EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Whistleblower: BP Oil Platform Faces 'Present and Imminent Danger'
Whistleblower claims about BP's Atlantis filed this week argue against Bureau of Ocean Energy Management's claims platform is safe
A whistleblower who has a standing lawsuit against BP has argued this week that the company's Atlantis Project, located 150 miles south of New Orleans in the Gulf of Mexico, faces "present and imminent danger."
The whistleblower, Kenneth Abbott, is a former BP contractor on the Atlantis. His lawsuit says that BP failed to keep required records of the safety systems for the Atlantis.
BP Atlantis in 2006 (photo: munchicken)
Back in 2010, Food & Water Watch, which joined Abbott's lawsuit, warned that the massive Deepwater Horizon oil disaster foreshadowed another Gulf of Mexico disaster caused by BP's Atlantis platform. At that time, Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Watch, said, “We have evidence that Atlantis is unsafe and is in danger of creating an even worse spill than the one caused by the Deepwater Horizon explosion.”
* * *
The Times-Picayune: BP Atlantis whistleblower alleges imminent safety threat for first time
A whistleblower is alleging for the first time in a yearslong lawsuit against BP that its massive Atlantis oil platform operation off the Louisiana coast faces present and imminent danger. Kenneth Abbott first complained in 2009 that BP had failed to keep required records of the design of pressure-relief systems and other safety mechanisms onboard the Atlantis. [...]
[T]he U.S. government joined in some of his claims when an independent reviewer justified many of Abbott's complaints. But BP, and later the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, determined that the lack of safety records did not pose any imminent threat.
Abbott's latest filing in the Houston court this week argues otherwise. [...]
[T]he Bureau of Ocean Energy Management released a report in March 2011 that declared the Atlantis rig safe, in spite of its failure to maintain proper records on board.
* * *
Food & Water Watch: Deepwater Horizon Accident Foreshadows a Potential Disaster Waiting to Happen in the Gulf
WASHINGTON - April 22 - Following Tuesday's explosion on the Deepwater Horizon Platform, leased and operated by British Petroleum (BP) in the Gulf of Mexico, the national consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch is warning of the possibility of a similarly tragic disaster involving the company's Atlantis Project- one of the world's deepest semi-submersible oil and natural gas platforms, located 150 miles south of New Orleans in the Gulf of Mexico.
Last year, a whistleblower and former company contractor alleged that the Atlantis platform has been operating without a large percentage of the engineer-approved documents needed for it to operate safely. An independent engineer later substantiated these concerns, concluding that a BP database showed that over 85 percent of the Atlantis Project's Piping and Instrument drawings lacked final engineer-approval, and that the project should be immediately shut down until those documents could be accounted for and are independently verified.
"The tragic explosion on the Deepwater Horizon platform is an urgent reminder of the calamity that could occur if BP's Atlantis platform is operating without the approved documents necessary for ensuring its safety," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. "This accident and the recent Massey mine disaster in West Virginia underscore a complete lack of regulatory oversight over the operations of the fossil fuel industry."
BP has denied the whistleblower's assertions regarding Atlantis, going so far as to write a letter to Congressional staff saying that they are "unsubstantiated," even though internal documents show that in August 2008, BP management was aware of the problems and believed that the document deficiencies "could lead to catastrophic Operator error." An investigation conducted by the company's Ombudsman in April 2009 seems to substantiate the charges, although the investigation's results did not become known until this month. BP has never acknowledged that the Ombudsman conducted an investigation of the project's document deficiencies.
"BP's recklessness in regards to the Atlantis project is a clear example of how the company has a pattern of failing to comply with minimum industry standards for worker and environmental safety," said Mike Sawyer, an Engineer at Apex Safety Consultants, who verified the contractor-turned-whistleblower's concerns about the company's lack of proper documents.
In March 2010, the Minerals Management Service (MMS), the agency charged with overseeing the nation's offshore oil and gas platforms, announced that it would investigate these allegations in response to a letter from Representative Raul M. Grijalva (D-AZ) and 18 of his colleagues calling for an investigation and a report on the findings issued to Congress. Food & Water Watch brought the situation to Representative Grijalva's attention in October of 2009.
Last week, Food & Water Watch submitted a letter to MMS detailing the key issues that need to be addressed with MMS's investigation, highlighting the recently-surfaced information about BP's own Ombudsman investigation. The organization called on MMS to conduct a thorough investigation of the situation, including interviewing the contractor-turned whistleblower who unearthed these potential safety hazards, and to penalize BP to the fullest extent of the law.
"The accident on the Horizon platform further highlights the importance of MMS's investigation of the Atlantis Project, as well as its regulation of offshore drilling activities in that area. As energy companies push to open more of the Outer Continental Shelf, MMS needs to make sure that companies like BP are operating safely and adhering to the law. If the agency does not adequately do so with its investigation of the BP Atlantis Project, the House Natural Resources Committee needs to hold oversight hearings and ensure that the explosion and mishap of the Horizon platform is not replicated," said Zach Corrigan, Food & Water Watch's senior staff attorney.
Read Food & Water Watch's full timeline of the problems associated with the BP Atlantis Project here.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

39 Comments so far
Show AllPart of the loss of winter is the jet stream, but the jet stream's changes may be climate change related also.
Obama allowed them to get off very lightly the first time. Obama permitted them to use corexit which hides or disperses the contamination but is much more poisonous than the original oil spill. He allowed them to perform "privately owned" policing of affected areas to prevent documentation. The value of the health of the ocean was ignored because it does appear on corporate balance sheets.
Now it has been confirmed that the penalties for polluting accidentally are small, effectively permitting BP to externalizing their costs. So there wont be that much money expended to prevent another disaster, which is why there is another disaster. It is because BP was not made to pay properly the first time.
Oil well pressures are very citical, it was over pressure from methane gas which blew the Deepwater Horizon well... There are a great amount of methane hydrates in the gulf of Mexico and BP knew the Deep water Horizon well was too dangeous to keep operating from the day they drilled their first test well.
Not having the proper pressure documents for operators is crazy.
http://oilbeseeingyou.blogspot.com/2010/08/methane-hydrate-risk-in-our-p...
As I see it, part of the responsibility of a government is to provide some protection for the people from macro-parasites. A company that externalizes the costs of its failures, waste products, and disasters while maximizing its profits is a macro-parasite. It feeds off and destroys the wealth of the Commons. A company that gets bailouts and support meant to encourage it to refinance mortgages, yet deliberately forecloses anyway because doing so is more profitable, and further creates financial bubbles, and bets on financial disasters, and attempts to gain access to our pension funds and governments is a macro-parasite. I can go on with examples, but it seems pretty clear that BP and several banking institutions can be described as macro-parasites.
It is past time that we demanded laws be written and enforced to protect us from the macro-parasites. Actually we are rather ineffectively doing so to some extent, and we are not labeling them as macro-parasites. We should. Words and images can be powerful. Remember "welfare queen"? Some did exist. I drove one in my cab to the welfare office once. But compared to the macro-parasites the few welfare queens do not cost us all that much, yet the right-wing framing was quite effective in changing our attitudes to welfare programs. So why not label these macro-parasites as macro-parasites. It is what they are. We are their host and they are feeding off of us and we need protection from them and it is absurd that we should not demand and expect that our government and institutions provide us protection from them. And it is well past time that we told our political parties that if they do not do something about this we will form and elect political parties who are prepared to provide us some protection from the macro-parasites.
