Lunch Break: A View Inside The Gulf

I didn’t respond to Art Pepper, et al. earlier on the prior BP thread, so I will reply up here regarding “What could Obama have done.”

Now I am not a mechanical engineer, a physicist, or a biologist. And even if I was, I don’t know specifically what the administration should have done differently regarding the blowout and the cleanup. What I object to is the apparent deference to BP with regard to overall strategy of both the repair and the cleanup. A brief list of my concerns:

1. As we all know, the Obama administration recently declared their support for off-shore drilling in principle. Obama called deep-water drilling safe. What was his basis for such a claim? Did he believe that a blowout was highly unlikely, if not impossible?

2. If Obama did believe that a blowout was possible, what was his understanding of industries’ capabilities to contain a blowout? Did he believe that it would take weeks, if not months to plug a leak? Did he consider that an acceptable time frame?

3. If Obama believed that blowouts could be contained faster than what we have seen, what was the basis of that belief? Is the failure to contain the blowout because the contingency plans were too optimistic, because of poor execution, or a combination? If the latter, are there other experts around the globe who have not been consulted and hired but who could have done a better job?

4. While the government appears to neither own the equipment nor employ the personnel necessary to contain the blowout, my understanding is…neither does BP. Since it is subcontractors who caused the problem, and subcontractors who will be fixing the problem, why do we need BP to call the shots? Let the U.S. government hire the personnel — and commandeer BP equipment and employees as needed — to manage both the repair work and the cleanup.

5. 11 people are dead. If early reports of malfeasance regarding testing are true, there may be criminal charges coming down the pipe (no pun intended). The site of the blowout is a crime scene. Certainly there will be plenty of civil suits. I want the people handling the repair and cleanup operations to be 100% focused on solving the problems and not to be concerned about evading civil or criminal liability. E.g. is the massive use of chemical dispersants really the most environmentally preferable solution? Or is it just a solution that may reduce BP’s civil liability for the disaster?

The administration must have strong oversight of BP actions. It needs to be proactive in the clean up. My concern is if it becomes hands on with stopping the “leak” and takes over, BP will use that to avoid liability.

I watched the video and wanted to weep. We are all responsible for this.