Re: Gulf Oil Spill 2010
Not really. Every commercial airplane does exactly that for thousands of pieces of equipment on airplanes on a continuous (not daily) basis. We use fault trees, functional hazard analysis, failure modes and effects criticality analysis, etc to root out areas where danger could be lurking in the system designs and then address those with built-in-test monitoring by the system control computers, redundancy, procedural checks on an appropriate periodic basis, etc. This information is prioritized and provided real-time to the pilots via an EICAS (Engine Indication and Crew Alerting System) display.
Sure, performing all that work is expensive (someone has to pay my salary!), but is nowhere near the cost of the consequences of not doing it. Given the level of demand for oil, the public would definitely pay the additional pennies per gallon that it would take to double or triple (whatever that means) the safety precautions and equipment monitoring provisions on every platform.
Of course, no matter how many precautions you take, you can still have a bad day. Black swans can (by definition) never be eliminated.
If you don't think these sites don't have those monitoring systems, you're kidding yourself. Read up on a distributed control system (DCS) and you'll see what I mean. Every instrument, control valve, pump, tank, etc. that is monitored is generally fed back to the DCS.
Regarding individual analyses and safety reviews, sit through a process hazard analysis for a plant start-up and you'll see. I sat through one on a single mixer, a couple of pumps, and a new powder handling system. It took days.
Testing individual components is fine on something as small and as RELATIVELY (please, reread that word because I know I'm going to catch flak for it) simple things as a commercial jet. Ever walk through a small chemical plant? What about a very large one? I have. They are infinitely complex. It's truly amazing how large these things are. Plus they already have these monitoring systems in place. They do monitor the processes. Disasters still happen because parts fail, humans fail, and sometimes it's just an act of God.
Adding to the level of complexity, an oil rig is only ONE site in the long journey gas takes to be made. And gas is only one product that is produced from oil. All of those would increase in price. And unlike an airplane, you don't get shutdowns every few hours. You get them weeks or months (and in many cases such as ethanol plants) even a full year apart.
No, it would not take pennies, it would take far more than that if we're going to force them to test every critical instrument, valve, piece of equipment, etc. (which is what I'm talking about, not just a few, but all of them).
I'm not trying to diminish the fact that planes are complex machines but we need to put it into perspective just how complex these sites are.
Edit: Dammit all... I don't like defending the oil industry but it's my bread and butter when it comes to employers. Safety does need to improve. I'm not trying to go against that. I'm just trying to respond to someone that said we needed to put the CEO in jail, check every valve daily, and the company should be forced into bankruptcy. I asked her how she felt about the people who work there that aren't involved in the operations of the processes. The secretaries, the research scientists, etc. She didn't care.
