Discuss how the poets convey the theme of loss and death Essay Example

Discuss how the poets convey the theme of loss and death Essay The theme of death is commonly used in the world of literature; it exists as one of the defying elements in the writing of poetry. Maybe because at some point in our lives, we must all face the dreaded idea of death. The poems Piano by the Victorian poet D.H Lawrence, Refugee Mother And Child by the Nigerian poet Chinua Achebe, Funeral Blues by the English poet W.H Auden, A Case of Murder by the illustrious Vernon Scannell, Remember by the romantic Christina Rossetti and On My first Sonne by the English Renaissance poet Ben Jonson, use a selection of poetic techniques in order to convey a broad variety of emotions surrounding the main theme of death.Through the use of direct words with negative connotation, Auden conveys the theme of death, whilst creating a dark, mournful time in the poem, Funeral Blues. The mood of Funeral Blues can come across as quite angry and frustrating, and I find that this anger and frustration towards the world increases, as Auden skillfully uses stronger w ords with negative connotation towards the end of the poem, ‘the stars are not wanted now: put out every one/ Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun/ Pour away the ocean and sweep up the wood.’ These words are of rejection, waste and redundancy. I find that this line not only highlights the frustrated emotions of the narrator, but additionally, through the use of direct words with negative connotation incorporated with nature, suggests that the narrator wants the whole world to stop dead, and mourn his loved one’s death.Moreover, the elegy Funeral Blues explores and expresses the frustration and sorrow of a lover, who is trying to cope with the death of his loved one. Through the use of imperatives, the poet’s intentions are made very clear as the poem commences, ‘Stop all the clocks, cut off the telephone/prevent the dog from barking with a juicy bone’. This beginning line suggests that the narrator is trying to keep his composure and gain co ntrol, as this will give him a sense of security and reassurance to cope with the death of his loved one. Auden cleverly uses onomatopoeia to highlight our everyday lives, for example, the ticking of the ‘clocks’, the ringing of the ‘telephones’, the barking from the dog and the steady rhythm of the ‘drum’. These are all sounds that we hear in everyday life, and I feel that the narrator has a huge urge to stop it all, and be left with nothing but silence. I understand that the narrator is longing for silence, in respect for the dead, and also that he feels there is no meaning in the world moving on.I understand that when Auden uses direct words with negative connotation, ‘stop’, ‘cut off’, ‘silence’, ‘coffin’, ‘mourners’, he is emphasising the theme of death throughout the poem. Similarly, in A Case of Murder, Scannell also uses direct words with strong negative connotation to con vey the theme of death, ‘alone’, ‘hot blood’, ‘mad’, ‘furry dark’, ‘snarl of a grin’ ‘cracked like a nut’, ‘dumped’.Additionally, the poet employs a regular rhyme scheme in Funeral Blues, as Auden intentionally starts the poem with an AABA rhyme scheme in the first stanza, which soon becomes a regular AABB in the second stanza. The use of rhyming couplets also gives the poem a sense of evenness and a steady, somewhat fast, rhythm and tempo to the poem, which works with the steady beat of the ‘muffled drum’ set by Auden. I find that the fast rhythm and tempo of the poem works well with the narrator’s frustrated emotions that seem to pour out one after the other.Moreover, Auden stresses the narrator’s grief and frustration in the last line of the poem, ‘For nothing now can ever come to any good’. Auden contrasts ‘nothing’ and ‘goodâ€⠄¢ to emphasise that nothing is important anymore. This makes me feel sorrow towards the narrator, as he feels that nothing worthwhile can ever be fulfilled. Through the use of direct language with strong negative connotation, incorporated with nature, Auden successfully conveys the frustrating emotions of the narrator, in the theme of loss and death.In contrast to Funeral Blues, On My First Sonne, shows the grief and emotionally difficult situation in which a father loses his favourite son. Even though both poems deal with death and the loss of a loved one, On My First Sonne, pours out a stream of emotions and sorrow in a much more careful and indirect way, which reflects upon the renaissance period, in which On My First Sonne was written in. This poem is about the reflection of a father’s pain in his favourite son’s‘thou child of my right hand’death. He feels that god has taken his son away as a punishment, as his ‘sinne was too much hope of theeâ €™, meaning he was too proud of his son, and expected high expectations of him.The father, Ben Jonson himself, speaks about how his son was the best thing he ever created, ‘Ben Jonson his best piece of poetrie’, and this reveals just how close and loving their relationship was. I find their relationship very similar to the relationship of the mother and son in the poem Refugee Mother and Child by Chinua Achebe. I find the starting line of the poem; ‘No Madonna and Child could touch/Her tenderness for a son’ expresses the close bond of the Mother and her son, for their love for one another is even greater than that of Madonna and Child.Furthermore, Achebe uses a lack of verbs to portray how tired the mother must be feeling, ‘waddling in labored steps’ and ‘dried-up bottoms waddling’. The use of sensory appeal and powerful imagery emphasise the theme of death all around the camp, ‘the air was heavy with odors of diarrhea/of unwashed children with washed-out ribs’. Just by reading this line, I can already imagine what death must smell like and how unhealthy and starved these young children must be. Achebe uses many words to symbolise the theme of death, ‘struggling’, ‘skull’ and ‘grave’. This, in result, foreshadows that the mother will lose her son at some point of the poem, and that he cannot escape death. The last line of the poem, ‘like putting flowers on a tiny grave’ has the most impact for me.The word ‘flowers’ shows respect for the loss of a loved one and ‘grave’ stresses the sorrowful and lonesome idea of death. The word ‘tiny’ emphasises just how young the son must be, and this makes me feel sorrow for both the mother and her son, as her son has not yet experienced and fulfilled life entirely, and that he is too young to cope with the frightening idea of death. I can understand his mother’ s grief, as she will never have the chance to watch him grow up, and make a life of his own. Instead, she is left to cope with, not only the harsh conditions in the refugee camp, but also the loss of her beloved son.On My First Sonne is in pure iambic pentameter, as is Rossetti’s Remember. Both narrators’ are dealing with death and loss, and the iambic pentameter brings a sense of calmness and evenness throughout the poem. Both narrators have similar purposes, as they are both trying to comfort themselves with the idea of never seeing their loved ones again, as well as comforting their loved ones. The narrator in Remember attempts to give her loved one a sense of comfort and security, while she has ‘gone faraway into the silent land’. ‘Silent land’ is less harsh than the idea of death and afterlife, and I think that Rossetti successfully achieves to make the idea of death seem rather calming.The narrator in On My First Sonne shows that the lov e for his son is caring and tender, ‘rest in soft peace’. Jonson uses words with positive connotation in this phrase, and the words, ‘rest’ and ‘soft’ bring a peaceful and calm image to my mind. When Jonson adds, ‘soft’, which emphasises how much he cares for his son, and how much he longs for his son to be happy during his ‘afterlife’. Jonson conveys the theme of death with the idea of resting in ‘soft peace’, as it makes the idea of death seem less frightening and more reassuring.Similarly, the poem Piano by D.H Lawrence also uses indirect words with positive connotation to convey the themes of loss and death. Even though the narrator does not have someone to comfort him, like the loved ones in Remember and On My First Sonne, the narrator reassures himself by remembering happy, and comforting memories of when he was a young boy with his mother, ‘hymns in the cozy parlor, the tinkling piano in our g uide’ and, ‘pressing the small, poised feet of a mother who smiles as she sings’. The line that has the most impact on me in the poem is, ‘Down in the flood of remembrance’.This line has such powerful imagery, and I can almost feel the rush of emotions pouring out of the narrator, and see the flood of tears that have overcome him. The word, ‘remembrance’ is powerful, as it not only conveys the narrator’s struggle of emotions as he copes with the loss of his mother, but also conveys the theme of death, as his mother can no longer be by his side, and he is only left with memories of his mother.In conclusion, all six poems use a broad variety of poetic techniques in order to explore and convey the main themes of both loss and death. Funeral Blues by W. H Auden was the most dramatic and direct poem, as Auden not only used a range of words with negative connotation, but he also explored effective techniques such as, imperatives and ono matopoeia. Auden stresses the frustrating emotions that almost everyone would feel, if they ever experienced the loss of a loved one. Refugee Mother and Child by Chinua Achebe is a beautiful poem that expresses the unconditional love that a mother has for her son. Achebe successfully used powerful imagery throughout the poem, which made it even more sickening and sad. On My First Sonne by Ben Jonson was very similar to Refugee Mother and Child as both narrators had to cope with the loss of their children.Jonson conveyed the themes of loss and death much more carefully and delicately than the other two poems. Even though there were only a few words with positive connotation, Jonson still managed to create a reassuring, calming and comforting tone through the steady tempo of the iambic pentameter. I feel that the poem, which best represented both themes of death and loss, was Refugee Mother and Child due to Achebe’s use of powerful imagery and sensory appeal. I could feel a rea l connection with the mother, and I could imagine how tired she must have felt. I was strongly touched by the unconditional love that the mother had for her son, and, despite being tired, her determination to make the last moments of her son’s life the happiest.

Hiroshima by John Hersey essays

Hiroshima by John Hersey essays In his book, Hiroshima, John Hersey tells the story of six human beings who lived through the greatest single man-made disaster in history the bombing of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945. Brilliant in his straightforward and unambiguous prose, John Hersey explains what these six individuals were doing immediately before and after 8:15 a.m. on that fateful day when the first atomic bomb destroyed Hiroshima. The story in its eloquence weaves a tale of the lives of these six survivors from the time they awoke on that momentous morning until the moment when, with a blinding flash, their lives were irrevocably changed. Hersey's purpose in writing this book is to demonstrate how the dropping of the atomic bomb impacted the lives of its victims in hopes that the horror of this event will never be repeated. Employing everyday language and depicting commonplace occurrences, Hersey enables the reader to experience the daily routines of the people. The author divides each chapter into sections that follow the movements of the six people during specific periods of time that morning. The book begins with their first waking thought, carries the six through the actual bombing of the city, and describes their utter bewilderment as to what had transpired. Hersey goes into minute detail, describing the sounds, the smells, and the sights. Although the citizens of Hiroshima anticipated that their city would be attacked, they did not expect the level of destruction that the atomic bomb produced. Hersey uses quotations from citizens who survived the assault to illustrate the people's inability to comprehend the devastation. Small clues such as the fact that walls had tumbled inward, not outward, the collapse of so many buildings when the people heard no planes, and the fact that not enough bombs h ad fallen to cause such a catastrophe, are but a few of the personal details the book sets forth. ...

