BP disaster started in February?

posted at 12:30 pm on June 19, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

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:

BP Plc was struggling to seal cracks in its Macondo well as far back as February, more than two months before an explosion killed 11 and spewed oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

It took 10 days to plug the first cracks, according to reports BP filed with the Minerals Management Service that were later delivered to congressional investigators. Cracks in the surrounding rock continued to complicate the drilling operation during the ensuing weeks. Left unsealed, they can allow explosive natural gas to rush up the shaft. …

On Feb. 13, BP told the minerals service it was trying to seal cracks in the well about 40 miles (64 kilometers) off the Louisiana coast, drilling documents obtained by Bloomberg show. Investigators are still trying to determine whether the fissures played a role in the disaster. …

BP used three different substances to plug the holes before succeeding, the documents show.

“Most of the time you do a squeeze and then let it dry and you’re done,” said John Wang, an assistant professor of petroleum and natural gas engineering at Penn State in University Park, Pennsylvania. “It dries within a few hours.”

Repeated squeeze attempts are unusual and may indicate rig workers are using the wrong kind of cement, Wang said.

By March, according to these documents, the natural gas surges had gotten so bad that BP warned MMS that it had difficulty controlling them.  On March 10th, BP e-mailed the MMS drilling director for New Orleans that they were in the midst of a “well control situation,” a result which led a Berkeley engineer to tell Bloomberg that “they [BP] damn near blew up the rig.”  That was just a day under six weeks before the rig actually blew up in the Gulf.

This revelation shows that the disaster was far from unforeseen.  In fact, it appears that it had already come close to a catastrophic blowout just six weeks before eleven people died in the subsequent explosion.  BP didn’t exactly keep it a secret, either.  They informed MMS of the problem, which apparently did nothing to intervene in a situation serious enough that a similar situation caused Exxon to shut down its well in 2006.

This may not change anything in terms of addressing the disaster in the short run, but it’s certainly good context to keep in mind when assessing the long-term consequences of this catastrophe and the potential solutions to prevent a repeat of it.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Everyone in the industry who does this particular stuff knows what went wrong. BP has disclosed the relevent facts. Incredible stupidity (Gross Negligence?)on BPs part in the few days leading up to the accident. –

Really??? What, particularly?

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 3:25 PM

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 3:13 PM

He couldn’t have prevented the blowout and I don’t think it was willful negligence. However, he is responsible for protecting us against the pollution. His handpicked MMS and EPA heads and his handpicked Sec of Interior weren’t prepared, although they had ample notification. That falls on him.

a capella on June 19, 2010 at 3:25 PM

Ragspierre.

Yup. Why salty sea water is considered a hazardous waste after seperation has always befuddled me. Dump it in the ocean, that is where it came from. It is just old buried sea water.

percysunshine on June 19, 2010 at 3:27 PM

He couldn’t have prevented the blowout and I don’t think it was willful negligence. However, he is responsible for protecting us against the pollution. His handpicked MMS and EPA heads and his handpicked Sec of Interior weren’t prepared, although they had ample notification. That falls on him.

I totally agree with that. The Feds failed, up and down.

Moreover, the very fact that we are drilling that kind of well is a function of http://hindenblog1.blogspot.com/2010/06/crash-stuck-on-stupid-government.html

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Read 16MPGs post. He has it nailed.

percysunshine on June 19, 2010 at 3:29 PM

Haven’t seen people talking about this:

But a couple days ago there were some article in the local south Louisiana papers about how places like Gulf Shores, Ala., Biloxi, Miss., etc. were debating whether they would have their 4th of July fireworks shows. Some officials were concerned it might light the oil on fire.

Rebuttals in the article pointed out how unlikely that was, etc.

But it makes me think – shouldn’t they be dealing with the oil this way:

1. Banning the use of ALL dispersants near the well (to let the oil come to the surface),

2. Intensively monitoring flow and direction,

3. Using that monitoring data to corral it in a couple-mile radius to allow for radial spread as it comes out of the well, and just burning it as it comes out?

