It is hard to imagine that this BP catastrophe has been rumbling on since April.
Back then, as I far as I can see, it was obvious that a disaster was going to unfold. Let’s face it, an explosion and a ruptured well a mile below the seas surface and thousands of barrels of oil gushing out was never going to be anything else.
When this first happened, listening to specialists on the radio, their view was that the ONLY way this was going to be ‘capped’ was by drilling a relief well into the side of the existing well and then capping off the faulty one. This was going to take 3 months.
Regardless of the reason it happened, BP has tried various ways to halt the flow of oil escaping, some seemingly comical, but nevertheless they have been constantly trying. I believe BP have also been continuing with drilling the relief well, which in a report I read today, is ahead of schedule.
Many mistakes have obviously been made here, but not only on BP’s side but in the political arena too. There are also tragedies on both sides of the Atlantic as a result.
U.S President Obama had to been seen to be doing something to placate the insatiable folks of good ole USA, we would have expected no less of our Prime Minister and Government. He did though make ‘errors’, in my opinion, with his handling of the situation.
- The first, as has been well publicised was to call BP “British Petroleum” which it hasn’t been since the turn of the century. It is in fact owned by US and UK investors.
- Second, from what I have seen and read, the main way he has acted in this is through litigation, talking money, suing for damages etc.
- Third, a disaster, yes, but an oval office broadcast, on the scale of 911? That, directly or indirectly led to the IRAQ war…
There have also been suggestions that David Cameron and the UK Government should have stepped in too. BP is not a National Company and although registered in the UK is not a British Company exclusively.
Yesterday the CEO of BP, Tony Hayward, faced a House of Representatives Committee. What was this ever going to achieve? It seems that it was just a way of the American legislature letting off steam and then criticising him for not answering their questions, what was he exactly supposed to say?
When George W was U.S President the climate talks were always being vetoed by the U.S. I remember an interview broadcast with some Americans from Texas, asking them if they would give up their gas guzzling cars and trucks. The answer was partially bleeped, think you can guess what they said. Does that not make the Americans just as culpable for “cutting corners” in an oil disaster, trying to quench their insatiable thirst for the stuff?
This is a disaster that is going to affect the US coastline for years to come, it is also a disaster which is going to affect some of us for years to come, in the form of pension investments (many pension investors have shares in BP). BP has set aside money, but am guessing if the U.S has it’s way, it will try and bleed the Company dry, and that will be a disaster.
The specialists said 3 months of oil was going to gush out into the ocean, it appears they were right. Isn’t the right time to have an inquiry and cast blame after the event and not during it?