Louisiana deep oil drilling disaster

[Ed Jewett]

Altered BP photo comes into question
By Steven Mufson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 20, 2010; A06


Apparently BP is no more adept at doctoring photos than it is at plugging deep-sea oil leaks.
A blogger has noticed that the oil giant altered a photograph of its Houston crisis room, cutting and pasting three underwater images into a wall of video feeds from remotely operated undersea vehicles. The altered photo is displayed prominently on the company's Web site.
An enlarged version of the photograph reveals flaws in the editing job. One of the 10 images sticks down into the head of one of the people sitting in front of the wall, while another piece of the image is separated from the other side of the head by jagged white space. The right side of the same image also hangs down below the area on which the video feeds were projected.
John Aravosis pointed out the alterations Monday evening on his Americablog.com and observed, "I guess if you're doing fake crisis response, you might as well fake a photo of the crisis response center." The photo doctoring comes as BP has promised transparency in a bid to regain the public's trust.
Scott Dean, a spokesman for BP, said that there was nothing sinister in the photo alteration and provided the original unaltered version. He said that a photographer working for the company had inserted the three images in spots where the video screens were blank.
"Normally we only use Photoshop for the typical purposes of color correction and cropping," Dean said in an e-mail. "In this case they copied and pasted three ROV screen images in the original photo over three screens that were not running video feeds at the time."
Dean said BP usually has a couple remotely operated vehicles on the surface at any given time for maintenance.
"We will replace the Photoshopped version currently on bp.com with the original image tonight," he added. "We've instructed our post-production team to refrain from doing this in the future."



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...ailarticle

[Ed Jewett]

BP Insider Admits Disaster Call Center Is A Diversion, Don't Even Take Notes...


[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3x1D0SPkJO8&feature=player_embedded"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3x1D0SPkJO8&feature=player_embedded
[/URL]

[Magda Hassan]

BP accused of 'buying academic silence'

By Robyn Bresnahan BBC News, London Bob Shipp said BP wanted to hire his entire marine science department
The head of the American Association of Professors has accused BP of trying to "buy" the best scientists and academics to help its defence against litigation after the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
"This is really one huge corporation trying to buy faculty silence in a comprehensive way," said Cary Nelson.
BP faces more than 300 lawsuits so far.
In a statement, BP says it has hired more than a dozen national and local scientists "with expertise in the resources of the Gulf of Mexico".
The BBC has obtained a copy of a contract offered to scientists by BP. It says that scientists cannot publish the research they do for BP or speak about the data for at least three years, or until the government gives the final approval to the company's restoration plan for the whole of the Gulf.



It also states scientists may perform research for other agencies as long as it does not conflict with the work they are doing for BP.
And it adds that scientists must take instructions from lawyers offering the contracts and other in-house counsel at BP.
Bob Shipp, the head of marine sciences at the University of South Alabama, was one of the scientists approached by BP's lawyers.
They didn't just want him, they wanted his whole department.
"They contacted me and said we would like to have your department interact to develop the best restoration plan possible after this oil spill," he said.
Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.



Russ Lea from the University of South Alabama: Some clauses in the contract "were very disturbing".

"We laid the ground rules - that any research we did, we would have to take total control of the data, transparency and the freedom to make those data available to other scientists and subject to peer review. They left and we never heard back from them."
What Mr Nelson is concerned about is BP's control over scientific research.
"Our ability to evaluate the disaster and write public policy and make decisions about it as a country can be impacted by the silence of the research scientists who are looking at conditions," he said.
"It's hugely destructive. I mean at some level, this is really BP versus the people of the United States."
In its statement, BP says it "does not place restrictions on academics speaking about scientific data".
'Powerful economic interests'
But New Orleans environmental lawyer Joel Waltzer looked over the contract and said BP's statement did not match up.
Continue reading the main story “Start Quote

Good scientists, they're going to be giving their opinions based on the facts and they are not going to bias their opinions”