Case study report Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words - 2

Case study report - Essay Example One approach is to ensure they understand the cultural, organizational, and national framework to ensure the personnel tasked with the duties of implementing such strategies understands the expectations and the context of the business. Reardon’s Hotels is one of the United Kingdom companies in the hotel industry embracing the concept of MNCs. The hotel has seven branches with it’s headquarter in Bristol. Edward Readson is the current Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The organization has an up-market accommodation as its strategic market position. The managerial style and the organizational culture is that of a father figure because it’s a family run business (Reardon’s family) but follows a standardization human resource policy. Their primary customer targets are the travelers. Given that, most MNCs have strategies that lure, attract, and retain the best staff, tailoring the reward scheme that is justified to, the position will play a critical role in buildi ng the institution (Marginson et al., 2010; Tony 2010). Therefore, the MNC plays a significant role in influencing change and the possible directions the organization is likely to take to ensure acceptance and profitable entry into various markets across the globe. Therefore, the case of Reardon Hotels is a good example in assessing the roles played by MNC in the context of HRM to ensure integration and differentiation within and between the national and international system of organization. There are several perspectives on literature that assessed the MNC by examining the differentiation and integration. The perspective associated with the fact that most MNCs have had a tendency of retaining their national goals and values (Doremus et al 1998), because they retain a much stronger link between their country of origin and the subsidiaries. However, some researchers have documented converging evidence that aimed

What is the relationship between drug use and crime Essay

What is the relationship between drug use and crime - Essay Example Trade in illegal drugs and use of the same substances fosters crime in the society. Increased proliferation and usage of the illegal drugs lead to a proportionate increase in crime in the society as the discussion below portrays. The relationship between drugs and crime is three tiers given the nature of drug use and the trade in drugs. The three types of crime that have a close relationship with drugs use and trade are economic related crimes, use related crime and system related crime (Adint, 1997). Use related crimes are the types of crimes that drug users commit because of the ingestion of the drugs. Drug users are unstable individuals since the drugs affect the functionality of the nervous system. They are likely to behave violently and commit a number of other crimes. System related crimes refer to the crimes that arise from the manufacture, sale and distribution of drugs. Economic related crimes, on the other hand, refer to the crimes that drug users commit in their attempt to fund their addictions. Firstly, the use of such drugs is a crime in the country. The drugs cause immense biological and psychological injuries to the populace. The government therefore banned the use of such drugs. In order to ensure that the country is free from such drugs, it formed an arm of law enforcement agency to curb the proliferation of such drugs in the country. The fact that the use of such drugs is a crime makes the linkage between drug use and crime proportional. Additionally, trade in drugs and drug use cause immense social disorder given the fact that both activities are illegal. Drug users are likely to act violently owing to the fact that the drugs impair their judgments. As such, they are likely to initiate various types of aggressive attacks all of which amount to criminal activities in the country (Galizio & Maisto, 1985). Trade in drugs is illegal in the country with the government forming a

Ethels Chocolate Lounges Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 13

Ethels Chocolate Lounges - Assignment Example The product line of gourmet chocolate comes at an expensive price to compete with multinationals in the industry such as Starbucks. Ethel’s Chocolate Lounge relies on limited decision making to influence the clients. Clients that engage in limited decision-making have a low level of involvement and do not engage in searching for alternative products and brands. The search for similar items will base the decision on similar ingredients when items are on sale or a prior experience on some of the item the consumer needed to purchase. Mars Corporation focuses on advantage routine response behavior frequent purchases by consumers’ exhibits routine response behavior. Some of the factors that can motivate the consumers to make a purchase at Ethel’s Chocolate include an advertisement with a desirable destination. A specific culture will move to various styles of chocolates to enjoy the taste-making of Ethel’s Chocolate. Some of the psychological factors that suit the consumers' needs include beliefs, perception, and attitudes. An upscale modern style will match with the popular culture of classy feel. The store has a modern look with an appeal of relaxing ambiance that encourages socialization to extend lounging.

Advantages And Disadvantages Of Design And Build Method Construction Essay

Advantages And Disadvantages Of Design And Build Method Construction Essay While construction contracts serves as a means of pricing construction, they also structure the allocation of risk to the various parties involved. The construction field is a very extensive and unique in each project. In this world most of the projects are managed by contracts. And as a principle to manage the project effectively we should first manage the contracts. The owner has the sole power to decide what type of contract delivery method should be used for a specific facility to be constructed and to set forth the terms in a contractual agreement. A firm has to choose the right delivery method which is project to project base and present its bid offer to the engineer/client during tendering stage to enable it to present competitive price and win the project without compromising the functional and the quality of the project. Choosing the right method to deliver the project will ease the project execution and give flexibility during construction as well as saving money and time for a firm and subsequently the same to the owner. It is important to understand the risks of the contractors associated with different type of delivery methods. In this instant you may ask what the contract delivery methods are and we should choose the right delivery methods. Projects delivery methods. There are three types of project delivery methods. In this section we will concentrate on design and Build because it s the best method for small and medium projects. 1- Tender or design-bid-build method In this type the owner/client will choose engineer to design the whole project and get the Approvals from authorities then floating tender to choose suitable contractor for the Construction under his supervision. In this type of method the client /engineer has full control of the project and the contractor has to comply with full design given by the engineer. Most suitable type of contract for this method is lump sum contract which the price given by the Contractor is fixed and the whole project is already designed and the scope of work is clear and fully detailed. 2-indefinite quantity contract method Under this type of contract there shall be no design and it is based on maintenance or repairing projects. Under this agreement the owner and the contractor will upfront set up prices for the labors and Equipments and markup etc 3- Design and build method. The term design-build refers to a range of alternatives to the traditional project delivery system. A useful way to look at design-build is by what it is not. Traditional design-bid-build is a segmented, sequential process in which the owner first contracts With a design professional to prepare detailed, suitable-for-construction plans and specifications (or Sometimes has them prepared by its in-house engineers), then uses the detailed plans and Specifications to solicit competitive bids for construction, and finally awards the construction Contract to the low bidder. Design-build means a procurement process in which both the design and construction of A project is procured from a single contractor. Usually, the design-build contract is awarded by some process other than competitive bidding Providing the best value (in price, features, functions [and] life-cycle costs) Thus, design-build differs from traditional design-bid-build in two ways. First, the design and construction components are packaged into a single contract. Second, the single contract is not necessarily awarded to the low bidder after competitive bidding I-Why Design-Build? (Advantages) Potential Cost Savings Design-build has the potential to reduce over-all project cost because the design-build contractor performing the design has a better feel for the construction cost of various alternatives, Thus can come up with a design that is less expensive to build and has an incentive to do so. Another way to look at this advantage is that it moves value engineering cost reduction incentive After contract award (with the contractor proposing cost-reduction ideas and sharing the savings with the owner) to pre-award (with the owner enjoying most of the cost savings). B. Earlier Project Completion Design-build may result in earlier completion and occupancy of the project because there is no Dead time between completion of design and start of construction. Further, the design-build Contractor can begin construction of early phases of the project (e.g. mobilization, site utilities, Foundations) before design of later phases (building envelope, interior partitions, HVAC, electrical) Is 100 percent complete? This process sometimes is referred to as fast track. C. Reduced Claims Exposure Design-build eliminates the liability gap. Design professionals can obtain insurance coverage only for negligent errors and omissions, and virtually all design contracts limit the designers liability to such. However, there can be non-negligent errors and omissions, which cost the owner money but for which the design professional is not liable. For example, a design professional may undertake Reasonable subsurface investigations but fail to detect a rock outcropping that will require additional work. In the traditional design-bid-build approach, the owner warrants the correctness of the plans and Specifications to the construction contractor. There can be design mistakes for which the owner is liable to the construction contractor under the Warranty of correctness but cannot transfer the liability on to the design professional. Even when the designer is in fact negligent, proving negligence can be difficult. The owner must obtain a certificate of merit from another design professional and then prove that the designer failed to meet the applicable professional standard of care, which requires expert testimony. On the other hand, the contractor usually can prove there was a defect in the plans that cost the Contractor money based on fact testimony alone. Thus, the owner may have to bear the cost. Design- build eliminates this gap because the design-bid build entity has no one but itself to blame For defective plans and specifications or differing site conditions. D. New Technologies Public Contracts usually prohibits brand-name or model-number specifications unless the Specification lists at least two brand names and is followed by the phrase or equal. This makes it difficult for traditional design-bid-build to reach innovative, proprietary Products where there may be only one brand-name and no equal. Further, substitution of a new or equal product for a standard product often is impracticable Because of the ripple effect. The designer designs the project around current generation Products and substitution of new or equal products after bidding can require revisions to structure, mechanical or electrical components to accommodate the new product. Who is going to pay for these ripple changes? Design-build resolves this problem. The design-build contractor selects the equipment (right down to make and model number) and Then designs the building around the selected equipment, which is a more logical way to proceed. In fact, the design-build contractor can sometimes obtain free design assistance from equipment Manufacturers desiring that their new technologies be used. E. Over-All Project Optimization Design-bid-build can suffer from sub-optimization when individual project participants optimize their own positions, often at the expense of the over-all project. The total cost to the owner of a building element, such as the steel frame, includes the cost of the engineering to determine the required steel sections plus the cost of the steel. The designer has little incentive to use a sharp pencil to achieve the minimum amount of Structural steel; he optimizes his own position by spending only the design time necessary to Ensure that there is enough steel to meet gravity and seismic loads, often by employing Conservative assumptions that may result in more steel than necessary. So, the owner may save money on design but pay for it in steel. With design-build, on the other hand, the design-build entity has an incentive to use the Optimum amount of engineering. As long as an additional dollar of engineering will save more than one dollars worth of steel, the design-build contractor will spend the engineering time up To the point of diminishing returns when an additional dollars worth of engineering saves only a Dollar s worth of steel because both the cost of design and the cost of steel come out of the same pocket. This is not to say that design-build results in flimsy or less-safe structures. More (steel, concrete, etc.) is not necessarily better. Simply specifying extra steel or concrete in one place because the engineer does not have the time or incentive to calculate exactly how much is actually required does not improve the over-all performance of the building. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. If the owner wants a building with higher floor Loadings, less floor deflection or resistance to a bigger earthquake than required by code, then The way to achieve this is by placing that requirement on the design-build entity up front not by Hoping that the designer will throw in some extra steel or concrete because he or she does not have time in the budget to use a sharp pencil. F.Reduced Administrative Burden Design-build may reduce the administrative burden on the owner because there is one solicitation, one award and one contract to administer. G. Earlier Cost Visibility The total cost of the project is apparent earlier with design-build. In traditional design-bid-build, Construction costs are not known until bid opening, and it is possible to spend money on a design that the agency cannot afford to build. All too often, construction bids exceed the budget, and the Project must be re-designed to bring it within the budget, thus delaying completion. H. Agency CM with Multi-Prime Contracts One of the advantages of design-build can be achieved by a construction management (CM) to Manage design and over-all project coordination and then contracting directly with several contractors, which are then managed by the CM. Construction project management s services provided by a licensed architect, registered engineer, or licensed general contractor. Under this approach, the early phases of the project (earthwork, site utilities, and foundations) can be placed under contract before design of the building shell and interior is 100 percent complete, and the structural steel and other long lead-time components can be ordered. Then, the contracts for the early phases can be awarded to follow-on contractors. There are two types of construction managers. An agency CM is a consultant to the owner; an agency CM is not in the chain of privity between The owner and the contractor(s) and does not guarantee the cost of the work. An at-risk CM, on the other hand, essentially is a brokering general contractor. The at-risk CM is either in the chain of privity between the owner and the trade contractors or Guarantees that the aggregate price of the contracts will not exceed some maximum figure. Any individual or firm proposing to provide construction project management services shall provide Evidence that the individual or firm and its personnel carrying out onsite responsibilities have Expertise and experience in construction project design review and evaluation, construction Mobilization and supervision, bid evaluation, project scheduling, cost-benefit analysis, claims Review and negotiation, and general management and administration of a construction project. Which type of contract is better for design-build? Most suitable type of contracts is lump sum contract because the owner has essentially assigned all the risks to the contractor, who in turn can be expected to ask for a higher markup in order to take Care of unforeseen contingencies. Beside the fixed lump sum price, other commitments are often made by the contractor in the form of submittals such as a specific schedule, the management reporting system or a quality control Program. If the actual cost of the project is underestimated, the underestimated cost will reduce the Contractor s profit by that amount. An overestimate has an opposite effect, but may reduce the Chance of being a low bidder for the project. The scope of work, the price, the time of performance is already defined. Usually the contractors include allowance for contingencies in their bid price so the price Small and medium projects are most suitable for this kind of project where is the design is easy not Complicated and can be managed by one party. II-disadvantages The potential advantages of design-build do not come without risk. A. Less Control. Under traditional design-bid-build, the owner has full control over the details of the plans and Specifications and does not publish them for bids until it is satisfied that they reflect its Requirements, including functional and aesthetic preferences. With design-build, the owner gives up some of this control. i.e., advancing the level of design through the design development stage (30 percent or so) before award of the design-build contract. Of course, by doing so the owner may give up some of the advantages of design-build. B. Need for Earlier Requirements Definition With design-build, the owner must lock in its requirements much earlier. With traditional design-bid-build, if the owner is a little fuzzy on its functional or aesthetic Requirements, it can clarify them during the design phase after if sees where the designer is heading. But with design-bid-build, post-award programmatic changes can be very expensive and disruptive. C. Recommendation So, if the city (country) rules are not certain what it wants, traditional design-bid-build may be the better alternative. D. Compliance with Subcontractors The Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act, requires that bidders list their subcontractors with their bids. This can be a problem for a design-build bidder. Without detailed design drawings, the subcontractors cannot precisely estimate costs. But, listing a subcontractor without a firm subcontract price puts the design-build contractor at a disadvantage in subsequently pricing the subcontract work. A listed subcontractor has the prime design-build contractor over the proverbial barrel. This is a manageable problem for a design-build contractor with many of the same type of projects in an Area, as a subcontractor can only get away with gouging the design-build entity once. Parking garages and housing are good examples of where the design-build entities work with a group of subcontractors on a repetitive basis, and subcontractors can estimate their work on a perspace. or.pre-square.foot.basis. Design-build contractor shall search for competitive bids for subcontracts not listed with its prime bid. The problem with this approach is that it depends on specific legislative authorizations that do not apply to the country. Thus, the safest approach may be to require listing of subcontractors at time of bid, even though this may result in either the subcontractors or the prime design-build entity including some contingency and mark-up. E. Payment bonds Generally it is required a payment bond payable by the terms of the contract. However, when the design services and the construction are procured under a single contract, must the payment bond be in the full amount of the design-build contract or only in the amount of the Construction portion? Logically, it would seem that 100 percent of the construction portion would fulfil the intent of the statute.

