Oil Spill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Emeritus said:
The criminal law is not the issue. What is suitable is a "receivership" i.e. you appoint a trustee to supervise the firm make sure that the company pays its obligations and does what it is supposed to do. After the Hartford Circus fire the circus was in receivership for 5 years to pay its obligations and operate safely
Click to expand...
Sure, that's basically my point. We can call it whatever we want. I'm familiar with receivership...but I also think this is a unique situation. It would also be complicated by the fact the BP PLC is a British company. An action under criminal law might give the authorities sharper teeth. I can't say though what the details of that action might be.

To this day BP is not acting responsibly. BP itself has a "worst case" estimate that there might be as much as 250,000 barrels a day flowing (no, there was not an extra zero). At that rate they should have all of their FPSOs steaming toward the Gulf just in case. I doubt they do.
 
DoingHomework said:
Sure, that's basically my point. We can call it whatever we want. I'm familiar with receivership...but I also think this is a unique situation. It would also be complicated by the fact the BP PLC is a British company. An action under criminal law might give the authorities sharper teeth. I can't say though what the details of that action might be.

To this day BP is not acting responsibly. BP itself has a "worst case" estimate that there might be as much as 250,000 barrels a day flowing (no, there was not an extra zero). At that rate they should have all of their FPSOs steaming toward the Gulf just in case. I doubt they do.
Click to expand...

BP never acted responsibly

Rig survivors: BP ordered shortcut on day of blast - CNN.com

If they don't cooperate with the receivership you seize their assets. In this case worth far more than the damages.
 
DoingHomework said:
If the statements from surviving crew are true, which I agree we need to wait before judging, BP and many company officials could be guilty of homicide.

The point is, the evidence of actions that do cross the line into criminal behavior is overwhelming. If it were you or I we would not be allowed to control the crime scene and decide how victims are compensated. I am not suggesting they be "convicted" without a trial, only that they be treated like any other accused criminal.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that they had a plan to murder 11 people?

i was once on a rig and it blew out (Sour gas). once we got it settled down the engineer asked how many bbls blew out. no one knew. the engineer told us all the managers in the office wanted to know. i told them to come out and they can count next time.

it's so easy to cast blame from a comfortable position and with hindsight.

my suggestion would be to continue enjoying the luxuries oil provides you and let the president find his "ass to kick."
 
ronocnikral said:
Are you suggesting that they had a plan to murder 11 people?

i was once on a rig and it blew out (Sour gas). once we got it settled down the engineer asked how many bbls blew out. no one knew. the engineer told us all the managers in the office wanted to know. i told them to come out and they can count next time.

it's so easy to cast blame from a comfortable position and with hindsight.

my suggestion would be to continue enjoying the luxuries oil provides you and let the president find his "ass to kick."
Click to expand...

OFGS homicide is not the only crime in the World
Intent (mens rea ) may not even be an issue
Many environmental crimes have no mens rea requirement.
 
ronocnikral said:
Are you suggesting that they had a plan to murder 11 people?
Click to expand...

Of course not. But there are several levels of murder. Reckless behavior that leads to death may be manslaughter. Even accidents may sometimes stretch that far if proper cautions were not taken. BP has a pattern of past problems that is unique among oil companies.

I'm not out there saying we should stop drilling. I'm just saying that this company has a miserable record that has caught up to it. And their behavior since the spill has been inappropriate.
 
Yeah I can agree that BP is acting irresponsibly when it comes to reimbursing businesses affected by this spill. They are requesting proof of loss, then not really examining it extensively. They are using the plan of a state government as a frame work for how they do things, since BP never wrote up one. They are having a very difficult time getting businesses in some areas to go fill out the paperwork to receive compensation. So much so that they asked the state to provide assistance getting the word out to those people.

You can not "arrest" anybody in this country without conducting a complete investigation, period. A corporation is considered a person here. Violating this can result in monetary damages being paid to BP not the other way around. If it really comes push to shove then what would keep BP from simply leaving the country? So what if a US court decides that BP owes 150 trillion dollars. If they don't have a presence in the country, there is little that can be done. Contrary to what is being reported in the national media, BP is doing fairly well by the people who have been affected. Yes they are requiring people to jump through some hoops, but that is in response to what happened after Katrina and is considered a "best practice" by the state program they are imitating.

