On Sunday, the Unified Area Command reported that they had successfully inserted a 4-inch pipe into the riser leaking the most oil into the Gulf. Today, May 17, 2010, National Public Radio reported that up to 1000 barrels per day were being pumped to a ship at the surface, but a final solution to stopping the gusher remains elusive.
The immediate cause of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is still uncertain. However, recent testimony and revelations from federal agency documents make it clear that there is plenty of blame to go around. Corporate finger pointing crescendoed at May 11 hearings in the Senate, and on May 14 in a statement from the White House, President Obama ridiculed the same companies for their “not-my-fault” testimony. Obama said his administration shared responsibility for the spill, in particular the Minerals Management Service. What follows is a summary of corporate, versus government, problems that likely contributed to the spill.
BP PLC (public limited company)
BP is the oil company deemed by the U.S. Coast Guard as the “responsible party” for the Deepwater Horizon spill. Responsible party is a strictly technical term, since BP filed a site-specific exploration plan in February 2009 stating that it was "not required" to file "a scenario for a potential blowout" of the Deepwater well. (May 6, 2010, “Feds let BP avoid filing blowout plan for Gulf rig,” Michael Kunzelman and Richard T. Pienciak, Associated Press).
According to Steven Mufson and David A. Fahrenthold of the Washington Post, both Transocean and Halliburton, the other two oilfield service companies involved in the spill, blame BP for its instructions to remove drilling mud from the riser prior to capping it (May 12, 2010, “In Senate testimony, oil executives pass the blame for massive gulf spill”). The mud, whose pressure likely helped to contain the well, was replaced with seawater before the well was sealed, possibly contributing to the blowout. It is unclear why this was done, although some commentators have implied that it was a decision based on saving time and money.
On May 13, 2010, Mufson and Fahrenthold reported that Representative Edward Markey (D-Mass.), member of a House energy panel investigating the spill, asked BP why “it seemed to be ‘flailing’ to deal with a spill only 2 percent as large as what it had said it could handle in its license application.” (“Oil spill investigators find critical problems in blowout preventer,” Washington Post)
During the same hearing, Representative Bart Stupak revealed that the blowout preventer (BOP) was characterized by BP as “fail-safe,” yet in 2001, Transocean had listed 260 “failure modes” that could require removal of the blowout preventer. Stupak was quoted as saying, “How can a device that has 260 failure modes be considered fail-safe?” Mufson and Fahrenthold report that during Senate testimony, lawmakers also noted that BOPs have failed in shallower waters and on land.
Transocean
Transocean is the owner and operator of Deepwater Horizon, the offshore drilling rig that exploded and sank in the Gulf. According to the Mufson and Farenthold article of May 12, 2010, BP has fingered Transocean as the party responsible for failure of the blowout preventer. The misnamed blowout preventer is a device that is meant to kick in and stop the flow of oil after a blowout has occurred. During the same Senate testimony, BP also suggested that Transocean may have disregarded “anomalous pressure test readings” prior to the explosion.
Also according to the Mufson and Farenthold article of May 13, 2010, the House energy panel investigation found that the blowout preventer “had a dead battery in its control pod, leaks in its hydraulic system, a ‘useless’ test version of a key component and a cutting tool that wasn't strong enough to shear through steel joints in the well pipe and stop the flow of oil.”
Halliburton Co.
Halliburton may have completed a flawed cementing job to cap the well, just prior to its blowout. Halliburton claims that their cement plug, the final barrier to contain the well, “was never set.” Cementing involves filling the space between the underground pipe and the drilled hole, as well as capping the well. An April 30, 2010 AP article (“Choppy seas frustrate effort to contain oil spill”) notes that a technician injured on the platform of the rig has filed a lawsuit claiming that Halliburton improperly cemented the well.
Cameron International Corporation
Cameron, maker of the blowout preventer that never properly cut off the flow of oil in the Gulf, was also grilled at the Senate hearings on May 11, 2010 (Mufson and Farenthold, May 12, 2010). In line with all the testimony that day, Cameron sought to deflect blame from itself when it said that a leak in the hydraulic system, which should have powered the shear rams of the blowout preventer, probably predated the accident because other parts of the system were intact even after the explosion.
Four corporations were involved in the equipment manufacture, drilling, operation, and servicing of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, and four corporations appear to share blame for the Gulf spill. However, inadequate government regulatory oversight by both the executive and legislative branches also contributed to the spill.