An Examination of the Second Meditation of Descartes :: Essays Papers

An Examination of the Second Meditation of Descartes Baird and Kaufmann, the editors of our text, explain in their outline of Descartes' epistemology that the method by which the thinker carried out his philosophical work involved first discovering and being sure of a certainty, and then, from that certainty, reasoning what else it meant one could be sure of. He would admit nothing without being absolutely satisfied on his own (i.e., without being told so by others) that it was incontrovertible truth. This system was unique, according to the editors, in part because Descartes was not afraid to face doubt. Despite the fact that it was precisely doubt of which he was endeavoring to rid himself, he nonetheless allowed it the full reign it deserved and demanded over his intellectual labors. "Although uncertainty and doubt were the enemies," say Baird and Kaufmann (p.16), "Descartes hit upon the idea of using doubt as a tool or as a weapon. . . . He would use doubt as an acid to pour over every 'truth' to see if there was anything that coul d not be dissolved . . . ." This test, they explain, resulted for Descartes in the conclusion that, if he doubted everything in the world there was to doubt, it was still then certain that he was doubting; further, that in order to doubt, he had to exist. His own existence, therefore, was the first truth he could admit to with certainty, and it became the basis for the remainder of his epistemology. In his "Synopsis of the Following Six Meditations," Descartes writes the longest paragraph by far on the Second Meditation. This is hardly surprising, since it is the one most critical to his methodology -- the one without which, his entire system of reasoning would collapse. In the first sentence of it, he presents exactly that conclusion which, as we have just seen, Baird and Kaufmann discussed: "In the Second Meditation," he says (p. 23), "the mind uses its own freedom and supposes the non-existence of all things about whose existence it can have even the slightest doubt; and in so doing the mind notices that it is impossible that it should not itself exist during this time." He goes on to say that this will enable the mind to distinguish itself from the body. At this point he spends a good deal of space speaking of exactly why he will not attempt to prove the immortality of the soul in this section, though perhaps some of his audience might have expected him to.