There was a CNN report I read today that was saying some of the workers reported they had been worked 24 hours straight recently. In a court everything must be backed up. There was nothing backing these reports up. This does not mean it did not happen only that it can not be proved. It also calls into question the creditability of the sources.
 
BP eyes showdown with US govt on liability-BP source | Reuters

interesting...i'm torn on this.

the gov't shuts down activity in the gulf and then demands that BP pay all the salaries. what if the gov't said no more activity ever? where is the line?

in my mind there is a breaking point somewhere. if you screw BP too much, they just walk, leave 10's of thousands unemployed, the US gov't seizes their US assets, they kick all the US companies out of the UK and seize their assets. then there is a huge pissing match back and forth. this is one end of the spectrum...and unlikely to happen. but some form of it could happen. like they pull out of the US and 10's of thousands are unemployed...

to think the law will dictate what happens is naive. politics is the main driver.
 
lets-retire said:
You can not "arrest" anybody in this country without conducting a complete investigation, period. A corporation is considered a person here. Violating this can result in monetary damages being paid to BP not the other way around.
Click to expand...

This is not the law, period. All you need to arrest someone is probable cause. Lots of investigations come later.
 
I'd like to see BP cap the well in some manner. There will be years- maybe decades- to unwind the mess.

First things first............................
 
Let's say that you could magically determine the total cost of the spill. That is, total cleanup (not possible of course), lost wages, damage to the Florida economy, damage to national economy, all ripple effects, etc.

How would that figure compare with BP's assets and revenue stream?
 
winger said:
I'd like to see BP cap the well in some manner. There will be years- maybe decades- to unwind the mess.

First things first............................
Click to expand...


The solution is obvious- why didn't someone think of this before?
 

Attachments

  • oil leak.jpg
    oil leak.jpg
    41.4 KB · Views: 4
ronocnikral said:
BP eyes showdown with US govt on liability-BP source | Reuters

interesting...i'm torn on this.

the gov't shuts down activity in the gulf and then demands that BP pay all the salaries. what if the gov't said no more activity ever? where is the line?

in my mind there is a breaking point somewhere. if you screw BP too much, they just walk, leave 10's of thousands unemployed, the US gov't seizes their US assets, they kick all the US companies out of the UK and seize their assets. then there is a huge pissing match back and forth. this is one end of the spectrum...and unlikely to happen. but some form of it could happen. like they pull out of the US and 10's of thousands are unemployed...

to think the law will dictate what happens is naive. politics is the main driver.
Click to expand...


I did not read your article, but read another... if this is where they are saying BP has to pay for the 6 months of all the workers that will not get work because of the 6 months moretorium (sp).... I completely disagree that BP should pay... this is a decision by the gvmt... if someone should pay (and I am not saying someone should)... it should be the gvmt...

They do not have to shut down ALL drilling like they are... it is a political decision. Since the likelyhood of another problem like this is slim because it seems most people have learned their lesson... I don't see where the 6 months really helps..

And you can probably do anything you come up with later IF there is anything to come up with... (ie, new blow out preventor or something similar)...
 
Texas Proud said:
I did not read your article, but read another... if this is where they are saying BP has to pay for the 6 months of all the workers that will not get work because of the 6 months moretorium (sp).... I completely disagree that BP should pay... this is a decision by the gvmt... if someone should pay (and I am not saying someone should)... it should be the gvmt...

They do not have to shut down ALL drilling like they are... it is a political decision. Since the likelyhood of another problem like this is slim because it seems most people have learned their lesson... I don't see where the 6 months really helps..

And you can probably do anything you come up with later IF there is anything to come up with... (ie, new blow out preventor or something similar)...
Click to expand...

I tend to agree about BP not having to pay for wages of oil workers. If I get laid off, I might have some words and opinion to give about BP, but I don't think I would think BP should have to cover my salary. Methinks I would chalk it up to the risk I took when I choose to go into the oilfield. of course...i say this now. Thankfully, 95% of my work is international.

While this is purely speculation, I think you find it wasn't a failure of the BOP system. One of the first things you do when you take a kick is to space out. depending on the type of pipe rams, they sometimes can't seal (ok, the hydril can, but it is usually rated for a lower pressure) around a tool joint. And the shear/blind rams certainly aren't designed to shear a tool joint, especially not drill collars. if they were doing what many have speculated they were doing, they most likely had their drill collars across the BOP's. which meant they were screwed come a kick. this is, again, purely my opinion and speculation, i think it will come out that it was a process thing - displacing when they shouldn't have, improper casing design and/or cementing. this is all politics aside...

either way...time will tell.
 
Texas Proud said:
They do not have to shut down ALL drilling like they are... it is a political decision. Since the likelyhood of another problem like this is slim because it seems most people have learned their lesson... I don't see where the 6 months really helps..
.
Click to expand...

The problem is whether you can keep drilling if all your public response assets are tied up responding to BP? Its a factual question. If you can only cope with one problem at a time, yes, the first spill "causes" the other to shut down if they dont have adequate separate response facilities. Alternatively you charge BP for the extra cost of providing more response facilities.
 
ronocnikral said:
TromboneAl said:
I've been curious about this. How are the beaches different? Whiter sand? Bluer water? Are they naturally different, or is it related to industry near the Mississippi?
Click to expand...
one is swamp land, the other is...a beach. one has brown silty water from swamp and the mississippi (as pointed out) the other is clear water. one is a major port for industry, the other is for tourism. this might be hard to fathom, but it's worse than galveston. not to mention the butt end of the mississippi has worse than just silt.
Click to expand...
But you can rent a cottage on the water on Grande Island much cheaper and you can eat fresh caught shrimp cheaply at the local restaurant.
 
Who in their right minds vacations on the beach in La, Ms. or Alabama ? Gimie a break here.
 
Texas Proud said:
They do not have to shut down ALL drilling like they are... it is a political decision. Since the likelyhood of another problem like this is slim because it seems most people have learned their lesson... I don't see where the 6 months really helps..

And you can probably do anything you come up with later IF there is anything to come up with... (ie, new blow out preventor or something similar)...
Click to expand...

Of course it is a political decision as it has become a political problem, but it is also the prudent thing to do. I strongly disagree with the premise that we can continue to drill and pump oil from extreme depths at this time. From what I have read the systems, processes and oversight are completely inadequate for dealing with the issues and forces involved, let alone for dealing with a blow out as is clearly demonstrated by the inability of both BP and the gov't to stop the current leak and clean up the mess. Our reach has exceeded our grasp.

DD
 
DblDoc said:
...From what I have read the systems, processes and oversight are completely inadequate for dealing with the issues and forces involved, let alone for dealing with a blow out as is clearly demonstrated by the inability of both BP and the gov't to stop the current leak and clean up the mess. Our reach has exceeded our grasp.

DD
Click to expand...
What about north sea drilling?
 
Emeritus said:
The problem is whether you can keep drilling if all your public response assets are tied up responding to BP? Its a factual question. If you can only cope with one problem at a time, yes, the first spill "causes" the other to shut down if they dont have adequate separate response facilities. Alternatively you charge BP for the extra cost of providing more response facilities.
Click to expand...

I don't see that as BP's problem...

I remember in college about one case of fault in business law... (and there is a possibility that it has been overturned with some other case or law... but who knows... maybe a lawyer here knows about this... IIRC it was a Supreme Court decision, but it has been 35 ish years since I had this class)...

It involved an explosion at a train station... the explosion rippled throw the platform and caused a clock to fall over and hit someone... was the train owner that exploded responsible:confused: From what I learned.. no... the falling clock was not a direct result of the explosion... it was a secondary result and so they were not liable.

To me, the workers who lose their jobs because the gvmt made a decision to stop offshore drilling is a secondary result of the leak... not a primary one. The people who can not fish, rent out their condos or feed people in their resturants (well, maybe this is a stretch) are primarily because of BP oil...



OK... did some research... the quick research shows that they can use intervening or proximate cause as a defense to pay the other workers... the gvmt is the intervening cause.



http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/proximate+cause
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/intervening+cause
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

cbo111
Getting an elderly parent to give up living alone
2 3 4
Replies
92
Views
5K
Scuba
S
F
selling a motorcycle - test drive?
Replies
23
Views
1K
Car-Guy
Car-Guy
OldShooter
Oil Spill Clean-up; Any chemists here?
Replies
11
Views
1K
jim584672
J
perinova
oil and gas
Replies
11
Views
642
Montecfo
M
street
Brigg Straton Engine No Oil Change Required
Replies
17
Views
836
street
street

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom