Choose an organisation whose operations have caused a negative environmental impact. Utilising appropriate theory and models of sustainability, critically evaluate that organization’s response after the event.
1.Select an organisation whose operations have had a negative environmental impact
- What were the circumstances which led up to the event?
the natural gas travelled up the Deepwater rig’s riser to the platform, where it ignited, killing 11 workers and injuring 17.
- What were the environmental and social impacts?
-As much as 20 percent of the oil spilled may have sunk to the bottom of the ocean, damaging deep-sea ecosystems.
-By June, oil and tar balls had made landfall on the beaches of Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. In all, an estimated 1,100 miles (1,770 km) of shoreline were polluted.
-Economic prospects in the Gulf Coast states were dire, as the spill affected many of the industries upon which residents depended.
-the company had lost almost a quarter of its market value and had hemorrhaged over $40 billion in costs associated with cleanup and recovery.
-Birds were particularly vulnerable to the oil’s effects, and many perished—from ingesting oil as they tried to clean themselves or because the substance interfered with their ability to regulate their body temperatures.
-According to another 2014 study, up to 800,000 birds were thought to have died
-1,700 turtles had been found dead
2.Consider the organisation’s response to the events.
- How did it respond at the time?
-BP appeared to be trying to duck responsibility
– chief executive Tony Hayward attempted to shift the blame for the accident to the US owner of the sunken rig, Transocean. “This was not our accident … This was not our drilling rig … This was Transocean’s rig. Their systems. Their people. Their equipment
-Hayward also made some ill-advised comments in an interview with the Guardian “The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume.” While technically correct, the comments made the company appear aloof and unconcerned about the environmental damage being done.
- Did it respond appropriately?
No, due to the fact that the company was not accepting the damage done and the carelessness they implemented that could have in fact saved the environment and the habitat inside the gulf. It pointed the blame towards other companies and later on admitted that they tried covering their trace. It was not sympathetic towards the animals that died and the people it had an effect on.
- What actions did it take?
-BP created a $20 billion compensation fund for those affected by the spill
– Immediately after the explosion, workers from BP and Transocean (owner of the Deepwater Horizon rig), and many government agencies tried to control the spread of the oil to beaches and other coastal ecosystems using floating booms to contain surface oil and chemical oil dispersants to break it down underwater
3. Critically evaluate the organisation’s actions following the events.
- What changes has it made to safeguard against it happening again?
the rules and regulations that made the Gulf and other marine environments safer from oil and gas drillers are being rolled back by the Trump Administration and its fiercely anti-regulation agenda.
- What has its track record been like since the event?
- What further recommendations would you make to the organisation?
To ensure that whatever actions you make, it could cost you a lot so to always make sure they are making sure the process runs smoothly. Also, denying actions that you have caused gives the company a negative image.
