PDA

View Full Version : Spill, Baby, Spill!


Pages : [1] 2

Secretariat
04-28-2010, 06:52 PM
New GOP campaign slogan.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100428/ap_on_bi_ge/us_louisiana_oil_rig_explosion

Crews to set fire to oil leaking in Gulf of Mexico
CAIN BURDEAU AND BRETT MARTEL, Associated Press Writers Cain Burdeau And Brett Martel, Associated Press Writers – 7 mins ago

OVER THE GULF OF MEXICO – It's a hellish scene: Giant sheets of flame racing across the Gulf of Mexico as thick, black smoke billows high into sky.

This, though, is no Hollywood action movie. It's the real-life plan to be deployed just 20 miles from the Gulf Coast in a last-ditch effort to burn up an oil spill before it could wash ashore and wreak environmental havoc.

The Coast Guard planned to use hand-held flares to set fire to sections of the massive spill. Crews turned to the technique after failing to stop a 1,000-barrel-a-day leak at the spot where a deepwater oil platform exploded and sank.

A 500-foot boom was to be used to corral several thousand gallons of the thickest oil on the surface, which will then be towed to a more remote area, set on fire, and allowed to burn for about an hour.

The Coast Guard initially said the fires would be started by midday, but officials later postponed the operation until late afternoon or early evening.

About 42,000 gallons of oil a day are leaking into the Gulf from the blown-out well drilled by the Deepwater Horizon oil rig. Eleven workers are missing and presumed dead. The cause of the explosion has not been determined.

..........................................

http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/water/article1090626.ece

Crist says oil spill proves drilling isn't safe, withdraws his support
By Marc Caputo, Mary Ellen Klas and Craig Pittman, Times/Herald Tallahassee Bureau
In Print: Wednesday, April 28, 2010

The oil spill spreading across the Gulf of Mexico is sending ripples through Florida and national politics, giving Gov. Charlie Crist a reason to withdraw his support for offshore drilling.

After a 90-minute plane flight Tuesday above the spill, which was spreading in an 80-mile by 42-mile blob, Crist said, "Clearly it could be devastating to Florida if something like that were to occur. It's the last thing in the world I would want to see happen in our beautiful state.''

He said there is no question now that lawmakers should give up on the idea of drilling off Florida's coast this year and in coming years. He has said previously he would support drilling if it was far enough from shore, safe enough and clean enough. He said the spill is proof that's not possible.

PaceAdvantage
04-28-2010, 06:57 PM
So, this one unfortunate, tragic incident convinces you that we should abandon the offshore drilling process?

In your estimation, how often do these types of accidents occur?

I guess if it were up to you, nuclear energy would have been erradicated after Three Mile Island.

ArlJim78
04-28-2010, 07:17 PM
as of tomorrow Crisp is an independent, and not affliated with Republicans.

Lefty
04-28-2010, 09:11 PM
Let's not drill for oil at all, it's not safe. Let's just all pay $15 a gallon for gas and lord knows what for heating and air conditioning. Let's just live safe lives and starve cause we're broke!.
Breaking news to sec and rest of the left: There's very little in this world that is safe

Steve 'StatMan'
04-28-2010, 09:23 PM
So what happens in other countries when they have an oil spill, both off shore, and land based? I'm sure it happens, but I don't think they cry to the whole world about it and how stupid their country is and long for more dependence on other countries to drill for the oil and take similar risks. Unfortunate, yes, but being big pussies about it isn't going to help fix it this or make the country better. Better damage and clean up methods and procedures are vital, and I'm sure far better than they were 30-40 years ago. Can't just use our solar powered cars and houses (the vast majority of us), can we.

JustRalph
04-28-2010, 09:23 PM
Sure Glad we didn't give up on Transatlantic Ships after the Titanic

ElKabong
04-28-2010, 09:47 PM
The first time Ozzie Smith committed an error at shortstop, the whole world knew he was a failure. And so it is in the world of oil exploration.

Secretariat
04-28-2010, 10:16 PM
So, this one unfortunate, tragic incident convinces you that we should abandon the offshore drilling process?

In your estimation, how often do these types of accidents occur?


No, this horrific incident didn't convince me to abandon offshore drilling processes. I had made that decision a long time ago. This incident however did convince Florida Republican Governor Charlie Crist to abandon the process.

How many types of accidents like this occur?

http://www.alternet.org/water/136793/the_consequences_of_'drill,_baby_drill':_more_than _90_oil_spills_a_day_in_the_u.s./

"The Consequences of 'Drill, Baby Drill': More Than 90 Oil Spills a Day in the U.S.

And that's just the fraction of reported spills. While big tanker disasters make the headlines, the daily toll of the oil industry is huge. "

...

The Coast Guard National Response Center, which tallies all reports of oil spills, logged more than 33,000 in 2008. Pipelines and platforms accounted for more than 1,300 each, and storage tanks suffered more than 2,400 spills.

...

The famous Prudhoe Bay oil field of Alaska's North Slope -- where would-be vice presidential husband Todd Palin worked -- suffers more than one oil spill every day on average, according to an analysis of spills from 1996 to 2008 recently compiled by the Northern Alaska Environmental Center. The period includes only two years with fewer than 400 spills.

...

prospector
04-28-2010, 10:31 PM
as of tomorrow Crisp is an independent, and not affliated with Republicans.
i look at it as another rino gone..like POS specter...

witchdoctor
04-28-2010, 10:34 PM
I agree with Sec. we should give up off shore drilling as there could be oil spills. We should give up flying because the plane could crash. We should give up driving because you could get killed in a car accident. We should give up riding horses as you could get thrown and killed or maimed. We should get rid of every medicine because there may be side effects. :bang:

bigmack
04-28-2010, 10:34 PM
this horrific incident didn't convince me to abandon offshore drilling processes. I had made that decision a long time ago. This incident however did convince Florida Republican Governor Charlie Crist to abandon the process.

How many types of accidents like this occur?
Golly, hard hitting facts there. Send those cards & letters to:

Barack H. Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Comments: 202-456-1111

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/4_28_10_19_30_51.png

Rather, you point out the non-Republican turning Independent Crist pulling a 180.

Go contact the big fish. He's in the office in the shape of an oval.

>90 spills/day? :rolleyes:

Tom
04-28-2010, 10:54 PM
as of tomorrow Crisp is an independent, and not affliated with Republicans.

Same with Sec. He will no longer be affiliated with the human race.
What a totally worthless post by a totally irrelevant poster.

Tom
04-28-2010, 10:58 PM
Sure Glad we didn't give up on Transatlantic Ships after the Titanic

And fire, don't forget fire. And water....floods, drowning......and wind - might bee a hurricane. And solar - we get sunburned, droughts.....no more solar power. Coal....egads! Enough said. And electricity, shorts cause fires and we all know about fire!


Jeepers, with no safe forms of energy, what can we do but roll over and play dead? Or was that was Sec was doing in his post? :lol:

johnhannibalsmith
04-29-2010, 12:31 AM
As much as Sarah Palin (and most Repubs) irritates me, I just can't see being sheepishly happy that something awful happened just to get to play the "I told you so" game.

PaceAdvantage
04-29-2010, 04:23 AM
No, this horrific incident didn't convince me to abandon offshore drilling processes. I had made that decision a long time ago. This incident however did convince Florida Republican Governor Charlie Crist to abandon the process.

How many types of accidents like this occur?

http://www.alternet.org/water/136793/the_consequences_of_'drill,_baby_drill':_more_than _90_oil_spills_a_day_in_the_u.s./

"The Consequences of 'Drill, Baby Drill': More Than 90 Oil Spills a Day in the U.S.Well, I asked you how often these TYPES of accidents occur, meaning in size and magnitude to the one currently going on...you responded with 90 a day.

You're saying there are 90 spills EVERY DAY like the one currently making headlines in the Gulf of Mexico? Or do you not know how to answer a basic question without spinning like a top?

PaceAdvantage
04-29-2010, 04:25 AM
>90 spills/day? :rolleyes:I'm thinking me standing over a rain puddle with a leaky can of WD40 would also count in that mixed up kind of world.

ddog
04-29-2010, 09:09 AM
Hard to say as to scope since it's still going on and maybe for 6 months or longer.

The wing-nuttery flat earth crowd is in full voice here , what are you flatters scared of anyway? :lol:

The issue is could/should there be ultra-deep water rigs sited anywhere without any obvious way to control the spill. That seems to have been the issue, not drill or no drill.


As in the other thread , humans are very bad risk managers, normally.

As to the wd40 - all depends if the puddle is in your yard or in your bed, don't it now sparky.

rastajenk
04-29-2010, 09:24 AM
As much as Sarah Palin (and most Repubs) irritates me, I just can't see being sheepishly happy that something awful happened just to get to play the "I told you so" game.That was my first impression when I saw the thread title and the poster. They never seem to pass an opportunity to politicize a disaster or a crisis.

Secretariat
04-29-2010, 11:29 AM
That was my first impression when I saw the thread title and the poster. They never seem to pass an opportunity to politicize a disaster or a crisis.

Politicize? Drill baby drill was the GOP political slogan of the 2008 election (which they lost).

The crisis that occurred is simply the possible consequences that can and will occur with that approach. There are estimates that the cost of this may exceed the Exxon Valdez. We accept the risk involved with tankers possibly spilling oil as happened earlier this month in the Great Barrier Reef off of the Australian coastline. Actually, Obama has chosen to side with offshore drillng while Charlie Crist realizes the possibilty of Florida shorelines covered with oil if the event of an expansion of drilling off the coastlines. Personally, I'm OK with it IF a state decides they want it and are willing to reimburse other states money in the event there shorelines are damaged. Also I don't think the federal government should pay one cent for any clean up as they do under the Oil Pollution Act. I think any clean up should fall under the individual state approving it and THEIR taxpayers, and litgation between that state and the individual company.

boxcar
04-29-2010, 11:43 AM
Politicize? Drill baby drill was the GOP political slogan of the 2008 election (which they lost).

The crisis that occurred is simply the possible consequences that can and will occur with that approach. There are estimates that the cost of this may exceed the Exxon Valdez. We accept the risk involved with tankers possibly spilling oil as happened earlier this month in the Great Barrier Reef off of the Australian coastline. Actually, Obama has chosen to side with offshore drillng while Charlie Crist realizes the possibilty of Florida shorelines covered with oil if the event of an expansion of drilling off the coastlines. Personally, I'm OK with it IF a state decides they want it and are willing to reimburse other states money in the event there shorelines are damaged. Also I don't think the federal government should pay one cent for any clean up as they do under the Oil Pollution Act. I think any clean up should fall under the individual state approving it and THEIR taxpayers, and litgation between that state and the individual company.

Such convoluted logic! :rolleyes: First off, Sec, you say in one breath "possible" consequences, then in the next breath in the very same sentence say, "that will occur.." So, which is it? A definite occurrence or a possible one? :rolleyes:

Also, when any state drills for oil,the whole country benefits. So, why not have the Feds foot the bill for accidents?

Next, going by your anti-drilling logic and taking it to its logical conclusion, shouldn't all nations immediately cease drilling in order to save the earth? To save the environment? To same the animals? And above all to save Libs from having anxiety or panic attacks? Or is okay to continue to drill in other nations' backyards, but not our own?

Boxcar

Robert Goren
04-29-2010, 11:53 AM
We should be drilling, but we should be moving as fast as we can to the position where we don't have to drill. JMO

hazzardm
04-29-2010, 12:39 PM
Also I don't think the federal government should pay one cent for any clean up as they do under the Oil Pollution Act. I think any clean up should fall under the individual state approving it and THEIR taxpayers, and litgation between that state and the individual company.

Why should the state or taxpayers pay for ANY of this? The company reaping the profits should be expected to pay the entire tab.

Robert Goren
04-29-2010, 12:42 PM
Why should the state or taxpayers pay for ANY of this? The company reaping the profits should be expected to pay the entire tab. You can bet that they have figured out away so that they won't have to pay anything near the whole cost.

prospector
04-29-2010, 03:17 PM
Why should the state or taxpayers pay for ANY of this? The company reaping the profits should be expected to pay the entire tab.
do you think the state and fed don't make money with all their taxes? they should lockbox a % of taxes for cleanups..

hazzardm
04-29-2010, 03:38 PM
do you think the state and fed don't make money with all their taxes? they should lockbox a % of taxes for cleanups..

Again, WHY should the fed/state pay for ANY this clean-up. They (BP) have a market cap of over $150 billion.

Gosh I would think the capitalists here would be screaming about govt intervention.

Lefty
04-29-2010, 03:42 PM
Obama has announced he has sent SWAT teams to the scene. Say what?

hazzardm
04-29-2010, 03:51 PM
Obama has announced he has sent SWAT teams to the scene. Say what?

Perhaps there are marauding gangs of sharks

ddog
04-29-2010, 04:32 PM
Such convoluted logic! :rolleyes: First off, Sec, you say in one breath "possible" consequences, then in the next breath in the very same sentence say, "that will occur.." So, which is it? A definite occurrence or a possible one? :rolleyes:

Also, when any state drills for oil,the whole country benefits. So, why not have the Feds foot the bill for accidents?