Deep Water

i i Dedication This report is dedicated to the 11 men who lost their lives on the Deepwater Horizon rig on April 20, 2010 and to their families, in hope that this report will help minimize the chance of another such disaster ever happening again. Jason Anderson Aaron Dale Burkeen Donald Clark Stephen Curtis Gordon Jones Roy Wyatt Kemp Karl Dale Kleppinger, Jr. Blair Manuel Dewey Revette Shane Roshto Adam Weise ii Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge the many individuals and organizations, government officials and agencies alike that offered their views and insights to the Commission.We would especially like to express our gratitude to the Coast Guard’s Incident Specific Preparedness Review (ISPR) for allowing Commission staff to participate in its interviews and discussions, which was invaluable to the preparation of this report. (A copy of the Coast Guard’s ISPR report can be found at the Commission’s website at www. oilspillcommission. gov). We would also li ke to thank Chevron for performing the cement tests that proved so critical to our investigation into the Macondo well blowout. Related article: Why Nations Fail Chapter 5We also thank the Department of Energy, which served as our supporting agency, and all of the Department employees whose assistance was so essential to the success and functioning of the Commission. In particular, we would like to thank Christopher Smith, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oil and Natural Gas, who acted as the Commission’s Designated Federal Officer, as well as Elena Melchert, Petroleum Engineer in the Office of Oil and Gas Resource Conservation, who served as the Committee Manager. But most importantly, we are deeply grateful to the citizens of the Gulf who shared their personal xperiences as Commissioners traveled in the region, providing a critical human dimension to the disaster and to our undertaking, as well as the many people who testified at the Commission’s hearings, provided public comments, and submitted statements to our website. Together, these contributions greatly informed our work and led to a bette r report. Thank you one and all. Copyright, Restrictions, and Permissions Notice Except as noted herein, materials contained in this report are in the public domain.Public domain information may be freely distributed and copied. However, this report contains illustrations, photographs, and other information contributed by or licensed from private individuals, companies, or organizations that may be protected by U. S. and/or foreign copyright laws. Transmission or reproduction of items protected by copyright may require the written permission of the copyright owner. When using material or images from this report we ask that you credit this report, as well as the source of the material as indicated in this report. Permission to use materials copyrighted by other individuals, companies or organizations must be obtained directly from those sources. This report contains links to many Web sites. Once you access another site through a link that we provide, you are subject to the use, copyr ight and licensing restrictions of that site. Neither the Government nor the National Commission on the BP/Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling (Commission) endorses any of the organizations or views represented by the linked sites unless expressly stated in the report.The Government and the Commission take no responsibility for, and exercise no control over, the content, accuracy or accessibility of the material contained on the linked sites. Cover Photo:  © Steadfast TV ISBN: 978-0-16-087371-3 iii iii Deep Water The Gulf Oil Disaster and the Future of Offshore Drilling Report to the President National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling January 2011 iv Commission Members Bob Graham, Co-Chair William K. Reilly, Co-Chair Frances Beinecke Donald F. Boesch Terry D. Garcia Cherry A. Murray Fran Ulmer v Table of Contents Foreword PART I: The Path to Tragedy Chapter 1 â€Å"Everyone involved with the job†¦was completely satisfiedâ⠂¬ ¦. † The Deepwater Horizon, the Macondo Well, and Sudden Death on the Gulf of Mexico vi xiii 1 21 Chapter 2 â€Å"Each oil well has its own personality† The History of Offshore Oil and Gas in the United States Chapter 3 â€Å"It was like pulling teeth. † Oversight—and Oversights—in Regulating Deepwater Energy Exploration and Production in the Gulf of Mexico 55 PART II: Explosion and Aftermath: The Causes and Consequences of the Disaster Chapter 4 But, who cares, it’s done, end of story, [we] will probably be fine and we’ll get a good cement job. † The Macondo Well and the Blowout 87 89 Chapter 5 â€Å"You’re in it now, up to your neck! † Response and Containment 129 173 197 Chapter 6 â€Å"The worst environmental disaster America has ever faced. † Oiling a Rich Environment: Impacts and Assessment Chapter 7 â€Å"People have plan fatigue . . . they’ve been planned to death† Recovery and Restor ation PART III: Lessons Learned: Industry, Government, Energy Policy Chapter 8 â€Å"Safety is not proprietary. † Changing Business as Usual 215 217Chapter 9 â€Å"Develop options for guarding against, and mitigating the impact of, oil spills associated with offshore drilling. † Investing in Safety, Investing in Response, Investing in the Gulf 249 Chapter 10 American Energy Policy and the Future of Offshore Drilling 293 307 356 358 359 362 365 366 368 Endnotes Appendices Appendix A: Commission Members Appendix B: List of Acronyms Appendix C: Executive Order Appendix D: Commission Staff and Consultants Appendix E: List of Commission Meetings Appendix F: List of Staff Working Papers Index vi Photo: Susan Walsh, Associated PressThe explosion that tore through the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig last April 20, as the rig’s crew completed drilling the exploratory Macondo well deep under the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, began a human, economic, and environmental disas ter. Eleven crew members died, and others were seriously injured, as fire engulfed and ultimately destroyed the rig. And, although the nation would not know the full scope of the disaster for weeks, the first of more than four million barrels of oil began gushing uncontrolled into the Gulf—threatening livelihoods, precious habitats, and even a unique way of life.A treasured American landscape, already battered and degraded from years of mismanagement, faced yet another blow as the oil spread and washed ashore. Five years after Hurricane Katrina, the nation was again transfixed, seemingly helpless, as this new tragedy unfolded in the Gulf. The costs from this one industrial accident are not yet fully counted, but it is already clear that the impacts on the region’s natural systems and people were enormous, and that economic losses total tens of billions of dollars.On May 22, 2010, President Barack Obama announced the creation of the National Commission on the BP Deepwat er Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling: an independent, nonpartisan entity, directed to provide a thorough analysis and impartial judgment. The President charged the Commission to determine the causes of the disaster, and to improve the country’s ability to respond to spills, and to recommend reforms to make offshore energy production safer. And the President said we were to follow the facts wherever they led. This report is the result of an intense six-month effort to fulfill the President’s charge.Foreword vii vii From the outset, the Commissioners have been determined to learn the essential lessons so expensively revealed in the tragic loss of life at the Deepwater Horizon and the severe damages that ensued. The Commission’s aim has been to provide the President, policymakers, industry, and the American people a clear, accessible, accurate, and fair account of the largest oil spill in U. S history: the context for the well itself, how the explosion and sp ill happened, and how industry and government scrambled to respond to an unprecedented emergency.This was our first obligation: determine what happened, why it happened, and explain it to Americans everywhere. As a result of our investigation, we conclude: †¢ †¢ The explosive loss of the Macondo well could have been prevented. The immediate causes of the Macondo well blowout can be traced to a series of identifiable mistakes made by BP Halliburton, and Transocean that reveal such , systematic failures in risk management that they place in doubt the safety culture of the entire industry. Deepwater energy exploration and production, particularly at the frontiers of experience, involve risks for which neither industry nor overnment has been adequately prepared, but for which they can and must be prepared in the future. To assure human safety and environmental protection, regulatory oversight of leasing, energy exploration, and production require reforms even beyond those sign ificant reforms already initiated since the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Fundamental reform will be needed in both the structure of those in charge of regulatory oversight and their internal decisionmaking process to ensure their political autonomy, technical expertise, and their full consideration of environmental protection concerns.Because regulatory oversight alone will not be sufficient to ensure adequate safety, the oil and gas industry will need to take its own, unilateral steps to increase dramatically safety throughout the industry, including self-policing mechanisms that supplement governmental enforcement. The technology, laws and regulations, and practices for containing, responding to, and cleaning up spills lag behind the real risks associated with deepwater drilling into large, high-pressure reservoirs of oil and gas located far offshore and thousands of feet below the ocean’s surface.Government must close the existing gap and industry must support rather than r esist that effort. Scientific understanding of environmental conditions in sensitive environments in deep Gulf waters, along the region’s coastal habitats, and in areas proposed for more drilling, such as the Arctic, is inadequate. The same is true of the human and natural impacts of oil spills. †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ viii We reach these conclusions, and make necessary recommendations, in a constructive spirit: we aim to promote changes that will make American offshore energy exploration and production far safer, today and in the future.More broadly, the disaster in the Gulf undermined public faith in the energy industry, government regulators, and even our own capability as a nation to respond to crises. It is our hope that a thorough and rigorous accounting, along with focused suggestions for reform, can begin the process of restoring confidence. There is much at stake, not only for the people directly affected in the Gulf region, but for the American peopl e at large. The tremendous resources that exist within our outer continental shelf belong to the nation as a whole.The federal government’s authority over the shelf is accordingly plenary, based on its power as both the owner of the resources and in its regulatory capacity as sovereign to protect public health, safety, and welfare. To be allowed to drill on the outer continental shelf is a privilege to be earned, not a private right to be exercised. â€Å"Complex Systems Almost Always Fail in Complex Ways† As the Board that investigated the loss of the Columbia space shuttle noted, â€Å"complex systems almost always fail in complex ways. Though it is tempting to single out one crucial misstep or point the finger at one bad actor as the cause of the Deepwater Horizon explosion, any such explanation provides a dangerously incomplete picture of what happened—encouraging the very kind of complacency that led to the accident in the first place. Consistent with the President’s request, this report takes an expansive view. Why was a corporation drilling for oil in mile-deep water 49 miles off the Louisiana coast? To begin, Americans today consume vast amounts of petroleum products—some 18. 