safety for money

Tom, hopefully you've seen a dentist this decade. 20 billion does wonders on slowing down a verbal beating. BP like the British people in general is an assclown and got punked by America.
 
BP has accused Halliburton of using an unstable cement design and said Transocean failed to test the automatic shut-off function on the blowout preventer before it was used on the rig.

Transocean has denied those charges and said BP's well design was a key factor in the accident. Halliburton has also defended its cement work on the well, and blamed other actions for causing the explosion.

It will be difficult to work out the discrepancies between the companies without the legal power to compel testimony from company representatives under oath, Bartlit said.

"I can't subpoena people. I wish I could," Bartlit said. "I think it's damn important."



Although a measure providing the panel with subpoena power passed the House of Representatives earlier this year, the measure was held up by partisan gridlock in the Senate.(thanks Republicans for protecting the corps again)


So lets see , this "study" is all based on the information the Cos allow us to have...........wow.
 
Last edited:
Topspin said:
Tom, hopefully you've seen a dentist this decade. 20 billion does wonders on slowing down a verbal beating. BP like the British people in general is an assclown and got punked by America.
Click to expand...


It you must know I went to a dentist this afternoon for a check-up, scale and polish.

I suggest you go onto a jokes website and get some new material because you are really fucking pisspoor at humour.
 
Last edited:
evince said:
BP has accused Halliburton of using an unstable cement design and said Transocean failed to test the automatic shut-off function on the blowout preventer before it was used on the rig.

Transocean has denied those charges and said BP's well design was a key factor in the accident. Halliburton has also defended its cement work on the well, and blamed other actions for causing the explosion.

It will be difficult to work out the discrepancies between the companies without the legal power to compel testimony from company representatives under oath, Bartlit said.

"I can't subpoena people. I wish I could," Bartlit said. "I think it's damn important."



Although a measure providing the panel with subpoena power passed the House of Representatives earlier this year, the measure was held up by partisan gridlock in the Senate.(thanks Republicans for protecting the corps again)


So lets see , this "study" is all based on the information the Cos allow us to have...........wow.
Click to expand...

From the report.

"To date we have not seen a single instance where a human being made a conscious decision to favour dollars over safety," the commission's Chief Counsel Fred Bartlit said at a meeting exploring the causes of the Gulf of Mexico spill.
Bartlit said the panel agreed with about 90 percent of the findings of BP's internal investigation of the accident released this summer. BP's report assigned much of the blame for the accident to its drilling partners.
Click to expand...
 
Bfgrn said:
The problem is the genie's out of the bottle tom. There was no acoustical regulator on the well in the Gulf -- a remotely triggered dead man's switch that might have closed off BP's gusher. From what I understand, BP uses the device voluntarily in Britain's North Sea.

Any knowledge or comment?
Click to expand...

Oh no, not the acoustic switch again! Here is a simple analogy, if you want to turn a light on you could use a mechanical switch or even an acoustic switch which is actuated by hand clapping. However if the lightbulb is defective, neither is going to work. Same story with the blowout preventer, they tried to activate it from the rig but the blind shear rams failed to completely seal the well, as far as I'm aware there has never been an instance where acoustic switches have been used in a real life situation.

It is also very doubtful that an acoustic switch would work at the depths where they were drilling.

http://www.suite101.com/content/what-is-a-blowout-preventer-in-an-oil-well-a284411
 
Last edited:
tom prendergast said:
Oh no, not the acoustic switch again! Here is a simple analogy, if you want to turn a light on you could use a mechanical switch or even an acoustic switch which is actuated by hand clapping. However if the lightbulb is defective, neither is going to work. Same story with the blowout preventer, they tried to activate it from the rig but the blind shear rams failed to completely seal the well, as far as I'm aware there has never been an instance where acoustic switches have been used in a real life situation.

It is also very doubtful that an acoustic switch would work at the depths where they were drilling.

http://www.suite101.com/content/what-is-a-blowout-preventer-in-an-oil-well-a284411
Click to expand...

The fire and explosion on the drilling platform may have prevented the dying workers from pushing the button
 
Bfgrn said:
The fire and explosion on the drilling platform may have prevented the dying workers from pushing the button
Click to expand...

The blind shear rams were activated several times but they failed to close fully on the pipe. Even a robotic submersible failed to fully close them. So how would a remote acoustic switch achieve something that a robot was unable to do?

They have now retrieved the BOP from the ocean floor so there should be no doubt about the cause.

I remind you of the Mark Twain quote; "a lie can make it half way around the world before the truth has time to put its boots on"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/21/us/21blowout.html?hpw
 
Last edited:
I don't really hate BP in particular. Singling out BP is stupid. It could've happened to anyone, it was going to happen to someone, and it's going to happen again. The important thing to remember is to BAN OFFSHORE DRILLING. Attacks on BP are a distraction from the meat of the issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top