... shame on you.
It has become completely obvious to anyone reading news on the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that BP grossly inflated their response capacity and underestimated the worst case scenario in their official response plans. These were notoriously botched up, including experts who died long before the "plan" was drafted and included possible impacts on wildlife that lives thousands of kilometers north of the Gulf. It has been established that none of BP's response plans can be taken at face value and must be reviewed line by line, no matter what they laim.
Fool me twice...
... shame on me. BP is working on drilling that is even more dangerous and little understood than the Gulf Deepwater drilling was. But BP's assuring us that all is fine and they know what they're doing. Why is this taken at face value? Any communication from BP on the safety of their operation should now be doubted on principle - they have proved times over that they don't know what they're talking about when it comes to environmental impacts and safety.
Juliette is a Digital Mobilisation Specialist at Greenpeace International. She likes chocolate, narwhals, and is slightly obsessed with the Arctic.
Smiling Irishman says:
Thankyou for this really pertinent post, Juliette. I'm disappointed that no-one has commented on your article prior to this, summer slumber, perhaps? The implications of the continuation of granting of petrochemical offshore leases in the Arctic, both in the U.S. dominion and that of Canada, are horrifying. I need to consider taking some Gravol right now, I feel very nauseated.
Posted 29 July, 2010 at 5:35 Flag abuse Reply
To post a comment you need to be signed in.
Are you sure to remove this comment?
Are you sure to report this comment as abuse?