SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: Why is BP taking ALL the blame?

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1287226/GULF-OIL-SPILL-Whys-BP-taking-blame.html

By Richard Pendlebury
Last updated at 9:46 AM on 17th June 2010

Last night Obama bullied BP into setting up a £13bn fund to compensate U.S. oil spill victims. Yet it's American firms that owned the rig AND the safety equipment that failed. snip

Aboard the deepwater-Horizon on the evening of April 20 were 126 crew. Only seven were employees of BP; 79 of the others worked for Transocean, including the rig's commander Capt Curt Kuchta. The rest were from a variety of other firms, including Anadarko, Halliburton and M-I Swaco.

Halliburton is one of the world's largest oilfield services suppliers. Yet another Texas-based firm, it made a fortune out of the Iraq war, being one of the U.S. military's prime supply contractors.

Most of the food and fuel trucked into the country from Kuwait was done so by a Halliburton subsidiary. The firm was also given a multi-billion contract to oversee the restoration of the Iraqi oil industry. Such deals caused an international furore because the then U.S. Vice-President dick Cheney, one of the architects of the war, had only recently been a Halliburton executive.

Four Halliburton staff were on the Deepwater Horizon to oversee the cementing of the oil well casing. Once that was finished, they would then plug the wellhead with cement, ready for later oil extraction.

The men from MI-Swaco were providing other engineering services. Their employer is another Texas-based multi-national, owned by another oil services giant, Schlumberger, which is itself incorporated for tax reasons in the Netherlands antilles, with an HQ in Houston.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1287226/GULF-OIL-SPILL-Whys-BP-taking-blame.html#ixzz0r6wtLHNM

[unhappycamper]

1. Fingerpointing is a great all time 'sport'.

[aquart]

2. BP should feel free to sue the asses off Halliburton and Schlumberger

And Transocean. In fact, I joyously encourage them to do so.

But BP chose to deal with these craptastic companies. This is BP's operation no matter how many contractors they hired.

And I LOVE hearing Obama "bullied" them. Any misery felt by the BP elite is balm to my soul.

[redqueen]

6. Yep... BP chose them so BP can sue them if they wish. (nt)

[mopinko]

9. and bp hollowed out their own company, dumping

engineers, and years of institutional knowledge and other "overhead", and replaced them with these contractors. but their name is still on the dotted line.

[aquart]

37. I didn't know. Ye gods, they privatized themselves!

[eowyn_of_rohan]

3. Yes- Go after Halliburton too

for starters

[pocoloco]

21. Tell us what the fuck Halliburton did wrong?

Inquiring minds would like to know!

[eowyn_of_rohan]

23. you betcha

:eyes:

[pocoloco]

26. "you betcha"????

Break your butt to be just a tad more specific?

[eowyn_of_rohan]

29. ...

your name suits you

[fascisthunter]

33. why so angry... do a search on DU... there is plenty of reason for Haliburton

to be held accountable.

[LaurenG]

36. in the interest of disclosure - do ya work for Halliburton?

Evidently they are being blamed for using substandard mud or cement.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

4. That is quite the article! Bookmarked. K&R.

[KharmaTrain]

5. BP Ain't Going Down Alone...

At least the Brit Press is starting to point fingers at the other co-conspirators on this crime rather than wave the Union Jack. If there are criminal charge brought due to this disaster (and I expect there could be several), BP won't be sitting in the dock alone...they'll drag anyone and everyone in this mess with them, including Trans-Ocean, Haliburton and any and all vendors who were involved in this project. The same goes for civil suits as they'll want to spread the liability.

I suspect we'll start hearing rumblings of indictments in the next few weeks. We could be treated to a rare show where the sharks try to eat each other as these corporates try to pass the blame back and forth.

[Statistical]

7. BP also only owns 65% of the well.

When news came out that BP setup $20B fund, Anadarko (APC) which owns 25% of the well fell 5% (while BP stocks rose 5%).

http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AAPC

Why not push for Anadarko to add say $5B (likely the minimum liability they face) to the $20B fund?

[dipsydoodle]

19. Japan Mitsui

is the parent of the other company with 10% of the bag and that in turn is partly owned by the japanese government.

I'm sure there's lots going on behind the scenes some of which may have a major bearing on the situation and none of which if likely to leak out in the meanwhile.

Might actually be easier for the present if BP simply bought Anadarko.

[LaurenG]

8. Because they were in charge - thats what happens when you manage the place

You man up and ante up and deal with it.

[NNN0LHI]

11. You mean kind of like the way US companies "man up" to their responsibilities?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8577794

[KittyWampus]

16. No, like the way GE was forced to pay to clean up the Hudson.

It isn't about "manning up". It's about the Govt. forcing culprits to pay.

[NNN0LHI]

20. Over 15,000 people were killed within days in Bhopal

Sure you want to compare the Hudson River to that?

Don

[KittyWampus]

27. Yes, because it's relevant. After all, only 11 people died in the BP explosion.

edit- using your logic.

[LaurenG]

22. That's digusting. It's time we handed our own companies their ass as well

I'm never going to excuse that behavior and hopefully you read my post correctly. I don't care who did the damage, own up to it and do what's right for those you have harmed.

[unblock]

18. hmm, generally speaking, partners share proportionally in both profits and liabilities

partners not managing it are unlikely to have any CRIMINAL responsibility, but the civil, financial responsibility is shared.

i'm sure the other partners will be made to pay their share.

[LaurenG]

25. so partners as in Haliburton or someone else

who are the partners? This could be exciting.

[unblock]

34. partners are bp (65%), anadarko (25%) and moex offshore 2007 (10%)

according to wikipedia.

halliburton and schlumberger and perhaps others worked as contractors but without any ownership. they might have liability to the extent that they screwed up.

given the number of players and their ability to pay for phenomenal legal teams, the financial side will be every bit as messy as the disaster itself.

[LaurenG]

35. I guess I should have known BP didn't own itself outright

but I was hoping you were meaning contractors when you said partners. Thanks for answering.

[TexasObserver]

10. Because it is BP's operation and BP has majority ownership and control.

Other companies undoubtedly have some responsibility, either because they were negligent, or because they have a contractual obligation to BP or others. The venture which owns the well is run by BP, but profits, losses, and costs are split with its other partners in the venture.

There are likely contractual provisions among the various parties - provisions to which we are not privy - which delineate how various risks and costs will be paid. Those may or may not require adjudication for a final determination of who will pay, and how much they'll pay. It's safe to say none of the major players will get out of this without paying dearly, either contractually or because of some tort they committed.

Before this is over, the blame will be spread around. BP can be on the hook for the entire thing, but still able to lay off up to 35% on its business partners or its contractors, maybe more. BP will likely end up paying more than all other parties combined, but in the end, probably 25-30% of the total will be paid by other parties.

[leveymg]

12. BP and Halliburton. Drowning men pulling each other down.

There's some kind of karma at work.

[opihimoimoi]

13. BP gatta take the brunt of the blame for one main reason, their CHEAPNESS

in approach to safety and contingency plans...

Profit motivated CHEAPNESS WITH TRAGIC RESULTS...

[NNN0LHI]

15. A reputable company wouldn't have tolerated the corner cutting

They would not have put the lives of their workers above making a few bucks.

Halliburton is not a reputable company. BP knew that. That is why BP hired them.

Don

[opihimoimoi]

28. Reputable Companies have INSURANCE COVERAGE...in this case

I do not hear of any mention...I assume they arew self insured...

Insurance companies try to insure things are done right so as to avoid huge losses..Its their business..simple as that.

They employ actuaries, specialists, etc to guard against large losses as much as possible..

This simple process was over looked by rookieness of the selfinsured....no guidelines, no backup plans etc.

BP had rookies making decisions hence oily crap in the gulf threatening our planet not to mention people impacted in the immediate vicinity ...

It comes down to the afore mentioned, cheapness by rookie decisions on dangerous projects such as happening presently.

As a consequence of going bare(w/o coverage, w/o backups) BP acted like a large city deciding to cut corners by going w/o Fire Depts hoping no conflagrations(VERY Large Fires) occur...

Was a stupid thing to risk so much....they flirted with higher profits risking Tragedy on a hemongous Scale..

Insurance exectutives are laughing at BPs Rookieness....oil geeks and nerds violating standard safety guards caught with dicks in a vice...I hope the guilty ones go to jail for long terms

[NNN0LHI]

30. You make some very good points

[KittyWampus]

14. IMO, the legal blame should rest squarely on whomever told work to proceed after knowing

that things were going wrong. Because falling behind schedule or doing things the right way or re-doing things would cost money.

[salguine]

17. And no one seems to be angry about all the federal regulatory agencies that

turned a blind eye to BP's long record of violations, corner-cutting, and compromising of safety procedures. If that's not part of the problem, I don't know what is.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

24. Haliburtom wasn't a "prime" contractor. they were the ONLY contractor...

And bet they are still the only company that gets to bid on lots of contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[stranger81]

31. Not that I enjoy defending Halliburton, but based on the information I've seen so far,

it sounds like Halliburton recommended using 21 centralizers when cementing the well (the process completed just a few hours before the rig blew) to make sure the cement casing ran down the center of the well bore; because it would cost $5-$10M more and take an additional ten hours to complete, BP rejected Halliburton's recommendation.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/14/bp-engineer-called-deepwa_n_611739.html

I'm all for suing the pants off of BP, Halliburton AND Transocean, but it sounds like BP is likely to be the party most responsible for this disaster.

[NNN0LHI]

32. That cuts both ways though

If Halliburton admits BP rejected their recommendations for safety Halliburton pretty much had a duty to walk away from the job at that point citing safety issues. By not doing so they became just as culpable. They are admitting they were aware of the danger and did it anyway.

Don