Do you believe that BP is doing everything in their power to stop the leak?

[Incitatus]

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Not just no.......FUCK NO.

:nuke: :nuke:

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. Leak of oil or leak of information, because my answer depends on which one we are talking about.

[Individualist]

3. It isn't a leak, it's a damn geyser.

[gateley]

4. I think they're doing everything they know of to stop it (the stuff they've used

before w/other disasters) but I don't think they've been open to considering different approaches, so I don't know how to answer that. Kind of like a doctor treating a patient with "this is how we've always done it and not being open to new research or treatments. So I don't know how to answer this.

I DON'T think they're doing everything in their power regarding the cleanup and regarding the 'plumes' - I think they're primarily focused on stopping the well.

[sandnsea]

5. Of course they are

Why the hell wouldn't they be? They lose money on that lost oil every day.

[Johonny]

6. Since I believe the head of BP sits on the right hand of the lord

I'm going with no on this. (I admit it is always possible the lord sits on the right hand of BP)

[tiptoe]

7. "I am now conviced that BP is not running this with engineering first, but rather as a PR excercise

with managers in charge who really do not know the core business of their company.

The only way they can deliver this devil of a flow to the surface is in a 21" riser pipe - exactly as they do in production."

...

"I am sorry if the BP engineers and managers feel hurt and under appreciated. Frankly, they are big boys and girls and they will get over it. Their individuals feelings is really not the most important thing here, nor is the BP corporate survival."

...

"In my line of work - military missiles, large naval radars - three failures in a row is not an option. If that is the result, in many fields it means you are done for now, lets bring in another team."

...

"I proposed a simple system, that has less back pressure on the BOP, uses standard production equipment and very standard flow management (hydraulic valve, diverter), allows for 100% oil capture to topside or refinery pipe and allows the industry to do what it does best - to produce oil, instead of producing CFD analyses.

What's more it is far cheaper than the schemes tried so far. All standard equipment except for a hydraulic valve and diverter, and I know the oil industry can make that.

And judging by their practice on the flange bolts right now, that's exactly what they are finally thinking, too.

Are you upset that a lowly "cookbook" aerospace engineer has thought of this rather obvious solution?"


— June 4 comment of a "Star Wars" aerospace engineer:


see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=8506824#8507803

[MilesColtrane]

8. BP has nothing to gain by letting this continue.

The company may already be doomed because it hasn't been able to stop this catastrophe.

[Angry Dragon]

9. I fail to see how anyone could vote yes............

[Incitatus]

10. I'm not convinced either way.

I don't see what they have to gain from letting this leak continue. They are clearly trying to hide information about how much oil is actually leaking, but why would they not want the leak to stop?

From what I understand, this well will never be a producing well. If we have to wait for the relief wells to be finished, they will pump mud and concrete into the current well and seal it off. Why wouldn't they want it stop the leak sooner, if it is possible.

The only thing I can think of is if any of the information they are hiding about the leak could be used by experts to help find a solution, but they are hiding it in an attempt to limit their liability.

[flamingdem]

11. If so they would be drilling 5 RELIEF WELLS. Ixtoc required 5 relief wells in 200 ft of water nt

[yodoobo]

14. why not 6 relief wells? Why not 10?

Why not 50 relief wells?

I suspect its because neither 2 or nor 5 were arbitrary numbers but were based on engineering and analysis driven by the desire to stop the money hemorrage as fast a possible.


I don't have any particular faith in BP, but Obama and his team are keeping BP's nose to the wheel on this.

[SoCalDem]

12. I think they are CLUELESS about how to stop it.

I think they would LOVE to HAVE that "loverly erl", safely stashed on their ships, headed for the "marketplace".

They gambled and ended up destroying an ecosystem, and the livelihoods of thousands (millions?) of people, and I don;t think they ever intended to do that.. they were just hopelessly careless, and now even they don't know how to stop it..

They are very much like a 10 yr old who "borrows" dad's car and barrels down the road at 100 mph, and then wonders how to stop the damned car.

BP thought they could continue to skate by on luck..and their luck an out

[yodoobo]

13. I think so.

Of course that is a different question from "is everything possible that can be done being done." It could be nuked but that is beyond BP's power.

What possible interest would BP have in letting that thing continue to leak?

that is money flowing out to sea and ultimately, money is the ONLY thing a corporation values.

[xchrom]

15. no -- and i don't think they know what they're doing

and i don't even think they are talking to all the people who do know.

but all of this -- whether true or not -- will be revealed later.