GET IT TO THE SURFACE AND BURN IT!

Currently, the dispersants are guaranteeing maximum ecological poisoning because they are allowing the oil to travel at depth. It will eventually get to shore as a long, complex molecule chain (I learned this at the St. Mary Parish town hall meeting the other night), where it will break down very slowly until collected. If it gets into the marshes, it will NEVER be collected! Maximum impact on the marshes as 100% of the oil lies in the marsh, poisoning everything until it finally breaks down.

People seem to forget that if the wildlife is poisoned, it may not come back as quickly as the land.

Continuing to use massive amounts of dispersants, as they currently are, is INCREASING the damage to marshes! Dispersants are to be used as a sort of storage device to contain the oil until it is collected.

This works on white sandy beaches, NOT marshes!

cane_loader on June 19, 2010 at 3:30 PM

Why salty sea water is considered a hazardous waste after seperation has always befuddled me. Dump it in the ocean, that is where it came from. It is just old buried sea water.

In most active fields, it is re-injected into the productive formation, through well-bores that never produced or have played out, driving the remaining formation oil toward producing well. That’s a better use, and it saves a lot on transport. It used to be common that people would just dump it, and that kills the soil.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 3:31 PM

28 Countries offer to help…

look how many are “under consideration” while more oil gushes into the Gulf…

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/143488.pdf

(Get a paper bag and something to throw up in, you will need it.)

UnderstandingisPower on June 19, 2010 at 3:39 PM

http://keithhennessey.com/2010/06/18/how-to-waive-the-jones-act/

That’s how it was done…TWICE…by Pres. Bush when the Jones Act got in the way.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 3:45 PM

This may not change anything in terms of addressing the disaster in the short run, but it’s certainly good context to keep in mind when assessing the long-term consequences of this catastrophe and the potential solutions to prevent a repeat of it.

And how about a thorough, independent, investigation into BP and our ‘illustrious’ and incompetent government?

Schadenfreude on June 19, 2010 at 3:48 PM

not W’s fault?????

oh the horror
/s

cmsinaz on June 19, 2010 at 3:50 PM

And how about a thorough, independent, investigation into BP and our ‘illustrious’ and incompetent government?

I kinda think the insurance industry, the drilling industry, and LOTS of other interests are well on their way with that.

No harm in pushing for a TRULY independent investigation, such as those above, OUTSIDE government.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 3:52 PM

BP is at fault for not putting a naked woman on the memo and not including a meth bag.

djaymick on June 19, 2010 at 3:55 PM

djaymick on June 19, 2010 at 3:55 PM

You mean an Arkansas wedding invitation…?

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 3:56 PM

Left unsealed, they can allow explosive natural gas to rush up the shaft.

As I recall, upinak and some of our other oil and gas professionals here mentioned at the time that was a likely cause of the explosion.

This looks like pretty damning evidence to me. Hard to argue negligence or recklessness was not a factor. Including on the government’s behalf.

NoLeftTurn on June 19, 2010 at 4:05 PM

Hard to argue negligence or recklessness was not a factor. Including on the government’s behalf.

I think it has to be shown that either was in play here. I read the posts, including MPG16′s, and I find them long on speculation. MPG16 knows what he’s talking about technically, but I don’t see where some of his generalized assertions come from in fact.

One thing I know; the oil field is not your armchair. Spit happens, after all you can do. Maybe all was NOT done here, but I don’t think anyone knows that yet.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 4:26 PM

What I’m seeing a lot of you writing is that BHO knew about this well being a beast (but not out of control)

Actually, I think BHO was in his apparent normal state about events around him, CLUELESS.

that BPs highest echelon knew it would blow out, that 11 guys were killed because…something…and stuff along those lines.

Yes, and through them, Goldman Sachs (GS) got alerted.

