Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (569488)	6/1/2010 4:52:56 PM
From: one_less	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1578347

"I suggest you start learning about what's going on down in the Gulf before you open your trap. In that way, you might not look so stupid." ooops, it's too late for one of you... well, you to be frank.

To: tejek who wrote (569488)	6/1/2010 5:26:47 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578347

What we do know is that BP cut corners in the design and in the installation of the BOP. We do NOT know this. We know it has been alleged. What you do not understand is that right now, this instant, hundreds of attorneys are positioning themselves for hundreds of lawsuits and billions of dollars worth of litigation. When a "consultant" says, "the BOP is a lousy design", you cannot just assume it to be an accurate, independent statement; in fact, you must assume that someone, somewhere is paying that consultant to say what he's saying. We also know that Cheney did a pass on a safeguard that is considered standard in Brazil and Norway.....a safeguard that might have prevented this disaster. I don't know this. I do know that Obama's administration approved innumerable items related to this platform's operations that were outside the norm. See how this works? I suggest you start learning about what's going on down in the Gulf before you open your trap. In that way, you might not look so stupid. You dolt. You couldn't find the Gulf on a freaking map.

To: tejek who wrote (569488)	6/1/2010 5:56:46 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578347

We only know what we read in the press and a lot of stuff in the press isn't well informed, may be incorrect, or may be irrelevant. There are some indications that BP may have cut corners in the well design, not necessarily the BOP design or installation. That will all be hashed out in court, there are going to be suits brought by all the companies involved against one another, brought by the families of the people killed on the rig, by those injured, by the non-operating investors in the well (like APC), and by the shareholders. It will take years and lots of depositions and expert testimony to hash things out. We also know that Cheney did a pass on a safeguard that is considered standard in Brazil and Norway.....a safeguard that might have prevented this disaster. Maybe not. They weren't able to get the BOP to close completely manually using ROV's so the acoustic switch you're getting at probably wouldn't have worked either. Most likely Cheney never made any decisions on BOP standards .... if he had, and if he had been influenced by his past involvement with HAL, that might actually have given him an interest in strong safety regulations. First off, HAL is a supplier to oil companies not an oil company itself and second, no one WANTS a blowout like this or is indifferent to it happening.

To: tejek who wrote (569488)	6/1/2010 9:53:01 PM
From: combjelly	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578347

"..a safeguard that might have prevented this disaster." No, actually it wouldn't have. The BOP stack was damaged, leaking hydraulic fluid. Reports have also indicated the battery was dead. So once power was interrupted from the platform, there was no way the BOP could be triggered. Which is probably why the deadman switch failed. Which isn't to say that acoustic triggers are a bad idea. They just wouldn't have helped in this particular situation.