BP wants $27m lawsuit cap!!!

16 years ago

I don't think that is correct - it may be asking for a limit on class action lawsuits (per lawsuit).

The claims system has evolved rapidly and lawyers as thick as flies on the coast right now. I wouldn't be surprised to see some limit imposed on the size of a suit that could be filed.

BP has already paid out millions to states and initial payments to those who have filed claims.

I think the claims will be paid and will say that BP has pretty much streamlined the claims process and provided multiple centers for filing claims. I just want the oil leak stopped and so far it hasn't happened.

The round robin in front of Congress was funny, though, with BP pointing to TransOcean who pointed to Halliburton who pointed to BP - and Congress sat there looking innocent and outraged.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2095527].message }}

Gravc

16 years ago

Just on a side note I saw on the news last night that this spill has already cost them 8% of their profits this year. Ouch

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2097866].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

$27m over all is DUMB and hopefully NO judge would grant it. $27m for each person in a class action lawsuit outside of the spill is VERY generous!And HOW MANY would be hurt to THAT degree? Again, I am talking OUTSIDE of the spill. The spill(Stopping it, cleaning up the mess, and doing what they can to help restore wildlife) will likely cost many BILLIONS.

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2097899].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

Oil is a natural substance, it comes out of mother earth, and as such is bio-degradable. If the wind direction would have been different ii would have dispersed into the sea without any adverse effect at all. It looks dramatic because it is black and gooey but is important to keeps things in perspective, it's only an oil spill not a nuclear leak, there are no long term implications. For clean up, a billion dollars here or there is peanuts for BP.

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2098011].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

The environment still hasn't recovered from the Exxon Valdez spill over 20 years ago. This current spill is equal to one Exxon Valdez spill every 4 days. I don't think wind direction would have made any difference because it started affecting ocean life before it hit land. With a spill this big it was bound to reach shore though. Plus, it looks dramatic because it will be the largest oil spill ever and I don't think anyone knows what the effect will be on the economy and environment. However, thanks for downplaying this by saying at least it wasn't a nuclear leak. Do you work for BP?

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

Oil is a natural substance, it comes out of mother earth, and as such is bio-degradable. If the wind direction would have been different ii would have dispersed into the sea without any adverse effect at all. It looks dramatic because it is black and gooey but is important to keeps things in perspective, it's only an oil spill not a nuclear leak, there are no long term implications. For clean up, a billion dollars here or there is peanuts for BP.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2098195].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

The environment still hasn't recovered from the Exxon Valdez spill over 20 years ago. This current spill is equal to one Exxon Valdez spill every 4 days. I don't think wind direction would have made any difference because it started affecting ocean life before it hit land. With a spill this big it was bound to reach shore though. Plus, it looks dramatic because it will be the largest oil spill ever and I don't think anyone knows what the effect will be on the economy and environment. However, thanks for downplaying this by saying at least it wasn't a nuclear leak. Do you work for BP?

Thanks Tim I was thinking the same thing.

Oil is a natural substance, it comes out of mother earth, and as such is bio-degradable. If the wind direction would have been different ii would have dispersed into the sea without any adverse effect at all. It looks dramatic because it is black and gooey but is important to keeps things in perspective, it's only an oil spill not a nuclear leak, there are no long term implications. For clean up, a billion dollars here or there is peanuts for BP.

As for the reactor comment, they use natural substances also (uranium, Boron) so by your oil leak logic a reactor leak is safe also.
Natural doesn't mean diddly squat here, over 200,000 gals. of oil spewing into the ocean isn't natural anywhere on this earth.

You got the part about a billion being peanuts to BP right though.

Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2098251].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

The environment still hasn't recovered from the Exxon Valdez spill over 20 years ago. This current spill is equal to one Exxon Valdez spill every 4 days. I don't think wind direction would have made any difference because it started affecting ocean life before it hit land. With a spill this big it was bound to reach shore though. Plus, it looks dramatic because it will be the largest oil spill ever and I don't think anyone knows what the effect will be on the economy and environment. However, thanks for downplaying this by saying at least it wasn't a nuclear leak. Do you work for BP?

There does seem to have been a slight miscalculation by BP scientists, they never expected the slick to reach the coast. With Exxon Valdez that was heavy crude in a confined area this is light crude in a vast open gulf.

The Gulf can absorb most things. Crude oil will dissolve in the 80 degree water temperatures, which are present in this case, and also dissolve in salt water, so even a large spill would not have been a problem .

The problem is, this is a totally unpredictable huge spill with a pressurized gushing which no-one saw coming.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2098766].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

There does seem to have been a slight miscalculation by BP scientists, they never expected the slick to reach the coast. With Exxon Valdez that was heavy crude in a confined area this is light crude in a vast open gulf.

The Gulf can absorb most things. Crude oil will dissolve in the 80 degree water temperatures, which are present in this case, and also dissolve in salt water, so even a large spill would not have been a problem .

The problem is, this is a totally unpredictable huge spill with a pressurized gushing which no-one saw coming.

Well, oil will float to the top of water. The valdez was a LEAK. It had the decreasing pressure of the oil behind it. THIS is an opening into a pocket that may be under a lot of pressure, and even the weight of the water may speed things up. BESIDES, the farther down they go the more pressure they should expect. Don't forget, they can't even take a sub down there!

As for crude dissolving, the actual oil, and many other products, WON'T! Maybe you are confusing that with impurities that could. AND, oil WILL disperse, over time. But we ARE talking about CRUDE oil and the heavier it is the more things you have like the tar balls.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2098819].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

For now, at least, BP's prodigious costs combating the oil spill in the Gulf are outweighed by prodigious profits.
On Monday, BP said it spent $350 million in the first 20 days of the spill response, about $17.5 million a day. It has paid 295 of the 4,700 claims received, for a total of $3.5 million. By contrast, in the first quarter of the year, the London-based oil giant's profits averaged $93 million a day.
The amount of oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico has been estimated at 5,000 to 25,000 barrels a day. In the first quarter, BP produced 2.5 million barrels of crude oil a day worldwide -- and it received $71.86 for every barrel.

At $93 million a day in profits, BP makes $350 million in about 3.8 days. The Washington Post noted that Exxon, through a decision by the Supreme Court, was able to pay only $507.5 million of the original $5 billion in punitive damages that it had been assessed for the 1989 Valdez disaster.

The Gulf can absorb most things. Crude oil will dissolve in the 80 degree water temperatures, which are present in this case, and also dissolve in salt water, so even a large spill would not have been a problem .

B.S. - pure and simple. This massive amount of oil has upset the ecology of the western and mid-gulf region and threatens to do the same throughout the gulf waters.

BP and gov say they can't accurately measure how much oil is leaking but I don't believe that. The oil is under pressure and BP knows how much oil entered that pipe before the accident....I think perhaps they don't want to mention that number.

This is not a headline or a newsflash - this is a problem that could take decades for the gulf ecology to recover - if not generations. I hope that's not the case but that's what marine biologists think is happening.

kay

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2098868].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

Oil is a natural substance, it comes out of mother earth, and as such is bio-degradable. If the wind direction would have been different ii would have dispersed into the sea without any adverse effect at all. It looks dramatic because it is black and gooey but is important to keeps things in perspective, it's only an oil spill not a nuclear leak, there are no long term implications. For clean up, a billion dollars here or there is peanuts for BP.

You DO realize that radiation is FAR more natural than oil leaks of this magnitude, right!?!?!?

I heard of a mexican IC company that had problems with its memory! The problem was traced to the CLAY used to make the ceramic coating for the circuits! It was RADIOACTIVE! Radioactivity can degrade the memory as easily as any computer.

Madame curie died of nuclear poisoning from PITCHBLEND! A NATURAL substance! HERE is what wikipedia says:

Skłodowska–Curie visited Poland a last time in the spring of 1934.[14] Only a couple of months later, Skłodowska-Curie died. Her death on 4 July 1934 at the Sancellemoz Sanatorium in Passy, in Haute-Savoie, eastern France, was from aplastic anemia, almost certainly contracted from exposure to radiation. The damaging effects of ionizing radiation were not then known, and much of her work had been carried out in a shed, without taking any safety measures. She had carried test tubes containing radioactive isotopes in her pocket and stored them in her desk drawer, remarking on the pretty blue-green light that the substances gave off in the dark.[citation needed]

She was interred at the cemetery in Sceaux, alongside her husband Pierre. Sixty years later, in 1995, in honor of their achievements, the remains of both were transferred to the Paris Panthéon. She became the first - and so far only - woman to be honored in this way.

Her laboratory is preserved at the Musée Curie.

Due to their levels of radioactivity, her papers from the 1890s are considered too dangerous to handle. Even her cookbook is highly radioactive. They are kept in lead-lined boxes, and those who wish to consult them must wear protective clothing.[30]

And that was BEFORE they could REFINE it!

So your entire post is just wrong. When is the last time you saw a beach covered in oil from a NATURAL leak. When I was a kid, all the ones I saw were downright PRISTINE and the only dreck washed up was SEAWEED!

BTW They had these glow in the dark dials on clocks when I was a kid. They were EVERYWHERE! They aren't anymore! Do you think maybe it was because THEY were RADIOACTIVE! They WERE, and were found to be dangerous.

HERE is what wikipedia says about THAT:

Radium was formerly used in self-luminous paints for watches, nuclear panels, aircraft switches, clocks, and instrument dials. In the mid-1920s, a lawsuit was filed by five dying "Radium Girl" dial painters who had painted radium-based luminous paints on the dials of watches and clocks. The dial painters' exposure to radium caused serious health effects which included sores, anemia and bone cancer. This is because radium is treated as calcium by the body, and deposited in the bones, where radioactivity degrades marrow and can mutate bone cells.
...
As a result of the lawsuit, the adverse effects of radioactivity became widely known, and radium dial painters were instructed in proper safety precautions and provided with protective gear. In particular, dial painters no longer shaped paint brushes by lip. Radium was still used in dials as late as the 1960s, but there were no further injuries to dial painters. This further highlighted that the plight of the Radium Girls was completely preventable.
...
Radium was also put in some foods for taste and as a preservative, but also exposed many people to radiation.[citation needed] Radium was once an additive in products like toothpaste, hair creams, and even food items due to its supposed curative powers.[2] Such products soon fell out of vogue and were prohibited by authorities in many countries, after it was discovered they could have serious adverse health effects. (See for instance Radithor.) Spas featuring radium-rich water are still occasionally touted as beneficial, such as those in Misasa, Tottori, Japan. In the U.S., nasal radium irradiation was also administered to children to prevent middle ear problems or enlarged tonsils from the late 1940s through early 1970s.[3]

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2098738].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Ken_Caudill

The key phrase here is "almost certainly" in the quoted Wikipedia article.

Plainly, that is speculation on the part of the writer. What we know is that she had anemia. We DO NOT know that pitchblende killed her.

Certainly, BP is liable for the oil spill and should pay all cleanup costs and damages to those whose businesses are harmed.

That's no reason to resort to wishful thinking.

OK, it IS possible that madame curie's ailment was simply an INCREDIBLE coincidence! Still, it is FACT that radiation can do that. AND, what I said about radium is ALSO fact! GRANTED one could argue that they were ALL alergic to horsehair, tough I have NEVER heard of an allergy working that way, and so few are alergic to horses, etc.... BUT, AGAIN, it is FACT it can do that.

I was NOT trying to mitigate BP's liability. Quite the contrary!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202607].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Ken_Caudill

Nothing incredible about it at all. There are plenty of anemic people who do not handle low-radioactive materials.

I'm glad we agree about BP's liability.

She apparently treated this like a FREAK SHOW! The effects of radiation have little to do with STRENGTH, but EXPOSURE! SO, if she had 1/10th as much as 20 times, it would be roughly like twice the EXPOSURE, and do similar damage. Ask a doctor sometime. They ARE supposed to limit the number of xrays you get. BTW madame curies ore was probably NEVER much less than an xray machine. In fact, it was probably MORE!

STILL, if she did this every day for YEARS, it is FAR worse than you having 50 xrays over one year.

There IS a reason why the FDA OUTLAWED consumer use of radioactive substances.

HECK, an atom bomb generally works by fission. Do you REALLY think you end up with what was in the bomb? It's going to be a lower grade radiation. The elements DEGRADE as part of the process. The extra material is used up in the explosion, and makes some relatively inert items radioactive. Yet it is STILL bad enough to strike fear in people. Some of that stuff, heck, MOST of it, is likely not much stronger than what madame curie used!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2204193].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

She apparently treated this like a FREAK SHOW! The effects of radiation have little to do with STRENGTH, but EXPOSURE! SO, if she had 1/10th as much as 20 times, it would be roughly like twice the EXPOSURE, and do similar damage. Ask a doctor sometime. They ARE supposed to limit the number of xrays you get. BTW madame curies ore was probably NEVER much less than an xray machine. In fact, it was probably MORE!

Actually, the strength depends on a lot of things. The isotope, amount of time exposed, and the distance from the source are critical when talking about radioactive exposure.

So the word strength is relative to a lot of things. How energetic the radiation is will determine how deeply it penetrates tissue. Right now there are highly energetic, essentially radioactive, particles that pass right through the earth and keep going. And if you're in the way... well...

But for example, neutron radiation, that's perhaps the worst because it will penetrate unprotected tissue quite easily. What happens is due to its high energetic state it causes cell death and DNA damage, and it's the DNA damage that can lead to cancers, etc.

Mdm. Curie most certainly died from long-term exposure to higher than safe, or recommended, exposure. The federal standard for annual exposure is 2000 mrems, or 2 REMS of radiation.

X-ray machines deliver very low levels, and they're pulsed to decrease the exposure for safety reasons. I think it's a very safe bet to assume she received a great deal more than 50 exposures worth from an x ray machine. Plus it was daily exposure at higher levels. Back then, there were no studies that existed at all.

I read something very recent about her. Don't remember why I was reading it. But what I did read, and this will give you an idea of the situation... her scientific manuals, her notes that she kept over the years, are sealed and cannot be handled because they are too radioactive to be safely handled. Imagine that?

STILL, if she did this every day for YEARS, it is FAR worse than you having 50 xrays over one year.

There IS a reason why the FDA OUTLAWED consumer use of radioactive substances.

HECK, an atom bomb generally works by fission. Do you REALLY think you end up with what was in the bomb? It's going to be a lower grade radiation. The elements DEGRADE as part of the process. The extra material is used up in the explosion, and makes some relatively inert items radioactive. Yet it is STILL bad enough to strike fear in people. Some of that stuff, heck, MOST of it, is likely not much stronger than what madame curie used!

Steve

Atomic bombs do work by fission. It's the energy released when radioactive atoms are split that releases the tremendous energy.

There are a ton of different kinds of isotopes created when an atomic bomb explodes, and many of them are very short lived. They have half-lives, just like you Kurt

, and will degrade to safe energy levels.

I do believe the materials released are a great deal more energetic than what Curie was dealing with.

You talk about industrial processes of old. I read about the women who used to paint the radioactive lithium on watch faces back in the early part of the 20th century. Naturally, many of them died of various cancers and organ failures. It is a known fact that these poor people would stick the paint brushes in their mouths to make the brush have a better point when they painted the radioactive lithium on the watches. Insane.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2204844].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

There are a ton of different kinds of isotopes created when an atomic bomb explodes, and many of them are very short lived. They have half-lives, just like you Kurt

, and will degrade to safe energy levels.

Ken's favorite beer is brewed about half a mile down-stream from the nuke plant he worked at....It's called "Miller Half Life".

Seriously, if we had real fusion, it's estimated a single bucket of sea water could generate enough power to supply Los Angeles for a month. The downside is, in the wrong hands the same bucket of sea water would have the power to destroy Los Angeles.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2205663].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

It is a known fact that these poor people would stick the paint brushes in their mouths to make the brush have a better point when they painted the radioactive lithium on the watches. Insane.

Yep, THAT is why I brought up the idea of allergies to horsehair! 8-) It isn't so insane if the paint is SAFE. But the paint isn't safe.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206518].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I do not think BP will file BK unless the rhetoric and posturing in the US drives it to do that.

When this began BP had 7 billion in cash assets - and then that was raised to 10 billion it seems as the seriousness of this leak became clear.

The current effort is to paint BP as a huge, nasty, threatening entity. The TRUTH is that these violations could not have occurred if OUR officials were doing their jobs - and they haven't been doing their jobs for about 10 years!!

BP is British - and yet no one here is talking to the Brit leaders about the problem. BP leaders are be avoided as no one want to be associated with the problem - so all the info is second, third and fourth hand....and much of it probably is wrong.

If you watch the news shows critically - you will see scientists and oceanographers not associated with BP explain why there had to be a serious of steps to try to cap the well and explain why no one is able to determine how much oil has escaped.

These scientists are followed by political hacks who appear only to shift all the blame to BP and away from D.C. On a state level - did any governor examine the evironmental statements of rigs operating 12-50 miles from their coastline. Who read the statement about protecting non-existent seals in the Gulf? Who approved leases with such statements submitted?

If this isn't a wakeup call for all of us to demand the people we hire do their jobs and stop kowtowing to big corporate money - I don't know what is.

What responsibility did TransOcean have to make sure BP's lease applications were properly done? What responsibility did Halliburton have when it proceeded with adding cement in a way that was not safe or acceptable according to Transocean?

The goal seems to be to distract people by pointing to Hayward or only to BP and ignoring the dozens or hundreds of people paid by US who were not doing their jobs. Everyone involved in this mess and responsible for it needs to be exposed. This includes BP - but a lot of other people, too.

kay

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206580].message }}

rondo

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

BP is British - and yet no one here is talking to the Brit leaders about the problem. BP leaders are be avoided as no one want to be associated with the problem - so all the info is second, third and fourth hand....and much of it probably is wrong.

It's 40% British owned and 39% US owned.

Andrew

Thanks

Signature

Online courses

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206656].message }}

NicheCowboy

16 years ago

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

Oil is a natural substance, it comes out of mother earth, and as such is bio-degradable. If the wind direction would have been different ii would have dispersed into the sea without any adverse effect at all. It looks dramatic because it is black and gooey but is important to keeps things in perspective, it's only an oil spill not a nuclear leak, there are no long term implications. For clean up, a billion dollars here or there is peanuts for BP.

spoken like a true BP stockholder.

If it's so "natural", why is so much wildlife already dying???

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133543].message }}

NicheCowboy 16 years ago

"The Gulf of Mexico is a crime scene," said Larry Schweiger, president of the National Wildlife Federation, "and the perpetrator cannot be left in charge of assessing the damage."

Truer words have never been spoken.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133553].message }}
seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by NicheCowboy

spoken like a true BP stockholder.

If it's so "natural", why is so much wildlife already dying???

NO, it IS natural! Madison Avenue is probably some poor kid that is TROLLING! Someone should dunk madison in the crude oil. The attitude would change REAL quick!

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2134449].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

I don't know if anyone mentioned this but BP Leader Dude just said in a interview that...

.. this spill is small compared to the total ocean in the gulf of Mexico.

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2098944].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I don't know if anyone mentioned this but BP Leader Dude just said in a interview that...

.. this spill is small compared to the total ocean in the gulf of Mexico.

TL

MAN, sometimes theey say the DUMBEST THINGS! ANOTHER MIRACLE!!!!!! PLEASE, SOMEONE tell those idiots to stop acting SO STUPID!!!!!!!!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2099512].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I don't know if anyone mentioned this but BP Leader Dude just said in a interview that...

.. this spill is small compared to the total ocean in the gulf of Mexico.

TL

He basicly said it was a tiny spill compared to the size of
the ocean...this is what I heard:

Its nothing, we do not care, its just a tiny
spill that we can just wipe up...

and he did not tell our reporters this, he told
some reporter in another country this statement.

and to think that BP pays this guy a lot of money

BP - FIRE HIM NOW!

and for the guy that basicly said this is nothing if it went the
other way..this is why we see waves coming to shore, and
not the other way around. wind normally blows over shores, not away from them...

for something that is not much a big deal, it has already affected
people in this already dead economy, people are already going out
of business because for some reason, they can not sell seafood with
an extra scoop of BP oil....business'es are closing down, and anyone
that is in the seafood business over there are losing jobs, or
already out of work for probably a long time to come, this may not
be a big deal because this person does not live around the oil
spill, but if he did, and he was in the seafood business, then he
would be singing another tune.."pay me BP, pay me now..."

and disasters like this will be cause and effect...

disaster = gas goes up = food goes up = higher costs, and so on...

so it is a big deal...and its not so much until it trickles down....

as for their profits, for each day this oil spill goes on, they are
losing a day worth of profits...and they have billions of $$$

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2099537].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

steve

As for crude dissolving, the actual oil, and many other products, WON'T! Maybe you are confusing that with impurities that could. AND, oil WILL disperse, over time. But we ARE talking about CRUDE oil and the heavier it is the more things you have like the tar balls.

Yes this is true to an extent, but most of the light crude on the surface will dissolve and dissipate however there is some residue which as you say is heavier, this residue will gradually sink down to the bottom of the ocean floor.

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2099347].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

steve

Yes this is true to an extent, but most of the light crude on the surface will dissolve and dissipate however there is some residue which as you say is heavier, this residue will gradually sink down to the bottom of the ocean floor.

It DISSIPATES, it does NOT dissolve! HEY, it hasn't in millions of years, what makes you think it will in a few months or years? And WHO CARES if it is on top of the ocean? If it goes to the bottom, don't you care about the health of the plankton, algae, catfishh, small fish, crustaceans, dolphins, seals, **********YOU************? Or do you not eat fish or plants or animals, or drink water? The oil may not DISSOLVE, but it CAN be pulled up with OTHER poisons! HEY, ever hear of DDT? It was a similar kind of poison. GRANTED, a BIT more deadly, but really no less pervasive or dangerous in the scheme of things. Oil is a product that is technically illegal to even throw away! Go to some oil change place, and ASK!

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2099506].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

And what happens when the residue sinks to the bottom of the ocean? It's not like the bottom isn't important. In fact what grows on the ocean floor and the life that lives there is very important to the overall ocean environment.

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

steve

Yes this is true to an extent, but most of the light crude on the surface will dissolve and dissipate however there is some residue which as you say is heavier, this residue will gradually sink down to the bottom of the ocean floor.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2099566].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

And what happens when the residue sinks to the bottom of the ocean? It's not like the bottom isn't important. In fact what grows on the ocean floor and the life that lives there is very important to the overall ocean environment.

Even if this tiny leak compared to the vast ocean was fixed this very second, then there would still be damage for many years to come.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2099643].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

steve

Yes this is true to an extent, but most of the light crude on the surface will dissolve and dissipate however there is some residue which as you say is heavier, this residue will gradually sink down to the bottom of the ocean floor.

You are wasting your time here with this -- you need to go convince the dying life forms that it's all just fine and dandy.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2101199].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Do you guys realize how TINY the items in a nuclear bomb are? The particles are SO tiny! Everything is SO tiny! And one tiny thing goes in and causes it to basically overflow. NO big deal! NO microscope, save perhaps the BIGGEST most state of the art electron microscope or better, could EVER hope to see such a small thing. Well, that one tiny action releases other components that are TINY, but there are perhaps hundreds of times as many. So the same thing happens with a couple hundred other items(let's call them ATOMS).

Now that might be a nuisance. But nothing spectacular, except that it happens at close to the speed of light.

So what happens of this story? This one VERY tiny particle that isn't even NEARLY as big as a hydrogen ATOM, causes the near simultaneous destruction of others that increase in number exponentially at each stage and each happens at SLIGHTLY less than the speed of light.

Science calls this a chain reaction, and the destruction of all this is called a nuclear explosion. That one RIDICULOUSLY TINY explosion that you would likely not even be able to see under the average microscope, EVEN in the dark, is enough to destroy the GALAXY if the ATOMs are large enough, and there is enough material. Simply because of its affect on the surrounding atoms.

To say that a minor leak is nothing is crazy. Look at the DDT that was left. For YEARS the eco system was hurt.

Oil has a LOT of poisons, and a lot of sea creatures can be adversly affected. What happens if salmon start to spawn, and the area is polluted by oil? A WHOLE AREA's population of salmon could be WIPED OUT! The SAME is true of TURTLES! Maybe WHALES! Alll creatures that may gather in the same place at about the same time.

And the runoff poisons that humans might not appear to be affected by may affect FROGS! So THEY could die. They are susceptible to various things.

And things that don't really hurt humans could hurt small animals that keep being eaten by larger animals until humans ingest the larger animal and get a MEGAdose that CAN hurt them.

So a LITTLE drop of oil in the wrong place at the wrong time WILL damage that area! And we are talking about a LOT more than a mere drop. Does ANYONE know how much oil there is? Will this well run for MONTHS? YEARS? HOW long!?!?!?!? We know just ONE day is TOO LONG!

BTW nearly every dangerous item is natural or has a natural analogue. SHAKESPEAR spoke of poisons!

Steve

[ 2 ] Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2100770].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

"bp oil dude" has an agenda - he's looking at billions in potential liability and also fighting information from insiders about the lack of attention to safety of their processes... The gulf of mexico has about 600,000 square miles - oil now covers about 4000 square miles and it's still spewing At what point do you think it might be a problem? 100k square miles - 50k square miles? It's true the oceans can process some oil - there is oil that leaks consistently from the floor of the ocean normally. The problem is this upsets the balance - it's like removing one link in a food chain. It doesn't seem like a huge deal if one species disappears - until everything above that link starts dying out. I'm waiting for someone to announce that the tar balls that washed up on a beach a couple miles from me yesterday are really only cow patties kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2100808].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Have no fear, Kevin Costner is here! Costner got into the oil cleanup business courtesy of his brother, who developed this here oil filteration machine. They've got a business going on, "Ocean Therapy Solutions" and showing demonstrations of the device. Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nunguesser says "with these odds and percentages, it only makes sense. Let's give it a try."

Kevin Costner Helps To Fight Spill

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2100838].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

Have no fear, Kevin Costner is here! Costner got into the oil cleanup business courtesy of his brother, who developed this here oil filteration machine. They've got a business going on, "Ocean Therapy Solutions" and showing demonstrations of the device. Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nunguesser says "with these odds and percentages, it only makes sense. Let's give it a try."

Kevin Costner Helps To Fight Spill

Now THAT is a nice solution! Both 200 gallons a minute? MAN is that fast! Of course, they would have to do this really AFTER the well is capped, and it will take a LONG time!

But a centrifuge could certainly work, and they claim to have it done. Of course, diesel is lighter, and less invasive, than crude, so the machine probably won't work as fast or as well with crude.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2100869].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

"bp oil dude" has an agenda - he's looking at billions in potential liability and also fighting information from insiders about the lack of attention to safety of their processes... The gulf of mexico has about 600,000 square miles - oil now covers about 4000 square miles and it's still spewing At what point do you think it might be a problem? 100k square miles - 50k square miles? It's true the oceans can process some oil - there is oil that leaks consistently from the floor of the ocean normally. The problem is this upsets the balance - it's like removing one link in a food chain. It doesn't seem like a huge deal if one species disappears - until everything above that link starts dying out. I'm waiting for someone to announce that the tar balls that washed up on a beach a couple miles from me yesterday are really only cow patties kay

The guy that says it is only a small part of the bay should have that much crude oil added to his bath/shower, and be provided only gray water to boot. Let's see how business like he looks the next DAY, and how healthy he looks the next WEEK, if he is even still alive. GEEZ, I can't even stand to have caprylic acid on my hands for long! And IT is good, harmless, and PURE. For those that don't know, it is a FATTY acid, and feels like vegetable oil. Add all the poisons in CRUDE oil, and FORGET IT!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2100853].message }}

Kurt 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

SHAKESPEAR spoke of poisons!

Steve

Shakespeare may have talked the talk, but Socrates walked the walk.
- Thanks
Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2100823].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Heysal,

That is ALMOST as good as my idea, and FAR easier. Put him where there are a llot of bears and wolves and see if he can somehow convince them that it is ok that their habitat might be hurt, etc... That the bears might not have any more salmon. 8-/ He probably won't be around to argue his position anymore.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2101704].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Well, with a couple correct measurements, the speed could be figured out that way. One person tried to determine the amount of OIL given the speed of flow using the spead at which features are moving. HIS estimate? 70,000 barrels of oil a day.

To put that into perspective, that is about 0.349% of the us daily usage of oil! About 287 wells at this rate would provide ALL the US oil.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2101733].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

What's the alternative to BP? People whinge about reliance on Middle-East oil etc etc but then use petrol(gas) like water. It has to come to out from somewhere, in the Middle East a lot of the oil wells are less than 5,000 feet deep but they are digging on land . Russia has dug a well 40,000 feet deep but this is also on land.

BP has tunneled 5,000 feet under the ocean, this is much harder, to get at the oil. Undertaking a task like this is like going to the moon something will inevitably go wrong at sometime.

The only alternative I can see is to use less oil, but is this feasible?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2102184].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

What's the alternative to BP?

MAN what a #$%^&* statement! BP DOES have competitors!

BP has tunneled 5,000 feet under the ocean, this is much harder, to get at the oil. Undertaking a task like this is like going to the moon something will inevitably go wrong at sometime.

THAT is the problem!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

The only alternative I can see is to use less oil, but is this feasible?

We aren't in the 1950s anymore! Then again, the overall period of high use of oil products out of pure "necessity" was pretty short lived. So YEAH, it was, and IS feasible!

I remarked just YESTERDAY to someone about how the airline industry is going and the looming disaster, and the GM disaster that was ****OUTLAWED**** in 1890!!!!!! The subprime deal that caused this depression was ****OUTLAWED**** in 1933!!!!!! Maybe if people spent more time looking at the past to see what may happen in the future, we can stop doing all this ridiculous stuff! HECK, I bought a home about 10 years ago. One reason was because,(OK, I was an IDIOT!) I figured that we had people that had IQs over 50 in the government and they would stop doing what they did. They DIDN'T! That helped enable the subprime business. I was a good risk, and even refinanced my home to make things better. Most others WEREN'T a good risk!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2102365].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

There have been alternatives to oil now for most of what we do with it -- but the guys at the top are making enough money to rule the world from oil, so we have not been allowed to use alternatives.

Even if we all just stopped using plastic bags and poisonous plastic containers for storing food we could save hundreds of millions, possibly a billion, gallons a year, plus we would produce less waste - toxic waste at that. Just by using natural fiber bags for shopping and putting our food in glass containers when we refrigerate it. Just by walking when we go somewhere that's only a few blocks away instead of driving we could save millions of gallons a year, and our population would be healthier and environment would be that much cleaner.

There was not one true reason that we needed to drill there. With a few more refineries the US has plenty of oil, it's not oil we lack, it's refineries. I know someone in oil exploration, and the amount of new oil resources found in just the last couple years is staggering - most are in safe locations. So what the hell is all this underwater stuff about? Why is there no news about the fact that gulf drilling could have "accidentally" tapped Mexico's oil cavities?
This whole thing from conception to enactment was nothing but pure politics - and I can't go there from here.

I also wonder if your specialty isn't disinformation for a lucrative oil concern.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2102363].message }}

femfatale68

16 years ago

Horrible! And mortified is the only word I can use to describe something that bugs me personally. I am new to the forum and exploring exciting new things related to my years of sales and marketing experience. However, I have my day job! And in my day job
I sell modeling tools to companies like BP and the Nuclear plants and the Aerospace gov't related communities. These design tools model failures -- like explosions and breakage and what if scenarios-- it tells management how to spend their money and to plan for safety like replacing parts every so often and taking things out of service for maintenance!!!!! So I am wondering today- Where is their safety group? What are BP Safety & Reliability engineers up to these days? Do they even have one? Or are they hiding their faces?

This device or sophisticated hunk of metal contraption that is dropped at the VERY bottom of the sea where it's difficult to get to----- and this device pumps oil from a hole under ground and up and out-- this mechanical device should not have been implemented without a plan that covered all risk scenarios and one that covered the safety of the waters-- the neighboring ecology and humans involved and the reliability of it's parts and systems and components that needs maintenance and timed outages. That is a Safety, Risk And Reliability plan.

Disgusted and mortified. You know, at one time several years ago they were interested in purchasing our products (a good deal at $50,000) would be in my best interest to contact them now... after they turned me down earlier this year?!!! I suppose the mighty have fallen....

So BP-- WHERE IS YOUR SAFETY RISK & RELIABILITY GROUP?

Apparanetly Tony Hayward is reported on UK telegraph dot com to to make Safety and Reliability priority now.

After a horrible fact that could have been prevented years ago by implementing a safety and reliability program that works!!!!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2176795].message }}

Andrew Leatherland

16 years ago

Originally Posted by femfatale68

Horrible!
I sell modeling tools to companies like BP and the Nuclear plants and the Aerospace gov't related communities. These design tools model failures -- like explosions and breakage and what if scenarios-- it tells management how to spend their money and to plan for safety like replacing parts every so often and taking things out of service for maintenance!!!!! So I am wondering today. What are BP Safety & Reliability engineers up to these days? Where is their safety group? Do they even have one? If so, what on earth were they thinking- that this hunk of metal dropped at the bottom of the sea would not ever fail? Ever? ?

The petroleum industry probably has a lot to answer for. I tried to do a bit of research into this and whilst it's a bit sketchy it might not be possible to stick the safety bit totally at the feet of BP.

It seems that Halliburton were responsible for the concreting work around the pipe with the displacement of the built up gas around the pipe a key risk. Halliburton are already being investigated according to the LA Times for this and another similar incident I believe just off Australia.

The problem will be the politics around it with different representatives being on the end of lobbying money from the different companies. This situation isn't just about an ecological disaster. As we've seen from the Russian natural gas story energy security is a massive priority to the point that it's almost become a weapon in economic warfare

The view over here in the UK is that it's probably time for a change within the organisation. Hammering them into oblivion with overly punitive fines whilst would give a certain sense of satisfaction would hurt America also. Although it's called BP I saw something that pointed to 30% US ownership either through institutions or individuals. If those institutions are pension funds (as it seems many of them are in the UK) that could hurt a lot of people who think they have no connection to it

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2176941].message }}

femfatale68

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Andrew Leatherland

The petroleum industry probably has a lot to answer for. I tried to do a bit of research into this and whilst it's a bit sketchy it might not be possible to stick the safety bit totally at the feet of BP.

It seems that Halliburton were responsible for the concreting work around the pipe with the displacement of the built up gas around the pipe a key risk. Halliburton are already being investigated according to the LA Times for this and another similar incident I believe just off Australia.

If Halliburton was on contract for BP than they have the same expectations and report reliability data to and for BP. So it goes to say that if BP had no program or had a weak one-- than it would be safe to say that Halliburton would be held to the same weak or non-existant program.

I'm sure they all thought they were untouchable....

I do hear what you are saying on the political and market side of things- it's complicated, alright. It usually takes a massive jolt like disaster as this to initiate change. It will be interesting to see what happens. Meanwhile it's the ecological part that is the highlight because the thing hasn't been capped off yet-- and that is the mortifying part. They weren't prepared!

Once again the old boy scout motto prevails-- Be prepared!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2177148].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

People claims that what-ever BP has to pay will be ultimately paid by the consumer in higher prices.

I say we should boycott BP gas period.

I'm certainly not filling up my car at a BP gas station.

They should be shunned.

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105115].message }}

Dave Patterson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

People claims that what-ever BP has to pay will be ultimately paid by the consumer in higher prices.

I say we should boycott BP gas period.

I'm certainly not filling up my car at a BP gas station.

They should be shunned.

TL

I'm with you on that one....especially since it appears their MAJOR concern is how they can save their oil instead of minimizing the environmental damage this cluster&^%$ this has/is/will cause....

They're not trying to CAP it....they're only trying to CAPTURE it.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Professional Googler

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105135].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Dave Patterson

I'm with you on that one....especially since it appears their MAJOR concern is how they can save their oil instead of minimizing the environmental damage this cluster&^%$ this has/is/will cause....

They're not trying to CAP it....they're only trying to CAPTURE it.

Well, I agree to a degree. But trying to cap it CAN be a serious problem. Let's say that the stuff was coming out at 300PSI. That is a LOT of force! To find something that can adequately seal at 300psi could be very difficult. Until they can do that, retrieving the oil may be FAR easier to do, and might have been the best option.

NOW, I say CAP IT, PERIOD!!!! NOW!!!!!! Time has run out.....

Three or four large plumes have been found, at least one that is 10 miles long and a mile wide, said Samantha Joye, a marine science professor at the University of Georgia.

Researchers Vernon Asper and Arne Dierks said in Web posts that the plumes were "perhaps due to the deep injection of dispersants which BP has stated that they are conducting." BP has won government approval to use chemicals on the oil near where it is gushing to break it up before it rises to the surface.

The researchers were also testing the effects of large amounts of subsea oil on oxygen levels in the water. The oil can deplete oxygen in the water, harming plankton and other tiny creatures that serve as food for a wide variety of sea critters.

Oxygen levels in some areas have dropped 30 percent, and should continue to drop, Joye said.

"It could take years, possibly decades, for the system to recover from an infusion of this quantity of oil and gas," Joye said. "We've never seen anything like this before. It's impossible to fathom the impact."

I figure we are at the start of the 3rd stage of a 6 stage process that, locally(the definition of local is growing everyday it isn't plugged) could lead to complete extinction of marine life and start affecting land life, including humans. Most creatures in the waters around the area now affected NEED that oxygen, or are dependent on creatures that do.

And the dispersants aren't going to necessarily help. WHO CARES how it looks? Take vegetable oil, put it in REAL chocolate milk, and throw THAT on the ocean! One guy says it looks like that ANYWAY! I would prefer THAT to crude oil! The milk would degrade and maybe provide food for the creatures. The VEGETABLE oil would have little impact(And, if whales happen to breath it in, it will likely irritate them, but not kill.), and likely degrade. But CRUDE OIL? DISPERSANTS? FORGET IT!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105187].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

People claims that what-ever BP has to pay will be ultimately paid by the consumer in higher prices.

I say we should boycott BP gas period.

I'm certainly not filling up my car at a BP gas station.

They should be shunned.

TL

The sad fact is that they are right! YOU'RE right also(PLEASE SOMEONE, STOP ME! 8-(). The problem is HOW do you find out who is getting oil from BP? They are a HUGE company! when I went into denmark, I was SHOCKED to find a company called Q8. In English, that sounds a bit like kuwait. It turns out it IS kuwaiti oil. Then again, Marathon is an AMERICAN company. But marathon probably has relations with OTHER oil companies. PERHAPS even BP.

But YEAH, if BPs costs go up, do you think THEY will just eat it? NOPE! Their prices will go up. It may be FRACTIONS of a penny per gallon, and the ppump prices might not go up for a while longer, but even if THAT happens, other things will be cut or prices will go up. When prices DO go up, competitors will raise THEIR prices, and the whole thing will appear to be due to the refineries or the cost of oil in general. And so it continues....

Steve

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105143].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

Edit: Ooops. My buddy Steve already posted this.

Now scientists are saying huge plumes of oil are underneath the gulfs surface. Some as large as 10 miles long, 3 miles wide and 300 feet thick. What will happen with these globs of oil? Nobody really knows but it can't be good.
- Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105200].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

People claims that what-ever BP has to pay will be ultimately paid by the consumer in higher prices.

I say we should boycott BP gas period.

I'm certainly not filling up my car at a BP gas station.

They should be shunned.

TL

A boycott on BP will have negligible effect. BP earns over $93 million a DAY, so the cleanup costs and litigation estimated to top over a few billion dollars over the next few decades is just the cost of doing business. Oil market speculators will be the ones driving up gas prices, not BP. Also there is pending legislation to add another 1% federal tax on EVERY barrel of oil from any source. Greed can never be capped.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105268].message }}

Dave Patterson 16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

Greed can never be capped.

No reality checks please....
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Professional Googler
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105282].message }}
- myob 16 years ago
  
  Check this out. Average gas prices going up soon.
  
  Gas Price Historical Price Charts - GasBuddy.com
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105321].message }}
  
  ThomM 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by myob
  
  Check this out. Average gas prices going up soon.
  
  Gas Price Historical Price Charts - GasBuddy.com
  
  This would be the oil companies spin on that.
  Two year ago gas was 4.20 a gal.
  So at 3.00 a gal. gas prices have gone down in the last two years
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
  Getting old ain't for sissy's
  As you are I was, as I am you will be
  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105342].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

A boycott on BP will have negligible effect. BP earns over $93 million a DAY, so the cleanup costs and litigation estimated to top over a few billion dollars over the next few decades is just the cost of doing business. Oil market speculators will be the ones driving up gas prices, not BP. Also there is pending legislation to add another 1% federal tax on EVERY barrel of oil from any source. Greed can never be capped.

What will happen if no one in the US goes to a BP gas station???

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105413].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

What will happen if no one in the US goes to a BP gas station???

TL

They would change the name of their stations to something like Gas Express, then they would lower their prices till they suckered everyone in and then raise them again.
Of course they would remove any reference to BP

I never get BP gas to begin with so me boycotting them is senseless in a way. Also I wonder how many of the Mom and Pop gas stations/convenient stores already get their gas from BP and we don't know about it.

I hate to say this, but given the size and scope of these big oil companies I don't think there is much people like you or I can do to harm them.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105478].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

They would change the name of their stations to something like Gas Express, then they would lower their prices till they suckered everyone in and then raise them again.
Of course they would remove any reference to BP

I never get BP gas to begin with so me boycotting them is senseless in a way. Also I wonder how many of the Mom and Pop gas stations/convenient stores already get their gas from BP and we don't know about it.

I hate to say this, but given the size and scope of these big oil companies I don't think there is much people like you or I can do to harm them.

I wonder what the effect of 75% of BP gas station customers not going to BP anymore would do to BP's bottom line?

BP does have gas stations going under names other than BP and it's easy to discover what names they are going under.

Sure, they could try to change their name etc. but with the internet and just a handful of anti BP sites they could be closely monitored and punished.

If they lower their prices - good - they certainly won't be making as much profit off US customers as they were making before.

If any company deserves to be punished it's BP and they should be.