That is simple madness. As I noted before, there are dozens of wells world wide that are beasts at any given time. They normally are controlled quite nicely. Nobody buys or sells on that information.

Well, that’s somewhat of a strawman you’re drawing there since no one knows just how out of control this particular beast was at that time, right? It could have been something normal as you say or it could have been a real bête noire. The question is, would the BP CEO and GS sell a huge amount of stock if it was just a normal beast? Interesting question, no?

BHO did not know…why would he…that a particular well had a problem. I really don’t think he even had this on his radar until days after the blow-out, although the WH claims otherwise.

On this, we agree.

Sailfish on June 19, 2010 at 4:28 PM

Well, that’s somewhat of a strawman you’re drawing there since no one knows just how out of control this particular beast was at that time, right? It could have been something normal as you say or it could have been a real bête noire. The question is, would the BP CEO and GS sell a huge amount of stock if it was just a normal beast? Interesting question, no?

Well, yeah we do know. It was under control right up until it was not. There were some apparent “OH, SPIT…!!!” moments, but those are not too uncommon. The well was a bad, bad well, but people deal with those. They plug and abandon them if they can’t tame them. They would just drill another hole, off a ways, to see if they could produce that formation in another area that was less troublesome.

The guys on the rig that day it blew thought they had it controlled, or could control it.

You seem to impute to people perfect knowledge. None of us have that.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 4:40 PM

Just another piece of evidence on the pile that this well was probably going to blow anyway. Tremendous pressure in “weak” rock leaves you with the great possibility that if it didn’t blow when they capped it, it might well have blown when they attempted to put it in production.

crosspatch on June 19, 2010 at 5:11 PM

Tremendous pressure in “weak” rock leaves you with the great possibility that if it didn’t blow when they capped it, it might well have blown when they attempted to put it in production.

Please explain what you mean. See, all oil-bearing horizons are “weak” in the sense they are porous. Lots of formations are not at all porous, which is why the oil stays put.

Also, to make them more productive, we intentionally “weaken” them (i.e., fracting) to make them MORE porous.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 5:18 PM

The oil spilled, Obama failed.

AGAIN.

The head of the MMS was firing, supposedly without Obama’s knowledge immediately after this…

Why? What did Obama know. When did Obama know it?

Will some reporter step up to the plate and do their job or just suck at Rahm Emanuel’s teat some more?

Skywise on June 19, 2010 at 5:23 PM

FIRED. The head of the MMS was *fired*.

Skywise on June 19, 2010 at 5:24 PM

Rags,
He is not talking about the pay zone, but instead the other parts of the formation. We only frac the area where the hydrocarbons are, not the whole damned thing.

The geological structure of the earth has many layers so when someone fraccs a wells it is like they drilled into a birthday cake and fracc only that middle layer of icing without harming the rest of the cake other than the borehole. Much of the time say as in tight formation shale pay zones, the “cake” is drilled from the top, then the well curves and travels horizontal in the middle icing layer. It is fracced so that the well will allow most of the “sugar” to go up through the hole. Lot of times it even has to be sucked out with vacuum pumps.

There are a lot of well which naturally flow at high pressures, say 10,000 psig.

Kermit on June 19, 2010 at 5:52 PM

Skywise,
The head of MMS should have never held that position to begin with she was an environmental activist who went to work for Pelosi after the 2006 election.

Kermit on June 19, 2010 at 5:53 PM

Also, to make them more productive, we intentionally “weaken” them (i.e., fracting) to make them MORE porous.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 5:18 PM

Fracting to increase the porosity, or the permeability?

Yoop on June 19, 2010 at 6:23 PM

Lets not forget that BP had obtained categorical environmental waivers of this well at the time.

tarpon on June 19, 2010 at 6:26 PM

Kermit on June 19, 2010 at 5:52 PM

I can’t think what I said that made you think any differently.

I’ve both worked on drilling crews and fracced wells working for Haliburton. I also owned rig moving trucks, and operated cranes, built locations, and performed reclamation, in addition to vacuum trucking.

