No. of Recommendations: 6
The oil executive you describe apparently thinks he needs to be able to respond very quickly to any disaster. And critized Exxon's response to the Valdez spill.
Just for the record, British Petroleum was responsible for the oil spill response immediately after the spill occurred. Below is a comment from CBS in an article written at the time of the Gulf of Mexico blowout.
The Alaska spill leaked nearly 11 million gallons of crude, killed countless wildlife and tarnished the owner of the damaged tanker, Exxon.
Yet the leader of botched containment efforts in the critical hours after the tanker ran aground wasn't Exxon Mobil Corp. It was BP PLC, the same firm now fighting to plug the Gulf leak.
BP owned a controlling interest in the Alaska oil industry consortium that was required to write a cleanup plan and respond to the spill two decades ago. It also supplied the top executive of the consortium, Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. Lawsuits and investigations that followed the Valdez disaster blamed both Exxon and Alyeska for a response that was bungled on many levels.https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bp-played-central-rol...Immediate response to the spill was slow and needed equipment was unavailable - covered by snow and poorly maintained.
Exxon asked the Coast Guard for permission to take over the spill response after 24 hours and it was granted. But valuable time had been lost during which the spill might have been better contained. Exxon's response wasn't perfect - it was long and expensive. I have friends who worked on it.
BP unfortunately had a long track record of putting profit before safety according to OSHA reports. This included several deaths at their Texas City refinery, leaks from corrosion of the Alyeska pipeline, and safety maintenance at the offshore platform that had the Gulf blowout. Exxon and other major oil firms did a lot of work behind the scenes to bring the BP blowout under control.
Makes me wonder how well informed your high level executive was.