Next, going by your anti-drilling logic and taking it to its logical conclusion, shouldn't all nations immediately cease drilling in order to save the earth? To save the environment? To same the animals? And above all to save Libs from having anxiety or panic attacks? Or is okay to continue to drill in other nations' backyards, but not our own?

Boxcar


logic is lost on you that's for sure.

So we should via fed tax dollars pay for any state to have companies drill for oil, that's your logic? Of course all the dry holes should be federally paid for as well since without the dry ones you will not find the wet ones.

Horrific but expected coming from a statist nut like you.

I think it a little better to let the price of oil reflect the costs of the oil which of course include liabilities for spills and other "accidents" , especially if one over commits and has no plan b for just in case.

A little cleaner system there.

Just as bad as the Feds getting involved in storm insurance for the welfare addicts who think they deserve to live on the coast at sea level without any risk.

ddog
04-29-2010, 04:36 PM
Obama has announced he has sent SWAT teams to the scene. Say what?


Not THE scene, they are sending to several scenes. I would not put it past some green-terrorist to blow these things up and I would also not put it past some of the companies to have cut back on costs via non-enforcement of regs so as to tilt toward other "accidents".

After all , at a certain level this is just tail-risk. These workers took a job and they knew what could happen.

prospector
04-29-2010, 04:45 PM
Again, WHY should the fed/state pay for ANY this clean-up. They (BP) have a market cap of over $150 billion.

Gosh I would think the capitalists here would be screaming about govt intervention.
again, because the state and fed take profit from them in the guise of taxes...corporations should pay no taxes..period..
corporations exist only to make money for the shareholders...and they're taxed enough.

ddog
04-29-2010, 04:49 PM
Corps should pay ALL the taxes , you have it exactly backwards.
There should be no personal taxes. Much easier system to administer , much lower costs of collection.


and again....these corps don't exist without the fed gvt protection either here or elsewhere , so they get a good deal since they are still turning a profit , which is what's left over after taxes. They don't pay it out of profits.

The costs of their business are never born by them fully.

Robert Goren
04-29-2010, 04:58 PM
again, because the state and fed take profit from them in the guise of taxes...corporations should pay no taxes..period..
corporations exist only to make money for the shareholders...and they're taxed enough. Those days are gone. Corporations are now run for the benefit of their top Executives. The shareholders get only the crumbs and no say in how they are run.JMO

hazzardm
04-29-2010, 05:25 PM
again, because the state and fed take profit from them in the guise of taxes...corporations should pay no taxes..period..
corporations exist only to make money for the shareholders...and they're taxed enough.

I'll phrase it a different way, why should cleanup cost not be considered part of the cost of doing business?

Tom
04-29-2010, 08:34 PM
Perhaps there are marauding gangs of sharks

Is he protecting the border from Illegal oil entering the country?:rolleyes:
Hey, that oil is just here to fuel cars that American oil not fuel!

Buckeye
04-29-2010, 09:02 PM
So, this one unfortunate, tragic incident convinces you that we should abandon the offshore drilling process?

In your estimation, how often do these types of accidents occur?

I guess if it were up to you, nuclear energy would have been erradicated after Three Mile Island.

What about wind mills? Just kidding. I wrote a paper circa 1987 discussing this very argument. Coal and nuclear generation of electricity are STILL all we have right now-- Thirty plus odd years later. Other side speak.

PaceAdvantage
04-30-2010, 05:27 AM
As to the wd40 - all depends if the puddle is in your yard or in your bed, don't it now sparky.That was some reach, even for you.

prospector
04-30-2010, 09:04 AM
I'll phrase it a different way, why should cleanup cost not be considered part of the cost of doing business?
i can almost agree with that..better question is insurance? was there none? why wouldn't the company be covered for that...i've got flood insurance and i'm a far piece from the river..but, if the 100 year flood comes tomorrow, i'm covered..

ArlJim78
04-30-2010, 07:14 PM
One thing that i don't understand about the response to the oil rig event, and the media coverage of it, is that it doesn't appear to me at least on the surface that there is enough attention being paid to what is in my opinion the most urgent and important aspect, stopping the flow of oil.

you hardly hear anyone talking about this. from what i can gather, the well head has been continuously leaking this whole time, yet they talk about this and call it a "spill". a spill is one thing, but a continuous flow of oil at the rate of 2 gallons per second for a week or more is quite another.

I don't know why this wasn't immediately addressed. Has the flow been stopped, has the well been capped off under water? they should have sent in every available resource right from the get go to bring the flow to a halt. but instead they talk about halting future drilling, who should be blamed, what damage will it do to the coastlines, etc. okay fine but first make sure TO STOP THE LEAK! then find out what happened, then make sure that the thousands of other rigs are checked. containment has to come first.

they need to call in all the Harry Stampers of the world and pay them to work aruond the clock on this. until they do this thing is an open ended disaster.

Lefty
04-30-2010, 09:42 PM
Imagine if GW was still Pres and he took 9 days to send anyone there to assess and do something about the situation. A guy on Tv said it should have been set on fire and burnt off right away. Obama sent lawyers as first responders? He's a bad joke Obama is.

plainolebill
04-30-2010, 10:54 PM
After Exxon Valdez every barrel of oil pumped or imported to the US has an 8 cent surtax to paid into an insurance pool for these kinds of disasters. BP has done a better job so far that Exxon did at the time but this is closer to home and higher profile. I read the fund has ~$1.6 billion in it.

It's going to be a shitstorm any way you look at it.

BlueShoe
05-01-2010, 12:18 AM
Has anything been mentioned officially that this explosion may not have been an accident, but a bombing? Not hard to quietly row a small boat to the rig in the middle of the night, send divers down to plant explosives, set fuses, and then depart without being seen. Terrorists, Iran, North Korea, our own far left environmental extremeists; lots of possible supects.

Tom
05-01-2010, 11:32 AM
What about libs bombing it? Maybe even Obama directed it.
Good way to vilanize off shore drilling so that they can ban it. Obama has a pattern of this methodology......maybe he has just progressed in strategy.

BlueShoe
05-01-2010, 11:49 AM
Already out are predictions of $5 a gallon gasoline prices by the end of the year.

ArlJim78
05-01-2010, 11:59 AM
BP Is Criticized Over Oil Spill, but U.S. Missed Chances to Act (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/us/02spill.html?pagewanted=1)

"Yet a review of the response suggests it may be too simplistic to place all the blame for the unfolding environmental catastrophe on the oil company. The federal government also had opportunities to move more quickly, but did not do so while it waited for a resolution to the spreading spill from BP.
The Department of Homeland Security (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/h/homeland_security_department/index.html?inline=nyt-org) waited until Thursday to declare that the incident was “a spill of national significance,” and then set up a second command center in Mobile, Ala. The actions came only after the estimate of the size of the spill was increased fivefold to 5,000 barrels a day.

The delay meant that the Homeland Security Department waited until late this week to formally request a more robust response from the Department of Defense, with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/n/janet_napolitano/index.html?inline=nyt-per) acknowledging even as late as Thursday afternoon that she did not know if the Defense Department even had equipment that might be helpful.

By Friday afternoon, she said, the Defense Department had agreed to send two large military transport planes to spray chemicals that can disperse the oil while it is still in the Gulf.

Officials initially seemed to underestimate the threat of a leak, just as BP did last year (http://www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/PLANS/29/29977.pdf) when it told the government such an event was highly unlikely. Rear Adm. Mary E. Landry, the chief Coast Guard official in charge of the response, said on April 22, after the rig sank, that the oil that was on the surface appeared to be merely residual oil from the fire, though she said it was unclear what was going on underwater. The day after, officials said that it appeared the well’s blowout preventer had kicked in and that there did not seem to be any oil leaking from the well, though they cautioned it was not a guarantee.

ArlJim78
05-01-2010, 04:37 PM
campaigning while a couple hundred thousand gallons per day flow into the ocean near our shores.

a photo timeline (http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/05/obamas-katrina-illustrated-timeline.html)

Secretariat
05-02-2010, 10:46 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100502/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_39

"Crews have had little success stemming the flow from the ruptured well on the sea floor off Louisiana or removing oil from the surface by skimming it, burning it or dispersing it with chemicals. Adding to the gloomy outlook were warnings from experts that an uncontrolled gusher could create a nightmare scenario if the Gulf Stream current carries it toward the Atlantic.

Long tendrils of oil sheen made their way into South Pass, a major channel through the salt marshes of Louisiana's southeastern bootheel.

"That is the very first sign of oil I've heard of inside South Pass," said Venice charter boat captain Bob Kenney, shaking his head. "It's crushing, man, it's crushing.""

.................

"The Coast Guard conceded Saturday that it's nearly impossible to know how much oil has gushed since the blast, after saying earlier it was at least 1.6 million gallons — equivalent to about 2 1/2 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

Even at that rate, the spill should eclipse the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident as the worst U.S. oil disaster in history in a matter of weeks. But a growing number of experts warned that the situation may already be much worse.

The oil slick over the water's surface appeared to triple in size over the past two days, which could indicate an increase in the rate that oil is spewing from the well, according to one analysis of images collected from satellites and reviewed by the University of Miami. While it's hard to judge the volume of oil by satellite because of depth, images do indicates growth, experts said.

"The spill and the spreading is getting so much faster and expanding much quicker than they estimated," said Hans Graber, executive director of the university's Center for Southeastern Tropical Advanced Remote Sensing. "Clearly, in the last couple of days, there was a big change in the size."

Doug Suttles, BP's chief operating officer for exploration and production, said it was impossible to know just how much oil was gushing from the well, but company and federal officials were preparing for the worst-case scenario.

In an exploration plan and environmental impact analysis filed with the federal government in February 2009, BP said it had the capability to handle a "worst-case scenario" at the site, which the document described as a leak of 162,000 barrels per day from an uncontrolled blowout — 6.8 million gallons each day.

Oil industry experts and officials are reluctant to describe what, exactly, a worst-case scenario would look like — but if the oil gets into the Gulf Stream and carries it to the beaches of Florida, it stands to be an environmental and economic disaster of epic proportions.

The well is at the end of one branch of the Gulf Stream, the warm-water current that flows from the Gulf of Mexico to the North Atlantic. Several experts said that if the oil enters the stream, it would flow around the southern tip of Florida and up the eastern seaboard.

"It will be on the East Coast of Florida in almost no time," Graber said. "I don't think we can prevent that. It's more of a question of when rather than if." "
.....




It won't be long until this hits almost the entire southern coastal border of Mississippi and Alabama looking at the timeline on the link. Florida's beaches are going to be impacted as well and the Lousiana wetlands. The shrimp industry down there is devastated by this.

What is frightening is the amount of other BP rigs down there this can happen to. It's another example of bypassing any kind of regulation on these rigs. The GOP motto, "Let the industry police themselves", and voila, we've got something worse than the Exxon Valdez in a "matter of weeks" AND it still has not been sealed. Imagine now, thousands more of these rigs with little or no oversight and the potential for more of these.

Who is going to pay for this? Spill, baby spill.

chrisl
05-02-2010, 11:06 AM
I would like to see how the fishing industry will be compensated for there losses. My wifes family was destroyed by the Exxon Valdez spill. Courts gave the plaintiffs after 20 years of court battles, a settlement of 30,000. Pennies of what was lost. You can still see the impact of this spill today, even though Exxon states the coast line is better now that it was before the spill.

Robert Goren
05-02-2010, 11:35 AM
They just can't stop the flow from the broken pipe down near the gulf bottom. From I have heard from numerous news sources that they are not likely to get it stopped any time soon. That $1.6 billion will just a drop in the bucket on what this thing is going to cost. They have no idea on the cause of it (or if BP does, they ain't talking) I really doubt that even as big as BP is that they have any near the resources to pay for this. The American taxpayer will be on the hook for a lot of it. On a side note, if you like shrimp now might be a good time to fill the freezer. JMO

johnhannibalsmith
05-02-2010, 11:48 AM
... It's another example of bypassing any kind of regulation on these rigs. The GOP motto, "Let the industry police themselves", and voila, we've got something worse than the Exxon Valdez in a "matter of weeks" AND it still has not been sealed. Imagine now, thousands more of these rigs with little or no oversight and the potential for more of these...

When was the Exxon Valdez disaster? Are you telling me that since that time with all of the administrative shuffles since then that the lack of regulations or oversight or whatever you are clamoring for with amazing hindsight hangs specifically on one political party?

Maybe I can believe you - but I'd like to see some evidence of the DEM aggressiveness to solve this problem over the last two decades only to be effectively rebuked by the GOP in order to buy into this odd brush of singular accountability you offer up here.

Tom
05-02-2010, 01:12 PM
You are doing a hell of a job, there, BARRY.

Welcome to your Katrina.
Oil spewing out, under a democratic regieme, car bombs in NYC, and where is the CNC?

Telling jokes at a party.