10k psi ain’t that much, Kermit. There are wells that produce multiples of that.

From the suggestions in this incident, the only thing that makes much sense to me is that a horizon very close to the production formation caused them the lost circulation. If not, it makes no sense to me, as they would have cased and cemented past another problem horizon where they lost circulation higher up.

But, as I noted, there is a lot we just don’t know here.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 6:37 PM

Fracting to increase the porosity, or the permeability?

I’m no expert here, just a guy whose done the dirty-hands part of this, but I don’t know there’s a big difference.

Fracing (or however that’s spelled) forces specially formulated liquids down hole at extreme pressure, where it flows through perforations in the final casing run, and out into the productive horizon. This exploits tiny fissures in the rock, and props them open with special sand that is part of the mix. The object being to open up a tight formation, allowing more oil and gas to flow to the well-bore. The job is completed by recovering as much of the fraccing liquids as possible, and testing to see how effective the effort has been.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 6:45 PM

Well, yeah we do know. It was under control right up until it was not. There were some apparent “OH, SPIT…!!!” moments, but those are not too uncommon. The well was a bad, bad well, but people deal with those. They plug and abandon them if they can’t tame them. They would just drill another hole, off a ways, to see if they could produce that formation in another area that was less troublesome.

Says you. Please forgive me if I don’t readily accept your simple explanation that the everything was under control one moment and then went out of control the next. I suspect like most things of this nature, there were early signs that things might get out of control. Do I think BP knew for certain it was going to go t*ts-up and intentionally risked the workers lives? No, but I wouldn’t doubt that they knew early enough that this one was not like to “normal” beasts and decided to sell their stock “just in case”. If it turned out to be a false alarm, they could simply re-purchase the stock afterward without much, if any, loss.

Why are you so willing to easily ignore the issue of this insightful early sale of stock as being a possible indicator of malfeasance on the key investors part?

The guys on the rig that day it blew thought they had it controlled, or could control it.

You seem to impute to people perfect knowledge. None of us have that.

We really don’t have all the details about what happened that day nor the few months beforehand. There’s a lot of disinformation being leaked about this.

Their knowledge didn’t have to be perfect, only precise enough to realize that their investment was more at risk with this beast than others, yes? Sorry, I won’t go into mystic monkeys mode and refuse to see, speak and hear no evil. The possibility of cynical wrongdoing on BP and GS part is too high not to be suspect.

Sailfish on June 19, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Sailfish on June 19, 2010 at 7:14 PM

You could be right. Time will tell.

My default mode is not to assume the very worst, or to see deep, dark motives in people until I have something that supports that.

As you correctly observe: “We really don’t have all the details about what happened that day nor the few months beforehand. There’s a lot of disinformation being leaked about this.” And it’s important to remember that the leaks abound from all quarters.

From all I can see, the people on the ground were doing what was called for in the circumstances. Did somebody screw the pooch here, or was this an “act of God”? Dunno yet.

That is one of the things our courts determine, and I think rather well.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 7:24 PM

I don’t readily accept your simple explanation that the everything was under control one moment and then went out of control the next. I suspect like most things of this nature, there were early signs that things might get out of control.

Is that a fair depiction of what I said? Do you accept that the crew was engaged in a plug and abandon operation? You don’t plug and abandon a well that you DON’T fear has potential to go wild (unless it’s a dry hole). Of course there were early signs, and they were being reacted to, or am I mistaken?

The well was under control one minute, and out of control the next, or something very like that. You don’t perform operations on a wild well (unless you are a wild well specialist).

Do you take exception to the assertion I made that BP could simply drill a new hole into a different part of the pay-zone, hoping to find better conditions? I mean, they now had WAY more information about what they could expect, and how to deal with another problem, right?

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 7:36 PM

I blame ObamaBush for not fixing the problems at MMSof terrorism that, umm, obviously did not exist before his administration.