There must be something the people of the US can do to punish BP for the damage they have inflicted on our environment.

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105603].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I wonder what the effect of 75% of BP gas station customers not going to BP anymore would do to BP's bottom line?

BP does have gas stations going under names other than BP and it's easy to discover what names they are going under.

Sure, they could try to change their name etc. but with the internet and just a handful of anti BP sites they could be closely monitored and punished.

If they lower their prices - good - they certainly won't be making as much profit off US customers as they were making before.

If any company deserves to be punished it's BP and they should be.

There must be something the people of the US can do to punish BP for the damage they have inflicted on our environment.

TL

If you find something let me know.
Like I said I already don't use their gas or any other products, I've had a bug up my butt against BP for so long I don't remember why anymore.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105677].message }}

myob 16 years ago

No one has punished Exxon for the 11 million gallon oil spill in Valdez back in 1989. Also Mobile Oil was responsible for up to 30 million gallons of petroleum spills for decades in Brooklyn NY up until the late 1950's. Exxon and Mobile merged in 1999 to become ExxonMobil. They sell under diffrent brands like Exxon, Mobil, Esso, Imperial Oil Limited, and also owns hundreds of smaller subsidiaries. Even if we could even identify them, can you boycott them all?

BP hasn't even come close to what ExxonMobil has done to our environment - yet. Like Valdez and Brooklyn, this will go on for decades and never get cleaned up.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105793].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I wonder what the effect of 75% of BP gas station customers not going to BP anymore would do to BP's bottom line?

BP does have gas stations going under names other than BP and it's easy to discover what names they are going under.

Sure, they could try to change their name etc. but with the internet and just a handful of anti BP sites they could be closely monitored and punished.

If they lower their prices - good - they certainly won't be making as much profit off US customers as they were making before.

If any company deserves to be punished it's BP and they should be.

There must be something the people of the US can do to punish BP for the damage they have inflicted on our environment.

TL

If they lower prices, it may be through affinity credit(so the REAL cost is HIGHER), or they may put more additives into the fuel, etc... The law DOES have SOME tolerance there.

I disagree that BP is ****THE**** culprit. They appear to be only ONE of about 3, maybe 4. The MAIN company may be involved with ALL offshore rigs. The OTHER company may be involved with many. Let's not get TOO carried away with blaming BP 100%. Good luck trying to boycott the other 2-3 though.

I WILL say that they had NO business having such a get together, or having people SLEEP at such a CRITICAL time! They should have waited at LEAST another 24-48 hours before even celebrating. Had they done so, they would be more sure that all was taken care of, people would have taken more care, and maybe the accident never would have happened.
Had the accident happened, MAYBE there would have been something they could have done. I believe the responsibility for THAT WAS 100% BP!

The BIGGEST thing that can be done is sanctions/fines by the US government(It could maybe affect over 55% of BPs bottom line!!!!!). Unfortunately, that would have to be the FEDERAL government, and BP has friends in VERY high places in the US. I COULD say more, but....

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105727].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Yes, the US government could do a lot but won't unless there is a huge public outcry about this spill. If there is enough support for strong sanctions/fines and that would translate to a political advantage for those in coming elections then things could happen no matter how many friends in VERY high places they have. I wonder if there will be the huge public outcry though. Especially if the leak is successfully closed soon. The public has a short attention span these days.

Originally Posted by seasoned

The BIGGEST thing that can be done is sanctions/fines by the US government(It could maybe affect over 55% of BPs bottom line!!!!!). Unfortunately, that would have to be the FEDERAL government, and BP has friends in VERY high places in the US. I COULD say more, but....

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2107360].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Yes, the US government could do a lot but won't unless there is a huge public outcry about this spill. If there is enough support for strong sanctions/fines and that would translate to a political advantage for those in coming elections then things could happen no matter how many friends in VERY high places they have. I wonder if there will be the huge public outcry though. Especially if the leak is successfully closed soon. The public has a short attention span these days.

That is the problem with people like you, you feel it is SO simple. And there IS a large public outcry. GRANTED, most people don't endanger their jobs, etc... to get the idea through the politicians thick heads by making Washington DC so full of people that all streets must be closed, etc....

HECK, one person, after staying in line for the whole day to get "reimbursed" for lost business, said that the payment was less than 1/3rd of what he usually gets. That was picked up by the news. The FULL impact may NEVER be known.

All any thinking person knows is that it is worse than anyone can imagine. The sun is blocked off, water is polluted, oxygen is depleted, the debris can kill even by merely changing the climate around egg clutches or very young/small fish. And that isn't even mentioning the effects of petroleum by products. And do you have ANY idea how much oil is needed to even spread the plume by 1foot, at this time?

And HOW could people claiming to care SO much about the environment not care about THIS? THIS is, to the fish, worse than global warming and most other things put together.

But politicians are paid a LOT to ignore this, and they have a mindset that they are totally isolated even from this planet.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2108335].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

You know Steve, the problem with you is you are an arrogant prick. That's pretty simple also. Geesh, I wasn't even disagreeing with you.

By the way, you are just plain wrong is you think their is a huge public outcry. Here's just one article about a poll that shows how wrong you are:

"The poll also found that the public still supports the idea of drilling offshore for oil and gas. By 50 percent to 38 percent, more people favor increased coastal drilling for oil and gas than oppose it."

"Poll detects little anger over oil spill"
http://www.dailymail.com/News/Nation...d/201005130850

Originally Posted by seasoned

That is the problem with people like you, you feel it is SO simple. And there IS a large public outcry. GRANTED, most people don't endanger their jobs, etc... to get the idea through the politicians thick heads by making Washington DC so full of people that all streets must be closed, etc....

HECK, one person, after staying in line for the whole day to get "reimbursed" for lost business, said that the payment was less than 1/3rd of what he usually gets. That was picked up by the news. The FULL impact may NEVER be known.

All any thinking person knows is that it is worse than anyone can imagine. The sun is blocked off, water is polluted, oxygen is depleted, the debris can kill even by merely changing the climate around egg clutches or very young/small fish. And that isn't even mentioning the effects of petroleum by products. And do you have ANY idea how much oil is needed to even spread the plume by 1foot, at this time?

And HOW could people claiming to care SO much about the environment not care about THIS? THIS is, to the fish, worse than global warming and most other things put together.

But politicians are paid a LOT to ignore this, and they have a mindset that they are totally isolated even from this planet.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109304].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

You know Steve, the problem with you is you are an arrogant prick. That's pretty simple also. Geesh, I wasn't even disagreeing with you.

By the way, you are just plain wrong is you think their is a huge public outcry. Here's just one article about a poll that shows how wrong you are:

"The poll also found that the public still supports the idea of drilling offshore for oil and gas. By 50 percent to 38 percent, more people favor increased coastal drilling for oil and gas than oppose it."

"Poll detects little anger over oil spill"
Poll detects little anger over oil spill* - Nation and World - Charleston Daily Mail - West Virginia News and Sports -

Well, there are ALL sorts of polls. And the dailymail speaks like white middle aged men are OK with such drilling. Well, it is funny since I believe that describes most of the people I saw waiting in that line, and the one complaining how the reimbursement is less than 1/3rd what he would normally get. Anyway, I COULD start showing how you are wrong, but that would get too political. If ONLY it were so simple.

HECK, one thing I HATE about rush limbaugh(He is really too tolerant of pollution and corporate greed for my liking) is that he feels people can do ***NO*** wrong to the environment. Well, I guess this rig has changed his opinion THERE! You think *I* am arrogant? Try listening to the old rush when people spoke of people hurting the environment. If this swayed HIS opinion, you know it likewise affected MANY more.

And I doubt ANYONE thinks gas will get down to 35 cents just by drilling. It may cost more that that just to REFINE it.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109405].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

What will happen if no one in the US goes to a BP gas station???

TL

When I was in california, I NEVER saw a BP station! ****NEVER****!!!! Do you REALLY think NONE of that gas goes elsewhere? I once worked at a cell phone company that used to have *****NO***** customers! But they made MILLIONS! HOW? They bought cells in little markets NOBODY wanted! There were really NO customers there! AT&T, for example, had NO customers or cells there! ****BUT**** when an AT&T customer "roamed" in that area, THEY WANTED SERVICE! So AT&T had to pay this other company for the privilege! So YOU might not have THOUGHT you were a customer. You may not have ever THOUGHT you paid them. They may not have known who you were. If you traveled through their areas, you probably paid roaming charges or your provider certainly did. That is how verisign makes most of its money today probably.

I suspect BP does the same sort of thing.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105671].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

When I was in california, I NEVER saw a BP station! ****NEVER****!!!! Do you REALLY think NONE of that gas goes elsewhere? I once worked at a cell phone company that used to have *****NO***** customers! But they made MILLIONS! HOW? They bought cells in little markets NOBODY wanted! There were really NO customers there! AT&T, for example, had NO customers or cells there! ****BUT**** when an AT&T customer "roamed" in that area, THEY WANTED SERVICE! So AT&T had to pay this other company for the privilege! So YOU might not have THOUGHT you were a customer. You may not have ever THOUGHT you paid them. They may not have known who you were. If you traveled through their areas, you probably paid roaming charges or your provider certainly did. That is how verisign makes most of its money today probably.

I suspect BP does the same sort of thing.

Steve

There are at least 10k gas stations under the BP banner across the country.

For you Steve...

BP also goes by the name of Aral and...

... Arco stations in the south, southwest and west coast.

From the BP website...

BP US Retailing:

As the second-largest gasoline marketer in the United States...

...BP offers consumers quality gasoline designed to meet the needs of the variety of gasoline-powered vehicles in the US.

BP is dedicated to producing fuels that help improve automotive performance, efficiency and emissions.

BP provides customers with fuel for transportation and energy for heat and light.

BP is the single, global brand formed by the combination of the former British Petroleum, Amoco Corp., Atlantic Richfield (ARCO) and Burmah Castrol.

Every year, over 22 billion gallons of fuel are sold annually through the BP and ARCO branded retail outlets.

Every day, BP serves 50 million gallons to our valued consumers via more than...

... 10,000...

... BP-branded retail locations east of the Rockies, and another 1,500 on the West Coast via the ARCO brand.

To find a complete list of BP and Arco stations, visit BP invigorate | Your Local BP.

Must go to a new Mexican restuarant with wife and kid and return by NBA game time.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105822].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

There are at least 10k gas stations under the BP banner across the country.

For you Steve...

BP also goes by the name of Aral and...

... Arco stations in the south, southwest and west coast.

I have *****NEVER***** seen an ARAL station!

ARCO WAS ATLANTIC RICHFIELD, an AMERICAN company! It was sold to BP in 2000.

ARCO - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When I was at ARCO, it was AMERICAN!

From the BP website...

BP US Retailing:

As the second-largest gasoline marketer in the United States...

...BP offers consumers quality gasoline designed to meet the needs of the variety of gasoline-powered vehicles in the US.

BP is dedicated to producing fuels that help improve automotive performance, efficiency and emissions.

BP provides customers with fuel for transportation and energy for heat and light.

BP is the single, global brand formed by the combination of the former British Petroleum, Amoco Corp., Atlantic Richfield (ARCO) and Burmah Castrol.

Every year, over 22 billion gallons of fuel are sold annually through the BP and ARCO branded retail outlets.

Every day, BP serves 50 million gallons to our valued consumers via more than...

... 10,000...

... BP-branded retail locations east of the Rockies, and another 1,500 on the West Coast via the ARCO brand.

To find a complete list of BP and Arco stations, visit BP invigorate | Your Local BP.

Must go to a new Mexican restuarant with wife and kid and return by NBA game time.

TL

OK, Try petitioning the US FEDERAL government for sanctions! They could *****REALLY***** hurt BP! Maybe they can force the release of American assets, and hurt them even MORE. It won't happen, but you can TRY!!!!!

BTW ABOUT ARCO... From wikipedia...

The Atlantic Petroleum Storage Company's heritage dates to 1866; it became part of the Standard Oil trust in 1874, but achieved independence again when Standard Oil was broken up in 1911.

HERE, let me translate this for you!

The Atlantic Petroleum Storage Company's heritage dates to 1866; it became part of the Standard Oil trust in 1874.

The government determined it was ILLEGAL since S/O violated the 1890 sherman antitust act and the government forced it to break up in 1911, and ARCO was, again, a separate company

As I said, "too big to fail" is a MYTH! What they are REALLY saying is they want things their OWN way and FORCE it by not enforcing the law! And S/O used to be a HUGE company. They were perhaps the only supplier of oil products to the US and perhaps the world. EXXON, currently the biggest company in the US, used to be PART of SO! AGAIN, from wikipedia...

Exxon is a brand of motor fuel and related products sold by ExxonMobil. From 1972 to 1999, Exxon was the corporate name of the company previously known as Standard Oil Company of New Jersey or Jersey Standard.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2105850].message }}

Matt-Marketing

16 years ago

The US must be off there rocker if they allow this to go ahead

BP should be made to clean 100% of the oil spill up
didnt they make a few billion Profit last year that
would be enough Ah!

Matt

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2108351].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Matt-Marketing

The US must be off there rocker if they allow this to go ahead

BP should be made to clean 100% of the oil spill up
didnt they make a few billion Profit last year that
would be enough Ah!

Matt

The US can't exactly order them to clean up. It is kind of like BP is a stubborn (ahem) donkey. The US has to use carrots and sticks! After all, it IS a BRITISH company!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2108553].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

BP should be made to clean 100% of the oil spill up

That's how many people seem to think about the spill - but it ignores reality. You cannot un-ring this bell - the damage is done and will continue to occur over a long period of time.

Oceanographers with scientific background and experience have encountered huge pockets of crude oil beneath the surface of the gulf in deep water. One such mass measured 3x10 miles in size.

BP says they are now siphoning off "some" of the gushing oil - but estimates they are getting 1000 barrels which is a small percentage of the total spilling each day.

BP continues to be able to set some rules as they please - scientists with the instrumentation/expertise to measure how much oil is spilling daily were not allowed by bp to place their instrumentation near the spill. Videos of the leak are only released when BP chooses and they seem to withhold more footage than they release.

Anyone who watched 60 minutes last night may have a glimpse of how big a fuss this may cause in the end.

kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2108733].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

One such mass measured 3x10 miles in size.

That amazes the hell outta me.

BP continues to be able to set some rules as they please - scientists with the instrumentation/expertise to measure how much oil is spilling daily were not allowed by bp to place their instrumentation near the spill. Videos of the leak are only released when BP chooses and they seem to withhold more footage than they release.

kay

So does this. But on the other hand, it doesn't considering the bigger picture
of things. I'm certainly not up on this, but is this located in international
waters? I don't understand how they can enforce this other than with force,
which I'm sure they would have no problem doing.

I usually like to avoid being captain obvious, but there's the greater good
that should come before BP's image and profits, etc. But it sounds almost
stupid even saying that considering the things that some entities have gotten
away with over the generations.

This is criminal.

But what will change as a result of this? Nothing, I believe. Well, maybe gas
prices and the price of anything containing petroleum products. No rant, I'm
too tired of this to even bother which is not good, either.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109014].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

That amazes the hell outta me.

So does this. But on the other hand, it doesn't considering the bigger picture
of things. I'm certainly not up on this, but is this located in international
waters? I don't understand how they can enforce this other than with force,
which I'm sure they would have no problem doing.

I usually like to avoid being captain obvious, but there's the greater good
that should come before BP's image and profits, etc. But it sounds almost
stupid even saying that considering the things that some entities have gotten
away with over the generations.

This is criminal.

But what will change as a result of this? Nothing, I believe. Well, maybe gas
prices and the price of anything containing petroleum products. No rant, I'm
too tired of this to even bother which is not good, either.

International waters are actually past about 370.4KM! This violated US space the INSTANT that spill came within 370.4KM of the US. So it is now a US issue! Technically, the US could go there and start a war, it is THAT bad! So BP has NO rights to privacy from the US, and the US can, and SHOULD, enforce ANY efforts to seal that and/or assess its damage.

International waters are provided as a general courtesy between governments and it is OK as long as criminal acts or sovereign rights violations are not committed. In this case, BP has done both. If it were intentional, and BP were doing nothing to fix it, you could bet that BP wouldn't be allowed anywhere near the rig.

IMAGINE if the taliban did this. The US might be tempted to just go out, obliterate them, and work on cleaning up the spill.

UPDATE, TRUTH COMES OUT!!!!!

He also said that both Transocean and BP engineers were well aware of problems with the rig's blowout preventer, which he said was damaged in a test weeks before the blowout. The damage occurred to the annular seal of the BOP, which grips around the drillpipe and is of vital importance in measuring the well's downhole pressures and monitoring whether any natural gas is getting into the well. During the test, when the BOP's rubber seals were clamped on the pipe, someone inadvertently activated machinery that pulled up the pipe. The intense friction degraded some of the replaceable rubber grips. Williams said the rig's mud handlers reported that bits and pieces of that rubber came up the well. Furthermore, one of the BOP's control pods had gone out, and the device had suffered a loss of hydraulic pressure.

UNREAL!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109102].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

That's how many people seem to think about the spill - but it ignores reality. You cannot un-ring this bell - the damage is done and will continue to occur over a long period of time.

Oceanographers with scientific background and experience have encountered huge pockets of crude oil beneath the surface of the gulf in deep water. One such mass measured 3x10 miles in size.

BP says they are now siphoning off "some" of the gushing oil - but estimates they are getting 1000 barrels which is a small percentage of the total spilling each day.

BP continues to be able to set some rules as they please - scientists with the instrumentation/expertise to measure how much oil is spilling daily were not allowed by bp to place their instrumentation near the spill. Videos of the leak are only released when BP chooses and they seem to withhold more footage than they release.

Anyone who watched 60 minutes last night may have a glimpse of how big a fuss this may cause in the end.

kay

Hopefully, everyone realizes the visible oil on the top is MAJOR and a MAJOR disaster, but really minor compared to everything else involved here. I am generaly against doing things that can't be controlled when there is a problem anyway, but this just makes big oil exploration even LESS likely to be ramped up. And they claimed earlier that they had 5000BPD, Unless they sealed around the fitting, which is unlikely and would be FRONT PAGE NEWS, 1000BPD would be just the tiniest dent. MAYBE it would be ENOUGH of a dent to facilitate them using something to seal it though. They really have to do SOMETHING.

BTW I relatively recently took positions, so I didn't really realize. With the accounts I have been dealing most with, 1% of the holdings are in BP! 8-( It isn't doing very well. It is now well below its 200 day moving average. A competitor, I just recently took a position in, is still 10% ABOVE the 200 day moving average, and even above the 50 day.

So BP stock IS being depressed, more than its competitors. by something that likely happened within the past 20 days, and the current trend is DOWN. Hopefully, they are feeling it.

BTW the positions were through basically a mutual fund and recomendations that I just quickly checked to make sure they were reasonable at the time.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109066].message }}

NicheCowboy

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Matt-Marketing

The US must be off there rocker if they allow this to go ahead

BP should be made to clean 100% of the oil spill up
didnt they make a few billion Profit last year that
would be enough Ah!

Matt

Money should be the least of their concerns.

Justice Department needs to become involved. Any laws or regulations that were broken, those responsible should be sent to prison. Absolute criminial negligence.

If I am drinking and driving and kill someone, how is this different than these negligent acts by BP that have killed workers? Why is there a double standard? Why should they get off with a fine while the average Joe would go to prison?

BP's safety record looks like a drug dealers rap sheet...

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/0...-of-legal.html

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133601].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

BP CEO: Tony Hayward is the one that stated that this is just a tiny spill compared to the size of the ocean. MORON!

BP: FIRE TONY HAYWARD

BP ALSO REFUSES TO MEASURE HOW MUCH OIL IS FLOODING INTO THE OCEAN.
GEE, I WONDER WHY THEY REFUSE TO MEASURE THIS?

The govt is normally quick about fining compaines..I wonder why I have not heard about the govt fining BP for this disaster...I am sure when the fine comes along, they will do everything they can to get out of it, and appeals will go on for years to come, I know this because they want the govt to limit their liability and lawsuits...If our govt is smart, no more bailouts, and force BP to pay 100% of all damages/claims.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109725].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

BP CEO: Tony Hayward is the one that stated that this is just a tiny spill compared to the size of the ocean. MORON!

BP: FIRE TONY HAYWARD

BP ALSO REFUSES TO MEASURE HOW MUCH OIL IS FLOODING INTO THE OCEAN.
GEE, I WONDER WHY THEY REFUSE TO MEASURE THIS?

The govt is normally quick about fining compaines..I wonder why I have not heard about the govt fining BP for this disaster...I am sure when the fine comes along, they will do everything they can to get out of it, and appeals will go on for years to come, I know this because they want the govt to limit their liability and lawsuits...If our govt is smart, no more bailouts, and force BP to pay 100% of all damages/claims.

If I were the government, I would wait until the spill was cleaned up, or a year, depending on which came first. Why fine them $5billion, if it costs $10 billion? And, if the spill weren't cleaned up, I would make it known that it would be more of a TAX than a fine.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109858].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

There is more fishy about this spill than just what has been discussed here. I'm starting to think there was purposeful sabotage involved. I know that as much is being covered up as possible, and nothing seems to fit with normal procedures - nothing adds up from either the official or the conspiracy side of this one.

Tim - Poll - number one, most people don't realize there is more to this one than MSM is feeding them - two, so many polls are being so rigged now that they are becoming useless.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109827].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

There is more fishy about this spill than just what has been discussed here. I'm starting to think there was purposeful sabotage involved. I know that as much is being covered up as possible, and nothing seems to fit with normal procedures - nothing adds up from either the official or the conspiracy side of this one.

Tim - Poll - number one, most people don't realize there is more to this one than MSM is feeding them - two, so many polls are being so rigged now that they are becoming useless.

You can't poll ANYONE about ANYTHING in one place for a NATIONAL poll and claim it is valid! ALSO, you can NOT leave questions open to interpretation! For some reason, "pollsters" don't seem to understand that! So even most "honest" ones are just GUESSES at best!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109879].message }}

Fernando Veloso

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

There is more fishy about this spill than just what has been discussed here. I'm starting to think there was purposeful sabotage involved. I know that as much is being covered up as possible, and nothing seems to fit with normal procedures - nothing adds up from either the official or the conspiracy side of this one.

Sal:

halliburton BP deepwater - Pesquisa do Google

If this post is somewhat political, please Mods, delete it. I don't see any problem BUT...

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

People make good money selling to the rich. But the rich got rich selling to the masses.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117539].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso

Sal:

halliburton BP deepwater - Pesquisa do Google

If this post is somewhat political, please Mods, delete it. I don't see any problem BUT...

NOPE, they want to MAKE it political! APPARENTLY, HERE is what happened!

Transocean's part had a defect. That was exacerbated by some careless BP person pulling up the bore while the Transocean part was tested. The Transocean part BROKE! Haliburton performed an operation which apparently MIGHT have gone better had the Transocean part worked. There was an explosion, Transocean's part failed, and the gusher occured! Here is part of a description in the transocean biased report:

According to oil experts, the timing of the initial blast points to problems with cementing, typically one of the most troublesome parts of the drilling process.

Faults in the process have caused explosions in the past; over the past 14 years, 18 of 30 blowouts have been linked to cementing. Typically, a faulty cement plug at the bottom of the well or cement between the pipe and well walls that did not harden is to blame.

Last August, Halliburton was the cementer on a well in the Timor Sea that blew out and caused tens of thousands of barrels of oil to leak. "The initial likely cause of gas coming to the surface had something to do with the cement," Robert MacKenzie, managing director of energy and natural resources at FBR Capital Markets, told the Wall Street Journal.

So WHAT was Transocean's part supposed to do? Well, here is a somewhat BP biased report:

Transocean admits India BOP 'issues' - Upstream Online

HERE is the detail on the actual purpose:

Blowout preventer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The invention and use of BOPs were instrumental in the ending of oil gushers, which were dangerous and costly.

Sound familiar!?!?!? So transocean was the company that made the part everyone depended on! Want to be REALLY outraged? NEW NEWS!

Suit Accuses Transocean of Inflating Stock - ABC News

Transocean CEO Steven Newman is also named as a defendant. In an appearance before a U.S. Senate committee on May 11, Newman said the explosion was caused by a failure of drilling cementing, casing or perhaps both. He dismissed suggestions that the blowout preventer, or BOP, owned by Transocean may have been a cause.

The suit alleges that Transocean was aware of studies showing potential problems with BOPs. In addition, another BP project being drilled by Transocean in June 2000 was shut down for several months because of a problem with a BOP, the suit said.

Transocean also was issued citations in 2005 and 2006 by regulators in Great Britain for failing to maintain a BOP properly and for problems with testing BOPs, the suit alleges.

"Defendants failed to disclose the serious risks Transocean faced as a result of its ongoing utilization of deficient BOPs," the suit says. "Defendants also omitted to disclose that on numerous prior occasions, Transocean had been censured or otherwise disciplined for BOP failures and problems."

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117797].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

BP does not want people knowing how much oil is coming out of the well. BP is putting stuff on the water to make the oil sink so it can not be seen from the air, they also refuse to measure how much oil is coming out so not to let everyone else know...do you see a pattern from BP?

BP is disorting the actual facts by hiding stuff, so when damages come along, then they can say it isnt so, its not that bad, so if it does not look bad, then maybe they can limit their damages.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2109927].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

BP does not want people knowing how much oil is coming out of the well. BP is putting stuff on the water to make the oil sink so it can not be seen from the air, they also refuse to measure how much oil is coming out so not to let everyone else know...do you see a pattern from BP?

BP is disorting the actual facts by hiding stuff, so when damages come along, then they can say it isnt so, its not that bad, so if it does not look bad, then maybe they can limit their damages.

That might work out in the middle of nowhere, but they are SO close to an area some know like the backs of their hands, that they WILL be caught if they try to do that. Anyway, eveyone KNOWS it is bad, and every day makes it worse. And let's not get caught up with BP. Transocean is no saint either!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2110024].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Well, I'm not surprised to hear about screwed-up tests, or tests that
revealed problems and nothing was done about it. Although, if there
were serious issues discovered two weeks before the blowout, then two
weeks isn't enough to do anything. I do know that much from having
worked in maintenance all my life, until just recently, lol. I'm outta the
maintenance business for good it looks like. But that's my choice.

This is such a classic example of what I've seen so many times. There's
a potentially serious condition, but fixing it requires losing money and
costs a lot to repair. I could give you some juicy examples from the nuc
industry, but probably shouldn't so I won't.

I'm curious about the statement that it was sabotage. Nothing would
surprise me, anymore, absolutely nothing. Hell, I remember reading some
things that presented a compelling argument about TMI being a sabotage
op perpetrated by the oil industry. Think it's irrational to even suggest
that? Well, just one (large) oil company makes 100 M per day. I think that
offers a good enough reason to do something like that.

It all stanks.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2110022].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Well, I'm not surprised to hear about screwed-up tests, or tests that
revealed problems and nothing was done about it. Although, if there
were serious issues discovered two weeks before the blowout, then two
weeks isn't enough to do anything. I do know that much from having
worked in maintenance all my life, until just recently, lol. I'm outta the
maintenance business for good it looks like. But that's my choice.

This is such a classic example of what I've seen so many times. There's
a potentially serious condition, but fixing it requires losing money and
costs a lot to repair. I could give you some juicy examples from the nuc
industry, but probably shouldn't so I won't.

I'm curious about the statement that it was sabotage. Nothing would
surprise me, anymore, absolutely nothing. Hell, I remember reading some
things that presented a compelling argument about TMI being a sabotage
op perpetrated by the oil industry. Think it's irrational to even suggest
that? Well, just one (large) oil company makes 100 M per day. I think that
offers a good enough reason to do something like that.

It all stanks.

A LOT of the trouble with capping the leak is the pressure, from the well, no means of directing things, and visibility. Those weren't issues until AFTER the leak. 2 weeks THEN is like 2 months or maybe 2 YEARS now! ALSO, if they knew about the failure 2 weeks earlier, WHY did they decide to rely on it working properly? IT is like needing electronic nevigation on a plane, finding out 2 weeks before you leave that there is a problem, and deciding to leave without fixing it. You could die, just because you decided not to fix it.

Say it took them 10 months to fix it. They could have WAITED to celebrate and seal it, and could have delayed things until it was fixed. They could have GIVEN themselves an extra 10 months! They could have formulated plans, and gotten support, just in case. Heck, MYTH BUSTERS is better prepared! Once it blew, TIME'S UP!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2110055].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

A LOT of the trouble with capping the leak is the pressure, from the well, no means of directing things, and visibility. Those weren't issues until AFTER the leak. 2 weeks THEN is like 2 months or maybe 2 YEARS now! ALSO, if they knew about the failure 2 weeks earlier, WHY did they decide to rely on it working properly? IT is like needing electronic nevigation on a plane, finding out 2 weeks before you leave that there is a problem, and deciding to leave without fixing it. You could die, just because you decided not to fix it.

Say it took them 10 months to fix it. They could have WAITED to celebrate and seal it, and could have delayed things until it was fixed. They could have GIVEN themselves an extra 10 months! They could have formulated plans, and gotten support, just in case. Heck, MYTH BUSTERS is better prepared! Once it blew, TIME'S UP!

Steve

Just from my experience in the nuke plant, I would bet the engineers were still trying to
figure out the best way to approach this when it blew. There's engineering assessing and
evaluating, then coming up with a plan. Then the plan has to be approved. For a problem
like was explained above, approval of a plan would have to come from layers of management
above engineering.

Then actually planning the work, getting all the necessary parts in place, and possibly
needing to manufacture specialty parts, etc. Then getting all the specialists in place to
do the work, etc. Considering the working conditions... more planning, equipment, etc.

I've seen jobs, in the nuke plant, that were rehearsed for weeks before the job actually
happened. The conditions were such that maximum efficiency was needed in addition to
doing the repair properly. I took part in those several times, and it was weird. We were
going through it all, and there were engineers and all kinds of management in/out just
standing there watching us to make sure we knew what we were doing.

But yes, the issue of visibility. I was thinking about that earlier today. One thing's for
sure, they can't just let it bleed forever.

I was also thinking about how it could be fixed, or stopped. Of course it can be done. I
have no doubts about that. But it's gonna be extremely painful because it will take time
to implement. Obviously, things are gonna get a lot worse in the mean time.

They'll have to make something to stop it. Ideally, something that can be put into place
that will also allow for pressure release so they can get the damn thing on it. Then step
it down, close the orifice, until it's stopped. Or, provide a permanent means for diversion
into something that can still capture and use the oil. I mean an alternate piping pathway
to another platform perhaps.

They can't force a plug into it, I'm guessing. So the only thing to do is accomplish it with
incremental pressure relief. Unless of course they come up with something truly creative.

Another thing I was thinking about was the fact that there seems to have been no
existing contingency plan for this. I'm sure these people have thought about this possibility,
but it sounds to me like nothing existed, no contingency plan. There should have been some
kind of emergency response plan with something already built that could be brought in and
used.

One thing about the nuclear industry and the effects of TMI. The nuke industry has gotten
such a bad rap over the years. But I will tell you that every single possibility (but not for
every infinitely possible) disaster or an emergency has been covered. It's true. And it's
impressive because in very many ways the nuke industry has their stuff in one sock. But
they were forced to do it because of TMI.

The oil industry has not been forced, to my knowledge, as much as the nuke industry. Also,
I believe the overall management of nuclear power is much more socially responsible than
other energy industries.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2110152].message }}

Kurt 16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Just from my experience in the nuke plant.

...Which explains Ken's "other" left hand.
- Thanks
Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2110276].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Ken,

The nuclear industry has been LUCKY! They probably USUALLY have decent redundancy, watchful people, etc... But they DON'T have every single possibility covered. Suppose it got TOO hot, all the backup systems failed, etc... You could, at the very LEAST have a major meltdown and radiation exposure. Want proof? Two names... Chernobyl and three mile island! Some of that might be that people know what COULD happen with the biggest disaster.

As for Oil, some people make it CLEAR they have NO idea how bad things can be! We had the SAME thing happen HERE, in MA, that happened in that OIL well. If you think about it, it was the SAME thing! OK, it was WATER instead of oil! It may have been a lower pressure. But people went without water for DAYS! STORES had all their water sold at like $4 for a liter, or MORE! Restaurants CLOSED and some had to offer canned drinks instead of draft on mere RUMOR! But it took DAYS to get things restored! And that was when they KNEW where the problem was, had a way to cap it, etc.... OH YEAH, they could also work on it with ALL technology and effort at their disposal.

Crews race to fix break in Boston's water supply - TODAY Food and wine

So how much harder is it to work on a well under a mile of water, with a noxious substance, on unstable soil, etc...?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2110711].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Ken,

The nuclear industry has been LUCKY! They probably USUALLY have decent redundancy, watchful people, etc... But they DON'T have every single possibility covered. Suppose it got TOO hot, all the backup systems failed, etc... You could, at the very LEAST have a major meltdown and radiation exposure. Want proof? Two names... Chernobyl and three mile island! Some of that might be that people know what COULD happen with the biggest disaster.

I'll edit my post as soon as I'm done with this. I really didn't think
anyone would really think all the infinite possibilities are covered.
Sorry if I misled you, or anyone else.

Steve, I don't really need proof. I worked in one for almost 11 years.
I hope that lends me some credibility in your eyes. But if it doesn't,
that's ok too. lol.

Even if all power was lost, there are protection systems in place
that can accomplish the most important concern, and that's
keeping the core covered. I know this because I was there.

If you're trying to make the point that nothing horribly wrong could
never happen, it's not necessary. Anything made by humans will not
be perfect, and I was not trying to imply that nor would I ever imply
that.

But I will tell you that the odds of another TMI are extremely remote,
and the events that led to what happened at Chernobyl would never
happen in the US. I hope it's not necessary to get into details because
it's really not necessary, in my opinion.

Also, I strongly disagree with your statement that they've been lucky.
There's a great deal that luck has nothing to do with. And to say "usually"
has "decent" redundancy? There is always much more than decent
redundancy. I know because I worked on it. It's much more than decent.

I will also say this: Yes, there are groups of failures that impact the same
systems and cause the same types of failures. And for the 'types' of
failures that you would never want to have happen, yes Steve - they are
covered with contingency plans in place.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2111008].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

But I will tell you that the odds of another TMI are extremely remote,
and the events that led to what happened at Chernobyl would never
happen in the US. I hope it's not necessary to get into details because
it's really not necessary, in my opinion.

I wasn't disputing your experience, merely stating what could happen, etc... And YEAH, chernobyl isn't the BEST example. I know the US doesn't allow such reactors, and the US ones are better. STILL, there can be problems, and that is all I am saying.

Also, I strongly disagree with your statement that they've been lucky.
There's a great deal that luck has nothing to do with. And to say "usually"
has "decent" redundancy? There is always much more than decent
redundancy. I know because I worked on it. It's much more than decent.

Well, I have just seen too many OTHER redundant systems fail. Didn't that happen at three mile island?

I will also say this: Yes, there are groups of failures that impact the same
systems and cause the same types of failures. And for the 'types' of
failures that you would never want to have happen, yes Steve - they are
covered with contingency plans in place.

OK, I have seen all sorts of things go wrong, and all could be part of a nuclear power plant. I will admit that problems seem to be RARE! I WILL admit there is generally a fair amount of time to react. There are often many things that can be done. But still, nothing is perfect and, in such things, if someone says they have EVERYTHING covered, it may be best to RUN!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2111077].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

I don't remember what kind of reactor Chernobyl had. But I was only
referring to what caused it to happen, the root cause. They basically
were flying by the seat of their pants while running a series of power
tests. They were inducing power fluctuation tests while restricting
coolant flow - pretty sure that's what they were doing.

We all had to sit through a bunch of movies about all that stuff. It was
interesting, but it was a long time ago. But basically, the operators
at Chernobyl were extreme dumbasses that day. The fluctuations got
out of control. Wildly swinging, and the perturbations throughout the
rest of the plant couldn't keep up. They uncovered the core - end of
story. I saw the saddest movie about that. I wrote about it in a post
a long time ago when someone posted pictures of it and was talking
about it.

No, nothing is absolute. But nuke plants are much safer than people
realize. I wouldn't worry about them. Unless you want to.

Oh... TMI. I'm trying to remember this really excellent movie we saw
about TMI. Actually, all the redundancies in place now are the result of
what happened at TMI. There's a great deal engineered into nuke plants
that basically cover, sorry for that word lol, the types of failures that
happened at TMI.

I'm too lazy to google it. If I did I would remember it pretty well because
that movie was very detailed. What happened at TMI actually had
several contributing factors behind it. One thing was either a failure, or
an 'out of service' type of over-pressure device that the control room
operator didn't know about. Sounds crazy, but things were different
back then. There were other things. It really was like all the planets
kind of lined up day. lol. Terrible way to put it. I guess anything's possible,
but they really do have redundancy for the redundancy for the...

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2111117].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Everything on every major system is breaking down. The govt doesnt care because it costs to much to fix everything, so why should BP be any different? Our roads, plants/refinaries, sewer, electric, dams...they are all past their prime...this is why they call it patch and pray...I seriously do not think any of our major systems will last another 50 years...no way in hell...everything is out-of-date, and nobody wants to flip to money either to fix EVERYTHING or REPLACE everything...

Since greed is the factor, then I would not be surprised if there is another oil rig or two just on the loom of disaster...and would not be surprised if another one sank in the next 5 years or so...I bet you can go into any land refinary, or oil platform and find all sorts of violations... its all about the almightly dollar...

oh no, another refinary blew in TX...

why am i not surprised...

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2111178].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Actually there is another rig at risk - the Atlantis, also in the Gulf. Warnings were first issued months ago by a whistle blower who told of the cost cutting and risks being taken - nothing has been done.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely - and greed has destroyed more civilizations than any natural disasters.

The oil is beginning to show up on shores just west of here and some of the wetlands in Louisiana are contaminated with it now.

The outcry will get louder when the loop current takes this oil through the keys and up the east coast. It doesn't look like that can be prevented now.

...and still BP is running the show and other scientists and engineers are kept out.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2111551].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Apparently, BP was earlier held to task for poor maintenance, etc... I wonder if they realize that the SLIGHTEST imperfection or weakness can be used, by the pressure and debris, to RIP a hole in whatever! It is like those bags with a little cut. The bag may be something one couldn't rip with 200lbs of pressure, but the tinniest little cut and a 2year old little girl who is WEAK with hunger could rip through it BY ACCIDENT!

HECK, that basically happened with my aorta. Withstanding as much as about 200lbs of pressure my whole life(DECADES), and a tiny little cut, and the whole thing rips in SECONDS! There is another little weakness that is threatening to grow. If it bursts, I'M DEAD! WHY? Because all the pressure will be released at once, and my chest would be filled with a pool of blood, JUST like what is happening with that rig, and the gulf!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2112290].message }}

sarahberra

16 years ago

What?? Wall street fuels the economy and the gov is trying to take over that as well. (Who really is greedy) If the govt continues to spend trillions of dollars that will crash our economy -not wall street executives. Also keep in mind that not everyone with money is greedy etc. There are plenty of really good hard working people with a lot of money and they help out those who are unfortunate and take care of their own families. There are also a lot of really poor people who are ****ty human beings- who steal from welfare, suck the system dry and do drugs. Not everyone on welfare does this, but a person's character is based on their choices and decisions in life. Stop listening to the media and start educating yourself. I am so tired of farmers and small business people being bullied because they want to take care of their families. Yes there are greedy executives, but there are also really greedy poor people who are just too lazy to lift a finger. They think everyone owes them.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Affordable Health Insurance

Click here for a: Fast Cure for Any Type of Flu Virus!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2112369].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

What is your point? That poor people are running BP? That the oil spill isn't a prime example of greed outstripping common sense?

What happened is due to a huge corporation that was supposed to be meeting certain requirements and getting certain permits - and didn't. Instead they were allowed by the very govt agencies supposed to oversee the drilling - to put profit above safety and take risks that should never have been taken.

The govt has no clue what to do because they've been letting companies like BP do whatever they wanted for years. Now there will be a "commission" to "look into the problem". And no one wants to admit THEY have allowed the oil companies to run the regulations and pay off the regulators.

Too friggin little - and too damned late.
- [ 5 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2112444].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

BP CEO Tony Hayward said the oil damage will be modest....I wonder
if he can spell the word I-D-I-O-T!

really?

If he was on a shore line, out of work with a fishing pole,
then I guess he would not be saying that.

BP has also refused to let others come in and measure
the flow of oil that is gushing into the gulf.

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2113501].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

The reason for the somewhat indulgent approach of the government is that both parties Democrat and Republican want to increase drilling for oil. Obama want's to increase drilling; Palin want's to increase drilling, even to include a wildlife reserve in Alaska.

BP is only doing what the politicians want it to do, albeit willingly and making a good money as they do it.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2113825].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

The reason for the somewhat indulgent approach of the government is that both parties Democrat and Republican want to increase drilling for oil. Obama want's to increase drilling; Palin want's to increase drilling, even to include a wildlife reserve in Alaska.

BP is only doing what the politicians want it to do, albeit willingly and making a good money as they do it.

Well yes, of course. If there was no demand for oil, BP would have to sell something else.
But none of those points are the point.

All of those goals can be accomplished in a manner that is responsible to not only society
but to the environment. I believe that's the point, in addition to others.

But it's a tired song watching the same things happen over and over again.

Corporate heads pay more heed to stock prices, bonuses, gold-plated toilet handles, and
whatever else more than they do to anything else. Everything else - the environment,
safety - only get lip service.

What those people always fail to get, and I've seen it hundreds of times in my life, is if they
do things the right way - they will profit more in the long term. It's really incredibly simple.
But they are always myopic in their approach and perspective on these matters.

Take care of the damn equipment, do things right - and it will last longer, break less often,
prevent catastophes just like we're seeing now, and they'll make more money. Think of all the
profits that are pissing into the water, right now as I write this. Think of all the money that
will spent on cleaning up. The law suits, bad image (not that they really care about that.),
etc.

