BP's Deepwater Horizon warning system was disabled

An article in today's Washington Post highlights disgusting, disgraceful business practices at BP. The profit-motive places pressure to pivot risk-analysis decisions on the short term bottom line numbers, particularly when the people making the decision are driven by personal gain.

The Post has video of Deepwater chief engineer Michael Williams, an ex-Marine who survived the April 20th explosion and fire, telling a government panel that "warning systems on the drilling rig were inhibited because the crew did not want to be disturbed in the middle of the night."

Williams told the panel that he understood that the rig had been operating with the gas alarm system in "inhibited" mode for a year to prevent false alarms from disturbing the crew.

Washington Post, 22 July 2010

The profit motive accomplishes certain things very well. It's driven the price of medical equipment in Japan well below what similar products produced in North America costs, for instance, and it obviously drives creative innovation across the business sector.

But the mortgage-lending and Wall Street crises that are still hampering our economy years after they surfaced demonstrate that without regulation and enforcement business owners can, and all too often do, become focused only on money. To balance that greed is one of the ways that governments can, and should, "promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity..."

Special interest money has entirely too much influence in Washington. It's time that our leaders stopped talking about small businesses while voting to enable big business to ruin our planet, our standard of living, and our future. That's a bankrupt ideology - that's the real threat to our children.

Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, Democratic Campaign Manager, journalist, and photographer who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.

The 12-step BP Deepwater Disaster-inspired Program

We can't change overnight, but if the 20th century U.S. reliance on gas-guzzling automobiles remains the pattern for economic growth then money just keeps flowing to big oil companies even faster than the crude oil is spewing into the Gulf of Mexico today (while BP attempts to put a better cap on the gusher.) They spend nearly incredible amounts of money convincing consumers how "green" they are with slick ad campaigns The reality is hidden, but it's there despite the wizards of Madison Avenue.

So what's to do?

We have to approach it in several ways, because oil-consumption is woven into the very fabric of our daily lives. No single action will solve this, it's too big. It's likely to take longer to fix than it did to create.


First and foremost we have to admit that we have an oil problem.
Next we resolve to restore sanity to our decisions rather than letting massive multi-national corporations continue to exploit our oil habit.
Join those who have to decided to prioritize our decisions on what's best for our planet, family, and neighbors.
To move forward, we have to understand why we rely on oil - we have to consider our past decisions as objectively as possible.
Like any other addict, we must admit we got it wrong - we may have been duped, but we own the decisions we made regardless.
We have to decide to change - we have to be ready to give up these dangerous habits. To do otherwise feeds both the oil pushers and others who haven't yet come to understand just how big the problem really is.
We have to be willing to lead in progressively reducing and surrendering our reliance on oil-fueled existence.
Think of all the people harmed by our cars, trucks, and other petroleum-based self-indulgences such as plastic shopping bags and bottles, and admit that it's not just BP and their peers that should make amends for the problem.
We have to actually make amends, not just think and talk; Boycotts alone won't solve the problem, and we can't wait for BP, Exxon, or governments to fix our demand, which is the real problem, when they can barely figure out how to contain the leaks from a single well.
We can't stop thinking. We have to consider that no matter how big it is, and how we continue to drive up the demand for petroleum, we must consciously act to reduce our own use over the days, months, and decades ahead while working to mitigate and remediate the effects as we find our way forward to new approaches that reflect our need to thrive in balance with the planet.
Deliberately improve our contact with nature. Nobody who has ever fished or been a bird-watcher can fail to be moved by the images from the Gulf; only by insulating ourselves from the environment can we pretend our petroleum consumption might not matter. We have had our heads in the sand so long even it has become oil-soaked.
Lastly, we must spread the word to practice this awareness and perspective to others, as Congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) did in his commentary on the the BP oil spill and the need for transportation reform at dc.streetsblog.org - it's a start.

Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, journalist, political staffer on the Madore For Congress campaign, and photographer who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community. He drives an efficient flex-fuel vehicle and scoffs at plastic grocery bags.

Palin proves TIMING is EVERYTHING - again.

Sarah Palin burst into the national consciousness almost two years ago, and for a short while news services could talk of nothing else, and following the VP candidates debate pundits said she'd won because she didn't completely blow it. By November the bump Palin provided McCain's ratings faded as the country learned more about his new running-mate, and U.S. voters elected the Illinois Senator with the "funny name and big ears." It wasn't so long after Obama's night in Grant Park that Palin calculated her title as Governor of Alaska was more of a hindrance to her career than a help, remember?