Robert Goren
05-02-2010, 01:46 PM
This is BP's show so far. They are running everything from the attempts to plug the pipe to the attempts to contain the oil slick. Nobody until yesterday was saying that the Feds should this over. Even today Jindal was saying that BP should be in charge of the "on the sea operations". Most people are saying that the government should only be in charge of the clean up. Quite frankly I am not sure there is anyone in the government who knows about this to be put in charge. The amazing thing how quiet the "drill, baby, drill" crowd has gotten. A month ago they were saying that there was no way something like this could happen. Where are they now, looking for a way to Obama. It would nice if one of those pro drilling people would step up and say " We were wrong".JMO

boxcar
05-02-2010, 02:15 PM
This is BP's show so far. They are running everything from the attempts to plug the pipe to the attempts to contain the oil slick. Nobody until yesterday was saying that the Feds should this over. Even today Jindal was saying that BP should be in charge of the "on the sea operations". Most people are saying that the government should only be in charge of the clean up. Quite frankly I am not sure there is anyone in the government who knows about this to be put in charge. The amazing thing how quiet the "drill, baby, drill" crowd has gotten. A month ago they were saying that there was no way something like this could happen. Where are they now, looking for a way to Obama. It would nice if one of those pro drilling people would step up and say " We were wrong".JMO

Yo, Robert, come here I have something to tell you -- but only if you promise to keep it a secret. Promise? Okay, good. Here it is: When BO made his announcement (I believe it was his initial one) regarding his decision to allow drilling, he himself said at the time that generally speaking it was pretty unlikely that any accidents would occur on those rigs.

Boxcar
P.S. I'm still for drilling. The black gold is what keeps the entire world's economy spinning smoothly. ;)

Boxcar

Robert Goren
05-02-2010, 02:30 PM
I am still for drilling too, But I want to know what cause this and a better plan for handling spills. I also want to go full speed ahead with plans to replace our need for oil. We can never be free of the Arabs as long as the use of oil is at anything close to the current levels. We don't have enough and a lot of we have is so expensive to get that it is cheaper to buy from the Arabs. But there is still bunch of people out there who said that this could not possibly happen. There is a difference between "unlikely" and "no way". JMO

Lefty
05-02-2010, 02:40 PM
We have Oil, we have Coal and we have Gas. All we need to do is get it.

Robert Goren
05-02-2010, 02:56 PM
We have Oil, we have Coal and we have Gas. All we need to do is get it. Well you are 2/3rds right. We have Coal and Gas. We have some oil, but not nearly enough. Coal has some problems with mining. Remember the cave-in a month ago. We have a lot of wind. We can do some more nuclear. The French use a lot of it. We need to moving away from oil as quickly as possible. What I don't understand is why anything is heated with oil anymore when we have so much Natural Gas and in my part of the country it has been the main heat source for as long as I have been alive.

prospector
05-02-2010, 03:08 PM
we should have done the shale oil in wyoming years ago..no tunas there..

JustRalph
05-02-2010, 04:56 PM
If this was Bush they would be calling it Katrina II

But then again, what is the race of those that are being hurt by this one?

I am waiting for Some Milquetoast White Singer to go on stage somewhere and declare "Barack Obama hates White People" or maybe he hates fish?

Tom
05-02-2010, 09:43 PM
Obama has an oil spill machine. :D

Robert Goren
05-02-2010, 11:59 PM
If this was Bush they would be calling it Katrina IIYou are right about that. Bush would be getting it good.

ceejay
05-03-2010, 09:45 AM
Politically, this blowout and subsequent leak I think will be a game changer. And, are no winners among stakeholders. The environment & fisheries lose, the American consumers lose (more dependence on foreign oil), the oil companies lose (by higher operational costs in the future).

lsbets
05-03-2010, 02:21 PM
Hey, we got nothing to worry about. A Dem is telling us the spill is just like chocolate milk!

During an interview with Biloxi’s WLOX-TV, Taylor said that the massive oil spill is “not nearly as bad” as he thought it would be and that it “isn’t Katrina. It’s not Armageddon. … A lot of people are scared and I don’t think they should be.” He went on to compare the spill to chocolate milk and said that the oil is “tending to break up naturally.”

I know, Sec is going to say he's a conservative Dem, might as well be a Rep, etc, etc ........... But, if you vote for that evil wench Pelosi to be speaker, you are a liberal no matter how you try to hide it.

We have a failed response from the Pres, and a Dem comparing it to chocolate. Sounds just like Katrina!

bigmack
05-03-2010, 02:37 PM
We have a failed response from the Pres, and a Dem comparing it to chocolate. Sounds just like Katrina!
:lol:

46zilzal
05-03-2010, 02:39 PM
Ecologically you have not a clue

bigmack
05-03-2010, 02:44 PM
Ecologically you have not a clue
I think that one's for you, Is. This guy is beautiful.

lsbets
05-03-2010, 02:46 PM
I think that one's for you, Is. This guy is beautiful.

I think it safe to say that 46 hasn't a clue. His response doesn't quite rise to the level of his genetic algorithms response, but shows once again that the guy isn't too bright.

ddog
05-03-2010, 03:18 PM
Perhaps since we know that bama can't handle it and it seems Bp is having some issues , perhaps the great man himself could be pressed into action for the sake of his country.

El Rusho"the oil spill(that it's NOT a spill , oh well :D ) is nothing that the sea can't take care of because oil has a tough time surviving in the sea :lol: :lol: "

And "some people(?) say that the sea will take care of the oil??? those would be who exactly??? :D :D El Rushbo????


And then the most insane quote of all , which shows the "depth" of his "understanding" of anything outside of hot-air and that would be "It's no big deal you know "Prince William Sound is PRISTINE now"!

:eek: What a joker , but maybe he could get the situation under control or at least since the sea will handle it, why is he bothering bama and the dims to waste money to clean it up he should be praising a lack of action as the fiscally sound policy. I guess he wants to spend money on another jobs bill and bailout. Where oh where are the fiscal con crowd now?



The "flats" on here curse the demoncrats for their insanity, the discourse on either side is full of boobs and nutjobs.

mostpost
05-03-2010, 03:21 PM
Well, I asked you how often these TYPES of accidents occur, meaning in size and magnitude to the one currently going on...you responded with 90 a day.

You're saying there are 90 spills EVERY DAY like the one currently making headlines in the Gulf of Mexico? Or do you not know how to answer a basic question without spinning like a top?
From what I can gather, there have been nine major oil spills in the U.S. and surrounding waters since 1969. Amounts of oil spilled ranged between 300,000 gallons to 140 million gallons.
Here is the definition of an oil spill according to the article which Sec linked to.
According to the Fish and Wildlife Service, a reported spill should be any "Discharges that cause a sheen or discoloration on the surface of a body of water; discharges that violate applicable water-quality standards; and discharges that cause a sludge or emulsion to be deposited beneath the surface of the water or on adjoining shorelines."

So, a quite small amount could be considered a spill. Even a small overflow rom someone filling an outboard motor would be counted as a spill.

JustRalph
05-03-2010, 03:28 PM
Ecologically you have not a clue

<html>
<body>

<script type="text/javascript">
document.write("Generic Liberal Spin inserted here");
</script>

</body>
</html>


Not a bad reply for a piece of Java Script

mostpost
05-03-2010, 03:40 PM
I'm not a "Drill, baby, drill" guy. That kind of simplistic sloganeering is best left to Sarah and friends. But, if we are going to drill, the oil companies must be responsible for disasters. Not just solutionally responsible, but preemptively responsible.
There is an acoustic shutoff valve which is required by law in all European off shore drilling sites. This device would have prevented most of the damage incurred in the Gulf. It is not required under United States law.
I do not know any details of this device, nor how much it costs. But, I will bet it doesn't cost one tenth of what it will cost to clean up the spill and not one hundreth of the overall economic cost.

johnhannibalsmith
05-03-2010, 09:12 PM
I'm not a "Drill, baby, drill" guy. That kind of simplistic sloganeering is best left to Sarah and friends. But, if we are going to drill, the oil companies must be responsible for disasters. Not just solutionally responsible, but preemptively responsible.
There is an acoustic shutoff valve which is required by law in all European off shore drilling sites. This device would have prevented most of the damage incurred in the Gulf. It is not required under United States law.
I do not know any details of this device, nor how much it costs. But, I will bet it doesn't cost one tenth of what it will cost to clean up the spill and not one hundreth of the overall economic cost.

Yes. Seems like fairly simple common sense.

bigmack
05-03-2010, 09:21 PM
Yes. Seems like fairly simple common sense.
Almost goes without saying. Heck, I don't even know why it was said.

Clearly, little change needs to take place.

I wouldn't use "Change You Can Believe In" that kind of simplistic sloganeering is best left to BO and Co.

Boris
05-03-2010, 09:41 PM
A - There is an acoustic shutoff valve

B - This device would have prevented most of the damage incurred in the Gulf.

C - I do not know any details of this device


And how does A + C = B?

mostpost
05-05-2010, 05:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mostpost
A - There is an acoustic shutoff valve

B - This device would have prevented most of the damage incurred in the Gulf.

C - I do not know any details of this device


Originally posted by Boris

And how does A + C = B?
Not very well stated by me. It took me a few days, but I have found more information.
From Examiner.com
http://www.examiner.com/x-38220-Orlando-Independent-Examiner~y2010m5d2-500K-device-may-have-prevented-oil-spill

Yes, that's correct...a device that costs one half million dollars may have prevented what is on track to become the worst oil spill in U.S. history.

The device is called an acoustic trigger (aka. acoustic switch, actuator). It is a remote-controlled device deployed off oil rigs that sends acoustic impulses through the water, triggering an underwater valve or explosives to shut down the well even if the rig is catastrophically damaged or abandoned.
From WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html

An acoustic trigger costs about $500,000, industry officials said. The Deepwater Horizon had a replacement cost of about $560 million, and BP says it is spending $6 million a day to battle the oil spill. On Wednesday, crews set fire to part of the oil spill in an attempt to limit environmental damage.
Sounds like a case of penny wise and pound (dollar) foolish. The United States Minerals Management Service did look into the acoustic switch system in 2003 and came to the conclusion that it was too expensive and of unproven reliabilty.
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/05/04/04greenwire-warnings-on-backup-systems-for-oil-rigs-sounde-30452.html

Of course, what we must consider is that this evaluation was made under a Bush Administration which was clearly in bed with the oil companies. The same NY Times article has this tidbit.
MMS's regulation of the oil and gas industry has come under scrutiny before. In 2008, then-Interior Inspector General Earl Devaney found massive misconduct at the service, saying employees rigged contracts and engaged in illegal moonlighting, drugs, sex and gift-taking from oil companies.

Thse systems are required in Norway and Brazil and have worked well. Their use in the gulf could have saved BP $millions and the economy in general $Billions.

lsbets
05-06-2010, 06:49 AM
Two interesting facts.

One - in 2009 the administration exempted BP from a detailed environmental impact analysis of their operations in the Gulf.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2011780029_oilrules05.html

Two - BP spent a shit ton of money on campaign donations and lobbying over the years. The person who got the most campaign cash from BP? Obama.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html

Is that hope or change?

ArlJim78
05-06-2010, 10:46 AM
right, and now after taking BP's campaign money and exempting them from the environmental study, they say it's all their fault and that they are going to keep their "boots on the neck" of BP. Interesting choice of words.

boxcar
05-06-2010, 10:51 AM
right, and now after taking BP's campaign money and exempting them from the environmental study, they say it's all their fault and that they are going to keep their "boots on the neck" of BP. Interesting choice of words.

BO sounds like he's throwing BP under the bus. Who would have thought? :rolleyes:

Boxcar
P.S. "Boot on the neck" is thugese lingo. Just what we'd expect from this administration...

mostpost
05-06-2010, 10:55 AM
Two interesting facts.

One - in 2009 the administration exempted BP from a detailed environmental impact analysis of their operations in the Gulf.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2011780029_oilrules05.html

Two - BP spent a shit ton of money on campaign donations and lobbying over the years. The person who got the most campaign cash from BP? Obama.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html

Is that hope or change?
Re: ONE.......This was obviously the wrong decision. We need to have more oversight in these situations. But are you not one of those who always argues for less government involvement?

Re: TWO........This makes it seem as if BP made a huge contribution to the Obama campaign, maybe in the millions. The fact is they contributed $77,051. That is a sizable contribution, but Obama raised $150 million in September alone. $77,051 is five one hundreths of one percent of that amount.

fast4522
05-06-2010, 11:06 AM
Sure, I have no doubt that this lady will provide exactly what you desire Mostpost!

johnhannibalsmith
05-06-2010, 11:39 AM
Re: ONE.......This was obviously the wrong decision. We need to have more oversight in these situations. But are you not one of those who always argues for less government involvement?

What does the poster's opinion of the role of government play in his posting this? Talk about side-stepping. It wasn't the poster's intent as near as I can tell to use the facts to support his position, but rather to demonstrate the typically bogus hypocrisy of those whose actions defy their stated "beliefs". I don't usually get too bogged down with piling on those that claim you are a "spin master deluxe", but criminy Mostpost, that's really an amazing transition in an effort to deflect from the message. You could have easily omitted that last part and looked fairly genuine with the initial statements.


Re: TWO........This makes it seem as if BP made a huge contribution to the Obama campaign, maybe in the millions. The fact is they contributed $77,051. That is a sizable contribution, but Obama raised $150 million in September alone. $77,051 is five one hundreths of one percent of that amount.