But, they'll have NO problems passing on the costs of their arrogance, incompetence, and
stupid mistakes onto US. Right? Right? Yes... that's right.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2113896].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

A new question is being asked here this week.

When there was a large oil spill in the mideast, the oil company immediately brought in tankers that basically vacuumed the surface oil and water which greatly limited the damage of the spill.

Not happening here - why not? Because the tankers are more profitable hauling oil than saving the environment? And because in the US, the oil companies call the shots.

I have reduced my own gasoline consumption by 50% in the past year - even though I still drive an SUV (it suits my lifestyle and needs).

I know I will never as long as I live buy gas from BP again - I'll walk first.

kay

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2116942].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

A new question is being asked here this week.

When there was a large oil spill in the mideast, the oil company immediately brought in tankers that basically vacuumed the surface oil and water which greatly limited the damage of the spill.

Not happening here - why not? Because the tankers are more profitable hauling oil than saving the environment? And because in the US, the oil companies call the shots.

I have reduced my own gasoline consumption by 50% in the past year - even though I still drive an SUV (it suits my lifestyle and needs).

I know I will never as long as I live buy gas from BP again - I'll walk first.

kay

MOST oil eventually gets water in it, so water isn't really meaningful from a refining standpoint. If not for the fact that vacuuming wouldn't really solve anything in the scheme of things, I would wonder the same. An actual SPILL is limited, and they could vacuum it up. The water will separate, they can return it, and end up not only cleaning the spill, but recover the oil. It is win/win. HERE, they use the term spill, but that is really kind of silly. It is a GUSHER! SURE they could vacuum up SOME, but all the rest goes all over, etc.... BP will look like they are merely trying to save the oil, and it may be basically lose/lose.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117052].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

"I know I will never as long as I live buy gas from BP again - I'll walk first."

BP is not going to care if you walk, there are many others that will not walk

and if you fall along the roadside, do you think that BP truck is going to
stop and help you up? hell no, he is going to the next gas station so
others do not have to walk

These big and powerful compaines do not
care about us, as they have plenty of others that will do business with them.

and most will get gas out of convinence, they are not going to go 5 miles
out of the way to a non-bp station if there is a bp station right in front of them.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117060].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

"I know I will never as long as I live buy gas from BP again - I'll walk first."

BP is not going to care if you walk, there are many others that will not walk

and if you fall along the roadside, do you think that BP truck is going to
stop and help you up? hell no, he is going to the next gas station so
others do not have to walk

These big and powerful compaines do not
care about us, as they have plenty of others that will do business with them.

and most will get gas out of convinence, they are not going to go 5 miles
out of the way to a non-bp station if there is a bp station right in front of them.

And that is a crying shame.

Most people won't have to go 5 miles to find another gas station.

The American public should be in the mood to punish BP.

I bet a concerted effort would easily & permanently cut their retail gas station sales by 20-50% in weeks.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117147].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Well, where I live now, they DO have BP stations. Luckily, most of the closer ones are AMERICAN! I'll buy THERE, at the american companies! I also won't buy any more of their stock, if I can avoid it.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117466].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

yawn. lol.

scary part? the world's full of this stuff that no one knows about. (yet) doh!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117894].message }}

ThomM 16 years ago

So now tar balls are showing up on Key West beaches and they think they may be from a passing ship:confused:
Plus on the news they quoted a BP exec. as saying the environmental impact would be very, very, mild:confused::confused::confused:
- Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117915].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Fox news just reported that one professor upped his estimate to 100,000barrels/day. They said that would mean it is already 4 times as bad as the exxon valdez disaster. Louisiana is seeing symptoms of the disaster. Oil in the marshes, dead animals, and other animals are running inland like there is some approaching storm.

They don't think this will EVER come back.

At least some animals have the ability and knowledge, to get away. Hopefully they won't be hurt.

BP paid florida to run a "tourism campaign"(Read help in a conspiracy to shift bome blame away from BP, at the possible expense of florida and travelers). Again, the news anchor said it MIGHT be clean, for the next 3 days at least.

ALSO, it looks like this may hit CUBA!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118380].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

I have a new marketing slogan for BP:

"Spill baby spill!"

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118436].message }}

Fernando Veloso

16 years ago

Ok, so far I got this:

Someone screw up.
Oil is spilling fast and furious.
They can't stop it.

Right?

OK, here's the bad news: If the guy that screw up can't stop this mess NOW, the oil will reach Atlantic Ocean.

All marine life DEAD in a matter of weeks (imagine the implications to world ecosystems) , all fishing prohibited (fishing industry dead in a couple weeks), oilly shores all over Europe, Africa and Atlantic Islands (dead tourism)...

Can you say "we're in deep trouble?"

Thanks

Signature

People make good money selling to the rich. But the rich got rich selling to the masses.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119770].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP PR dude called the spill an...

"industrial accident"

On TV today.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121450].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

BP PR dude called the spill an...

"industrial accident"

On TV today.

TL

YEP, a nuclear explosion at a bomb making plant would ALSO be an industrial accident. OOPS! That doesn't make it ANY better! BP could have removed SO much of the bad press, etc... by telling the TRUTH! The TRUTH is that they are not 100% to blame. They might have like 60% of the blame, maybe less. That is STILL not great, but certainly better than 100%. Alas, they seem to just WANT to look bad. Oh well, it is too late now!

As for the REST of the blame? One company has ALREADY had plenty of bad press, and the OTHER made such an accident FAR more likely. BP is guilty only of bad planning, poor support, having managerial control over the rig, not INSISTING that the BOP get repaired, and the careless act that made the BOP WORSE! Haliburton, likewise, should have INSISTED that the BOP be FIXED! A problem like they had, has happened almost 20 times(IIRC)! The BOP was what limited the impact.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121523].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

YEP, a nuclear explosion at a bomb making plant would ALSO be an industrial accident. OOPS! That doesn't make it ANY better! BP could have removed SO much of the bad press, etc... by telling the TRUTH! The TRUTH is that they are not 100% to blame. They might have like 60% of the blame, maybe less. That is STILL not great, but certainly better than 100%. Alas, they seem to just WANT to look bad. Oh well, it is too late now!

As for the REST of the blame? One company has ALREADY had plenty of bad press, and the OTHER made such an accident FAR more likely. BP is guilty only of bad planning, poor support, having managerial control over the rig, not INSISTING that the BOP get repaired, and the careless act that made the BOP WORSE! Haliburton, likewise, should have INSISTED that the BOP be FIXED! A problem like they had, has happened almost 20 times(IIRC)! The BOP was what limited the impact.

Steve

The truth is, if it was their rig that exploded they are 100% to blame.
It's like one of our better presidents said years ago "The buck stops here".
Work or equipment provided by other companies may have failed, but in the end it was and is BP's responsibility to over see and sign off on whatever happens on their rig.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121576].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

The truth is, if it was their rig that exploded they are 100% to blame.
It's like one of our better presidents said years ago "The buck stops here".
Work or equipment provided by other companies may have failed, but in the end it was and is BP's responsibility to over see and sign off on whatever happens on their rig.

I agree with that 100% - now if they had contacted another
company to fix the problems, and they failed to fix them,
then I could see them blaming another party...

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121586].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

I agree with that 100% - now if they had contacted another
company to fix the problems, and they failed to fix them,
then I could see them blaming another party...

They DID contact another party to fix the problems! TRANSOCEAN! The WHOLE idea of the BOP is to PREVENT and act as a safety to limit and PREVENT the blow out that happened!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121627].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

I agree with that 100% - now if they had contacted another
company to fix the problems, and they failed to fix them,
then I could see them blaming another party...

Nope still their fault

I've owned my own landscape business and ran the physical side of a few apartment complexes to name a couple of things. If a problem came up on my watch that required an outside contractor, it was my job to oversee whatever they where doing and be 100% sure the job was done right or it was my head.

If BP hired or contracted the repairs to another company it is still BP's total responsibility to oversee and approve the work.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121629].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Nope still their fault

I've owned my own landscape business and ran the physical side of a few apartment complexes to name a couple of things. If a problem came up on my watch that required an outside contractor, it was my job to oversee whatever they where doing and be 100% sure the job was done right or it was my head.

If BP hired or contracted the repairs to another company it is still BP's total responsibility to oversee and approve the work.

only if it was an easy and shut case like that...lets say BP contacted
a contractor to fix these problems prior to the explosion, and it did not
get done, some of that liability could go toward the contractor for
not fixing the repairs, boom, rig sinks...did the contractor not do
the work, were they aware of the massive problems that resulted
in the rigs explosion? This is why they are playing the blame game.

If it was an open and shut case, then the govt would just come out and say BP gets 100% of the blame, this is why they are investigating this on who is going to get blame, of course, I suspect that BP will get most of
the blame if not all of it, otherwise, they would not be investigating on who is going to get the blame...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121681].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

only if it was an easy and shut case like that...lets say BP contacted
a contractor to fix these problems prior to the explosion, and it did not
get done, some of that liability could go toward the contractor for
not fixing the repairs, boom, rig sinks...did the contractor not do
the work, were they aware of the massive problems that resulted
in the rigs explosion? This is why they are playing the blame game.

If it was an open and shut case, then the govt would just come out and say BP gets 100% of the blame, this is why they are investigating this on who is going to get blame, of course, I suspect that BP will get most of
the blame if not all of it, otherwise, they would not be investigating on who is going to get the blame...

Tho some of the problem may be because of contractor work, in the end it still falls on the owner. If the contractors where on schedule then they have no blame at all. If they are behind schedule it still falls on BP to find out why and get back on schedule. If the contractors didn't get something done, BP should of been well aware of it.
Now I'm not saying BP shouldn't go after any contractors they used that didn't complete their contract in an excepted way. But it still all falls on BP for hiring the contractors and approving any of their work.

Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2122029].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

The truth is, if it was their rig that exploded they are 100% to blame.
It's like one of our better presidents said years ago "The buck stops here".
Work or equipment provided by other companies may have failed, but in the end it was and is BP's responsibility to over see and sign off on whatever happens on their rig.

You're RIGHT! I just hope that transocean gets enough blame that THEY ALSO pay! As for haliburton, it looks like they are the LEAST culpable. But you are certainly right! As I said, they are BAD, they should have handled things better, and SHOULD pay! I would just like to see transocean pay ALSO! Not INSTEAD, but in ADDITION TO!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121619].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Why is nobody reporting that it was BP that was behind the Valdez spill.....is it because the world population would want the heads of the people who allowed them to do it again?

The Oil is about to hit the current loop. Stock up on tuna - it might be the last ocean fish you ever eat.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121537].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Why is nobody reporting that it was BP that was behind the Valdez spill.....is it because the world population would want the heads of the people who allowed them to do it again?

The Oil is about to hit the current loop. Stock up on tuna - it might be the last ocean fish you ever eat.

The valdez was EXXONS deal! Are you saying BP had something to do with THAT also!?!?!? Things are clouded, because the BP disaster is SO huge, nobody has anything to compare it to. The best they can do is compare it to the valdez. The valdez was almost like water draining from a swimming pool. BAD, but NOTHING compared to the BP gusher that is like a broken water main. Of course, even THAT doesn't describe it adequately.

How's this? Based on the latest estimates, compared to what I remember the earlier ones being, that ONE gusher puts out enough oil to provide for almost 1% of the oil in the US!

US 20,680,000 bbl/day (2007 figure)
HIGH est: 200,000 bbl/day

BTW Sobering thought. #2 on this list was listed as the #3 consumer, CHINA at 7,578,000 bbl/day!
Saudi arabia is 10th at 2,311,000 bbl/day!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121639].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

If I had known this thread would be popular,
then I would have offered BP stock at rock bottom prices

Join the BP business opportunity matrix...
"We spill the oil, you pay for the cleanup"
Guarnteed! and you will not get a refund.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121551].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Yes - Exxon was dealing with BP on that as well.

There are also scientists who are now saying that this spill, if not stopped very soon will lead to the extermination of large human populations. So what are reporters and politicians going to say? "Sorry we just killed so many of your population by allowing the use of a company that caused a major problem before when we knew damned well a mistake on this one would be catastrophic, but hey - they were cheap and I got large personal assets for hiring them." At this point of time the only thing they CAN do is downplay what is in store because people ARE going to panic when they figure it out and it would be just as well they panic in small groups at this point.

Another thing I have mentioned before, is that those oil caverns appear to be connected to the Mexican oil source cavities. Yet I have heard absolute squat from anyone about what they are saying about all this - and I'm sure that they aren't silent.

I just think there is so much more going on than you or I will ever hear.

A lot of hilarious crap going on. I wonder who's going to suck on the murder charges? Yeah, I know.........what murder charges. When people allowed corporations and their controllers to become as large as they have become, it was tantamount to allowing raptors, gorgons, and Tyrannosauruses to be recreated, over-populate, and over-run the earth. You build unstoppable predators, and sooner or later you get eaten.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2121726].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Yes - Exxon was dealing with BP on that as well.

There are also scientists who are now saying that this spill, if not stopped very soon will lead to the extermination of large human populations. So what are reporters and politicians going to say? "Sorry we just killed so many of your population by allowing the use of a company that caused a major problem before when we knew damned well a mistake on this one would be catastrophic, but hey - they were cheap and I got large personal assets for hiring them." At this point of time the only thing they CAN do is downplay what is in store because people ARE going to panic when they figure it out and it would be just as well they panic in small groups at this point.

Another thing I have mentioned before, is that those oil caverns appear to be connected to the Mexican oil source cavities. Yet I have heard absolute squat from anyone about what they are saying about all this - and I'm sure that they aren't silent.

I just think there is so much more going on than you or I will ever hear.

A lot of hilarious crap going on. I wonder who's going to suck on the murder charges? Yeah, I know.........what murder charges. When people allowed corporations and their controllers to become as large as they have become, it was tantamount to allowing raptors, gorgons, and Tyrannosauruses to be recreated, over-populate, and over-run the earth. You build unstoppable predators, and sooner or later you get eaten.

The extinction is NOT far fetched! Like I said, we were on the beginning of stage 3 of perhaps 6. Well, it looks like stage 6 has ALREADY started around louisiana! NOT ONLY is it

1. affecting the top, which looks ugly, blocks out light, affects water foul, insects, some mammals, some reptiles, amphibians, etc.....

2. affecting the oxygen level which will end up affecting ALL other water creatures.

3. affecting the bottom, which will affect scavengers, eggs, some young, etc....

BUT, it is NOW....

4. Affecting the coasts which affects many other reptiles, amphibians, mammals, and insects.

5. Hurting some plants and animals that live in that habitat.

In louisiana, they are saying that species have ALREADY died out.

Frankly, if this were to cover the whole ocean, basically all life in the oceans would CEASE! Imagine the migratory creatures! THEY may disappear. And what if the oil just kept gushing? It is unlikely, but what if? And could noxious byproducts invade water supplies?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2122551].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

The extinction is NOT far fetched! Like I said, we were on the beginning of stage 3 of perhaps 6. Well, it looks like stage 6 has ALREADY started around louisiana! NOT ONLY is it

1. affecting the top, which looks ugly, blocks out light, affects water foul, insects, some mammals, some reptiles, amphibians, etc.....

2. affecting the oxygen level which will end up affecting ALL other water creatures.

3. affecting the bottom, which will affect scavengers, eggs, some young, etc....

BUT, it is NOW....

4. Affecting the coasts which affects many other reptiles, amphibians, mammals, and insects.

5. Hurting some plants and animals that live in that habitat.

In louisiana, they are saying that species have ALREADY died out.

Frankly, if this were to cover the whole ocean, basically all life in the oceans would CEASE! Imagine the migratory creatures! THEY may disappear. And what if the oil just kept gushing? It is unlikely, but what if? And could noxious byproducts invade water supplies?

Steve

Yes - that's the general scenario, and why they are keeping so muffled, I believe. Unless they stop that flow and do it soon, there's a lot of this planet that is going to be purely FUBAR.

The climate is getting colder and we have 6.75 bil to feed and are killing off food sources. The chain reaction is going to be devastating - the cold will also mean floods and crop-killing cold snaps. With around 33 countries which have surviving populations purely because of financial aid right now it could get extremely ugly very fast. There will be a lot of immigration/emigration - but where are these populations going to go without hurting their host? Everyone is already stretched beyond carrying capacity already.

I would like to hear a very non-censored version of this one in "investigation" as if we could trust them to do a completely above-board investigation. A LOT of money is going to change hands on this one....but I wonder if they are bringing the last spill into it? There was quite a rumble over whose fault it was last time. I'm almost certain that one has been sealed and buried but some will remember or know what newspapers or old magazines still have archives.

In the long run though - if they don't get it plugged and plugged real fast - it's not going to matter one rat's patoot who's fault it was because we'll be too busy dealing with the aftermath to take time to point.

I don't swallow that there was a lapse in inspection and reporting either - I think this was pure purposeful sabotage by idiots who did not realize exactly how devastating to the whole world this action might be. Even BP knew the size of what they were dealing with this time and already experienced the one spill. I don't think they had anything to do with it - - even money can't bend common sense THAT far.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2123091].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I don't think they had anything to do with it - - even money can't bend common sense THAT far.

OH, it is SHOCKING how much destruction has been caused for MONEY! HECK, WWII basically started over it. I could say FAR more, but that would be.....

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2124516].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Well that's true, Steve - a lot of death and destruction goes on for greed. But this still boggles the mind - pm coming. I can't give my points here.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2124776].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

The crude has finally reached Louisiana marshes and is coating everything in sight. Mississippi has been lucky so far as the oil has moved south and we've had only dead turtles, dead dolphins, some distressed birds and a few tar balls. That could change any time and we know it.

Hurricane season starts on June 1 - the conditions in the water this year are the same as we had in 2005 (katrina). If the oil isn't cleaned up by August when hurricanes are most likely to be in the Gulf - the oil could be carried miles inland.

The sheen reached the loop current early yesterday and it looks like some of the crude will also catch that current. That takes it to Miami - the keys - and up the east coast.

YESTERDAY - bp admitted for the first time that the leak is much larger than they've been telling the public. An oceanographer now estimates what has leaked to far is the equivalent of SEVERAL Valdez spills.

The tube they inserted is siphoning of 5k barrels a day - which is what they were saying was the total leak.....but what is still leaking is many times 5k a day. The actual leak is now being estimated as high as 100k barrels a day. BP will not allow scientists in to measure it.

Next try is to use the junk shot, then mud, then heavy cement to try to close the leak. This could turn the leak into a gusher if the pipe damaged by the sinking platform (which did not disengage as it should have) cannot carry the load of mud.

NOAA should be leading this along with the EPA. Until yesterday, the EPA has bowed to BP and allowed them to use chemical dispersants that are known to be highly toxic. There are tons of less toxic dispersants sitting in Texas unused - they were ordered by BP initially after the spill and not used.

In several countries of the world (japan, for example) there are mini-subs designed to do repair work at one mile depths. The US doesn't have such subs because we wouldn't spend the money to develop them.

Oceanographers and scientists who might be able to find some solution are not being allowed in the area - the coast guard seems to be limited to being a liaison with the states for the most part.

BP promised 25 mill to LA, MS and AL to help them fight the encroaching oil but has not paid those amounts.

YESTERDAY, D.C. finally issued a demand for information. Only been a month or so - glad someone noticed this is a crisis, not a regional problem.
WHY did the govt take notice? Because of the 60 minutes interview that aired Sunday. The secrets came out - finally.

The truth is, if it was their rig that exploded they are 100% to blame.

BP ignored the advice of TransOcean when changing from exploratory well to producing well. They wanted to get the oil flowing faster - they ignored damaged that occurred to the fittings near the ocean floor (human error caused damaged to the sleeve 2 weeks before - not repaired).

BP was told by transocean that all three of the cement "sleeves" needed to be installed completely before removed the drilling mud. BP was in a hurry and argued with TO and took charge - pumping out the drilling mud after only two of the sleeves were installed. They were told it was dangerous - they went ahead because they had a group of bigwigs on the platform for a celebration of the drilling success and their "safety" record.

BP took over and did the changeover their way - ignoring TO's advice - and it blew up. The problem isn't only the one mile depth - but the fact that this was the deepest well drilled below the ocean floor. They don't know how much is there or what that oil field is connected to - or what the pressure is if the rest of the pipe gives way. This is a frightening scenario and the damage will be catastrophic no matter where the majority of the oil goes.

Bobby Jindal in Louisiana is ticked off - and not shy about saying so.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2124889].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Russia has used nukes in cases like this and have had extreme success with them. They also move fast so when accidents happen they are stopped almost immediately. The fact that scientists weren't allowed in there just reeks of something else going on than just BP. The catastrophe wasn't contained to their own area and there was no damned way that they should have had any say in keeping anyone out that needed to be there to measure or repair that was sent in.

As far as the amount of the leak -- it's been discussed by scientists already, but MSM didn't and gov officials lied their faces off so people think nobody knew. They knew. It was just kept quiet as possible. Once those plumes hit the loop it became a waste of time to try to cover it up any more.

My question is why after a whole month this isn't fixed when Russia is able to fix their accidents over-night?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2125007].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Russia has used nukes in cases like this and have had extreme success with them. They also move fast so when accidents happen they are stopped almost immediately. ...

My question is why after a whole month this isn't fixed when Russia is able to fix their accidents over-night?

You are actually advocating using NUKES!?!?!? YIKES! If this were another country, and the spill were bigger, and the bomb more reliable, MAYBE, but wouldn't the US get upset and consider it an ACT OF WAR!?!?? To use it on your OWN land, is INSANE!

Russia historically hasn't been that careful OR honest, and they certainly haven't taken care of things quickly.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2125363].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Someone told me that Russia used nukes to stop oil leaks. From what I have heard they haven't done this since the 60s. Not sure, but using nukes to stop an oil leak seems pretty risky for several reasons.

Originally Posted by HeySal

Russia has used nukes in cases like this and have had extreme success with them. They also move fast so when accidents happen they are stopped almost immediately. The fact that scientists weren't allowed in there just reeks of something else going on than just BP. The catastrophe wasn't contained to their own area and there was no damned way that they should have had any say in keeping anyone out that needed to be there to measure or repair that was sent in.

As far as the amount of the leak -- it's been discussed by scientists already, but MSM didn't and gov officials lied their faces off so people think nobody knew. They knew. It was just kept quiet as possible. Once those plumes hit the loop it became a waste of time to try to cover it up any more.

My question is why after a whole month this isn't fixed when Russia is able to fix their accidents over-night?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2125376].message }}

Lawrh

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Someone told me that Russia used nukes to stop oil leaks. From what I have heard they haven't done this since the 60s. Not sure, but using nukes to stop an oil leak seems pretty risky for several reasons.

The Soviets used nukes for a lot of things in the 50s and 60s. Even blasting out salt mines. The result is that many areas of the former Soviet Union are so badly irradiated that no human can live anywhere near. The Politburo demonstrated that no matter what the ideology, politicians can be profoundly stupid.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

â€œStrategy without action is a day-dream; action without strategy is a nightmare.â€ â€“ Old Japanese proverb -

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2125435].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Lawrh

The Soviets used nukes for a lot of things in the 50s and 60s. Even blasting out salt mines. The result is that many areas of the former Soviet Union are so badly irradiated that no human can live anywhere near. The Politburo demonstrated that no matter what the ideology, politicians can be profoundly stupid.

It is IRONIC that the US iodizes salt, presumably to help provide iodine and help the thyroid. MEANWHILE, according to lawrh, russia uses nukes to mine salt that, so iradiated, has the OPPOSITE effect!!!!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2125458].message }}

Lawrh 16 years ago

The salt mines that got blasted were for the creation of toxic waste dumps, not mining.

I got my dates wrong in my last post. The Soviet program went from 1965 to 1989. There were 115 blasts. Here's a link that describes the program and lists the blasts.

Nuclear Explosions for the National Economy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Thanks
Signature

â€œStrategy without action is a day-dream; action without strategy is a nightmare.â€ â€“ Old Japanese proverb -
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2125509].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

... Not sure, but using nukes to stop an oil leak seems pretty risky for several reasons.

If nukes don't work in stopping the leak, we'll at least have lots of free fish floating in the Gulf. Ready to eat freshly nuked: dolphins, black sea bass, flounder, mackeral, snapper, barracuda, and other surprises. Maybe even some sea turtles and fried in the sky poultry. Yum!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132319].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Using nukes - or any bombs is nuts to me. The effect could opening the entire oil field. The oil is under extreme pressure - a bomb could easily open a hole to allow more oil to escape. Don't even mention the radioactivity....

The "hair" idea has also been debunked - because it doesn't work.

Junk shot and mud is next. If that doesn't work the leak may continue for two more months (at least) until the other emergency wells are drilled. At least that's what BP is saying here at the moment.

kay

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132341].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Using nukes - or any bombs is nuts to me. The effect could opening the entire oil field. The oil is under extreme pressure - a bomb could easily open a hole to allow more oil to escape. Don't even mention the radioactivity....

The "hair" idea has also been debunked - because it doesn't work.

Junk shot and mud is next. If that doesn't work the leak may continue for two more months (at least) until the other emergency wells are drilled. At least that's what BP is saying here at the moment.

kay

I agree it's scary...It's almost like they're trying to make 2012 come true by starting a chain of events now.

If they do try a bomb, I'm guessing they'll also consider the MOAB which is the most powerful, non-nuclear bomb...This is one of those thing were they better be 110% sure before they go experimenting with nukes.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132369].message }}

myob 16 years ago

Try this experiment: Stop a garden sprinkler leak by tossing a hand grenade on it. The physics principle still applies at 5,000 feet under water with oil pressure at 15,000psi.
- [ 3 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132449].message }}

Dave Patterson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

The "hair" idea has also been debunked - because it doesn't work.

This won't STOP the leak but....stand back and let a couple of good 'ol boys show the geniuses how to clean up their mess....

YouTube - CWRoberts Presentation 2.wmv

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Professional Googler

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132470].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Dave Patterson

This won't STOP the leak but....stand back and let a couple of good 'ol boys show the geniuses how to clean up their mess....

YouTube - CWRoberts Presentation 2.wmv

Burning for energy sounds GREAT, until you realize this is CRUDE oil! It has a LOT of contaminants, and burning it could be almost as bad as burning TIRES! and if we are going to have a skimmer, why not do it NOW!?!?!?

ALSO, crude oil has a lot of noxious stuff hay won't pick up. They are using purer oil.

It's times like this I wish I had a ship. You could have 2 pumps. have one connected to a small sealed container with just THREE entry points, ONE would be close to the bottom, and go to the pump that would have an outlet into the air above the ocean. A second would be in the ocean starting JUST BELOW the oil, and go to a point near the top of the sealed container. The third would be on the bottom of that sealed container and have a line going to just above where the outlet is. That could go to a much larger container. A switch could be driven by the conductivity of the water to turn the outlet, to the ocean, pump off, and the one from the ocean on. once the water has dropped below the outlet, to the larger tank.

Would it plug the leak? NOPE! But what it COULD do is get a LOT of the oil. Nearly all of the liquid going to the large tank would be oil, and all of the liquid going back to the ocean would be anything but. IMAGINE! If you could collect even 1000 gallons in a day, you could maybe finance a fleet of such boats to go out and clean up 10s of thousands of gallons a day, and Maybe use some of the money to lobby to shut the stupid thing down.

I figure if we are going to give ideas as to cleanup, and speak of skimmers, etc... I might as well put a simple idea out that will work. It is SIMPLE! Water constantly comes in, contaminated with oil. Oil floats to the top. EVENTUALLY, it goes above the outlet and the oil drops down to the tanker area. JUST before water is about to go through that pipe, the input stops, and the output pump pumps it out. It falls to a certain point, the output stops, and the input pump turns on, and the whole cycle repeats. It will basically act like a cross between a vacum cleaner and a skimmer.

As for plugging up the hole, I don't even want to replace the lights on my living room, and stairway ceiling. They are over 12 feet in the air, etc... I certainly don't want to go in space, etc... I would be fine in a sub, but in the murky darkness, trying to manuver like that, etc? NO THANKS!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132638].message }}

myob 16 years ago

Tourists now are all covered with "oil" in Destin, FL.

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...check-out.html
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133099].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Tim - Nukes have worked for their leaks - 5 or 6 times. Of course, we aren't talking about Mushroom clouds over the country - smaller ones on the range of dynamite. I'm sure there are some risks.....but at the rate that stuff is being pumped into the water, and considering the size of the caverns, if they can't get their butts in gear and get something to work real fast, I'm thinking that nukes would be a very much lesser of two evils. I'm trying to find some stats now and afraid when I find them I'm going to need a clear runway to the porcelain. This is making me sick fast.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2130711].message }}

Lawrh 16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Tim - Nukes have worked for their leaks - 5 or 6 times.

Sal, they used nukes 5 times to seal leaks. None of the leaks were oil, they were high pressure natural gas leaks. As per the link in my last post the average non military blast was 12.5 kilotons. To put out a gas well that had been blowing out for three years they used a 30 kiloton bomb, for another high pressure blow out they used a 47 kiloton bomb.

30 kiloton and 47 kiloton. Hiroshima was 13 kilotons and Nagasaki was 21. We are talking big booms. Yes, mushroom clouds.

The concept of using nukes is compelling as a last resort, but there has been no previous use of bombs smaller than Hiroshima for sealing gas wells and no use ever for sealing oil wells.
- Thanks
Signature

â€œStrategy without action is a day-dream; action without strategy is a nightmare.â€ â€“ Old Japanese proverb -
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2130783].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Interesting Lawrence - I didn't go into the research that far - just knew that underwater nukes had worked and that Russia has suggested it for this one. I pretty much trust their scientists actually. I'm thinking that at the pressure of a mile of water that size of a blast would be greatly muffled, but not sure about the radiation effects. Over here there are so many species becoming deformed from the DDT and other estrogenics in so many sunscreens (even our kids are becoming gender confused from it) that nobody will even notice the effects of the Nukes, LMAO....oh crap...that's not funny.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132123].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Interesting Lawrence - I didn't go into the research that far - just knew that underwater nukes had worked and that Russia has suggested it for this one. I pretty much trust their scientists actually. I'm thinking that at the pressure of a mile of water that size of a blast would be greatly muffled, but not sure about the radiation effects. Over here there are so many species becoming deformed from the DDT and other estrogenics in so many sunscreens (even our kids are becoming gender confused from it) that nobody will even notice the effects of the Nukes, LMAO....oh crap...that's not funny.

Well, Hiroshima's and nagasaki'ss blooms were PLANNED and ENHANCED at the last minute for effect. It made it clear what happened, put up a large display, and made them more destructive. It was done by blowing them up BEFORE they hit the ground. SO, of course, ones closer won't be QUITE so dramatic. ALSO, Water WILL muffle radiation. In iradiation chambers, the radioactive substance is lowered into water while food and all are put in the chamber. When it is sealed, the substance is raised. STILL, a nuclear explosion would cause a HUGE concussion that could KILL fish, iradiate fish, etc... and EVEN cause a tsunami! It would be hard to predict the range of the effects.

As for gender confusion, there ARE testosterone supplements and prohormones that make women seem more masculine and men seem more feminine(Endogenous production of testosterone can shut down, and excess testosterone may become estrogen)! Still, MOST women try to stay away from that, and MOST men that might use them know they can cause problems, and may take measures to reduce the effects. OBVIOUSLY, Arnold had a doctors advice, and probably limited exposure. He later had kids which MANY that took testosterone and had such success, at the time, couldn't do. As shown on house, some topical applications are just STUPID, for the SAME reason!

NOW, they even have LH stimulators that can trigger puberty earlier. YOUNG kids taking these may end up being shorter, and the only other real affect on girls will be that they may be more likely to become pregnant. Outside of female fertility, they are used to create more endogenous testosterone and fertility in males.

As for estrogen, it is ALL OVER! And male fertility has been dropping QUICKLY! ALSO, apparently the Y chromosome is now mutating! According to some articles I have read, the last generation of humans, if we live that long, may be only female, and maybe some sterile males.

And then there are drugs, like propecia, that interfere with fetuses becoming healthy males!
THEY may end up looking in every way female, and probably WILL end up effectively being lesbians. So you might have real gender confusion THERE. I don't know of anything that could have the same effect on seemingly full males though.

SOME people apparently DO, so the story goes, have testosterone resistance. In most cases, this COULD probably be explained by the anti-5 alpha reductase.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132284].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

BTW If I were a RUSSIAN, on RUSSIAN SOIL, I wouldn't trust their judgement. They are where we were in like the 1800s! THAT is why the U.S. created the FDA, etc.... People even sold radium contaminated liquids as TONICS! I saw some documentaries about the stuff that was sold then, and the outcomes. It was NOT pretty. Russia is careless about such things in the SAME way.

I trust them EVEN LESS HERE because, if we don't fix this, this leak could affect THEM! If we blow up a atomic bomb here, they may NEVER NOTICE! ALSO, the bomb COULD hurt our cost, economy, etc.... People may move away from the blast because of even FEAR of irradiation. The SAME thing happened in RUSSIA also! So it would be seen as a WIN/WIN for THEM! Their government AND country would win.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132317].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Though MYOBs statement is crazy(The idea behind the bomb in the ocean I would think is that the walls could collapse, and cause debris in the well that could slow or stop the gusher, so it isn't quite like that garden hose sprinkler.), that is the way the "myth busters" think. Like Kurt said, they better be DARN sure before they try something so drastic! As bad as this gusher(that MOST have called juust a LEAK) is, even the gusher some here FEAR is not NEARLY as bad as it could get. Not NEARLY! Let's say some jerk decides to blast an atom bomb(or maybe even a CONVENTIONAL one) some distance below the ground. It COULD conceivably cause a much LARGER gusher which could pale in comparison to a larger volcano also caused, cause a huge splash that could rival katrina AND a tsunami. WHO KNOWS? This is an AWFULLY deep well.

Back to the myth busters. Today I saw one where they used fertilizer, black powder, and gun cotton to make explosive trousers, and didn't even get smoke. well, they used fertilizer in the OK bomb, black powder can smoke, and potentially explode, and the "myth busters" THEMSELVES earlier used gun cotton that was near explosive. Yet they "debunked" such "myths"!

And I knew as a little kid that low power hydrolysis of water couldn't create oxygen or hydrogen economically enough to be of much use. Yet the "myth busters" used "PLANS"(though they later referred to online patents!) to create a gas replacement. Not surprisingly, it FAILED! What surprised ME was that they used aa hydrogen tank OUT IN THE OPEN to prove it might have been possible. They seemed surprised on their second successful attempt when they got a fire. They weer LUCKY! If jamie were in front, and the car was a bit older, the fire could have spread to the battery, caused an explosion, and he could have gotten burned by sulfuric acid! But "Don't try this at home, [they're] what you call experts."! YEAH RIGHT!

If they want to debunk a myth, maybe they can expose companies, like NTP that file FALSE patents "patenting" obvious things hoping that ONE DAY some company, like RIMS, may actually figure out how to apply such technology, so they can sue them!

RIM, NTP and Patent Madness - Mobile and Wireless from eWeek

THAT was what their "PLANS" were! I knew about this about 40 years ago! HOW!?!?!? It was in a little science book I had! The holders of that "patent" probably aren't nearly as old as I am. It is basically PUBLIC DOMAIN! That patent shouldn't have been allowed to be filed, but they hope that ONE DAY someone will find water with a weaker bond, or better electrodes, or a higher power source that still can't be used to power moters, etc... and THEN they use that "patent" to SUE!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2132536].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

What I don't understand is that this should REALLY only be good for those coming in say the next week! Those coming a week later should KNOW that there is NO way such a claim can be made. Those comiing an appreciable distance LATER must plan far in advance, and telling me it is pristine NOW doesn't help me in making arrangements 3+ weeks out.

Frankly, any thinking person expecting to be there by Thursday or later should treat that like a claim that it won't rain in the next month, ESPECIALLY given the fact that they want to try a major attempt on tuesday! Usatoday is STILL saying there is a threat!

Despite previous spills, oil cleanup research falls short - USATODAY.com

The coastguard ACTUALLY said it would take "an act of God" to avoid it!

Florida Braces for Oil Spill, Impact on Tourism Industry - Yahoo! News

Floridians breathed a sigh of relief on Wednesday when the Coast Guard confirmed that the dozens of tar balls found washed up near Key West this week were not from the massive BP oil spill out in the Gulf of Mexico. But it was the briefest of respites. Almost simultaneously, the Coast Guard said tendrils of the BP spill had entered the Gulf's Loop Current, which could carry it not only toward Florida's west coast but down to the Florida Keys, and perhaps on to Miami's beaches, beginning as early as next week. Said Coast Guard Rear Admiral Paul Zukunft: "It would take an act of God" to avoid that scenario.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133292].message }}

johnsongt

16 years ago

Im pretty sure if you want to make money or as you said "Save a Buck" it would not involve the product you are selling getting wasted day after day and to add insault to injury they have to pay for removing, dispersing, and clean up of thier sole product. Im not in favor of them but it is quite clear NO ONE wanted this to happen Cheers..
Ps dont flame me just my view.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133318].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by johnsongt

Im pretty sure if you want to make money or as you said "Save a Buck" it would not involve the product you are selling getting wasted day after day and to add insault to injury they have to pay for removing, dispersing, and clean up of thier sole product. Im not in favor of them but it is quite clear NO ONE wanted this to happen Cheers..
Ps dont flame me just my view.

Well, dispersing it may be doing NOBODY a favor, and HAS led to BAD PR against them!

Nobody is saying they WANTED this, only that they were VERY careless! They are too isolated also. FRANKLY, if someone wants to do that, it should be a US company, as they will have MORE interest in taking care of it. We have a british and swiss company managing it, and they just don't seem to care.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133387].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Should be an interesting week - EPA ordered BP to stop using the highly toxic dispersant they are using - and BP has now refused to stop.

All of our brown pelicans in Louisiana and MS are in their breeding grounds this month - they disappear to the marshes along the coast every year at this time.

Hundreds of them are now threatened with oil and wildlife groups are trying to capture and clean them quickly to save as many as possible. Many have been found floating dead in the water inside the berms. 50 miles of coast in Louisiana is coated with heavy crude and oil mixed with toxic dispersant. The oil has gone 12 miles into the marshes so far.

Meanwhile Jindal in LA wanted to build berms by dredging sand to protect the wetlands - and the EPA tells him it will need to "study the impact of berms on the environment". To his credit, Jindal has now basically said "screw that" and is proceeding without their permission.

This is the same EPA that allowed the oil companies to do their own "environmental impact" studies on the consequences of deep drilling in the Gulf.

Of course BP didn't want this to happen - but they knew it could happen and just "hoped" it wouldn't. The same is true of the EPA and the ineffective marine services agency that gave all of these wells "exemptions" from forms, inspections and rules.

This is no way a conspiracy - it's a total failure of systems and agencies charged with protecting the people and the natural resources of this country.

They all keep saying "we don't want this to happen again". It shouldn't be happening now. Some heads need to roll on this one - but I doubt that will happen.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133538].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Should be an interesting week - EPA ordered BP to stop using the highly toxic dispersant they are using - and BP has now refused to stop.

Thought they could MAYBE be considered international waters, it is an INTERnational resource, and affecting the US. They REFUSED to stop!?!?!? Why doesn't the US just go out and say they are violating the international resource, US soil, and US sovereignty, and they STOP or else get a free stay IN PRISON!!!!!! That is ridiculous!

Originally Posted by Kay King

All of our brown pelicans in Louisiana and MS are in their breeding grounds this month - they disappear to the marshes along the coast every year at this time.

Hundreds of them are now threatened with oil and wildlife groups are trying to capture and clean them quickly to save as many as possible. Many have been found floating dead in the water inside the berms. 50 miles of coast in Louisiana is coated with heavy crude and oil mixed with toxic dispersant. The oil has gone 12 miles into the marshes so far.

Ironically, it is the one time in the year they should probably be left alone. Talk about rotten luck.

Originally Posted by Kay King

Meanwhile Jindal in LA wanted to build berms by dredging sand to protect the wetlands - and the EPA tells him it will need to "study the impact of berms on the environment". To his credit, Jindal has now basically said "screw that" and is proceeding without their permission.

Yeah, I just heard about that on fox. They're lauding it. 8-) What IDIOT would ask for an environment study on such a thing? If you have a firedoor, and there is a fire on the other side, that is NOT the time to decide to leave the door open because a screw is loose or something isn't 100% up to code. CLOSE THE DOOR! Maybe barracade it better. Take stuff you need, get out, and try to put the fire OUT! They have ASKED BP to put the fire out, and THEY DON'T CARE!, and some idiot is saying jindal shouldn't even close the door!!!!!!

And is ANYONE really even trying to PLAN on the weekends?

Originally Posted by Kay King

They all keep saying "we don't want this to happen again". It shouldn't be happening now. Some heads need to roll on this one - but I doubt that will happen.

Yeah, they single handedly probably stopped the entire industry.

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2134439].message }}

KenThompson 16 years ago

Originally Posted by johnsongt

Ps dont flame me just my view.

lol... John, no one would ever do that, here. I promise!

Welcome to F Troop.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133682].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

On the subject of exploding nukes to stop it. Some of you have made
some very good points about it.

There are two extreme dangers with this scenario. First, the unknown
and the possibility of making it worse. Secondly, the similar concerns
for atmospheric testing that led to it being banned way back when.

All of that radiation will be carried who knows where around the world.
Much of it will be ingested by things people will eat. Who knows the
impact on generations of marine life.

To me, it's about the dumbest thing that could be done. But what
concerns me is it may be a choice of the lesser of two evils, both of
which are terrible.

If nothing is done to BP by our government, I don't know what it will
take to make people wake up and get pissed off. I'm talking about the
majority of people.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133702].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

To BP - yes - but should also be something done to the agencies that allowed this and bowed to lobby pressures (and money). If you have a govt agency that didn't do it's job - I think that agency should be closed down and replaced with new minds that don't owe the oil companies.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133731].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

To BP - yes - but should also be something done to the agencies that allowed this and bowed to lobby pressures (and money). If you have a govt agency that didn't do it's job - I think that agency should be closed down and replaced with new minds that don't owe the oil companies.

Kay I'm in total agreement with you. But I hate to say or suggest that will probably
never happen. I'm referring to your comment about US agencies, etc.

(why are you stealthy?)

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2133743].message }}

NicheCowboy

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

To BP - yes - but should also be something done to the agencies that allowed this and bowed to lobby pressures (and money). If you have a govt agency that didn't do it's job - I think that agency should be closed down and replaced with new minds that don't owe the oil companies.

oh absolutely...the criminal negligence doesn't just stop with BP. There are those in the interior department who deserve jail cells right next to their BP counterparts.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2134756].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

I could say a lot here, but I won't... 8-(

[ 2 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2135150].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

I seriously think that we are not getting the full story - NOTHING adds up - I suspect sabotage and I think we will never hear of it no matter what. It doesn't add up for me that a company that was almost nailed for the Valdez spill would know how much larger this one is and completely ignore the safety hazards. They stood to lose to much and knew there was no cover (Exxon) to save their hides this time. It's just not making sense. I am having a very hard time with this - they KNEW if something went wrong it would probably be the end of their company. Sorry - I don't buy the "they were careless" crap - there was too much at stake this time. Also - we still have yet to hear how Mexico was feeling about us drilling into caverns that would have very likely tapped into THEIR oil supply. Several years back there were discussions about that - so what the hell happened? Everything between those discussions and the leak is blacked out.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2135814].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I seriously think that we are not getting the full story - NOTHING adds up - I suspect sabotage and I think we will never hear of it no matter what. It doesn't add up for me that a company that was almost nailed for the Valdez spill would know how much larger this one is and completely ignore the safety hazards. They stood to lose to much and knew there was no cover (Exxon) to save their hides this time. It's just not making sense. I am having a very hard time with this - they KNEW if something went wrong it would probably be the end of their company. Sorry - I don't buy the "they were careless" crap - there was too much at stake this time. Also - we still have yet to hear how Mexico was feeling about us drilling into caverns that would have very likely tapped into THEIR oil supply. Several years back there were discussions about that - so what the hell happened? Everything between those discussions and the leak is blacked out.

Who was IYHO responsible for the sabotage and what do they gain??

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2135826].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Apparently the crew who were responsible to shut off the emergency valve, or "blow out preventer" were killed in the initial blast. A back up "dead man switch" that should have automatically shut down the well failed to activate. What they are probably trying to hide is the fact that they should have also had remote control systems such as the acoustic switch, which they fought against having installed.

Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device - WSJ.com

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2135916].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

Apparently the crew who were responsible to shut off the emergency valve, or "blow out preventer" were killed in the initial blast. A back up "dead man switch" that should have automatically shut down the well failed to activate. What they are probably trying to hide is the fact that they should have also had remote control systems such as the acoustic switch, which they fought against having installed.

Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device - WSJ.com

Well, the seal and an actuator were ALSO broken, so a remote may not have helped AT ALL! HECK, if a remote control would have helped, why can't they simply trigger the closure via robot? The idea, up to now, is that there is NOTHING left to trigger! So TWO actuators, that may have to act in tandem, and one is DAMAGED! And a seal, that MAY be necessary, is DAMAGED! But you are saying a simple switch, that must work THROUGH the actuators, might have been able to shut down the well!?!?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2135925].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

But you are saying a simple switch, that must work THROUGH the actuators, might have been able to shut down the well!?!?

Steve

A $500,000 remote acoustic backup mechanism is not a "simple switch", but an expense BP lobbied successfully against for years until 2003, when U.S. regulators decided remote-controlled safeguards needed more study. A report commissioned by the Minerals Management Service said "acoustic systems are not recommended because they tend to be very costly." Hmmmm .....

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2135974].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

A $500,000 remote acoustic backup mechanism is not a "simple switch", but an expense BP lobbied successfully against for years until 2003, when U.S. regulators decided remote-controlled safeguards needed more study. A report commissioned by the Minerals Management Service said "acoustic systems are not recommended because they tend to be very costly." Hmmmm .....

Sorry, EVERY mention of it EVERYWHERE! ****EVERYWHERE**** I have seen describes it as what its name describes! A remote control device operating on accoustic controls. A way to ACTIVATE the device when the electrical cables break, and the deadman switch fails somehow. In other words, a SWITCH! OTHERWISE, you are talking about a BOP for the BOP! As for the cost? Well, it DOES need to withstand pressure, and operate on unusual patterns that are unlikely to occur in nature but quick and easy to transmit. And there IS a limited market, risk, etc... WHO KNOWS? Sometimes things just cost a LOT, especially today.

I could even throw your own article back at you: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...417936798.html LOOK at the illustration, the caption, how it describes the remote, how it describes what the unit ON the BOP does in response. It even says "TRIGGERS the device". OK, it is a COMPLICATED switch. I understand WHY it can be hard to fashion the signal, and why accoustic is probably best, but it is described as a TRIGGER!(aka SWITCH). HECK, they might want to make the switches expensive so others are less likely to fiddle with the signals, etc...

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136430].message }}

myob

16 years ago

LOL! It's all an Illuminati conspiracy. "What better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig?" Sez Limbaugh. It all makes sense to me.

The spill was an inside job and shown in the predictive programming with lluminati symbolism in the movie "Knowing". There is something about the number eleven too. 11.. Remember the entire World Trade Center event on 9/11 was underlined with the occultic number 11. 11 people were killed also in the Gulf oil rig explosion.

YouTube - 'Knowing' Movie Knew About Oil Rig...

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136815].message }}

The 13th Warrior

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

LOL! It's all an Illuminati conspiracy. "What better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig?" Sez Limbaugh. It all makes sense to me.

The spill was an inside job and shown in the predictive programming with lluminati symbolism in the movie "Knowing". There is something about the number eleven too. 11.. Remember the entire World Trade Center event on 9/11 was underlined with the occultic number 11. 11 people were killed also in the Gulf oil rig explosion.
YouTube - 'Knowing' Movie Knew About Oil Rig Explosion

Ok..., yeah..., I think its time to upwrap the aluminum foil hat , turn off the Fox-fixed channel shortwave radio and come out of the 1941 built bomb shelter.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136873].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Sal -

It does add up. Like many man made problems that could have been prevented this catastrophe was not one thing but a series of errors in judgement, cronyism, and failure to STOP when a problem was identified.

The stop switch is required to drill in several other countries and BP uses them there. It was proposed in 2003 by the marine resource management and then abandoned due to guarantees of safety and claims of "costs too much" by the oil companies. It's not as simple as saying Transocean built it - because the building is done to the oil company's specs.

Several weeks before the explosion BP KNEW that a PERSON had thrown a switch at the wrong time and that the sleeve (which is very heavy rubbery type material) in the value had been damaged.

They knew this because pieces of that sleeve came up the pipe. That should have been a "shut down" right then to repair the damaged part - but they didn't do it.

They KNEW they had a low battery - and ignored it. They KNEW it was risky to remove the drilling fluid until the three cement collars had been fully installed and set - but they removed the fluid allowing the oil to rise in the pipe after only two collars had been set.

Half of the spills in the gulf have been caused by poor cement in the pipes. It's a difficult process that requires a heavy mix and then chemicals to cure it quickly. It's not an exact science and there are three companies that do this work - and all three have had failures. When you have a known risk - you don't minimize it in order to move faster for more profit....and those decisions should be tightly regulated and require approvals from those in charge who will take responsibility for making the decision.

The only conspiracy is one of stupidity and greed. BP should not have had the authority to decide not to shut down and fix a damaged part - should not have had the authority to decide to ignore Transocean warnings about removing the drilling mud early.

The relationship of big oil with politicians is one huge problem. The failure of legislators to oversee requirements and add to them without approval from big oil is a huge problem. Agencies should not have the authority to give blanket exemptions from the requirements - but that's been done consistently. Even now, while the govt is not granting exemptions for new wells (at the moment) - they are not requiring re-inspections of deep wells now in the gulf or adding any safety standards. All of these wells were granted exemptions - but we didn't know that, did we?

Every decision on something that can affect the country in such a big way or potentially devastate our wildlife areas should be made with the "worst that can happen" scenario clearly outlined by the company doing the work...and a list of TESTED remedies should that worst happen.

Truth is - more booms and skimmers are needed on the Louisiana coast right now - and they can't get them. Landrieu is making promises of massive payouts by BP - but no one knows where she got that info as so far they are running behind paying the local boat owners working for them.

kay
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136934].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by The 13th Warrior

Ok..., yeah..., I think its time to upwrap the aluminum foil hat , turn off the Fox-fixed channel shortwave radio and come out of the 1941 built bomb shelter.

I don't think fox is on shortwave. And they don't talk about THIS kind of conspiracy. STILL. the idea of "no good disaster goes to waste" certainly makes sense. During the OK bombing, people used it to advocate against gun ownership. He didn't use a gun!!!!!!

How's THAT for crazy "reasoning"!?!?

I'm surprised they aren't really flaunting THIS again oil drilling. Maybe they finally realize that those that might listen ALREADY know. Frankly, I have ALWAYS been against oil. If they never found a use for gas, maybe they would have moved to steam or electric. The world wouldn't have moved as fast, there would probably be fewer people, the arabs would still be nomads, 9/11 wouldn't have happened, etc.... HECK, that jerk that started SO probably would have gone BANKRUPT, because the use for kerosene dropped so fast, etc....

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136936].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

LOL! It's all an Illuminati conspiracy. "What better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig?" Sez Limbaugh. It all makes sense to me.

If Limbaugh had even half a brain he'd realize he just came up with another reason not to drill or use nuke power: Sabotage.

It's one thing to try to make things "mistake proof", but we also need to make them "on purpose proof". Good luck with that Rush!

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136948].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Any conspiracy theory put out by Rush Limbaugh and others has been put to rest by BP's Prez Lamar McKay. The probable cause is less sinister and more mundane; "I believe we’ve got a failed piece of equipment." :rolleyes:

Gulf Oil Platform Explosion Conpiracy?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136970].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

Any conspiracy theory put out by Rush Limbaugh and others has been put to rest by BP's Prez Lamar McKay. The probable cause is less sinister and more mundane, "I believe we've got a failed piece of equipment."

Gulf Oil Platform Explosion Conpiracy?

Well, with that reasoning, EVERYTHING bad is due to a failed piece of equipment. look at grenades, if they didn't lose that pin, they would be paperwieghts that might serve a purpose. heck, you don't damage the little cap in the back, and bullets are harmless.

NOBODY disputes that equipment failed. The question is WHY, and WHY did they ignore everything. Kays last message was very complete, and true!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2137023].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

If Limbaugh had even half a brain he'd realize he just came up with another reason not to drill or use nuke power: Sabotage.

It's one thing to try to make things "mistake proof", but we also need to make them "on purpose proof". Good luck with that Rush!

One thing I always hated about rush, and I said it here earlier, is that rush believes that corporations never go too far and the planet can recover from anything people do.

The problem is that a little 1 year old could EASILY blow up the planet! Just put them in a room in russia or the US where they could push buttons to release nukes. retaliation could complete the deal.

OK, THAT is far fetched because WHO would risk that. Yet people die all the time because kids or even babies did something. SO, if THEY could do that, imagine how much one person WANTING to create damage can be. How about an ARMY? The idea that people are so harmless is just ludicrous.

So here some people on ONE rig bore a hole that is HOW? big in diameter? And they end up doing damage that could be beyond imagination. I only hope they get it fixed SOON! Tomorrow is their next planned attempt. Within the next 19 hours we should know what happens.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2137077].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

The only question I've ever had about Limbaugh is why on earth anyone would take that drivel seriously.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2137134].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

A $500,000 remote acoustic backup mechanism is not a "simple switch", but an expense BP lobbied successfully against for years until 2003, when U.S. regulators decided remote-controlled safeguards needed more study. A report commissioned by the Minerals Management Service said "acoustic systems are not recommended because they tend to be very costly." Hmmmm .....

Costly huh...I bet they are kicking their boots now...

BP's latest plan is not working

http://www.mail.com/Article.aspx/mon...Spill?pageid=1

I wonder how that "Boot to the throat" plan is working out for the gov't.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2157127].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Who was IYHO responsible for the sabotage and what do they gain??

TL

Gee, that's kind of a tough question not knowing ALL that goes on behind the scenes. The middle east makes billions a year on US oil dependency, so that's a possibility. It doesn't seem it would be Mexico as if that cavern taps into their oil supply that's like spilling their own financial blood, but then they could also figure that by the time their own oil got tapped the spill would be fixed and very possibly the "fix" would shut down the drilling in that area, so possible. Actually - I wish I knew the complete behind the scenes story so I could actually figure out who the most likely source of such an action would be. But as it stands, nothing - official story, the chain of events, how the hell we got there in the first place after the issues a few years ago, why BP was hired after almost being punched for Valdez -- just nothing makes sense from this side of the boardrooms.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136054].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Unfortunately it all makes sense to me.

Originally Posted by HeySal

But as it stands, nothing - official story, the chain of events, how the hell we got there in the first place after the issues a few years ago, why BP was hired after almost being punched for Valdez -- just nothing makes sense from this side of the boardrooms.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136303].message }}

Vwarf

16 years ago

The US govt should really step up on this issue....flex some more muscle to let BP to clean up the mess and pay all the damages it inflict to the people and the environment! hope this would not just be another case of bailing out another giant disaster maker.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2136967].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

I got an idea...Let's use Rush to plug the leak.

On a serious note...Again, those rigs aren't "buildings" and are considered vessels. It seems this rig was flying under the flag of the Marshall Islands. The reason to do this is because a ship follows the <safety> laws and regulations of the country where the ship (rig) is registered.

Anyone willing to bet me a year's salary that the Marshall Islands has very few safety regulations?

Now here's what I don't understand...The US has the strictest maritime standards in the World.

Why do we have these tough laws if we're going to let US people and US companies work on vessels from other countries circumvent our safety lawst o collect our resources?

Either do away with our laws so we can use US flag ships, or require foreign flag vessels to follow the same laws US vessels have to protect US workers.

Also, 30+ new permits for off-shore rigs have been approved since this disaster. I don't think people realize how many of them there are...There's places in the Gulf that literally look like good-sized cities at night, with all the rigs lit up.

And these rigs always don't fill tankers directly, they often have a pipeline that runs to shore (or a tanker or another pipeline), and each and every pipeline can fail (or be sabotaged). As a sea-going tug, most of our work was working with the ocean barges that laid these pipe-lines. The tugs run the anchors, then the barges slowly use the anchors and winches to slowly inch themselves along as they the pipe. As the barge moves, the tug picks up the anchors and moves them to a new location, and the barge continues moving as it lays pipe.

At least the tugs are US flagged.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2137197].message }}

The 13th Warrior 16 years ago

Why is Man Slaughter , criminal negligence and hard-time imprisonment is ONLY disproportionately applied to Joe "Six-pack"/ 9 to 5" Citizen vs people and companies with financial and other means?

Like that company that got away with numerous safety violations and killed all those coal miners.

The supposed enforcer of the safety codes AND the corporate person(s) responsible for green lighting the safety cuts and postponements should be in prison..., a life sentence, each, for every life lost.

Whats the difference between them and a serial killer?

Answer: a serial killer has not learned to to make friends and business associates in high places and direct legal endowments financially beneficial to those that count.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2137282].message }}
- The 13th Warrior 16 years ago
  
  Hey, Rush is a pioneer and the MicroSoft of his niche in talk radio.
  
  If you took politics, WWE wrestling, Barnum Baily Circus and a public relations agent and mixed them all together, you got CASH=RUSH.
  
  Its a goldmine.
  
  Dude taps into the darkest, ugliest recesses of a particular audience and gives out innumerable multitudes of arguments , counter-arguments , rationalizations, justifications and other wealth of ammunition for a type of thinking/rationalization that has his audience give their last penny to him and his sponsors.
  
  Their nuclear attack or weapon of last resort is a barrage of name calling, hollering ,shouting and stirring up mob frenzy if they don't have a rational argument or non-hypocritical, linear logic to their premise.
  
  He's like the first to find oil in his niche.
  
  And anyone close to duplicating him finds even MORE oil than he originally did.
  
  "Sure-Money" in the bank.
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2137332].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

You know, Rush has some bad aspects, WHO DOESN'T! And some of the other aspects don't come off in the best way. I don't think even HE would say he is eloquent, even if he at least USED to say he had "talent on loan from god". I don't know if he still says that, and he probably always kind of meant thatt as a joke. But he isn't all bad, etc... Oh well, I guess saying more would seem too political.

Does anyone know what their plans are if the junk shot doesn't work? And WHY did it take like 2+ weeks to do the junk shot?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2137401].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

There's a 12 hr testing BP will do tomorrow to find out if the remaining pipe structure at the ocean floor is strong enough to withstand the try for Wednesday.

If they think it will hold up - on Wed morning they will try to send the drilling mud under high pressure to fill the pipe. Then comes the junk shop - maybe.

Now that the oil has reached shore it's spreading rapidly and the pictures today of the brown pelicans breaks my heart. They were just taken off the endangered species list and now thousands will die. They are such cool birds. A research team lowered a camera to a reef in the Gulf - that reef is always teeming with fish....and today there were only 3 fish seen. The oil isn't just on the surface but far below the surface, too.

I think the person to put in charge overall is Lt Gen Honore. He was in charge after Katrina and the man kicks some serious butt. He's in position now but frustrated at the lack of coordination of the efforts. They need ONE person who can order BP, agencies, CG and anyone else involved to get their act together. The man knows the coast and the gulf, knows the people and isn't afraid of bruising some egos.

I remember thinking to myself a few months ago that it was amazing we could drill so deep in the water and so deeply into the earth in a safe way - I was basing that on the announcement of more drilling rigs to be added and the comments about the great safety of these rigs. I believed what I was told - it's safe, it's great, it works. It wasn't, it isn't, and it doesn't always work as intended.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2137473].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

There's a 12 hr testing BP will do tomorrow to find out if the remaining pipe structure at the ocean floor is strong enough to withstand the try for Wednesday.

If they think it will hold up - on Wed morning they will try to send the drilling mud under high pressure to fill the pipe. Then comes the junk shop - maybe.

MORE LIES THEN!? TERRIFIC!(sarc)

Now that the oil has reached shore it's spreading rapidly and the pictures today of the brown pelicans breaks my heart. They were just taken off the endangered species list and now thousands will die. They are such cool birds. A research team lowered a camera to a reef in the Gulf - that reef is always teeming with fish....and today there were only 3 fish seen. The oil isn't just on the surface but far below the surface, too.

THAT was actually PLANNED! That is one of the reasons for the dispersants, and one of the reasons I HATED the idea. Some of that oil is going to be more likely to mix with the water. Of course, that was a problem earlier too, and the reason for the floor garbage and decreased oxygen. Of course, some plants and microscopic organisms use light to create oxygen, and THEY are affected. LUCKILY, SOME fish might have been afraid, iritated, or just smart, so you would EXPECT to see fewer fish. There is STILL a chance that that is not QUITE as bad as it appears. Of course, some creatures can't move fast enough, plants can't, and eggs can't, so they are probably GONE! And those creatures that were there for mating season and pulled away might not ever mate again.

Sometimes it is a GOOD thing that oil and water generally don't mix.

I think the person to put in charge overall is Lt Gen Honore. He was in charge after Katrina and the man kicks some serious butt. He's in position now but frustrated at the lack of coordination of the efforts. They need ONE person who can order BP, agencies, CG and anyone else involved to get their act together. The man knows the coast and the gulf, knows the people and isn't afraid of bruising some egos.

HECK, I have been on projects where people worked ROUND THE CLOCK to solve problems. Sometimes I get almost NO sleep. BP should be doing the same. Someonee asked if yesterday was a normal monday in the US. Is THAT why they did NOTHING yesterday!?!?!?

In MY case, it is usually ARBITRARY or to satisfy some EGO! In one case, a jerk told his boss we would have a report on his desk when he got in like 6am monday. We were not due to get to that point for MONTHS and just made major changes that would make any such attempt take DAYS! We were told late friday about his promise. We all worked the ENTIRE WEEKEND, LONG DAYS, pulled out NEEDED code(Which delayed and complicated the actual project) to generate enough data to be cut and pasted. OK, cut and taped! YEP, literally CUT with scissors, and taped with scotch tape! One guy never saved his report program so when windows crashed I had to do HIS job also!

It was on his desk AS PROMISED! For our trouble!?!?!? We got DOUGHNUTS! WOW!(sarc)

Well, this BP problem is one where every day makes its impact FAR worse! It isn't some arbitrary deadline.

I remember thinking to myself a few months ago that it was amazing we could drill so deep in the water and so deeply into the earth in a safe way - I was basing that on the announcement of more drilling rigs to be added and the comments about the great safety of these rigs. I believed what I was told - it's safe, it's great, it works. It wasn't, it isn't, and it doesn't always work as intended.

kay

I mused HERE, I believe in this very thread, about the RELATIVE safety. You think OIL is bad? On a scale from 1-10, 10 being worse, it might not even rank an 8! Don't get mee wrong, a 6 would be BAD! Possibly catastrophic. But a 10 would be FAR worse!

Yeah, I might have been OK with drilling for oil like this ALSO....IF we didn't start so deep and DRILL so deep. That is UNREAL!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2138416].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

It doesn't look like they have run ANY tests, but they ARE talking about getting ready for tomorrow.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2140507].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Somebody wants to eliminate all caps on the amount of damages oil cos have to pay...

Sen. Robert Menendez is set to introduce on Tuesday afternoon a bill that would fully eliminate any cap on the amount of economic damages that oil companies would have to pay for spills they've caused.

He's revising an earlier version of legislation he introduced which would have raised the cap from $75 million dollars in liability to $10 billion.

Now, the cap will be effectively unlimited, an aide said.

Somebody is trying hard to block the new legislation...

Here's their reason...

They oppose unlimited caps because it would limit the ability of oil companies to drill for oil.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2140533].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Apparently BP is liable for up to $4300 per barrel:

SPECIAL REPORT-Civil fine in Gulf spill could be $4,300 barrel | Reuters

No wonder they kept the live videos of the leak from being shown. Jerks. My guess is BP is a big fan of the laissez faire philosophy: "Let It Be".

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2141900].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Apparently BP is liable for up to $4300 per barrel:

SPECIAL REPORT-Civil fine in Gulf spill could be $4,300 barrel | Reuters

No wonder they kept the live videos of the leak from being shown. Jerks. My guess is BP is a big fan of the laissez faire philosophy: "Let It Be".

This I did not know.

It warms my heart.

Thanks!!

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2141918].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Apparently BP is liable for up to $4300 per barrel:

SPECIAL REPORT-Civil fine in Gulf spill could be $4,300 barrel | Reuters

No wonder they kept the live videos of the leak from being shown. Jerks. My guess is BP is a big fan of the laissez faire philosophy: "Let It Be".

There comes a point where people no longer have any concept of difference. You could understand BP not showing the video because some, especially with people calling it a leak, might have thought it was FAR smaller, and would be less likely to indict BP. After all, a fender bender is bad, and people may get VERY upset, but TOTALLING a car is FAR worse, totalling a rolls royce is worse, and death is WORSE. The videos certainly make it clear that this is BAD!

But thanks for letting us know what people CLAIM they will have to pay. That comes to about, last I knew, $860million a day. I lost track of time, but I think that puts the current total around 34.4billion so far. Apparently the Current market value is about 133billion.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2142782].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

BP actions STILL aren't certain! Also, transocean owned, and built the well as well as the BOP. So they SHOULD chip in!

BP yet to make call on latest bid to stop Gulf oil - Yahoo! News

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2143138].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Kay - yes I realize there was a string of "errors". That doesn't make it sit right with me. Too many errors, in fact, make it look a little suspicious.

I have no clue what Rush has to say about this one. I really don't follow him.

What my questions arise from is the fact that:
Prudhoe Bay More than 200000 gallons of oil spilled from a BP pipeline in Alaska in 2006 Also - those Alaska pipes were supposed to supply oil for the US and BP failed to honor that and started outsourcing all over the place........not just careless but backstabbing?

They almost got hung in the Valdez spill, which they were involved in.

Yet this is the company that is involved with the Largest oil deposit we've drilled yet.....the most dangerous -- and it's offshore so who will they be piping the oil to this time?

Okay - now, I still want to know what happened to the quarrel between US and Mexico over US drilling into an area that will more than likely tap into Mexico's oil. I can't even find reference to it anywhere now. Mexico is the 3rd largest worldwide in oil - and they are just going to let us drill a cavern that could deplete their own supply without a flinch?

That is what is "fishy" to me Kay. No doubt there were "a series of mistakes" - when BP takes the wheel there usually are, and backstabbing such as the outsourcing of US oil in Alaska doesn't seem to be a "series of mistakes" at all.

So why was this company put in charge? That sits in everyone else's craws okay? Sorry, I can buy that they F***ed up - again. Maybe. I can't figure out how we got there in the first place without a loud international incidence (maybe they were promised we'd absorb all the illegals) or why anyone would hire a major 2 time spiller and a company that stabbed us on oil exports for this job.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2143717].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

BP just started the Top Kill attempt. See it here live:

The Rundown News Blog | PBS NewsHour | PBS

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2144714].message }}

The 13th Warrior

16 years ago

How bout that Office of Mineral something or other?

Supposed to be a watchdog and enforcer of public trust, getting our tax money but run by oil men, conflict of interest right there, strike one.

Politicians openly know and state the ridiculous saturation of legal and illegal gifts, bribes, free drugs, amphetimines, trips,sex and other things these public officials of THAT office have gotten for years, pretty much in PLAIN sight, strike two.

DAMN THE LAW, you don't need an Oxford or Yale Ph.D degree to understand the intent and spirit of the law whether violated or not, written verbatim or not.

Especially if you willfully violated public safety and it is directly linked to deaths, a law needs not be written , specifically, verbatim, explicitly or otherwise.

Coercion(legal and illegal) of ANY kind which even "hints" of such should be harshly dealt with, and at the very least, these guys in charge of enforcement and rights of natural resources should be :

1) severely financially penalized,

2) forfeit any unemployment, pension, and other future benefits and rights for their present and past pathetic public service

3) lifetime ban on any employment or association with any local , state, federal level and any association with

4) any private sector company hiring them forfeit ALL federal subsidies and ANY tax payer paid stipends that corporations usually get.

Their negligence caused death that can never be repaired.

The most severe involuntary Manslaughter charges and hard prison time should be the minimum.

Since they all play the game at one level or another, this is fantasy land of the most ridiculous kind that anything close to justice would come to pass.

They may throw us, the stupid public, a Lee Harvey Oswald type fall guy, and we will quiet down, shut up, and feel some justice was done, outrage will die down, like giving a baby who hasn't eaten in 2 days a lifeless, inanimate plastic pacifier to at least temporarily shut him up for the time being, till even a dumb baby knows when HE'S being fooled, eventually.

Betcha if one of those that died NEEDLESSLY was your husband or brother or baby girl, the technical interest, buzz , engineering challenge, reality t.v. aspect and guesstimates of how its going to be fixed would not outweigh the concern of lost life and future destruction of lives currently.

Can we at least get a refund of our tax money that went to that stupid, financial brothel of an office while those whores ran it?

I'll accept a Government Money Gram.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2145101].message }}

The 13th Warrior 16 years ago

This office even let them create safety forms and write their own safety regulations.

Folks like this should be lined up, and one by one, be publicly gutted with 1946 farm tools.

The 13th Warrior
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2145129].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by The 13th Warrior

How bout that Office of Mineral something or other?

Supposed to be a watchdog and enforcer of public trust, getting our tax money but run by oil men, conflict of interest right there, strike one.

Politicians openly know and state the ridiculous saturation of legal and illegal gifts, bribes, free drugs, amphetimines, trips,sex and other things these public officials of THAT office have gotten for years, pretty much in PLAIN sight, strike two.

DAMN THE LAW, you don't need an Oxford or Yale Ph.D degree to understand the intent and spirit of the law whether violated or not, written verbatim or not.

Especially if you willfully violated public safety and it is directly linked to deaths, a law needs not be written , specifically, verbatim, explicitly or otherwise.

Coercion(legal and illegal) of ANY kind which even "hints" of such should be harshly dealt with, and at the very least, these guys in charge of enforcement and rights of natural resources should be :

1) severely financially penalized,

2) forfeit any unemployment, pension, and other future benefits and rights for their present and past pathetic public service

3) lifetime ban on any employment or association with any local , state, federal level and any association with

4) any private sector company hiring them forfeit ALL federal subsidies and ANY tax payer paid stipends that corporations usually get.

Their negligence caused death that can never be repaired.

The most severe involuntary Manslaughter charges and hard prison time should be the minimum.

Since they all play the game at one level or another, this is fantasy land of the most ridiculous kind that anything close to justice would come to pass.

They may throw us, the stupid public, a Lee Harvey Oswald type fall guy, and we will quiet down, shut up, and feel some justice was done, outrage will die down, like giving a baby who hasn't eaten in 2 days a lifeless, inanimate plastic pacifier to at least temporarily shut him up for the time being, till even a dumb baby knows when HE'S being fooled, eventually.

Betcha if one of those that died NEEDLESSLY was your husband or brother or baby girl, the technical interest, buzz , engineering challenge, reality t.v. aspect and guesstimates of how its going to be fixed would not outweigh the concern of lost life and future destruction of lives currently.

Can we at least get a refund of our tax money that went to that stupid, financial brothel of an office while those whores ran it?

I'll accept a Government Money Gram.

OH NO! The world IS coming to an end! You reminded me of some things, BUT....

Amendment 29: No pension, Insurance, expense account, or other benefit, outside of those that are available to all other US citizens shall be given to or retained by any person in the US government.

Amendment 31: Any fraud, misrepresentation, or felony shall require impeachment, and they shall be subject to any civil or criminal penalties thereof.

Amendment 42: NO lobbyist, or person with any government agency, shall in any way bribe or otherwise unjustly encourage any person in or with any government in the united states to do anything, or vote in any way.

Amendment 47: For any Prisoner guilty of any crime, no treatment of mental, or exotic disease shall be provided. For any felon, treatment outside of basic healthcare shall not be provided. TV shall be of no caliber exceeding the basic TV available to people at the poverty line. No games, gaming, or athletic equipment or weights shall be provided. Only a basic library shall be provided. Open free time shall be limited to 2 hours per day. There shall be no store to buy more than the basic of health and personal care supplies. Any money earned shall be put into the treasury. Felons shall not be allowed to vote or collect any subsidies.

In other words, pretty much all the 13th warrior said! OH, if only it were law!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147754].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

I agree - major jail time and murder charges apply for many involved in this fiasco.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2145627].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Senator Nelson is calling for the Military to take over if the Top Kill doesn't work. The military is great for a lot of things, especially blowing up stuff, but how would they be better able to stop a huge leak 5,000 feet down in the ocean?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2145648].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Senator Nelson is calling for the Military to take over if the Top Kill doesn't work. The military is great for a lot of things, especially blowing up stuff, but how would they be better able to stop a huge leak 5,000 feet down in the ocean?

They can't possibly be worse than the bozos in charge now.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2145923].message }}

The 13th Warrior 16 years ago

Hmmm.., let's see..., I'm the law enforcer, the sight overseer , the politician with the power to serve or start prosecution, whatever, and the public wants me to headhunt any BP and others affiliated with this catastrophe.

The public wants to know why politicians are doing the two-step , the Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire dance steps all around this, doing the porky pig impression of saying or doing anything definitive...,

Let's see.., I have circumstantial evidence because various departments allowed them to do whatever they pleased WITHOUT any credible or objective reports or record keeping by responsible agencies in charge of the oversight.

And any evidence that is available mostly points to 78% of me and various political officers and agencies in lock and step with BP and associates in every ethic , legal, and law logistic compromised with agencies approval.

Essentially, I, the politician, opened the door, pointed the direction, offered lunch , and even offered to towel them off after they finish their political pedophila with an underaged little child, the tax payers and environment.

And the public wonders why I'm doing the tap dance?

If BP was an Organized Crime Syndicate ( don't see much difference) , would they be able to say what they will and won't do or disclose?

Why don't they treat them with the same brand of good ole local american justice they give to Joe "Nobody-Special" Citizen and presume them guilty and MAKE them prove their innocence?

Forget about it, just like the crazy and unusual weather, one after the other, before this is even warm, MORE corporations are probably going to show the ugliest side, like for years, sweeping dust under a rug unnoticably until you got a mountain in your living room that bust thru the upper level and breaks thru your roof, impossible to ignore and harder, if not impossible to deal with, especially when there is more to come.

You only got so many resources before you are bone dry.

Then comes the fun.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2146133].message }}
Kay King 16 years ago

BP are the people who should be working on the leak - and they are. Problem is, they seem to be the only people doing anything in an organized way. There is no one in govt with the expertise to do this work - the ongoing failure is the lack of organized protection of the shoreline.

Too many lines of command - and all the final approvals seem to come from D.C. - after a while to think it over. No tankers to vacuum oil before it reaches shore - and no coast guard or skimmers seen between the slick and the shoreline for miles.

Fact: EPA is the one that approved the dispersant being used 3 weeks ago - and it is on the EPA approved list of chemicals to use. Turns out - that's why BP wasn't willing to just stop and wait for another study...which is what the EPA wanted them to do. That's why the EPA backed down, too.

Every request to govt agencies for supplies, more berm, or any decision requested is met with a "let us think it over" or "need to do a study on it first" and no one seems to have the authority to just say "yes" or "no". Total lack of decisive action or quick answers.

I don't like BP - but I have to say they are the only group here that seems to be acting efficiently on many levels. They have 30+ staging areas set up along the coast, they give regular updates and at least the head of BP walked the affected shoreline. That's more than most politicians have done. According to D.C. there are many top agency people here - but we don't hear from them or see them. Oh wait - they're in Texas, aren't they?

My impressions may be wrong but they are shared by most here. You believe what you see happening. There may be planning and strategizing going on at the highest levels - but if there is, we aren't told about it here.

Even though I dislike BP, the company, I've been impressed that their top people are staying on this. At least they're not preaching about new regs in the future, giving speeches or wanting study commissions to see what's going on. They have boots on the ground. The two head guys of BP are here on the coast - haven't left - and give the updates themselves several times a day and often late into the night. They don't make excuses - just give facts and answer questions.

What is needed is ONE person in charge on the ground - with full authority to make decisions without days or weeks of delay in D.C. - who can get people into the marshes to start cleanup and can get some skimmers between the spill and the shoreline to try to get the worst of the crude. That is not being done.

There are enough volunteers to do the work here - if there were one real leader. I've said for some time - put Honore in charge and turn him loose. He knows the coast and the people here trust and respect him.

Anyone see the msnbc coverage tonight of the 1979 Gulf spill near Mexico?
Same exact procedures tried - same exact problem - at 200 foot depth. It went on for months. Apparently we are slow learners.

The only guaranteed way to stop the oil is the relief well though we're hoping this top kill will work. Makes me wonder if the answer in the future is to require a relief well be at least partially drilled and capped before a platform begins producing. Don't know if that's possible - but it seems logical.

Keeping my fingers crossed that the leak will at least be reduced by the top kill - we'll know in a couple days.

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2146180].message }}
- TimPhelan 16 years ago
  
  Well, you are in a very small minority there Kay.
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  I don't like BP - but I have to say they are the only group here that seems to be acting efficiently on many levels.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  Over 50 Dating
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2146351].message }}

Lawrh

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Senator Nelson is calling for the Military to take over if the Top Kill doesn't work. The military is great for a lot of things, especially blowing up stuff, but how would they be better able to stop a huge leak 5,000 feet down in the ocean?

You're forgetting the Army Corp of Engineers. I have no idea what they would do in this scenario, but they have a well deserved reputation for problem solving and quickly completing very large scale projects.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

â€œStrategy without action is a day-dream; action without strategy is a nightmare.â€ â€“ Old Japanese proverb -

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2146038].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Senator Nelson is calling for the Military to take over if the Top Kill doesn't work. The military is great for a lot of things, especially blowing up stuff, but how would they be better able to stop a huge leak 5,000 feet down in the ocean?

Originally Posted by HeySal

They can't possibly be worse than the bozos in charge now.

Originally Posted by Lawrh

You're forgetting the Army Corp of Engineers. I have no idea what they would do in this scenario, but they have a well deserved reputation for problem solving and quickly completing very large scale projects.

The biggest difference between our military and BP is: Our military isn't afraid to spend money and BP is.

In this case, this is probably a good thing.

I agree with Lawrh...The Corp of Engineers is probably the most qualified at this point...Or possibly the Navy. And our military would only be interested in getting the job done, not politics or profits.

What's the pressure (psi) of the leak, anyone know?

And I have a prediction: Watch for BP to file for bankruptcy and totally screw everyone they are liable to.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2146098].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

What's the pressure (psi) of the leak, anyone know?

They don't know EXACTLY how big the hole is, or what is on the other side, so the BEST they could do is GUESS based on the depth, maximum observed speed, the size of the hole on top, and a guess at average viscosity. The fact is that, with all the debris, etc... THAT estimate would probably be LOW! HEY, they don't even claim to know the actual average volume of oil!

And I have a prediction: Watch for BP to file for bankruptcy and totally screw everyone they are liable to.

You may be right. I think state farm just got the contracts rescinded when THEY ran into a similar problem. Some industries start a fund for a class. They are ways to avoid bankruptcy, but the end result is often the SAME!

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147794].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

They probably are involved already to some extent. If it's ideas and expertise, I think that is being covered from what I have heard. It's not just BP coming up with possible solutions really at this point.

Originally Posted by Lawrh

You're forgetting the Army Corp of Engineers. I have no idea what they would do in this scenario, but they have a well deserved reputation for problem solving and quickly completing very large scale projects.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2146155].message }}

jaya_allways

16 years ago

Hahahahahaha.. Wow.. $27m is a LOTT.. It has been mixed with some political importance.. Dunno about that large company, but A company which is very large surely affect some country's political, and have the politic interest..

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2146402].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by jaya_allways

Hahahahahaha.. Wow.. $27m is a LOTT.. It has been mixed with some political importance.. Dunno about that large company, but A company which is very large surely affect some country's political, and have the politic interest..

Well, Apparently, the REAL limit at least WAS $75million for basic suits, and $1Billion for cleanup. The republicans, apparently, wanted to make that $10Billion. The democrats want to remove any limit. Of course, $10billion represents almost 10% of the company's value.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147709].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Well, Apparently, the REAL limit at least WAS $75million for basic suits, and $1Billion for cleanup. The republicans, apparently, wanted to make that $10Billion. The democrats want to remove any limit. Of course, $10billion represents almost 10% of the company's value.

Steve

Is your characterization of the situation correct???

I hear most/all repub legislators are saying that 10bill will prevent smaller companies from drilling and don't want anything near 10bill - if anything at all...

... and many dem senators want at least 10bill or don't want any cap at all. ( Harry Reid )

Someone has blocked the legislation from even being considered on the floor - twice.

Here's a short article on Reuters (a pretty middle of the road news org. ) reporting on the situation.

UPDATE 1-$10 bln oil liability cap not enough-US Sen. Reid | Reuters

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147837].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Is your characterization of the situation correct???

I hear most/all repub legislators are saying that 10bill will prevent smaller companies from drilling and don't want anything near 10bill - if anything at all...

... and many dem senators want at least 10bill or don't want any cap at all. ( Harry Reid )

Someone has blocked the legislation from even being considered on the floor - twice.

Here's a short article on Reuters (a pretty middle of the road news org. ) reporting on the situation.

UPDATE 1-$10 bln oil liability cap not enough-US Sen. Reid | Reuters

TL

Well, that was my understanding. 10billion is obviously a LOT! MANY think companies can spend all they make, or all their assets, and NEITHER is true! And YEAH, a 10billion dollar cap would even cause BP to blink! And how big are THEY!?!?!? Judging by the range of places that invested, and the size, I would say they are substantial. Yet $10billion is a LOT!

THAT would be like Bill Gates spending over $4billion USD! And a lot of bill gates net worth is PAPER, like STOCK! Trying to sell almost 10% could devalue the stock, etc...

BUT, frankly, I hate the idea of creating a well where you can't get to it. I don't think that should be allowed. And this is compared to katrina. SUPPOSE a storm like katrina had come along! IT could have caused this. That iss an EXPECTED scenario and, CLEARLY, they weren't prepared!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147972].message }}

The 13th Warrior

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Someone has blocked the legislation from even being considered on the floor - twice.

THAT persons name and face should be BLASTED all over media exposing that financial pervert, that benedict arnold, that corporate protectionist, that cheap Whore, and why aren't people of that politicians district gathering names for an IMMEDIATE recall, if that means anything at all?

Recall's means nothing, anyway, that person is PAID for life, MADE their cash.

Since they NEVER have to give back the:

bribes,

consistent legal allotments,

commissions,

grants,

annuities,

subsidies,

allowances,

endowments,

donations,

gifts,

dividends,

proceeds,

procurements,

provisions,

interests,

contributions,

honorariums,

stipends,

appropriations,

and gratuities IN ADDITION to, and thanks , by the way, our hard earn TAX DOLLARS/salary, PENSION and LIFETIME BENEFITS that almost EQUAL if not surpass their current wage, recalls are not much of anything in the way of pain/punishment that fits the crime and seriously discourages and brings any fear to practice such behavior.

The game is simple: how MUCH can you amass and how many/much lifetime paid allowances can you get before you're out of office?

Everyone recalled or voted out is living the Good Life, probably receiving 100 different checks from the private sector and dividend quarterly payments, along with their Govt. benefits.

Yeah, voters showed THEM....., what a hollow victory for Joe Public, we are STILL paying them.

The appearance of a victory, no victory at all.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2148000].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by The 13th Warrior

THAT persons name and face should be BLASTED all over media exposing that financial pervert, that benedict arnold, that corporate protectionist, that cheap Whore, and why aren't people of that politicians district gathering names for an IMMEDIATE recall, if that means anything at all?

