Posted on 06/19/2010 12:26:08 PM PDT by kara2008
Until this week, the general impression of the Deepwater Horizon blowout in the Gulf has been that the explosion took everyone by surprise, and that neither BP nor a dysfunctional MMS had any idea that the well had reached a critical stage. Two days ago, however, Bloomberg reported that both BP and MMS were well aware of the high risk of a blowout at that particular well. BP and its subcontractor Transocean had in fact been fighting against a blowout for over two months, and MMS was well aware of the situation:
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
HOUSTON, Jun 18, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) --Following this week's hearings in Washington regarding the Deepwater Horizon tragedy, Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (NYSE: APC) issued the following statement:
"The events surrounding the Deepwater Horizon explosion represent a terrible loss for the families of those who lost their lives and an unprecedented environmental tragedy," Anadarko Chairman and CEO Jim Hackett said. "Sadly, it also continues to have tremendous impacts on the livelihoods of many Gulf Coast families and their communities. We, along with others in the industry, have continued to support the Unified Command in its response with technical expertise and specialized equipment.
"The mounting evidence clearly demonstrates that this tragedy was preventable and the direct result of BP's reckless decisions and actions. Frankly, we are shocked by the publicly available information that has been disclosed in recent investigations and during this week's testimony that, among other things, indicates BP operated unsafely and failed to monitor and react to several critical warning signs during the drilling of the Macondo well. BP's behavior and actions likely represent gross negligence or willful misconduct and thus affect the obligations of the parties under the operating agreement," continued Hackett.
Under the terms of the joint operating agreement (JOA) related to the Mississippi Canyon block 252 lease, BP, as operator, owed duties to its co-owners including Anadarko to perform the drilling of the well in a good and workmanlike manner and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The JOA also provides that BP is responsible to its co-owners for damages caused by its gross negligence or willful misconduct. Importantly, any actions Anadarko may take under the agreement to protect its rights relative to BP's performance as operator in the drilling of the well will in no way shift any financial burden to the American taxpayer. Hackett also said, "We recognize that ultimately we have obligations under Federal law related to the oil spill, but will look to BP to continue to pay all legitimate claims as they have repeatedly stated that they will do."
The operator of a well determines the detailed planning and execution of the well, and is responsible for the day-to-day activities of, and decisions executed by, personnel on the rig. Consistent with standard industry practice around the world, non-operating investors rely upon the operator to make the appropriate decisions on the rig.
"BP's failures in the drilling of this well are not a reflection of the many tremendously skilled and committed individuals in our industry who work hard every day to deliver needed resources to America. We look forward to continuing to work with the Administration and our industry to identify further enhancements to the industry's operating procedures and practices, and to helping get the Gulf's dedicated workers back to work soon," Hackett said.
DONATION OF OIL REVENUE
Anadarko also announced that it will donate to charitable and civic agencies along the Gulf Coast any revenue it is entitled to receive from oil recovered from the clean-up efforts.
"We hope donating these proceeds to the people of the Gulf Coast will help offset some of the hardships being experienced in so many ways by those living in the affected communities," said Hackett. "We are saddened by the loss of lives that occurred in this accident and the livelihoods that have been damaged by the spill. We continue to offer our prayers to the families of those lost and to all of those who are still suffering through this tragic event."
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation's mission is to deliver a competitive and sustainable rate of return to shareholders by exploring for, acquiring and developing oil and natural gas resources vital to the world's health and welfare. As of year-end 2009, the company had approximately 2.3 billion barrels-equivalent of proved reserves, making it one of the world's largest independent exploration and production companies. For more information about Anadarko, please visit http://www.anadarko.com.
This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Anadarko believes that its expectations are based on reasonable assumptions. No assurance, however, can be given that such expectations will prove to have been correct. A number of factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the projections, anticipated results or other expectations expressed in this news release, including the outcome of events in the Gulf of Mexico relating to the Macondo well incident and the company's ability to successfully defend its stated position under the joint operating agreement. Other factors that could impact the forward-looking statements are described in "Risk Factors" in the company's 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 and other public filings and press releases. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which speak as of the date hereof. Anadarko undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements.
SOURCE: Anadarko Petroleum Corporation
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation
MEDIA:
John Christiansen, 832.636.8736
john.christiansen@anadarko.com
-- or --
Matt Carmichael, 832.636.2845
matt.carmichael@anadarko.com
INVESTORS:
John Colglazier, 832.636.2306
john.colglazier@anadarko.com
-- or --
Chris Campbell, CFA, 832.636.8434
chris.campbell@anadarko.com
-- or --
Dean Hennings, 832.636.2462
dean.hennings@anadarko.com
It definitely shows "how BP operates" ... :-)
It’s high time the American people wake up to the criminal element running this country and the world, who have puppets on BOTH sides of the aisle.