The oil companies cause oil spills, finance the global warming deniers, take steps to keep renewable energy sources from being developed, influence governments to prevent investments massively subsidize urban sprawl, road and air transportation systems while starving public transportation systems. Rather than reduce their production and profits and help to find a solution to the problems caused by accessing risky and dirty oil and gas sources they encourage our continued addiction to their products and pollute our environment as an externalized cost of maximizing their profits. They feed off us for their profits. It is time to label them as macro-parasites and open up a public discussion of how protect ourselves from the macro-parasites. BP and Goldman Sacks are two of the poster corporations that we can point to as macro-parasites.
3. Please list five issue areas that you feel are most important and what would you do about them. (Who are you?)
1. OBLITERATION OF THE “TWO PARTY” SYSTEM – I will achieve this by becoming the first Green Party President of these United States as a result of our victory in the 2012 general election.
I also believe it’s essential to do away with the Electoral College.
2. CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE – I will introduce a Constitutional Amendment that will end corporate personhood and remove the unfair advantage that corporations have in influencing the decisions made in Washington. If it doesn’t think, breathe and bleed, it’s not human. It’s not even a dog. I will then take this one crucial step further and embrace current efforts to remove all money from our electoral process.
3. ECONOMIC JUSTICE – As President of the United States, I will reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 as well as bringing back the financial transaction tax that, for pennies on the dollar, will be a windfall for social programs in danger of being cut. I will remove the immoral cap on FICA tax for the rich. I will rewrite labor laws so that U.S. companies are bound by them even when they try to skirt them by shipping jobs overseas. This will effectively roadblock mega-corporations from outsourcing production to countries with immoral, inadequate and nonexistent labor laws.
Our jobs will stay here in the United States of America where they belong. I will close the loopholes that allow some of our nation’s most profitable corporations to get away with not paying any taxes at all.
4. HEALTH CARE NOT WARFARE – Not only will I bring home all U.S. troops from Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Mexico and the Horn of Africa, but I will also permanently shut down the 1,000-plus foreign U.S. military bases around the world.
This would save more than enough money to implement a single-payer health care system in the United States. Guantanamo Bay will remain open and that is where I will send anyone who opposes this plan. Just kidding on that last part.
5. LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA – I’m sick and tired of this “medical marijuana” sham. All marijuana is medicinal and we have to stop pretending that there is some sort of moral superiority to calling some of it “medical.” I will legalize all marijuana and all drugs in general. Drug education will be offered and treatment plans will be put in place for abusers. Sweeping the problem under the rug by turning non-violent abusers into criminals only exacerbates the problem by pretending that real solutions don’t exist. Behold the Greening of America!
Re: macroparasites
OleManRiver and memento,
I first came across the term macroparasites in William H. McNeill's short book The Human Condition: An Ecological and Historical View (1980). The book was based on a series of lectures given in 1979 at Clark University in Worcester, MA. The lectures and the book offered a sweeping overview of human history and pre-history from an ecological perspective, focusing on microparasites (bacteria, viruses, microplasm) which cause disease and human macroparasites which thrive through exploitation and oppression. The rest of us, the 99% in the words of the Occupy movement are the biological host for these parasites.
Microparasites and macroparasites that are so highly lethal they quickly kill off their hosts are necessarily smaller in number and need an especially effective means (vector) for moving from host to host (i.e. they are highly infectious).
The collapse of the Soviet Union might be interpreted as an example where the power of the macroparasites was undermined by their own extremely intense exploitation and consumption of the unwilling source of their power, their host, the proletariat, the people.
Clearly, these days the same interpretation can easily be applied by even the most casual observers to capitalism in its economic and environmental exploitation of the people and the planet. The planet, course, has also been exploited by Communist (with a capital "C") macroparasites.
Although McNeill didn't suggest this idea, proto-democracy (the form of democracy which is being dismantled in the United States and elsewhere around the world these days) (less so) and even genuine large scale representative democracy (more so), can be seen as the development of a form of symbiosis between macroparasites (the power elite) and a host (the people) in some particular geographical area (the nation state).
Andrew Bard Schmookler's The Parable of the Tribes: The Problem of Power In Social Evolution (1984) and William McNeill's The Human Condition were the first attempts, to explain our entire human experience on this planet from a distinctly ecological perspective that I encountered. Needless to say both books had a major, although not defining, impact on my thinking.
Anarchist, libertarian socialist author and philosopher Murray Bookchin, the founder of social ecology, should be mentioned as well in this context. (Wikipedia URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Bookchin)
So far as I know neither Schmookler or Bookchin (deceased) have ever used the term macroparasite.
Jared Diamond uses the term kleptocracy, which expresses a similar idea, in his book Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies (1999), which features the following endorsement from McNeill.
.
Thank you PuffinThrush for explaining where the term macro-parasite comes from. A book by McNeill was where I first saw the term in his book "Plagues and Peoples(1977).
What is the "vector" that spreads the infection? Is the vector the bankers who create and loan money? Or the corporations? Or the military through conquest? Or those with opportunity who have amassed sufficient resources to influence the running of governments? How might we immunize ourselves from infection (once we have recovered from the current infection)?
It will take some more explaining on your part for me to see proto-democracy as being "a form of symbiosis between macroparasites (the power elite) and a host (the people) in some particular geographical area (the nation state)." I am not adverse to considering the idea, but at first glance it seems that the US proto-democracy was set up to keep the British corporations out of the area, and the proto-democracy was set up to share the power among the new replacement elites who did not plan on universal suffrage until later when more or less forced into it. Possibly the regulation of industry can be seen as an attempt at symbiosis, but at times that can be a symbiosis of one group of macro-parasites with another group of macro-parasites.
Not all corporations behave as macro-parasites, and macro-parasites have other tools available to them besides corporations. Macro-parasites and their structures such as corporations and monopolies can exist and feed in countries that are not organized as kleptocracies. As you can see my usage of the term macro-parasite is still sloppy. I use the term to refer to the corporate structures that are designed for the purpose of living off of us, and I use the term to refer to the people who build and use these structures in order to live off us.
memento,
Plagues and Peoples (1977) by William McNeil.
Got it. I haven't read that one.
* * * * *
memento wrote:
What is the "vector" that spreads the infection? Is the vector the bankers who create and loan money? Or the corporations? Or the military through conquest? Or those with opportunity who have amassed sufficient resources to influence the running of governments?
- - - - -
My Repy:
With respect to highly lethal macroparasites, and I'd say intense propaganda and intense physically violent repression of any non-compliance by those of us who make up the host, along with massive appropriation of whatever we the host produce.
Seems like we are intensely experiencing two of these three vectors already and the physical violence is ramping up. The third vector (massive appropriation) actually includes a number of the vectors (means of appropriation) that you mentioned. Intensity makes a difference.
* * * * *
memento wrote:
It will take some more explaining on your part for me to see proto-democracy as being "[the development of] a form of symbiosis between macroparasites (the power elite) and a host (the people) in some particular geographical area (the nation state)." I am not adverse to considering the idea, but at first glance it seems that the US proto-democracy was set up to keep the British corporations out of the area, and the proto-democracy was set up to share the power among the new replacement elites who did not plan on universal suffrage until later when more or less forced into it. Possibly the regulation of industry can be seen as an attempt at symbiosis, but at times that can be a symbiosis of one group of macro-parasites with another group of macro-parasites.
- - - - -
My Reply:
Proto-democracy features quasi-democratic elections and some significant degree of protection of the civil rights of a large percent (not necessarily a majority) of the people, but for the most part those allowed to vote still only get to choose which representatives of the macroparasites run the government, not whether or not representatives of the macroparasites run the government. To the extent that macroparasites genuinely must compete in some way for the support of the host, the host gets something in return. This is better that absolute monarchy or dictatorship.
Proto-democracy potentially is a precursor to genuine representative democracy. In that sense proto-democracy is at least a precusor to symbiosis between macroparasites and host. If the term kleptocracy doesn't fit as a description of the proto-democracy, then I'd say the proto-democracy can be said to involve some form of symbiosis. But I agree with you. Symbiosis between macroparasites and host doesn't evolve without considerable struggle on the part of the host.
I'd also say the dismantling of proto-democracy has been going on for about thirty years, but has intensified greatly in recent years and is pretty close to completion.
* * * * *
memento wrote:
Not all corporations behave as macro-parasites, and macro-parasites have other tools available to them besides corporations. Macro-parasites and their structures such as corporations and monopolies can exist and feed in countries that are not organized as kleptocracies. As you can see my usage of the term macro-parasite is still sloppy. I use the term to refer to the corporate structures that are designed for the purpose of living off of us, and I use the term to refer to the people who build and use these structures in order to live off us.
- - - - -
My Reply:
I don't think your use of the term macroparasites is sloppy, but government is of course also a means through which macroparasites operate, a means which predates the rise of corporations.
The revolving door of influential people between government and powerful corporations is spinning faster nowadays. Powerful people who control large corporations almost completely control government. In the United States elections, particularly at the national level, feature intense propaganda and choices between representatives of the macroparasites who largely campaign upon superficial differences that don't significantly effect the distribution of power or wealth in society.
* * * * *
memento wrote:
How might we immunize ourselves from infection (once we have recovered from the current infection)?
- - - - -
My Reply:
The establishment of genuine democracy powerful enough to enable the host to control any macroparasites that have not been eradicated or otherwise rendered harmless. In other words among other things implementation of genuinely democratic elections including regulation of the expenditure of money for the purposes of disseminating political speech in a manner consistent with the U.S. Constitution's equal protection under the law clause, prohibition of for profit corporate expenditures of money by corporate officers for the same purpose because there is no constitutional justification for such expenditures based upon individual freedom of speech and freedom of political association rights, and the dismantling of capitalism and the military industrial complex, although not the abandonment of the use of "capital" in the provision of goods and services.
I support non-violent means of revolution / evolution including various forms of civil disobedience and strikes as well as more conventional politics and the development of "parallel" economic and political institutions and activity.
We are definitely at the "the Right of the People to alter or to abolish" stage.
memento wrote:
How might we immunize ourselves from infection (once we have recovered from the current infection)?
* * * * *
My additional reply:
I haven't read these two decisions yet (Gonzales v. Raich, 2005 and Wickard v. Filburn, 1942), but when the U.S. Constitution's interstate commerce clause can be used to regulate or ban economic activity that does not involve participation in the market much less interstate commerce, I'd say the Supreme Court has once again acted against the interest of the 99% of the people and in favor of people who control large for profit corporations.
I was immediately reminded of Mahatma Mohandas Ghandi's Salt March protest against British colonial rule in Inda.
After some four decades of closely following the American public's orientation to environmental issues and, most recently, its orientation to the increasingly present issue of pollution-driven climatic destabilization, I am just about convinced that exactly nothing of significance is going to be done about these issues until a critical mass of the American people are DIRECTLY affected by either a major environmental disaster such as the Deepwater Horizon incident or a devastating weather event such as what, for example, happened last week in Dexter, Michigan when a tornado went through that area and damaged or destroyed around 100 homes within minutes.
As long as the majority of the American public can continue to reassure themselves that these kinds of life-disrupting events always happen "to somebody else", very little if anything will be done in the service of committing to the work necessary to build a cleaner energy economy.
"Charges to be filed against Chevron in oil leak - São Paulo» Brazilian prosecutors said Saturday they will file criminal charges against 17 executives of Chevron Corp. and drilling contractor Transocean Ltd. for a new oil leak near the offshore well where at least 110,000 gallons spilled late last year. Those targeted include George Buck, chief operating officer for Chevron’s Brazilian division."
That would never happen in the USA. Transocean participated in the criminal BP Gulf oil spill.