Risk Analysis of the BP Oil Spill - Case Study Example

Risk analysis of the BP oil spill Introduction Environmental pollution has been in the agenda of most international conferences since it has been realised that environmental protection should be incorporated in the national plans of nations. Many treaties have been signed as a way of nations committing themselves to environmental protection and management. Environmental pollution occurs through atmospheric emissions, release in water such as oil spills and land pollution through dumping of waste and deforestation. The British Petroleum Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that happened the 20th of April 2010 was a great environmental disaster. This disaster was caused by the rupturing of the 5,000 feet wellhead and the failure of the remote operated robot submarines to close the emergency valves so as to prevent oil flow (Greenpeace n.d). The oil explosion led to eleven fatalities and crude oil losses of about 1,000 barrels per day. The marshes and beaches along the coasts of Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida were heavily affected by these oil spills. The BP Company accepted responsibility and said that it would compensate fro the damage as well as take mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts of the oil spill both on humans and the environment. The BP deepwater horizon was speculated to have been caused by several factors that are both human and technical. According to Lepsinger (2010, p.2), there are four key failures that contributed to the occurrence of this complex and tragic event. Firstly, there was lack of coordination between the different companies and government organisations. Lepsinger (2010, p.2) notes that all the organisations in the operations of the Deepwater Horizon rig including the well owner who is BP, Transocean the rig owner, Halliburton the oil rig services provider and the Minerals Management Services that protects wildlife and the environment from damage by the drilling activities did not work harmoniously. The organisations were not unanimous in their decision making processes and each did not perform their responsibilities. In addition, there was no accountability, coordination and communication among these organisations. Secondly, Lepsinger (2010) observes that another contributing factor to this disaster was the money-minded nature of BP which he terms as ‘focus on greed’. Investigations showed that BP evaded safety policies whereby engineers used equipment that were risky and had not undergone quality tests (Lepsinger 2010). The surprising thing is that the senior management was in support of this treacherous behaviour. Thirdly, the lack of cooperation between organisations operating at the Deepwater Horizon as well as laxity of government agencies to enforce rules contributed to the happening of the oil spill (Lepsinger 2010). The lack of cooperation was also evident after the disaster when there were arguments on who was in charge. The fourth cause of the oil spill was the lack of integrating people with expertise in decision making and how to handle such a disaster. Lepsinger (2010) notes that the lack of effective organisational structure hindered BP from recruiting people who had knowledge and experience to handle the spill. He also argues that BP did not empower its employees through training on safety and disaster preparedness and emergency procedures but instead top management did not respect the juniors and was used to yelling at them and treating them with no respect. In summary, the BP oil spill was caused by both human and technical failures whereby human failure was manifested through lack of cooperation and communication, poor knowledge, poor management of human resources, corruption, poor decision making, lack of situational analysis as well as lack of proper operating procedures (Deepwater Horizon Study Group 2010). On the other hand, technical failures happened when the remote controlled robots failed to close the valves as well as the design of the oil project (Deepwater Horizon Study Group 2010) The BP oil spill had great implications especially to the environment and aquatic life. These implications can be classified as being of high risk, moderate risk or low risk. One of the significant implications is the death of wildlife and aquatic life. According to greenpeace.org (n.d), the marshes and beaches along the coasts of Alabama, Mississippi and Florida were the most affected and the damage could even last for a long time. It is estimated that these coastlines are habitants to over 600 species of wildlife of which most are endangered animals (greenpeace.org). In addition, the oil spill happened during the spawning and nesting season of most aquatic animals such as fish, mammals and birds that live in the Gulf of Mexico (greenpeace.org). This means that the larvae of these animals will die due to lack of oxygen that is caused by the oil spill. The death of this larvae means that the future generations of these animals are killed and this may lead to tier extinction. On the other hand, the environmental damage caused by the BP oil spill is in form of water pollution whereby oil covers the surface of water. Though water has a natural way of cleaning oil spills through waves, the BP oil spill could not be cleared by natural methods but