Oil Spill

[TromboneAl]

There's a lot of stuff that just doesn't make sense here. Either there's some serious baloney being given out, or the press is confusing things.

Check out this headline:

BP Plans to Replace Containment Cap Next Month

Company Believes a Bigger Cap Will "Provide a Better, Tighter Fit" over Oil Well Blowout at the Bottom of the Gulf of Mexico

​

But if they can't handle any more oil, what's the point of putting on a cap that will capture more? It's inconsistent with this report:

Report: BP lacks capacity to collect oil from cap
​

and the press should at least try to reconcile those two things.

--------------

Even if BP has to waste money and spend an extra billion, the PR benefits of having supertankers line up to collect oil would be worth it, as would big helicopters with BP on the side ferrying thousands of cleanup workers from beach to beach.

 

[REWahoo]

Al, I suspect (and hope) the lack of capacity to process all the oil and gas they are collecting is temporary. I read something a few minutes ago saying they were bringing in another vessel which would almost double the processing capacity - up to 20,000 barrels a day.

Edit: Here it is...

The company hopes to ramp up the amount to around 20,000 barrels a day as it adjusts the cap and brings online a secondary system that will take advantage of some of the equipment it installed as part of earlier failed efforts to plug the leak.

FT.com / Companies / Oil & Gas - BP ramps up oil recovery effort

 

[TromboneAl]

Yes, OK that makes sense.

 

[DoingHomework]

what resources are you suggesting they move or procure? to my knowledge, all oil and nat gas is piped to shore in the GOM. could be wrong about that as well...

They've had 45+ days (lost count) to bring in resources. They could have moved ships or equipment from anywhere in the world in that time. BP clearly has equipment currently moving oil elsewhere in the world. Why is that not being brought in to help?

As I said, I don't think in any way BP wanted this to happen. It very definitely could destroy the company (though I don't think it will). Even if they did something wrong, pushed the schedule, cut corners, or whatever in the days that led up to the accident I would not necessarily be too critical.

But now is the time to bring ALL of the company's resources to bear in addressing the problem, cleaning up the mess,and making things right. Get the accountants out cutting checks to the fishermen and hotel owners (there seem to be delays in this), get the security guards and corporate attorneys out sopping up oil on the beaches. Divert every ship they have available to the Gulf if it can help. And clearly they do not know how much this will cost so I think it is downright fraudulent to pay the dividend with this kind of potential bill hanging over their head.

My only information comes from the news. But I not seeing much of a Herculean effort. I'm mostly seeing a lot of PR and spin while teh oil continues to flow and BP sits on its cash and sweet talks investors.

 

[RonBoyd]

As I said, I don't think in any way BP wanted this to happen. It very definitely could destroy the company (though I don't think it will). Even if they did something wrong, pushed the schedule, cut corners, or whatever in the days that led up to the accident I would not necessarily be too critical.

And it will all blow over relatively quickly. There will be many compelling arguments -- based on "lessons learned" -- after the media goes home to rapidly get back to "business as usual." People (and not only U.S. citizens) will be looking for any excuse to keep up the "flow."

 

[DoingHomework]

And it will all blow over relatively quickly. There will be many compelling arguments -- based on "lessons learned" -- after the media goes home to rapidly get back to "business as usual." People (and not only U.S. citizens) will be looking for any excuse to keep up the "flow."

Well, I don't think it will blow over as quickly as you do but I do agree that people are not going to give up their oil! I think we'll get a lot stricter regulation on drilling and production out of this, especially in the way of accountability. BP claims to be spending $7 million a day on this. I think we'll see fines many times that for future spills. And I think we'll see some renewed push for eliminating dependence on oil as a fuel.

 

[Leonidas]

They've had 45+ days (lost count) to bring in resources. They could have moved ships or equipment from anywhere in the world in that time. BP clearly has equipment currently moving oil elsewhere in the world. Why is that not being brought in to help?

I don't know what the daily rates are for the particular ships that are being used, but I would think that around $100,000 a day would not be too far off base. Anyway, I heard some BP dude say the other day that they were going to move cautiously if they got the cap on successfully. The implication was that moving too fast could cause the whole setup to fail.

 

[DoingHomework]

I don't know what the daily rates are for the particular ships that are being used, but I would think that around $100,000 a day would not be too far off base. Anyway, I heard some BP dude say the other day that they were going to move cautiously if they got the cap on successfully. The implication was that moving too fast could cause the whole setup to fail.

Nothing wrong with moving cautiously. But when they claim that they now lack the capacity to process the oil they are able to recover it tells me that they did not adequately prepare for "success." It hardly matters that they got a cap on if the oil is still billowing into the sea because they have nowhere to put it.

There are still "credible" estimates that the flow might be as high as 100,000 barrels a day though the most likely value is 1/5 that. Wouldn't it have made sense to move enough production ships into place to handle 100,000 barrels a day just in case they got the well capped? The only argument I can think of against making that kind of preparation would be to save money and keep production going elsewhere. BP has the ships and has had time to get them into position. Why haven't they done it?

 

[Leonidas]

Nothing wrong with moving cautiously. But when they claim that they now lack the capacity to process the oil they are able to recover it tells me that they did not adequately prepare for "success." It hardly matters that they got a cap on if the oil is still billowing into the sea because they have nowhere to put it.

I don't think the quote about the drill ship capacity was an official BP statement, just a comment from a "technician".

The company says that it's really an issue of keeping the seawater out, preventing frozen hydrates from choking the flow from the BOP to the ship (which is why the first cap thing failed). So, they are keeping the vents open while they are pumping chemicals down to prevent the freezing. Once they get the pressure under control the seal should work properly and they will be pumping more up to the surface and less will be escaping.

The ship does not seem to really be the issue.

However, now they say they want to install a bigger cap. I think they should consider themselves lucky to have got the second one installed and maybe roll with it for a while. They tried all of this on Ixtoc I, none of which worked, and that was only in 50 meters of water. I'm too damn good looking to be an engineer, but if I was lucky enough to get the cap on I think I would vote for "let's don't f*(k with this one as long as it's working". Maybe that's another reason why I'm not an engineer, aren't they infamous for always wanting to [-]screw with something that works okay[/-] make it just a little better?

 

[Zathras]

They have not yet reached capacity and another vessel is on it's way.
IF the second vessel isn't in place by the time they reach capacity of the first, I would call that poor planning. Not BP refusing to spend the money.
Even BP must realize by now that any loss of money due to moving another vessel in is nothing compared to the cost of repairing the bad PR AND the larger fines.

 

[DoingHomework]

I don't think the quote about the drill ship capacity was an official BP statement, just a comment from a "technician".

The company says that it's really an issue of keeping the seawater out, preventing frozen hydrates from choking the flow from the BOP to the ship (which is why the first cap thing failed). So, they are keeping the vents open while they are pumping chemicals down to prevent the freezing. Once they get the pressure under control the seal should work properly and they will be pumping more up to the surface and less will be escaping.

The ship does not seem to really be the issue.

Ah, that makes more sense. Though I did read in the news today from something more official than a technician that processing and capacity are an issue. We'll probably never know the full story.

I'm too damn good looking to be an engineer, but if I was lucky enough to get the cap on I think I would vote for "let's don't f*(k with this one as long as it's working". Maybe that's another reason why I'm not an engineer, aren't they infamous for always wanting to [-]screw with something that works okay[/-] make it just a little better?

Hmm, I am an engineer. (I guess if I had been better looking I could have been whatever you are/were.) But the closest I've been to an oil rig is a gas pump. We may like to f with things but not with something this tricky. In my j*b our main goal is not to break anything.