YYZ on June 19, 2010 at 1:36 PM

…funny how having a democratic President nullifies the “buck stops at the Presidents desk” that we heard from the “adults” for over 8 years……

Baxter Greene on June 19, 2010 at 7:38 PM

So it was known on Feb 16th that the rig had a “well control situation,” but an award of some kind was given for it’s safety? Am I remembering that correctly?

shick on June 19, 2010 at 7:47 PM

Is that a fair depiction of what I said?

Yeah, pretty much:

It was under control right up until it was not.” — Ragspierre

I think we are in the “What did they know and when did they know it” territory. You seem to want to make this more about what was going on with the workers on the rig than about what BP and GS were doing in the background; whereas, I’m more interested in the opposite. Dunno.

The well was under control one minute, and out of control the next, or something very like that. You don’t perform operations on a wild well (unless you are a wild well specialist).

Are you suggesting that there was zero spillage one moment and then, POW!, 60,000 thousand gallons per day? Anything’s possible, I suppose but I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that it didn’t really play out in that binary fashion.

Do you take exception to the assertion I made that BP could simply drill a new hole into a different part of the pay-zone, hoping to find better conditions? I mean, they now had WAY more information about what they could expect, and how to deal with another problem, right?

I can’t comment on that one way or the other since I don’t know all the machinations that were occurring during this failed operation. As with most major projects, you have people on the ground working on one set of rules/facts and then decision makers in corporate working on a complete different set of rules/facts. For example, one early report stated that the some workers had warned the BP suits that there were problems proceeding with suspect equipment/fittings, to no avail. As we know with Space Shuttle Columbia, sometimes schedules trump safety concerns. Thus, the need for a full and independent investigation of this.

Sailfish on June 19, 2010 at 8:33 PM

Are you suggesting that there was zero spillage one moment and then, POW!, 60,000 thousand gallons per day? Anything’s possible, I suppose but I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that it didn’t really play out in that binary fashion.

I’m calling BS on that. I never said anything of the kind. In fact, there may have been predominantly natural gas during the initial blow-out. Nothing I said could be construed to be “binary”, except you have a well under control one minute, and the next minute (or very few) you don’t. People don’t stand around sucking their thumbs, and by all accounts it was a very sudden event.

Plus, it’s maybe 60k bbls per day.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 8:49 PM

..First we had Obama slamming Bush for Katrina and promising that he would never let the Gulf Coast down…
“never again” …..

It’s time for America to rebuild trust with the people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast.  When I am president, I will start by restoring that most basic trust: That your government will do what it takes to keep you safe.  The words “never again” spoken sooo often in those weeks after Katrina must not fade to a whisper.

Obama, New Orleans Feb. 7th, 2008

….Then we had Obama’s “Mission Accomplished” moment:

President Obama on April 2, 2010: “I don’t agree with the notion that we shouldn’t do anything. It turns out, by the way, that oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills.

….no they don’t ….but that is not a reason to give a total pass on safety inspections,oversight,and emergency response procedures…..all of which was done by the Obama administration:


AP IMPACT: Fed’l inspections on rig not as claimed

By JUSTIN PRITCHARD, Associated Press Writer Justin Pritchard, Associated Press Writer Sun May 16, 4:34 pm ET

Earlier AP investigations have shown that the doomed rig was allowed to operate without safety documentation required by MMS regulations for the exact disaster scenario that occurred; that the cutoff valve which failed has repeatedly broken down at other wells in the years since regulators weakened testing requirements; and that regulation is so lax that some key safety aspects on rigs are decided almost entirely by the companies doing the work.


U.S. exempted BP’s Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study

By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 5, 2010; A04

The decision by the department’s Minerals Management Service (MMS) to give BP’s lease at Deepwater Horizon a “categorical exclusion” from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on April 6, 2009 — and BP’s lobbying efforts just 11 days before the explosion to expand those exemptions — show that neither federal regulators nor the company anticipated an accident of the scale of the one unfolding in the gulf.

