en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_explosion
3 corrections found
Production casing was being run and cemented at the time of the accident.
The production casing had already been run and cemented before the accident. By then, the crew had moved on to later temporary-abandonment steps.
Full reasoning
Authoritative investigations describe the casing-and-cementing work as already completed before the blowout.
A BP accident report filed with the SEC states that "[a]t the time of the accident, the final string of casing had been run into the well, and the cement ..." and that pressure testing had been completed. The National Academies likewise reported that once the casing and cementing operations were concluded, the work had moved on to testing well integrity and completing the temporary-abandonment process.
That means the article's wording is incorrect: the accident did not occur while production casing was still being run and cemented; those steps had already finished.
2 sources
- Deepwater Horizon Accident Investigation Report (SEC-hosted BP report)
At the time of the accident, the final string of casing had been run into the well, and the cement ... pressure testing had been completed.
- Macondo Well Deepwater Horizon Blowout: Lessons for Improving Offshore Drilling Safety | National Academies
Once the casing and cementing operations were concluded, the focus moved to the installation and testing of the integrity of the wellhead seals and testing of the integrity of the cement, and then to completion of the temporary abandonment process.
9:56 p.m. (UTC-6)
The UTC offset shown is wrong. In April, Louisiana-area local time is Central Daylight Time, which is UTC−5, not UTC−6.
Full reasoning
The problem here is the time-zone offset.
NIST explains that U.S. daylight saving time begins on the second Sunday in March and that the Central time zone uses CST = UTC−6 during standard time but CDT = UTC−5 during daylight time. April 20, 2010 fell during daylight saving time, so a Louisiana-area local time should have been expressed as CDT (UTC−5) rather than UTC−6.
So even if the intended local clock time was 9:56 p.m., the offset printed in the infobox is incorrect.
1 source
- Local Time FAQs | NIST
Daylight saving time (DST) begins each year on the second Sunday in March ... Central (CT) | CST -6 | CDT -5.
while the court found that 4.2 million bbl (670,000 m3) were spilled.
That was the government's estimate, not the court's finding. Judge Barbier later found 3.19 million barrels were discharged into the Gulf (4.0 million released from the reservoir).
Full reasoning
This sentence incorrectly attributes the 4.2 million barrel figure to the court.
EPA's page for the Phase Two trial points to the court's findings on the amount spilled, and multiple official summaries of that ruling state that on January 15, 2015 Judge Carl Barbier found that 3.19 million barrels of oil discharged into the Gulf of Mexico. NOAA's incident summary says the judge ruled that 4.0 million barrels were released from the reservoir, of which 3.19 million barrels entered the Gulf. DOJ similarly described 4.19 million barrels as the United States' estimate, while noting that the trial judge's finding was 3.19 million barrels discharged into the Gulf.
So the article is wrong to say the court found 4.2 million barrels were spilled. That figure was associated with the government's position, not the court's final finding.
3 sources
- Deepwater Horizon; Gulf of Mexico | NOAA IncidentNews
Judge Barbier ruled in the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PHASE TWO TRIAL on January 15, 2015, that 4 million barrels of crude oil were released from the reservoir, of which 3.19 million barrels ... were released into the Gulf of Mexico.
- Assistant Attorney General John C. Cruden speech | U.S. Department of Justice
The United States estimated that 4.19 million barrels of oil was discharged ... The trial judge determined the amount of oil discharged into the Gulf of Mexico was 3.19 million barrels of oil.
- Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Recent Activities and Ongoing Developments | Congressional Research Service
On January 15, 2015, the same judge determined that the oil spill resulted in a discharge of 3.19 million barrels (134 million gallons) of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.