Case Study: The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

Running head: THE DEEPWATER HORIZON OIL SPILL
Case study on the British Petroleum’s Deepwater Horizon
Name
Institutional Affiliation

THE DEEPWATER HORIZON OIL SPILL
Introduction
The Deepwater Horizon was an oil rig owned by three multinational oil and gas
companies; with the British Petroleum (BP) owning a larger stake compared to Transocean
Limited and Halliburton Energy Services. The oil spill started on the 20th of April in 2010 to the
19th of September when the well was declared completely sealed. An estimated leakage of 4.9
million barrels of oil was discharged into the Gulf of Mexico with at least 20% of this leakage
making its way into the deep ocean bed (Chernov & Sornette, 2016). The cause of this disaster
was concluded to be a blowout that was led by uncontrolled built up pressure and faulty
cementing (infusing of the cement with nitrogen gas in order for it to dry fast) on the walls of the
well that could not withstand strong amounts of pressure causing the rig to explode.
This incident claimed 11 lives, 17 people were seriously injured and a report indicated
that millions of the aqua life that were exposed to the spillage in the Gulf of Mexico developed
deformities or conditions that could limit their lifespans by three quarter (Environmental
Protection Agency, 2010). A trade involving fish in the region deteriorated by 80% as buyers
resulted in getting fish from other fisheries due to fear of contamination from the fish found in
the Gulf of Mexico. Tourism was reported at an all-time low during that period despite the sandy
beaches along the Gulf that usually attracted thousands of tourists. For the employees at the oil
rig, they were temporarily unemployed for more than four months after the spillage occurred and
throughout its containment (U.S Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, 2014).
British Petroleum was found solely responsible in September 2014 due to ignorance,
negligence and its cost-cutting decision. An investigation conducted showed that the employees
of the oil rig overlooked small indications during testing procedures that would have shown them

THE DEEPWATER HORIZON OIL SPILL
the kick that happens before a well head blow out, in turn preventing all the damage from
occurring. The investigations also discovered faulty and inadequate safety systems as modern
wells have blowout preventers which in British Petroleum's case, did not work as it would
salvage the situation if it did.
The British Petroleum has had to deal with tens of charges and penalties throughout
America including its inability to get any federal contracts. In November 2012, it was charged
with eleven counts of manslaughter, four misdemeanors, and one felony count. It was slapped
with a total fine of $20.8 billion in October 2015, making it the highest paid fine in America's
history. The British Petroleum also paid more than $500,000 for lying to its stakeholders about
the size and extent of the leakage. The then Chief executive officer, Tony Hayward received
heavy backlash from the public and the former United States president, Barack Obama when he
called the spill "very very modest" and "very tiny in comparison to the ocean" which was a
downplay as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill is today referred to as the largest oil catastrophe in
recent history.
There are many ways that the British Petroleum would have solved this crisis, salvaging
their quickly dwindling public image. Using Konrad Palubicki's five stages of crisis management
in the digital age. First, British Petroleum should have prepared in advance. Tony Hayward, on
an interview with CNN, said that his company was ‘not prepared ‘for the occurrence. Being
prepared in this context means having a well-strategized crisis management plan to follow
through in the event of an oil spillage. A crisis communication team is also an important asset as
they are within the company, then they should be the first to disseminate information that is
truthful and consistent to the public.