• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Smoking Kills

Puppycow

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
32,019
Location
Yokohama, Japan
Halliburton Worker on Smoke Break Missed BP Well Data

Dec. 7 (Bloomberg) -- A Halliburton Co. technician missed key signals that BP Plc’s doomed Macondo well was on the verge of blowing out because he was taking a smoking break, a federal investigative panel heard.

Joseph E. Keith, a senior unit manager for Halliburton’s Sperry subsidiary, told the U.S. Coast Guard-Interior Department panel in Houston today that he left his post aboard the Deepwater Horizon for about 10 minutes on the night of the April disaster to drink coffee and smoke half a cigarette.

While he was away from his monitors, pressure data indicated the well was filling up with explosive natural gas and crude, according to charts entered into evidence today by the panel in Houston. Keith said that had he seen the pressure data, he would have “called the rig floor” to warn fellow workers they were in danger.

Something else to blame nicotine for.
 
As much as I'd like to give a Muntz-style "Ha ha" to this, how is it any different if the dude went to the bathroom?

If a system is responsible for monitoring another critical system, it should have a way to pull people's attention to it. I've worked in telecoms for the last 10 years and every operator has such a system. When something goes south, there are audible alarms, big blinking screens, and mass emails sent to every pager/phone within seconds. And that's just because people can't make phone calls; not even a-sploding stuff.

This is also coming from a guy who think smokers are on-average less productive in a given time because they take X number more 10-minute breaks per day than do non-smokers.

ETA:If this guy is required to be at his position for his whole shift, except pre-determined breaks, he's boned.
 
Last edited:
If the system was that critical, shouldn't there have been more than one person around? I'm not trying to excuse the guy who decided his responsibility for making sure the world doesn't explode wasn't quite as important as his drug addictions, but would it have killed the company to put a second guy on the same shift?
 
These are valid points. Still, in the military we were taught that when you are standing a watch, you never quit your post until you are relieved. Of course, not all watches are equal. There's a big difference between a watch in a war zone and at the barracks in peacetime.

But it would be better in the future to remove the human element and have the alarm sound automatically. If the emergency is something that only happens once in a hundred years or less, there is a very strong temptation to get complacent.
 
Poor form attacking smokers. If you dont smoke you go to toilet break, coffee break. Now why he was on a break with no replacement if it is that important is worth commenting on.
 
There is nothing in the article that says
a. He was not allowed to take a break. This is not the military.
b. He was not relieved by another person who failed to recognize the problems.
c. The readings were bad enough to trigger any alarms. After all they returned to normal.
 

Back
Top Bottom