I'm sympathetic to the challenges, the need to drill for oil, and all that goes with it. But I simply have not seen actions from BP that make it look like it is focused on the spill (as opposed to focused on money). As someone said, where's the organized effort to get cleanup crews where they need to be? Where's the support for cash disbursement to people damaged? Why are they taking steps to legally insulate themselves and partition corporate resources? Why on earth would they pay a dividend? Their bond rating has been cut and their market cap has fallen dramatically. Bankruptcy is being mentioned, not because they are insolvent but because litigation and cleanup are likely to consume the company for many years.

 

[Westernskies]

Thanks for disowning the 49th state and my home, Alaska.
I won't take it personally.
I haven't checked in to this thread for awhile, but I guarantee that most every Alaskan knows the name of the Captain of the Exxon Valdez, Joe Hazelwood.
Unfortunately, you are probably right. Most people do not look past their own back yards and their own family, and to hell with the rest of the world. They are like the frog in the pot of water that is slowly heating to a boil. Hence those of us who do look further are labeled "environmentalists" and "tree-huggers" or worse. Maybe even (cover your eyes if you are a minor) LIBERALS.
Ok, end of rant. Is there any solution to companies like BP putting the bottom line ahead of safety?

So, are you going to send your Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend Check(s) to BP to help fund the Gulf Cleanup? (Since it's funded by the oil companies bottom line...)

 

[ronocnikral]

seems like bp is cutting checks...but it doesn't seem like it's enough. They referenced $4.8MM for 3518 people. That's what? $1300/person? seems low, but i am sure there is more coming. that sad thing is, there will be some people who take advantage. i guess anyone could make a claim they are affected...

the enterprise is fetching some $523,000/day!! That wasn't even it's spread cost when I worked on it. wowza, the spread cost has to be through the roof right now. the horizon was fetching around $480,000/day before it sank. I'll let you all in on the oilfield secret...

how come no one talks about anadarko? i wonder if they'll loose their palace in the woodlands?

 

[Bestwifeever]

seems like bp is cutting checks...but it doesn't seem like it's enough. They referenced $4.8MM for 3518 people. That's what? $1300/person? seems low, but i am sure there is more coming. that sad thing is, there will be some people who take advantage. i guess anyone could make a claim they are affected...

Some of the people affected by the spill won't be able to collect--they don't have tax records to prove their losses:

Oil spill: Fishermen seeking compensation for losses fear the tax man - chicagotribune.com

The article also says

BP officials said that more than 25,000 claims had been submitted and that more than 12,000 payments totaling about $36 million had been sent to people facing financial ruin.

which so far would be $3,000 per claim on average.

 

[Leonidas]

Some of the people affected by the spill won't be able to collect--they don't have tax records to prove their losses

That's probably not going to work out very well for a lot of those people living along the bayous. Even people who live nearby will tell you that it is a whole different world on the bayous. Running cash businesses and staying under the radar as much as possible is how those people have always lived.

 

[Westernskies]

That's probably not going to work out very well for a lot of those people living along the bayous. Even people who live nearby will tell you that it is a whole different world on the bayous. Running cash businesses and staying under the radar as much as possible is how those people have always lived.

If you choose to operate elusively, then help shouldl also be elusive. You can't have it both ways.

I suspect there will be a lot of unsubstantiated claims, probably outnumbering those with legitimate documentation. I sincerely hope BP stands their ground and pays only legitimate, well-documented claims. Otherwise it will be another Katrina financial free-for-all.

The Carpetbaggers are already descending on the Gulf once again!

 

[Texas Proud]

Interesting to see the 'day rate'.... but from my very limited knowledge (and it could be someone blowing up my skirt)....

I interviewed for a job being the accountant for a drilling ship... they said the yearly budget for the ship was $1 billion.. or just over $2.7 million per day..

As I said, it was just and interview, so I do not know if it was real...

 

[lets-retire]

seems like bp is cutting checks...but it doesn't seem like it's enough. They referenced $4.8MM for 3518 people. That's what? $1300/person? seems low, but i am sure there is more coming. that sad thing is, there will be some people who take advantage. i guess anyone could make a claim they are affected...

the enterprise is fetching some $523,000/day!! That wasn't even it's spread cost when I worked on it. wowza, the spread cost has to be through the roof right now. the horizon was fetching around $480,000/day before it sank. I'll let you all in on the oilfield secret...

how come no one talks about anadarko? i wonder if they'll loose their palace in the woodlands?

Heard an interview yesterday that the figure was up to 34 million paid out. I also heard the company say they weren't going to nit-pic the claims too much. Also the figure is going to keep growing, because it isn't a one time payment. They are making payments as they go. If the problem lasts three months then the people will be getting three months worth of check, if it lasts a year they will be getting a years worth of checks. At least that is how it is being sold right now.

 

[ronocnikral]

That's probably not going to work out very well for a lot of those people living along the bayous. Even people who live nearby will tell you that it is a whole different world on the bayous. Running cash businesses and staying under the radar as much as possible is how those people have always lived.

I've never heard about the cash businesses. While I don't doubt some people evade taxes, my guess would be it's not anymore than the average joe running their own small business anywhere in america.

my experience is that "those people living along the bayous" are very honest. a lot of them are in the oil industry. anytime i ever bought shrimp or seafood on my way back in from offshore, i was always able to pay with a credit card.

i will agree it's a different world...

westernskies sums it up well...have your cake or eat it, but not both.

thanks for the other links. the money article seemed low and i was just going off what they gave me. it gets complex as they are handing out money on real estate deals going south in florida and what not...i was trying to focus in on LA.

 

[TromboneAl]

BP has a luxury that the government doesn't -- they can waste money. If the government overspends, then down the road the news media will ridicule them (e.g. FEMA trailers that just sat there, trucks with ice that was never used, fraudulent claims that were paid).

But that either won't happen with BP, or will make BP look good. If BP wastes 5 Million moving tankers around that it doesn't need, it will only look like they tried really hard to make things right.

So if I were in charge I'd say "spend, spend, spend." Send a guy downtown to sit at a table and hand out checks with very little evidence required. Fund a food bank with $10 million and hand out food to anyone who needs it. That would be PR money well spent.

Some of the people affected by the spill won't be able to collect--they don't have tax records to prove their losses

Good. Screw 'em. They've been lying, and I've been paying their share of taxes.

 

[TromboneAl]

Here's another question that the news hasn't answered for me:

How much oil can one of those skimmer boats collect, how do they collect it, and what do they do with it? From the images I've seen, it seems pretty futile.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Good. Screw 'em. They've been lying, and I've been paying their share of taxes.

They might realize now (doubtful given the people interviewed in the article and their lifestyles, but maybe) they've pretty much been screwing themselves too for whatever reason--wait til they try to collect SS and find out they don't have enough work history.

 

[Rustic23]

T AL, did you really mean to say the Government does not waste money?

 

[TromboneAl]

No, only that they have to try harder not to. They can't say "Well, let's make sure this gets done even if we have to waste a little money" because if they do, there will be a "Fleecing of America" segment on it a year later. "Your tax dollars went to pay for a supertanker that did nothing more than float around the gulf for 6 months!"

In this situation BP can say "So what if we spend $1 million on a tanker that we end up not using." Even if NBC does a story on how BP wasted money, it would only make them look good. "BP wanted so much to help Americans, that it spent on $1 million on a tanker to have just in case!"

 

[ERD50]

No, only that they have to try harder not to. They (ERD50 clarifier:the government) can't say "Well, let's make sure this gets done even if we have to waste a little money" because if they do, there will be a "Fleecing of America" segment on it a year later. "Your tax dollars went to pay for a supertanker that did nothing more than float around the gulf for 6 months!"

I think they just call that 'stimulating the economy' and 'creating jobs' these days. 'Waste' is sooooo 'last century'.

-ERD50