BP’s ‘Nightmare’ Well: Internal Documents Uncover Negligence!

In an e-mail written six days before the Deepwater Horizon explosion, a BP engineer called the well a “nightmare.” The e-mail was released Monday by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and it’s one of many company documents describing the risky, cost-cutting decisions that preceded the disaster.

“This has been a nightmare well which has everyone all over the place,” wrote BP engineer Brian Morel to a colleague. Morel wanted the company to use a “liner,” or sheath around the well that would keep gas from surging up the pipes and possibly exploding. One such surge caused the Deepwater Horizon to temporarily shut down in early April, but BP opted against installing the liner, which would have cost an extra $7 million to $10 million.

“BP appears to have made multiple decisions for economic reasons that increased the danger of a catastrophic well failure,” wrote committee chairs Henry Waxman (D-California) and Bart Stupak (D-Michigan) in a letter to BP CEO Tony Hayward. “In several instances, these decisions appear to violate industry guidelines and were made despite warnings from BP’s own personnel and its contractors. In effect, it appears that BP repeatedly chose risky procedures in order to reduce costs and save time.” In addition to BP’s decision not to use a liner, the committee’s letter describes four other examples of risky negligence.

Halliburton, the company responsible for cement in the well shaft, recommended using 21 “centralizers” to position the metal tube that ran down the center of the well. An off-center tube would cause cement to harden at different rates, producing gaps and channels that could weaken its structure and increase chances of failure. BP used just six centralizers. A mid-April review of the well said “it is unlikely to be a successful cement job,” but BP declined to run a “cement bond log,” a day-long evaluation of the cement’s integrity. A crew that arrived expecting to perform the evaluation was sent home.

BP also failed to circulate muds that filled the well as it was drilled. That allowed mud that stayed on the bottom to absorb gas and debris, further weakening cement at the well’s base. BP then decided not to use a “lockdown sleeve,” which would have secured the top of the well, where it emerged from the seafloor.

Source: www.wired.com...

As we all know, we are even close to the bottom of this mess and the resulting cover-up's, mis-direction, deception and on & on. I think it is time for the States to take over and do their own saving and then investgations.

I think it is evident that the Fed Govt and B.P is not able or is unwilling to do what is needed to end this mess/event.

Great idea on the sprerate thread board for this stuff ATS.

You know what I find really amazing?

Is that we have a hole in the ground, with stuff coming out.

And somehow, from that simple thing, we have over a month generated billions of words about it. And there will be billions more words generated before it is over.

Now that is pretty amazing in my opinion.

About your OP,
I agree with you Anon72, that the Federal government and BP actually don't give a dam about us.

Why? Because we are their slaves. No one cares what their slave's opinion is.

And the plot reveals it's wicked plan...

S@F for you Op.

This is just the kind of information which should be released to the GP but alas this is a covert operation with a wide expanse of deceptions.

I will keep a close eye on this thread.

And yes it is a good idea to open up a seperate forum for the BP/Deepwater related threads, there will be many more in the weeks to follow.

I'd like to emphasize that the, as always evil portrayed, company Halliburton, actually strongly recommended BP to make changes because of safety concerns. Did BP listen? Of course not!

Just wanted to draw attention to that fact, since everybody always screams and blames "evil Halliburton" for everything. When there is actually prove against them having their hand in it, then this should be just as acknowledged as when they supposedly have their hands in stuff.

Said from a person who is getting tired of her spouse receiving evil looks from people who don't have a true clue, just because he makes a living for his family in that company.

reply to post by Serafina


I have to agree. I don't like Halliburton but they did warn BP. BP decided to cut costs at the expense of an entire local economy and then try to cover it up. Why do we put up with corporations like this? Aren't there like 300,000,000 people in the US? WTF GIVES!?

Where's the uprising? Where's the protesting? Where is everyone?!?!

[edit on 15-6-2010 by DaMod]

protest is largely ineffective as most people believe that only nuts, hippies and conspiracy theorists protest and we've been trained to put on a patronizing smile sigh and roll our eyes at them as if they're all making noise for the sake of making noise (I concede some may be doing just that)

One Dimensional Man- a great book by the way- discusses the phenomenon of society collectively cencoring itself and fostering a defeatist attitude.
In the relationship between the centre and periphery of a nation (substitute elites and masses if you wish), the periphery only have the centre to observe the failings and learn possible solutions from. Its a documented phenomenon, particularly noticeable in revolutions where the oppressed, upon gaining freedom, become the oppressors themselves as it is all they have known.

Most people, as much as they hate the status quo, fear having to come up with an alternative, whether they acknowledge the fear or not. Plus their is the paradox of the status quo. You may hate it because it is forced upon you or outside of your ability to change, but what then would you or I do should the opportunity to institute change arrive? Is it right of us to make such exhortations? Do we institute a status quo that inevitably will not satisfy all sections of society?

I agree its frustrating that the collective size of the periphery in any nation is always larger than the centre yet rarely ever institute change as a whole. Usually everyone can agree that the countries direction is wrong, but rarely is there a consensus on the causes or the solutions.


Cheers
edited for clarity

[edit on 15-6-2010 by thebulldog]