Recall's means nothing, anyway, that person is PAID for life, MADE their cash..

Well, I SEARCHED! Apparently I FOUND the person. She apparently is NOT as bad and greedy as some think. She EVEN has an agreement with REID on a similar issue! BUT, if you are out for blood, read HER side!

Press Releases - Press Office - United States Senator Lisa Murkowski

BASICALLY Robert Menendez asked for passage of a bill that Lisa felt was unreasonable, and she had already presented her own, that he never read. The goal is the same in the end but Lisa wants to try to limit corporate risk over the short term, save some contracts for alaska, etc...

OH, and to prove this IS the person, and show reid's and robert's side:

http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/05/...-cap-increase/

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2148227].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by The 13th Warrior

THAT persons name and face should be BLASTED all over media exposing that financial pervert, that benedict arnold, that corporate protectionist, that cheap Whore, and why aren't people of that politicians district gathering names for an IMMEDIATE recall, if that means anything at all?

Recall's means nothing, anyway, that person is PAID for life, MADE their cash.

Since they NEVER have to give back the:

bribes,

consistent legal allotments,

commissions,

grants,

annuities,

subsidies,

allowances,

endowments,

donations,

gifts,

dividends,

proceeds,

procurements,

provisions,

interests,

contributions,

honorariums,

stipends,

appropriations,

and gratuities IN ADDITION to, and thanks , by the way, our hard earn TAX DOLLARS/salary, PENSION and LIFETIME BENEFITS that almost EQUAL if not surpass their current wage, recalls are not much of anything in the way of pain/punishment that fits the crime and seriously discourages and brings any fear to practice such behavior.

The game is simple: how MUCH can you amass and how many/much lifetime paid allowances can you get before you're out of office?

Everyone recalled or voted out is living the Good Life, probably receiving 100 different checks from the private sector and dividend quarterly payments, along with their Govt. benefits.

Yeah, voters showed THEM....., what a hollow victory for Joe Public, we are STILL paying them.

The appearance of a victory, no victory at all.

Heads are starting to roll...

The Obama administration has fired the head of the U.S. Minerals Management Service Elizabeth "Liz" Birnbaum, in response to blistering criticism over the federal government's lax oversight of BP and the rest of the offshore oil industry.

House cleaning of that entire agency is underway.

and...

Look out for Mr. Salazar to resign about 3-6 months after this leak is stopped.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2148643].message }}

Gasen

16 years ago

Oh crap, it gets worse

A source told IG investigators that oil and gas officials on the platforms had filled out inspection forms, which would then be completed or signed by an MMS inspector.

Thanks

Signature

Who Else Wants To Make Multiple Streams On Income Online Using These 21 Proven Ways Methods?

What You Actually Need To Know About List Building To Make Serious Profits Or Lose Out To Your Competitors!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147861].message }}

Gasen

16 years ago

BP had a key role in the Exxon Valdez disaster - Yahoo! News

Thanks

Signature

Who Else Wants To Make Multiple Streams On Income Online Using These 21 Proven Ways Methods?

What You Actually Need To Know About List Building To Make Serious Profits Or Lose Out To Your Competitors!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147871].message }}

Gasen

16 years ago

washingtonpost.com

Thanks

Signature

Who Else Wants To Make Multiple Streams On Income Online Using These 21 Proven Ways Methods?

What You Actually Need To Know About List Building To Make Serious Profits Or Lose Out To Your Competitors!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147875].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

HECK, there is one guy that is pretty much GUARANTEED to say the opposite of what I want! His WIFE, interestingly, is officially AGAINST him politically. There is *****NO***** way he would say ANYTHING against this government! NO WAY! PERIOD! NEVER! Oh well, he is from LOUSIANA! He and I agree! He is VERY vocal! YIKES!

Even conservatives that don't generally like him say, happily and admiringly in a way, that now we know he puts his state above politics!

And YEAH, I don't know WHAT can be done here, but the army corps of engineers is supposed to work on SOMEWHAT similar things. If this were a lot closer to the coast, or in shallower water, they would probably just build a dam, pump the water out, and pump the oil into a tank while trying to get a device on to cap it. Fairly simple! Move that out miles, or put it a mile down, and it becomes FAR harder. If they had a sub with a simple goal, and accurate sonar or some such, MAYBE they could do it. Oh well, I never claimed to be an expert, hopefully they can do it easily enough.

Orin Hatch claimed he knows a guy that has equipment for doing this, but nobody would listen! HIS plan is a modificatioon on the original BP idea. Maybe THAT would work.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147910].message }}

Gasen

16 years ago

Fishermen Report Illness From BP Chemicals - Health News Story - WDSU New Orleans

Thanks

Signature

Who Else Wants To Make Multiple Streams On Income Online Using These 21 Proven Ways Methods?

What You Actually Need To Know About List Building To Make Serious Profits Or Lose Out To Your Competitors!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2147918].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Well, BP is saying it appears to be working. They should confirm it later tonight.

I love how they say "We can stop drilling, but how much are you willing to pay?"? HUH? The cost isn't due to supply! It is due to greed and inflation(which itself is partially due to oil). If it were due to supply, it wouldn't have been so eratic, OPEC wouldn't exist, etc... And OPEC "limits supply"(read HOLDS BACK) to increase price. But, frankly, we should work on getting rid of OIL, etc...

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2149247].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Well, BP is saying it appears to be working. They should confirm it later tonight.

I love how they say "We can stop drilling, but how much are you willing to pay?"? HUH? The cost isn't due to supply! It is due to greed and inflation(which itself is partially due to oil). If it were due to supply, it wouldn't have been so eratic, OPEC wouldn't exist, etc... And OPEC "limits supply"(read HOLDS BACK) to increase price. But, frankly, we should work on getting rid of OIL, etc...

Steve

Natural gas until we can convert to wind/solar, etc. We have a 200 year supply of natural gas right here in this country, on land and is cheaper, safer and cleaner than oil.

Converting cars to natural gas is fairly easy and cheap.

In 3 years, the US will be the World's leading exporter of natural gas because we don't use it.

Does it make sense to export natural gas then import oil?

[ 1 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2149325].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Natural gas until we can convert to wind/solar, etc. We have a 200 year supply of natural gas right here in this country, on land and is cheaper, safer and cleaner than oil.

Converting cars to natural gas is fairly easy and cheap.

In 3 years, the US will be the World's leading exporter of natural gas because we don't use it.

Does it make sense to export natural gas then import oil?

You're right, but I am not sure about some related things. Still, there is a heavily used CNG plant by logan airport. so tthere IS commercial use of CNG in transportation. AND, here at least, they are ADVERTISING it as a gasoline replacement.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2149345].message }}

Lawrh

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Does it make sense to export natural gas then import oil?

This is already the next target of the energy market manipulators. Russia holds 38% of the worlds proven natural gas supplies and is the largest exporter, with the Middle East holding 35%. Natural gas is plentiful and should be dirt cheap.

Does anyone really think the energy industry will allow prices to come down? If people switched to Natural gas, we would no doubt have shortages, pipeline bursts, any excuse to keep the price up. Cynicism has set in. Sorry.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

â€œStrategy without action is a day-dream; action without strategy is a nightmare.â€ â€“ Old Japanese proverb -

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2149408].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Lawrh

This is already the next target of the energy market manipulators. Russia holds 38% of the worlds proven natural gas supplies and is the largest exporter, with the Middle East holding 35%. Natural gas is plentiful and should be dirt cheap.

Does anyone really think the energy industry will allow prices to come down? If people switched to Natural gas, we would no doubt have shortages, pipeline bursts, any excuse to keep the price up. Cynicism has set in. Sorry.

Which is exactly why we should start building wind and solar like crazy. Both oil and gas need to be cheaper than green, or no one will use them.

Building wind and solar will force oil and gas prices to fall, and this is never factored into the price of green energy, which is the effect it will have on the prices of gas and oil.

Plus, even if natural gas becomes the same price as oil, the money will stay in the US, and it's safer and cleaner than oil and we wouldn't need to be worried about oil spills in the Gulf.

The US just needs to be better educated that there are alternatives with tax credits for early adaptors.

Not to mention, T Boone Pickens has plenty of investors for NLG that aren't worried about how the rest of the energy industry feels. They're willing to make a buck from gas if no one else wants to. All he needs is the go-ahead.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2149509].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Which is exactly why we should start building wind and solar like crazy. Both oil and gas need to be cheaper than green, or no one will use them.

Building wind and solar will force oil and gas prices to fall, and this is never factored into the price of green energy, which is the effect it will have on the prices of gas and oil.

Plus, even if natural gas becomes the same price as oil, the money will stay in the US, and it's safer and cleaner than oil and we wouldn't need to be worried about oil spills in the Gulf.

The US just needs to be better educated that there are alternatives with tax credits for early adaptors.

Not to mention, T Boone Pickens has plenty of investors for NLG that aren't worried about how the rest of the energy industry feels. They're willing to make a buck from gas if no one else wants to. All he needs is the go-ahead.

The dems are going to work very hard to not give that big contract to Mr. Pickens or any group he's associated with.

They don't like his part in what they see as the swift boating of John Kerry during the 2004 prez election.

Let's hope their dislike of Mr. Pickens won't be a major impediment in the nation moving forward on a new energy direction.

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2149958].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Lawrh

This is already the next target of the energy market manipulators. Russia holds 38% of the worlds proven natural gas supplies and is the largest exporter, with the Middle East holding 35%. Natural gas is plentiful and should be dirt cheap.

Does anyone really think the energy industry will allow prices to come down? If people switched to Natural gas, we would no doubt have shortages, pipeline bursts, any excuse to keep the price up. Cynicism has set in. Sorry.

That's a good point:

Russia supplies up to half the EU's gas supply through a pipeline.

Last year Russia turned off the pipe supplying Ukraine's gas, leaving that country in turmoil. If you are dependent on imported energy the supplier can turn off your supply at a whim. It's why Russia is treated with great respect by the EU.

At the time an official at Gazprom's headquarters in Moscow said the ominous words: "We have fully cut off supplies to Ukraine as of 10am (0700 GMT) today."

Gas is also(especially if using tankers) much more expensive to transport than oil, transportation costs are over half the cost of the gas market value.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2155463].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Natural gas until we can convert to wind/solar, etc. We have a 200 year supply of natural gas right here in this country, on land and is cheaper, safer and cleaner than oil.

Converting cars to natural gas is fairly easy and cheap.

In 3 years, the US will be the World's leading exporter of natural gas because we don't use it.

Does it make sense to export natural gas then import oil?

The key isn't with cars, that's small time stuff.
What needs to be converted first and what will have the biggest impact is the semi's, buses, and other larger vehicles that burn diesel.
If that was done we would be able to produce enough oil domestically and on land to supply our cars and motorcycles for a very long time.
Of course I'm not saying building cars that run on natural gas and hybrids shouldn't be done. Just that the big users and the ones that have the larger impact are the big rigs.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2150086].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

The key isn't with cars, that's small time stuff.
What needs to be converted first and what will have the biggest impact is the semi's, buses, and other larger vehicles that burn diesel.
If that was done we would be able to produce enough oil domestically and on land to supply our cars and motorcycles for a very long time.
Of course I'm not saying building cars that run on natural gas and hybrids shouldn't be done. Just that the big users and the ones that have the larger impact are the big rigs.

Maybe I should have said "vehicle". However there is much more gas consumed than diesle. Granted the chart is 6 years old, but I doubt the percentages have changed that much since then...From doe.gov: (diesel is a distillate)
U.S. Oil Demand by Product

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2150113].message }}

myob 16 years ago

And besides, a burst in a natural gas pipe 5,000 ft deep in the Gulf would only make bubbles.
- [ 2 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2150283].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

The key isn't with cars, that's small time stuff.
What needs to be converted first and what will have the biggest impact is the semi's, buses, and other larger vehicles that burn diesel.
If that was done we would be able to produce enough oil domestically and on land to supply our cars and motorcycles for a very long time.
Of course I'm not saying building cars that run on natural gas and hybrids shouldn't be done. Just that the big users and the ones that have the larger impact are the big rigs.

BUSES are ALREADY being converted! As I said, look at logan! Perhaps ALL their buses are CNG!!!! Semis CAN'T be easily converted because they have to go all over, and there has to be an infrastructure in place. CARS come FIRST! If THEY are comverted, the infrastructure will be in place for most other things.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2150438].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Lawrh,

You may be right. I will NEVER forget, and wish I knew WHY ****ONE**** little resin plant in japan SUPPOSEDLY blew up, and RAM prices SKYROCKETED!

I KNEW, even when I was like 6, that CERAMIC was BETTER than plastic! They stopped using it because RESIN reduced costs by about $1 RETAIL per chip. Well, OK, I just proved that the resin plant was NOT the real cause of the increase. OK, now that I think about it, if it were, then TVs would have increased in price by WELL over $1000!

You really have to wonder sometimes!

Too Lean A Machine?

One explosion at a chemical plant in Japan in 1993 cut off half the world's capacity for a resin used to make computer chips. The next month, the price of memory chips doubled, driving laptop prices up by $100.

Although that DID happen, SUPPOSEDLY for that reason, anyone that ever looked at the IC industry knows it is a LIE! And why just MEMORY!?!?!?!? Almost every circuit in a PC uses the same stuff! The CASE might ALSO!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2149467].message }}

rondo

16 years ago

Check out this video about the clean-up.

BP Fails Booming School 101

Warning: Very Coarse language

YouTube - BP Fails Booming School 101 Gulf Oil...

Thanks

Signature

Online courses

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2150397].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Rondo,

The highest esitimate I heard was 400,000gallons! SCRATCH THAT, NOW the highest is 504,000gallons. and I WISH they would make it clear WHICH gallons they are speaking of.

A gallon is a measure of volume of approximately four litres in the United States, and approximately five litres in the United Kingdom. Historically it has had many different definitions, but there are three definitions in current use. These are the U.S. liquid gallon (≈ 3.78 L) and the lesser used U.S. dry gallon (≈ 4.4 L) which are in use in the United States, and the Imperial (UK) gallon (≈ 4.5 L) which is in unofficial use within the United Kingdom and Ireland and is in semi-official use within Canada (See Canadian units).[1] The gallon, be it the Imperial or U.S. gallon, is sometimes found in other English-speaking countries.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2150467].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Rondo,

The highest esitimate I heard was 400,000gallons! SCRATCH THAT, NOW the highest is 504,000gallons. and I WISH they would make it clear WHICH gallons they are speaking of.

Steve

It doesn't really matter on that scale of magnitude. It is a disaster. The differential percentage is negligible, and considering the accuracy of measurement it may actually even be well within any margin of error no matter what unit of measurement is used.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2154361].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

It doesn't really matter on that scale of magnitude. It is a disaster. The differential percentage is negligible, and considering the accuracy of measurement it may actually even be well within any margin of error no matter what unit of measurement is used.

Well, it could be close to 25%! STILL, many want to know. If it took 5 years for one measure to invade the world, another might take LESS than 4! And when I say years, I realize it may take longer, or far less time. It is just for illustration. At the rate it is going, it could surround the US in a year, and would probably hit CUBA in that time. Hopefully, this capping attempt will work, etc... And they say 2 days. Is that 2 chronological days, meaning sometime sunday, or political garbage deceptive speak, meaning perhaps wednesday, since they may stop saturday, sunday, and monday(which is memorial day and a holiday)?

BTW I spoke earlier basically saying that to tell travelers that it was OK to go to florida because it is pristine was basically a LIE, as it would be meaningless unless the trip was already planned and they would arrive before yesterday. After all, a MINOR change could EASILY make the place a MESS, and you can't really forcast that! Well, reports are that the oil has found a SHORTCUT! It is apparently on its way to florida and may soon be there.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2154447].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

So it seems BP is still playing stupid games. Friday, it appears BP hired about 300 temp workers to be on the beach when Obama was there. According to locals who have been at the beach every day the last few weeks, these workers were only there while Obama was there and immediately left after the Prez left. Are these people for real!? Who do they think they are fooling?
- Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2154890].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

YIKES!

It is ONE thing to be bad, etc... but to bus in workers just for appearances!?!?!? FRANKLY, you would figure that the volunteers, city, etc... would demand they do real work, and stay there for some appreciable time. And you would think that the government would treat it as a purchase(With the purchaser, or here the company, paying ALL taxes, and the workers, not actually paid for labor, wouldn't be able to claim it.). Frankly, BP should be forced to pay EVERY penny they would have to pay if it were legal full time employment, and the workers shouldn't get any benefit outside of the basic payment, because they are complicit.

And it is FRAUD, so why isn't it treated accordingly?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2155181].message }}

AlanGNW

16 years ago

I love conspiracy theories...

Sabotage... BP behind the Valdez...! And as for using a nuke to solve the spill! Hilarious reading.

Lets not forget that the company is regulated and the IRS has a major interest. You want conspiracy theories - look closer to home.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free SEO guide for beginners | Design Your Own Wordpress Themes

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2155221].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by AlanSLV

I love conspiracy theories...

Sabotage... BP behind the Valdez...! And as for using a nuke to solve the spill! Hilarious reading.

Lets not forget that the company is regulated and the IRS has a major interest. You want conspiracy theories - look closer to home.

Well, I think most here do NOT want to discuss nukes! If there were a big enough blast in the right spot, or an imperfection in that well, a nuke could fracture the crust and increase the size of the gusher AND create a VOLCANO! Frankly, I don't think that would be good for the gulf coast. There is a national park in Hawaii that is constantly changing, etc.. because of a volcano there, and THEY are "used" to such phenomena.

There are SO MANY conspiracies that are FACT! HECK, the US has one that was exposed MONTHS ago and is only now PROVEN FACT(Admitted YESTERDAY)! I could say more, but.... HECK, people in 1945 said they saw some odd bodies. APPARENTLY, the US government created a conspiracy so that in 1954(notice the transposition!?!?!?) they dropped dummies fitting the description of those 9 years earlier. The government LATER said people made a mistake on the dates, and they simply saw the dropped dummies! Sounds reasonable, right?!?!? Well, let me ask you questions that apparently nobody asked before....

******WHY******? They CLAMED something like they were testing parachutes or some such. ******WHY******? I mean the dummies were too small, and the proportions were off, so any tests would be near WORTHLESS for humans! And WHY were they so oddly colored?

Still, it is odd to believe that someone would remember something so far off, etc...

and what of project bluebook? They stopped it so soon, etc... HECK, it took them a LONG time to reveal groom lake! So YEP, conspiracies exist. The argument that a secret can't be kept is STUPID on its face! NONE of the above secrets were kept, which is OBVIOUS because of the "conspiracy theory". Still, the FACTS were either not listened to, not believed, or "discredited". EVEN the stealth bomber was NO secret! It was rumored for MONTHS, perhaps years, and one company introduced a model that was close BEFORE the stealth bomber was revealed to the world!

As for these wells being regulated, they really aren't. SOME consider the waters international waters. BESIDES, nobody really KNOWS what they are doing! GRANTED they KNEW this would affect the US, and HAD to fess up, etc... They COULD have left, and it may have taken WEEKS to find out about it and track it down to them. One person in government even lauded BP saying they could have just left, but they are doing the right thing and trying to take care of it.

Of course, if I were president, and they left, I would have gone straight to the queen of england(Who basically retained rights to control of BP, and similar companies) and would have told her about what BP had done, and the proof, and made it clear that we would sever all relations with the UK if they didn't come out ASAP and give it 100% effort. She would probably have just made a call to them and demanded that they be on the next flight out. Could you imagine how they would react, and the pressure of having the US and the UK breathing down their necks, and the embarrassment? One would hope Obama would have done the same thing. But they stayed and fessed up, so none of that was necessary.

BTW LUCKILY the news is reporting that 2 days is 2 days! They should know by tomorrow. HOPEFULLY they will work on monday. It would be an INSULT to all veterans and the US if they were unfinished on monday and still took the day off. They FOUGHT and the holiday is to honor, those that fought to PROTECT the US.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2155447].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

GREAT! Spain is really in trouble, and BP seems to have NO plan! They say the next step will take 4-7 days. Does 4 mean 4,5,6, or 7? Is 7 7,8, or 9?

Frankly, I am surprised there haven't been death threats yet. I mean WOW! I can just imagine the thoughts that must be going through some people's heads in Louisiana.

For those that don't know, LA is one of those places that has some wierd customs, laws, lifestyle, etc.... Some even have their own language Louisiana Creole French - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (though they do generally speak english). They have special holidays, like mardigras Mardi Gras - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . In short, the people brought up there that like that place are like their counterparts in texas! They couldn't see themselves living ANY other place. It isn't like they could even move the next state over! Destruction of the environment in LA, EVEN if it affected NO other place, would be like losing a beloved friend or relative. Of course, I wouldn't want it to destroy ANY environment. Right now, I am living near boston, and it will be heavily affected if this mess goes up the east coast.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2157501].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

BP's Action Plan: None

but our benefit's package is awesome....

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2157619].message }}

NicheCowboy

16 years ago

from todays article on yahoo...

"
In the past three years, BP ran up 760 "egregious, willful" safety violations, while Sunoco and Conoco-Phillips each had eight, Citgo had two and Exxon had one comparable citation, ABC News reports, citing OSHA statistic.
Bishop, who's British, says BP's fumbles and Hayward's incompetence have been wince-inducing.
"He's up there with Lloyd Blankfein at Goldman Sachs," says Bishop, who says "insensitivity" by CEOs is now a business risk for the firms they lead. "

sickening.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174000].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by NicheCowboy

from todays article on yahoo...

"
In the past three years, BP ran up 760 "egregious, willful" safety violations, while Sunoco and Conoco-Phillips each had eight, Citgo had two and Exxon had one comparable citation, ABC News reports, citing OSHA statistic.
Bishop, who's British, says BP's fumbles and Hayward's incompetence have been wince-inducing.
"He's up there with Lloyd Blankfein at Goldman Sachs," says Bishop, who says "insensitivity" by CEOs is now a business risk for the firms they lead. "

sickening.

YEAH! Conoco is one of the companies I have invested in, and sunoco is the one I do the most business with right now, when I buy gas for my OWN car, which isn't very often.

I wouldn't touch citgo with a 50 foot pole.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174044].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Yep, incompetence is the word that comes to mind quickly regarding the BP CEO. The guy is tone death and a walking foot in the mouth idiot. The recent comment about wanting "my life back" has to go down in history as one of the most insensitive, ridiculous and offensive statements by a ceo in history.

Originally Posted by NicheCowboy

...Hayward's incompetence have been wince-inducing.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174160].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Yep, incompetence is the word that comes to mind quickly regarding the BP CEO. The guy is tone death and a walking foot in the mouth idiot. The recent comment about wanting "my life back" has to go down in history as one of the most insensitive, ridiculous and offensive statements by a ceo in history.

Yeah, if I were there, I would say, "Well, WE want our LAND, and wildlife, back as well as our lives!"!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174194].message }}

NicheCowboy 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Yeah, if I were there, I would say, "Well, WE want our LAND, and wildlife, back as well as our lives!"!

\

11 people killed from BP's negligence will never get theirs back.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175315].message }}

Danny_C

16 years ago

Whatever it ends up being, I can only hope it puts them out of business for good. I know that's doubtful, but I can dream.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174124].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Is the Federal Government going to get tough on these folks at BP?

There are signs but there's another twist,

It's a British Company.

Will the British gov plead for leniency - behind the scenes???

We shall see what happens.

TL

Ps. Anyone have any numbers that they would like to see BP pay?

( should there be punitive damages paid?? )

I think we're talking...

( at least... )

... 100 Billion Dollars.

( like the bad guy on Austin Powers ).

Any guesstimates???

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174211].message }}

Mike Wright 16 years ago

On a positive note,

all that oil spreading out around the Gulf, should help to
calm the troubled waters in the new hurricane season.

Then at the end of the season a suitably mega hurricane
could hoover up all the oil and dump it over some wasteland
with no sentient lifeforms (Texas possibly?)
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174626].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

From a story I just read:

"Obama's administration on Thursday handed BP a $69 million bill for recovery costs to date -- a figure sure to grow in the weeks and months ahead."

That's not punitive. Just a cleanup bill to date. Seems like $100 billion is likely.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Ps. Anyone have any numbers that they would like to see BP pay?
( should there be punitive damages paid?? )
I think we're talking...
( at least... )
... 100 Billion Dollars.
TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2181405].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

From a story I just read:

"Obama's administration on Thursday handed BP a $69 million bill for recovery costs to date -- a figure sure to grow in the weeks and months ahead."

That's not punitive. Just a cleanup bill to date. Seems like $100 billion is likely.

This is like a wrongful death claim. TECHNICALLY, it IS a wrongful death claim. The ONLY difference is that most of the deaths aren't human, and we care about the mess also. But HOW can such a claim EVER really be paid back? 100billion may well be a comparitive drop in the bucket.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2181658].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

100 Billion, by all accounts, would basically BANKRUPT the company! If they sold EVERYTHING at 100% of its HIGH, they would have about $167Billion. So you are talking about around 60% of the company, at its HIGH! TODAY, it is like 118Billion. As for earnings? $19,713,166,666.67 SO, if they paid 100percent of their stated earnings at 0%, it would take over 5 years to pay it, assuming the Euro didn't drop any more.

To pay it off in five years, at 6.5%, they would have to pay approximately 1,956,615,000.00 every month(about 20% more than they make in a year). Ironically, that would be over 117,396,900,000, which is almost enough to effectively buy the company now!

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174646].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

100 Billion, by all accounts, would basically BANKRUPT the company! If they sold EVERYTHING at 100% of its HIGH, they would have about $167Billion. So you are talking about around 60% of the company, at its HIGH! TODAY, it is like 118Billion. As for earnings? $19,713,166,666.67 SO, if they paid 100percent of their stated earnings at 0%, it would take over 5 years to pay it, assuming the Euro didn't drop any more.

To pay it off in five years, at 6.5%, they would have to pay approximately 1,956,615,000.00 every month(about 20% more than they make in a year). Ironically, that would be over 117,396,900,000, which is almost enough to effectively buy the company now!

Steve

How much in damage dollars do you think they could cause???

How about a 15-20 year payback plan???

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174785].message }}

NicheCowboy

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

100 Billion, by all accounts, would basically BANKRUPT the company! If they sold EVERYTHING at 100% of its HIGH, they would have about $167Billion. So you are talking about around 60% of the company, at its HIGH! TODAY, it is like 118Billion. As for earnings? $19,713,166,666.67 SO, if they paid 100percent of their stated earnings at 0%, it would take over 5 years to pay it, assuming the Euro didn't drop any more.

To pay it off in five years, at 6.5%, they would have to pay approximately 1,956,615,000.00 every month(about 20% more than they make in a year). Ironically, that would be over 117,396,900,000, which is almost enough to effectively buy the company now!

Steve

BP is planning to give a "lick and a promise" cleanup. Just like they have been doing for the last 45 days. There should be 100 times the amount of booms in the water right now...100 times the amount of ships and workers out there....every asset they and our own government has should be out there. Once it's all resolved, the government should be passing the bill to BP.

The costs to TRULY clean the gulf ...and god forbid...the Atlantic...are limitless, not to mention costs to compensate those affected.

By the way, the coast guard admiral is truly a joke. That video Rondo posted sums up why.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175361].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

How much damage COULD they cause, as in are ABLE to? MAN, they could effectively destroy the planet! I am just talking about the practical end. You likened your statement to that of Mr. Evil. HE was constantly laughed at because it was either SO low that people thought WHY BOTHER, or so high that people thought it ludicrous.

How asbout creating a REAL trust fund, and having the company pay 1/3rd of their market value, or 10Billion, whichever is more, UP FRONT on the disaster, and pay up to 80% of their net profits and any portion of salary over $150,000 for the rest of their existance until all have the standard of living and environmental experience that they should have had? That would be somewhat fair, DEFINATELY punitive to all, and hopefully get it all done. IMAGINE a $1,000,000 CEO having to suddenly live off of $150,000, and being doomed to that until louisiana, florida, etc... are cleaned up, the fishermen have a viable business, etc....!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2174978].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

So, you're saying that they will probably will more damage than they are worth right?

Did I see somewhere in this thread that you said you owned BP stock???

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175068].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

So, you're saying that they will probably will more damage than they are worth right?

Did I see somewhere in this thread that you said you owned BP stock???

TL

I DID, I don't anymore! Why?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175191].message }}

TLTheLiberator 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

I DID, I don't anymore! Why?

I was just curious if you were still invested with them.

There must be a lot of short positions and options betting on the stock going down out there in investment land.

Someone also probably dreamed up a derivative related to BP stock also.

TL
- Thanks
Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175397].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

If it were up to me, I would look for any legal way for BP to get the death penalty and wouldn't be allowed to exist as a company doing business in/w the US. I'd send a big message to investors that they are responsible for the actions of the companies they invest in.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175098].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

If it were up to me, I would look for any legal way for BP to get the death penalty and wouldn't be allowed to exist as a company doing business in/w the US. I'd send a big message to investors that they are responsible for the actions of the companies they invest in.

WAY TO GO! NOBODY would invest in ANYTHING! I had TWO investments that I knew of. ONE was GENERIC through a predefined portfolio. I didn't pick the stock! ANOTHER I setup because it was in cramers portfolio and he had a good track record. BTW HE has sold it ALSO!

BTW don't be TOO hard on us! YOU might have an investment in BP! Most of the people here might! Unless you checked all your stocks, and own NO money markets or mutual funds, don't bet that you don't!

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175201].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

WAY TO GO! NOBODY would invest in ANYTHING! I had TWO investments that I knew of. ONE was GENERIC through a predefined portfolio. I didn't pick the stock! ANOTHER I setup because it was in cramers portfolio and he had a good track record. BTW HE has sold it ALSO!

BTW don't be TOO hard on us! YOU might have an investment in BP! Most of the people here might! Unless you checked all your stocks, and own NO money markets or mutual funds, don't bet that you don't!

Steve

And in your "opinion" fining a company its entire worth won't hurt stock owners. You're suggestions are also giving BP the death penalty, you just can't see it. The difference is, I'm more honest and upfront about it. You hide behind fines that will have the same impact on the company and hurt those same investors you now try to protect. Where do you think all the fine money you said to take will come from?

Defending people making money off a company like BP is a joke. And if by some strange chance I have money invested in BP, I deserve to lose that money. You may be able to enjoy blood money, but I can't. And investors should learn that if they invest in a company that did what BP did, they will likely lose their money.

Those same investors you are now so concerned about, you totally disregard in your own "solution". The person that has money invested in BP and didn't know it will still lose money with your "idea". Oooooops.

But hey, if you want to be a cheerleader for keeping BP in business, then "RAH RAH RAH"!!!

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175268].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

And in your "opinion" fining a company its entire worth won't hurt stock owners. You're suggestions are also giving BP the death penalty, you just can't see it. The difference is, I'm more honest and upfront about it. You hide behind fines that will have the same impact on the company and hurt those same investors you now try to protect. Where do you think all the fine money you said to take will come from?

Defending people making money off a company like BP is a joke. And if by some strange chance I have money invested in BP, I deserve to lose that money. You may be able to enjoy blood money, but I can't. And investors should learn that if they invest in a company that did what BP did, they will likely lose their money.

Those same investors you are now so concerned about, you totally disregard in your own "solution". The person that has money invested in BP and didn't know it will still lose money with your "idea". Oooooops.

But hey, if you want to be a cheerleader for keeping BP in business, then "RAH RAH RAH"!!!

It may hurt BP stock, etc... but BP has a chance of making SOME amends, etc... BESIDES, let's be reasonable. If it costs $100Billion to fix the problem, you can BET it will cost $250Billion! WHY? Well, about $100Billion for the effort, perhaps $50billion in commissions, etc... for lawyers et al. About another $50billion for politicians. And that leaves $50billion for inflation, various outlandish costs, etc...

OK, when you said :

If it were up to me, I would look for any legal way for BP to get the death penalty and wouldn't be allowed to exist as a company doing business in/w the US. I'd send a big message to investors that they are responsible for the actions of the companies they invest in.

Maybe I read too much into it. But YEAH, people KNOW that such a thing can hurt their investment. But MOST shareholders are EXEMPT from ANY other liability.

Hey, I probably didn't even get a DIVIDEND from BP, I was in it a short time, and lost my shirt. Of course, it was one of several hundred companies I invested in.

And NOW, you have

Former Clinton Labor Secretary and Obama advisor Robert Reich thinks a great solution to the BP oil spill would be for the government to take it over. When questioned by, of all people, a substitute anchor on CNN - Reich stood by the idea that government would be able to run and operate a giant oil company efficiently.

WOW, they think they can control anything! What's next, the UK? Interestingly, the Queen apparently relinquished her golden share in BP, according to an article in a 2004 publication I just read, but it IS still a british company. Although it APPEARS to be on the NYSE, closer examination shows it ISN'T! That "STOCK" isn't stock in BP, but an ADR for BP stock! American Depositary Receipt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia And if the government is SO great, let them stand up and PROVE IT! If they can REALLY fix this leak, they can simply DO IT!

BTW if the queen had NOT given up her share, a hostile takeover would be against the sovereignty of the UK itself! It would be like the US trying to take over the bank of england, or the treasury of it!

NicheCowboy,

That is kind of my point.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175422].message }}

NicheCowboy

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

WAY TO GO! NOBODY would invest in ANYTHING! I had TWO investments that I knew of. ONE was GENERIC through a predefined portfolio. I didn't pick the stock! ANOTHER I setup because it was in cramers portfolio and he had a good track record. BTW HE has sold it ALSO!

BTW don't be TOO hard on us! YOU might have an investment in BP! Most of the people here might! Unless you checked all your stocks, and own NO money markets or mutual funds, don't bet that you don't!

Steve

Any company that makes business decisions that are co careless and wreckless...in regards to both human life and the environment we all live in...deserve to face crippling criminal and civil consequences.

If this were just a bad accident that happened while BP was operating within the laws, that's one thing. They don't operate within the laws though. They laugh at government fines the same way Donald Trump would laugh over a traffic ticket.

It's time for the reaper to visit BP. Their days are about over.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175384].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

After they went and sold us out on our oil in Alaska - that was supposed to be OUR oil and as soon as they could (after cleaning up THAT spill they caused) they wrote us off and are selling it offshore.......I think that anyone who had anything to do with HIRING them should also be prosecuted. With BP's reputation for spillage and backstabbing business practices there was no excuse whatsoever for them to be hired for this one. It was just an irrational and irresponsible action and they should have to face some of those consequences. I'm not sure who hired them so don't know WHO I am talking about so don't take that into politics. Whatever money changed hands to arrange this deal came before the safety of the planet. Hope they choke on their three martini lunches.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175127].message }}

myob 16 years ago

I think it's something like 43 million gallons have gushed out so far. BP does not have the money to clean up the oil, let alone the incalculable environmental damage.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175162].message }}

enterpryzman

16 years ago

As far as I am concerned, the heads of BP are as guilty or worse than those who went to jail for Enron involvement.
Frye 'em !

Enterpryzman

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175481].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by enterpryzman

As far as I am concerned, the heads of BP are as guilty or worse than those who went to jail for Enron involvement.
Frye 'em !

Enterpryzman

I was saying enron should go bankrupt for about 2 years prior to them doing so. It turns out they were worse than I dreamed! People may have DIED! Some WERE tortured, because of enron! And they literally LAUGHED about it! They actually found TAPES with them actually LAUGHING about it! They were claiming they would quickly retire RICH, while people that were poor were suffering without the essentials, and rich people paid a LOT more! So don't claim their culpability is in ANY way mitigated by BPs GARBAGE! MOST of the stuff enron did never made it to the front pages, though it was important enough to be front page news. And enron bought at least ONE GOOD STRONG company, and GUTTED everything! People that were about to retire after a long productive and dangerous life lost their ENTIRE retirement.

Of course, I am not saying BP is innocent either. They did so much wrong that one more thing might actually make people want to hang them because it would appear so obviously intentional.

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175672].message }}

myob 16 years ago

BP got slapped with a $69 million "first installment" cleanup bill, under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, enacted after the Exxon Valdez oil disaster. More charges to come.

US to send BP 69-million-dollar bill for spill expenses
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2175806].message }}

enterpryzman

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

I was saying enron should go bankrupt for about 2 years prior to them doing so. It turns out they were worse than I dreamed! People may have DIED! Some WERE tortured, because of enron! And they literally LAUGHED about it! They actually found TAPES with them actually LAUGHING about it! They were claiming they would quickly retire RICH, while people that were poor were suffering without the essentials, and rich people paid a LOT more! So don't claim their culpability is in ANY way mitigated by BPs GARBAGE! MOST of the stuff enron did never made it to the front pages, though it was important enough to be front page news. And enron bought at least ONE GOOD STRONG company, and GUTTED everything! People that were about to retire after a long productive and dangerous life lost their ENTIRE retirement.

Of course, I am not saying BP is innocent either. They did so much wrong that one more thing might actually make people want to hang them because it would appear so obviously intentional.

Steve

I appreciate your passion however, this is fresh and in time, I am certain you will be outraged at this company as well.
I have relatives who are directly involved in off shore oil and the wealth created is beyond what most can ever dream of. The things the companies do, shortcuts they take, and damage they do to human and animal life is HUGE.
Please do not think I am against the oil and gas industry completely BUT, I absolutely promise you this is as bad as Enron ever was or will be.......wait and watch what happens in the next 6 months.

Michael

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2176068].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by enterpryzman

I appreciate your passion however, this is fresh and in time, I am certain you will be outraged at this company as well.
I have relatives who are directly involved in off shore oil and the wealth created is beyond what most can ever dream of. The things the companies do, shortcuts they take, and damage they do to human and animal life is HUGE.
Please do not think I am against the oil and gas industry completely BUT, I absolutely promise you this is as bad as Enron ever was or will be.......wait and watch what happens in the next 6 months.

Michael

I AM outraged at this! I think most people are. I was surprised that my father cared so little, but he and I disagree on many things.

Enron was HORRIBLE for california. If it could have played the game longer, it might have ALSO hurt the gulf, etc... It wouldn't be as bad as the oil problem in a lot of ways, but if yoou were in michigan when it was ABSURDLY cold, and found you had NO heat, it would be a DIFFERENT story! IMAGINE freezing, and possibly having your house damaged because of stress due to the weather, and burst pipes, etc.... EVEN GAS heaters are controlled by, and often ignited by, ELECTRICITY!

And ENRON made TONS of money for CAUSING problems, INTENTIONALLY! BP was at least trying to mitigate a problem.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2176412].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

Here's some images and a video that shows what all this oil does to wildlife:

YouTube - Raw Video: Dozens of Heavily Oiled...
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2176775].message }}
- Patrician 16 years ago
  
  OMIGOD - This made me so sick - We need a vomiting smiley in this forum to best represent our emotions.
  
  I was not feeling well again until the news somewhere in the middle of the night where it showed a pelican being cleaned up and actually looking pretty happy.
  
  ... of course a cheap thrill since it was followed by 'for every 1 bird that is saved, 5 die'.
  
  This is just heartbreaking and nothing - no amount of money can ever make up for this.
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  Here's some images and a video that shows what all this oil does to wildlife:
  
  YouTube - Raw Video: Dozens of Heavily Oiled Birds Off La.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Patricia Brucoli
  Plug-In Profit Site Helpdesk
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2182958].message }}

Amagi71 16 years ago
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2186092].message }}
- dsimms 16 years ago
  
  Slap this sign up on all oil rigs....
  
  REPLACE WARNING WITH BP
  
  Originally Posted by Amagi71
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2186882].message }}

zachary0611

16 years ago

Hopefully this encourages everybody to go towards being green.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Professional Web Designers www.WebDesignBros.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2176991].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Chris Matthews suggested that the admin encourage young folks to come down to the gulf region and work this summer cleaning up the spill on BP's dime.

Think Peace Corps for the oil spill.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178015].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

That's a stupid idea - Matthews should perhaps think before speaking for once.

There are thousands of volunteers that have not been called to help yet - the oil is dangerous, trapped wildlife is dangerous, this is not a place for young people to come hang out.

Volunteers are being very lightly used now because paid workers are doing the cleanup - and that's as it should be.

There are thousands thrown out of work by this accident- and they need the jobs created by the cleanup and paid for by BP.

The news media needs to report the news - not try to make it.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178057].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

That's a stupid idea - Matthews should perhaps think before speaking for once.

There are thousands of volunteers that have not been called to help yet - the oil is dangers, trapped wildlife is dangerous, this is not a place for young people to come hang out.

Volunteers are being very lightly used now because paid workers are doing the cleanup - and that's as it should be.

There are thousands thrown out of work by this accident- and they need the jobs created by the cleanup and paid for by BP.

The news media needs to report the news - not try to make it.

kay

You made a few good points. These jobs are NOT created jobs! They are jobs that have kind of REPLACED other jobs, and THOSE people should be the first in line for them.

And these animals are sick and miserable, so they may be more dangerous than they would be if they were healthy. The oil is bad enough! And OIL is just a name. This is CRUDE oil, and is worse in a lot of ways than oil you might get in a store. It is as different from motor oil as motor oil is from vegetable oil.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178082].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Steve -

We have people in from many states that are experienced in handling birds and wildlife in distress and trained to try to save the animals. These wild animals can die of fright and stress so this is not a job for amateurs.

After Katrina, volunteers could come in and help pick up debris and help rebuild - and they did. This isn't that kind of disaster - the debris can be dangerous and you can't just jump in and help.

To me - any news person or politician who has not been to the gulf has no business conjecturing about it. They should report the news and nothing more.

Guess the pres is coming back today or tomorrow to the La coast. The plan is to visit until he gets it right? Sorry - but this takes up time of the leaders here, disrupts traffic and accomplishes what? The perception here is that local criticism after last week's quick, clean visit is the reason for the return this week. Scene 1, Take 2?

kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178151].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

He won't be able to get it right according to some because no matter what he does he will be criticized.

Originally Posted by Kay King

Guess the pres is coming back today or tomorrow to the La coast. The plan is to visit until he gets it right? Sorry - but this takes up time of the leaders here, disrupts traffic and accomplishes what? The perception here is that local criticism after last week's quick, clean visit is the reason for the return this week. Scene 1, Take 2?

