… that I have posted elsewhere:
The rig belonged to Transocean Ltm., but it was BP that submitted, and then altered, the design of the well that led to the blowout.
It was BP that chose the risky option of using only 6 centralizers on the final string of casing when their own analysis demonstrated that channels would be created in the final cementing of that casement.
It was BP that told the Schlumberger crew that a cement-bond log on that final cement job was unnecessary even though it was clear that the practice was standard operation in the completion of wells, and would have found some of the flaws inherent in the design that led to the blowout.
It was BP that chose to ignore industry standards when it chose not to fully circulate the drilling mud which would have given indication of dangerous levels of formation fluids in the mud.
It was BP that chose to not install a lock down sleeve that would have provided another redundancy against communication of formation fluids through the well head.
It seems apparent that BP chose a sub-standard design that ignored standard protocol in an attempt to save a couple of days on-site. Their attempt, if successful, would have saved only a fraction of the total cost of the well bore, and in relation to the profits that the reservoir hold, not even a mere pittance.
No one, that I am aware of, is angry at the British people, but we are furious at the criminal neglect of a company that has long flouted industry standards, and chooses profits over people… going all the way back to its days as the Anglo Iranian Oil Company.
Concessions??? Yeah, right!