The Odds of Failure

by Daniel Farber

May 03, 2010

Cross posted from Legal Planet.

A couple of key observations about the oil rig blowout, based on my work on disaster issues.

First, “human error” is a cop-out when you’re dealing with major technology.  It’s not like human fallibility is a surprise.  Training, good management, and smart design should be the responses, not whining after the fact that the workers weren’t perfect.  Or, if human error is unavoidable and the outcome would be catastrophic, you’d better rethink the project.

Second, it’s probably true that this was a very unlikely way for an oil rig to go wrong, but that doesn’t mean much.  Suppose this was an eight-thousand-year event at any given oil rig.  That is, you’d expect to have such an accident at that rig once in eight thousand years, or to put it another way, the odds in any given year at any given rig are 1 in 8000.  You could imagine that the engineers might have thought that was pretty darn safe.  (And not just engineers: in the Benzene case, the Supreme Court expressed uncertainty about whether a 1 in 1000 risk — nearly ten times greater — was significant enough to worry about.)

A one in eight thousand year accident  sounds very remote, but it’s actually a recipe for disaster. As it happens, there are over 800 manned U.S. rigs in the Gulf.  So you’d expect an “eight-thousand-year accident” to happen somewhere in the Gulf about once every ten years.  If you’re unwilling to live with anything more than a 1% chance per decade that this kind of accident will happen in the Gulf, you need to get the annual odds at any given rig down to 1/800,000!


Be the first to comment on this entry.
We ask for your email address so that we may follow up with you, ask you to clarify your comment in some way, or perhaps alert you to someone else's response. Only the name you supply and your comment will be displayed on the site to the public. Our blog is a forum for the exchange of ideas, and we hope to foster intelligent, interesting and respectful discussion. We do not apply an ideological screen, however, we reserve the right to remove blog posts we deem inappropriate for any reason, but particularly for language that we deem to be in the nature of a personal attack or otherwise offensive. If we remove a comment you've posted, and you want to know why, ask us ( and we will tell you. If you see a post you regard as offensive, please let us know.

Also from Daniel Farber

Daniel A. Farber is the Sho Sato Professor of Law, Director of the California Center for Environmental Law and Policy, and Chair, Energy & Resources Group, University of California, Berkeley.

Promoting Energy Innovation

Farber | Apr 13, 2018 | Energy

Climate Change in the Courts

Farber | Apr 02, 2018 | Climate Change

Trump, EPA, and the Anti-Regulatory State

Farber | Jan 25, 2018 | Environmental Policy

The Off-Switch Is Inside the Fenceline

Farber | Dec 27, 2017 | Energy

Looking Back on Lucas

Farber | Dec 11, 2017 | Regulatory Policy

The Center for Progressive Reform

455 Massachusetts Ave., NW, #150-513
Washington, DC 20001

© Center for Progressive Reform, 2015