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178282].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

He won't be able to get it right according to some because no matter what he does he will be criticized.

That is a cross to bare for most American presidents.

Often times it's the opposition professionals that gin up criticism of a president and sometimes it's well deserved and no pros are needed.

According to most of the major media, the American public wants him to show lots more emotion regarding the gulf problem.

When C-Span recently opened the topic, only about 30% of callers wanted more emotion out of the president - ruffly the same numbers as his serious opposition.

Here's a very short list of public people who want the president to act more emotional and where I believe they stand on most public issues...

Chris Matthews -L
Maureen Dowd -L
David Gergen -R
David Broder-L
Joe Scarborough-R
James Carville -L
Peggy Noonan -R
Thomas Friedman- C

Entire Morning Joe Cast -R

White House Press Corps - C

Where you're located in the country will also have a lot to do with how you feel about this topic.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178541].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

That is a cross to bare for most American presidents.

Often times it's the opposition professionals that gin up criticism of a president and sometimes it's well deserved and no pros are needed.

According to most of the major media, the American public wants him to show lots more emotion regarding the gulf problem.

When C-Span recently opened the topic, only about 30% of callers wanted more emotion out of the president - ruffly the same numbers as his serious opposition.

Here's a very short list of public people who want the president to act more emotional and where I believe they stand on most public issues...

Chris Matthews -L
Maureen Dowd -L
David Gergen -R
David Broder-R
Joe Scarborough-R
James Carville -L
Peggy Noonan -R
Thomas Friedman- C

Entire Morning Joe Cast

White House Press Corps - C

Where you're located in the country will also have a lot to do with how you feel about this topic.

TL

What do they think him getting more emotional will accomplish?
Personally I prefer the leader of our country to remain calm during disasters so they can make their decisions based on logic and facts, not emotions.
This is the worst disaster facing this country at this moment, but it's not the only thing on his plate.
He has appointed people to be involved with this 24/7.
It's up to them to do thier job so he can do his.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2179487].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

The thing is - everyone is trying - but so many things are falling through the cracks.

Oil - crude oil - washed up on Alabama coast TODAY - yesterday our Petis Bois and Horn Islands were affected. Florida is next and it could happen this weekend. The wildlife is dying every day and only a few can be saved. Dead dolphins often just disappear under water and don't wash up on shore so there's no way to calculate how much life is being lost in the Gulf.

Alabama Gov is furious because promises of double and triple booms have only been promises and never done. Today the Pres directed Allen to provide the booms tomorrow....but why did it take his visit for an order to be issued?

If it's not done tomorrow - the Gov is to go to D.C. next week to discuss it - talk isn't what we need. We need action - and fast. Get the booms in, get the berms built (they are still under discussion) - move it, folks.

Yes, there's frustration and it may be no matter how hard and fast everyone works, it just won't be enough to save the coast.

I don't think many people understand how much the effect is along these four states. Businesses are cutting hours for employees because there are no tourists. Some business that barely have survived the economy won't survive this.

Shrimp season actually opened here and shrimpers are fishing as fast as they can close to the MS shores and the shrimp are being tested continually. It's expected to be shut down soon but the fish boats are trying desperately to work around the clock to earn as much as they can.

I know it's part of marketing that you profit from trends - but this is one I don't have the heart to cash in on.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2179615].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Steve -

We have people in from many states that are experienced in handling birds and wildlife in distress and trained to try to save the animals. These wild animals can die of fright and stress so this is not a job for amateurs.

After Katrina, volunteers could come in and help pick up debris and help rebuild - and they did. This isn't that kind of disaster - the debris can be dangerous and you can't just jump in and help.

To me - any news person or politician who has not been to the gulf has no business conjecturing about it. They should report the news and nothing more.

Guess the pres is coming back today or tomorrow to the La coast. The plan is to visit until he gets it right? Sorry - but this takes up time of the leaders here, disrupts traffic and accomplishes what? The perception here is that local criticism after last week's quick, clean visit is the reason for the return this week. Scene 1, Take 2?

kay

Well I DID say "THOSE people should be the first in line for them." So if they STILL need help, others can take the positions, etc....

And yeah, even James Carville is getting upset. That doesn't bode well. So MANY feel as you do. I know, it doesn't help much, but we do.

BTW I am not going to complain about a person simply to complain. HEY, I have complained about republicans also, and lauded some democrats. I thought glass steagle was a good plan, and it was done by DEMOCRATS! I could say SO much more. Really I could. MAYBE I could sway everyone here to the way kay and I feel about this. It is just TOO easy. Alas,....

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178503].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Does anyone know how many paid workers are working on cleaning up the spill??

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178178].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

BP has hired 26-28,000 workers to control/clean up as of early this week - which includes some that are outsourcing companies using their own trained people so the numbers may be a bit higher.

In addition, there are groups such as wildlife management from California and the National Audubon Society that have brought in teams of trained wildlife rescue people and set up recovery stations along the coast.

Many neighborhoods such as my own that are on the water have set up their own volunteer groups to keep the beaches clean of tide debris so that cleaning up after the oil won't be as complicated.

There are a lot of people working on this and I know the frustration level is high. This is a huge problem that is not going to be easily managed, controlled or fixed.

I'm angry at BP, the company, but the workers out there on the rigs trying to fix this leak are working very hard - and they are locals, too.

When the moratorium on more drilling was placed, another group of people here lost their jobs. There are a lot of rig workers along the coast.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178296].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

BP has hired 26-28,000 workers to control/clean up as of early this week - which includes some that are outsourcing companies using their own trained people so the numbers may be a bit higher.

In addition, there are groups such as wildlife management from California and the National Audubon Society that have brought in teams of trained wildlife rescue people and set up recovery stations along the coast.

Many neighborhoods such as my own that are on the water have set up their own volunteer groups to keep the beaches clean of tide debris so that cleaning up after the oil won't be as complicated.

There are a lot of people working on this and I know the frustration level is high. This is a huge problem that is not going to be easily managed, controlled or fixed.

I'm angry at BP, the company, but the workers out there on the rigs trying to fix this leak are working very hard - and they are locals, too.

When the moratorium on more drilling was placed, another group of people here lost their jobs. There are a lot of rig workers along the coast.

That's a lot of people.

Do you agree with the moratorium on more drilling???

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178365].message }}

Sleaklight

16 years ago

Did you guys capitalize of this spill and get some of them $80+ leads several of the CPA networks were and are still offering.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178582].message }}

myob 16 years ago

Originally Posted by Sleaklight

Did you guys capitalize of this spill and get some of them $80+ leads several of the CPA networks were and are still offering.

Or you can sell t-shirts:
Spill, Baby Spill! Oil Spill Disaster T-Shirts on Sale Now
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2178814].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Rumors are...

BP will be paying out about 10bill this year to shareholders in dividend payments.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2179019].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

"BP has hired 26-28,000 workers to control/clean up as of early this week - which includes some that are outsourcing companies using their own trained people so the numbers may be a bit higher."

have you not been watching the news? This number has to be another BP lie! These so called $12 an hour clean workers have been "texting" or on their cell. Our beaches ARE NOT BEING CLEANED UP. BP has told lies from the start as if they have been doing everything possible, they have not...from what I see on the news, they may have hired a few beach bum slackers to pretend to do beach cleanup....

I thought our govt was going to keep their "boot on the thoart of BP" our govt is not even doing that. They are slacking around just like BP...neither one of these seem to care...

Fire that idiot Tony Hayward now!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2179177].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

CEO Tony Hayward is an arrogant ******* - If you ever listen to him - he clearly does not care what is going on - he talks down, and truely does not care about the people. I remember when he once stated this oil spill is just a spit in the bucket compared to the size of the ocean, and will not cause much harm...

on the menu today:

BP flavored quail
lightly flavored fish
pelacan with an extra bucket of oil

( I think I am being cheated on my post count, I post, and my
post count remains the same)

I blame Tony Hayward for that...

The most hated man in american....

I have always said when the end comes, it will
be because of US, not anyone else. We are our
own downfall.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2180423].message }}

The 13th Warrior 16 years ago

Its simple.

Prisons are not for real criminals.

Prisons are for small timers.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2180540].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  ( I think I am being cheated on my post count, I post, and my
  post count remains the same)
  
  Really not Hayward's fault - posts in the OT section don't count.
  
  Hayward is the "face" of BP so he's not going to be popular no matter what he says or does.
  
  The first month (actually five weeks) of the oil leak, it was Hayward who gave twice daily briefings on local news stations about what was going on. Last week talking heads on TV and guest politicos began blaming Hayward for everything in phrases that sounded eerily similar. Also last week, Thad Allen banned BP's Hayward from the daily updates - now we get better updates from CNN than from the local update.
  
  Fear and frustration breed anger - it's human nature. The goal seems to be to point that anger at Hayward. As good a place as any, I guess.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2180663].message }}
  
  TimPhelan 16 years ago
  
  Well, he is the CEO of this company. Seems like the logical place to point anger at.
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  The goal seems to be to point that anger at Hayward. As good a place as any, I guess.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  Over 50 Dating
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2180797].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

You know, right now there are 3,500 rigs in the Gulf. It's actually amazing how safe they really are.

And that's really the scary part. We really can't do any better, we're human.

It's time to move on...Let the oil rig workers start building wind and wave mills and drilling for natural gas. It may be a little more expensive now, but will pay off big time in the long run.

An ocean is a terrible thing to waste.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2180827].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

You know, right now there are 3,500 rigs in the Gulf. It's actually amazing how safe they really are.

And that's really the scary part. We really can't do any better, we're human.

It's time to move on...Let the oil rig workers start building wind and wave mills and drilling for natural gas. It may be a little more expensive now, but will pay off big time in the long run.

An ocean is a terrible thing to waste.

The only part I hate is that they did it SO deep! If it were closer or shallower, it would have been FAR easier to fix. They made a LOT of mistakes, and knew it as they happened and carelessly distracted everyone when the were most vulnerable IRONICALLY for having NO material accidents! Of course NOW they are so detached, etc... Then again, BP is not the ONLY one so detached. CSM....

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2180885].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

The only part I hate is that they did it SO deep! If it were closer or shallower, it would have been FAR easier to fix. They made a LOT of mistakes, and new it as they happened and carelessly distracted everyone when the were most vulnerable IRONICALLY for having NO material accidents! Of course NOW they are so detached, etc... Then again, BP is not the ONLY one so detached. CSM....

Steve

I was flipping through and caught a segment by Rachel Maddow a few days ago. She brought up a similar situation in 1979. At that time, they tried everything we're doing today, and everything failed then.

The only differences were that the names of the techniques (that failed) have changed, and that the first time was in only 200 feet of water.

Since BP is using the exact same strategies that were used in 1979, we may deduce that there hasn't been a lot of innovation in capping underwater wells in the past 30 years.

We've gotten the stuff to the well, it simply hasn't worked, just as it didn't in 1979 in only 200 ft. of water.

And this is just one problem. As I posted, there's 3500 more rigs and each has underwater pipelines that are vulnerable from any number of threats. Earthquakes, faults in the pipe, weather, anchors dragging the bottom, sabotage, human error, etc.

Plus, this isn't limited to the Gulf. Try fixing an oil leak in the North Sea during bad weather. That ought to be fun.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2180914].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

I was flipping through and caught a segment by Rachel Maddow a few days ago. She brought up a similar situation in 1979. At that time, they tried everything we're doing today, and everything failed then.

The only differences were that the names of the techniques (that failed) have changed, and that the first time was in only 200 feet of water.

Since BP is using the exact same strategies that were used in 1979, we may deduce that there hasn't been a lot of innovation in capping underwater wells in the past 30 years.

We've gotten the stuff to the well, it simply hasn't worked, just as it didn't in 1979 in only 200 ft. of water.

And this is just one problem. As I posted, there's 3500 more rigs and each has underwater pipelines that are vulnerable from any number of threats. Earthquakes, faults in the pipe, weather, anchors dragging the bottom, sabotage, human error, etc.

Plus, this isn't limited to the Gulf. Try fixing an oil leak in the North Sea during bad weather. That ought to be fun.

In 79, in 200feet, it should have been EASY! I DID hear of one accident like this, that happened around that time, and it sounded BAD, but it was fixed in 11 DAYS! We are already on like day 47 here!

And yeah, I brought up the idea of earthquakes earlier. Just THAT makes you think this should never EVER have been allowed by ANYONE! AND, unlike "solid" land, you can't really tell if a place underwater is subjected to earthquakes. A rather major one could look like it came from somewhere else, or be covered by the water. All technical means are not 100%, so they can't depend on them.

And did you guys get a load of how big that BOP looks? Ad that little pipe is actually 21" in diameter SO, if it is drawn to scale, that BOP is HUGE!!!!!!!!! The more surface area there is, the greater the chance of a problem, due to earthquakes, etc...

Oh well, I never liked these on LAND either. I couldn't say what the world would be like if crude oil were never tapped, but a LOT of the changes I would have liked. And the arabs would still be a bunch of relatively harmless nomads!

BTW the way they did that "mud" was DUMB! I mean they were SURPRISED that it didn't stop the leak? COMEON! I thought they were just trying to slow it down and would then send cement down to cap it. And they KNEW that it would be cold, and there would be icing. Why didn't they do something to prevent it? As for siphoning the crude oil, they stated that would only mitigate the flow, and people already realized their estimates were low.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2181651].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

LB,

For the last ****EIGHT**** quarters, BP paid out ONLY $0.8400 per quarter, or $3.36 ANNUALLY!!!!!!!!!!! PROOF? BP Cash Dividends Per American Depositary Share | General dividend information | BP

Quote for BP - FreeRealTime.com

has a minor flaw, so it is CLEAR the shares outstanding are 1000 times what is stated, NOTE the dividend and the cap! So they will NOT pay 10Billion this quarter! They will pay out 10,519,242,720 for the YEAR! 2629810680 or about 2.6Billion for the quarter!

I KNOW you said year, but OBAMA said:

"My understanding is that BP has contracted for 50 million dollars worth of TV advertising to manage their image during the course of this disaster," Obama said. "In addition, there are reports that BP will be paying 10.5 billion dollars in dividend payments this quarter."

To CONSIDER that they would pay that much a quarter is ludicrous. They keep almost as much, and 40Billion a year would amount to a 25% return over ALL of its assets, AFTER the dividend payout, etc....

Of course, if one will criticize another for advertising..... I COULD say more....

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2180869].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

LB,

For the last ****EIGHT**** quarters, BP paid out ONLY $0.8400 per quarter, or $3.36 ANNUALLY!!!!!!!!!!! PROOF? BP Cash Dividends Per American Depositary Share | General dividend information | BP

Quote for BP - FreeRealTime.com

has a minor flaw, so it is CLEAR the shares outstanding are 1000 times what is stated, NOTE the dividend and the cap! So they will NOT pay 10Billion this quarter! They will pay out 10,519,242,720 for the YEAR! 2629810680 or about 2.6Billion for the quarter!

I KNOW you said year, but OBAMA said:

To CONSIDER that they would pay that much a quarter is ludicrous. They keep almost as much, and 40Billion a year would amount to a 25% return over ALL of its assets, AFTER the dividend payout, etc....

Of course, if one will criticize another for advertising..... I COULD say more....

Steve

Does BP pay out dividends quarterly, bi-annually or yearly?

Perhaps dividend payments are due this quarter for the year that just passed.

It doesn't matter one way or the other if the pres mistakenly spoke about div payments for the quarter etc.

The point is they are reportedly going to pay out a huge dividend when they may need the money for cleanup efforts etc.

You could say more????????????????

- Is something going on??

- Is the pres trying to gin up resentment of BP by claiming 10bill in div payments for one quarter???

- Does this bespeak of a larger competency problem with "44" in your view???

You could say more????????????????

You can PM me if you like with your secret info or just spill the beans in public.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2182297].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Does BP pay out dividends quarterly, bi-annually or yearly?

Perhaps dividend payments are due this quarter for the year that just passed.

It doesn't matter one way or the other if the pres mistakenly spoke about div payments for the quarter etc.

The point is they are reportedly going to pay out a huge dividend when they may need the money for cleanup efforts etc.

You could say more????????????????

- Is something going on??

- Is the pres trying to gin up resentment of BP by claiming 10bill in div payments for one quarter???

- Does this bespeak of a larger competency problem with "44" in your view???

You could say more????????????????

You can PM me if you like with your secret info or just spill the beans in public.

TL

Well, you should NOT state an annual amount as a quarterly value. If the government did that with your taxable income, you'd be VERY upset.

What do you mean by "44"?

And YEAH, accidents happen, THAT is why I say having wells so deep is CRAZY. It is like that episode of ST TNG where the virus, from the research settlement, killed everyone on a ship. They were ASSURED that the kids were HARMLESS, and had NO disease! They were SURE the force field could contain the virus. Still, they relented ONLY when ALL testing was done on a shuttle in space. The kids were the problem, and the doctor got sick and nearly died. Likewise, when people paint or blow insulation, they are often careful and wear masks. People with german measles are quarantined. Still, the OS drilling is trreated more like AIDS.(Bad, but protection is discouraged)

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2182533].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Well, you should NOT state an annual amount as a quarterly value. If the government did that with your taxable income, you'd be VERY upset.

What do you mean by "44"?

And YEAH, accidents happen, THAT is why I say having wells so deep is CRAZY. It is like that episode of ST TNG where the virus, from the research settlement, killed everyone on a ship. They were ASSURED that the kids were HARMLESS, and had NO disease! They were SURE the force field could contain the virus. Still, they relented ONLY when ALL testing was done on a shuttle in space. The kids were the problem, and the doctor got sick and nearly died. Likewise, when people paint or blow insulation, they are often careful and wear masks. People with german measles are quarantined. Still, the OS drilling is trreated more like AIDS.(Bad, but protection is discouraged)

Steve

"44" means the 44th POTUS.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2182760].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

"44" means the 44th POTUS.

TL

OH, OK! As for COMPETENCY here, the MORONS that say if THEY ran it they would solve EVERYTHING are 100% INCOMPETENT! If anyone dares to say I am wrong there, PLEASE, simply have them prove me wrong by doing it *******NOW*******!

But as for the POTUS HIMSELF? The problems are ELSEWHERE with him, not incompetency in the handling of BP of direct action against the spill, just everything ELSE! CSM...

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2182786].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

OH, OK! As for COMPETENCY here, the MORONS that say if THEY ran it they would solve EVERYTHING are 100% INCOMPETENT! If anyone dares to say I am wrong there, PLEASE, simply have them prove me wrong by doing it *******NOW*******!

But as for the POTUS HIMSELF? The problems are ELSEWHERE with him, not incompetency in the handling of BP of direct action against the spill, just everything ELSE! CSM...

Steve

You're entitled!

Even the first president had his vocal critics.

It's the great American pastime.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2183000].message }}

illianafrazer

16 years ago

Thank god it didnt happen in a third world country.. imagine all the politics tht would have cost a million creatures life

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2181901].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

We really can't do any better, we're human.

That has become painfully obvious.

However, I think there is a balance to maintain. Advanced in technology for drilling should be matched by advances in safety and in methods to handle an emergency.

We haven't insisted on that - and that's the problem. Big oil will not spend money on cures for "a problem that is unlikely to happen" unless they are required to do that in order to keep drilling deeper and deeper. They are "for profit" and we know it - and the govt knows it, too.

Autos became safer when it was required....pharmas began disclosing potential side effects of medication when it was required. Food manufacturers added nutritional information when it was required.

This is what happens without regulation and oversight.

kay

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2182127].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

That has become painfully obvious.

However, I think there is a balance to maintain. Advanced in technology for drilling should be matched by advances in safety and in methods to handle an emergency.

We haven't insisted on that - and that's the problem. Big oil will not spend money on cures for "a problem that is unlikely to happen" unless they are required to do that in order to keep drilling deeper and deeper. They are "for profit" and we know it - and the govt knows it, too.

Autos became safer when it was required....pharmas began disclosing potential side effects of medication when it was required. Food manufacturers added nutritional information when it was required.

This is what happens without regulation and oversight.

kay

Sorry, I disagree. The whole "make things safer" line of thought has a serious flaw: Terrorism and sabotage. Not to mention the human element. Laws and regulations were in place. They weren't followed.

Or that we will still be sending $500-$700 billion (with a B) over-seas EVERY YEAR to people that don't like us. Or the pollution caused by burning fossil fuels (and oil spills).

We have to get off oil. Now.

I also disagree with you on the Chris Matthes suggestion. I don't see where it's "either/or", we need every hand on deck. While saving animals takes skill, shoveling up globs of oil from beaches doesn't. It doesn't take experience to feed the people that clean the animals, or wash their clothes.

It would do this country a lot of good to have a bunch of younger kids go and work to help clean this up and experience the consequences first hand. This will be an experience they will have for the rest of their lives.

No, they shouldn't take jobs from those that lost jobs. But that isn't the only solution.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2182556].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

I hear BP is about to spin off this American problem to an American subsidiary and give us an American CEO to be angry at.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2183018].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I hear BP is about to spin off this American problem to an American subsidiary and give us an American CEO to be angry at.

TL

That won't work. HECK, George Bush is still getting blamed for things he didn't even do, and that is the SAME office. If BP creates a subsidiary for THIS, smarter people will just be ANGRIER at them for wasting the money to do so. Just filing a foreign corporation can cost THOUSANDS of dollars. GRANTED, if they created a NEW corporation in a place like nevada, it would be cheaper, but even THAT now costs $200/year JUST for the paperwork, a percentage of assets, etc.... AND, if it is public, the base fee only gives you 1500 shares, as I recall. MORE cost MORE money. Then there is the presence, notification, etc.... which can cost many thousands. It really starts to add up. To make a substantial subsidiary here could cost MILLIONS.(paperwork, taxes, filing, employees, office space, resources, etc...) What would it accomplish anyway? The liability is on the company that did the deed.

ALSO, congress and Obama said they don't want any such tricks.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2183677].message }}

Josh MacDonald

16 years ago

BP fails at life!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2183811].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

How much to drill secondary relief wells?

I watched a news segment and they had an oil expert on and he was asked how much he thought it would take to drill secondary relief wells.

His resonse was about "$100-200 Million" per.

I'm not sure each rig would need to wells, so let's use the small number and just get a quick estimate:

$100,000,000
x 3,500
$350,000,000,000

Can that be right?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2183928].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

How much to drill secondary relief wells?

I watched a news segment and they had an oil expert on and he was asked how much he thought it would take to drill secondary relief wells.

His resonse was about "$100-200 Million" per.

I'm not sure each rig would need to wells, so let's use the small number and just get a quick estimate:

$100,000,000
x 3,500
$350,000,000,000

Can that be right?

The larger and deeper they are, the more they will cost. ALSO, they want to be VERY safe on these, and have to do it FAST, so the cost will be higher. So you can't say that this represents the cost of the AVERAGE well. Still, $100million is CHEAP if you can get over $30million a year for several years.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2183956].message }}

Kurt 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

The larger and deeper they are, the more they will cost.

Thanks for stating the obvious.

ALSO, they want to be VERY safe on these, and have to do it FAST, so the cost will be higher.

Really? They want to be safe AND fast? That's good to know.

So you can't say that this represents the cost of the AVERAGE well. Still, $100million is CHEAP if you can get over $30million a year for several years.

Sure I can and just did. You even quoted my post so I'm sure you are aware that I could do it.

Now try to follow the context, I'll explain it to you:

This is what's known as a "conversation". Sometimes people bring up "examples" during a "conversation" that aren't meant to be taken litterally.

This isn't an audit and I'm not an accountant...So there's no need to be perfect. One day in math class, we were taught how to estimate things, just for this situation. You must have ditched that day.

In this example, my intention was to come up with a ball-park figure for how expensive it would be to drill two wells, to see if that's a legit expense.

And despite you being the World's foremost expert in the oil field, I'm going with the "fake" expert they had on TV that said it was cost prohibitive. Sorry, I'm just funny that way.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2184014].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

WHERE did I EVER claim to be the foremost expert, or even an expert? Frankly, I'm sure many that claimed to be experts now are hoping nobody calls them to task. You yourself spoke of how so many ideas done now are just things they tried before.

As you said, some things are just VERY obvious. But it is AMAZING how some obvious things are MISSED!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2184038].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Everyone keeps blaming Obama for not doing more, his campain was about stopping this war...he passes ObamaCare that the people said they did not want, now he is slow to react on the oil spill. I wonder if he will make it the next round when election comes up again? I did vote for him, I will not make that mistake again.

I think BP/Obama needs to sit down at the table, and say, what do we
need to do to get this mess taken care of, and get it done, then bill BP.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2184129].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Which war? The US is on schedule in Iraq. He ran on health care reform. The admin was not slow on reacting to this spill. I hope you will be happy voting for Palin in the next election since she blaims the environmentalists for this spill: "drill baby drill". Good luck with your vote.

Originally Posted by dsimms

Everyone keeps blaming Obama for not doing more, his campain was about stopping this war...he passes ObamaCare that the people said they did not want, now he is slow to react on the oil spill. I wonder if he will make it the next round when election comes up again? I did vote for him, I will not make that mistake again.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2187206].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Which war? The US is on schedule in Iraq. He ran on health care reform. The admin was not slow on reacting to this spill. I hope you will be happy voting for Palin in the next election since she blaims the environmentalists for this spill: "drill baby drill". Good luck with your vote.

Plain quit her job so she could cash in... Do you really think a quitter would make a good presidential canidate?

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2187367].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

That was my point. I could say more....

Originally Posted by dsimms

Plain quit her job so she could cash in... Do you really think a quitter would make a good presidential canidate?
- Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2187407].message }}
seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

Plain quit her job so she could cash in... Do you really think a quitter would make a good presidential canidate?

Careful!!! This position could shoot yourself in the foot! CSM...

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2193095].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Which war? The US is on schedule in Iraq. He ran on health care reform. The admin was not slow on reacting to this spill. I hope you will be happy voting for Palin in the next election since she blaims the environmentalists for this spill: "drill baby drill". Good luck with your vote.

Actually, we now have more troops in Afghanastan than Iraq. Agree, disagree, this is exactly what Obama said he'd do pre-election.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2187441].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

That was my point. I could say more....

Actually - no you can't. Tim, you know the rules about politics. The rest of us are being careful to avoid going there. If you can't post about the subject of the oil spill without defending your personal politics, just don't go there, please. The only relevance D.C. has right now is saying "we're in charge" - and it's "BP's fault" (we know that part) - but when we can't get approvals for protection and can't get quick decisions (or any decisions) .....you start to wonder "who's on first". If you look closely - no one's on first.

We need a leader down here who has authority over all - and we don't have one! What we get are thinkers and apologists. Talk doesn't solve squat - no matter who is talking.

Kurt -

I totally agree with you about alternative and renewable energy resources and we know there were regulations that weren't followed.

That was my point - for other big businesses the rules have been followed and any failure to abide by those rules has resulted in fines and discipline. The only place it seems OK to ignore the rules or to proceed when there is clearly a problem identified with safety is in energy production - in mines and on oil rigs. It's nuts.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2187482].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Actually Kay, you are one who brings up politics before others occasionally. Including in this thread.

By the way, I was just lightheartedly making fun of Steve's phrase that he has been made 100s of times at least here in the off topic section: "I could say more...."

Originally Posted by Kay King

Actually - no you can't. Tim, you know the rules about politics. The rest of us are being careful to avoid going there. If you can't post about the subject of the oil spill without defending your personal politics, just don't go there, please. The only relevance D.C. has right now is saying "we're in charge" - and it's "BP's fault" (we know that part) - but when we can't get approvals for protection and can't get quick decisions (or any decisions) .....you start to wonder "who's on first". If you look closely - no one's on first.

.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2187521].message }}

Mike Wright 16 years ago

This was a disaster waiting to happen .... like many things where
technology is pushed to the limits ... or where costcutting results
in unintended consequences. Minds tend to get focussed when
these things happen on our own doorsteps.

At least BP is going to considerable effort and costs to resolve
the problems .... and is already dealing with compensation claims.

Folks in India have been far less fortunate
BBC News - Bhopal trial: Eight jailed over India gas disaster

( may be what "seasoned" vaguely recalled in a previous post )

When the tanker Torrey Canyon ran aground off the UK coast
some years ago, there was considerable ecological and economic
damage resulting from the oil spill. This was not helped by attempting
to bomb the tanker and oil to destruction with a Buccaneer airstrike.
Just caused more problems.

These issues are considerably easier to resolve on land than at
sea.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2188601].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Actually Kay, you are one who brings up politics before others occasionally. Including in this thread.

By the way, I was just lightheartedly making fun of Steve's phrase that he has been made 100s of times at least here in the off topic section: "I could say more...."

I was going to reply to kays post on this, but I guess I will here. By CSM, I am basically saying there is a lot that could defend my point, or this will start to get into an area this forum doesn't allow, so I am simply mentioning it. I just feel better about THAT, than acting like I have nothing left to say, etc...

HEY, if you get a kick out of it, so be it. BTW there was a guy on fox you would actually LOVE! (Most liberals don't realize this, but even some CONSERVATIVE shows on fox have liberals, even as regulars, and they get to speak on nearly every issue with no editing, etc...) I HATE him! For a couple minutes, he actually ranted and I actually AGREED with every point! SCARY! Of course, THEN he went onto other things and was his old self. You really DO have to wonder though. We are suddenly agreeing SO much.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2193110].message }}

ordinary

16 years ago

oil is leaking, BP got to pay heavy penalty...

at the end, we, the innocent citizen, got to pay for it... rise in petrol price !

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2187379].message }}

The Copy Nazi

Banned 16 years ago

Guess what? BP had a contingency plan for this. Including a "Worst Case Scenario". Dated June last year. In it you'll see they have no idea what affect the dispersants will have on the environment. Bordering on criminal wouldn't you say? Check this out and share it around - BP Gulf Oil Spill Worst Case Scenario

Oh yeah...these bits are crucial too -

In the worst case discharge scenario, an oil leak was expected to come ashore with highest probability in Plaquemines Parish within 30 days
BP talking heads were advised never to assure the public that an ecosystem would be back to normal after the worst case scenario. How surprising. :p
The oil dispersant - "Corexit" ("Corrects it" - ha bloody ha) toxicity has not been tested on ecosystems, according to their brilliant Oil Spill Response Plan.

Ecotoxilogical effects: No toxicity studies have been conducted on this product.

You Tube Large

And from Corexit's homepage comes this propaganda -

Prompt deployment of Nalco COREXIT® oil spill dispersants is one very effective and proven method of minimizing the impact of a spill on the environment. When the COREXIT dispersants are deployed on the spilled oil, the oil is broken up into tiny bio-degradable droplets that immediately sink below the surface where they continue to disperse and bio-degrade. This quickly removes the spilled oil from surface drift...reducing direct exposure to birds, fish and sea animals in the spill environment. By keeping the oil from adhering to wildlife COREXIT dispersants effectively protect the environment.

Nalco also offers a COREXIT technology designed for shoreline protection and cleaning. It has been specifically designed to remove a wide range of crude oil and petroleum products from contaminated shoreline surfaces, including certain vegetation. Major test programs at both Louisiana State University and the University of Miami clearly showed that COREXIT EC9580A can save mangroves and marsh grass if applied early after oiling.

"...effectively protect the environment". Well that's lucky isn't it. No need to worry then. Carry on.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2188655].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Here's a link to info about the 1979 Mexican oil link:
Ixtoc I oil spill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This one was in less only about 160 feet of water. The team that capped it was the famous Red Adair and took 10 months to cap. They used pretty much the same strategies that BP is trying today.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2188763].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Kay's Gov...

Haley Barbour:

Oil? What Oil? Press Should Stop Scaring Tourists

The biggest problem facing Mississippi in the wake of a massive oil spill in the Gulf isn't tarred beaches or ecological waste, ...

...the state's governor Haley Barbour said on Sunday.

It's the national press corps,...

... which, he asserted, is inflating the disaster's current impact and, as a result, decimating the state's tourism industry.

In an appearance on Fox News Sunday, ...

...the Mississippi Republican veered as close as any elected politician could to insisting that the biggest oil spill in the history of this country had been overblown -- at least when it comes to his state.

"The truth is,...

..." he said, "we have had virtually no oil.

If you were on the Mississippi Gulf coast anytime in the last 48 days you didn't see any oil at all.

We have had a few tar balls but we have had tar balls every year,...

... as a natural product of the Gulf of Mexico. 250,000 to 750,000 barrels of oil seep into the Gulf of Mexico through the floor every year.

So, tar balls are no big deal.

In fact, I read that Pensacola or the Florida beaches when they have tar balls yesterday didn't even close. They just sent people out to pick them up and throw them in the bag."

"The biggest negative impact for us has been the news coverage," Barbour added.

"There has been no distinction between Grand Isle and Venice and all the places in Louisiana that we feel so terrible for that have had oil washing up on them.

But to the average viewer [of] this show thinks that the whole coast from Florida to Texas is ankle-deep in oil.

And of course, it's very, very bad for our tourist season.

That is the real economic damage.

Our first closure of fisheries in Mississippi waters came just earlier this week after about 45 days.

So it may be hard for the viewer to understand, but the worst thing for us has been how our tourist season has been hurt by the mis-perception of what is going on down here.

The Mississippi gulf coast is beautiful. As I tell people, the coast is clear.

Come on down!"

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2188931].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Do you agree with the moratorium on more drilling???

I have mixed feelings. I think it was a knee jerk reaction and not surprised about it as I think many in charge would "go there".

I do think there should be a moratorium on deep water drilling until acoustic switches are required and until technology finds answers to how to stop a leak if it happens. We can't just go on with business as usual. It doesn't matter how many "safe" rigs are out there if one accident like this fouls the Gulf of Mexico for years to come.

According to the news, other rigs in the Gulf have been inspected and are fine. I take that with a grain of salt as I'm not certain we even have qualified inspectors and I know Atlantis has been cited for violations and has been talked about as an unsafe platform by people who have worked on it.

TL - The beaches in MS are clear - but the Barrier Islands are being affected to some extent, particularly Petit Bois.

The EPA says picking up tar balls with your bare hands might be hazardous because they may contain the dangerous chemicals being used as a dispersant. I think it's irresponsible to keep beaches open when tar balls are coming onshore in large quantities - a few may not be a problem. I walk the beach near my home several times a week and if tarballs are normal they must be very small as I haven't seen them.

Barbour is getting a lot of flak for his worries about money from tourists over anything else. He doesn't seem to be connected to the concerns of the coastal residents. I understand what he is trying to do - but he is alienating residents here as they feel he has his head in the clouds...or somewhere. MS has been so lucky to date - being tucked at the north side of the Gulf has kept our beaches and wetlands clear so far.

It's a difficult balance - if you say everything is fine, people aren't concerned. Things are not fine in the Gulf and the only way to let the rest of the country know what is happening is to show those images. They are real and painful to see.

It's an odd thing - in Louisiana there is almost hysteria - in MS it's business as usual - Alabama immediately closed the beaches, Florida doesn't. Really interesting to watch as it unfolds.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2189594].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Kay's Gov...

Haley Barbour:

Oil? What Oil? Press Should Stop Scaring Tourists....

Well, that isn't because he is republican, etc.... A LOT of affected people are saying they aren't. I was saying for a couple weeks that florida was technically lying because they promoted their area as pristine. Everyone knew they would likely be hit by the time most people making their reservations NOW would have been there! Granted, many politicians there are republican, but many others aren't. They just are hoping they can keep most of the business. Sad, but true...

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2193211].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Well, that isn't because he is republican, etc....

A LOT of affected people are saying they aren't. I was saying for a couple weeks that florida was technically lying because they promoted their area as pristine.

Everyone knew they would likely be hit by the time most people making their reservations NOW would have been there!

Granted, many politicians there are republican, but many others aren't. They just are hoping they can keep most of the business. Sad, but true...

Steve

I never said his stance was because he was a republican.

Why do you feel a need to provide cover??

Any governor would try to put the best face on this problem in order to keep the tourist bucks coming in.

What are the attractions in MS???????

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2194053].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I never said his stance was because he was a republican.

Why do you feel a need to provide cover??

Any governor would try to put the best face on this problem in order to keep the tourist bucks coming in.

What are the attractions in MS???????

TL

It was mentioned in your post. I just wanted to make it clear.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2194122].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

....What are the attractions in MS???????

Oh, things like theme parks, water parks, golfing, casinos, theater, kayaking, canoe, and the Katrina Hurricane Memorial to name a few. However, many such attractions are still closed due to hurricane Katrina.

But there are other more sinister, murky forces at play in the Gulf. The NWO types are using BP for their own nefarious purposes. Homeland security is on high alert for civil unrest – one of the desired objectives of the NWO plotters.

They've been wanting some kind of social disruption catalyst to get people upset and moving into unrest so they have a reason to install their martial law and population reduction.

I could say more ...

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2195677].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

Oh, things like theme parks, water parks, golfing, casinos, theater, kayaking, canoe, and the Katrina Hurricane Memorial to name a few. However, many such attractions are still closed due to hurricane Katrina.

But there are other more sinister, murky forces at play in the Gulf. The NWO types are using BP for their own nefarious purposes. Homeland security is on high alert for civil unrest - one of the desired objectives of the NWO plotters.

They've been wanting some kind of social disruption catalyst to get people upset and moving into unrest so they have a reason to install their martial law and population reduction.

I could say more ...

Please don't, save yourself.

I can understand the thought of the NWO crowd trying to find some way to use this crisis to push their agenda forward but...

...what on Earth would prompt the civil unrest????

marshall law?? population reduction???

Sounds like a konspiracy to me.

Surely you jest.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2197916].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Please don't, save yourself.

I can understand the thought of the NWO crowd trying to find some way to use this crisis to push their agenda forward but...

...what on Earth would prompt the civil unrest????

marshall law?? population reduction???

Sounds like a konspiracy to me.

Surely you jest.

TL

I do not joke around. This is serious. There are dark forces at work here. One example is that Goldman Sachs allegedly knew beforehand of the sinking of the rig and shorted stock on TransOceans just days before the explosion. GS made huge profits, and everyone thinks it was a joke. They did the same thing with the housing bubble before the economic collapse, and even with airline stocks just before 9/11. They know how to play the game. Be afraid - be very afraid.

No joke: Goldman Sachs shorted Gulf of Mexico

I could say more ... but we are being watched ... by ... the NWO conspirators ...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2198316].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Every group with any agenda seems to be "using" the spill as proof of their predictions or agenda. What else is new?

I learned a fact yesterday that absolutely blew my mind.

Before responding - everyone please understand this is not meant as any political statement - this is about basic communication necessary to managing the response.

At no time since the oil leak began 51 days ago has the pres talked directly to the CEO of BP. Maybe that is protocol - but it blew my mind to learn that. When communications go through 9 agencies and various personnel on their way to providing "information and facts" - there is a lot being lost/added/inferred along the way.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2198373].message }}
- myob 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  .. the oil leak began 51 days ago ..
  
  After weeks of employees expressing concern about safety on the oil rig and "well control", it suspicously exploded on April 20 and sank on April 22, causing the worst environmental damage in history which "happened" to coincide with Earth Day. Coincidence?
  
  I could say more ... but you know how it is with those NWO types.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2198510].message }}
  
  Kay King 16 years ago
  
  I'll never be a good conspiracy theorist - because coincidences happen all the time.
  
  After weeks of employees expressing concern
  
  Most of the interviews I've seen with the employees express concern mostly in hindsight. They say they "wondered" or "thought that wasn't right" - but none of them seem to have been forceful in objecting and none reported the problems to regulators. That's not uncommon as on a rig just as on a ship you do what you are told and assume the guy over you knows what he's doing. The communication is between the top command on the rig and regulators - no way for lowly workers to report problems.
  
  It is what it is - we just have to deal with it now.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2198666].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Sidebar: off topic in the OT...

Kay, you're MS gulf coast area?

I went to tech school at Keesler AFB in 76-77. Lovely area. Had
a helluva good time, too.

Ken

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2190120].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Yes, I'm in Ocean Springs very close to the water.

I moved here to be closer to my older son who flew full-time with the Hurricane Hunters for 16 years - out of Keesler, no less.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2190127].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Yes, I'm in Ocean Springs very close to the water.

I moved here to be closer to my older son who flew full-time with the Hurricane Hunters for 16 years - out of Keesler, no less.

Wow, I haven't heard that name, Ocean Springs, in a long time. lol I've been
there, or passing through, many times.

Yes, I remember the Hurricane Hunters. I remember seeing their C-130's parked on
the ramp and watching them take off and land. I've also seen, years ago, TV
shows like Discovery or whatever about them. It looked like a pretty cool job.

I wanted to get a flying job in the AF - ELINT, electronic intelligence. It was big
back in the Cold War days, or years, and basically they would fly intelligence
gathering missions near the Eastern block countries, and others I presume. They
had electronic technicians on-board to fix anything that broke in-flight. But they
didn't have any openings at the time. Oh well...

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2190180].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

BP CEO Tony Hayward is saying that they are on top of all claims, and all claims are or have been paid 100% - Other sources are saying that is a LIE, they continued to say that BP has only paid upto 50% of claims.

BP is lying.

BP has been lying on everything from the start.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2190361].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Hey so has anyone noticed this one?

Texas pipeline blast kills 3: official - Yahoo! News

WTF is going on down there in the South with our resources? Are we at war or something?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2191494].message }}

Bill Farnham

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

WTF is going on down there in the South with our resources? Are we at war or something?

Sal, remember this one...?

YouTube - Rocket fuel factory explosion

~Bill

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2191522].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Bill Farnham

Sal, remember this one...?

YouTube - Rocket fuel factory explosion

~Bill

I don't remember that one, Bill. When/where?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2191709].message }}

Kurt 16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I don't remember that one, Bill. When/where?

Pretty sure that's the Henderson, NV explosion from about 1987, about 15 miles from the Las Vegas Strip.
- Thanks
Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2191795].message }}

Bill Farnham

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I don't remember that one, Bill. When/where?