7 million barrels per day—to fuel our economy.Unlike many other oil-producing countries, the United States relies on private industry—not a state-owned or -controlled enterprise—to supply oil, natural gas, and indeed all of our energy resources. This basic trait of our private-enterprise system has major implications for how the U. S. government oversees and regulates offshore drilling. It also has advantages in fostering a vigorous and competitive industry, which has led worldwide in advancing the technology of finding and extracting oil and gas. Even as land-based oil production extended as far as the northern Alaska frontier, the oil and gas industry began to move offshore.The industry first moved into shallow water and e ventually into deepwater, where technological advances have opened up vast new reserves of oil and gas in remote areas—in recent decades, much deeper under the water’s surface and farther offshore than ever before. The Deepwater Horizon was drilling the Macondo well under 5,000 feet of Gulf water, and then over 13,000 feet under the sea floor to the hydrocarbon reservoir below. It is a complex, even dazzling, enterprise. The remarkable advances that have propelled the move to deepwater drilling merit comparison with exploring outer space.The Commission is respectful and admiring of the industry’s technological capability. ix ix But drilling in deepwater brings new risks, not yet completely addressed by the reviews of where it is safe to drill, what could go wrong, and how to respond if something does go awry. The drilling rigs themselves bristle with potentially dangerous machinery. The deepwater environment is cold, dark, distant, and under high pressuresâ€⠀and the oil and gas reservoirs, when found, exist at even higher pressures (thousands of pounds per square inch), compounding the risks if a well gets out of control.The Deepwater Horizon and Macondo well vividly illustrated all of those very real risks. When a failure happens at such depths, regaining control is a formidable engineering challenge—and the costs of failure, we now know, can be catastrophically high. In the years before the Macondo blowout, neither industry nor government adequately addressed these risks. Investments in safety, containment, and response equipment and practices failed to keep pace with the rapid move into deepwater drilling.Absent major crises, and given the remarkable financial returns available from deepwater reserves, the business culture succumbed to a false sense of security. The Deepwater Horizon disaster exhibits the costs of a culture of complacency. The Commission examined in great detail what went wrong on the rig itself. Our investi gative staff uncovered a wealth of specific information that greatly enhances our understanding of the factors that led to the explosion. The separately published report of the chief counsel (a summary of the findings is presented in Chapter 4) offers the fullest account yet of what happened on the rig and why.There are recurring themes of missed warning signals, failure to share information, and a general lack of appreciation for the risks involved. In the view of the Commission, these findings highlight the importance of organizational culture and a consistent commitment to safety by industry, from the highest management levels on down. * But that complacency affected government as well as industry. The Commission has documented the weaknesses and the inadequacies of the federal regulation and oversight, and made important recommendations for changes in legal authority, regulations, investments in expertise, and management.The Commission also looked at the effectiveness of the res ponse to the spill. There were remarkable instances of dedication and heroism by individuals involved in the rescue and cleanup. Much was done well—and thanks to a combination of good luck and hard work, the worst-case scenarios did not all come to pass. But it is impossible to argue that the industry or the country was prepared for a disaster of the magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Twenty years after the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, the same blunt response technologies—booms, dispersants, and skimmers—were used, to limited effect.On-the-ground shortcomings in the joint public-private response to an overwhelming spill like that resulting from the blowout of the Macondo well are now evident, and demand public and private investment. So do the weaknesses in local, state, and federal coordination revealed by the emergency. Both government and industry failed to anticipate and prevent this catastrophe, and failed again to be prepared to respond to it. *The chief counsel’s investigation was no doubt complicated by the lack of subpoena power. Nonetheless, Chief Counsel Bartlit did an extraordinary job building the record and interpreting what he learned.He used his considerable powers of persuasion along with other tools at his disposal to engage the involved companies in constructive and informative exchanges. x If we are to make future deepwater drilling safer and more environmentally responsible, we will need to address all these deficiencies together; a piecemeal approach will surely leave us vulnerable to future crises in the communities and natural environments most exposed to offshore energy exploration and production. The Deepwater Drilling Prospect The damage from the spill and the impact on the people of the Gulf has guided our work from the very beginning.Our first action as a Commission was to visit the Gulf region, to learn directly from those most affected. We heard deeply moving accounts from oystermen witness ing multi-generation family businesses slipping away, fishermen and tourism proprietors bearing the brunt of an ill-founded stigma affecting everything related to the Gulf, and oil-rig workers dealing with mounting bills and threatened home foreclosures, their means of support temporarily derailed by a blanket drilling moratorium, shutting down all deepwater drilling rigs, including those not implicated in the BP spill.Indeed, the centrality of oil and gas exploration to the Gulf economy is not widely appreciated by many Americans, who enjoy the benefits of the energy essential to their transportation, but bear none of the direct risks of its production. Within the Gulf region, however, the role of the energy industry is well understood and accepted. The notion of clashing interests—of energy extraction versus a natural-resource economy with bountiful fisheries and tourist amenities—misses the extent to which the energy industry is woven into the fabric of the Gulf cul ture and economy, providing thousands of jobs and essential public revenues.Any discussion of the future of offshore drilling cannot ignore these economic realities. But those benefits have imposed their costs. The bayous and wetlands of Louisiana have for decades suffered from destructive alteration to accommodate oil exploration. The Gulf ecosystem, a unique American asset, is likely to continue silently washing away unless decisive action is taken to start the work of creating a sustainably healthy and productive landscape. No one should be deluded that restoration on the scale required will occur quickly or cheaply.Indeed, the experience in restoring other large, sensitive regions—the Chesapeake Bay, the Everglades, the Great Lakes—indicates that progress will require coordinated federal and state actions, a dedicated funding source, long-term monitoring, and a vocal and engaged citizenry, supported by robust non-governmental groups, scientific research, and more. We advocate beginning such an effort, seriously and soon, as a suitable response to the damage and disruption caused by the Deepwater Horizon emergency.It is a fair recognition not only of the costs that energy exploitation in the Gulf has, for decades, imposed on the landscape and habitats—and the other economic activities they support—but also of the certainty that Americans will continue to develop the region’s offshore energy resources. For the simple fact is that the bulk of our newly discovered petroleum reserves, and the best prospects for future discoveries, lie not on land, but under water. To date, we have xi xi made the decision as a nation to exploit the Gulf ’s offshore energy resources—ruling much of the Florida, Atlantic, and Pacific coasts out of bounds for drilling.The choice of how aggressively to exploit these resources, wherever they may be found, has profound implications for the future of U. S. energy policy, for our need to u nderstand and assure the integrity of fragile environmental resources, and for the way Americans think about our economy and our security. Although much work is being done to improve the fuelefficiency of vehicles and to develop alternative fuels, we cannot realistically walk away from these offshore oil resources in the near future. So we must be much better prepared to exploit such resources with far greater care. The Commission and Its WorkWhile we took a broad view of the spill, it could not be exhaustive. There is still much we do not know—for instance, the blowout preventer, the last line of defense against loss of well control, is still being analyzed; and the Deepwater Horizon itself, after its explosive destruction, remained out of reach during our investigation. The understandable, immediate need to provide answers and concrete suggestions trumped the benefits of a longer, more comprehensive investigation. And as we know from other spills, their environmental conseq uences play out over decades—and often in unexpected ways.Instead, the Commission focused on areas we thought most likely to inform practical recommendations. Those recommendations are presented in the spirit of transforming America into the global leader for safe and effective offshore drilling operations. Just as this Commission learned from the experiences of other nations in developing our recommendations, the lessons learned from the Deepwater Horizon disaster are not confined to our own government and industry, but relevant to rest of the world. We wish we could say that our recommendations make a recurrence of a disaster like the Macondo blowout impossible. We do not have that power.No one can eliminate all risks associated with deepwater exploration. But when exploration occurs, particularly in sensitive environments like the Gulf of Mexico or the Arctic, the country has an obligation to make responsible decisions regarding the benefits and risks. The report is divide d into three sections. Chapters 1 through 3 describe the events of April 20th on the Deepwater Horizon, and, more important, the events leading up to it in the preceding decades—especially how the dramatic expansion of deepwater drilling in the Gulf was not met by regulatory oversight capable of ensuring the safety of those drilling operations.Chapters 4 through 7 lay out the results of our investigation in detail, highlighting the crucial issues we believe must inform policy going forward: the specific engineering and operating choices made in drilling the Macondo well, the attempts to contain and respond to the oil spill, and the impacts of the spill on the region’s natural resources, economy, and people—in the context of the progressive degradation of the Mississippi Delta environment. xii Chapters 8 through 10 present our recommendations for reforms in business practices, regulatory oversight, and broader policy concerns.We recognize that the improvements we advocate all come with costs and all will take time to implement. But inaction, as we are deeply aware, runs the risk of real costs, too: in more lost lives, in broad damage to the regional economy and its long-term viability, and in further tens of billions of dollars of avoidable clean-up costs. Indeed, if the clear challenges are not addressed and another disaster happens, the entire offshore energy enterprise is threatened—and with it, the nation’s economy and security.We suggest a better option: build from this tragedy in a way that makes the Gulf more resilient, the country’s energy supplies more secure, our workers safer, and our cherished natural resources better protected. Our Thanks and Dedication We thank President Obama for this opportunity to learn thoroughly about the crisis, and to share our findings with the American public. We deeply appreciate the effort people in the affected Gulf regions made to tell us about their experiences, and the time and preparation witnesses before the Commission dedicated to their presentations.We have come to respect the seriousness with which our fellow Commissioners assumed our joint responsibilities, and their diverse expertise and perspectives that helped make its work thorough and productive. On their