Peter Robinson · Jun 14, 2010 at 9:21pm

From the Wall Street Journal:

Congressional investigators say documents uncovered as part of their inquiry into the Gulf of Mexico oil spill have raised "serious questions about the decisions made by BP in the days and hours before the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon" drilling rig....The letter amounts to a warning to Mr. Hayward [BP's CEO] that he will face tough questioning Thursday when he testifies for the first time before Congress.

BP represents the one entity on the planet with the resources and expertise to plug the leak--a task that, on a recent Ricochet podcast, Haley Barbour, the governor of Mississippi, likened to "performing brain surgery under a mile of water."  In recent days BP has begun making progress, installing a siphoning device that appears to be capturing some 10,000 gallons of oil a day.  At the same time the company is conducting the necessary geological surveys and assembling the necessary equipment to perform what all the experts seem to agree represents the only true and final solution to the leak, the drilling of a couple of new wells nearby that will suck up the oil that would otherwise leak into the Gulf.  Capturing thousands of gallons a day of leaking oil while preparing to drill new wells.  These represent massively complicated projects; in effect, underwater moonshots.

Question:  How much time do you suppose BP chairman Tony Hayward will be able to devote to leaking oil in the Gulf while forced to deal with the toxic slick now spreading across Washington?

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Kennedy Smith
Joined
May '10
Kennedy Smith

More pressingly, how much time will Tony Hayward be able to devote to his golf game? Will he be able to jet off to NYC for date night? Surely he can make time to provide NBA commentary. Or World Cup commentary, seeing as he's got one of those villainous British accents like Lord Snooty McToffington.

As the recent Apple story illustrates, however, CEOs are expected to periodically genuflect to DC even if they're not remotely suspected of malfeasance. Cost of doing bidness, and part of the job, for which he is paid handsomely. I doubt he's on the front lines on the technical side. Probably hasn't even determined what needs kickin.

Once, just once, though, I'd like to see a witness treat these committees with the respect they deserve. Like, none. It'd be cathartic.

George Savage

It's good to know who to target for tomorrow's Two Minutes' Hate. First it was predatory mortgage lenders, then GM execs, followed in succession by AIG, pharma execs, health insurers, Wall Street folks and bankers generally, Arizonans, and now Big Oil as personified by evil, crude-spewing BP. At least the Obama administration improves on Orwell by rotating its Enemy of the State every couple of months..

Andrea Ryan
Joined
May '10
Andrea Ryan

Why isn't this demonstrating the obvious...drill in shallow water. When given all the opportunities to do this off the coast of California companies are forced instead to drill 5,000 feet below the ocean's surface. Tying a shoe lace is complicated at that depth and pressure.

By the way, George, I just said something nice about your mineral-coated smart chip. I'm sorry...if it were not past midnight I would remember the proper name of it. Hey, nice to see you around again, Kennedy.

ParisParamus
Joined
May '10
ParisParamus

Yes, drill in shallow water--and no water. This needs to be the reply to the moronic green energy thing.

Cindy
Joined
May '10
Cindy

Putting aside the issue of whether they should be drilling in deep water vs. shallow water, the National Petroleum Reserve, and ANWAR,(which makes a lot more sense to me) it certainly seems to me that BP has a great deal to answer for here. I am not sure when they should be answering the questions, but the decisions they made to save time and money have come at a great cost to the men whose lives were lost, their families, the livelihoods of all the families in the region and in surrounding regions, and to the oil industry itself.

George Savage
Cindy: Putting aside the issue of whether they should be drilling in deep water vs. shallow water, the National Petroleum Reserve, and ANWAR,(which makes a lot more sense to me) it certainly seems to me that BP has a great deal to answer for here. I am not sure when they should be answering the questions, but the decisions they made to save time and money have come at a great cost to the men whose lives were lost, their families, the livelihoods of all the families in the region and in surrounding regions, and to the oil industry itself. · Jun 15 at 5:21am

The when question is critical, as Cindy points out. All resources right now should be focused on stopping the spill and cleaning up the oil. BP's culpability should be sorted out afterwards. However, President Obama evidently calculates that this approach will cause further damage to his his political popularity, and nothing takes precedence over that.

Duane Oyen
Joined
May '10
Duane Oyen

Imagine if we could sop up and refine all the oil that leaks continuously from the sea floor. Former environmentalists in Santa Barbara have been trying to push that for years. Of course, they are "former" because they suggest drilling relief wells and using (pssst: oil).

Aaron Miller
Joined
May '10
Aaron Miller

I'm not certain BP's attention should be solely on sealing the leak and retarding the spill. Most Gulf Coast businesses affected by the spill likely need reparations for lost revenue and lost jobs sooner rather than later. Their bills won't wait. The spill is the clear priority, but not BP's only pressing concern.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In