Reply With Quote
..the Gulf...
Where is it going?
BP rejects oil drill partner's 'negligence' claim
BP has denied claims by one of its partners that its handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill amounted to "gross negligence".
BP said it "strongly disagrees" with Anadarko Petroleum, who said BP's behaviour in the run-up to the disaster was "reckless".
Anadarko, the largest independent oil and gas company operating in the Gulf, owns 25% of the well.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_...a/10356365.stm
=========
The Long Knives are out, the money-grubbing criminals are turning on their own kind.
..the Gulf...
Where is it going?
There is all kinds of social services already available to tide people over. What about the oil rig workers Obama is putting out of work with the moratorium? Who's paying for that?
My god. What is it with you lib s? You want to make a false claim, knowing it wont be verified? Make a $50,000 claim, and run with the money? If verification isn't done, PB will be ripped off.
Why should that prevent BP from paying its fair share of the damages?
"There is all kinds of social services already available to tide people over"
the taxpayer, protect the corp. Typical rightwing, ideological crap.
@WC: You're for the US taxpayer paying the tab for ass ups, instead of letting ty companies and their investors eat ? Really? I thought you weren't like that, but I guess it shouldn't surprise me.
:-0
BP’s plan: Raise $50 billion, sue business partners
By Agence France-Presse
Sunday, June 20th, 2010 -- 10:46 am
BP is trying to raise 50 billion dollars to cover the cost of the Gulf of Mexico spill and is preparing to sue its partners in the oil field, British newspapers said on Sunday.
The Sunday Telegraph said BP is readying to take legal action against US firm Anadarko, its main partner in the field, for its share of the clean-up costs.
The broadsheet cited a "senior BP source" as saying Anadarko was "shirking its responsibilities", not accepting its liabilities and that legal action in the United States is now likely to follow.
The Sunday Times said BP is working on a plan to raise 50 billion dollars to cover the cost of the oil spill, which would start next week with a bond sale to raise 10 billion dollars.
A further 20 billion dollars would come from bank loans, while the final slice is expected to come from asset sales over the next two years, the broadsheet said.
Story continues below...
The push is to make sure they have enough money to deal with claims, and to bolster market confidence in its finances, said the weekly.
Meanwhile The Observer newspaper said BP might sell its remaining North Sea interests, plus stakes in dozens of exploration and production projects where it does not exercise overall control, in a bid to reduce its costs.
The weekly, citing "well-placed City sources", said such measures would cut costs by 14 billion dollars (11.3 billion euros) within six months.
BP will also study the possibility of selling its 1.4 percent stake in Rosneft, which it bought at the time of the Russian firm's 2006 flotation for one billion dollars, the report said.
======
iow, BP ain't gonna go bankrupt, has plenty of assets, cash flow, assured future profits of $Bs/year. So shake them down for every penny, plus criminal penalties.
BP will very certainly do like Exxon, that wonderful US citizen "person" and screw down the victims to pennies on the dollar.
"BP holds enough oil in its reserves to single-handedly supply the United States for two years. It has little debt for a company of its size and makes more money than Apple and Google combined."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bp_s_future/print
By REUTERS
Published: June 20, 2010
Filed at 1:37 p.m. ET
Source: Reuters
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An internal BP Plc do ent released on Sunday by a senior U.S. congressional Democrat shows that the company estimates that a worst-case scenario rate for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill could be about 100,000 barrels of oil per day.
The estimate of 100,000 barrels (4.2 million gallons/15.9 million liters) of oil per day is far higher than the current U.S. government estimate of up to 60,000 barrels (2.5 million gallons/9.5 million liters) per day gushing from the ruptured offshore well into the sea.
The do ent appears to estimate the highest potential flow of oil if key components of the well fail. The do ent does not indicate that the 100,000 barrels per day is BP's estimate of the actual amount flowing from the ruptured Gulf of Mexico well.
