Surf the Internet or Talk

¶ … surf the internet or talk with the man on the street to recognize that the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is a catastrophe unseen in modern history. As June approaches, there seems to be no end in sight to the ever-gushing oil. BP (British Petroleum) has attempted a series of "Top Kill" efforts to no avail (Krauss, 2010). The president, Barack Obama, has appeared inept in his handling of the crisis, defiant of his actions and apologetic all in the same press conference (Baker, 2010). We are facing the consequences of big oil run amok and government inaction that has no winners. Indeed, there are only losers in this eco disaster.

On April 20, 2010 an offshore oilrig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, sank two day later, and ultimately killed 11 workers (N.A, 2010). The explosion caused an oil leak one mile under the sea. Initially, BP estimated the leak to be at 1,000 barrels per day (N.A). Perhaps grudgingly, BP later accepted the United States Government estimate of 5,000 barrels per day (N.A). BP suggested it would spare no expense stopping the leak, pledging to spend $7 million per day fighting the leak (N.A). However, when one considers that BP's first quarter profits for 2010 are estimated to be $61 million per day, it seems small in comparison (N.A.). The U.S. Government claimed that BP was responsible for the cleanup (both fiscally and the actual clean up operation) (N.A.).

The pressing question is: Who is keeping a watchful (e.g. ethical) eye on BP?

Analysis

As the text suggests, (cite on your own), ethics is the study of right and wrong and the search for justice. In this situation, was BP "right" or "wrong" in how they (the company) (a) reacted to the explosion and the ensuing oil spill and (b) the follow through with stopping the leak and the ongoing clean up. First, one must agree that BP is a corporation and is viewed by international law, as an entity replete with privileges and liabilities separate from the employees of the corporation (N.A.). Thus, for this analysis, the author is deeming "they" to be BP, the corporation.

Insofar as the initial question posed, was BP "right" or "wrong" in the reaction to the explosion and the ensuing oils spill, this author contends that BP was in the right. First, one must assume in this situation that BP and all sub-entities and employees working in the field knew the risk of working on an offshore oilrig. The risk was outweighed by the financial gains (e.g. salary) of such dangerous work. In other words, it was a dirty, hard job, and the workers knew the risk. And so, how could BP "react" to an explosion, but in the manner that the company did (shock, awe, grief, etc.) and then transcend the tragedy by attempting to fix the problem. Moreover, BP acted as quickly as a large corporation could in attempting to contain the spill. Has it been effective? Clearly not. but, BP has not given up the cause.

As to the second question, was the company "right" or "wrong" in the follow through that remains to be determined? As of this writing the leak has not been stopped, nor has the clean up truly begun. One cannot predict what the ultimate outcome will be until long after the crisis has been averted.

Ultimately, the question posed, who is watching BP, the obvious answer is the world. This is a disaster of global proportions that is being played out online, on television and the blogosphere. What should occur is a different matter. Clearly the United States Government has been slow, cumbersome and ineffective in its reaction to the crisis. Ironically, Obama appears Bushesque in his handling (or is it mishandling?) of the disaster. One could argue that yes, the previous administration (led by two oilmen) loosened regulations and brought government and big oil into bed together and that President Obama merely inherited the mess. However, such an argument is weak and flaccid when one recognizes that as President, Obama is charged with serving the public. Has he served the public effectively? Perhaps yes, perhaps no. Again, it is early in the final analysis.