….remember all that talk from Obama about how “lobbyist were not going to set the agenda”……yeah right.


Interior Department Gave Deepwater Horizon Operators Safety Award in 2009

Saturday, May 01, 2010


……now that is some successful lobbying right there.

Baxter Greene on June 19, 2010 at 9:08 PM

…and how did that promise not to let down the people of the Gulf with an inadequate response work out for Obama:


Gulf of Mexico oil spill: Burning should have started a week ago, former NOAA official says

By Ben Raines

MOBILE, Ala. — Federal officials should have started burning oil off the surface of the Gulf last week, almost as soon as the spill happened, said the former oil spill response coordinator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.


Despite plan, not a single fire boom on hand on Gulf Coast at time of oil spill

By Ben Raines
May 03, 2010, 12:09PM

..and of course there were already plans in place for the federal officials to follow:

Gouget, now an environmental consultant with Windward Associates in Seattle, was part of the group that created the 1994 plan designed to allow federal responders to begin burning oil as soon as a major spill occurred, without an approval process.

….because it is the Obama administrations responsibility to oversee this disaster:

NY Times
By CAMPBELL ROBERTSON and ERIC LIPTON
05/01/10

But it is still the government, in this case the Coast Guard, that has the ultimate say.

A law passed a year after the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster makes the owner of a rig or vessel responsible for cleaning up a spill. But oversight of the cleanup is designated to the Coast Guard, with advice from other federal agencies.

…this so called “engaged since day one” response included 9 days until Homeland Security Chief showed up to spout her infinite wisdom:

The delay meant that the Homeland Security Department waited until late this week to formally request a more robust response from the Department of Defense, with Ms. Napolitano acknowledging even as late as Thursday afternoon that she did not know if the Defense Department even had equipment that might be helpful.

…and Obama showed up on the 12th day to give a speech and then hurry back to the Golf Course.

Baxter Greene on June 19, 2010 at 9:11 PM

….Obama was fully aware of the problems at MMS…but apparently his pockets were so full of BP money that he was slow to move against them and enact his “Hope and Change” policies we “hear” so much about:

Rolling Stone: Deepwater blew and Obama knew

posted at 12:55 pm on June 9, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/09/rolling-stone-deepwater-blew-and-obama-knew/

Salazar himself has worked hard to foster the impression that the “prior administration” is to blame for the catastrophe. In reality, though, the Obama administration was fully aware from the outset of the need to correct the lapses at MMS that led directly to the disaster in the Gulf. In fact, Obama specifically nominated Salazar – his “great” and “dear” friend – to force the department to “clean up its act.” For too long, Obama declared, Interior has been “seen as an appendage of commercial interests” rather than serving the people. “That’s going to change under Ken Salazar.” …

….and BP knew it could cut corners without getting any heat from Mr. Hope and Change:

BP Engineer Called Doomed Rig a ‘Nightmare Well
Published June 14, 2010

BP apparently rejected advice of a subcontractor, Halliburton Inc., in preparing for a cementing job to close up the well. BP rejected Halliburton’s recommendation to use 21 “centralizers” to make sure the casing ran down the center of the well bore. Instead, BP used six centralizers.

…so much for the “Halliburton” conspiracy theories…..

……but Obama and his followers will tell you that government oversight is the road to success…….

Baxter Greene on June 19, 2010 at 9:15 PM

..But the Obama administration was “engaged from day one” right?????…..
……..yeah right…if this is what you could call “engaged”:

Report: Obama knew from the beginning that oil leak would likely last months

posted at 9:56 pm on June 4, 2010 by Allahpundit


This makes all those golf outings, sports-team photo ops, and celebrity jams with Paul McCartney over the past six weeks feel extra special, doesn’t it?

The White House appears resigned to living with the BP oil spill for some time to come. But that’s not surprising—since President Obama and his team were briefed from the outset that the blowout at the Deepwater Horizons rig was epic in scope—and would not be fixable for a long, long time.

