What does that have do the ability to shut in a well? A shut in isn't stopping something that's leaking or stopping a blowout. It's the ability to deliberately and temporarily stop production.
A loss of containment is very very very bad and a huge problem, but it's not related to a shut in.
I'm well aware of shallow hazards (e.g. mass wasting aka mudslides). I've mapped them in many areas. I'm well aware of the ongoing Taylor spill. I've actually worked with monitoring it using satellite imagery from the regulatory side. I've also worked with it from the oil industry side...
None of that is even remotely relevant here, though... I'm still very unclear how anything you mentioned relates to anything I said...
That having been said, if you think _anything_ around the oil industry isn't done with safety and environmental concerns first and foremost, you've _clearly_ never been anywhere around the industry. I'm dead serious.
What they do is really, really, really damned dangerous and it's fair to debate whether that risk is worth it at a societal level.
However, don't for a goddamn second think that these folks don't care or are sloppy. _Every_ meeting all the way to the top starts with a discussion about safety and possible environmental impacts. I really, really mean that... Every damn one. It's vastly more important than very literally anything else. The first decision is _always_ HSE, never money.
Yeah, things can go wrong in very bad ways. It's not because people don't care or are trying to make a buck at the expense of the environment. It's because they're working in a really difficult environment. Yes, deepwater horizon was preventable. Yes it was due to a poor well design. BP fucked up. That doesn't mean that the oil industry is some evil mustache twirling villain.
You want cheap vegetables, flights across the continent, and plastics? Right now, we have to have oil for that. It ain't ideal, but it's not because people are out there trying to make money off of environmental disasters.