BP lies
Posted: Wednesday, June 09, 2010
by e
Dhammabucha Rocksprings Meditation
Oil flow . . .
Originally, BP estimated that the well was leaking 1,000 barrels a day. On April 28, the government figured more like 5,000 barrels, but BP wouldn't allow anyone near the leak. The company refused to allow scientists to perform more accurate readings. "Independent measurements are not relevant to the response and that such efforts might distract from efforts to stem the flow," said BP.
Now let's fast forward to the present where BP is bragging about capturing, "15,000 barrels a day." Yet the leak continues underwater visibly unchanged. How much is really leaking? At least 30,000 to 100,000 barrels a day is what is estimated, much more than the 1,000 barrels that BP originally low-balled. This leaves only two possibilities; that either BP has no clue about what they are doing, which would be disastrous, is disastrous, or that they are liars. You make the call.
Dispersants . . .
What you can't see won't hurt you, or that is the apparent philosophy at BP. It would be a PR nightmare to have large oil slicks cover the gulf, so why not hide them deep in the depths of the ocean where they will do their damage without anyone noticing - SOP for oil companies.
And of course let's use the most effective, cheapest dispersant so that our bottom line is not affected as much, who cares about environmental damage.
Wikipedia: On May 7, Secretary Alan Levine of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality Secretary Peggy Hatch, and Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Secretary Robert Barham sent a letter to BP outlining their concerns related to potential dispersant impact on Louisiana's wildlife and fisheries, environment, aquatic life, and public health. Officials are also requesting BP release information on the effects of the dispersants they are using to combat the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
BP is using Corexit EC9500A and EC9527A neither of which is the least toxic, nor the most effective, among the dispersants approved by the Environmental Protection Agency, and they are banned from use on oil spills in the United Kingdom. Twelve other products received better toxicity and effectiveness ratings, but BP says it chose to use Corexit because it was available the week of the rig explosion. Critics contend that the major oil companies stockpile Corexit because of their close business relationship with Nalco. By 20 May, BP had applied 600,000 US gallons (2,300,000 l) of Corexit on the surface and 55,000 US gallons (210,000 l) underwater.
On May 19, the Environmental Protection Agency gave BP 24 hours to choose less toxic alternatives to Corexit. BP spokesman Scott Dean said Friday, May 20, that BP had responded to the Environmental Protection Agency directive with a letter "that outlines our findings that none of the alternative products on the Environmental Protection Agency 's National Contingency Plan Product Schedule list meets all three criteria specified in yesterday's directive for availability, toxicity and effectiveness.
" BP has so far refused to offer an acceptable "detailed description of the alternatives investigated and the reason they believe those products did not meet the required standards" on a public Web site, as called for in a letter sent on May 20 by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson to BP CEO Tony Hayward. BP claims that such full disclosure would compromise its confidential business information. - More BS.
In a press conference on May 24, EPA administrator Lisa P. Jackson said the 700,000 US gallons of dispersants already used was "approaching a world record" and that "dissatisfied with BP's response" she was ordering the EPA to conduct their own evaluation of alternatives to Corexit, while ordering BP to take "immediate steps to scale back the use of dispersants."
Smooth talking tyrants - misleading PR . . .
Wikipedia: "Initially BP downplayed the incident; CEO Tony Hayward called the amount of oil and dispersant "relatively tiny" in comparison with the "very big ocean." Hayward also stated that the environmental impact of the Gulf spill would likely be "very very modest." Later, he said that the spill was a disruption to Gulf Coast residents and himself adding, "You know, I'd like my life back." (apparently completely insensitive to the creatures who were losing their lives and the peopel who were losing their livelihoods.)
"The company has required oil spill cleanup workers, including many fishermen, to sign non-disclosure agreements and not publicly talk about the spill.
"BP contractors and Coast Guard officials threatened to arrest CBS reporters investigating an oily beach in South Pass, Louisiana, citing "BP's rules."
"Representative Ed Markey, chairman of a House energy committee investigating the oil spill, suggested that the oil company has misled the public about the magnitude of the spill, and advised people to not trust what the company is saying.
On June 4 BP began running TV ads featuring CEO Tony Hayward as he apologized for the disaster, also adding, "We've helped organize the largest environmental response in this country's history." The company also ran print ads in newspapers including The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today and The Washington Post. The cost for this PR campaign was about $50 million, according to Jon Bond, co-founder of the Kirshenbaum Bond Senecal agency. The TV ads, which appeared on national cable and broadcast networks, had the same tag line as the newspaper ads: "We will get this done. We will make this right."
"President Obama responded to this development later that day on his third trip to the Gulf region, saying, "My understanding is that BP has contracted for $50 million worth of TV advertising to manage their image during the course of this disaster... what I don't want to hear is when they're spending that kind of money on TV advertising, that they're nickel-and-diming fishermen or small businesses here in the Gulf who are having a hard time."
"BP spokesperson Toby Odone told ABC News that BP has successfully bid for several search terms related to the oil spill on Google and other search engines so that the first search result will link directly to the company's website. This is "a great PR strategy" commented Kevin Ryan, CEO of a firm devoted to corporate internet communications, and one not used before by other firms facing similar public relations "nightmares," adding that research suggests most people can not distinguish between such paid search results and actual news sites."
Lying is certainly a convenience. Sometimes we lie in order to get what we want because truth becomes secondary to our ambitions, and since oil companies have one overriding objective which is to please its shareholders by a positive bottom line, oil companies do whatever is necessary to achieve that goal including hiding oil leaks and pollution and minimizing any discovered damage to the environment that has been accidentally stumbled upon.
I was fortunate enough to work for an oil company as a Jobber Representative on the West Coast for many years, which gives me a bit of a license to relate my impressions of the culture within one of these organizations.
I could easily sum it up with a few words: "Unabashed, but heavily cloaked Greed," which would not begin to describe the manipulation of the public with their smooth BS and sugary sweet advertising filled with wildflowers and honeybees that covers up the dirty truth; that these companies are raping and fouling the earth at unprecedented levels, and until they are discovered for what they are and for what harm they are doing, they will continue unrestricted because of our insane, blind thirst for oil.
For these corporations have no conscience. These are the bottom liners who will do anything for money. And oil companies aren't alone.
Do we really want corporate dictators influencing congress and running our society?
This Article has been viewed 1,801 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
More commentsInteresting. There is not a lot of evidence to suggest that deep sea oil drilling is particularly safe.Too many incidends.All it takes is one disaster of the type we are suffering through now. I mean, you only have one shot at permanent destruction, right? When something goes wrong like this, its devastation lasts for decades, maybe longer. The Prince William Sound is still polluted by the Exxon Valdez disaster, 21 years ago. The present oil spill, being orders of magnitude greater, probably spells the end for coastal activities in Louisiana, Alabama, and Gulf-side Florida for decades and decades. It is the end, there is no do over.And what brought us to this in a Christian nation? Very skewed priorities. Mammon over love of our fellow creatures, animals that treasure their life no differently than we do. Animals are not something to be simply harvested for our appetites, they are living beings. It should be with the greatest regret that their lives are taken Thou shall not kill? I guess that should come with some qualifiers - like animals that are tasty, criminals, anyone we disagree with in war, as a matter of fact, anything and anyone we want to kill.I guess it's safe if everything is hidden. How about an EPA official on every rig, 24/7? And very tight restrictions; no deep well drilling. Period.
Terrific work! This is the type of information that should be shared around the web. I have added this to my favourites.Thanks so much Chris, and thanks for joining my fan club!
great article... thank you!You're very welcome Rob.Best.....e
Can't help feeling this is anti British, BP are not the only players in this, it was a contractor who built the equipment and a contactor who operated the rigg, it was also a local administration who told them to drill deep for a hungry consumer.
An environmental catastrophe without doubt but by knocking BP because it's a foreign target is not on, I can list many US companies who have caused all sorts of problems worldwide, have they been subject to the same outcry?