End Quote Professor Irv Mendelssohn Louisiana State University
"They're the ones who control the process. They're depriving the public of the data and the transparency that we all deserve."
But some scientists who have been approached by lawyers acting on behalf of BP are willing to sign up.
Irv Mendelssohn is a professor in the Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences at Louisiana State University.
"What I'm doing wouldn't be any different than if I was consulting with one of the natural resource trustees. I am giving my objective opinion about recovery."
Some scientists approached by BP lawyers have been offered as much as $250 an hour.
Prof Mendelssohn says he would negotiate his normal consulting fee, which is between $150 and $300 an hour. But he says that is not why he is doing it.
"Good scientists, they're going to be giving their opinions based on the facts and they are not going to bias their opinions. What's most important is credibility."
But Cary Nelson is concerned about the relationship between corporations and academia.
"There is a problem for a faculty member who becomes closely associated with a corporation with such powerful financial interests.
"My advice would be: think twice before you sign a contract with a corporation that has such powerful economic interests at stake."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10731408

[Magda Hassan]

Copy of the BP contract

[Peter Lemkin]

$250 an hour!~......they won't have too much trouble finding sell-outs at that price! But all too many scientists are already sell-outs to the big corporations and highest bidders. Montsanto scientists or those working for the coal and oil industry to debunk global climate change come to mind...but there are too many examples to list. :listen:

[Jan Klimkowski]

The BBC has obtained a copy of a contract offered to scientists by BP. It says that scientists cannot publish the research they do for BP or speak about the data for at least three years, or until the government gives the final approval to the company's restoration plan for the whole of the Gulf.

(snip)

And it adds that scientists must take instructions from lawyers offering the contracts and other in-house counsel at BP.

(snip)

Some scientists approached by BP lawyers have been offered as much as $250 an hour.

Grease.

Bribe.

Kickback.

Baksheesh.

Omerta.

[Ed Jewett]

[quote=Jan Klimkowski]

Grease. Bribe. Kickback. Baksheesh. Omerta.

Isn't the operative local word "lagniappe"?

[Jan Klimkowski]

Isn't the operative local word "lagniappe"?

Ed - very good!

Add it to the list.

In passing, I was pleased to see some of the scientists showing integrity and giving BP this: :thefinger:

[Magda Hassan]

Schlumberger denies it has any Deepwater Horizon mud logs
By Wayne Madsen
Online Journal Contributing Writer