INDEED TO THE MAX . . . THOUGH . . .
It’s high time the American people wake up to the criminal, [TRAITOROUS, DEMONIZED, GLOBALIST TYRANNICAL] element running this country and the world, who have puppets on BOTH sides of the aisle.
THEY’VE
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2519352/posts?page=2#2
BEEN BRAZENLY TELLING US FOR 110 YEARS WHAT THEY WERE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING AND GOING TO DO.
Bush Sr was quoted as purportedly saying that if the public knew what the elites had been up to, they’d have all been hung from the nearest lamp posts.
I have often wondered if we would actually be told of a terrorist caused event such as an explosion intentionally caused like what happened in the gulf.
If the terrorists wanted to bring us down, they could do it if there was no target to take out the anger and frustration of the American people.
Would our government hide the fact of terrorism if this was the cause?
hmmmmm
thx.
Amen!
If the terrorists wanted to bring us down, they could do it if there was no target to take out the anger and frustration of the American people.
Would our government hide the fact of terrorism if this was the cause?
Well, I can tell you who would be the first to start yelling and screaming "It was terrorists!" -- if that was the case ... LOL ...
It would be BP ...
With BP facing paying over $100 BILLION out of its company's profits and stopping payments to investors and having its stock price go down ... and losing money left and right, and having the CEO of BP removed from duty -- yes ..., the first one to "yell" terrorists would be BP.
HOWEVER, what we see is that the criminal negligence of BP doesn't seem to be exceeded by the ability of terrorists to attack. I don't think terrorists could have caused more damage than merely the criminal negligence of BP.
EVEN BP's other oil company partner points out that BP is totally negligent in how they handled it.
See Post #121 for the statement from Anadarko.
And then see Post #122 for how negligent BP has been for years, as compared to the other oil companies.
A terrorist could not have "done a better job" in creating this disaster than BP did itself.
Well, not only that... The head honcho for the Coast Guard was #2 under "Brownie" at FEMA under Bush and also a Bush appointee!!!
I just LOVE your "islamabama" reference and wonder why he's not living in Islamabad, instead of Warshington, D.C.
Too funny!!!
My step-dad was a drilling mud warehouseman, trucker all of my teen years and into college.
He was also a fair self-taught geologist respected by many credentialed geologists.
I don’t doubt your assertions.
I just do not think that BP has lily white hands, remotely.
Your question about the seawater is a telling and interesting one, imho.
The stock sales are also quite telling, imho.
AT a minimum, I think there’s an exceeding amount of skullduggary—for whatever mix of motives—to go around.
A terrorist could not have “done a better job” in creating this disaster than BP did itself.
SOUNDS TO ME like this is at least minimally true.
“Had they left the heavy mud in the hole none of this would have happened (99.9% sure). I have heard no logical explanation of why this was done and that gives me concern, a lot of concern.”
I don’t think there was, or will be a “logical” reason. The BP company man said something to the effect of “I’m the boss here, do it. That’s what the pinchers (BOP) are for”. I can completely understand that. Some blowhard company man that thinks he knows more than the driller and crew that had been fighting this beast for months.
A company man under pressure to get the well done. Passing that “kick the dog” and “I’m the boss” attitude to the crew.
What I CAN’T understand is why, once they started replacing the mud with sea water, and started seeing problems they didn’t stop. Instead they interpreted the data (pressure jumps, etc.) in the best possible light so they could continue the risky process. They stopped twice IIRC to monitor the jumps and data, and went on anyway.
Were the original driller and crew gone and replaced by a completion crew or something? I had just a brief experience of being on a rig for a couple of summers. But, at the least the company man could have been locked in his trailer by the crew. Or, slipped on the wet spot and fell into the mud pit.
Although I suppose things are different on an independet land well vs. these ocean rigs. Still.
“Obama’s proposed solution to leaking oil.”
Leave it to Obama to appoint a “Cleanup Czar”. An a Nobel Prize winning sponge at that!
There were things that they did that were negligent, unsafe and far away from standard procedure, but the replacing of the heavy mud with sea water was well beyond negligent considering what they knew and had been knowing for some time. I would argue that point with anyone.
I would be interested to see if any other oilfield hands on this forum could come up with any explanation.
“I just can’t understand the decision in any way other than a crazy company man (or worse) running the show.”
As I’ve said before, the company man relying on the BOP is like thinking it is okay to go 100 mph on an icy mountain road because your car has airbags.
The list, ping
Wow, that’s really something!
Yes, if you had a government that gave a rat’s a$$ about enforcing the law.
Cuba silent when there’s a chance to skewer their number one enemy and capitalism plus the oil is headed toward or has already reached Cuba’s beaches. Yeah, silence there is unnatural. Now what does it mean?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.