Makes you wonder what kind of sweet deals shrouded in bullshit proclamations apply to the other ninety-five hundredths of ninety-nine percent if you want to use that as a serious rebuttal.

hcap
05-12-2010, 05:58 AM
All for nought

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_9ks36c549BI/S-dFVw9XfzI/AAAAAAAABWM/UfZ8ydQbiRg/s400/oilconsumption_0.JPG

lsbets
05-12-2010, 07:19 AM
Re: ONE.......This was obviously the wrong decision. We need to have more oversight in these situations. But are you not one of those who always argues for less government involvement?

Re: TWO........This makes it seem as if BP made a huge contribution to the Obama campaign, maybe in the millions. The fact is they contributed $77,051. That is a sizable contribution, but Obama raised $150 million in September alone. $77,051 is five one hundreths of one percent of that amount.

One - you were trying to blame the Bush administration for not doing anything. My opinion of what government should do is not the issue. You are the one willing to submit to the tyranny of the state and its clear your man's administration did not do what you wanted them to do.

Two - how about the donations of BPs execs not only during the Pres campaign, but during his very brief Senate career?

He is bought and paid for, and you sadly buy into his BS as if you have no mind of your own. :ThmbDown: You're smarter than that, or at least you appear you should be. You helped put this disaster in office, hold his feet to the fire. Quit the blame Bush brigade and hold your man accountable.

hazzardm
05-12-2010, 11:07 AM
right, and now after taking BP's campaign money and exempting them from the environmental study, they say it's all their fault and that they are going to keep their "boots on the neck" of BP. Interesting choice of words.

What about this do you not approve? Is this not what EVERYONE expects from govenrment? I would seem to me only BP shareholders would feel differently.

Tom
05-12-2010, 11:14 AM
I object to them getting a pass on the environmental impact study.
Whoever did this in gov/t should be in jail.

I believe this whole mess is not an accident.

Black Ruby
05-12-2010, 11:20 AM
McCain's #2 on the list of current legislators in the amount received from BP. Sadly, not much would be different between the two miserable choices we were presented.

Robert Goren
05-12-2010, 11:21 AM
Is there politician that BP hasn't given money to? I think they would give money to both sides in a race for dog catcher.;)

Robert Goren
05-12-2010, 11:29 AM
For tea partiers who worship at the feet of Sarah Palin and are all over Obama for this spill. Todd Palin worked for BP for 18 years. Just something for you to think about.;)

Tom
05-12-2010, 12:48 PM
How much money did they give to him and how many audits did he exempt them from during that time? :rolleyes:

Hey, this is the standard that left set during Bush's terms - as POTUS, Obamadinijhad is 100% responsible for all manner of natural disasters and responses. It is out of our hands. We must accuse.

fast4522
05-12-2010, 12:58 PM
"Todd Palin worked for BP for 18 years. Just something for you to think about."

So he had a job for 18 years with BP, so what, you want us to support you kin folk on welfare or something. You are beating a dead horse, they are 100% correct WE DON'T CARE! Good jobs for hard workers, nothing for gimmie gimmies. You want to tax the shit out of those who generate jobs, keep your birdseed because your next.

ddog
05-12-2010, 01:14 PM
I object to them getting a pass on the environmental impact study.
Whoever did this in gov/t should be in jail.

I believe this whole mess is not an accident.


Ya know, this thread is so brain dead, it would seem most have been given an exemption on thinking of any kind.

The reason enviro exempts can be given is because THE CLASS OF OPERATION HAS ALREADY BEEN studied. THUS , they are just riding on the previously done studies from similar projects.

I am not saying that the Minerals and MInes dudes are/were not bought and paid for or that their superiors wanted fast tracked approvals , but that should not come as a surprise to anyone given the hue and cry over drill here drill now.


CONgress idiots are crying about well "kicks", hell those "kicks" are not unusual in any well operation,that's what a lot of what failed here is designed to cope with.

The MSM is so brain-dead and or bought and paid for that to use anything from them is useless.

The OIL that is needed is offshore here and we will have other accidents and we will still need to get it.

Tough life but that's it children.

P.S. BP has many exemptions in the pipeline previous to this and they should go forward.

hazzardm
05-12-2010, 01:58 PM
I believe this whole mess is not an accident.

Please tell more.

Tom
05-15-2010, 01:37 PM
Obama this week told the three companies involved to stop pointing fingers.

Then he blamed it all Bush.


Hazz, just as global warming was fabricated to push lib agenda, I believe this, too was manufactured to do the same.

Obama got his hands on Bush's hurricane machine that he used to attack NO and adapted it to attack oil wells. Perhaps he was given some of the left over C4 that Bush used to lever the Twin Towers.

hcap
05-16-2010, 05:52 AM
http://www.bartcop.com/Gulf-Of-Cheney.jpg

rastajenk
05-16-2010, 06:45 AM
Why am I not surprised? :D

onefast99
05-16-2010, 08:51 AM
How much money did they give to him and how many audits did he exempt them from during that time? :rolleyes:

Hey, this is the standard that left set during Bush's terms - as POTUS, Obamadinijhad is 100% responsible for all manner of natural disasters and responses. It is out of our hands. We must accuse.
Yes someone has to be responsible for this disaster and since Bush and Cheney no longer occupy the Whitehouse Obama is left trying to deal with this mess. BP has no real plan to cap the broken pipe, it is trial and error and there is nothing anyone can do to punish BP or Haliburton or Transocean. As reported by a top oil analyst the BP mess will cost the consumers about 12 cents a gallon by mid to late fall.

chrisl
05-16-2010, 09:25 AM
Todd Palin worked for BP? What has that got to do with anything. Please correct me.

Robert Goren
05-16-2010, 09:56 AM
Todd Palin worked for BP? What has that got to do with anything. Please correct me. I merely pointed this out to show there escaping the influence that BP and the other oil companies have over all politicans. Tea party favorites are no exception.

chrisl
05-16-2010, 10:16 AM
OK: so please correct me if I am not getting your opinion. It is your feeling that, because Todd Palin's employer was BP that BP must have influence over his wife's political decision's. So the truth is out, it was not Bush or Obama or any other politician who might of had there hand in the oil spill, it was Todd and Sarah Palin. I heard that they like Thai food, so they could be supporting the Thai Government on the assaults on the Thai poeple. This is easy

Robert Goren
05-16-2010, 10:39 AM
OK: so please correct me if I am not getting your opinion. It is your feeling that, because Todd Palin's employer was BP that BP must have influence over his wife's political decision's. So the truth is out, it was not Bush or Obama or any other politician who might of had there hand in the oil spill, it was Todd and Sarah Palin. I heard that they like Thai food, so they could be supporting the Thai Government on the assaults on the Thai poeple. This is easy Re read what you have wrote there. You have lost it. There is world of difference between take money from Thai government and liking Thai food. For the record, I am not saying she took money from the Thai government. She is about as pro oil company as any politician out there. Are you denying that? She is also about as anti regulation as any politician out there . Are you denying that? If we had good oversight of this rig, this mess would have never happened. Are you denying that? Quit drinking the BP koolaide.

chrisl
05-16-2010, 11:04 AM
Great Post. And there is a difference between personal opinions and real facts

Robert Goren
05-16-2010, 11:14 AM
Yes someone has to be responsible for this disaster and since Bush and Cheney no longer occupy the Whitehouse Obama is left trying to deal with this mess. BP has no real plan to cap the broken pipe, it is trial and error and there is nothing anyone can do to punish BP or Haliburton or Transocean. As reported by a top oil analyst the BP mess will cost the consumers about 12 cents a gallon by mid to late fall.There is very good chance that all three will go bankrupt paying for this mess.

Tom
05-16-2010, 04:00 PM
Hope so.

Nice to see hcap is a "leaker." :D

JustRalph
05-16-2010, 04:11 PM
Todd Palin worked for BP for 18 yrs 5000 miles away and you think that is germane to the conversation ?

Goren, you are crazier than the guy in your avatar, and he is a nut....... :lol:

The Dems run Around screaming "Haliburton!" at the top of their lungs every time something remotely can be connected to Cheney. Next they will be telling us that Dick Cheney was scuba diving in the area or that he was moonlighting as a mechanic on the rig...........what the hell is next ? ?

Lefty
05-16-2010, 04:18 PM
JR, I guess Todd and Sarah have been planning this for all those years.

PaceAdvantage
05-17-2010, 10:05 PM
None of this will change the fact that the Dems (and some Republicans) will be slaughtered at the ballot box this November...try as they might at diversionary tactics and silliness like "Gulf of Cheney"

boxcar
05-17-2010, 10:15 PM
Re read what you have wrote there. You have lost it. There is world of difference between take money from Thai government and liking Thai food. For the record, I am not saying she took money from the Thai government. She is about as pro oil company as any politician out there. Are you denying that? She is also about as anti regulation as any politician out there . Are you denying that? If we had good oversight of this rig, this mess would have never happened. Are you denying that? Quit drinking the BP koolaide.

Good oversight? I don't get it. The government inspected that rig on BO's watch and not only found it safe, but awarded BP to boot with some kind of safety award.

Let me ask you the same thing that I asked Zilly, who has since crawled back under his rock because he doesn't want to answer: Is the U.S. government also culpable for this accident? Think carefully before you answer. ;)

Boxcar

Tom
05-17-2010, 10:26 PM
None of this will change the fact that the Dems (and some Republicans) will be slaughtered at the ballot box this November...try as they might at diversionary tactics and silliness like "Gulf of Cheney"

And posted on the eve of Bloody Tuesday no less! :D

cj's dad
05-19-2010, 08:30 AM
in history:


Kuwait - 1991 - 520 million gallons
Iraqi forces opened the valves of several oil tankers in order to slow the invasion of American troops. The oil slick was four inches thick and covered 4000 square miles of ocean.
Mexico - 1980 - 100 million gallons
An accident in an oil well caused an explosion which then caused the well to collapse. The well remained open, spilling 30,000 gallons a day into the ocean for a full year.
Trinidad and Tobago - 1979 - 90 millionDuring a tropical storm off the coast of Trinidad and Tobago, a Greek oil tanker collided with another ship, and lost nearly its entire cargo.
Russia - 1994 - 84 million gallonsA broken pipeline in Russia leaked for eight months before it was noticed and repaired.
Persian Gulf - 1983 - 80 million gallonsA tanker collided with a drilling platform which, eventually, collapsed into the sea. The well continued to spill oil into the ocean for seven months before it was repaired.
South Africa - 1983 - 79 million gallonsA tanker cought fire and was abandoned before sinking 25 miles off the coast of Saldanha Bay.
France - 1978 - 69 million gallonsA tanker's rudder was broken in a severe storm, despite several ships responding to its distress call, the ship ran aground and broke in two. It's entire payload was dumped into the English Channel.
Angola - 1991 - more than 51 million gallonsThe tanker expolded, exact quantity of spill unknown
Italy - 1991 - 45 million gallonsThe tanker exploded and sank off the coast of Italy and continued leaking it's oil into the ocean for 12 years.
Odyssey Oil Spill - 1988 - 40 million gallons
700 nautical miles off the cost of Nova Scotia.
The current oil accident is approaching 25,000,000 gallons.

BTW - the Exxon Valdez spill was ranked #34 !!

Tom
05-19-2010, 09:09 AM
Good oversight? I don't get it. The government inspected that rig on BO's watch and not only found it safe, but awarded BP to boot with some kind of safety award.

Let me ask you the same thing that I asked Zilly, who has since crawled back under his rock because he doesn't want to answer: Is the U.S. government also culpable for this accident? Think carefully before you answer. ;)

Boxcar

Wasn't this same rig cited for violations during the Bush years?

Robert Goren
05-19-2010, 11:12 AM
Where did you get the 25,000,000 number? So far BP is refusing to say how much is leaking.

cj's dad
05-19-2010, 11:16 AM
Several days ago, the number was given at 22 million and because the well is uncapped and it's been more days of spillage since then, I posted "approaching" 25mil.

I didn't fabricate the 22m., I heard it on the news.

boxcar
05-19-2010, 11:17 AM
in history:


Kuwait - 1991 - 520 million gallons
Iraqi forces opened the valves of several oil tankers in order to slow the invasion of American troops. The oil slick was four inches thick and covered 4000 square miles of ocean.
Mexico - 1980 - 100 million gallons
An accident in an oil well caused an explosion which then caused the well to collapse. The well remained open, spilling 30,000 gallons a day into the ocean for a full year.
Trinidad and Tobago - 1979 - 90 millionDuring a tropical storm off the coast of Trinidad and Tobago, a Greek oil tanker collided with another ship, and lost nearly its entire cargo.
Russia - 1994 - 84 million gallonsA broken pipeline in Russia leaked for eight months before it was noticed and repaired.
Persian Gulf - 1983 - 80 million gallonsA tanker collided with a drilling platform which, eventually, collapsed into the sea. The well continued to spill oil into the ocean for seven months before it was repaired.
South Africa - 1983 - 79 million gallonsA tanker cought fire and was abandoned before sinking 25 miles off the coast of Saldanha Bay.
France - 1978 - 69 million gallonsA tanker's rudder was broken in a severe storm, despite several ships responding to its distress call, the ship ran aground and broke in two. It's entire payload was dumped into the English Channel.
Angola - 1991 - more than 51 million gallonsThe tanker expolded, exact quantity of spill unknown
Italy - 1991 - 45 million gallonsThe tanker exploded and sank off the coast of Italy and continued leaking it's oil into the ocean for 12 years.
Odyssey Oil Spill - 1988 - 40 million gallons
700 nautical miles off the cost of Nova Scotia.
The current oil accident is approaching 25,000,000 gallons.