Jul 21, 2010, 00:20(WMR) -- On July 7, 2010, WMR reported: “Oil drilling industry inside sources have reported to WMR that ‘smoking gun’ documents, including what are known as “mud logs” are being kept at the Tulsa, Oklahoma headquarters of Schlumberger Oilfield Services. Mud logging entails the detailed analysis of rocky material and sediment from a borehole for signs and pressure levels and types of gas being encountered during the drilling process. Mud logging is always carried out by a third-party and in the case of the Deepwater Horizon, this function was performed by Schlumberger.”
The web site, www.OklahomaWatchdog.org in Oklahoma City followed up on the story and Schlumberger’s media relations officer Stephen Harris commented: ”Schlumberger did not run any mud logs for Deepwater Horizon. This story, for intents and purposes, is made up. We don’t have files or paperwork on mud logs within our organization.” Harris reportedly was irritated by the questions about the mud logs reportedly in the firm’s possession.
Harris was obviously picking his words carefully. Although Schlumberger does not, itself, perform mud logging operations, that is under the control of the chief driller, the oil services firm does perform third-party analysis of the mud logs. Schlumberger mud logging analysts were on board the Deepwater Horizon hours before the rig exploded on April 20. The chief driller controls the well head pressure and drilling rate based on the mud logging provided by the third-party geologists and in the case of the Deepwater Horizon the analysis was carried out by Schlumberger.
According to Offshore magazine, earlier this year, Schlumberger acquired Geoservices, a privately-owned French oilfield services company specializing in mud logging, slickline, and production surveillance operations, particularly in the deepwater market. Andrew Gould, Schlunmberger’s chairman and CEO, stated, “The combination of Schlumberger real-time downhole formation sampling measurements with Geoservices’ drilling mud analysis will help customers better identify and react to drilling hazards, while the combination of mud logging with Schlumberger formation evaluation measurements will bring more complete understanding of rock lithology and fluid content.”
On July 11, 2010, Reuters reported: “The world’s largest oilfield services company [Schlumberger] had performed wireline services for BP on the rig in the Gulf of Mexico where the April 20 explosion and spill occurred.
In our July 7, 2010 report, we provided a Schlumberger timeline, titled “Mississippi Canyon Block 252 Timeline,” which states that on April 20, “At approximately 11 :15 a.m., Schlumberger crew departs Transocean Deepwater Horizon on regularly scheduled BP helicopter flight.”
WMR has learned more details of Schlumberger’s mud logging analysis from an oil industry insider: Mud loggers are always geologists and are contracted by the drilling company. The geologists analyze the soil strata as the well operators drill through them.
Schlumberger provided the equipment and personnel to analyze the geological data, Schlumberger makes 3-dimensional maps of the rock formations, checked the structural integrity of the well, and provided the data for BP. They also conducted geological survey services, including data logging, as well as ultrasonic, magnetic, electrical conductivity, radiological, X-ray, and neutron analysis services. The services include data storage and data processing for geological structures.
Schlumberger and other third-party mud log analysts cannot provide these services without having a copy of the mud logs. The data is extremely valuable to a client’s competitors and it is considered an important industrial secret. Schlumberger has in place a confidentiality agreement with all of their clients.
Therefore, Schlumberger never admits what data they have in their possession.
If Schlumberger admitted what kind of data they possess, their clients would stop using them. The business is lucrative for Schlumberger since the firm charges $12,000 an hour for their mud log analysis services.
The mud log information is also worth millions of dollars to BP’s competitors. It would tell them how much oil is present at BP drilling sites and how much it costs to exploit it. Attempting to gain access to the mud logging data could also result in a prosecution under federal industrial espionage statutes. Thus, in Tulsa, the location of Schlumberger’s oil services headquarters, employees and their friends have been warned that anyone who discusses Schlumberger’s Deepwater Horizon mud logs will go to prison. jail. Schlumberger is also required to destroy any and all data at the client’s request or clam that it never existed. In the case of the Deepwater Horizon, this act may have been already carried out since Schlumberger’s analysis of the doomed well would have provided it with detailed knowledge of the well’s condition before it exploded.
BP contracted Schlumberger to run the Cement Bond Log (CBL) test that was the final test on the well plug that was skipped before the April 20 explosion. Theoil industry website, www.oildrum.comquoted Gregory McCormack, director of the Petroleum Extension Service at the University of Texas, as saying the CBL is the “gold standard” of cement tests. The website reported the CBL ”records detailed, 360-degree representations of the well and can show where the cement isn’t adhering fully to the casing and where there may be paths for gas or oil to get into the hole.”


Schlumberger’s contractors ordered BP’s Deepwater Horizon operational manager to dump kill fluid down the well to plug up the well. The BP manager refused and. Schlumberger’s team asks for a helicopter to evacuate all Schlumberger’s personnel to shore. BP’s manager replied that there were not more scheduled helicopters that week but the Schlumberger crew interceded with Schlumberger’s front office, which sent a helicopter to evacuate their personnel at Schlumberger’s expense.
Schlumberger has another reason to deny possession of the mud logs from the Deepwater Horizon. One source close to the oil industry told WMR, “If Schlumberger admits to providing any services to BP on that rig they open themselves up to being a co-defendant in any law suits filed. Any data that they have can also be subpoenaed. But if the data is destroyed before any law suits are filed, then it is legal to destroy the data. That is why BP. Halliburton and Schlumberger are sending out the sharks in advance so they can plug any information leaks before the tort lawyers find out. Schlumberger’s main service is real-time data logging on oil well bore holes, well cementing certification, well drilling management, and end-of-life services to cap wells. They just process the data from mud logging, etc. . but they don’t do the physical job of mud logging themselves.They just process the data in real time.”

Previously published in the Wayne Madsen Report.

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/...6135.shtml

[Peter Lemkin]

So, where are the logs?! Someone is lying and covering-up. Mud logs are always kept - never 'thrown away'....except to avoid criminal liability....:bandit: