Case Study:
BP and Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill
Presented by: Valerie Reese
Case Summary:
On April 20, 2010, a British Petroleum (BP) oil well in the Gulf of Mexico exploded. Eleven people were killed and 17 more were injured (Barnard 413,421). The explosion caused a huge amount of oil to spill into the Gulf of Mexico. Before the explosion, BP had been known as a safe and environmentally friendly company. BP had been awarded several awards and received recognition as being a good company. However, they did not seem very safe or environmentally friendly after the explosion occurred.
Not only was BP responsible, but their contractors were as well. Two of their main contractors were Transocean and …show more content…
One cost was reputation costs. These companies were not looked at as favorably as they were before the oil spill. BP gas stations were boycotted. Another cost suffered was legal costs. They paid fines, penalties, legal fees, clean up fees, etc. estimated in the billions. Even though Transocean and Halliburton warned BP that problems could occur due to cut backs on procedures and tests, they let BP tell the workers to continue with the drilling. Transocean and Halliburton showed ethical belief and had ethical intent, but BP did not act ethically. In other words, Transocean and Halliburton knew there were problems and tried to persuade BP that more tests were needed; however, they did not stop the drilling process as ordered by BP. Perhaps if policies were in place for a decision making process and these policies would have been followed, the disaster would be less likely to have happened and lives could have been saved. …show more content…
If BP sells the well, they could use the money to pay back their fines and penalties and to help the families who lost loved ones or to those who were injured. It would not be ethical for BP to profit from reopening the well or from selling the well to another company; however, by selling the well they could help cut back on risks by investing into programs, technology, and people and try to gain back the trust of consumers and other
BP and Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill
Presented by: Valerie Reese
Case Summary:
On April 20, 2010, a British Petroleum (BP) oil well in the Gulf of Mexico exploded. Eleven people were killed and 17 more were injured (Barnard 413,421). The explosion caused a huge amount of oil to spill into the Gulf of Mexico. Before the explosion, BP had been known as a safe and environmentally friendly company. BP had been awarded several awards and received recognition as being a good company. However, they did not seem very safe or environmentally friendly after the explosion occurred.
Not only was BP responsible, but their contractors were as well. Two of their main contractors were Transocean and …show more content…
One cost was reputation costs. These companies were not looked at as favorably as they were before the oil spill. BP gas stations were boycotted. Another cost suffered was legal costs. They paid fines, penalties, legal fees, clean up fees, etc. estimated in the billions. Even though Transocean and Halliburton warned BP that problems could occur due to cut backs on procedures and tests, they let BP tell the workers to continue with the drilling. Transocean and Halliburton showed ethical belief and had ethical intent, but BP did not act ethically. In other words, Transocean and Halliburton knew there were problems and tried to persuade BP that more tests were needed; however, they did not stop the drilling process as ordered by BP. Perhaps if policies were in place for a decision making process and these policies would have been followed, the disaster would be less likely to have happened and lives could have been saved. …show more content…
If BP sells the well, they could use the money to pay back their fines and penalties and to help the families who lost loved ones or to those who were injured. It would not be ethical for BP to profit from reopening the well or from selling the well to another company; however, by selling the well they could help cut back on risks by investing into programs, technology, and people and try to gain back the trust of consumers and other