Comments on: BP and the Climategate Inquiry

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 27 May 2010 22:25:31 +0000

The Spill is not only a black eye for BP but also for the Obama administration. They both need to down play the amount of spillage. Conspiracy Theory #32

By: AMac

AMac — Thu, 27 May 2010 15:45:57 +0000

Wall St. Journal, 5/27/10 page A7
“BP Aims to Avoid Fresh Restrictions on Drilling”
by Elizabeth Williamson

Aiming to blunt a regulatory and political backlash as oil continues to gush into the Gulf of Mexico, BP PLC has revved up its influence machine, relying on heavy hitters with deep Democratic roots.

[snip]

After the spill, the company brought on crisis communicator Hilary Rosen, former Democratic congressional staffer, former chief of the RIAA, and a current editor-at-large for HuffingtonPost.com. … Ms. Rosen declined to be interviewed on the record.

[snip]

Extraordinary events in the Gulf of Mexico; business as usual with respect to politics, influencing policy, and public relations.

By: clazy8

clazy8 — Thu, 27 May 2010 01:34:43 +0000

BP *is* in chemicals. However, their record in that industry has not been inspiring — see Texas City.

By: ianl8888

ianl8888 — Wed, 26 May 2010 21:15:36 +0000

Sorry, but I was heavily involved with my colleagues in the late 70′s/early 80′s trying to advise BP on HOW to assess potential purchases of deposits

They did indeed choose deposits more on politics than geology, and the results were absolutely predicted … one of my colleagues was actually sacked because his exploration programme unequivocally demonstrated the silliness of BP’s method of choosing – a classic example of shooting the messenger

By: David Watt

David Watt — Wed, 26 May 2010 17:19:43 +0000

ian18888 hasn’t quite got the whole picture on oil company involvement in coal. He is right of course that BP made some bad investments in Aus and the US, but they also made some quite good ones in e.g. South Africa and Indonesia.

The main thing they got wrong were that they over-estimated growth in energy demand and hence thought that “peak oil” would come by 2000. In that scenario energy coal prices were projected to soar, but this never happened.

They timed their exit badly too, getting out of coal just before it became evident what a large market for coal imports China would turn out to be.
(

By: Roth

Roth — Wed, 26 May 2010 15:04:54 +0000

The head of engineering for BP’s Gulf of Mexico operations should have been minding his knitting; not doing his political thing. Drilling at these depths and pressures is extremely technical and exacting. Too much drilling mud weight and the mud disappears into the formation; not enough and a kick of gas or oil can light you up. The fire occurred at a most critical juncture; when the production casing was being cemented. It will likely come out but it looks like the BOP(blow out prevention) device was not in place; common during the cementing process.

By: WebHubTel

WebHubTel — Wed, 26 May 2010 03:00:06 +0000

BP was required to report all oil production numbers in the North Sea. No hiding of information there, because the UK put it into law and made it all public. One can look at the size distribution of oil reservoirs in the North Sea and immediately understand how much oil is there and how long it will last.

On the other hand, the USA is governed by a bunch of corrupt corporatists who make it impossible to deduce oil reserve numbers. Of course BP follows the letter of the law here, which is miniscule accounting.

“Hiding the decline” is a huge topic in oil depletion circles. It takes a great deal of effort to unravel the decline of oil production. The climategate “hide the decline” is trivial in comparison.

We know that CO2 will cause climate change, trivial to prove, not so easy to show that oil depletion will hit just as quickly.

By: Lewis

Lewis — Tue, 25 May 2010 22:33:56 +0000

It isn’t germane to talk about BP and/or it’s alleged failings in the Gulf of Mexico. What’s Steve’s post was about was the very odd ‘blind siding’ that one of it’s majour employees seemed to be employed in – the necessity for extraordinary precision in digging a well more than 10000 feet beneath the skin of this planet and then be on certain boards, panels, discussions where imprecision seems the norm. By the way, I’m sick of Google correcting my British spelling! Or is it WordPress!

By: Lewis

Lewis — Tue, 25 May 2010 22:15:58 +0000

I know what your saying, Steve, let’s not get dragged into politics. (Except, I think BP is now being accused, as a ‘foreign’ company,of being ‘foreign’. The best engineering company that I know!) And, what is being asked, is best practice and scrupulousness. So why this blind spot, when it comes to the ‘books’ of academia in this particular area? Only an historian a couple of decades hence will perhaps really know!?

By: Jim Brown

Jim Brown — Tue, 25 May 2010 21:32:21 +0000

Tomorrow’s a big day -hope it works:
http://bp.concerts.com/gom/kentwells_update24052010.htm