….WHAT A GREAT TIME FOR SOME R & R….


The First Couple Vacations in North Carolina at the Edge of the Appalachians

By SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
April 22, 2010


While Oil Slick Spread, Interior Department Chief of Staff Rafted with Wife on “Work-Focused” Trip in Grand Canyon

May 05, 2010 5:47 PM

….then add several rounds of Golf….political campaigning…..private concerts….and White House parties to the “engaged since day one” narrative that only the liberal sheep are swallowing hook..line..and sinker.

Baxter Greene on June 19, 2010 at 9:18 PM

…..instead of partying and playing Golf…maybe Mr. Hope and Change should have been working on getting some of the international help that was being offered on board:

Steffy: U.S. and BP slow to accept Dutch expertise
By LOREN STEFFY Copyright 2010 Houston Chronicle

Three days after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch government offered to help.
It was willing to provide ships outfitted with oil-skimming booms, and it proposed a plan for building sand barriers to protect sensitive marshlands.

The response from the Obama administration and BP, which are coordinating the cleanup: “The embassy got a nice letter from the administration that said, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’” said Geert Visser, consul general for the Netherlands in Houston.

…after weeks of millions of gallons of oil gushing into the Gulf….this attitude had changed:

After delays, U.S. begins to tap foreign aid for gulf oil spill
By Juliet Eilperin and Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, June 14, 2010; A04

Four weeks after the nation’s worst environmental disaster, the Obama administration saw no need to accept offers of state-of-the-art skimmers, miles of boom or technical assistance from nations around the globe with experience fighting oil spills.

“We’ll let BP decide on what expertise they do need,” State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid told reporters on May 19. “We are keeping an eye on what supplies we do need. And as we see that our supplies are running low, it may be at that point in time to accept offers from particular governments.”

That time has come.

In the past week, the United States submitted its second request to the European Union for any specialized equipment to contain the oil now seeping onto the Gulf of Mexico’s marshes and beaches,

…59 days later…the Obama administration states:

NO waivers of the Jones Act have been requested. They need skimmers, Allen says, and so, if someone comes forward, “We have expedited procedures to go with customs and border protection which would grant it. I’m willing to do that.”

…fifty…..nine…..days….later.

…we still have offers from over 28 countries with only about 6 being approved by the “engaged since day one” Obama crew.

…but let there be no doubt…these statements are 100% correct:

WH Energy Adviser Browner On Oil Spill: “We’ve Always Been In Charge”

“Make no mistake,” he said. “BP is operating at our direction. Every key decision and action they take must be approved by us in advance.”

Obama,Presidential News Conference
May 27, 2010

….how do we know they are 100% correct.

………because only the inept,idiots that make up the Obama administration could be responsible for such a devastating cluster f#@k of a disaster as this.

Baxter Greene on June 19, 2010 at 9:22 PM

16MPG on June 19, 2010 at 12:57 PM

Perhaps, but most laymen would call it a clue, something’s not right here.

When added to the time factor of February, not just April 20th, along with the notification to MMS and this has the making of a serious scandal against Obama and his Admin.

DSchoen on June 19, 2010 at 9:58 PM

………because only the inept,idiots that make up the Obama administration could be responsible for such a devastating cluster f#@k of a disaster as this.

Baxter Greene on June 19, 2010 at 9:22 PM

Baxter Greene:Superb posts,heres a link on oil and gas
seepage that naturally occurs!!:)
===============================================

Natural Oil Seeps vs. Oil Spills May 26, 2010

http://politicalclimate.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/natural-oil-seeps-vs-oil-spills/

canopfor on June 19, 2010 at 11:21 PM

FIRED. The head of the MMS was *fired*.

Skywise

And replaced with….a lawyer with no experience or background in metals, minerals, or management, lol.

xblade on June 20, 2010 at 4:11 AM

I totally agree with that. The Feds failed, up and down.

