(OT?) Australia - Mobil fails to shift blame - Avgas saga update

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread


Mobil fails to shift blame....(segment)

MOBIL came under fire yesterday after revealing to a Senate committee that the oil giant had paid out less than $200,000 from a $15 million fuel contamination emergency fund.

Fuels marketing director Paul Wherry and other company officials beat a hasty retreat from the Senate hearing in Sydney in a day of surprises in which Mobil revealed new evidence about its manufacturing process and its lawyers claimed in court that it was not responsible for the contamination that grounded 5000 aircraft.

---------------(end segment)

This saga has more twists and turns than a box of self tappers in a carpenter's toolbag.

Regards from OZ

-- Pieter (zaadz@icisp.net.au), January 31, 2000


Thanks, Pieter. It sure would be interesting to read the actual testimony they gave to the Senate committee, especially in regards to the "new evidence about its manufacturing process." Is there any chance that testimony has been/will be placed online?

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), January 31, 2000.


Thanks for the challenging inquiry. You might like to explore this link, the portal to official OZ records.

Australian Hansard

During the next day or so I'll explore some other avenues. If I find the Senate Committee links I'll post them pronto.

Regards from OZ

-- Pieter (zaadz@icisp.net.au), January 31, 2000.

Thanks for the link, Pieter, although my experience reading our own Hansard tells me it contains records only of what is said in the House of Commons and nothing of what is said to Senate or House committees. I'll check it out as soon as I get time.

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), January 31, 2000.

Meanwhile, here's a latest link:

Sydne y Morning Herald

"Tuesday, February 1, 2000

Mobil 'acted rapidly'


"An apologetic Mr Wherry said there was an internal inquiry in progress as to find out the cause of the contamination, which he did not wish to pre-empt. There had been a change in the process of injecting additives into the fuel in November, but the principles behind the new method went back 40 years.

The product that was delivered to the market had passed every international test, he said."

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), January 31, 2000.

Now I'm really confused. This is what Professor Trimm ostensibly said to the committee:

"Leading fuel chemist Professor David Trimm testified that Mobil had used an 'old-fashioned' refining process at its Altona Refinery because there was little incentive in the industry to spend on infrastructure."

Goes against what Mobil says on its website in terms of the new cat cracker, doesn't it?

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), January 31, 2000.

An old process? Sounds like a MANUAL process to me!

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 31, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