Close

SPECIAL OFFER FOR OUR CLIENTS! CLICK TO ORDER WITH 5% DISCOUNT: CLICK TO ORDER WITH 5% DISCOUNT: FIRST5

Published: 27-09-2019

121 writers online

Disclaimer: This essay is not an example of the work done by the EssayPay© service. Samples of our experts work can be found here. All opinions and conclusions belong to the authors, who sent us this essay.
If you want to pay for essay for unique writing BP DEEPWATER DISASTER PLAN FAILURE, just click Order button. We will write a custom essay on BP DEEPWATER DISASTER PLAN FAILURE specifically for you!

BP DEEPWATER DISASTER PLAN FAILURE

Disaster is a severe occasion that seriously causes severe alterations society which causes human, financial, material and environmental loss. BP failed to make appropriate contingency plans for an explosion at its Deepwater Horizon oil properly and then misled officials about the quantity of oil spilled when the worst occurred. The Deepwater catastrophe in Could 2010 killed eleven men and oil was spread more than miles across the coast of Louisiana causing billions of dollars of harm to fishing and tourism business. About 5 barrels of oil spear out into the Gulf of Mexico making it worst disaster in world history. BP spent 86 days struggling against to cap the well by making use of a variety of methods recognized such as “Cofferdam” , “top hat”. Even it includes pumping of mud and other material into blowout preventer.

The investigation team “found no evidence that BP performed a formal danger assessment of essential operational choices made in the days major up to the blowout. BP’s failure to completely assess the dangers associated with a number of operational choices major up to the blowout was a contributing cause of the Macondo blowout.” The report also mentioned price- or time-saving decisions made by BP “without thinking about contingencies and mitigation” contributed to the disaster, as was the power company’s “failure to make certain all dangers associated with operations on the Deepwater Horizon have been as low as reasonably practicable.”

Though reading some of the content of report Mr. Moss stated that he is conscious of, “there have been striking similarities to the Piper Alpha incident in the North Sea numerous years ago.” The Piper Alpha platform was destroyed by fire in 1988 following an explosion, killing 168. Reports stated in earl’s 2012 indicated that the well site was still leaking. Right after numerous investigations conducted they derived to the conclusion that was responsible for explosion and spilling of oil. The U.S. government stated in September 2011 report that due to defective cement on the properly, BP was at the fault but partial fault was also of rig operator Transocean and contractor Halliburton.

Earlier in 2011, a White Residence commission likewise blamed BP and its partners for a series of price reducing decisions and an inadequate safety technique, but also conclude that the spill resulted from “systemic” root causes and “absent significant reform in both industry practices and government policies, may effectively recur”. Numerous investigations had proved that the explanation behind the explosion was mess developed by with cement, drilling mud, fluid pressure, botched tests, management difficulties and poor choices. The blowout preventer sealed the properly temporarily, but then it failed and that triggered the huge spill.

According to survey the accident was triggered by the failure of eight distinct safety systems that were meant to stop this sort of incident: The bottom of the borehole was not fully sealed by cement and as a outcome of that oil and gas started to leak by means of it into the pipe which leads to surface of water body. BP discovered that the cement formulation did not prove to function effectively. Similarly, the bottom of the pipe to the surface was capped in two ways. It was also filled with cement, and it also contained two mechanical valves developed to quit the flow of oil and gas. But all of these arrangements failed, permitting oil and gas to travel up the pipe towards the surface.

The group members carried out various stress tests to decide whether or not the well was sealed or not. The outcomes following these tests have been misinterpreted, which make them think that the properly was below handle. The crew ought to be able to recognize the flow of oil and gas by unexpected boost in pressure in the properly but the crew was not able to detect and increase in stress occurred about 50 minutes just before the rig explode by taking into consideration it was not a leak. About 8 minutes just before the explosion, a mixture of mud and gas began pouring onto the floor of the rig. The members attempted to close a valve in a device known as the blowout preventer, which is situated on the ocean floor more than the leading of the properly borehole. It did not work correctly.

Even though the members had the option of diverting the mixture of mud and gas away from the rig, via pipes over different side. Instead, the flow was diverted to a device on board the rig designed to separate modest amounts of gas from a flow of mud. The so-called mud-gas separator was swiftly overflowed and flammable gas started to surround the rig. The rig had a gas detection system fitted on prime of it. It begins as quickly as the alarm rings triggering the ventilators fans to avert the gas reaching rig’s engines which results in fire but the alarm system was deactivate to quit ringing fake alarm. The explosion destroyed the control lines the crew was utilizing to close safety valves in the blowout preventer. However, the blowout preventer has its personal safety mechanism in which two separate systems ought to have shut the valves automatically when it lost get in touch with with the surface. A single technique seems to have had a flat battery and the other a defective switch. As a result, the blowout preventer did not close.

“It is apparent that a series of complicated events, rather than a single mistake or failure, led to the catastrophe. Several parties, such as BP, [oilfield services business] Halliburton and [offshore drilling firm] Transocean, have been involved,” said Tony Hayward, BP’s chief executive. The report even mentioned that the fault was of the rig operators. The safety board investigator Mary Beth Mulcahy stated that well owner BP and rig operator Transocean didn’t test the blowout preventer’s individually for security. They just tested the device as a complete. It turned out there had been two sets of faulty wiring that triggered issues and a dead battery. Mulcahy even mentioned that individual tests had been recommended by the preventer’s manufacturer but the firms alternatively followed a standard set by the industry. The security board also found that the drill pipe bent ahead of the accident occurred. Not only pipe was fault blowout preventers had been equally at fault stated by investigation team in the report.

To overcome the defects investigation group created a report which states recommendation which can stop such incidents in future. Firstly beginning from technical point of view. Strengthen Bp’s rig audit to boost the closure and verification of audit findings and actions across BP-owned and BP-contracted drilling rigs. From Safety efficiency it demand drilling contractors to implement an auditable integrity monitoring program to continuously assess and improve the integrity overall performance of well control equipment’s against a set of established top and lagging indicators. Assess and confirm that vital well manage and effectively monitoring practices, such as effectively monitoring and shut-in procedures are clearly defined and rigorously applied on all BP-owned and BP-contracted offshore rigs. Rig safety is also important. It needs Hazard and Operability(HAZOP) testimonials of the surface gas and drilling fluid systems. Whilst taking critiques of HAZOP phase 1 must address offshore rigs and phase 2 addresses to selected onshore rigs such as higher stress and high temperature.

General, the oil spill disaster in Gulf of Mexico leaves excellent effect behind on atmosphere as properly as human life. The group did nt identify any single or inaction that caused this accident to occur rather a complicated system getting mechanical failures, human judgments, design and team interfaces all collectively became the cause for this accident. Right after all the investigation was carried out series of recommendations was driven out to allow prevention of related accidents. The recommendation covered two broad areas which would be kept in mind to avoid such disaster- Drilling and properly operation practice and operating management method implementation, contractor and service oversight and assurance
Calculate your price
Pages
What are you waiting for?
Thousands of students choose us!
close

Sorry, copying is not allowed on our website. If you want a paper on this sample, we’ll created new for you.

Order Now

Order Now