What about Bhopal and Union Carbide, there are still young families living on the waste left by Union Carbide, that is a scandal.BP lied about the flow of oil coming out of the ruptured line. Also a survivor of the fire on the platform testified that a BP official asked them to cut corners as they were two weeks behind schedule. Also, look at the latest articles about Hayward and how has has lied repeatedly. Also, according to comments from a Houston resident, BP is the worst of the worst as far as safety goes. This is not anti-British, this is anti greed and stupidity. I could go on if you like. Thank you for your comment.Write an article telling Union Carbide to clean up the Indian countryside where local Indians benefited not one bit from the presence of Union Carbide, you all drive cars.Fallacious argument my friend, changing the subject. BP, not the UK, is at fault and will pay big.
Perhaps investigate the real world before you spout off about greed Raymond, there's lot's more out there to complain about NIMBYThe real world is animals dying in the Gulf of Mexico my friend, or perhaps that doesn't register with you.
BP employers risk their lives everyday doing the dangerous job of extracting oil so that we the consumer can go about our lives being wasteful with it. We are the ones demanding the resource, BP is only responding to market demands. This leak was a huge disaster, but I think it is and for that matter has always been the time to think about our own life styles and the demands we make on the earth. BP are only the bringer of our desire. Perhaps we should think about what we ask for. A thought provoking article, many thanksThank you so much Elfreda for your comment and for your kind rating. Certainly nobody is blaming the workers. This was a management deception which created a culture of sloppiness and profit at the expense of safety. As proof, look how BP has lied repeatedly since this debacle has happened. I have drilled and fracked wells in my youth and understand the dangers involved, reason enough to get out of oil and into green technology.And I agree with you wholeheartedly about personal responsibility for this disaster -with a caveat that BP assured everyone that this could not happen, which was another lie - I personally have recently cut my gasoline consumption in half by only going into town twice a month instead of once a week. I change my oil every 10,000 miles (not 3,000 which is a waste and hype by oil companies) using synthetic oil. Neither my wife nor I buy any cosmetics and carefully try to avoid products made with oil byproducts. If everyone would cut back, the oil business would eventually shut down. Sorry, I am not a proponent of jobs at all cost. If it hurts the environment, which is irreplaceable, other jobs must be developed. In the mean time, strict regulations and an outlawing of deep water drilling must be enforced. Also, a penalty of $5,000 a barrel of spilled oil must be legislated, and an escrow fund of $500,000,000 registered with every oil company. Unless we get tough, nothing will change. If they all go to other countries to drill, then we must pressure the other countries to do the same. Look; either wa are gong to begin saving this earth or not, if not now, when?
It's a dirty business and will continue to be....cost cutting while some pockets get fatter and fatter:BP's oil spill in Alaska blamed on cost-cuttingBy Andrew Buncombe in WashingtonThursday, 17 May 2007BP's ceaseless efforts to promote itself as an environmentally responsible energy producer took a serious blow yesterday after a US congressional committee said "a mountain of evidence" showed the company's cost-cutting on maintenance had led to a large oil spill in Alaska. The US government said it was "highly likely" to fine BP over the leaks.The committee was also told that the causes of the spillage - which happened at a time when BP was making huge profits - shared "striking similarities" with the problems that led to the 2005 explosion at a Houston refinery in which 15 people died."My review of the mountain of circumstantial evidence can only lead me to the conclusion that severe pressure for cost-cutting did have an impact on maintenance of pipelines," said the Republican Bart Stupak, chairman of the House Energy subcommittee on oversight and investigations........Thanks so much Anonymous for backing me up. It's obvious, and when all the facts are in, probably criminal, costing lives. They should be kicked out of the country as soon as they repair all the damage they have done. They are fired!
I really enjoyed the timeline on BPs actions/mis-steps. We hear all these in bits and pieces over the news. thank you for putting this together.You're welcome Jacob.
Good article E. Ray, what worries me most of all is why the accident occurred in the first place. They have hundreds of off shore rigs many also in deep water and have for years gone without such an accident. Somebody just wasn't minding the ship. This is where the blame lies.Thanks Joel. I hope it doesn't ruin our Gulf.
Boycott BP gas Stations! Thank you so much for the info.Years ago I had BP pegged as liars when they tried to change their name from "British Petroleum" to BP. They need to be banned in America. The latest testimony before congress spells put how many shortcuts they made and violations committed to rush the Deepwater Horizen into production. Then when it blew, they lied about how much oil was spewing out. I hope Obama reams them a new one!
More comments
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.