They hold all the headlines, their scandal is all the rage, and behind the Beatles, they’re the most controversial export of the UK: British Petroleum.

Only recently did the company decide to shorten the title to BP – I would avoid petroleum labels as well – conveniently opening up the door for a witty, self-promoting “BP” slogan: Beyond Petroleum.

Opponents have toyed with Beyond Preposterous and Beyond Pretentious to characterize BP’s motives, but I would rather mock the actions resulting from these motives.

BP has long been the champion of green-washing efforts by appearing to be an environmentally friendly company, through advertisements or donations directed toward alternative energy programs, while continuing to drive on the one-lane road of petroleum dependency.

It seems as if BP dreams beyond petroleum but can’t quite seem to get past petroleum. To them, there is no need for action; they’ve got plenty of words.

The company has branded itself the “global leader in clean energy production,” and surprisingly, there is some truth in the statement.

BP is the world’s third largest producer of solar panels – a great title, but the state of solar technology production reveals how worthless the title actually is.

They hoist up their bronze medal while less than 1 percent of the world’s energy usage comes from solar photovoltaic technology. On top of that, 93 percent of their 2008 investments went into oil- and gas-related practices.

Yes, they are a “global leader in clean energy production,” but only in comparison to our shortsighted, uniform energy economy. It’s hard to knock on them for making the claim, since it’s technically true, but I don’t admire the manipulation.

And don’t miss the obvious statement here: “global” leader. Not just a global leader in supplying the product, but a global leader in providing jobs.

After receiving a multi million dollar grant from the Department of Energy to fund alternative energy production, BP decided to scoot into cheaper areas.

After shutting down their Maryland solar plant, they decided to set up shop in India and China for a more profitable production process.

I guess outsourcing is a necessary action to be a “global leader.” The move makes things cheaper and more efficient for BP, but leaves America in the dust – losing out in the energy race windfall. Once again, one can’t blame the reason, but one can’t respect the decision.

While who was at fault for the current disaster is debatable, BP doesn’t hold an admirable track record to defend their innocence.

A refinery explosion in Texas in 2004 killed 15 workers, and BP was fined an exorbitant amount of money on the basis that they “failed to correct potential hazards.”

Two years later, a BP-managed pipeline in Alaska ruptured, pouring out nearly 300,000 gallons of oil. Deemed negligent and ignorant to the corroded and leaking pipelines, BP was slapped with more fines.

In 2007, BP was in violation of improper training for their workers. But the investigation was conducted by the Minerals Management Service (MMS) – the same service that is currently tied to the lack of safety precautions on the Deepwater Horizon Rig – so, I’ll give BP a freebie on this one.

Obviously, BP has quite a few skeletons in the closet. And even though this spill will end up being BP’s call to shame, this may be the one tragedy that may not even be their fault.

With the blowout preventer failing to cap the well – which would have prevented the explosion and the current leakage – one can make sense of BP placing blame on Transocean Ltd., since Transocean ultimately owns and manufactured the rig.

But the drilling operation, and all the safety protocols that come with it, is the responsibility of BP and the aforementioned Minerals Management Service.

It may have been BP, MMS or even both, but the relationship between the two has not delivered encouraging results. It has been reported that MMS exempted BP from the environmental and safety review for the rig. Was it bribery? A favor owed? This claim could easily diminish any credibility BP has left.

Sure, they may have ignored safety protocols due to lack of awareness or concern, but to avoid the mandatory review outright? Now, that is beyond preposterous.

It would be ignorant to think BP is the only company involved in corruption with regulatory organizations – and dare I say, the federal committees – but this report is cause for a broader concern.

It’s obvious the oil companies control all the strings with their ability to bribe, lobby and lie their way out of any scandal.

The present tragedy should reveal BP’s scarred past and expose the comprehensive lack of federal oversight and corrupted compliance within the oil industry.

Nevertheless, if the formerly listed practices and activities haven’t discredited BP’s values in your view, then I would hope the spill is verification.

No longer can BP shadow its actions; we’ve seen the smoking gun.

– Armand Resto is an Oregon State U. junior in environmental science.