by the use of oil dispersants. These oil dispersants are chemicals that are toxic to the environment though their toxicity levels are not known. Oil chemicals that dissolve in water may take longer to evaporate and hence can cause water pollution (Ramseur 2010). It is also predicted that the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico may cause climate change in the long run by affecting thermoregulation activities. According to a satellite study done between May and June 2010 showed that the breaking of a warm current known as the Loop Current present at the Gulf Stream broke down for the first time in May 2010 (Zangari 2010). The destruction of the Loop current means that there will be a significant change in global climate and this can be harmful to all living things including humans. Furthermore, the BP oil spill has an indirect effect on human health through the combustion of the crude oil that produces carbon dioxide, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide (Deepwater Horizon Study Group 2010). Although these gases do not have an immediate effect on human health, their effect can not be overlooked since they damage the respiratory system. Additionally, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene that are found in oil have been considered to be harmful to human health by the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (Deepwater Horizon Study Group 2010). However, the BP oil spill could have been prevented through a number of ways. Firstly, the organisation should have trained its employees on safety issues as well as risk management. Empowering employees with safety and risk management skills could have reduced the magnitude of the disaster since the trained personnel could have effectively dealt with the disaster. According to Deepwater Horizon Study Group (2010), BP did not have safety, culture and major accidents prevention programs. In fact, most of the safety procedures were not updated neither were they followed by both the management and the employees. Secondly, human failures could also have been prevented through implementation of safety policies that were to be strictly followed by oil operators. The organisation’s management should have ensured that there are safety policies that were to be strictly adhered to. According to Deepwater Horizon Study Group (2010), the BP safety policies set high expectations that were not achieved due to poor organisational management. On the other and, technical failures could have been prevented through regular maintenance and repair of equipment. As stated earlier, BP’s management approved the use of substandard equipment that were not fit for drilling oil (Lepsinger 2010). In addition, all engineering controls such as hydraulics, gauge equipment as well as valves should have been kept in a good working condition (Deepwater Horizon Study Group 2010). BP should learn form the 2010 tragic oil spill and put the following measures in place: Establish an organisational culture that promotes safety Implement safety policies in the organisation Regular maintenance and repair of equipment Development of communication and coordination strategies within and without the organisation Conclusion The 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico was a tragic event that had diverse effects on the environment and wildlife. For environmentalists, this was a setback to the efforts of environmental pollution prevention and management. This oil spill could have been prevented if the both organisational and technical operations were well coordinated. The lack of coordination and communication, poor policies, lack of safety procedures and lack of expertise are organisational failures that led to the disaster. Technical issues such as improper design and use of faulty and substandard equipment also contributed to the occurrence of this tragedy. The oil spill caused environmental pollution, death of aquatic life, human health damage and climate change, all of which are serious problems since they lead to fatalities. However, this tragedy could have been prevented through better coordination, collaboration and communication both inside and outside organizations as well as use of proper equipment and operational procedures. References BP Refinery (Kwinana) Pty Ltd n.d, Oil spills response, author, Rockingham. BP Company 2011, BP summary review 2010, Pureprint Group Limited, London. Deepwater Horizon Study Group 2010, National Commission on the BP Deep Water Horizon oil spill and offshore drilling, author, Berkeley. Greenpeace n.d, The BP Deepwater Horizon oil disaster: Consequence of misguided energy policy, viewed on 29th November 2011, greenpeace.org Hagerty, C.L 2010, Deepwater Horizon oil spill: Selected issues for Congress, viewed on 29th November 2011, www.crs.gov King, R.O 2010, Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster: Risk, recovery, and insurance implications, viewed on 29th November 2011, www.crs.gov Lepsinger, R 2010, Execution meltdown: Four key failures that sank BP, viwed on 29th November 2011, www.onpointconsultingllc.com Ramseur, J.L 2010, Deepwater Horizon oil spill: The fate of the oil, viewed on 29th November 2011, www.crs.gov Zangari, G 2010, Risk of global climate change by BP oil spill, Institute of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, Italy. Read More