behalf, we wish to recognize the extraordinary work the Commission’s staff—scientists, lawyers, engineers, policy analysts, and more— performed, under demanding deadlines, to make our inquiries broad, deep, and effective; and we especially highlight the leadership contributions of Richard Lazarus, executive director, and Fred Bartlit, chief counsel.Together, they have fulfilled an extraordinary public service. Finally, to the American people, we reiterate that extracting the energy resources to fuel our cars, heat and light our homes, and power our businesses can be a dangerous enterprise. Our national reliance on fossil fuels is likely to continue for some time— and all of us reap benefits from the risks taken by the men and women working in energy exploration. We owe it to them to ensure that their working environment is as safe as possible. We dedicate this effort to the 11 of our fellow citizens who lost their lives in the Deepwater Horizon explosion.Bob Graham, Co-Chair William K. Reilly, Co-Chair xiii xiii xiii Part I The Path to Tragedy On April 20, 2010, the 126 workers on the BP Deepwater Horizon were going about the routines of completing an exploratory oil well—unaware of impending disaster. What unfolded would have unknown impacts shaped by the Gulf region’s distinctive cultures, institutions, and geography—and by economic forces resulting from the unique coexistence of energy resources, bountiful fisheries and wildlife, and coastal tourism.The oil and gas industry, long lured by Gulf reserves and public incentives, progressively developed and deployed new technologies, at ever-larger scales, in pursuit of va luable energy supplies in increasingly deeper waters farther from the coastline. Regulators, however, failed to keep pace with the industrial expansion and new technology—often because of industry’s resistance to more effective oversight. The result was a serious, and ultimately inexcusable, shortfall in supervision of offshore drilling that played out in the Macondo well blowout and the catastrophic oil spill that followed.Chapters 1 through 3 describe the interplay of private industry and public oversight in the distinctive Gulf deepwater context: the conditions that governed the deployment of the Deepwater Horizon and the drilling of the Macondo well. Chapter One 1 1 Chapter One â€Å"Everyone involved with the job . . . was completely satisfied. . . † The Deepwater Horizon, the Macondo Well, and Sudden Death on the Gulf of Mexico At 5:45 a. m. on Tuesday, April 20, 2010, a Halliburton Company cementing engineer sent an e-mail from the rig Deepwater Horizon, in the Gulf of Mexico off the Louisiana coast, to his colleague in Houston.He had good news: â€Å"We have completed the job and it went well. †1 Outside in the Gulf, it was still dark—beyond the glare of the floodlights on the gargantuan rig, the four decks of which towered above the blue-green water on four huge white columns, all floating on massive pontoons. The oil derrick rose over 20 stories above the top deck. Up on the bridge on the main deck, two officers monitored the satelliteguided dynamic positioning system, controlling thrusters so powerful that they could keep the 33,000-ton Deepwater Horizon centered over a well even in high seas.The rig’s industrial hum and loud mechanical noises punctuated the sea air as a slight breeze blew in off the water. The crew worked on Pride of the Transocean fleet of offshore drilling rigs, Deepwater Horizon rides calmly on station 40 miles off the Louisiana coast. The $560-million-dollar rig, under lease to BP was p utting the finishing touches on the oil company’s , 18,000-foot-deep Macondo well when it blew out and escaping methane gas exploded. Eleven workers died in the inferno. According to the government’s estimates, by the time the well was sealed months later, over 4 million barrels of oil had spilled into the Gulf. lt; Photo courtesy of Transocean 2 National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling the well bore, aiming always to keep the pressure inside the well balancing the force exerted by the surrounding seabed. 2 By the time the Halliburton engineer had arrived at the rig four days earlier to help cement in the two-and-a-half-mile-deep Macondo well, some crew members had dubbed it â€Å"the well from hell. †3 Macondo was not the first well to earn that nickname;4 like many deepwater wells, it had proved complicated and challenging.As they drilled, the engineers had to modify plans in response to their increasing knowledge of the precise features of the geologic formations thousands of feet below. Deepwater drilling is an unavoidably tough, demanding job, requiring tremendous engineering expertise. BP drilling engineer Brian Morel, who had designed the Macondo well with other BP engineers including Mark Hafle, was also on board to observe the final stages of work at the well. 5 In an April 14 e-mail, Morel had lamented to his colleagues, â€Å"this has been [a] nightmare well which has everyone all over the place. 6 BP and its corporate partners on the well, Anadarko Petroleum and MOEX USA, had, according to government reports, budgeted $96. 2 million and 51 days of work to drill the Macondo well in Mississippi Canyon Block 252. 7 They discovered a large reservoir of oil and gas, but drilling had been challenging. As of April 20, BP and the Macondo well were almost six weeks behind schedule and more than $58 million over budget. 8 The Deepwater Horizon was not originally meant to drill Macondo. Another gian t rig, the Marianas, had initiated work on the well the previous October. Drilling had reached more than 9,000 feet below the ocean surface (4,000 feet below the seabed), with another 9,000 feet to go to â€Å"pay zone† (the oil and gas reservoir), when Hurricane Ida so battered the rig on November 9 that it had to be towed in for repair. Both Marianas and Deepwater Horizon were semisubmersible rigs owned by Transocean, founded in Louisiana in 1919 as Danciger Oil & Refining Co. and now the world’s largest contractor of offshore drilling rigs. 10 In 2009, Transocean’s global fleet produced revenues of $11. 6 billion. 1 Transocean had consolidated its dominant position in the industry in November 2007 by merging with rival GlobalSantaFe. 12 Deepwater Horizon, built for $350 million,13 was seen as the outstanding rig in Transocean’s fleet; leasing its services reportedly cost as much as $1 million per day. Since Deepwater Horizon’s 2001 maiden voyage to the Gulf, it had been under contract to London-based BP (formerly known as British Petroleum). By 2010, after numerous acquisitions, BP had become the world’s fourth-largest corporation (based on revenue)14 producing more than 4 million barrels of oil daily from 30 countries. Ten percent of BP’s output came from the Gulf of Mexico, where BP America (headquartered in Houston) was the largest producer. But BP had a tarnished reputation for safety. Among other BP accidents, 15 workers died in a 2005 explosion at its Texas City, Texas, refinery; in 2006, there was a major oil spill from a badly corroded BP pipeline in Alaska. * *A barrel equals 42 gallons. * * * Chapter One 3 3 Deepwater Horizon had arrived at the Macondo lease site on January 31, at 2:15 p. m. It was 55 degrees, chilly and clear—the night of a full moon.About 126 people were aboard: approximately 80 Transocean employees, a few BP men, cafeteria and laundry workers, and a changing group of worke rs contracted for specialized jobs. Depending on the status of the well, these might include Halliburton cementers, mud loggers from Sperry Sun (a Halliburton subsidiary), mud engineers from M-I SWACO (a subsidiary of Schlumberger, an international oilfield services provider), remotely operated vehicle technicians from Oceaneering, or tank cleaners and technicians from the OCS Group. The offices and living quarters were on the two bottom decks of the rig.Helicopters flew in and out regularly with workers and supplies, landing on the top-deck helipad, and service ships made regular visits. At its new Macondo assignment, Deepwater Horizon floated in 4,992 feet of water just beyond the gentle slope of the continental shelf in the Mississippi Canyon. 15 The seabed far below was near-freezing, visible to the crew only via cameras mounted on the rig’s subsea remotely operated vehicle. Another two and a half miles below the seabed was the prize BP sought: a large reservoir of oil an d gas from the Middle Miocene era trapped in a porous rock formation at temperatures exceeding 200 degrees. 6 These deepwater hydrocarbon fields, buried far below the seabed—not just in the Gulf, but in other oil-rich zones around the world, too—were the brave new oil frontier. The size of some deepwater fields was so huge that the oil industry had nicknamed those with a billion barrels or more â€Å"elephants. †17 Drilling for oil had always been hard, dirty, dangerous work, combining heavy machinery and volatile hydrocarbons extracted at high pressures. Since 2001, the Gulf of Mexico workforce—35,000 people, working on 90 big drilling rigs and 3,500 production platforms—had suffered 1,550 injuries, 60 deaths, and 948 fires and explosions. 8 The rig never slept. Most workers on Deepwater Horizon, from BP’s top â€Å"company man† down to the roustabouts, put in a 12-hour night or day shift, working three straight weeks on and then hav ing three weeks off. Rig workers made good money for the dangerous work and long stints away from home and family. Top rig and management jobs paid well into six figures. On the morning of April 20, Robert Kaluza was BP’s day-shift company man on the Deepwater Horizon. On board for the first time, he was serving for four days as a relief man for Ronald Sepulvado, a veteran well-site leader on the rig.Sepulvado had flown back to shore April 16 for a required well-control class. 19 During the rig’s daily 7:30 a. m. operations conference call to BP in Houston, engineer Morel discussed the good news that the final cement job at the bottom of the Macondo well had gone fine. 20 To ensure the job did not have problems, a three-man Schlumberger team was scheduled to fly out to the rig later that day, able to perform a suite of tests to examine the well’s new bottom cement seal. 21 4 National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore DrillingAccording to the BP team’s plan, if the cementing went smoothly, as it had, they could skip Schlumberger’s cement evaluation. Generally, the completion rig would perform this test when it reopened the well to produce the oil the exploratory drilling had discovered. The decision was made to send the Schlumberger team home on the 11:00 a. m. helicopter, thus saving time and the $128,000 fee. As BP Wells Team Leader John Guide noted, â€Å"Everyone involved with the job on the rig site was completely satisfied with the [cementing] job. 22 At 8:52 a. m. , Morel e-mailed the Houston office to reiterate: â€Å"Just wanted to let everyone know the cement job went well. Pressures stayed low, but we had full returns on the entire job†¦We should be coming out of the hole [well] shortly. † At 10:14 a. m. , David Sims, BP’s new drilling operations manager in charge of Macondo, e-mailed to say, â€Å"Great job guys! † * * * * The rest of the day would be devoted t o a series of further tests on the well—positiveand negative-pressure tests—in preparation for â€Å"temporary abandonment. * During the positive-pressure test, the drill crew would increase the pressure inside the steel casing and seal assembly to be sure they were intact. The negative-pressure test, by contrast, would reduce the pressure inside the well in order to simulate its state after the Deepwater Horizon had packed up and moved on. If pressure increased inside the well during the negative-pressure test, or if fluids flowed up from the well, that would indicate a well integrity problem—a leak of fluids into the well.Such a leak would be a worrisome sign that somewhere the casing and cement had been breached—in which case remedial work would be needed to reestablish the well’s integrity. At 10:43 a. m. , Morel, about to leave the rig on the helicopter with the Schlumberger team, sent a short e-mail laying out his plan for conducting the day ’s tests of the well’s integrity and subsequent temporary abandonment procedures. Few had seen the plan’s details when the rig supervisors and members of the drill team gathered for the rig’s daily 11:00 a. m. pre-tour meeting in the cinema room. Basically [we] go over what’s going to be taking place for today on the rig and the drill floor,† said Douglas Brown, chief mechanic. 