It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
BP and government agencies responding to the spill have scrambled to assemble enough oil-containing boom and the ships and hardware needed to keep oil out of marshes and off beaches.
Originally posted by IMOVERHERE
reply to post by Copperflower
I don't believe the US are lilley-white in all this because why the hell did the US grant BP a licence to drill a mega well deep into the unknown when people were well aware ( no pun intended ) of the inherent dangers including piercing a batholth, super high pressures, and release of very toxic substances, It was common knowledge that the Russians hit similar problems but were able to solve due to being surface drill heads.
If the departments were not aware of the associated dangers they were not qualified to grant a licence, if they were aware they had no right to do so. They should have been aware that this bloody dangerous operation had never been attempted 1500m below sea level.
BP had no right to request a licence for an operation that they did not appear to have enough experience to carry out.
Who formulated and accepted / the associated risk assessment ?
I believe there a lot of guilty parties who did not have a mandate to put us all at such risk.
Massive projected profits never ever sanction the acceptance of such risk to the ecosystem, population, wildlife and enviroment.
MMS said in early 2000, in a notice to lessees, that it planned to require oil companies operating in deep-water to use new oil-spill predictions specifically designed for deep water.
That regulation never came into effect. Oil companies today still base their contingency plans on the government's models, designed only for surface spills.