Ragspierre on June 19, 2010 at 3:28 PM

That’s one point of view. The other might be that they were completely successful in “their” objectives.

5. Five Republican (one changed to I) Govs had their states damaged

4. 16% of economy effectively shut down.

3. Total offshore oil drilling ban

2. Provided a platform for pushing “Cap and Tax”

1. Soros will make a huge sum off this

CC

CapedConservative on June 20, 2010 at 7:31 AM

This actually sounds realistic to me. I think that it’s only logical that this was preceded by some serious problems.

The same situation would exist in fixing as in containing the spill: BP would still have to be in charge of repairs.

Very sad, sad situation.

AnninCA on June 20, 2010 at 8:00 AM

Natural Oil Seeps vs. Oil Spills May 26, 2010

http://politicalclimate.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/natural-oil-seeps-vs-oil-spills/

canopfor on June 19, 2010 at 11:21 PM

Thanks…and your posts on the Dr. Zero thread were spot on
with great links…thanks for the info.

Baxter Greene on June 20, 2010 at 11:05 AM

So last week I saw a “conspiracy story” about the mini-subs that Chaves bought from Russia being the cause of the explosion of the oil rig. At the time, I thought it was typical BS. Today, Drudge has a link about two fishermen fishing off Hollywood Florida spotting what they thought was a mast. As the approached, they saw it was actually a periscope from… a mini-sub that got out of Dodge as they got closer.

That would make things interesting…

CC

CapedConservative on June 20, 2010 at 6:48 PM

“Most of the time you do a squeeze and then let it dry and you’re done,”

Does he mean “set”?
Things have a tendency not to “dry” underwater or underground…

Count to 10 on June 21, 2010 at 9:48 AM

Just goes to show you that paperwork doesn’t stop problems. What it takes is action. MMS could’ve stepped in to force BP to revisit concerns over the cement, the blowout preventer, etc.

Although in the case of a well, how would you stop work on the well? Wouldn’t you have to cap the well in to do that, and isn’t that precisely what was giving BP problems and eventually lead to the explosion?

hawksruleva on June 21, 2010 at 10:15 AM

The worst-case scenario is based on what would happen if the damaged wellhead were removed and not capped. The document showed a low-ball estimate of 55,000 barrels per day.

Sailfish on June 21, 2010 at 2:24 AM

Which is one reason they went with junkshot, top hat, etc. Before using a solution that sawed off a clean end of the well pipe. And now they’re talking about switching to a new attachment that will allow them to plug the well in case they have to leave because of a hurricane – if they do switch attachments, they’ll have a period where the well is flowing out at its top rate.

Which begs the question. why can’t they do the work inside some sort of massive containment bubble? The well pipe isn’t that wide; seems to me like you could create something that would allow you to capture much of the escaping oil & gas while working on it.

hawksruleva on June 21, 2010 at 10:19 AM

When added to the time factor of February, not just April 20th, along with the notification to MMS and this has the making of a serious scandal against Obama and his Admin.

DSchoen on June 19, 2010 at 9:58 PM

I guarantee you obama will not suffer any long term political damage as a result of this gusher. No matter what his culpability is, the press will continue to shift the blame and it will work again.

I’m constantly surprised by those here who can’t see this. Our govt is in the hands of people who should never have been in charge of it, and nothing that happens this November will change any of that. It should also be obvious to anyone watching that the republicans will not change the direction we’re going in, and it’s not even likely they’ll slow it down anymore.

runawayyyy on June 21, 2010 at 10:56 AM

The Dutch skimmer flotilla blockade is working like a charm.

seven on June 21, 2010 at 4:15 PM

So, when Obama announced that he was going to allow expanded drilling in the OCS “if it can be done absolutely safely”, he knew damn well that there would be some irregularities from this site (if not the complete fustercluck that it has become) to point to as his excuse to shut down drilling completely.

The Monster on June 21, 2010 at 8:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 2