- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: So, was there ever a disaster plan for a situation like this?
Posted on 5/10/10 at 4:35 pm to YatTigah
Posted on 5/10/10 at 4:35 pm to YatTigah
quote:
The way that I see it, the BOP is not to blame, it's the total lack of a workable leak-stopping solution in 5,000 feet of water.
And the way I see it is they shouldnt be drilling there if this is their excuse.
0
Posted on 5/10/10 at 6:26 pm to Decatur
quote:
Obviously not. It's a damn shame.
this
Posted on 5/10/10 at 7:48 pm to windriver
Why do the know-it-alls demand that the oil industry be held to impossible standards and not other industrys. Even though the probability of occurance is very small, (though much larger than the probability of an oil spill), plane crashes will occur in the future. Using the same logic, how can this be allowed to happen, why have the aircraft manufacturers and operators not predicted every possible sequence of events that my result in a crash and made changes to prevernt it? Why have we not demanded that passenger aircraft be fitted with ejection seats for every passenger? Not doing so would mean the airlines are not utilizing every possible safety device available.
Posted on 5/11/10 at 2:07 pm to JWS3
quote:
Why do the know-it-alls demand that the oil industry be held to impossible standards and not other industrys. Even though the probability of occurance is very small, (though much larger than the probability of an oil spill), plane crashes will occur in the future.
Because in a proper risk analysis you look not only at the "probability" of the risk ... you also look at the "consequence" of the risk. Unfortunately for the people on an airplane, the consequences impact only a limited amount of people (although perhaps 100% fatal for them).
I supported drilling and continue to do so. But I really do not want to hear any excuses from the industry on this one. Even if the probability is low, the reality is that this is the third time in the last 30 years that we have had a formation venting into the water uncontrollably. I would have thought they had a plan for that. It didn't seem to take them very long to think of the containment dome idea ... why did they not have those things sitting on shore waiting for any such incident ... testing them in advance to the extent that they could be tested.
I sure hope that the nuclear power industry has a back up plan waiting for the day that a containment dome is breached on one of their facilities. Because no matter how low the probability of occurrence, it has already happened once ... and the consequences are worse than this BP incident.
Posted on 5/11/10 at 2:33 pm to TigerDom
quote:
Why do the know-it-alls demand that the oil industry be held to impossible standards and not other industrys. Even though the probability of occurance is very small, (though much larger than the probability of an oil spill), plane crashes will occur in the future.
TigerDom makes great points. The risk impact of this disaster is far greater than the risk impact of a single flight. Also take into account that people volunteer to get on an airplane. I don't think that "Joe the commercial fisherman" or "Susie the Beachhouse owner" were consulted before they made plans to allow deepwater drilling.
Actually I think the biggest risk impact here is to the industry. This is going to keep offshore drilling from happening possibly ever in California, and may even slow it down in the gulf, or serve as the tipping point to keeping it out of Florida and the east coast, who seemed to be starting to favor it. I'm sure that Exxon and Shell are keeping a close eye on this and probably will end up helping in any way that they can because this will impact them significantly as well.
Obviously we are MMQB-ing it here so we have all the answers now...but I have been surprised that they seemed to have to dream up ideas to stop this. There was a "submit your idea" page on the MMS website for goodness sake. I'm sure that all future wells will have a new safeguard after it's all said and done...either a second BOP or something else the dream up...
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News