23 During the rig meeting, the crew on the drill floor was conducting the Macondo well’s positive-pressure test. 24 The positive-pressure test on the casing was reassuring, a success. 25 There was reason for the mood on the rig to be upbeat. Ross Skidmore, a subsea engineer explained, â€Å"When you run the last string of casing, and you’ve got it cemented, it’s landed out, and a test was done on it, you say, ‘This job, we’re at the end of it, we’re going to be okay. †26 At noon, the drill crew began to run drill pipe int o the well in preparation for the negativepressure test later that evening. 27 By now, it was a sunny afternoon. Transocean’s top men on the rig, Jimmy Harrell and Captain Curt Kuchta, were standing together near the helipad, watching a helicopter gently land. Kuchta had come in from New Orleans just * Temporary abandonment describes the process, after successful exploration, for securing the well until the production platform can be brought in for the purpose of extracting the oil and gas from the reservoir. Chapter One 5 5 that morning to begin his three-week hitch.Harrell was the top Transocean man on the rig when—as now—the well was â€Å"latched up. † Captain Kuchta, who had served on the Deepwater Horizon since June 2008, was in command when the vessel was â€Å"unlatched† and thus once again a maritime vessel. 28 The helicopter landed, the doors opened, and four Houston executives stepped out to begin their 24-hour â€Å"management visibili ty tour. †29 Harrell and Kuchta greeted the VIPs. 30 Two were from Transocean: Buddy Trahan, vice president and operations manager for assets, and Daun Winslow, a one-time assistant driller who had worked his way up to operations manager.BP’s representatives were David Sims, the new drilling operations manager (he had sent the congratulatory e-mail about the cement just that morning), and Pat O’Bryan, vice-president for drilling and completions, Gulf of Mexico Deepwater. 31 At about 4:00 p. m. , Harrell began his escorted tour of the Deepwater Horizon for the VIPs. 32 He was joined by Chief Engineer Steve Bertone, on board since 2003, and senior toolpusher Randy Ezell, another top man on the rig. 33 Like Harrell, Ezell was an offshore veteran. He had worked for 23 years with Transocean34 and was now the senior man in charge of the drilling floor.He had been on the rig for years. If any people knew this rig, they were Harrell, Bertone, and Ezell; they showed the V IPs around. At 5:00 p. m. , the rig crew, including toolpusher Wyman Wheeler, began the negativepressure test. 35 After bleeding pressure from the well, the crew would close it off to check whether the pressure within the drill pipe would remain steady. But the pressure repeatedly built back up. As the crew conducted the test, the drill shack grew crowded. 36 The night crew began arriving to relieve the day shift, and Harrell brought the VIPs through as part of their tour. 7 â€Å"There was quite a few people in there,† said Transocean’s Winslow. â€Å"I tapped Dewey Revette on the shoulder. He was the driller master. I said, ‘Hey, how’s it going, Dewey? You got everything under control here? ’ â€Å"And he said, ‘Yes, sir. ’ â€Å"And there seemed to be a discussion going on about some pressure or a negative test. And I said to Jimmy [Harrell] and Randy Ezell, ‘Looks like they’re having a discussion here. Maybe you coul d give them some assistance. ’ And they happily agreed to that. †38 Bertone took over the tour, wandering on to look at the moon pool, down toward the pontoons and the thrusters. 9 The two shifts continued to discuss how to proceed. It was about 6:00 p. m. Jason Anderson, a tool pusher, turned to Ezell and said, â€Å"Why don’t you go eat? †40 Ezell had originally planned to attend a meeting with the VIPs at 7:00 p. m. He replied, â€Å"I can go eat and come back. †41 6 National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling Anderson was from Bay City, Texas, and had been on the rig since it was built; he was highly respected as a man who understood the finer points of deepwater well control.This was his final shift on the Deepwater Horizon: he had been promoted to teaching in Transocean’s well-control school, and he was scheduled to fly out the next day. He told Ezell, â€Å"Man, you ain’t got to do that. Iâ⠂¬â„¢ve got this. Don’t worry about it. If I have any problems at all with this test I’ll give you a call. †42 â€Å"I knew Jason well,† said Ezell, â€Å"I’ve worked with him for all those years, eight or nine years†¦. He was just like a brother. So I had no doubt that if he had any indication of any problem or difficulty at all he would have called me. So I went ahead and ate. I did attend the meeting with the dignitaries. 43 Wheeler was â€Å"convinced that something wasn’t right,† recalled Christopher Pleasant, a subsea supervisor. Wheeler couldn’t believe the explanations he was hearing. But his shift was up. 44 Don Vidrine, the company man coming on the evening shift, eventually said that another negative test had to be done. 45 This time the crew members were able to get the pressure down to zero on a different pipe, the â€Å"kill line,† but still not for the drill pipe, which continued to show elevated pres sure. 46 According to BP witnesses, Anderson said he had seen this before and explained away the anomalous reading as the â€Å"bladder effect. 47 Whether for this reason or another, the men in the shack determined that no flow from the open kill line equaled a successful negative-pressure test. 48* It was time to get on with the rest of the temporary abandonment process. Kaluza, his shift over, headed off duty. 49 At 7:00 p. m. , after dinner, the VIPs had gathered in the third floor conference room with the rig’s leadership. According to BP’s Patrick O’Bryan, the Deepwater Horizon was â€Å"the best performing rig that we had in our fleet and in the Gulf of Mexico.And I believe it was one of the top performing rigs in all the BP floater fleets from the standpoint of safety and drilling performance. † O’Bryan, at his new job just four months, was on board in part to learn what made the rig such a stand-out. 50 Despite all the crew’s troubl es with this latest well,51 they had not had a single â€Å"lost-time incident† in seven years of drilling. 52 The Transocean managers discussed with their BP counterparts the backlog of rig maintenance. A September 2009 BP safety audit had produced a 30-page list of 390 items requiring 3,545 man-hours of work. 3 The managers reviewed upcoming maintenance schedules and discussed efforts to reduce dropped objects and personal injuries: on a rig with cranes, multiple decks, and complicated heavy machinery, errant objects could be deadly. 54 Around 9:00 p. m. , Transocean’s Winslow proposed they all go visit the bridge, which had not been part of their earlier tour. According to David Sims, the bridge was â€Å"kind of an impressive place if you hadn’t been there†¦[l]ots of screens†¦lots of technology. †55 The four * The precise content of this particular conversation is disputed and is considered more fully in Chapter 4.Chapter One 7 7 men walked outside. The Gulf air was warm and the water calm as glass. Beyond the glare of the rig’s lights, the night sky glimmered with stars. * * * * After concluding that the negative-pressure test was successful, the drilling crew prepared to set a cement plug56 deep in the well—3,000 feet below the top of the well. 57 They reopened the blowout preventer and began pumping seawater down the drill pipe to displace the mud and spacer* from the riser (the pipe that connected the rig to the well assembly on the seafloor below). 8 When the spacer appeared up at the surface, they stopped pumping because the fluid had to be tested to make sure it was clean enough to dump it in the Gulf, now that it had journeyed down into the well and back. By 9:15 p. m. , the crew began discharging the spacer overboard. 59 * * * * Inside the bridge, Captain Kuchta welcomed visitors Sims, O’Bryan, Trahan, and Winslow. 60 The two dynamic-positioning officers, Yancy Keplinger and Andrea Fleytas , were also on the bridge. 61 Keplinger was giving the visitors a tour of the bridge while Fleytas was at the desk station. 2 The officers explained how the rig’s thrusters kept the Deepwater Horizon in place above the well, showed off the radars and current meters, and offered to let the visiting BP men try their hands at the rig’s dynamic-positioning video simulator. 63 Winslow watched as the crew programmed in 70-knot winds and 30-foot seas, and hypothetically put two of the rig’s six thrusters out of commission. Then they put the simulator into manual mode and let Sims work the hand controls to maintain the rig’s location. Keplinger was advising about how much thrust to use.Winslow decided it was a good moment to go grab a quick cup of coffee and a smoke. He walked down to the rig’s smoking area, poured some coffee, and lit his cigarette. 64 * * * * Senior Toolpusher Randy Ezell left the evening meeting with BP feeling pleased at their praise à ¢â‚¬Å"on how good a job we had done†¦How proud they were of the rig. † He stopped in at the galley to get a beverage before continuing to his office. At 9:20, he called Anderson up on the rig floor and asked, â€Å"‘How did your negative test go? ’†65 Anderson: â€Å"It went good. . . . We bled it off. We watched it for 30 minutes and we had no flow. Ezell: â€Å"What about your displacement? How’s it going? † Anderson: â€Å"It’s going fine. . . . It won’t be much longer and we ought to have our spacer back. † * As described more fully in Chapter 4, a â€Å"spacer† is a liquid that separates drilling mud used during the drilling operations from the seawater that is pumped in to displace the mud once drilling is complete. 8 National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling Ezell: â€Å"Do you need any help from me? † Anderson: â€Å"No, man. . . . I’ve got this. . . . Go to bed. I’ve got it. † Ezell concluded: â€Å"Okay. 66 Ezell walked to his cabin. He had worked with Anderson since the rig came from the shipyard. He had complete confidence in him. â€Å"Jason was very acute on what he did. . . he probably had more experience as far as shutting in for kicks than any individual on the Deepwater Horizon. † So Ezell prepared for bed, called his wife, and then turned off the lights to watch a bit of TV before going to sleep. 67 * * * * Up on the bridge, O’Bryan was taking his turn on the simulator. 68 Sims had stepped to the opposite side of the bridge when he felt a distinct high-frequency vibration. 9 Captain Kuchta looked up and remarked â€Å"What’s that? † He strode to the port-side door and opened it. 70 Outside, O’Bryan could see the supply vessel Bankston glistening with what looked like drilling mud. 71 The captain shut the door â€Å"and told everybody to stay inside. †72 Then the re began a hissing noise. 73 * * * * BP’s Vidrine had headed back to his office to do paperwork. He had been there about 10 to 15 minutes when the phone rang. It was Anderson, who reported â€Å"they were getting mud back and were diverting to the gas buster. † Vidrine grabbed his hard hat and started for the drill floor.By the time he got outside, â€Å"[t]here was mud and seawater blowing everywhere, there was a mud film on the deck. I decided not to continue and came back across. †74 * * * * Down in Ezell’s cabin, he was still watching TV when his phone rang. It was assistant driller Steve Curtis calling, also from the rig floor. â€Å"We have a situation. †¦The well is blown out. . . . We have mud going to the crown. † Ezell was horrified. â€Å"Do y’all have it shut in? †75 Curtis: â€Å"Jason is shutting it in now. . . Randy, we need your help. † Ezell: â€Å"Steve, I’ll be—I’ll be right there. 