Most of the pundits assure us that Tea Party activists (or at least coverage of them on TV) bolstered by Palin's photogenic smile tipped the balance against incumbent Utah Senator Robert Bennett when he failed to secure his party's nomination at a state convention.

Naturally, Palin has bestowed her Tea Party blessing on John "Complete the Danged Fence" McCain, yet by all accounts McCain is in danger of being upset in a primary. There's no question Arizona is currently the focus of the immigration storm in the U.S., but it's shaping up as the epicenter of the anti-incumbent earthquake since McCain's well-documented "toughening" of his rhetoric on that issue hasn't staved off the challenge from former congressman/talk show radio host J.D. Hayworth.

Like former President Bush, as recently as 2007 mavericky Senator McCain had championed less-extreme solutions to immigration reform before consulting the tea leaves and getting his position right. Unlike Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter, McCain's not in a primary today, but he may wish he was as Hayworth continues to make inroads in McCain's lead. By the time the late August Arizona primary happens the Palin endorsement will be ancient history, and McCain's staff will be struggling to dominate the news cycle much the way Specter's struggled to be "bigger news" than Joe Sestak.

The "re-assignment" of Campaign Manager Shiree Verdone and Aide Mike Hellon reveals just how precarious McCain's situation really is -- and that demonstrates how little impact Palin's early endorsement had. Given her own notoriety it's hard to say if Michelle Bachmann is getting any boost from her connection to Palin, but she's already worried about the Democratic front runner, State Senator Tarryl Clark, who hasn't even secured her place on the November ballot yet (MN primary: August 10th.)

Palin's endorsement may not be enough to preserve McCain's power. Specter's calculated change of parties hasn't looked very effective. Bachmann's running negative ads before her own presumed challenger has even won the primary. Meanwhile the Obama administration is moving forward fast on Wall Street reform, and the unholy trinity of BP, Haliburton, and Transocean squandered that same administration's willingness to let off-shore exploration move ahead.

Drill, baby, drill? Timing is everything.

Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, journalist, political staffer, and photographer who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.

Obama's Comprehensive Energy Plan

Barack Obama's energy plan will provide meaningful short-term relief for our families and make a historic investment in alternative energy development that will create millions of new jobs, keep the cost of energy affordable and secure our energy independence once and for all. This is the sort of leadership the current generation of Americans needs - and demands - from our elected officials.

Learn more about Obama's comprehensive energy plan at: http://www.NewEnergyForAmerica.com

The Columbus Dispatch Ad Watch said the RNC was "Stretching the Truth":

While Obama is offering real solutions for America's energy future, the Republican National Committee recently released a false, negative ad attacking Barack Obama on energy.

"The commercial accurately points out that McCain favors temporarily lifting the federal gasoline tax, which Obama opposes. Nearly every reputable economist says lifting the gas tax would save motorists nickels and dimes and not produce one new gallon of gasoline."

"The commercial also accurately points out that McCain favors drilling off the coasts of California and Florida, while Obama does not. But many economists are not convinced that oil exploration off the coasts would dramatically reduce gasoline prices any time soon. Instead, oil prices have risen because demand has outpaced production worldwide. The commercial does not mention that McCain once opposed offshore exploration. And it probably is no accident that the commercial is being aired in Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin rather than Florida and California."

"VERDICT: 'Stretching The Truth'" [Columbus Dispatch 7/7]

It's all part of Obama's unified view of the way energy affects our economy, our environment and climate, and our national security interests. He's advocating a much more pro-active leadership approach to science than the Republican party has prioritized in recent memory. At a glance, Obama wants to:

• Reduce Carbon Emissions 80 Percent by 2050
• Invest in a Clean Energy Future
• Support Next Generation Biofuels
• Set America on Path to Oil Independence
• Improve Energy Efficiency 50 Percent by 2030
• Restore U.S. Leadership on Climate Change

Barack Obama introduced a bold new plan that brought Republicans and Democrats, CAFE supporters and long-time opponents together in support of legislation that will gradually increase fuel economy standards and offer what the New York Times editorial page called "real as opposed to hypothetical results." That's the sort of change that works for America and the world.

Digg this story! | read more...