The REAL Reason BP Isn't Stopping The Oil Flow

It's become increasingly obvious that everything BP says or does at this point is being vetted through the prism of litigation strategy.

While BP struggles to stop the oil gushing from its exploded well in the Gulf of Mexico, lawyers throughout the New Orleans area are gearing up for what could be the biggest environmental and maritime litigation case the nation has ever seen.

Defense firms have been working their oil and gas contacts to position themselves as local counsel for corporations with exposure to the April 20 explosion and subsequent sinking of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig. And plaintiffs attorneys formed a litigation group and immediately chartered planes to photograph the fire on the rig, began collecting water and air samples, and started advertising to sign up clients. More clients increase the potency of the suit, allowing attorneys to collect more fees.

Dartagnan's diary :: ::
That's why they initially sent their minions to the Louisiana Coast to bilk poor Cajun watermen out of their ability to sue. That's when they thought the damage could be contained from a financial perspective. That was Plan "A."

"Plan "A" is long since moot.

I would argue that at this point in the disaster the die is cast, and it makes little if no difference to BP's ability to operate as a going concern whether the gushing volcano is stopped now or months from now. The sheer magnitude of the lawsuits is going to be staggering--think of the hundreds of billions of dollars in permanently despoiled property alone. All of these claims will ultimately find their way to BP's door, or the door of their excess insurance carriers.

Which is why it makes sense, from the standpoint of defending itself, for BP not to stop the gushing, and in fact to take half-measures which by their very nature will not succeed, yet prolong the appearance of BP "making an effort." The nature of this type of liability litigation practically demands that BP do this to survive.

If BP were able to stop the flow of oil through either its "top hat," "junk shot," or any of the other creative methods being bandied about, the line of attack at trial would be "Why weren't you able to do this sooner?" That's an argument that BP, with all of its hired experts, can never win. The sole question the plaintiff's lawyers will rely on (in addition to their case on causation of the explosion itself) will be "Was the technology available to stop this a month earlier?" The answer is obvious--yes, it was. Of course it was.

"Then, BP, why didn't you employ that method sooner?"

When automotive manufacturers introduced airbags, they were sued for failing to put airbags in earlier model cars. When construction equipment manufacturers introduced roll bars on their tractors, they were sued for failing to install them on earlier models. When doctors' patients get sick and die, the doctors are sued for failing to make an earlier diagnosis. That is the way product liability and negligence cases work. If BP stops the bleeding now, a key tenet of their litigation defense is lost...

More at the original website: www.dailykos.com...

Let me sum this article up for everyone.

BP had this huge disaster happen. If they introduced availible technology to cap & clean the spill immediately, they would get sued for not having it on older models, and for not acting fast enough. Since this has gone on for WAY too long, their best interest is to simply use methods that help, but do not stop the leak.

This is how insane our world has gotten.

reply to post by sh1fty


Not saying in this case, but its true so much behind the scenes is hidden, so that the world works in a practical way.

If everything was ok, there would be hardly any jobs, for all the murderers who want to be police would there?

According to two Dutch companies they have a method to clean the place up but aren't allowed to do so.

"The Americans don’t have spill response vessels with skimmers because their environment regulations do not allow it. With the Dutch method seawater is sucked up with the oil by the skimmer. The oil is stored in the tanker and the superfluous water is pumped overboard. But the water does contain some oil residue, and that is too much according to US environment regulations."

LINK

reply to post by sh1fty


Excuse me? Is this dartagnan a lawyer? I see he or she has linked to an article about the litigant lawyers but nothing in there states any of the preposterous assumptions being made.

OP, can you link us to any cases where this strategy has been employed? Or are we to assume this dartagnan knows the strategy of the BP company by osmosis or some such other venerable knowledge acquisition?

It is the Daily Kos.

"If BP were able to stop the flow of oil through either its "top hat," "junk shot," or any of the other creative methods being bandied about, the line of attack at trial would be "Why weren't you able to do this sooner?" That's an argument that BP, with all of its hired experts, can never win. The sole question the plaintiff's lawyers will rely on (in addition to their case on causation of the explosion itself) will be "Was the technology available to stop this a month earlier?" The answer is obvious--yes, it was. Of course it was."

These are NOT creative methods...they are methods that have been used many times in the past with varying degrees of success. Unfortunately, according to people I've been hearing that work in the industry, it is DISINFO that BP continues to hype these strategies in this case, they will not work. The reason BP has failed to stop the flow is simply that they can NOT by any previous method used, do that with any chance of success. The fact that BP has been left to it's own devices so far suggests to me a few things...our government, and the powers at BP are both in the know that this is far more serious than anything experienced so far with offshore drilling. By leaving BP in charge, you effectively reduce the chance of a leak of another kind, and that is, a leak with the facts about just how critical the situation is in Gulf.
BP knows a TOP KILL or a JUNK SHOT will NOT work with this problem. They are just buying time. It was supposed to be today, now it's delayed until Tuesday. If the plan works on Tuesday, I'll eat my words. They may have a week or two before the government steps in because of the constant delay (which has been threatened just today). Once the government steps in, the "truth" will slowly come out, and as times goes on, Americans will not need to be told how serious it is, they will KNOW. At that point, BP will be drawn & quartered American style. Meaning a scapegoat or two will be hung publicly, but it will be BIZ as usual in a just a while after that.
Plan on seeing oil gushing until Aug, Sept, October...

Why, oh why did you post this? As much as I hate it, you have put me in a position of having to defend BP.

I don't think they'd employ this strategy. It just doesn't make sense. Seriously, think about it for a minute. BP would just waste all that oil?

Seriously, I don't think this was planned this way, I really don't.

[edit on 23/5/2010 by Iamonlyhuman]