BTW - the Exxon Valdez spill was ranked #34 !!

Good thing none of these countries shut down oil production after these accidents. We'd all be sitting in candlelight and riding in rickshaws.

Boxcar

cj's dad
05-19-2010, 11:35 AM
Good thing none of these countries shut down oil production after these accidents. We'd all be sitting in candlelight and riding in rickshaws.
Boxcar

The planet will survive this just as it has for all the other man made "disasters"

Just like us if we take a drink of sour milk; we spit it out and move on.

cj's dad
05-19-2010, 11:41 AM
Where did you get the 25,000,000 number? So far BP is refusing to say how much is leaking.

Update from Google:

Spill estimate now at 25,000 to 80,000 barrels per day as per University of Georgia and others from oceangraphic institutes on board the research vessel "Pelican".

Going with the low end estimate of 25k per day x 31 gallons per barrel x 29 days = 22,475,000 Gallons.

bigmack
05-19-2010, 11:46 AM
Where did you get the 25,000,000 number? So far BP is refusing to say how much is leaking.
Disappointed it's not more?

46zilzal
05-19-2010, 11:47 AM
The planet will survive this just as it has for all the other man made "disasters"

Just like us if we take a drink of sour milk; we spit it out and move on.
This is the common IGNORANT position of those that do not understand ecological balance and carrying capacity.

IN EVERY POPULATION EVER STUDIED, when the population moves into exponential growth without any checks and balances to that growth, each and every one ever studied, spoils their environment to the point that the population crashes.

This STUPID idea that man is somehow immune from the laws of nature is mind boggling.

Tom
05-19-2010, 11:52 AM
What's worse, the tar balls in the Gulf or the scum balls in DC?

cj's dad
05-19-2010, 12:00 PM
This is the common IGNORANT position of those that do not understand ecological balance and carrying capacity.

IN EVERY POPULATION EVER STUDIED, when the population moves into exponential growth without any checks and balances to that growth, each and every one ever studied, spoils their environment to the point that the population crashes.

This STUPID idea that man is somehow immune from the laws of nature is mind boggling.

My "ignorant and stupid" response would be that as per post #107, The Earth has ingested a total of 1,158,000,000 (as in ONE BILLION +) gallons of oil in it's waters worldwide in a space of 16 years (1978-1994).

Obviously, this does not include all of the spills and leaks during that period and up to the present day.

And exactly where is the mayhem and carnage caused by these "disasters"?

cj's dad
05-19-2010, 12:02 PM
This is the common IGNORANT position of those that do not understand ecological balance and carrying capacity.

IN EVERY POPULATION EVER STUDIED, when the population moves into exponential growth without any checks and balances to that growth, each and every one ever studied, spoils their environment to the point that the population crashes.

This STUPID idea that man is somehow immune from the laws of nature is mind boggling.

Apparently China and India haven't heard of these studies. :lol:

Robert Goren
05-19-2010, 12:18 PM
Update from Google:

Spill estimate now at 25,000 to 80,000 barrels per day as per University of Georgia and others from oceangraphic institutes on board the research vessel "Pelican".

Going with the low end estimate of 25k per day x 31 gallons per barrel x 29 days = 22,475,000 Gallons.I hope you right about taking the low estimate. If you take high end it will be at #2 in no time. I think it is really strange that BP refuses to give their own numbers.

boxcar
05-19-2010, 12:19 PM
This is the common IGNORANT position of those that do not understand ecological balance and carrying capacity.

IN EVERY POPULATION EVER STUDIED, when the population moves into exponential growth without any checks and balances to that growth, each and every one ever studied, spoils their environment to the point that the population crashes.

This STUPID idea that man is somehow immune from the laws of nature is mind boggling.

In your world, genocide and use of WMDs has to be a good thing, right? What better "checks and balances" to population growth is there? This is man's way of thinning out the herd.

Boxcar

46zilzal
05-19-2010, 01:34 PM
Apparently China and India haven't heard of these studies.
Ignorance is often based upon cultural or religious dogma base even in light of established fact.....Poverty blunts enlightenment too sadly.

boxcar
05-19-2010, 01:47 PM
Ignorance is often based upon cultural or religious dogma base even in light of established fact.....Poverty blunts enlightenment too sadly.

What 'bout political dogma? All political dogma is good?

Boxcar

DJofSD
05-21-2010, 02:08 PM
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-oil-spill-hollywood-20100521,0,2351299.story

I wonder if he'll recover his investment. Or, possibly even make a -- get ready, here it comes -- profit.

Robert Goren
05-21-2010, 02:21 PM
Disappointed it's not more? As I feared it is more, a lot more. The 70,000 figure is now the middle to low end guess. Be careful what you post, it can come back to bite you.;)

bigmack
05-21-2010, 02:38 PM
As I feared it is more, a lot more.
The point was deep down inside you wish it were 10x whatever it is. Now if it can get all over the coast you'll feel even better.

Robert Goren
05-21-2010, 03:20 PM
The point was deep down inside you wish it were 10x whatever it is. Now if it can get all over the coast you'll feel even better. The point is that you believed BP and they lied to you. The difference is that I knew they were lying from day one. Unlike you, I didn't have my head buried in now oil covered sand. Admit it, you were hoping some Moslem terrorist was behind it so you and the "drill baby drill" crowd would not have to admit the risks invovled with offshore drilling. It really hurts you that Eco freaks were right, doesn't it?

hazzardm
05-21-2010, 03:21 PM
Disheartening video ....

http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream2&hpt=T1

bigmack
05-21-2010, 03:35 PM
admit the risks invovled with offshore drilling.
School me (or yourself) on the risks involved. Start by looking at how many offshore rigs there are, multiply by the number of days they've been in operation and divide by the number of spills there have been.

Three Mile Island still have you freaked out? :D

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/shit-happens-poster.jpg

DJofSD
05-21-2010, 03:43 PM
Nice poster. Is that hanging on your wall?

bigmack
05-21-2010, 03:45 PM
Nice poster. Is that hanging on your wall?
:lol: There are some 'beauts in there, DJ.

Atheism: I don't believe this shit!

Tom
05-21-2010, 08:48 PM
Descartes! :lol:

Robert Goren
05-21-2010, 09:35 PM
BP......It doesn't matter how much we shit.
bigmack... goren is secretly wishing for more shit
Arizona... We are stopping and checking illegals to see they have papers to shit
California... We are going boycott shit from Arizona
NYRA... NTCOTB owes us shit and if we don't get that shit, we going to stop shitting.
Santa Anita... We are going to Chile to check out their shit
Monmouth Park... We are paying $1500 to last place shit
Obama.... We inherited all this shit from Bush
Rush... Let me explain how this is Obama shit
Olbermann... Now for today's worst shit of the day
Glenn Beck... Who shit on my chalk board
Zilly..... Canadian shit is better than American shit
CJ's dad... American shit is better than Canadian shit
PA.... Beyers shit will beat non Beyers shit
and least but probably not last
Goren... JMS(just my shit);)

Robert Goren
05-21-2010, 09:44 PM
My apologies to boxcar for leaving him off the list, I couldn't think of anything that was not Sacrilegious and I try not make fun of other people's Religious beliefs.

JustRalph
05-22-2010, 12:50 AM
how long is Obama going to let this go on?

Tom
05-22-2010, 10:54 AM
Never waste a good tragedy.

DJofSD
05-22-2010, 10:58 AM
You know, one good sized hurricane will clean up that whole mess.

Robert Goren
05-22-2010, 11:12 AM
You know, one good sized hurricane will clean up that whole mess.Huh?

DJofSD
05-22-2010, 11:23 AM
Huh back at you.

What's so difficult to understand that the churn caused by wave and tidal forces generated by a hurricane will dispurse the oil.

PhantomOnTour
05-22-2010, 11:35 AM
Huh back at you.

What's so difficult to understand that the churn caused by wave and tidal forces generated by a hurricane will dispurse the oil.
Since when does 'disperse' = clean? I dispersed the trash instead of taking it to the dumpster. So I have put little pieces of trash all over the place...yeah, that's clean. :rolleyes:

DJofSD
05-22-2010, 11:40 AM
Did I use the word clean? Well, I did, didn't I. I meant to say disperse when I said clean up.

Will it be as pristine as it was before the spill? Eventually.

Robert Goren
05-22-2010, 11:40 AM
Huh back at you.

What's so difficult to understand that the churn caused by wave and tidal forces generated by a hurricane will dispurse the oil. Even if that is true, How is it going plug the hole. They are now on what, Plan Y. Nobody, not BP, Not the government has a clue on how to do that. If they can't the hole plug whatever amount of oil dispursed the hurricane when soon be right back.

PhantomOnTour
05-22-2010, 11:42 AM
Did I use the word clean?
Yes, in post #136...PAY ATTENTION!

See it now?

Lefty
05-22-2010, 11:42 AM
TheGovt doesn't know? That's odd, Obama said the govt could do anything...

DJofSD
05-22-2010, 11:44 AM
Yes, in post #136...PAY ATTENTION!

See it now?
Sorry, I corrected myself.

DJofSD
05-22-2010, 11:48 AM
Even if that is true, How is it going plug the hole. They are now on what, Plan Y. Nobody, not BP, Not the government has a clue on how to do that. If they can't the hole plug whatever amount of oil dispursed the hurricane when soon be right back.
Why in the hell do you think the government has to supply the answer or even have any expertise in the area? I don't.

The last I paid any attention to the situation, the plan was to drill some additional wells to relieve the pressure and harvest oil that would otherwise be spewed into the water. Estimated time: two months.

Has that changed? Or are we just going to wring our collective hands and point fingers. Fix the damn problem. There'll be enough time later to pass around the blame.

boxcar
05-22-2010, 12:02 PM
You know, one good sized hurricane will clean up that whole mess.

We surely could use that Bush-Cheney wind machine right about now. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

Robert Goren
05-22-2010, 12:04 PM
Why in the hell do you think the government has to supply the answer or even have any expertise in the area? I don't.

The last I paid any attention to the situation, the plan was to drill some additional wells to relieve the pressure and harvest oil that would otherwise be spewed into the water. Estimated time: two months.

Has that changed? Or are we just going to wring our collective hands and point fingers. Fix the damn problem. There'll be enough time later to pass around the blame. The last plan I heard was that anybody thought would work was to drill in the side of the well and detour the oil to the new pipe. BP is drilling now. They are saying 2-3 months, others are saying more like 5 if it works. I have heard anything about the additional wells to relieve the pressure in quite awhile. If they knew how to fix the problem, it would have fixed by now. The government hasn't a clue, but nether does anyone else. They are beyond grasping at straws.

DJofSD
05-22-2010, 12:06 PM
That is probably what I heard.

LottaKash
05-22-2010, 12:14 PM
Huh back at you.

What's so difficult to understand that the churn caused by wave and tidal forces generated by a hurricane will dispurse the oil.

To where ?....Surely you jest about a hurricane....I am not so sure that most people comphrehend what an order of magnitude that will be the effect on the quality of life along the shorlines of Texas, LA, MS, AL and Fl.....It has hadn't enough time to rear it's ugly head as of yet....The damage will be catastrophic further on down the line....That is a certainty....Sure, nature will take care of itself in time, but not in our lifetime...This stuff will slowly seep into the soil and beaches, and will remain there for a very long time......Swim and fish (and eat them) at your own peril, from now on...til someday...

sadly,

DJofSD
05-22-2010, 12:23 PM
Jest? No.

Lot's of things to read on the internet about the long term affects.

At random, here's one: http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/spills/

JustRalph
05-22-2010, 12:52 PM
how long is Obama going to let this go on............

DJofSD
05-22-2010, 12:59 PM
Until the oil reaches Guantanamo Bay in Cuba then he can evacuate it and shut it down.

LottaKash
05-22-2010, 01:27 PM
Jest? No.

Lot's of things to read on the internet about the long term affects.

At random, here's one: http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/spills/

I am talking about "now"....(say 10 years or so)...

Ok then, by all means, have some oysters, shrimp and some red snapper, and then come on in, the water is just fine....:jump:

best,

Buckeye
05-22-2010, 01:38 PM
So, this one unfortunate, tragic incident convinces you that we should abandon the offshore drilling process?

In your estimation, how often do these types of accidents occur?

I guess if it were up to you, nuclear energy would have been erradicated after Three Mile Island.

You are correct Pace Advantage. Not only that, let's just stop using coal because it ONLY provides 50 F in percent of our electricity! and maybe more. AND/OR! let's just go back to the Dark Ages of stupidity. Hell no I won't. Energy is bad? Ok, make your arguement solar people and then tell us how much you'll produce.

