Should an American firm takeover BP's US interests?
Shortcutting BP short-circuits safety
The disaster was engineered by a management climate in which engineers discarded their profession in pursuit of cheaper and faster performance metrics. I believe it was General Russell Honore who remarked that BP’s MBA’s were in charge when the engineers should have been.
Today, Admiral Thad Allen is in charge of the government side of the cleanup operation, and he displays consistently good knowledge of the situation. But where are the “enforcers?” The EPA and the Department of Interior have a hand in this to set things right. Are all of the forces of government delivering with laser focus to mitigate the damage? It is still not too late, though it is very late as we watch the calamity to continue to unfurl.
Email from Brett Cocales, BP operations engineer: engineers had not taken all the usual steps to center the steel pipe in the drill hole, a standard procedure designed to ensure that the pipe would be properly cemented in place
Engineer’s response: "[W]ho cares, it's done, end of story, will probably be fine and we'll get a good cement job," he wrote.”
Would it have made any difference if an American owner had been in charge? Should not the precious shores of America be more carefully managed by American national interest? I think so. What American company should be taking over BP’s assets? God, I hope you don’t say, Halliburton.
“Lawmakers accuse BP of 'shortcuts'
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
To save time and drilling costs, BP took "shortcuts" that may have led to the oil rig explosion and the spill in the Gulf of Mexico, according to a letter released Monday by two House Democrats leading an investigation of the disaster.”