Sal,

Talk about wondering if a conspiracy was taking place, these three disasters hit in a very short timeframe, May 4th, 1988.

The tallest building at that time west of the Mississippi, the Interstate Bank building in Los Angeles (where I lived), caught fire, our (US) major rocket fuel plant exploded in Nevada, and a Shell Oil refinery exploded in Louisiana.

Here are some links...

Rocket Fuel Plant Explosion Investigation, accident Reconstruction
Interstate Bank Building Fire
Death Toll Up to 6 in Blast - NYTimes.com

It was similar to what happened on Sept 11, albeit dramatically less servere, in that one could imagine we were under attack from some enemy that day.

Coinkydinky? Appearently so. But at the time...

~Bill

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2191852].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Bill Farnham

Sal,

Talk about wondering if a conspiracy was taking place, these three disasters hit in a very short timeframe, May 4th, 1988.

The tallest building at that time west of the Mississippi, the Interstate Bank building in Los Angeles (where I lived), caught fire, our (US) major rocket fuel plant exploded in Nevada, and a Shell Oil refinery exploded in Louisiana.

Here are some links...

Rocket Fuel Plant Explosion Investigation, accident Reconstruction
Interstate Bank Building Fire
Death Toll Up to 6 in Blast - NYTimes.com

It was similar to what happened on Sept 11, albeit dramatically less servere, in that one could imagine we were under attack from some enemy that day.

Coinkydinky? Appearently so. But at the time...

~Bill

I wasn't even close to politics back then and missed all three. I believe a few small events can be coincidental, but when events that can easily be tied together in the background start stacking up, the odds of a coincidence get smaller and smaller. Right now what we are seeing has just such a large stack of stuff that's very closely related behind the curtain (and some even in front of it), that I just don't see coincidences being even a small fractional possibility.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2193650].message }}

Andie

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Hey so has anyone noticed this one?

WTF is going on down there in the South with our resources? Are we at war or something?

ummm....don't get me started, this one was idiots armed with shovels and machinery. I could expound more on it but i'll control myself

There was a horrible BP plant explosion down in Texas City a few years back....seems like they just finally settled the suits with the families not too long ago.
They don't say 'Texas gold' for no reason....if it stinks like oil in this town they call it the smell of money. Seriously

andie

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

**Warrior KimW needs a kidney & YOUR support**

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2191524].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Andie

ummm....don't get me started, this one was idiots armed with shovels and machinery. I could expound more on it but i'll control myself

There was a horrible BP plant explosion down in Texas City a few years back....seems like they just finally settled the suits with the families not too long ago.
They don't say 'Texas gold' for no reason....if it stinks like oil in this town they call it the smell of money. Seriously

andie

Yeah, well here's the thing Andie:
BP - Valdez Spill
BP - Alaska Spill and Broken trade agreement (selling US oil offshore)
BP - Mexico - you probably know more about that than I do.
BP - Gulf of Mexico -Talk about drilling but pointed out that US possibly drilling into Mexican oil caverns. (Before or after Last spill? Not sure)
3 year WILD swings in the price of oil
BP - Executive hired by White House to oversee GofM drilling project.
BP granted drilling of GOM
BP - Drilling and spilling in Gulf of Mexico
Natural Gas Explosion in Texas

It was sounding like a lot of ignorance for awhile - but right now it's beginning to smell like Corporate Warfare -- that's exactly what a corporate war looks like.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2191534].message }}

Andie

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Yeah, well here's the thing Andie:
BP - Valdez Spill
BP - Alaska Spill and Broken trade agreement (selling US oil offshore)
BP - Mexico - you probably know more about that than I do.
BP - Gulf of Mexico -Talk about drilling but pointed out that US possibly drilling into Mexican oil caverns. (Before or after Last spill? Not sure)
3 year WILD swings in the price of oil
BP - Executive hired by White House to oversee GofM drilling project.
BP granted drilling of GOM
BP - Drilling and spilling in Gulf of Mexico
Natural Gas Explosion in Texas

It was sounding like a lot of ignorance for awhile - but right now it's beginning to smell like Corporate Warfare -- that's exactly what a corporate war looks like.

Let's add another one to the list....Dayummmmm

Blast in Texas Panhandle kills 2, injures 3 | Energy | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Thanks

Signature

**Warrior KimW needs a kidney & YOUR support**

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2195894].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Andie

ummm....don't get me started, this one was idiots armed with shovels and machinery. I could expound more on it but i'll control myself

There was a horrible BP plant explosion down in Texas City a few years back....seems like they just finally settled the suits with the families not too long ago.
They don't say 'Texas gold' for no reason....if it stinks like oil in this town they call it the smell of money. Seriously

andie

Well, in a LOT of areas, it is ILLEGAL to dig more than about 6" without clearing it with the city government. HECK, I knew that my neighbor was going to start digging because I saw all the flags on his property. that the city put up. So WHY is it illegal? Because if you don't have THEM come out and tell you where the cables(like TV, phone, electric, etc...) and pipes(water, gas, sewer, etc...) you may hit one and affect a large number of people.

MAN, I thought they called it texas(gold/tea) because there was so much, and it was valuable. And I always thought smell of money was the actual smell, or the appearance that a lot was spent.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2193191].message }}

Andie

16 years ago

BP......Halliburton....etc
IMO, it all comes down to the greed of money/power
always has been and longer it goes on the less 'humanity' has anything to do with the choices they make and actions they take/or not. It is all about the biggest profit and no conscience about how they get it.

going to hell in a handbasket...i tell ya...*sigh*

Thanks

Signature

**Warrior KimW needs a kidney & YOUR support**

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2191578].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

I hear Facebook has a boycott BP page that has over 500k members.

I wonder if BP will try to get FB to get rid of the page?

Here's the page if you're interested.

Boycott BP | Facebook

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2193627].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Oh Hell YES -- and here we have yet ONE MORE SPILL going on not too far from the BP leak since April 30 === and nobody reported it at least to US.

Another Gulf oil spill: Well near Deepwater Horizon has leaked since at least April 30 | al.com

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2194389].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Hey Andie - don't forget to add the other oil spill in the Gulf either - They think there may be two - one owned by a guy named Taylor, one owned by Diamond. Taylor was the one that has the leak for sure. I saw later that Diamond might be leaking, too, but I can't confirm that from anything I've read on it so far.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2196013].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Dude dives into the gulf...

YouTube - AP Exclusive: Scuba Diving in the Gulf...

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2198736].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Gruesome vid TL.

Well I can only believe in so many coincidences surrounding one area of resources and one company........but.........

I saw a theory last night that just blows my mind that anyone was able to even think of it. Holy cow. This one takes the cake.

They said that BP actually drilled into a fault line and the reason they can't stop the spill is that they cracked the crust some way and the oil is actually spilling through the crack. Okay..not so hard to imagine yet.....

They went on to say that the fault line is the end of New Madrid fault line and that the leak is completely unrepairable and the entire cavern will empty into the ocean...once it is empty some sort of reaction (can't remember how they explained this reaction) will cause the whole faultline to separate and the great lakes will dump into the fault and flood everything on down to the gulf as the lakes empty into the gulf.
That was only part of this wanker's scenario. And of course, this was all done purposely (right after saying they accidentally cracked the crust) so that Obama can take over what is left of the world. Of course, by this time the guy hadn't given much world being left to be taken over.

I didn't get to the end of it so don't know what else was tossed into this mix. I couldn't even start to understand how he was sticking all that weird stuff together trying to make science out of it. Holy cow. I'm thinking that the "earthquakes are going to kill us all" crowds are gonna love the new end of the world story, though.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199195].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I saw a theory last night that just blows my mind that anyone was able to even think of it. Holy cow. This one takes the cake.

They said that BP actually drilled into a fault line and the reason they can't stop the spill is that they cracked the crust some way and the oil is actually spilling through the crack. Okay..not so hard to imagine yet.....

They went on to say that the fault line is the end of New Madrid fault line and that the leak is completely unrepairable and the entire cavern will empty into the ocean...once it is empty some sort of reaction (can't remember how they explained this reaction) will cause the whole faultline to separate and the great lakes will dump into the fault and flood everything on down to the gulf as the lakes empty into the gulf.
That was only part of this wanker's scenario. And of course, this was all done purposely (right after saying they accidentally cracked the crust) so that Obama can take over what is left of the world. Of course, by this time the guy hadn't given much world being left to be taken over.

Well, they ARE saying that the oil may migrate to a higher level in the crust, if they seal the leak. That WOULD be ALMOST tantamount to the fault scenario, and may have led to this myth. I doubt they could have drilled into a fault without it being obvious to all by now. So I doubt the great lakes will be affected AND, if they were, they probably wouldn't make THAT much of a difference.

As for the rest? Well, many HAVE said they won't let a disaster go to waste. CSM...

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199269].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Who are "they"? "They" seem to ignore the massive amount of geological work that goes into choosing a drilling site. Does anyone really think a huge profitable oil company just plops a platform down and drills without significant research before hand?

Would the fourth most profitable corporation in the world decide to sabotage itself in a way that could damage the financial stability of the company? Mr. Conspiracy - meet Ms. Fantasy.

I'm not a "drill,baby,drill" proponent but some of the theories being thrown out - often by those who live nowhere near the Gulf or any large body of water - by people who don't have geological knowledge or engineering or oceanographic experience - are just nuts.

Some of them remind me of the tongue in check "hurricane preparedness" page I posted here last year. It's easy to be prepared for hurricanes - if you live in Nebraska:p

Currently much of what you see in the media is hyped conjecture - not all, but much of it. They need to keep the story alive and when there is nothing to report they report on what "they" say and throw out "what ifs" as if that is real information.

A good example is the big fuss currently about "digital photographic" images which are portrayed by some as "withheld". They go on to theorize these better photos have been available but were hidden. In fact, what is reported here by authorities is that the special camera was lowered to provide clear views of the the oil at the time the bent pipe was cut and the cap installed. Those aren't real time images as the other cameras are showing.

Every engineer and oceanographer I've heard talk about this say BP is doing all it can to control the oil - and that they move slowly so as not to destabalize the pipe that is below the ocean floor. That's what is so stupid about the "nuke" idea though it still is mentioned on the news as if it makes sense.

The pipe is 21" at the ocean floor and tapers to 7" 3 miles down. Blow that up and you could open the entire oil field in the gulf. Not to mention you would have radioactive, oil covered fish and water.

There are hidden facts, maneuvering for power and position and other ugly things associated with any catastrophe. Those who translate that into massive conspiracies seem to lose touch with reality to me.

Do I think there conspiracies at work? Sure - but they are more about power, money and positioning after the fact than about the cause of the disaster.

kay
- [ 2 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199335].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Technically - from geological sites - the New Madrid fault stops short of the Gulf though it does extend down the mississippi river. There is one geologist who has theorized the New Madrid fault extends to and affect the Gulf Rift of the southern Gulf of Mexico but there is no proof of that and it is not accepted by the larger scientific community. There are blogs claiming the New Madrid fault runs through the Gulf - but can't find a single geological map that shows that.
  
  My own theory (another thing totally unsupported by science I expect) is that for every huge fault line we know about there are hundreds of small cracks that may shift or widen and cause the ground to shake and there have been tremors reported in the gulf in the past. They were small and almost unnoticeable but they were documented as recently as 2006.
  
  However, when we drill as deeply into the earth as this platform did (remember this well was touted last October as the "deepest well drilled") I think we are asking for trouble and disturbing the earth in a way that could have results we don't intend.
  
  I wonder if a significant amount of this deep drilling in an area could create new fault lines?
  
  kay
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199417].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Gruesome vid TL.

Well I can only believe in so many coincidences surrounding one area of resources and one company........but.........

I saw a theory last night that just blows my mind that anyone was able to even think of it. Holy cow. This one takes the cake.

They said that BP actually drilled into a fault line and the reason they can't stop the spill is that they cracked the crust some way and the oil is actually spilling through the crack. Okay..not so hard to imagine yet.....

They went on to say that the fault line is the end of New Madrid fault line and that the leak is completely unrepairable and the entire cavern will empty into the ocean...once it is empty some sort of reaction (can't remember how they explained this reaction) will cause the whole faultline to separate and the great lakes will dump into the fault and flood everything on down to the gulf as the lakes empty into the gulf.
That was only part of this wanker's scenario. And of course, this was all done purposely (right after saying they accidentally cracked the crust) so that Obama can take over what is left of the world. Of course, by this time the guy hadn't given much world being left to be taken over.

I didn't get to the end of it so don't know what else was tossed into this mix. I couldn't even start to understand how he was sticking all that weird stuff together trying to make science out of it. Holy cow. I'm thinking that the "earthquakes are going to kill us all" crowds are gonna love the new end of the world story, though.

And according to the "theory", if this thing blew, it would be far worse even than if the Yellowstone Caldera blew out. There is an estimated oil deposit of trillions of barrels over nearly 25,000 square miles, almost the size of the Gulf itself. From below a mile undersea, and with a 1/4-mile opening, the pressure is estimiated to be up to 150,000 psi of oil and natural gas behind it. It would be a near-extinction event.

Just the scenario NWO was hoping for in their quest for population reduction and martial law.

I could say more ...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199360].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

And according to the "theory", if this thing blew, it would be far worse even than if the Yellowstone Caldera blew out. There is an estimated oil deposit of trillions of barrels over nearly 25,000 square miles, almost the size of the Gulf itself. From below a mile undersea, and with a 1/4-mile opening, the pressure is estimiated to be up to 150,000 psi of oil and natural gas behind it. It would be a near-extinction event.

Just the scenario NWO was hoping for in their quest for population reduction and martial law.

I could say more ...

If it's worse than Yellowstone, no one will be taking over, except the roaches. Seriously.

So we are to assume that whoever thought this up is a genius enough for coming up with the plan, but then becomes a total moron and destroys the earth? LOL

The good news is if the Mississippi valley does split and the Great Lakes drain into the Gulf, I GUARANTEE there won't be any civil unrest. There won't be any civilization to be restless.

PS...Pretty good impersonation though Paul.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199441].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

So we are to assume that whoever thought this up is a genius enough for coming up with the plan, but then becomes a total moron and destroys the earth? LOL

Some of the suggestions such as "nuke it" are reminiscent of the oil company's statements way back when....

"drill deeper - it's probably safe - it should work - damage would be minimal"

and if it isn't safe ... and it doesn't work? What then, genius?

We're watching that scenario right now - do we want to see a replay?

I'm opting out of that one.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199594].message }}

Fernando Veloso

16 years ago

Theories, conspiracies, whatever you want to call them.

This is what they've done:

Oil spill approaches Louisiana coast - The Big Picture - Boston.com

Thanks

Signature

People make good money selling to the rich. But the rich got rich selling to the masses.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199647].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Well for one thing - they aren't on the fault line Steve - they aren't even near the fault line. It only runs about 150 miles. This guy seems to think that just because there is a river, means the whole river is a fault line. Second - the 8.3 mag quake right on the middle of the fault line didn't disturb the river structure. Thirdly - If there is a fissure actually drilled and the oil empties, it's not going to just stay empty. Once the pressure of the oil is relieved, water can flow into a fissure just as easy as oil can squirt out of it so the result of dry empty cavern doesn't make sense. - And - if taking the oil out of the cavern is going to cause the whole river (which was idiotically termed a fault line itself) to split, they wouldn't be drilling oil in the gulf at all.

Now if we have another mag 8+ quake on the river at the actual fault again, the river could temporarily flow backwards, but that is a hell of a long way from splitting the damned country into two halves when there isn't even a fault line there.

I don't know who the idiot was on the audio I heard. But he either knows nothing about science, or he used what he knows people are afraid of right now to scare em a little more. Most people think the earth is just shaking to pieces right now because a few major quakes hit highly populated areas so made a lot of news. There was also some study involving the New Madrid fault line because it could blow, blew at 8.3 in 1811 - and we have some large cities on that fault area now. But - to mash that all together and come up with the river splitting open and draining the great lakes is absolutely so crazy I can't believe it was even thought of.

Kay - that fault doesn't go near the gulf, no matter what the blogs say.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199653].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Well for one thing - they aren't on the fault line Steve - they aren't even near the fault line. It only runs about 150 miles. This guy seems to think that just because there is a river, means the whole river is a fault line. Second - the 8.3 mag quake right on the middle of the fault line didn't disturb the river structure. Thirdly - If there is a fissure actually drilled and the oil empties, it's not going to just stay empty. Once the pressure of the oil is relieved, water can flow into a fissure just as easy as oil can squirt out of it so the result of dry empty cavern doesn't make sense.

I never said ANYTHING to the contrary! Poke a tiny hole in a bottle, and it may NEVER empty! Ever try sucking from a closed container, with the only outlet in your mouth? GOOD LUCK! It doesn't work. As it empties, a vacuum increases and if something else doesn't fill it, you won't be able to suck hard enough to overcome the pressure. So YEAH, oil leaves the chamber, creates a vacuum, and the water fills it. And that happens AS it is emptying, so there will NEVER be air in that cavern, unless maybe it is above the well output.

Originally Posted by HeySal

And - if taking the oil out of the cavern is going to cause the whole river (which was idiotically termed a fault line itself) to split, they wouldn't be drilling oil in the gulf at all.

Yeah, a fault line is a MEANINGFUL split in the earths crust, NOT the mere depression required for a river. In the scheme of things, such a river wouldn't make any difference in where a faultline would occur.

Originally Posted by HeySal

Now if we have another mag 8+ quake on the river at the actual fault again, the river could temporarily flow backwards, but that is a hell of a long way from splitting the damned country into two halves when there isn't even a fault line there.

Again, I didn't say ANYTHING to the countrary.

BTW when I said "That WOULD be ALMOST tantamount to the fault scenario, and may have led to this myth. ", note the ALMOST. What I meant was that the leaking and MAYBE the increase in PSI and area would be ALMOST like his fault scenario. I wasn't saying it would be a fault, etc... In fact, I DOUBT the PSI is THAT high, so such a cavern would have to be CLOSE to the surface, maybe even only a few FEET, to be affected in that way. SO it might be like that river. Basically it WOULD be a river of oil, and the pressure, IF it were close enough to the surface, would merely rupture that few feet. ALSO, such a river increases surface area which means a HIGHER pressure would be required to burst through. The question is will the area, IF it even exists, be high enough and small enough to be a problem.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199921].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

I do not care how much damage BP has done, I do not think they will ever pay as much as you think they should, and could be tied up in court for the next 20-30 years while people loose their jobs, and I doubt the govt will step up to the plate either...even if BP was fined a trillion dollars, they will tie this up over the next 50 years, or make payments so small it wont make a difference, either way, they will do whatever it takes to get out of it. I would imagine BP has the worlds leading lawyers, if not, they will soon have them.

as one news guy stated...fish is not the worlds economy, you eat fish/shrimp because you want too...you use oil because you HAVE too, and if BP fails or falls, then you are talking about another global economic disaster, and in the end, our govt will protect BP because oil is a must, they will not care too much about the fish, or the people, so in the end, I do not think the loss of your job will matter, its the oil that matters.

Its like save the oil, everything else can lay waste or die.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199884].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

I do not care how much damage BP has done, I do not think they will ever pay as much as you think they should, and could be tied up in court for the next 20-30 years while people loose their jobs, and I doubt the govt will step up to the plate either...even if BP was fined a trillion dollars, they will tie this up over the next 50 years, or make payments so small it wont make a difference, either way, they will do whatever it takes to get out of it. I would imagine BP has the worlds leading lawyers, if not, they will soon have them.

as one news guy stated...fish is not the worlds economy, you eat fish/shrimp because you want too...you use oil because you HAVE too, and if BP fails or falls, then you are talking about another global economic disaster, and in the end, our govt will protect BP because oil is a must, they will not care too much about the fish, or the people, so in the end, I do not think the loss of your job will matter, its the oil that matters.

Its like save the oil, everything else can lay waste or die.

If the ocean dies, WE will probably die!!!!!! IT generates the oxygen, provides for a lot of other animals, etc....

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200082].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

BTW LB,

Apparently the QUARTERLY dividend is expected around 6/21, which makes sense since the FYE is December. They ARE talking about telling BP to forget it though. BPs cost of business has SKYROCKETED! People are talking about bankruptcy. Oh yeah, BP stock has dropped over 20% since I sold it. The stock is selling at almost BOOK price!

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2199985].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

BTW LB,

Apparently the QUARTERLY dividend is expected around 6/21, which makes sense since the FYE is December. They ARE talking about telling BP to forget it though. BPs cost of business has SKYROCKETED! People are talking about bankruptcy. Oh yeah, BP stock has dropped over 20% since I sold it. The stock is selling at almost BOOK price!

Steve

BP stock crashes; oil giant trading below book value

It was a bad day for most stocks today, but it was a bloodbath for embattled oil giant BP. Shares of BP dived 16 percent today, driving the stock price to ...

Economy Watch - BP stock crashes; oil giant trading below book value

and this is just the start of the end if this keeps going.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200008].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Kay - that fault doesn't go near the gulf, no matter what the blogs say.

I know - that's what I said - fault line maps show it part way along the MS river but not to the mouth of it or near it. Point I was making is that "they" (whoever they are) take a fact and twist and stretch it until their conspiracy theory fits.

The idea (whoever posted it) that an oil company would either deliberately or by accident drill 3 miles deep on a fault line is not believable and is a nutcase conspiracy to my mind (which was pointed out, I should add).

I'm not sure anyone has the authority (or should have it) to tell BP what it can pay it's shareholders. The shares are on the quarter preceding the oil leak - which was a highly profitable quarter. The dividends for this quarter are likely to be quite different. This is a company that had 7 billion in cash assets a month ago.

If BP were showing reluctance to pay claims, that is one thing - but they are taking claims, calling back quickly (yes I know that is true) and they are making payments.

They are requiring documentation which some here complain about - but if they didn't they'd get scammed just like FEMA did after Katrina.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200070].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

I know - that's what I said - fault line maps show it part way along the MS river but not to the mouth of it or near it. Point I was making is that "they" (whoever they are) take a fact and twist and stretch it until their conspiracy theory fits.

The idea (whoever posted it) that an oil company would either deliberately or by accident drill 3 miles deep on a fault line is not believable and is a nutcase conspiracy to my mind (which was pointed out, I should add).

Yeah - it was nutcase stuff. Just was interesting to see what they used to try to get it out there. As far as I can see just sticking to basic facts and histories is enough to boggle the mind.

I would love to see BP crashed right out of business - this is their 4th spill of notoriety. There is either something going on in the background or they are just too damned stupid to be allowed into the environment for any purpose. Take your pick of the two, but there is nothing left to say about that company. Where they go, disaster strikes.

And there are a good number of very daunting possibilities that this can be a very lethal problem........I don't know why the guy I listened to had to go so far out of his way to make up such wild crap when the REAL repercussions already going on and possibilities are so sickening already.

Let that stock crash....this is one Major Corp that needs to go under.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200680].message }}

Patrician

16 years ago

Did anyone see yesterday on Anderson Cooper? They had the oil rig workers who survived the explosion - they were mostly emotional wrecks - don't hold me to the details as I was kind of just listening in the background and did not get all the details -

However what I did get was that whatever they were doing was several million dollars over budget - BP was working with some drilling company who specifically told them not to do something and they over rode the safety/legal stuff and said - 'just do it' - this was immediately before the explosion.

These guys were not wearing tin foil hats and although I am not a psychic I would bet my bottom dollar that they were sincere and not conspiracy nuts. They were absolutely traumatized - one could barely finish a sentence without crying. The other had this look like he was amazed to still be alive -

Then a lawyer came on and was talking about if this was all true that this was absolutely criminal negligence leading to homicide versus an 'accident'. Sure does sound like it.

... alas - nobody looks worse than the poor birds. and as i said earlier no amount of money can ever replace them or make up for this -

Originally Posted by Kay King

The idea (whoever posted it) that an oil company would either deliberately or by accident drill 3 miles deep on a fault line is not believable and is a nutcase conspiracy to my mind (which was pointed out, I should add).

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Patricia Brucoli
Plug-In Profit Site Helpdesk

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200942].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Patrician

BP was working with some drilling company who specifically told them not to do something and they over rode the safety/legal stuff and said - 'just do it' - this was immediately before the explosion.

Not surprising.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200952].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Someone mentioned pressures to 150,000 psi. I can only
squeeze my right hand and generate about 25,000 psi, so
150k is impressive. Anyway...

150k can be handled by someone at least...

High Pressure Valves for Pressures To 150,000 psi from Haskel International, Inc.

Not that my opinion or this post matters at all, but
you know... maybe a little outta the box thinking is
in order.

Instead of fighting nature, the pressure, work with
it maybe. Instead of trying to plug it, capture it and
divert it.

In the words of some sage...

Just sayin'...

Later... time for coffee and more writing.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200299].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Actually the pressure seems to be between 20,000 and 50,000 psi behind it. But natural gas and oil are leaking out of the deposit as far inland as Central Alabama and way over into Florida and even over to Louisiana almost as far as Texas. It is huge - trillions of barrels.

There are computer models that suggest a worst case scenario of a volcano effect. As oil is pushed out (currently an estimated 2 cubic miles of oil has been displaced), the sea floor is destabilized and the danger of volatile natural gas expands as it fills the voids. There is a risk that this growing volume of natural gas could rupture a hole 1/4 mile wide at a fault slippage, with pressures exceeding 150,000psi and ignite into a firestorm bigger than a volcano. There is just no shut off valve quite THAT big.

I could say more ... but gotta run now ...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200445].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

I could say more also. A LOT more!!! I mean SO much more it would be beyond more. I have so much more I could say that is bottled up inside my cramped cranium that it is a burden I must carry. A CROSS I must carry, but I can't really say more about that because that would delve into religious territory. By the way, I have much more I could say about THAT also. 8-)

It is uncomfortable and EVEN HURTS also! I mean having all this more I could say but knowing I can't say it here. Sometimes when I have more to say and can't say it my aorta quivers, aches and I have to take TWO aspirins!!! I also know that the MORE I can say would blow away and persuade anyone within reach that the more I have to say is the actual truth. Anyone can say MORE, but my more is unique in that it is not more of the same.

I can't say more....

Originally Posted by myob

I could say more ...

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200532].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I could say more also. A LOT more!!! I mean SO much more it would be beyond more. I have so much more I could say that is bottled up inside my cramped cranium that it is a burden I must carry. A CROSS I must carry, but I can't really say more about that because that would delve into religious territory. By the way, I have much more I could say about THAT also. 8-)

It is uncomfortable and EVEN HURTS also! I mean having all this more I could say but knowing I can't say it here. Sometimes when I have more to say and can't say it my aorta quivers, aches and I have to take TWO aspirins!!! I also know that the MORE I can say would blow away and persuade anyone within reach that the more I have to say is the actual truth. Anyone can say MORE, but my more is unique in that it is not more of the same.

I can't say more....

Is there anything at all you can add to that? You know... more?

Now, I really can't say more because I've reached my word quota for
the day. (the little red light is blinking.)

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200553].message }}

MikeAmbrosio 16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I can't say more....

Sure you can - post on your blog, put a link in your sig. People will read it.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200559].message }}
- myob 16 years ago
  
  There are some things you just should never say. For example, that fire on the oil rig was started on April 20, on the anniversary of the birth of Adolf Hitler. The rig exploded and sunk on April 22 - Earth Day, and precipitated the worst ecological disaster in history. Are those just coincidences ... or is it a message from the NWO conspirators?
  
  I could say more ... but maybe too much has been said already ...
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200628].message }}
  
  Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Tim - I agree - put it on your blog. Cramped cranium is not something to take lightly.
  
  (the little red light is blinking.)
  
  Ken - doesn't that happen just before the explosion?
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200646].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Just making the point about handling pressure. But there is a main hole
where this is coming from. But anyway...

Well, Paul, that all sounds quite cataclysmic.

It's interesting though to think about one company essentially
endangering the planet. Of course, if someone wants to drill a 3 mile
hole in the earth, it is 3 miles I think someone posted, then it seems
perhaps more people should buy into it.

Reminds me of some movie I saw. There were two people, and one
of them did something stupid. The other person turned and said, "You
just killed us."

Don't know why all of this reminds me of that.

Anyway... enjoy the evening.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200492].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Here's some scary stuff:

The dumping of all the crap into the well to seal it may have caused the oil reserves to start seeping through the "formation", which is the rock surrounding the oil. If this is true, it means it will be impossible to plug the leaks.

Animal guy Jeff Corwin is doing environmental reports for NBC. He says there's a plume of oil a mile high and the oil isn't all at the top. This means, every level of the environment of the Gulf is affected.

BTW, Corwin also said that every Atlantic tuna breeds a few miles from the plume and this will be devastating to every tuna that swims in the Atlantic. Seems that even though they spend their entire life in the Atlantic, they are all born and bred in the Gulf.

Someone needs to tell the tuna, "Sorry Charley".

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200678].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Here's some scary stuff:

The dumping of all the crap into the well to seal it may have caused the oil reserves to start seeping through the "formation", which is the rock surrounding the oil. If this is true, it means it will be impossible to plug the leaks.

Animal guy Jeff Corwin is doing environmental reports for NBC. He says there's a plume of oil a mile high and the oil isn't all at the top. This means, every level of the environment of the Gulf is affected.

BTW, Corwin also said that every Atlantic tuna breeds a few miles from the plume and this will be devastating to every tuna that swims in the Atlantic. Seems that even though they spend their entire life in the Atlantic, they are all born and bred in the Gulf.

Someone needs to tell the tuna, "Sorry Charley".

Great. Blue fins were just about extinct anyhow. Most countries had signed an agreement to stop hunting them, 5 had been holding out even though the fish would be gone within a few years if hunting wasn't stopped right now. Guess it will get stopped short no matter who the hell decides they will hunt something to extinction if they feel like it.

Looks like Karma might just be feeling like a genuine wench right now.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200702].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Here's some scary stuff:

The dumping of all the crap into the well to seal it may have caused the oil reserves to start seeping through the "formation", which is the rock surrounding the oil. If this is true, it means it will be impossible to plug the leaks.

I'm surprised, sort of, that the minds behind the operation
didn't think about the head of pressure they were creating,
or would create, if they merely plugged it.

They drilled 3 miles deep. So who knows what the real pressure
is 3 miles down. It's significantly more than at the opening at
the bottom of the Gulf.

The well is an unnatural formation. So plugging it will naturally
cause the pressure to look for other ways to stabilize. To me,
and any other blue collar instrument tech, plugging it will cause
other issues.

But plugging it is the easiest thing to try, and it's the cheapest
so far as the actual operation is concerned. But since it failed,
and I knew it would, then the ancillary costs will be much more
than if they tried to figure out a way to capture the leak, coming
out of the well entrance, and temp divert it.

It's certainly possible to construct a temp structure to capture,
divert into piping, and use either a series of devices such as pressure
manifolds or valves to step down the pressure to a workable level.

No one will ever convince me that is not possible. I've worked with
pressures up to 20,000 psi before, smaller scale - yes, but the
principles are exactly the same. I realize it's under water, etc. But it
can be done.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200728].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Hey Ken,

One thing to consider is that the pressure of the oil leak is somewhat balanced by the pressure of being a mile under water, so the pressure escaping is counter-acted by the pressure a mile of water is exerting...So while the escape pressure may be 20,000 psi, the water pressure cold be exerting 15,000 psi downward, for a net difference of 5,000 PSI. This would be the number of most importance. (I went to marine engineering school in Baltimore and the MD eastern shore.

)

I'm with you...I don't understand why a big "inverse funnel" can't be erected over the spill. You run 8 (or more) anchors from the funnel connected to cables and a winch to position the funnel in place.

I think the problem is, the ocean floor in that part of the Gulf isn't stable enough to let anchors get a grip.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200756].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Hey Ken,

One thing to consider is that the pressure of the oil leak is somewhat balanced by the pressure of being a mile under water, so the pressure escaping is counter-acted by the pressure a mile of water is exerting...So while the escape pressure may be 20,000 psi, the water pressure cold be exerting 15,000 psi downward, for a net difference of 5,000 PSI. This would be the number of most importance. (I went to marine engineering school in Baltimore and the MD eastern shore.

)

I'm with you...I don't understand why a big "inverse funnel" can't be erected over the spill. You run 8 (or more) anchors from the funnel connected to cables and a winch to position the funnel in place.

I think the problem is, the ocean floor in that part of the Gulf isn't stable enough to let anchors get a grip.

That's funny... didn't even think about the net pressure due to water pressure. I
wonder though if they've thought about doing that. Really seems to me that they
must have. They can afford all the talent money can buy.

It also seems that it can't be too terribly unstable, shifting etc, but certainly not out
of the question. But I guess that that has been there quite a while. So it must have
some reasonable amount of stability to it.

Plus, it really would not have to be completely anchored down over it I would think
just as long as the pressure kept it going into an orifice.

I'd really like to be a fly on the wall over there in BP land.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200772].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

That's funny... didn't even think about the net pressure due to water pressure. I
wonder though if they've thought about doing that. Really seems to me that they
must have. They can afford all the talent money can buy.

.

I'm sure they've thought of it. Even if the funnel/anchor idea works, you still need at least a mile of pipe from the funnel to the surface...

And where does the pipe go?

How much oil is being put out a day?

How much does a super tanker hold?

Can other existing pipelines in the area be used? Can they be connected to the funnel?

I think everything would need to be in place before they tried to cover the well with a funnel.

But as far as the anchor and funnel idea goes, they aren't limited to 8 anchors, nor are they limited to just dropping an anchor. Maybe drill support "holes" filled with concrete to use as anchors for winches.

If it's true that the oil is now seeping through the rock formation, none of the above will even matter.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200823].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

I'm sure they've thought of it. Even if the funnel/anchor idea works, you still need at least a mile of pipe from the funnel to the surface...

And where does the pipe go?

How much oil is being put out a day?

How much does a super tanker hold?

Can other existing pipelines in the area be used? Can they be connected to the funnel?

I think everything would need to be in place before they tried to cover the well with a funnel.

But as far as the anchor and funnel idea goes, they aren't limited to 8 anchors, nor are they limited to just dropping an anchor. Maybe drill support "holes" filled with concrete to use as anchors for winches.

If it's true that the oil is now seeping through the rock formation, none of the above will even matter.

Kurt... it's 2 AM and I'm eating my dinner. Do I have to answer these
now? I mean, now?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200864].message }}

Kurt 16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Kurt... it's 2 AM and I'm eating my dinner. Do I have to answer these
now? I mean, now?

If you don't mind.
- Thanks
Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200874].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Check this out... BP et al accepting ideas about the situatiion. It's
interesting.

Government looks to Facebook for some friendly suggestions on oil spill - KansasCity.com

"In Houston, BP has received 40,000 suggestions, and about 250 of them have made it to the point of serious consideration, spokesman Toby Odones said."

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200785].message }}

troon

16 years ago

I think this post was originally about law suit limitations so remember this...no one will likely ever recover their personal loses from this tragedy BUT the lawyers will get filthy rich! It's like any other class action law suit, those damaged receive penny's and the lawyers receive windfalls!

I'm sure most of you have received those legal notices informing us that we're part of a class action law suit because we purchased some product or service in the past. I just received one yesterday about a suit involving merchant credit card fees. I own a retail business so I obviously take credit cards. I always take time to read the part about how the lawyers will be paid. In this case they will receive 25% of the settlement and I can take 30 minutes to complete a claim form for $25.

So how much was the total settlement for...how about $350,000,000. Yep, $87,000,000 for the lawyers and $25 for those of us who were "damaged" by the greedy credit card companies.

If I were that Judge in this case I would require the lawyers to detail the number of hours spent on the case. I would love to see what their hourly "fee" works out to be (oh, I forgot...the Judge is a lawyer too. Guess that will never happen!).

Sorry for the rant but remember the lawyers will be the ones who reap the most from the BP spill. Those who really deserve more will never get it. That's simply the way our system works!

[ 4 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

DOMAIN FOR SALE ===> PPCBank.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200850].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by troon

I think this post was originally about law suit limitations so remember this...no one will likely ever recover their personal loses from this tragedy BUT the lawyers will get filthy rich! It's like any other class action law suit, those damaged receive penny's and the lawyers receive windfalls!

I'm sure most of you have received those legal notices informing us that we're part of a class action law suit because we purchased some product or service in the past. I just received one yesterday about a suit involving merchant credit card fees. I own a retail business so I obviously take credit cards. I always take time to read the part about how the lawyers will be paid. In this case they will receive 25% of the settlement and I can take 30 minutes to complete a claim form for $25.

So how much was the total settlement for...how about $350,000,000. Yep, $87,000,000 for the lawyers and $25 for those of us who were "damaged" by the greedy credit card companies.

If I were that Judge in this case I would require the lawyers to detail the number of hours spent on the case. I would love to see what their hourly "fee" works out to be (oh, I forgot...the Judge is a lawyer too. Guess that will never happen!).

Sorry for the rant but remember the lawyers will be the ones who reap the most from the BP spill. Those who really deserve more will never get it. That's simply the way our system works!

Looking for justice? I recommend any one of the fine Dirty Harry movies from the 70s.

Of course Unforgiven was excellent. I liked the ending. "I'm here to kill you, Little Bill,
for what you done to Ned."

That's justice.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2200891].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

BP has lost 50% of their stock in a short period of time, so if BP goes BK over this, then what? Who is going to pay to fix the oil leak? Who is going to pay for the clean up? Who is going to pay for the Businesses/Workers that are out of business?

Another govt bailout for BP?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2201603].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Regarding the class action lawsuits, they use a quirk in the law that make it such that really only lawyers can or should litigate such lawsuits, and various red tape.

Some plaintiffs like them because they DO limit costs/risks/trouble, and some end up making a KILLING!

The FACT is that some plaintiffs get FAR less than they should, there are time limits, the defendant has FIXED costs, and the lawyers get paid OFF THE TOP! In a sense, EVERYONE loves it and benefits, except those that most deserved and needed the money. YEAH, even BP would love it because NOW their costs could be in the TRILLIONS! A classaction lawsuit might limit it to say 100Billion, 60billion miht go to the lawyers, and the other 50 billion is split among the plaintiffs.

BTW Some publications in Great Britain are saying that obama has his boot on british pensioner's necks. THEY, like many here, rely on that BP dividend. 8-(

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2201987].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

NEW ORLEANS -- Despite the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico,

Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu D, is reiterating her call to end the Obama administration's moratorium on deepwater drilling, saying it will cause economic hardship in the region.

Speaking Thursday on ABC's "Good Morning America," Landrieu said the moratorium was issued without much economic analysis and said the deepwater rigs in the Gulf "employ, directly, hundreds of people and indirectly thousands."

Landrieu said the rigs' safety must be ensured but they should then be allowed to get back to work.

Her comments come as efforts continue to cap a blown out well that began spewing oil into the Gulf after an April explosion on a rig that killed 11 workers.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202005].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Many people think there is oil in New Orleans - they need to look at the map. It's a knee jerk reaction that is equivalent to "stop the world while I think about this problem". If there is a safety problem that causes an auto recall - do they stop making cars?

I don't like Landrieu - but she has a point.

There are many jobs on those rigs - and they are held by people who live along the Gulf coast. These are good paying jobs and though I've never been near a rig - I know people who work on them.

Closing them down is another huge job loss for the coast - profitable rigs will not be left idle but could be moved by the oil companies to other areas to continue oil production.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202093].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

They fix the problem that caused the recall then continue to make cars. Have they fixed the problem that caused this oil leak yet? I don't think so.

Originally Posted by Kay King

If there is a safety problem that causes an auto recall - do they stop making cars?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202294].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

They fix the problem that caused the recall then continue to make cars. Have they fixed the problem that caused this oil leak yet? I don't think so.

Going by the interview I saw with workers who where on the rig when it exploded, if they keep with proper drilling methods this wouldn't of happened at all.
I'm most certainly not an expert, but they where saying something about replacing the mud that was in the pipe which keep the pressure in check with sea water so they could complete the job faster.
From what they where saying this all falls on BP trying to cut corners (and cost).
I don't see where there is any comparison between the car recalls and this.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202360].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

Me either! That was Kay's analogy.

Originally Posted by ThomM

I don't see where there is any comparison between the car recalls and this.
- Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202365].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Going by the interview I saw with workers who where on the rig when it exploded, if they keep with proper drilling methods this wouldn't of happened at all.
I'm most certainly not an expert, but they where saying something about replacing the mud that was in the pipe which keep the pressure in check with sea water so they could complete the job faster.
From what they where saying this all falls on BP trying to cut corners (and cost).
I don't see where there is any comparison between the car recalls and this.

I read somewhere that they had a cost analysis on paper that put worker's lives at 10 mil when they evaluated cost cutting methods so they were fully aware that some cost cutting could at least take out some workers. After all the explosions, deaths, spills, and environmental damage this company has caused through the years and still get contracts for things as lethal as this one could have (and did) turn into, why should they feel that they can't get away with anything they damned well want to? I think they just need to be shut down. They are right up there with MONSANTO for environmental destruction if not even leading it.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202407].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I read somewhere that they had a cost analysis on paper that put worker's lives at 10 mil when they evaluated cost cutting methods so they were fully aware that some cost cutting could at least take out some workers. After all the explosions, deaths, spills, and environmental damage this company has caused through the years and still get contracts for things as lethal as this one could have (and did) turn into, why should they feel that they can't get away with anything they damned well want to? I think they just need to be shut down. They are right up there with MONSANTO for environmental destruction if not even leading it.

You have to put a cost on human lives if you are doing a cost analysis.
Besides that, after this I wouldn't be upset if BP was made to disappear.
As far as Mosanto, here's a little info for the gardeners out there.
Miracle Grow is owned by Monsanto.
That doesn't explain why their potting soil is loaded with fungus gnat eggs and larva, but it does explain why their fertilizers kill beneficial microbes creating an environment where the plants are dependent on miracle grow to survive.

Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202668].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

They fix the problem that caused the recall then continue to make cars. Have they fixed the problem that caused this oil leak yet? I don't think so.