Buckeye
05-22-2010, 01:50 PM
Not 50% I'll guess. Not even 5% is more likely.

Buckeye
05-22-2010, 01:55 PM
I once took a course (and passed it) called Energy Economics. Meanwhile I play horses just like you do. Consider the facts.

Robert Goren
05-22-2010, 01:55 PM
Not 50% I'll guess. Not even 5% is more likely.But that doesn't mean we should be moving toward it and wind and natural gas.

WinterTriangle
05-23-2010, 02:03 AM
So, this one unfortunate, tragic incident

In your estimation, how often do these types of accidents occur?



While I am all in favor of finding safer and less expensive means of energy, I know quite a lot about deep ocean drilling platforms, and the incredible technology that goes into every aspect of them.

BP, Chevron, and others contract these rigs, since they are too high tech and expensive that you don't just go out and buy your own to drill with.

Believe me, these deep water exploration / drilling rigs have the very best of everything of state-of-the-art science and technology known to man.

And, considering that there are over 4,000 rigs operating in the Gulf region alone, 24/7 365 days a year, under amazingly adverse condtions, you don't hear about all the gazillions of repairs, upgrades, etc. made every hour of every day.

The drilling platforms have ROV's, helicopters, and the whole "package" probaby costs well over $3 million PER DAY to contract.

So it's not like it's a bunch of mickey mouse machinery. No, this stuff is the best that technology has to offer, and some very technically savvy people running it, designing it, maintaining it, not to mention what goes into actually making a high tech floating city that operates in the most amazing conditions.

It is inherently dangerous and expensive. But we all want to continue to drive our cars....I know I do.

Right now, I am being mindful that even amidst the greatest modern marvels of what our technological world has to offer.......11 men are missing and not expected to be found, and aquatic wildlife will also suffer tragedy.

I'm sure there will be a lot of finger pointing but these rigs actually have pretty amazingly good safety records, given operating 24/7 365 days a year, of course, you only hear about the tragedies!!!

BTW, DirectTV added The Documentary Channel to my lineup, I've been enjoying it. One I'm looking forward to is " Who Killed The Electric Car". Trailers show GM "shredding" some ..... perfectly good new ones.......at the time their PUSH was that they thought people wanted....................HUMMERS. :bang:

At any rate, I have a lot of information on the amazing technology of deep water rigs, and for now, until we come up with other energy ideas, we have to have them.

I really would, however, like to see a push toward other energy ideas, as I don't see oil drilling as the way of the future, at least, not for most of our energy. Unfortunately, we are not only galvanized by disasters, but we often learn from them, as I'm sure scientists and engineers will learn from this disaster.

But equipment failures happen, that is a fact of life, whether it is on a space capsule, a satellite, an oil rig or refinery, or a nuclear plant. There is always something we do not know, or could not foresee.



and, um.....Ralph. Blaming this on Obama is ........absurd.

Lefty
05-23-2010, 02:17 AM
There HAS been a push towards alternative energy, it still isn't all that practical. When the problems with AE or finally solved, it will be "backyard garage" inventors, not the govt.

Lefty
05-23-2010, 02:19 AM
why isn't it fair to blame obama? there was a protocol put in place in 1994 for
this kind of accident. Obama didn't use it. We paid for it and the bum didn't use it.

bigmack
05-23-2010, 02:24 AM
But that doesn't mean we should be moving toward it and wind and natural gas.
Have you gone completely crackers? Are you not familiar with the dangers of natural gas?

Google New London School explosion and you will never speak of this 'Natural Gas' again.

NJ Stinks
05-23-2010, 02:37 AM
why isn't it fair to blame obama?

I bad day at Monmouth today. Somehow it's Obama's fault. I don't know how. I don't know why. But I'm guessing somebody here will know why it's obviously true. :jump:

Lefty
05-23-2010, 03:16 AM
stinks, it won't fly. I gave you a specific reason why obummer bears some blame.
He did not put the 94 protocol in place. So don't give me your sarcastic piece of feces.

Robert Goren
05-23-2010, 09:24 AM
Have you gone completely crackers? Are you not familiar with the dangers of natural gas?

Google New London School explosion and you will never speak of this 'Natural Gas' again. I live where Natural gas is way of life. I heat my apartment with it. I cook with it. I have done so my whole life. So does most of 250M residents of Lincoln. So do almost all of the residents of Nebraska. You need get over rambling on about stuff you know nothing about about like natural gas.

bigmack
05-23-2010, 09:49 AM
I live where Natural gas is way of life. I heat my apartment with it. I cook with it. I have done so my whole life. So does most of 250M residents of Lincoln. So do almost all of the residents of Nebraska. You need get over rambling on about stuff you know nothing about about like natural gas.
"Natural gas is a way of life" :lol: :lol:

Don't you care about the disaster that killed in excess of 295 students and teachers? I think we need to halt any/all further exploration/use of NatGas until we have 120-128% assurance that no further persons will be hurt by this natural killer.

johnhannibalsmith
05-23-2010, 12:09 PM
I bad day at Monmouth today. Somehow it's Obama's fault. I don't know how. I don't know why. But I'm guessing somebody here will know why it's obviously true. :jump:

Let me take a stab at this: your analytical and critical skills have been obliterated by months of blind faith and delusional self-assurances.

LottaKash
05-23-2010, 12:21 PM
I live where Natural gas is way of life. I heat my apartment with it. I cook with it. I have done so my whole life. So does most of 250M residents of Lincoln. So do almost all of the residents of Nebraska. You need get over rambling on about stuff you know nothing about about like natural gas.

RG, fyi, Natural gas, a child of LNG, which is more dangerous, Still NG is more dangerous than you would imagine....

I used to work at a major oil company, and our facility was located on a waterway that separated NJ from Staten Island, NY...And during those years I had seen many a ship and barge loaded with dangerous chemicals and petroleum products go by our facility....So, why is it that whenever a "Natural Gas" ship would go by, all the port facilities activities and the river and bay traffic was stopped in order to accomadate the "Natural Gas" ship, when other ships with their dangerous cargoes wouldn't get the same treatment as the LNG (Liquified Natural Gas) ships, as with the regular ships also carrying dangerous cargo it was business as usual... Liquified Natural gas is "much more" dangerous that is why...Transporting it is the hard part...Once The LNG is regasified, it becomses much mores stable in it's vaporous form rather than in the liquid state...It has to be kept at -174oC for storage, but the real danger comes when the LNG is at a cold temperture, and if there is any water present, it will cause RPT "rapid phase transition"....yikes !

In fact, there was a "humonguous" storage tank built in Staten Island that never was put into service, and I would see this tank all throughout the day from my dock on the NJ side, and all those years I always wondered why that was, until the skipper of a ship who was in our port, told me the reason why....
The walls of that tank were something like 10-feet thick, and most of the tank was underground, and it was built to withstand almost anything....The catch was; if anything ever went wrong, it would be the equivalent of "7-Hiroshima's", and that is why...In the NYC-metro area....:D :ThmbDown:

It seemed that once the people in public office got wind of the "atomic bomb" aspect of that tank, they never did commission it into play....

Even to this day, most communities, and for good reasons, do not want the volatile storage & regasification plants anywhere near to them...me too...

best,

RaceBookJoe
05-23-2010, 12:41 PM
I bad day at Monmouth today. Somehow it's Obama's fault. I don't know how. I don't know why. But I'm guessing somebody here will know why it's obviously true. :jump:

Because you put all of your money on " Hope and Change " even though he was clearly unprepared, totally outclassed, couldnt handle any pace thrown at him and would be struggling just to make it to the finish line??? :) rbj ps: tried to keep it in the horseracing at Monmouth scenario.

Robert Goren
05-23-2010, 12:57 PM
All you say maybe true, but they have been using a lot of it in the midwest and plain states since well before I was born. The only time you hear about it is when the price goes up. The rest of the time you never hear a word about it. I never heard of a problem with it exploding in Nebraska ever.

DJofSD
05-23-2010, 01:03 PM
The only thing that explodes in NE are grain elevators.

NJ Stinks
05-23-2010, 01:34 PM
So don't give me your sarcastic piece of feces.

I just don't think this kind of language is called for! :mad:

:D

NJ Stinks
05-23-2010, 01:38 PM
Let me take a stab at this: your analytical and critical skills have been obliterated by months of blind faith and delusional self-assurances.

Why do you say that? :confused:

I mean - just because I had a bad day at Monmouth is no reason.... :p ;)

DJofSD
05-23-2010, 01:44 PM
A bad day at Monmouth is worse than a good day on the PaceAdvantage OT forum.

NJ Stinks
05-23-2010, 02:04 PM
A bad day at Monmouth is worse than a good day on the PaceAdvantage OT forum.

Once again we agree, DJ. :cool:

WinterTriangle
05-23-2010, 02:36 PM
There HAS been a push towards alternative energy, it still isn't all that practical.

Brazil would differ with you.

Robert Goren
05-23-2010, 02:47 PM
The only thing that explodes in NE are grain elevators.You right about that. You would not think that grain dust would act like TNT, but it does.

Lefty
05-23-2010, 02:47 PM
We are not in Brazil. if they have the answer why isn't our savior Obama implementing it? Far as I have researched Alternative Energy cannot rival Oil, coal and gas.

johnhannibalsmith
05-23-2010, 03:07 PM
Why do you say that? :confused:
...

Mainly because I have a day off and I felt like picking on you since you asked for it. :p

Tom
05-23-2010, 04:22 PM
But that doesn't mean we should be moving toward it and wind and natural gas.

Good GOD man, have you seen the damage wind can do?
We surely can't mess around with WIND! :rolleyes:

bigmack
05-23-2010, 04:32 PM
Good GOD man, have you seen the damage wind can do?
We surely can't mess around with WIND! :rolleyes:
I say we halt any/all further exploration of wind until we can be absolutely sure that it is 110% safe. Until then, we cannot afford the risks. I once had a kite torn to shreds by wind. We need to protect the children.

boxcar
05-23-2010, 05:35 PM
Good GOD man, have you seen the damage wind can do?
We surely can't mess around with WIND! :rolleyes:

Those windmills will surely destroy more than a few birds. Once the ground is littered with our feathery friends, we know what will happen next when the animal rights activists get involved. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

bigmack
05-23-2010, 05:51 PM
Doctors throughout the world have conducted studies on the health effects of industrial wind facilities including Dr. Robert McMurtry, Ontario, Canada; Dr. Nina Pierpont, USA; Dr. Amanda Harry, UK; and Dr. Robin Phipps, New Zealand. Dr. Pierpont reports Wind Turbine Syndrome is the disruption of sensory input to eyes, ear and stretch and pressure receptors in a variety of body locations.” She also states, “One does not have to be able to hear low frequency noise and vibration to experience the effects described as Wind Turbine Syndrome.”

You don’t have to travel far to investigate the reports of health concerns. In a recent listening session held by state Senator Joe Leibham in Fond du Lac County, over 50 people shared concerns including negative health effects attributed to the turbines since the project went on line. Many report jet engine and wooshing sounds day and night, sleep problems, headaches, dizziness, exhaustion, and depression.

Included in the list of complaints are continuous shadow flicker, strobe light effect and loss of property values leading to mental stress. Those living near turbines report, “pulsations laying down in bed and when the turbines get into a particular position, tremors going through your body…it feels like something is vibrating your body like sitting in a vibrating chair but your body is not moving.” :eek:
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2009/03/20/study-points-to-health-hazards-of-wind-turbines/

It's clear Goren advocates the advancement of an industry that is harming our fellow man. :ThmbDown:

boxcar
05-23-2010, 06:21 PM
:eek:
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2009/03/20/study-points-to-health-hazards-of-wind-turbines/

It's clear Goren advocates the advancement of an industry that is harming our fellow man. :ThmbDown:

This is the plan. Kill off man -- then he won't be around to cause man-made global warming. Man will become extinct; but the earth will be saved. And that's what counts. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

Robert Goren
05-23-2010, 07:09 PM
Those windmills will surely destroy more than a few birds. Once the ground is littered with our feathery friends, we know what will happen next when the animal rights activists get involved. :rolleyes:

Boxcar Anybody who knows me will tell you that there are very few things I hate more than birds. Just too many years in the parking garage business, I guess.

boxcar
05-23-2010, 07:13 PM
Anybody who knows me will tell you that there are very few things I hate more than birds. Just too many years in the parking garage business, I guess.

You should have taken a scatter gun to work with you. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

Lefty
05-23-2010, 07:18 PM
Boxcar, you just recited the plot of the remake "The Day The Earth Stood Still"
Loved the orig. hated the remake.

When we are gone, who will put out the forest fires?

WinterTriangle
05-23-2010, 08:05 PM
We are not in Brazil. if they have the answer why isn't our savior Obama implementing it?

You believe an alternative energy plan can be implemented in a year or two?:lol:

The predecesssor had 8 years and didn't get it done. And the one before him about the same. And before him, too.

Irrespective of politics. But of course, that's not your agenda.

Anyway, I ONLY entered the topic thinking there would be some interesting discussion about the disaster, about rig and drilling technology, about pressure control equipment or any insight or conversation into what could be done with ROVs, pollution control methods, etc. for the spill, like moving in antoher rig to drill fresh and intersect the blowing one.