76 He put on his coveralls, pulled his socks on, and opened the door to go across the hall to his office for his boots and hard hat. Once in the hall, â€Å"a tremendous explosion†¦ blew me probably 20 feet against a bulkhead, against the wall in that office. And I remember then that the lights went out, power went out. I could hear everything deathly calm. †77 * * * * Chapter One 9 9 Up on the main deck, gantry crane operator Micah Sandell was working with the roustabouts. â€Å"I seen mud shooting all the way up to the derrick. . . . Then it just quit. . . I took a deep breath thinking that ‘Oh, they got it under control. Then all the sudden the. . . mud started coming out of the degasser. . . so strong and so loud that it just filled up the whole back deck with a gassy smoke. . . loud enough. . . it’s like taking an air hose and sticking it in your ear. Then something exploded. . . that started the first fire†¦ on the starboard side of the derrick. †78 Sandell jumped up and turned off the crane cab’s air conditioner, worried that the gas would come in. â€Å"And about that time everything in the back just exploded at one time. It. . . knocked me to the back of the cab. I fell to the floor. . put my hands over my head and I just said, ‘No, God, no. ’ Because I thought that was it. †79 Then the flames pulled back from his crane and began to shoot straight up, roaring up and over the 20-story derrick. 80 * * * * Down in the engine control room, Chief Mechanic Douglas Brown, an Army veteran employed by Transocean, was filling out the nightly log and equipment hours. He had spent the day fixing a saltwater pipe in one of the pontoons. First, he noticed an â€Å"extremely loud air leak sound. † Then a gas alarm sounded, followed by more and more alarms wailing.In the midst of that noise, Brown noticed someone over the radio. â€Å"I heard the captain or chief mate, I’m not sure who, ma ke an announcement to the standby boat, the Bankston, saying we were in a well-control situation. †81 The vessel was ordered to back off to 500 meters. 82 Now Brown could hear the rig’s engines revving. â€Å"I heard them revving up higher and higher and higher. Next I was expecting the engine trips to take over. . . . That did not happen. After that the power went out. † Seconds later, an explosion ripped through the pitch-black control room, hurtling him against the control panel, blasting away the floor.Brown fell through into a subfloor full of cable trays and wires. A second huge explosion roared through, collapsing the ceiling on him. All around in the dark he could hear people screaming and crying for help. 83 Dazed and buried in debris, he pulled himself out of the subfloor hole. In front of him appeared Mike Williams, chief electronic technician, blood pouring from a wound on his forehead, crawling over the rubble, screaming that he had to get out. 84 * * * * Steve Bertone, the rig’s chief engineer, had been in bed, reading the first sentence of his book, when he noticed an odd noise. As it progressively got louder, it sounded like a freight train coming through my bedroom and then there was a thumping sound that consecutively got much faster and with each thump, I felt the rig actually shake. †85 After a loud boom, the lights went out. 86 He leapt out of bed, opening his door to let in the emergency hall light so he could get dressed. 87 The overhead public-address system crackled to life: â€Å"Fire. Fire. Fire. † 88 10 National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling The air smelled and tasted of some kind of fuel.A second explosion roared through, flinging Bertone across his room. He stood up, pulled on his coveralls, work boots, and hard hat, and grabbed a life vest. Out in the hall, clogged with debris from blown-out walls and ceilings, four or five men stood in shock. Berton e yelled to them to go out by the port forward or starboard forward spiral staircases and report to their emergency stations. He ran toward the bridge. 89 He went to the portside back computer, the dynamic positioning system responsible for maintaining the rig’s position. â€Å"I observed that we had no engines, no thrusters, no power whatsoever.I picked up the phone which was right there and I tried calling extension 2268, which is the engine control room. There was no dial tone whatsoever. † It was then that Bertone looked out to the bridge’s starboard window. â€Å"I was fully expecting to see steel and pipe and everything on the rig floor. † â€Å"When I looked out the window, I saw fire from derrick leg to derrick leg and as high as I could see. At that point, I realized that we had just had a blowout. †90 Fleytas hit the general alarm. 91 The alarm went off: â€Å"Report to emergency stations and lifeboats. † The rig crew heard:  "This is not a drill. This is not a drill. 92 Fleytas, realizing that the rig had not yet issued a Mayday call, sent it out. 93 Out in the dark of the Gulf, three friends on the 31-foot Ramblin’ Wreck were out on the water for a day of tuna fishing. 94 Around 9:45 p. m. , Bradley Shivers trained his binoculars at a brilliant light in the distance and realized it must be an oil rig on fire. 95 On their radio, they heard, â€Å"Mayday, Mayday, Mayday, this is the Deepwater Horizon. We are on fire. †96 At that moment they â€Å"heard and felt a concussive sonic boom. †97 The Ramblin’ Wreck headed to the scene, their first tuna outing of the year cut short. 8 Bertone was now back to his station on the bridge, thinking, â€Å"The engines should be starting up because in approximately 25 to 30 seconds two engines start up, come online. . . . There was still no power of any kind. No engines starting; no indication of engines starting. †99 At that moment, the water-tight door to his left banged open and he heard someone say, â€Å"The engine room ECR [engine control room] and pump room are gone. They are all gone. † Bertone turned around, â€Å"What do you mean gone? † The man speaking was so coated in blood Bertone had no idea who he was. Then he recognized the voice. It was Mike Williams.Bertone saw how badly lacerated Williams’s forehead was, grabbed a roll of toilet paper from the bathroom, pressed it on the wound to staunch the bleeding, and ordered, â€Å"Hold this here. †100 Then he went back to his station and looked at his screen. â€Å"There was still nothing, no engines starting, no thrusters running, nothing. We were still [a] dead ship. †101 He heard the water-tight door slam again and saw another man soaked in blood, holding a rag to his head, repeating, â€Å"I’m hurt. I’m hurt bad, Chief. I’m hurt real bad. † It was the voice of Brent Mansfield, a Transoce an marine engineer. Bertone pulled back Mansfield’sChapter One 11 11 hand holding a rag, saw the head wound, and ran over to the bridge door and yelled down to the life-vessel area, â€Å"We need a medic up here now. †102 * * * * After the explosion, Randy Ezell lay buried under the blown-out walls and ceilings of the toolpusher’s office. The room was dark and smoky, the debris atop him so heavy he could barely move. On the third try, adrenalin kicked in. â€Å"I told myself, ‘Either you get up or you’re going to lay here and die. ’† Pulling hard on his right leg, he extricated it and tried to stand up. â€Å"That was the wrong thing to do because I immediately stuck my head into smoke. . . I dropped back down. I got on my hands and knees and for a few moments I was totally disoriented. † He wondered which way the door was. He felt air. He crawled through the debris toward the door and realized the â€Å"air† was methane. He could feel the droplets. He was crawling slowly atop the rubble in the pitch-black hall when he felt a body. 103 Ezell then saw a bobbing beam of light. Stan Carden, the electrical supervisor, came round the corner. Carden had a light that bounced off shattered walls and collapsed ceilings in the pitch-black corridor, giving glimpses into rooms on each side wrecked by the power of the blast. 04 Stumbling into what was left of the hall was Offshore Installation Manager Jimmy Harrell, who had been in the shower when the rig exploded;105 he had donned coveralls, and now was groping his way out of what was left of his room. â€Å"I think I’ve got something in my eyes,† Harrell said. He had no shoes. â€Å"I got to see if I can find me some shoes. †106 Carden and Ezell tugged debris off the man they now recognized as Wyman Wheeler. Chad Murray, Transocean’s Chief Electrician, also appeared in the hall with a flashlight, and was immediately dispatched to fi nd a stretcher for the injured man. 07 Believing it would save time to walk Wheeler out, Ezell slung Wheeler’s arm around his shoulder. Wheeler groaned, â€Å"Set me down . . . . Y’all go on. Save yourself. †108 Ezell said, â€Å"No, we’re not going to leave you. We’re not going to leave you in here. †109 Just then, they heard another voice from under the rubble: â€Å"God help me. Somebody please help me. † Near the ruins of the maintenance office the flashlight picked out a pair of feet jutting from the rubble. It was the visiting Transocean manager, Buddy Trahan, badly injured. By now Murray was there with a stretcher.Ezell, Carden, and Murray dragged away the remains of ceilings and walls trapping Trahan and loaded him on the stretcher. Carden and Murray carried him through the smoke and dark to the bow of the rig and the lifeboats. 110 Outside, the derrick fire roared upward into the night sky, an inferno throwing off searing hea t and clouds of black smoke. The blinding yellow of the flames was the only illumination except for the occasional flashlight. The rig’s alarms were going off, while over the public announcement system Keplinger yelled, â€Å"THIS IS NOT A DRILL! †111 As the 12National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling crew struggled out of the blasted quarters, galley, and offices, in various states of undress, they converged in a chaotic and panicked mass at the lifesaving vessels, putting on life vests. 112 Sandell, the gantry crane operator, had escaped and come around the port side of the deck to the life vessels. â€Å"It was a lot of screaming, just a lot of screaming, a lot of hollering, a lot of scared people, including me, was scared. And trying to get people on boats. It was very unorganized—we had some wounded we was putting in the boat.Had people on the boat yelling, ‘Drop the boat, drop the boat,’ and we still didn ’t have everybody on the boat yet. We was still trying to get people on the boat and trying to calm them down enough to—trying to calm them down enough to get everybody on the boat. And there was people jumping off the side. We was trying to get an accurate count and just couldn’t get an accurate count because people were just jumping off the boat. † 113 * * * * On the Bankston, Captain Alwin J. Landry was on the bridge updating his log when his mate noticed the mud. Landry stepped out and saw â€Å"mud falling on the back half of my boat, kind of like a black rain. He called the Deepwater Horizon bridge to say, â€Å"I’m getting mud on me. † Landry instructed his crew to get inside. The Deepwater Horizon called back and told him to move back 500 meters. 114 A crew member noticed a mud-covered seagull and egret fall to the deck. 115 Shortly after, Landry saw the rig explode. Before the ship could move away, his crew had to detach the long mu d transfer hose connecting them to the rig. 116 As they scrambled to disconnect, the Bankston slowly moved 100 meters back, then 500 meters. As the rig went dark, and secondary explosions rocked the decks, the Bankston turned on its searchlight.Landry could see the Deepwater Horizon crew mustering by the portside life vessels. â€Å"That’s when I seen the first of three or four people jump to the water from the rig. †117 One of those was Gregory Meche, a compliance specialist. After five minutes of the chaos around the lifeboats, and a series of large explosions, he headed down to the lower deck. He jumped into the water. 118 Antonio Gervasio, the Bankston’s relief chief, and two others began launching the ship’s fast rescue craft. 119 Within a minute or two of the explosions, they got the boat lowered into the water, and noticed how calm the Gulf was. 20 â€Å"I saw the first person jump in the water. So I told one of the guys to keep an eye on him. â⠂¬ 121 The rig life jackets were reflective, and as the fast craft made its first sweep round from one side of the burning rig to the other, they hauled Meche and two or three others out of the water. 122 * * * * Back on the rig, Transocean’s Winslow had made his way from the coffee shop to the lifeboats, surviving the second blast’s wave of concussive force, which blew in the Chapter One 13 13 corridor’s walls and ceilings. On the deck, a firestorm of flames roared in the night sky above the derrick. 23 Winslow directed the dazed crew toward the covered life-saving vessels, instructing the first arrivals, â€Å"We need to make sure we get a good head count. † Seeing Captain Kuchta standing at the starboard bridge door, he ran up, and said people should evacuate. Kuc