The do ent states, "If BOP (blowout preventer) and wellhead are removed and if we have incorrectly modeled the restrictions -- the rate could be as high as ~ 100,000 barrels per day up the casing or 55,000 barrels per day up the annulus (low probability worst cases)"
Markey: BP 'either lying or grossly incompetent' on worst-case scenario
Source: The HillA key Democratic lawmaker revealed an internal BP do ent on Sunday showing that the embattled oil giant's worst-case scenario projected that 100,000 barrels of oil could be released each day that the well remains uncapped.
Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, said that number was in stark contrast to BP's public projections at the time the study was finished that only 5,000 barrels would be lost each day.
The top-ranking Democrat on the Energy and Commerce's subcommittee on energy policy said on NBC's "Meet The Press" that "again, right from the beginning, BP was either lying or grossly incompetent. First they said it was only 1,000. Then they said it was 5,000 barrels. Now we're up to 100,000 barrels."
Almost nine weeks have passed since an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig and the ensuing Gulf Coast gusher that BP has not been able to cap yet.
Markey held a high-profile hearing last week with BP CEO Tony Hayward.
"It was their technology. It was their spill cam. They are the ones that should have known right from the beginning and either to limit their liability or because they were grossly incompetent they delayed a full response to the magnitude of this disaster," Markey told "Meet The Press" host David Gregory.
BP rejects Markey charge underestimated oil spill
Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:20pm EDT
Source: ReutersHOUSTON June 20 (Reuters) - BP Plc (BP.L)(BP.N) on Sunday rejected a charge by U.S. Representative Ed Markey that the British company had understated the size of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
"I don't think there's been any underestimating," BP spokesman Toby Odone told Reuters after Markey released a do ent that the congressman said shows BP has been deceptive.
The internal BP do ent released by Markey on Sunday shows that the company estimates that a worst-case scenario rate for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill could be about 100,000 barrels (4.2 million gallons/15.9 million liters) of oil per day.
The undated do ent states, "If BOP (blowout preventer) and wellhead are removed and if we have incorrectly modeled the restrictions -- the rate could be as high as ~ 100,000 barrels per day up the casing or 55,000 barrels per day up the annulus (low probability worst cases)."
Odone said the do ent appeared to be genuine but the 100,000 barrels of oil per day estimate applied only in a situation where the well's blowout preventer was removed.
"Since there are no plans to remove the blowout preventer, the number is irrelevant," he said.
But Markey said the do ent raised troubling questions about what BP knew and when they knew it.
"It is clear that, from the beginning, BP has not been straightforward with the government or the American people about the true size of this spill. Now the families living and working in the Gulf are suffering from their incompetence," Markey said in a statement.
The amount of oil actually gushing from the well has been a matter of considerable controversy since the spill began on April 20. BP initially estimated that the spill was pouring 1,000 barrels per day into the ocean and then upped that figure to 5,000 barrels per day.
The latest U.S. government estimates say up to 60,000 barrels (2.5 million gallons/9.5 million liters) per day are gushing from the ruptured offshore well into the sea.
BP said, however, it had not underestimated the flow rate.
"We've always said we would deal with whatever volume of oil was being spilled, and that's exactly what we're doing. We've mounted the biggest spill response in history," Odone said. (Reporting by Bruce Nichols, Editing by Sandra Maler)
Locals say BP is not letting them grab turtles caught in the burn circles. turtles (aka criminal/punishable evidence) burned.
Same is happening on shore with birds, and fish, dolphins. Not being counted, more evidence destroyed.
Barack Obama recieved more money from BP than any other candidate in 2008. 2 weeks before the accident , you know something unplanned, Obama supported Palins drill baby drill slogan by reversing the nations offshore drilling policy. The one that has been in play for 25 years or so. Obama supports BP, oil drilling and Sarah Palin so blame him for not letting the locals grab the turtles, birds, fish and dolphins.
Repugs are responsible for nothing,
corps are responsible for nothing,
it's all on Magic Negro.
Jack, you're one twisted .
LOL@ locals thinking they can just grab dolphins!!!!!! In burn circles at that!!!!!!
You think it's because Obongo wants to burn evidence. That is twisted, u !
BP pipe tilting more than Leaning Tower of Pisa.