Or, having moved into the topic of energy alternatives, at least some discussion about bringing all available technology to bear and some thoughts about that.

Obviously, that's not going to happen ---- and it's just a troll-type topic with one-liners being thrown out,whining and complaining with a political agenda, and no useful, or even interesting conversation, to be had.

No wonder I never come down here.

stinks, it won't fly. I gave you a specific reason why obummer bears some blame.

In a room filled with drilling engineers, subsea containment specialists, and relief wells, etc. who are even staunchly republican, you would be a laughingstock. At least, that is what happened when I shared "the kinds of things I'm seeing posted on internet forums."

newtothegame
05-23-2010, 08:46 PM
Winter....will all due respect....THIS ADMINISTRATION (and past ) could care less about finding an alternative that truly helps the people.
They will do every thing possible now to pass cap and trade. It doesnt matter if half the world scientist disagree with this man made "the earth is dying" theory. They do NOT want to solve the problem. Its pure and simple about MONEY. POWER, and CONTROL.
So, with the aboce being said, its hard to discuss alternatives when they will never come to fruition. There is nothing that is 100% safe. There will be accidents. Its part of exploration, research and developments. Its not about IF accidents will happen, its about how we react to those accidents moving forward.
It will almost always come down where someone has to take the blame. The left would have you believe that even though we are almost half way in 2010, its BUSH's fault.

boxcar
05-23-2010, 09:06 PM
You believe an alternative energy plan can be implemented in a year or two?:lol:

The predecesssor had 8 years and didn't get it done. And the one before him about the same. And before him, too.

Irrespective of politics. But of course, that's not your agenda.

Anyway, I ONLY entered the topic thinking there would be some interesting discussion about the disaster, about rig and drilling technology, about pressure control equipment or any insight or conversation into what could be done with ROVs, pollution control methods, etc. for the spill, like moving in antoher rig to drill fresh and intersect the blowing one.

Or, having moved into the topic of energy alternatives, at least some discussion about bringing all available technology to bear and some thoughts about that.

Obviously, that's not going to happen ---- and it's just a troll-type topic with one-liners being thrown out,whining and complaining with a political agenda, and no useful, or even interesting conversation, to be had.

No wonder I never come down here.



In a room filled with drilling engineers, subsea containment specialists, and relief wells, etc. who are even staunchly republican, you would be a laughingstock. At least, that is what happened when I shared "the kinds of things I'm seeing posted on internet forums." (emphasis mine)

You come down here to whine and complain about the uninteresting conversation on the thread, and like a typical empty suit make no contributions yourself that may get the thread headed in a direction you like.
Therefore, it's "no wonder" at all (to borrow your phrase) that the best you can muster is a hit-and-run put down of everyone else, which "down here' we don't take kindly to because we easily see through dime-a-dozen phonies like you.

Boxcar
P.S. But do stop by again when you think you might have something constructive and substantive to contribute to a topic. Maybe next time, I might be a little gentler with you. ;)

Lefty
05-23-2010, 09:28 PM
winter, someone intimated that AE works great in Brazil. I just asked why obama isn't implementing it? Fair question, eh what?
The laughingstocks are the people that blve anything obummer says. Is that you, sir? Huh, huh, huh...

Tom
05-23-2010, 11:13 PM
mam.

bigmack
05-23-2010, 11:19 PM
Or, having moved into the topic of energy alternatives, at least some discussion about bringing all available technology to bear and some thoughts about that.
Hey man, we'z cerebarale as the next guy. We done covered NatGas & wind & evrathang.

Sounds like you got some good idears though. Can you hep us out and get us started or somethin' with some of them fancy words you been using & all?

I herd corn can make a moped run - That true?

boxcar
05-23-2010, 11:46 PM
Hey man, we'z cerebarale as the next guy. We done covered NatGas & wind & evrathang.

Sounds like you got some good idears though. Can you hep us out and get us started or somethin' with some of them fancy words you been using & all?

I herd corn can make a moped run - That true?

Science needs to find a way to harness stupidity and use the otherwise meaningless brain waves generated by spastic brain cells as an energy source. God only knows there are enough liberals around to keep the world energized indefinitely. (Talk about a gift that would keep on givin'... :D )

Boxcar

JustRalph
05-23-2010, 11:47 PM
How long is Obama going to let this go on ?

WinterTriangle
05-24-2010, 12:03 AM
NowtotheGame, with all due respect, finding and implementing alternative energy sources, as well as replenishing current ones, has been a problem for 40+ years. So, I do find it just a little bit comical that anyone would dump that in Obama's lap, as Lefty did.

By doing so, one just looks foolish. As are those who would have dumped the entire problem in Bush's lap.

I don't allow politics, or my political affiliations, to strip me of my rational thought processes. ;)

What I received was an absurd statement from Lefty that Obama is at fault for not having implemented (in 2 years) what it took Brazil since the early 70's to accomplish.

I'm sorry, but if I'm to take conversation seriously, then we must be talking while firmly rooted in some kind of......um..........reality. That means realistic statements, and realistic expectations.

Do you believe that Obama is to blame for lack of energy independence, and that as Lefty says, he should be implementing technology (out of thin air and which doesn't even exist yet) that took Brazil 40+ years to develop?

Maybe Lefty can *explain* what there IS to implement, before he complains that it has not been implemented. :)

Over the years, I've complained about politicians from BOTH parties, but I don't level absolutely ridiculous complaints and accusations on them just because "I don't like them."

When I sense that people are just on a jag to discredit someone, I tune out. I did the same with people who hated Bush, so it's not like I'm protecting Obama. Nobody can be WRONG all the time....about everything. And rational people, who are capable of critical thinking, know that there is truth to that statement. :)

Politicians have been in Big Oil's pocket for the entire time I've been alive.

Having not much respect in general for politicians, I do find it humorous that some people think that "theirs" can put it all right, though. :) I am under no such illusions, therefore, I can't really argue in favor or not in favor, of any one party or person.

I DO feel that those who "toe the party line" are what my grandfather would have called "followers". It's easy to follow, and drink in somebody else's thoughts and words and ideas.

So, when I notice anyone who is totally *gone* over to one side or the other, I also know that that is the last place I'm going to find truth, or answers.

When I encounter people who dislike all democrats, or all republicans, or all liberals, and all conservatives, and ditto their ideas..........I run in the other direction. This is the psychology of True Believers, which Eric Hoffer wrote about.

NJ Stinks
05-24-2010, 01:58 AM
Anyway, I ONLY entered the topic thinking there would be some interesting discussion about the disaster, about rig and drilling technology, about pressure control equipment or any insight or conversation into what could be done with ROVs, pollution control methods, etc. for the spill, like moving in antoher rig to drill fresh and intersect the blowing one.

Or, having moved into the topic of energy alternatives, at least some discussion about bringing all available technology to bear and some thoughts about that.



I don't know about anybody else here but I know little or nothing about rigs and drilling. Or alternative energy technology. So if there is going to be an interesting discussion here, others are going to have to provide it.

hcap
05-24-2010, 04:39 AM
Science needs to find a way to harness stupidity and use the otherwise meaningless brain waves generated by spastic brain cells as an energy source.
BoxcarYou could always speak into a microphone

Robert Goren
05-24-2010, 07:59 AM
You should have taken a scatter gun to work with you. :rolleyes:

Boxcar I wish I could have. While have a gun inside the city limits of Lincoln is not against the law, firing it is. The only time they prosecute anyone is when they shoot birds or possums.

cj's dad
05-24-2010, 10:18 AM
Where are the Army Corps of Engineers (they have ships you know), The U.S. Navy, the U.S. Coast Guard ?? What about the countless engineers on the U.S. payroll. Where are they?


One idea could arise from this group that could be the one thing that has yet to be thought of.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained !!

My God, even Chris (my leg tingles) Mathews and James (the Beast) Carville are criticizing the "chosen one".

cj's dad
05-24-2010, 10:31 AM
Has 4 "hopper dredges"; these are ships approx. 350' in length which can dredge up to the equivalent 600 dump trucks of sand/silt from the ocean/lake/river bottom in ONE HOUR. After doing so, the load is then re-deposited in another location. Their function has normally been the dredging of ship channels, to remove unwanted build up of sludge, etc...

It would seem to me that these vessels which can suck in sand could also suck in this oil sludge as it is discharged and redeposit it in much deeper ocean waters where the damage will have less of an envoronmental impact.

Balow is a picture of the vessel Essayons:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/06/Essayons.JPG/800px-Essayons.JPG (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Essayons.JPG)

Tom
05-24-2010, 11:37 AM
Yer doing a hell of a job there, Barry.

boxcar
05-24-2010, 12:21 PM
You could always speak into a microphone

But whenever I do, I always make perfectly good sense. After all, I'm not a lib.

Boxcar

boxcar
05-24-2010, 12:23 PM
I wish I could have. While have a gun inside the city limits of Lincoln is not against the law, firing it is. The only time they prosecute anyone is when they shoot birds or possums.

Sounds like a discriminatory law. Have you considered a lawsuit?

Boxcar

horses4courses
05-24-2010, 02:38 PM
Obviously, this oil spill is one huge mess.
What I don't understand is why there is no emergency backup in place.

Are there any engineers among us here who would know why shut-off valves cannot be installed at different intervals along a pipeline?

Seems to me it should be possible..... :mad:

Robert Goren
05-24-2010, 02:50 PM
Obviously, this oil spill is one huge mess.
What I don't understand is why there is no emergency backup in place.

Are there any engineers among us here who would know why shut-off valves cannot be installed at different intervals along a pipeline?

Seems to me it should be possible..... :mad: They were and they didn't work. There all sorts of stories on why they didn't work.

DJofSD
05-24-2010, 02:52 PM
Unless I'm really off base, the problem is not with a pipeline, it with a well head at the bottom of the ocean under more than 5,000 feet of water.

Watch the segment 60 Minutes did a week ago yesterday. It should be on their web site.

BP thought they had it covered (no pun intended) with the large rubber donut -- whatever the technical name is -- that is part of an assemble on the well head but they ignored there own people that told them chunks of rubber were coming up. For me, that is a very key part of the problem. It reminds me of the many times NASA has ignored it's own engineers, along with Morten-Thikal (sp?), the FBI, Toyota, and....you add your own names.

Robert Goren
05-24-2010, 03:03 PM
You are right there is no pipeline, but there suppose to be several shutoffs at the well head on the gulf floor. They all failed. Right now we heard at least 5 different stories on why.:bang:

JustRalph
05-24-2010, 05:59 PM
how long is Obama going to let this go on...............

Buckeye
05-24-2010, 07:09 PM
how long is Obama going to let this go on...............

until he finds a solution for it. :eek:

There is no technically economic alternative solution yet to replace oil and coal. What else is there to say? Burn baby burn? Remember, I studied this shit on scholarship and wrote papers at a cost of $50,000 per year back THEN.

The USA has oil and 50% of the World's coal which is more than most can say. We also have, if History proves any guide, most of the brainpower. So take it easy folks. :)

Tom
05-26-2010, 09:00 AM
They say this spill will likely cause more extinctions to occur.
Namely, democrats.

Marshall Bennett
05-26-2010, 12:17 PM
BP is really nervous about this top kill procedure . Should it fail , the results could be catastrophic , making the current conditions seem minimal .
Wouldn't be surprised to see them scrap this plan . They'd take heat for it , but not like they would should it fail .
BP really has its back to the wall .

ddog
05-26-2010, 12:27 PM
marsh

they will know(i think) by the test shots they are taking although I would suspect that IF they go they will find that the mud will not get to where they need to plug. I hope that's not the case.


You know the one no nonsense solution to this type of deal is to mandate in certain sensitive areas that a second "relief" well be drilled along with the exploration well. Yes, that would cost more and slow the drilling but in areas like the Macondo it seems it should have been done. I would have recommended such as other countries have required it in the past.


Jindal is nuts on the sand wall stuff, i think that would be the end of the gulf they are trying to protect. Plus it would take MONTHS to build such a project.

The relief well(s) will take care of it before then, unless the whole wellbase collapses. God i hope not.

cj's dad
05-26-2010, 12:46 PM
And still no end in sight.

Here is what I don't understand;

The U.S. stands to suffer the worst financial and environmental damage of any country in the world, yet our government is sitting this one out.

We have thousands of Mechanical Engineers in the employ of the Federal Gov't.
Isn't itpossible that any one one of them could come up with a solution if given the opportunity. It is blatantly obvious that BP doesn't, as yet, have an answer.

What is the "chosen one" waiting for. I know he's looking forward to the weekend in Chicago, but come on BO, get off your dead, lazy ass and do something other than predicting who will win the NCAA basketball tourney, throwing out first pitches (like a fairy), printing money, ramming Health Care down our throats, bowing and scraping to foriegn leaders, kissing Calderon's ass, and apologizing for everything but the Revolutionary War.

Maybe it's that $77,000 contribution that BP gave you that has you sitting on your jive ass.

Quite possibly the most pitiful person ever to sit in the White House.

