Strike Three for BP?
Thursday, December 2nd, 2010
BP has been responsible for at least two major disasters involving oil and North America. First, on MARCH 24, 1989, the Exxon Valdez tanker, skippered by Captain Joe Hazelwood, ran aground on Bligh Reef, spilling more than 11 million gallons of crude oil in Prince William Sound.
Then in April of 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill caused by a wellhead blowout spewed at least 4,200,000 US gallons per day over an Area of 2,500 to 68,000 square miles. It’s been called the largest accidental marine oil spill in the history of the petroleum industry.
That’s two strikes. Is BP headed for strike three?
In college I took an electronics lab. We joked about creating an “anticipation” gate; one that knew the result before the inputs had been given. I don’t want to jump into the race before the starting whistle, but BP has shown what it thinks of maintenance, preventative or otherwise. So, where’s the light of the anticipation gate going to come on?
Somewhere on the Alaskan pipeline of course. Reports have been surfacing recently about the horrendous leaks, lack of regular maintenance, and BP’s continued usage of a pipeline designed to last only for 15 years; it was built in the 1970’s. But when the line continued to be profitable its use was continued for several more decades. Was maintenance stepped up for this antiquated system? Were newer and more efficient warning systems put in place in case of failure? By BP? Surely you jest. Profit is king here, not personnel or the environment.
According to workers, high pressure gas lines aren’t inspected frequently enough and are being “run to failure,” risking a leak and a major explosion. A document, obtained by ProPublica, shows that as of Oct. 1, 2010 at least 148 BP pipelines on Alaska’s North Slope received an “F-rank” from the company. From the company itself! Inspections have determined that more than 80 percent of the pipe wall is corroded and could rupture, releasing toxic or flammable substances. In addition, the company’s fire- and gas-warning systems are unreliable, the giant turbines that pump oil and gas through the system are aging, and some oil and waste holding tanks are on the verge of collapse. Typical BP?
In an e-mail, BP Alaska spokesman Steve Rinehart said the company has “an aggressive and comprehensive pipeline inspection and maintenance program,” which includes pouring millions of dollars into the system and regularly testing for safety, reliability and corrosion. He said that while an F-rank is serious it does not necessarily mean there is a current safety risk and that the company will immediately reduce the operating pressure in worrisome lines until it completes repairs.
Reduce the pressure, not stop the flow and do the needed maintenance?
Kovac, a BP mechanic and welder, said some of the pipes have hundreds of patches on them and that BP’s efforts to rehabilitate the lines were not funded well enough to keep up with their rate of decline.
“They’re going to run this out as far as they can without leaving one dollar on the table when they leave,” Kovac claims.
In 2010, before the enormous costs of the Gulf spill created an estimated $30 billion in BP liabilities, the company eked out more “efficiencies” in its Alaska budget. It said it would maintain record high funding for new projects and major repairs while reducing its budget for regular maintenance, according to a letter that BP Alaska President John Minge sent to Congress in February 2010. The letter said holding-tank inspections will be deferred and replacement of one pipeline will be postponed; flows through that line will be reduced “to mitigate erosion.”
So, not only is preventive maintenance something BP only gives lip service to, but they also have either not done or are ignoring failure analysis reports.
A failure analysis report should have been done on the pipelines, holding tanks, and all warning systems. These reports give the standard period between maintenance inspections and repairs, and also give the rate of failure over time. So, BP knew at the beginning when the pipes, turbines, holding tanks, and warning systems would begin to fail. Replacement of any and all parts should have begun well before the anticipated failure time. But the pipeline has been running for over 15 years longer than it was designed for. Can anyone say catastrophic environmental disaster?
So, there are some of the facts about the vaulted Alaskan Pipeline. In my opinion, it’s an accident (or disaster) waiting to happen. Will we wait until after the catastrophe to react? Probably. Should we? No.
And this doesn’t take into account minor spillage in the past. Other ruptures have occurred, but weren’t “big” enough to gather much notice. But newspaper articles in 2000, 2004, and 2006 reported these spills. So, maybe in essence, BP has already gotten its third strike.
Here in the United States we have the “Three Strikes” law. It states if you are brought to court for breaking the law, the third time you go to jail — do not pass go, do not collect your stock dividends, just get acquainted with a nice, dark cell. If the disaster I’ve contemplated above happens, will this happen to anyone at BP?
Of course not. Big business will prevail. BP may hang out someone else to twist in the wind, but as a whole they will accept no responsibility for the lives they’ve ruined, the environment they’ve spoiled, or the corruption they’ve allowed to control their motives.
Should BP be held responsible for the clean-up of a rupture in the pipeline? Of course. Should they be required to clean up after themselves? Of course. Will they continue to ignore any laws they think hinder their God given right to make a profit at any expense. (Drum roll.) Of course.
Is there a solution to this problem? Yes, but’s it’s a long process, will include changes many people (mostly greedy business people) will fight tooth and nail against, and will cause many short term problems.
Over the next months, I’m going to start two series: “The Bottom Line”, and “Simplify”. The first will address how we Americans) need to define where and what we stand for. The second will address things we all can do to simplify our lives. Materialism, corruption, and the breakdown of social traditions and customs are leading us to the edge of the void. I, for one, don’t want to go there. Do you?
Resources:
- http://www.adn.com/2008/06/25/446170/exxon-valdez-case-timeline.html
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill
- http://www.propublica.org/article/with-all-eyes-on-the-gulf-bp-alaska-facilities-are-still-at-risk
- http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-12999987.html