"The broken wellhead gushing millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico is tilting over, potentially threatening further disaster. The Deepwater Horizon riser package that sits on the seabed a mile below the ocean surface weighs over 450 tons, including the 48-foot-tall failed blowout preventer. In a press teleconference Monday, National Incident Commander Thad Allen announced that the riser package is tilting “10 or 12 degrees off perpendicular,” "
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/06/22/leaning-tower-oil/
=============
Is sub-surface oil leaking from the pipe and eroding the sand supporting the pipe? 450 tons?
again...
Did BP Just Blow Up The Obama Presidency?
Forget about the new oil well explosion in the Gulf of Mexico. The big breaking news is BP's attempt to leverage its promised $20 billion Gulf Restoration Fund to get the US government to let it keep drilling for oil in the Gulf.
The New York Times reports:
BP is warning Congress that if lawmakers pass legislation that bars the company from getting new offshore drilling permits, it may not have the money to pay for all the damages caused by its oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
[... ]
"If we are unable to keep those fields going, that is going to have a substantial impact on our cash flow," said David Nagle, BP's executive vice president for BP America, in an interview. That, he added, "makes it harder for us to fund things, fund these programs."
BP's global operations generated more than $33 billion in profits in 2009, so coming up with $20 billion shouldn't be an issue.
But, as the Wall Street Journal reported on Aug. 10, the Obama administration has permitted BP to finance the $20 billion exclusively from its Gulf of Mexico drilling operations:
The Obama administration and BP PLC are close to a deal to use future revenues from the oil giant's Gulf of Mexico operations to guarantee its $20 billion cleanup and compensation fund, a move that would give both sides an incentive to continue production in the Gulf, scene of the U.S.'s worst-ever offshore oil spill.
In his June 15 Oval Office address, President Obama explicitly said he would hold BP responsible for cleaning up the Gulf and compensating all those effected (Video link here): "We will make BP pay for the damages... This fund will not be controlled by BP... BP will pay for the impact this spill has had on the region."
And when he met with BP's executives on June 16, BP's Chairman, Carl-Henric Svanberg said they would pay to restore the Gulf, no strings attached (Video link here): "... a framework that will show the American people that we mean what we say... We will look after the American people."
Who would have guessed that a president who appeared to recognize the illegal as well as immoral nature of BP's business practices (after all, people died) would actually negotiate with them over the terms of the penalty they'd be paying?
Negotiating the terms of BP's penalty? Setting the stage for BP holding the $20-billion fund hostage to getting its way with the Congress of the United States?
Couldn't that be called "extortion"?
This is not how I thought the Obama administration would be treating BP in the face of this tragedy. BP does not deserve to be compensated for paying its debt to society.
This $20 billion is a penalty for operating the way it does. It is not some bizarre new form of political contribution.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven...tml?view=print
================
There was no doubt that BP would go Exxon and play legal/political game, even extortion, to avoid paying for its incompetence and recklessness.
Like I sid earlier, BP got a sweet deal. I'm sure their lawyers earned their pay the way they pulled the wool over the Obama administration. No lawsuit liability, only $20 billion to pay...
Sweet deal, and the funniest part of all, Obama gave them the sweet deal.
I doubt any president ever gave Big oil such a sweet deal in history!
Where'd you read that people can't sue? That's only if they settle with BP.
So you're applauding Obama's move? After all, we need to keep the big corporations in America!
No.
I think it's one of the stupidest decisions they made.
BP should profit or fail like any other corporation. By merit. Thy ed up, and need to pay applicable costs. I believe this saved them maybe double or more the expendable of the spill in the end.
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 09-05-2010 at 08:51 PM.
Will the govt really charge the BP $35 per barrel spilled, about $21B in penalties?
If BP contains/isolates all accounting for spill costs to the Drilling & Exploration subsidiary, as the govt has allowed, that division is bankrupt.
I expect there will be some kind light-touch, finger-rapping "settlement" for the BP Corporate-American, the kind of settlement not allowed to underwater/bankrupt Human-Americans.
Personally I think BP should be responsible for every penny of damages, but adding a "fine" on top of it that goes to the US government that was equally responsible because of limited/non-existent oversight is total bull .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