And where are the cries of outrage directed at this POSPOTUS from the environmentalists ?? and the press ?? and his supporters ??

Any word from Greenpeace ??

Why does this jerk get a pass on everything ??
Never mind, I know the answer.

Lefty
05-26-2010, 12:52 PM
cj's dad, you know, even that rabid dem, James Carville, is asking the
same question.

46zilzal
05-26-2010, 12:55 PM
Isn't this rig in international waters? 40 miles out

Tom
05-26-2010, 01:07 PM
It's really getting dicey now....I just heard that this morning, SpongeBob found tar balls in his squarepants! :eek::eek::eek:

ArlJim78
05-26-2010, 01:29 PM
Obama has shown his keen problem solving skills on this one, he got mad in the meeting and said "just plug the damn hole".

face it, he's a community organizer. his skills are in creating problems and blaming corporations, not in crisis management.

I keep watching the video to see when this "top kill" starts, what it looks like, what it accomplishes.

the folly is that the only reason that they are pushed out into the deep water for drilling, where a problem like this can become such a collosal calamity because it's inaccessable, is because of government regulations. it would be much safer to drill on land or in shallow water. even if you did have a problem you could get at it and fix it.

thank you environmentalist whackos.

cj's dad
05-26-2010, 01:32 PM
Isn't this rig in international waters? 40 miles out


It is 50 miles southeast of Venice, La. Venice is part of the La. bayou.

And Zilly, even if it is considered Int'l waters, this is not an act of war; this should be a request by the U.S. gov't to lend technical aid/assistance as the effects of this disaster directly impacts every citizen of the U.S.

Lefty
05-26-2010, 01:36 PM
"just plug the damn hole"
I'm no engineer but wouldn't 5 million Tampax solve the problem?

Steve 'StatMan'
05-26-2010, 02:19 PM
"just plug the damn hole"
I'm no engineer but wouldn't 5 million Tampax solve the problem?

No. It's going to take more than 50 million Tampax just to handle the "Offshore-Oil Abolishonists" for one month!

Lefty
05-26-2010, 02:25 PM
ok, but i'm definitely on the right track, eh what?

Steve 'StatMan'
05-26-2010, 02:27 PM
Yeah, you're on the right track. 5 million to fill the hole, 50 million to keep the oil criers skirts and pants from having an ooze through.

ddog
05-26-2010, 02:41 PM
They have started the process.... no news is good news....if all goes well , by Friday morning we will have a good start to killing this darn thing.


"just plug the hole" --- there are multiple holes, what they are doing is to try to dump "mud" into the well below the BOP and have it sink down to stop the flow.

They are not plugging it from the top, think of it as shooting some heavy fluid into a pipe from the side that has a BIG hole at the bottom and a small hole at the top. The weight of the mud+gravity will eventually push down into the big hole and stop the flow.

That's how I understand this part of it anyway.

I say we could use dollar bills if all else fails or just throw all the CONgress chumps down there.

ddog
05-26-2010, 02:43 PM
Obama has shown his keen problem solving skills on this one, he got mad in the meeting and said "just plug the damn hole".

face it, he's a community organizer. his skills are in creating problems and blaming corporations, not in crisis management.

I keep watching the video to see when this "top kill" starts, what it looks like, what it accomplishes.

the folly is that the only reason that they are pushed out into the deep water for drilling, where a problem like this can become such a collosal calamity because it's inaccessable, is because of government regulations. it would be much safer to drill on land or in shallow water. even if you did have a problem you could get at it and fix it.

thank you environmentalist whackos.


Kinda like "bring it on!" huh...... :D

"the folly is that the only reason that they are pushed out into the deep water for drilling, where a problem like this can become such a collosal calamity because it's inaccessable, is because of government regulations"


just fundamentally incorrect, but keep up with the "junk shots".

:lol:


Given all the crying and wailing on here by the "cons" you would think they actually believe the gvt has a better shot to stop this than BP. :lol:

What a bunch of crap, you do realize you are NOW saying that the gvt is functional beyond the sixth grade level.

Whatever gave you that idea based on the last 20 years or so??? :faint:

IF you WISH A TOTAL DISASTER just get some of bama's nutjobs running this thing.
:D

Lefty
05-26-2010, 02:49 PM
they were pushed out to the deep water by environmentilist whackos who
said it was too much of an eyesore to drill closer in.

ddog
05-26-2010, 02:51 PM
they were pushed out to the deep water by environmentilist whackos who
said it was too much of an eyesore to drill closer in.



just wrong , you need to check with oil exploration dudes.

THEY are exploring , EXPLORING get it!

I fear not.


E X P L O R I N G ...... look it up.

The oil we and the world need according to demand projections is about plus 40% or so in the next 20 years. That is not sitting in a nice lake somewhere in the U.S. or it would be GONE ALREADY.

Check our our own DOD report from a couple of months ago, look at what they are saying about the oil deal.

PaceAdvantage
05-27-2010, 03:10 AM
just wrong , you need to check with oil exploration dudes.

THEY are exploring , EXPLORING get it!

I fear not.


E X P L O R I N G ...... look it up.

The oil we and the world need according to demand projections is about plus 40% or so in the next 20 years. That is not sitting in a nice lake somewhere in the U.S. or it would be GONE ALREADY.

Check our our own DOD report from a couple of months ago, look at what they are saying about the oil deal.Don't you ever get tired of trying to appear right about everything?

PaceAdvantage
05-27-2010, 03:18 AM
That live feed at live.cnn.com is simply sickening.

No ddog, we don't think the gov't is any better at stopping this disaster than BP. However, I doubt that's what anyone is saying here.

We're just asking, where is the hand wringing and the 24/7 criticism of The White House's lack of action, lack of ideas, and lack of leadership in this disaster.

I believe the only thing they've done to date is to issue an order to stop applying the chemical that was being used to break down the oil on the surface. But then they backtracked on that once they realized it was a very bad idea.

They are absolutely clueless, but are they being called out on it?

Tom
05-27-2010, 07:54 AM
Gov Jhindal has offered numerous suggestions and resources....and been turned down by Ovomit.

Robert Goren
05-27-2010, 09:08 AM
The right has no problem in believing that federal government could seal our borders if they only wanted to.

ArlJim78
05-27-2010, 09:36 AM
the government has too many overlapping agencies, jurisdictions and red tape to be able to respond well to something like this.
The government is good at creating hot air, spin, finger wagging and blame, raising taxes, and CYA.
In a crisis like this you need a particular type of clear thinking leader who has access to scientists, techicians, experienced tool men, etc, someone who can process all the variables and develop a logical response and decision tree. I'm sure BP has such a team in place and they are working around the clock. the government should be a part of this team, offering to do whatever it takes to get BP any resources that it needs in order to get the job of capping the leak out of the way. The government should have taken the lead role immediately on the skimming and protection of the coastlines with a similar approach. But it looks like despite the fact that the officials everyday say that they were involved from day 1 and doing everything they can, the actual result on the ground is nil. The people of Lousiana feel it most directly and I think that is why you have people like Carville coming unglued at the lack of response.

This is a giant open-ended disaster, it needs to be treated as such. 38 days after it began Obama is going to take a break from his war on Arizona and fundraising for Barbara Boxer to face press questions.

Tom
05-27-2010, 09:42 AM
The right has no problem in believing that federal government could seal our borders if they only wanted to.

And you want them to take over your health care!

ArlJim78
05-27-2010, 09:43 AM
The right has no problem in believing that federal government could seal our borders if they only wanted to.
damn right they could, because its simple. Do you really think that the task of building a fence and patroling it is too much to ask of the US government?
that is their JOB #1. Not healthcare or regulating salt, or redistributing weath.

DJofSD
05-27-2010, 10:21 AM
The right has no problem in believing that federal government could seal our borders if they only wanted to.

Silly me. And here I thought it was the duty of the federal government to secure our borders. But should I really be surprised in a day and age when responsibility means absolutely nothing -- victimhood, the ends justifying the means and if it feels good do it have replaced morals and ethics.

Buckeye
05-27-2010, 09:31 PM
I'd be in favor of that. Times are bad and the Democrats are in power. Fill in the blanks. As I've said, every vote counts hopefully. Me personally, I don't go to sleep and wake up thinking about oil spills but our President does. What a joke.

ArlJim78
05-27-2010, 11:23 PM
holy crap.

cDGAoU1H2gM

bks
05-28-2010, 01:39 AM
For reasons that have everything to do with what is ruining this country, BP was somehow allowed to lead the cleanup operation. Since they knew they were unprepared to remedy the situation, they chose instead to try to bury the body. Their use of toxic dispersants alone are cause enough to lock their CEOs in jail for a long time. Criminals.

It's inconceivable that a corporation [and a foreign one at that] would be left in charge of this situation. BP's first priority is saving it's own ass, not looking out for the interests of the Gulf shore communities. In America, that's supposed to be the federal government's job.

Obama looks as bad on this as Bush did on Katrina, and that's bad. And yet, the right-wingers on this board who scream about big government are getting a taste of what can happen when you gut regulations and allow corporate money to run the show. Firing the head of the MMS doesn't mean a thing. The system is corrupt.

And by the way, this coming hurricane season is forecast to be a very active one. Not good.

NJ Stinks
05-28-2010, 02:00 AM
For reasons that have everything to do with what is ruining this country, BP was somehow allowed to lead the cleanup operation. Since they knew they were unprepared to remedy the situation, they chose instead to try to bury the body. Their use of toxic dispersants alone are cause enough to lock their CEOs in jail for a long time. Criminals.

It's inconceivable that a corporation [and a foreign one at that] would be left in charge of this situation. BP's first priority is saving it's own ass, not looking out for the interests of the Gulf shore communities. In America, that's supposed to be the federal government's job.

Obama looks as bad on this as Bush did on Katrina, and that's bad. And yet, the right-wingers on this board who scream about big government are getting a taste of what can happen when you gut regulations and allow corporate money to run the show. Firing the head of the MMS doesn't mean a thing. The system is corrupt.

And by the way, this coming hurricane season is forecast to be a very active one. Not good.

I disagree with the bolded portion for sure. BP's first priority was to save as much of that oil reserve as it could.

Also, it may have been discussed here but if not, here goes:

While people compare this oil catastrophe with Katrina, there is one big difference. Katrina was a natural disaster that required the government to get in there and save people. This oil leak is a man-made disaster that requires specialized skills to fix the leak. Although I will say I agree that Obama and the state of Louisiana could at least organize a sincere effort to cleanup whatever oil can be cleaned up now. So far it looks like hardly anybody is trying to save anything. :mad:

bigmack
05-28-2010, 02:30 AM
holy crap.
I find that hard to believe.

Why would they talk of not only tankers but supertankers not being able to navigate through the gulf and end their segment talking about a supertanker coming to the rescue?

ArlJim78
05-28-2010, 06:33 AM
I find that hard to believe.

Why would they talk of not only tankers but supertankers not being able to navigate through the gulf and end their segment talking about a supertanker coming to the rescue?
It was BP that said that supertankers couldn't navigate around all the smaller ships in the area. These two seem to think that supertankers could be used to skim off and suck up the oil.

bks
05-28-2010, 08:43 AM
NJ Stinks wrote:
I disagree with the bolded portion for sure. BP's first priority was to save as much of that oil reserve as it could.

That's part of saving it's own ass, IMO.

Tom
05-28-2010, 09:08 AM
BP has announced that it will not charge us for any of the oil we collect from the Gulf. Freebie.

Robert Goren
05-28-2010, 09:30 AM
BP is in-charge of sealing the leak. That is the law. Thank you, Bush 41. The federal government has to be in charge of the clean up because it to big a job for anyone else to handle and the bill is sent to BP. So far everyone including BP and Obama have done a lousy job. We can only hope that both will do better in the future, but that hope is getting dimmer on both counts every day.

Tom
05-28-2010, 09:47 AM
TY 41????

What about 8 years of Clinton and 1.5 of OBama?
What about LA has been trying to implement emergency actions for 18 days with no reply from Ovomit, other than he is looking to see if it cost effective!

Ovomit's total incompetence is being highlighted.

DJofSD
05-28-2010, 09:52 AM
What law is that?

I expect it applies to US companies and how they do business since the site of the well is in international waters and I don't think US Federal law extends to other companies drilling in international waters.

Or do we now have some kind of international law?

Robert Goren
05-28-2010, 09:54 AM
The law was passed in 1990 when Bush 41 was president. Now you can blame all the presidents since for not changing if like, but that is when it passed. This is the first time it has really been tested on a large scale.

Robert Goren
05-28-2010, 10:15 AM
What law is that?

I expect it applies to US companies and how they do business since the site of the well is in international waters and I don't think US Federal law extends to other companies drilling in international waters.

Or do we now have some kind of international law?It is called the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. The exclusive economic zone extends out 200 nautical miles. Here is a link explaining international waters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters

Tom
05-28-2010, 10:35 AM
That was passed by a democrat congress.

Robert Goren
05-28-2010, 10:37 AM
That was passed by a democrat congress. That it was.

DJofSD
05-28-2010, 10:41 AM
That link does not tell me anything about a US law. It discusses a convention used by the UN for it's Law of the Sea. This is a slippery slop.