Well, they DID basically bypass a LOT of failsafes in this rig. Technically, it didn't have a BOP, because the BOP broke. However, ken is right about one thing. There is a LOT of pressure down there and do they REALLY have an idea of how much, etc? Have they REALY tested it? Judging by the problems they have had here, I would have to shout NO WAY!

SO, they have a BOP that could fail because of the pressure, and that MIGHT be why the actuator broke. The valve broke in several ways, so it might as well not exist.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202384].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Considering that we don't know the details on what went wrong - stopping all rigs now might be necessary if something covert is going on. Also - if there is enough oil out there the chance of an explosion might just be too great to allow others to be where their lives are at risk.

There is now a media blackout - people with cameras are being arrested (newspress) = that is a rumor but many people are reporting it's true and have seen arrests being made.
the WH gave BP 72 hours to figure it out, I think that was yesterday.

Haven't heard anything else about the leak at Taylor's rig. Nobody is saying anything, but the satellite pics were very convincing.

Just found out BP was involved in the Texas explosion in 2005, too. So that brings them to 5.

I'm still wondering why they didn't just run a slightly narrower hose down the inside of the one that is leaking - have done that in a few radiator hoses during emergencies when the hose cracked while I was out in the middle of nowhere. Don't understand why they can't do that one. This whole "can't fix it thing" is just becoming a bit too unbelievable.

Oh - and Kevin Kosner (or some star or other) is going to Congress with an invention of his that clean up the oil out of the water. Sounded like a good little rig and hope to hell we have a hero on our hands!

We just don't really know what is up. If I was off work as a driller right now because they wouldn't allow us back in the water, I think I'd be willing to bet there's a reason I shouldn't be there and would be seriously looking to do something else for awhile. I like to stay away from stuff that makes no sense - especially with a media blackout attached to it.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202368].message }}

caldream2020

16 years ago

Where did you hear $27M? Thats not even 10% of the total clean up cost in last week's estimate by BP.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Good Insurance | Insurance Policy

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202415].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by caldream2020

Where did you hear $27M? Thats not even 10% of the total clean up cost in last week's estimate by BP.

It was on the news. BP knew they were in trouble, they went to a judge early to asked to place a cap on damages/liability...I have not heard anything about it since, as you can clearly see why....last I heard BP has spent $100m on whatever, and has caused $11b in damages and still counting.

I also heard on the news that may not be well known, that there is another oil rig leak that is not related to this one. I think they said it was like 100 miles away on another rig. I think they have tried to keep it quite as BP does not want anymore bad publicity, to be honest, I assume it is another BP rig, if not, then it is owned by another oil company.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202851].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

I also heard on the news that may not be well known, that there is another oil rig leak that is not related to this one. I think they said it was like 100 miles away on another rig. I think they have tried to keep it quite as BP does not want anymore bad publicity, to be honest, I assume it is another BP rig, if not, then it is owned by another oil company.

You are correct on this, but the leak is very, very small. The rig is also not owned by BP, I can't remember who owns it, but I don't think it's any huge Oil Company (but I may be wrong). Last I heard it was leaking 15 barrels a day, and was damaged from natural causes. Oil leaks happen all the time in the drilling industry, just not like BP's of course.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202865].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

You are correct on this, but the leak is very, very small. The rig is also not owned by BP, I can't remember who owns it, but I don't think it's any huge Oil Company (but I may be wrong). Last I heard it was leaking 15 barrels a day, and was damaged from natural causes. Oil leaks happen all the time in the drilling industry, just not like BP's of course.

no leak should be acceptable, not even a small one.

This planet is fragile enough, and it is fragile because
of the harm that we cause the planet...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202922].message }}

DukkyMan 16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

no leak should be acceptable, not even a small one.

This planet is fragile enough, and it is fragile because
of the harm that we cause the planet...

I never said it was acceptable. I live in Louisiana and watch every day as more and more of our fragile wetland is destroyed by the oil every day. I was merely trying to inform the poster more about the leak, and I didn't want anyone to go into a panic thinking there was another gusher out there spewing out 500,000+ gallons of oil a day.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2203138].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

You are correct on this, but the leak is very, very small. The rig is also not owned by BP, I can't remember who owns it, but I don't think it's any huge Oil Company (but I may be wrong). Last I heard it was leaking 15 barrels a day, and was damaged from natural causes. Oil leaks happen all the time in the drilling industry, just not like BP's of course.

I already gave the specifics on this on the last page.

The second leak is on a rig that belongs to a guy named Taylor - John Taylor, and I doubt that is the John Taylor in our forum:rolleyes:

There is also a possible leak on a rig that is owned by Diamond, but I wasn't able to find out if that turned out to be true or if they just suspected the wrong rig at first.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2204149].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

It was TransOcean - the rig builder - that requested this, not BP.

June 2 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. government asked a federal judge to reject Transocean Ltd.'s bid to use a 159-year-old law to cap its liability at $27 million for environmental claims tied to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

Not BP.

From Huffington:

Similarly, Transocean, the owner of the Deepwater Horizon rig has submitted a petition in a Houston federal court claiming that its liability for the accident is limited to $27 million under the Limitation of Liability Act, a maritime law enacted in 1851. Under the Act, a vessel owner can limit its liability to the value of the vessel and its freight.
Transocean asserts that the current value of the Deepwater Horizon rig is $27 million and thus, under the law, its liability must be limited to that figure. However, this law was passed 160 years, before insurance companies began offering coverage to seafaring vehicles and Transocean has already received a payout of $400 million from its insurance provider. Allowing it to limit its liability to $27 million would actually allow Transocean to potentially profit from the oil spill.

(underlines were in the posts on those blogs)

and for Halliburton:

Halliburton (HAL) shares jumped 12% in Wednesday trading, as company officials reassured the market that it's indemnified against potential claims and expenses arising from BP's (BP) massive Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

See full article from DailyFinance: Halliburton Shares Soar as Company Outlines Obligations in BP Oil Spill - DailyFinance

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202892].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

ok. You here BP come up more then any of the other compaines,
I know someone requested a $27m cap...but thats ok...
was that approved by the way

protect your company, not the environment....

Originally Posted by Kay King

It was TransOcean - the rig builder - that requested this, not BP.

Not BP.

From Huffington:

(underlines were in the posts on those blogs)

and for Halliburton:

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202914].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Heysal,

Rigs are KNOWN to be RISKY! They probably SHOULD apply some good value to people's lives, etc... That doesn't really mean anything sinister.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202445].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Heysal,

Rigs are KNOWN to be RISKY! They probably SHOULD apply some good value to people's lives, etc... That doesn't really mean anything sinister.

Steve

Sure - especially when the value assigned is in an analysis of how much it can cost them if the cost cutting procedure goes wrong - like it has for them at least 5 times now.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202699].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I don't see where there is any comparison between the car recalls and this.

We know already the explosion was caused by known factors and decisions that should not have been made by BP.

The point about cars is that if one carmaker has a safety defect that causes millions of cars to be recalled (and is responsible for several deaths) - we don't stop selling cars until the problem is studied. Instead, a recall of affected vehicles is required.

Perhaps all BP rigs should be closed until inspected - but not all companies are BP. BP took risks they should not have taken - that doesn't mean all owners of rigs take those risks. BP turned in an environmental study that claimed the seals and sea lions would not be harmed. Excuse me? Who is reading this crap when it is sent to the feds? What sea lions and seals??? That is the action of a for profit company that knows it is not being regulated or monitored.

Oil rig jobs pay well - because of the risk involved and becuase it's hard work. Losing those jobs as well as losing the use of the Gulf is a double whammy along the coast.

The safe thing to do is close all rigs - but it is not practical if it further destroys a stressed economy in Gulf states. As it is, foreclosures and business closures in the area are expected to skyrocket this summer.

What I'm saying is that caution must be balanced with common sense. Inspections should not be "planned" - they should be underway by now.

kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202799].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

We know already the explosion was caused by known factors and decisions that should not have been made by BP.

The point about cars is that if one carmaker has a safety defect that causes millions of cars to be recalled (and is responsible for several deaths) - we don't stop selling cars until the problem is studied. Instead, a recall of affected vehicles is required.

Perhaps all BP rigs should be closed until inspected - but not all companies are BP. BP took risks they should not have taken - that doesn't mean all owners of rigs take those risks. BP turned in an environmental study that claimed the seals and sea lions would not be harmed. Excuse me? Who is reading this crap when it is sent to the feds? What sea lions and seals??? That is the action of a for profit company that knows it is not being regulated or monitored.

Oil rig jobs pay well - because of the risk involved and becuase it's hard work. Losing those jobs as well as losing the use of the Gulf is a double whammy along the coast.

The safe thing to do is close all rigs - but it is not practical if it further destroys a stressed economy in Gulf states. As it is, foreclosures and business closures in the area are expected to skyrocket this summer.

What I'm saying is that caution must be balanced with common sense. Inspections should not be "planned" - they should be underway by now.

kay

Exactly Kay.
If there are a thousand other rigs operating safely now there is no reason to shut them down. Inspect they A.S.A.P. yes, shut them down till then, no.

Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202863].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

What is becoming very clear is this isn't just a BP problem. There are many issues that are coming to light because of this disaster. One of the main ones is that these companies do not know how to deal with oil leaks at this depth. These companies have lied to us. They are making up ways to cap this leak as they go.

The analogy with car recalls does not work. The problems with this type of oil drilling are too widespread. There's too many issues that are screwed up that can lead to this oil leak. A car recall usually involves one part of one type of car within one company.

Originally Posted by Kay King

We know already the explosion was caused by known factors and decisions that should not have been made by BP.

The point about cars is that if one carmaker has a safety defect that causes millions of cars to be recalled (and is responsible for several deaths) - we don't stop selling cars until the problem is studied. Instead, a recall of affected vehicles is required.

Perhaps all BP rigs should be closed until inspected - but not all companies are BP. BP took risks they should not have taken - that doesn't mean all owners of rigs take those risks. BP turned in an environmental study that claimed the seals and sea lions would not be harmed. Excuse me? Who is reading this crap when it is sent to the feds? What sea lions and seals??? That is the action of a for profit company that knows it is not being regulated or monitored.

Oil rig jobs pay well - because of the risk involved and becuase it's hard work. Losing those jobs as well as losing the use of the Gulf is a double whammy along the coast.

The safe thing to do is close all rigs - but it is not practical if it further destroys a stressed economy in Gulf states. As it is, foreclosures and business closures in the area are expected to skyrocket this summer.

What I'm saying is that caution must be balanced with common sense. Inspections should not be "planned" - they should be underway by now.

kay

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2204379].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I live in Southeast Louisiana and can smell the oil from my house, the thing is, I live in New Orleans which doesn't even touch the gulf. It is truly more horrible than anyone can imagine, and the politics/efforts behind fixing it are so awful that I don't even know what to do anymore.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202784].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

As a Louisiana resident let me explain what almost every Louisiana resident fears will happen:

1) The Moratorium will pass
2) The Louisiana economy will plummet, it's already in bad shape, around 18% of Louisiana's economy is from the Oil & Oil Services industry.
3) 40,000+ residents will lose their jobs. 10,000 people are employed directly, and somewhere around 30,000 probably more are paid indirectly. The 6th man ban will put nearly 50,000 people or maybe even more than that, out of a job.

However, we also fear that another instance like this could happen, which would be terrible as well. President Obama has to make sure that the rigs in the gulf are inspected and pass safety regulations. But if he bans them for 6 months, the rigs will pack up and leave for South America or Africa and probably never come back, and Louisiana will die.

[ 2 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2202824].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

news says BP could file BK. BP says it will not happen. The thing is, BP has not told the truth on anything since this disaster began, so if BP stock continues to crash, then it would be a good opportunity for another huge oil company to buy BP, of course the new company would be liable for the damages of the oil spill, the good news is, the new company would have access to all BP owned stations, and the oil itself, and it would be a good deal for the new company to settle compensation damages....

I see two options:

Govt BP bailout
BP takeover by another oil company

Because if BP does not fix this, then there is only
one direction that BP can go in, and its not up....

We will see....

Govt has given permission to BP or others to drill even deeper (2.5) miles.
They can not even fix the current oil leak at a mile. If you ask me, I think
they should put cut off solutions into the piping below the ground when
they insert their piping, so if this happens, then just close the valve off
in the ground, thus stopping the oil from coming out, this is my idea,
so if they use this, they should pay me

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2203259].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

news says BP could file BK. BP says it will not happen. The thing is, BP has not told the truth on anything since this disaster began, so if BP stock continues to crash, then it would be a good opportunity for another huge oil company to buy BP, of course the new company would be liable for the damages of the oil spill, the good news is, the new company would have access to all BP owned stations, and the oil itself, and it would be a good deal for the new company to settle compensation damages....

I predicted earlier on this thread that BP will file bankruptcy and screw everyone.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2203322].message }}

silverwaterfall

16 years ago

After this catastrophe, hopefully people will stop voting against wind farms and other alternative energy?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2203327].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by silverwaterfall

After this catastrophe, hopefully people will stop voting against wind farms and other alternative energy?

Oil compaines will vote against anything that does not require the use of their oil products, they will fight, spend money, or do whatever it takes for you to continue to use oil.

But can you imagine if something came out overnight to replace
oil, gas, and it was cheaper, safer, then the oil industry would
crash resulting in more economic ruin.

Oil is like a drug that we are now addicted too, there must not be
anything alternative because we are still using oil/gas - some
alternatives yes, but not nearly anything that would allow
us to stop using oil/gas altogether.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2203369].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

Oil compaines will vote against anything that does not require the use of their oil products, they will fight, spend money, or do whatever it takes for you to continue to use oil.

But can you imagine if something came out overnight to replace
oil, gas, and it was cheaper, safer, then the oil industry would
crash resulting in more economic ruin.

Oil is like a drug that we are now addicted too, there must not be
anything alternative because we are still using oil/gas - some
alternatives yes, but not nearly anything that would allow
us to stop using oil/gas altogether.

The oil companies can build wind and solar power grids if they choose.

And if we replaced oil tomorrow, in theory we'd be keeping about $500 BILLION dollars in the US each year, instead of sending it to oil producing countries.

I read a study about three countries that had gone to green energy, can't remember the three. Each had positives effects on their economies.

[ 2 ] Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2203463].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Clean and renewable energy is of course the only way of the future, but to say that we could replace Oil over night is naive. Our country is far too large and utilizes far too much energy to get rid of oil, until there is a sound and carefully planned infrastructure of green energy to replace it.

Have any of you heard of a process called Thermal Depolymerization? It's a process that's used to break down organic material, usually waste (they already have a plant that uses turkey guts), and converts it into light crude oil. The process not only removes the waste, it also doesn't release any carbon dioxide (I'm pretty sure about this, but I can't remember why it doesn't). The cost per barrel from the turkey guts factory is $80 a barrel. Sound pretty amazing to me, I've only researched it a little, if anyone out there knows more, I'd love to hear what you have to say.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2203554].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Have any of you heard of a process called Thermal Depolymerization? It's a process that's used to break down organic material, usually waste (they already have a plant that uses turkey guts), and converts it into light crude oil. The process not only removes the waste, it also doesn't release any carbon dioxide (I'm pretty sure about this, but I can't remember why it doesn't). The cost per barrel from the turkey guts factory is $80 a barrel. Sound pretty amazing to me, I've only researched it a little, if anyone out there knows more, I'd love to hear what you have to say.

Hey Kurt... do you sleep? Or on another one of your legendary crank
binges?

Anyway... you otter read about thermal depolymerization. Since you hate
oil, capitalism, and profits. lol

That process supposedly can be used to replace anything made from oil. It's
pretty cool, and that's something that certainly could decrease dependence on
oil. Might even be the nail in the electric car coffin! Naw... we can't do that to
you.

Actually, Mr. Mallard, the process does release CO2. But it's supposedly a closed
system, and what they mean by that is the CO2 released would be balanced by
other resources used to fuel the process. When I read that, it seemed a little
fuzzy. Or maybe I was fuzzy from drinking my Half Life.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2205933].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Hey Kurt... do you sleep? Or on another one of your legendary crank
binges?

Anyway... you otter read about thermal depolymerization. Since you hate
oil, capitalism, and profits. lol

That process supposedly can be used to replace anything made from oil. It's
pretty cool, and that's something that certainly could decrease dependence on
oil. Might even be the nail in the electric car coffin! Naw... we can't do that to
you.

.

For the record, I'm not anti profit. I am anti oil.

And actually, I'm more free market that just about anyone on this issue.

I believe there are costs involved with oil that aren't factored into the final cost of oil, like the Gulf oil leak and the effects of pollution on our health. Pollution is now even linked to diabetes.

Another is that it's estimated that half of our military budget is spent protecting US business interests abroad. Much of this is for oil. Why shouldn't they pay for their own protection?

I think if we factor in these costs, the REAL cost of oil gets more and more expensive.

In a true free market shouldn't these be factored into the real costs? And I didn't even mention the possiblity that fossil fuels may cause climate change. While we won't start that debate, everyone can admit clean air sure won't hurt and may help.

I am familiar with depolymerization and all options should be considered. I prefer electricity because we use it in so many different ways already. Wind and solar stations can be "off grid" and can be used on an individual scale. Depolymerization will rely on manufacturing plants and distribution networks. But again, it should still be looked into more, as should all alternatives.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206907].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Closing a rig that is operating safely may actually be BAD for the environment! If they can watch it, maintain it, etc... it may run for a good long time. As they take the oil out, it relieves pressure, etc... AND they get oil whose profits, in part, can be used to make things BETTER. If you just kick them off, what happens if something goes wrong 5 years down the road? SURE, you may hold them to task, but they can say WE WEREN'T THERE! YOU denied us all this income, etc... And now you expect us to pay for what YOU forced us to abandon? I'm not sure, but there MAY be legal precedent for that.

Stevecaldream2020,

I wondered that myself. APPARENTLY the law CURRENTLY, if they didn't get the law changed, allows for a limit of $75Million PER person, AND $1Billion for cleanup. BP supposedly said they would go beyond that.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2204143].message }}

l3vi501

16 years ago

Intresting link on oil spills: Oil Spills and Disasters — Infoplease.com

In Ohio there is a Cole mine that has been burning for over 122 years and counting. I have also seen a oil rig in afghan that burned for 20 years. It has a name but I can't remember it.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2205262].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

"I do not think BP will file BK unless the rhetoric and posturing in the US drives it to do that."

It really does not matter why. BP still does not have this leak undercontrol, and everyweek, we hear a new plan that ends in failure...Even though BP may seem to have a lot of money, it has already lost half its value, and everyday that this leak remains, it costs BP money and resources that could be used to put their company back together again, but since this leak continues...no company has been too big to fail, we recently saw this with financial sector, even though that was caused by fraud, overlending, etc...as long as this leak exists, BP is not safe from collapse...I am getting the feeling that the GOVT/People want BP to fail, and if they fail, then the govt will have to take over, and we know the govt does not know anything about oil drilling, they can not even manage properly, much less take over BP's projects, and BP keeps stating, we are getting the oil, and the news keeps stating, yet more oil is coming out then reported before...not good! BP keeps down playing everything....

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206829].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

"I do not think BP will file BK unless the rhetoric and posturing in the US drives it to do that."

It really does not matter why. BP still does not have this leak undercontrol, and everyweek, we hear a new plan that ends in failure...Even though BP may seem to have a lot of money, it has already lost half its value, and everyday that this leak remains, it costs BP money and resources that could be used to put their company back together again, but since this leak continues...no company has been too big to fail, we recently saw this with financial sector, even though that was caused by fraud, overlending, etc...as long as this leak exists, BP is not safe from collapse...I am getting the feeling that the GOVT/People want BP to fail, and if they fail, then the govt will have to take over, and we know the govt does not know anything about oil drilling, they can not even manage properly, much less take over BP's projects, and BP keeps stating, we are getting the oil, and the news keeps stating, yet more oil is coming out then reported before...not good!

If the government dares to CLAIM they can do better, it is tantamount to (NO, it is EXACTLY) saying that THEY are 100% RESPONSIBLE! You see, if the government really could solve this problem so easily, EVERY thinking person should be screaming then WHY didn't you do that BEFORE the US coastline was threatened?

Yeah, the government does NOT know how to run oil wells. And the U.S. government will NOT be able to pull the tricks with BP that they pulled with GM!

Heck, I wish I felt better. Last night there was a nice documentary about this disaster on, I believe, the discovery channel.

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206868].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

If the government dares to CLAIM they can do better, it is tantamount to (NO, it is EXACTLY) saying that THEY are 100% RESPONSIBLE! You see, if the government really could solve this problem so easily, EVERY thinking person should be screaming then WHY didn't you do that BEFORE the US coastline was threatened?

Yeah, the government does NOT know how to run oil wells. And the U.S. government will NOT be able to pull the tricks with BP that they pulled with GM!

Heck, I wish I felt better. Last night there was a nice documentary about this disaster on, I believe, the discovery channel.

Steve

If BP were to come close to collapse, I think our govt would give them a bail out, the govt needs BP to stop this, they can not stop this leak without BP or some other huge oil company, or if the govt did not give them a bailout, then another oil company could take them over, and deal with the oil problem.

BP forsale (cheap)

I think i have $90b under the couch....

You cant tell me that other compaines are not thinking about it
if their stocks keep crashing, I bet you they are watching closely, and
if they can get a good deal on a buy out, they might try...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206877].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

If BP were to come close to collapse, I think our govt would give them a bail out, the govt needs BP to stop this, they can not stop this leak without BP or some other huge oil company, or if the govt did not give them a bailout, then another oil company could take them over, and deal with the oil problem.

BP forsale (cheap)

I think i have $90b under the couch....

You cant tell me that other compaines are not thinking about it
if their stocks keep crashing, I bet you they are watching closely, and
if they can get a good deal on a buy out, they might try...

The rumor is that a chinese company IS looking to buy. If they do though, THEY take on the liability. So such a move NOW would be DUMB!

Steve

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207137].message }}

KenThompson 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

The rumor is that a chinese company IS looking to buy. If they do though, THEY take on the liability. So such a move NOW would be DUMB!

Steve

I wonder if other (western) oil companies wanted to buy BP if
there would be antitrust issues.

I don't know who owns what regarding oil companies, but if I
was one of them, I think I'd be interested to buy BP. Long term
investment, take care of this mess and move on.

Btw, Kurt... I realized your thing about for the record. You should know by
now that all the stupid stuff I say referencing you is just yanking your chain.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207248].message }}
dsimms 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

The rumor is that a chinese company IS looking to buy. If they do though, THEY take on the liability. So such a move NOW would be DUMB!

Steve

It would be dumb for a company not to consider its options...If they can get a good deal (less then full value) fix the damn oil leak, pay some damages/liability, now they have BP pumps/rigs/oil, then get back on track...and life goes on, and BP does not...one way or another, this has to be costing BP massive amounts of money every day....how long can any company keep this up?
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207373].message }}
myob 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

The rumor is that a chinese company IS looking to buy. If they do though, THEY take on the liability. So such a move NOW would be DUMB!

Steve

If this is true, the purchase by the Chinese of BP would most likely be blocked because it is British and US owned. Actually, rivals such as Exxon and Shell are circling like buzzards waiting for the bankruptcy hammer. Clean up costs and all the legal claims will be spun off into a completely separate corporate entity. The long-term cleanup up costs and liabilities are already hovering at nearly $40 billion, estimates could go over $100billion over decades. And with BP cash at around $12 billion, an estimated total assets of $81 billion; do the math. We're going to get screwed big time. Tax payers will wind up paying the bill.

Texaco used a similar tactic in 1987 when it sought bankruptcy protection over a $1 billion jury verdict. Although it was different, this tactic could certainly be a possibility now. In 1987, Pennzoil successfully sued Texaco for “jumping” its planned merger with Getty Oil and was awarded $1billion in damages after a judge knocked it down from $10 billion.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207908].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

BP still does not have this leak undercontrol, and everyweek, we hear a new plan that ends in failure...Even though BP may seem to have a lot of money, it has already lost half its value,

It's a much bigger problem to solve than many realize. It is a complex mess and there are some of the best engineering minds in the world working on it.

The stock has lost value - but that is to be expected.

The biggest problem here at the moment is the same as it's been for weeks - lack of cohesive leadership. We can't stop the leak - BP has to do that and they are working to do that.

What we can do is keep as much of the oil away from the coast as possible - and this is not being done effectively. Florida leaders asked for berm to be installed - Coast Guard says "not needed there" - the next day oil washes up on that very beach. CG response "we didn't know oil was that close" - why not?

Thad Allen is very good at describing what bp is doing and giving numbers of boats working the problem, etc - but not good at protecting the shoreline. He's operating as a knowledgeable official - but not as a leader.

The berms requested by Louisiana in early May have NOW - this week- been approved. Is anyone asking if spending hundreds of millions of dollars for this makes sense NOW? Nope. This is a project slated to take 9 months - is it really a good idea now that the oil is already ashore in LA?
Isn't this a bit like closing the barn door behind the horses?

Proactive, forward thinking leadership has been absent throughout this entire episode. We can blame BP for the leak and complain about how long it is taking to control it. The CG mission should have been protecting the shore - and nothing else. In case after case, locals have been contradicted and second guessed - and in case after case, the locals have been right. People here like the fishermen know these waters - they are a valuable asset that has been ignored in planning the response.

These aren't arguments - just cautions that you can't look at one part of a problem and draw conclusions when there are so many forces at work.

There are some proven products that will soak up and ingest the oil - but most of those are not practical to apply in the open water because it would take too much of the product to do the job. However, why aren't these products with oil-eating micro-organisms being used in the affected marshes?

Point is - if you are leading a response to a catastrophe - you have to be out ahead of the consequences...not following along behind as we are doing.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206909].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Kay is absolutely right about this. Anyone with a leadership role in Louisiana has had to spend most of their time dodging red tape for this mess. Bobby Jindal's request to start building the sand berms, which really is just obvious and not even difficult measure to put into place, didn't even get acknowledged by the federal government for something like 9 days. That's only one instance, and the politicians and citizens of Louisiana, and all the gulf coast for that matter, can't understand why it takes nearly two weeks to get permission to protect our homes.

There's a large consensus down here, in Louisiana at least, that if the federal government doesn't start taking quick and decisive action, that local politicians will stop asking for permission and just do what needs to be done to protect our coast, homes, and way of life. I'm curious what others not from LA or the gulf coast think about this? Would you want your local politicians and leaders to stop waiting for federal permission, and to take action?

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206962].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Kay is absolutely right about this. Anyone with a leadership role in Louisiana has had to spend most of their time dodging red tape for this mess. Bobby Jindal's request to start building the sand berms, which really is just obvious and not even difficult measure to put into place, didn't even get acknowledged by the federal government for something like 9 days. That's only one instance, and the politicians and citizens of Louisiana, and all the gulf coast for that matter, can't understand why it takes nearly two weeks to get permission to protect our homes.

There's a large consensus down here, in Louisiana at least, that if the federal government doesn't start taking quick and decisive action, that local politicians will stop asking for permission and just do what needs to be done to protect our coast, homes, and way of life. I'm curious what others not from LA or the gulf coast think about this? Would you want your local politicians and leaders to stop waiting for federal permission, and to take action?

Because if you put up berms in LA, the oil will go ashore in MS. If you put up berms in MS, the oil will go ashore in AL. If you put up berms in AL, the oil will go ashore in FL.

If I were you guys, I'd be more concerned about hurricane season. Small waves make oil go over and under berms. A tidal surge can push all that oil 10 miles inland and there's nothing berms will do about it. And forecasts are for a heavy hurricane season.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206999].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Because if you put up berms in LA, the oil will go ashore in MS. If you put up berms in MS, the oil will go ashore in AL. If you put up berms in AL, the oil will go ashore in FL.

If I were you guys, I'd be more concerned about hurricane season. Small waves make oil go over and under berms. A tidal surge can push all that oil 10 miles inland and there's nothing berms will do about it. And forecasts are for a heavy hurricane season.

Well I have to disagree with you on this one. The berms are made of sand, and the oil simply washes up onto the sand berm, where it is absorbed by the sand, and sand is the easiest thing to clean oil from.

I don't think you need to remind anyone in Louisiana to be weary of hurricane season, you might have heard we've had some experience. From what I've been hearing, if a hurricane comes through that the oil will be picked up and literally rained down, places like New Orleans, Houston, I even heard it could make it all the way up to Memphis. Also if oil is sprayed on a house, it is very destructive, and no insurance covers it.

They predict a heavy hurricane season every single year by the way. They make these reports like the technology they are using is totally accurate, but really they don't have a very good idea of how light or heavy any hurricane season will be.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207119].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Well I have to disagree with you on this one. The berms are made of sand, and the oil simply washes up onto the sand berm, where it is absorbed by the sand, and sand is the easiest thing to clean oil from.

I don't think you need to remind anyone in Louisiana to be weary of hurricane season, you might have heard we've had some experience. From what I've been hearing, if a hurricane comes through that the oil will be picked up and literally rained down, places like New Orleans, Houston, I even heard it could make it all the way up to Memphis. Also if oil is sprayed on a house, it is very destructive, and no insurance covers it.

They predict a heavy hurricane season every single year by the way. They make these reports like the technology they are using is totally accurate, but really they don't have a very good idea of how light or heavy any hurricane season will be.

BTW, I lived in LA, in both Metarie and Lafayette. I worked sea going tugs in the Gulf out of Golden Meadows and Port Author. I have a US Coast Guard Z card. I am (was) certified in life boat training and firefighting at sea, including oil and metal fires. I've been at sea in the Gulf during a hurricane.

And despite predictions "every year", I'd still be more worried about hurricanes than lack of berms. Don't forget that in the "Little Boy that Cried Wolf", the wolf did really show up at the end. (And those hurricane predictions have been right more than wrong.)

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207216].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

BTW, I lived in LA, in both Metarie and Lafayette. I worked sea going tugs in the Gulf out of Golden Meadows and Port Author. I have a US Coast Guard Z card. I am (was) certified in life boat training and firefighting at sea, including oil and metal fires. I've been at sea in the Gulf during a hurricane.

And despite predictions "every year", I'd still be more worried about hurricanes than lack of berms. Don't forget that in the "Little Boy that Cried Wolf", the wolf did really show up at the end. (And those hurricane predictions have been right more than wrong.)

Sorry Kurt, saw in your locations that you have Rocky Mountain High listed, and we both know there's none of that down on the bayou. Obviously a hurricane would be a lot worse than not building the berms, but really what could we possibly do to stop a hurricane? Ff one comes one comes, and there is nothing we can do about it. At least the berms have a chance to fight back the oil, and as a matter of fact they serve the duel purpose as the first line of defense against hurricanes. Just like our barrier islands, they could help to weaken the hurricane.

By the way Kurt with your impressive background it sure sounds like we could use your help down here. We need all the help we can get.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207255].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Is it that obvious and simple? Here's a couple articles about why building these berms may be a bad idea:

The Case Against Sand Berms | Jamie Friedland's Blog
""A project that could cost as much as a half-billion dollars should warrant serious review. Yet it has been very difficult to find a public record or details of the proposed project design and how it was vetted. Obviously, there was never any intention to solicit public comment. This may be appropriate in an emergency, but it begs the question: Who designed the project? Have they used the best available science? And will it work as advertised?

The state of Louisiana has a wealth of fine coastal scientists who have been working on the coastal restoration of the Louisiana delta region for decades. Yet those who I have spoken with have indicated that they have not been consulted on the project. I have yet to speak to a scientist who thinks the project will be effective."

"The EPA directly questioned the proposed berm's effectiveness, suggesting there is no evidence that the project will stop oil from entering the marshes and estuaries because it is constructed only in front of the barrier islands and will not block the inlets and deepwater passes. In addition, EPA questioned whether a project that will take at least 6 to 9 months to build would be completed in time to have any impact on the spill.""

Let’s leap without looking. Slabbed explores the genesis of the sand berm scheme. slabbed

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Bobby Jindal's request to start building the sand berms, which really is just obvious and not even difficult measure to put into place, didn't even get acknowledged by the federal government for something like 9 days.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207141].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

There's a large consensus down here, in Louisiana at least, that if the federal government doesn't start taking quick and decisive action, that local politicians will stop asking for permission and just do what needs to be done to protect our coast, homes, and way of life. I'm curious what others not from LA or the gulf coast think about this? Would you want your local politicians and leaders to stop waiting for federal permission, and to take action?

I wouldn't blame any state along the Gulf for doing what is
necessary to protect themselves. When you think about it, if
whatever is done has a positive effect, then it will save the
federal govt, and US taxpayers, money.

If danger is imminent, I wouldn't wait for a phone call from the
deds in dc to get permission.

[ 2 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207212].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Has anyone heard about Kevin Cosner?

He testified on the hill about a machine that will suck up 60k gallons of water/oil per hour. ( I think )

He invested 20 million into the company that makes the devices and BP has ordered about 10 of them to help with the cleanup.

They should begin in about 2 weeks I think.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2206991].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

All I have to say is this. You may very well be right, they MIGHT not work, this is the first time I've seen an estimate saying it would take 6-9 months, but what do I know I'm not an engineer.

But after nearly two months of nothing, you would want to try something as well. They haven't done anything, we can throw out theoretical hypothesis about what could happen all we want, but in a time of crisis the mark of a good leader is someone who makes decisions, if Obama had observed the request and flat out said no when it was first brought up, that is certainly better than saying nothing at all, at least they could have moved on.

I may not be thinking as rationally as others, but after getting up every day and smelling the oil, seeing dead wild life, and listening to those effected speak, you would feel the same way too. Tell me you wouldn't want to take any action possible after listening to the mayor of a small coastal town burst into tears explaining how his citizens are coming to him asking him how they are going to get food, his response was to give the families his credit card to buy what they need to survive. He makes $500 a week.

And by the way just because its typed up, and presented in a nice, smart sounding fashion doesn't make it true. I can find plenty of intelligent sounding reports out there that say the Moon landing never happened.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207193].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Hey Dukky,

I love LA, especially Nawlins. The history, music, people. Nothing beats real red beans and rice with fresh french bread. I love 24 hour states like LA and NV. And I even know how to play bouree.

The only things I don't like are the bugs and the humidity. And I always wondered why y'all call someone from Colorado a "yankee"? We weren't even a state during the war.

Quick story: When I was 19 I met a guy in a park in Denver that was from NO. He told me about the merchant marines. So about a week later, I hitchhiked from Denver to NO to join the merchant marines.

I wanted to sail the World, but could only get a job on sea going tugs. I met someone in NO that had connections to a marine engineering school in Baltimore. She got me into the school and there I got my certificates.

I had to drop out due to a personal issue...But was prepared and wanted to spend the rest of my life at sea.

While I am/was certified and did train, I've never fought a real fire at sea or loaded people into a life boat in a real emergency. I'm not an expert, but I'm not totally ignorant either. If there was an expert, I'd follow them, but if there wasn't I'd probably be the next best thing. Kind of scary, considering the hang over I had during the metal fire training. My school days were also my drinking days.

What do we do about it? We need to get you Gulf oil guys into a different economy. I am an evironmentalist, but I'm also a realist. We can't just take away jobs without replacing them. I really believe there is a solution, but we need to make it a top priority to find one.

How about we build wind and wave machines at sea? What are the costs? Not all inflation is all bad. I wish we had these numbers so we could make accurate judgements if it's worth the extra money. At the very least, wouldn't it be a form of insurance?

[ 2 ] Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207416].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Thanks Kurt, New Orleans, LA and all the gulf really is a wonderful place, as I'm sure most people know.

Being a realist and environmentalist as well, I think it is unfair for so many people to demand that LA be stripped of one of its primary sources of employment and income. To many hard working and honest people would be put out of work, and the loss of income would cripple any chances LA has of fighting the effects of this disaster.

I'm no politician, economist, or engineer, but what are the possibilities of the 40,000+ people that will undoubtedly lose their jobs because of the moratorium, being employed in setting up and working for the first State Wide Green Energy network, from which LA would get most of its energy? I don't think green energy is at the stage where it could provide enough energy for something like this, or it would be far to expensive, but like always I could be wrong.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207729].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

I saw a film of a diver who was diving so we could see what the oil looked like from under water. It was frightening. What he said about oil rigs though, was a bit different from what we have all heard. He says that the rigs make great places for coral colonies to form and that the ecology around these rigs (when they aren't leaking anyway) is very lush and well developed.

As far as BP - let em bleed out as far as possible, then someone can buy them out with much of the cost of the spill already handled. You know in the long run it's going to be the states with the effected coast lines that end up paying a lot of the costs for this anyway -- and the citizens. When do we not get the short end of the stick when someone at the top screws up?

As far as I heard also - Kevin Costner went to show Congress his machine a few days ago. I haven't heard anything further about it, but if I were a state in the line of fire of that spill, I'd sure be buying a few of those things and manning them with guys out of work. And ANY and ALL of the recovered oil would belong to that state -- to refine and give to their people as they see fit.
Losers weepers. If I have to clean YOUR freaking oil off of MY shorelines, It's MINE.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207890].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

As far as I heard also - Kevin Costner went to show Congress his machine a few days ago. I haven't heard anything further about it, but if I were a state in the line of fire of that spill, I'd sure be buying a few of those things and manning them with guys out of work. And ANY and ALL of the recovered oil would belong to that state -- to refine and give to their people as they see fit.
Losers weepers. If I have to clean YOUR freaking oil off of MY shorelines, It's MINE.

I actually know some people who are involved in this, and they helped Mr. Costner bring the machine into LA. It is supposed to be able to separate 200,000 of gallons of water and oil a day. They have sent it out to the gulf already, I believe it left earlier this week. The sad thing is I haven't heard anything else about it, which cannot be a good sign (or maybe it is since the media only reports bad news).

On a side note you mentioned the gulf states getting the oil collected up from this mess, the sad part of all this is that LA has been getting screwed out of its share of Oil revenues for YEARS. It dates back a long way to some corrupt politicians, but most revenue from the oil brought in through pipelines in LA goes to the federal government and the companies themselves. LA has been getting only scraps for years, while the miles of pipelines have eroded our coast and destroyed our ecosystem.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207942].message }}

myob 16 years ago

Here's my post from back on May 14 where Kevin Costner first got into the oil cleanup business with this machine and his brother - Ocean Therapy Solutions. They probably did "give it a try", but would most likely had made some news if there was any real practical use for it on such a scale.
Have No Fear Kevin Costner is Here!
- [ 1 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207965].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I actually know some people who are involved in this, and they helped Mr. Costner bring the machine into LA. It is supposed to be able to separate 200,000 of gallons of water and oil a day. They have sent it out to the gulf already, I believe it left earlier this week. The sad thing is I haven't heard anything else about it, which cannot be a good sign (or maybe it is since the media only reports bad news).

On a side note you mentioned the gulf states getting the oil collected up from this mess, the sad part of all this is that LA has been getting screwed out of its share of Oil revenues for YEARS. It dates back a long way to some corrupt politicians, but most revenue from the oil brought in through pipelines in LA goes to the federal government and the companies themselves. LA has been getting only scraps for years, while the miles of pipelines have eroded our coast and destroyed our ecosystem.

So why haven't your politicians filed suit for damages? Sounds like you might need to motivate them to get off the martini lunch train and actually do some fighting for you down there.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2207986].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

So why haven't your politicians filed suit for damages? Sounds like you might need to motivate them to get off the martini lunch train and actually do some fighting for you down there.

If a politician actually had to work, they may just have a heart-attack.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2208143].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I wish more than anything that I could answer that question. Corruption has been business as usual in LA for YEARS, but we've had some great moves in the right direction recently. Bobby J. and Mitch Landrieu the new mayor of N.O. both seem to be good honest guys, but I guess you never really can know with politicians.

The LA senate has been working on getting LA a fair share of the revenue for a while, and I'm pretty sure they just fast tracked it due to the recent events, but of course now there is no drilling in the gulf

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2208024].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Some have wondered about Kevin Costner and the testing with
the oil separator. It sounds like the tests were positive because
32 of them have been ordered for use in the Gulf.

BP Onboard With Kevin Costner's Oil-Cleanup Device - E! Online

Dances with Wolves done good.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2208725].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

YAY - and Costner wasn't working alone -- Cameron and Redford also had a part in building this contraption! Really!

Ah - come on everyone, deep down we all knew these guys were heroes.
If You Spill It, They Will Come: Costner, Cameron, Redford Solve the Gulf Oil Catastrophe? - E! Online

These guys have always looked good, but now they're making the suits look real shabby next to em.

Starting to remind me of the Blues Brothers now -- "We're on a mission from God".

EDIT: Not sure that Cameron and Redford are actually part of building the machine - they are involved somehow with fixing the spill but it doesn't really say what their part in it exactly is.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2208795].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Well I'm proud of those guys. Over the years a lot of actors have
been involved with all kinds of issues, and sometimes it seemed that
people only made fun of them.

So kudos to all of them and The Blues Brothers.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2208812].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Crap I need to edit that again - it says what part Cameron and Redford are playing in the effort right at the bottom of the article.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2208836].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

A picture from Denmark:

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2208947].message }}

Lawrh

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

A picture from Denmark:

No need for hip waders in Denmark. Alberta may be Canada's main oil producer but it also has the most and biggest wind farms. I swiped this pic from an Industry Canada pdf.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

â€œStrategy without action is a day-dream; action without strategy is a nightmare.â€ â€“ Old Japanese proverb -

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2209081].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I read recently that the wind turbine "farm" in the Atlanta off the NE coast had finally gotten approval - but haven't heard any more since then.

It's been proposed for years and held up by the rich,influential folks along the coast who think it would be "unsightly".

I've always though the wind machines were rather elegant to look at - and they work!

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2209093].message }}

Lawrh

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

I've always though the wind machines were rather elegant to look at - and they work!

That pic from Summerview is part of a 38 turbine wind farm that produces 68 megawatts and powers 24,000 homes. They definitely work.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

â€œStrategy without action is a day-dream; action without strategy is a nightmare.â€ â€“ Old Japanese proverb -

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2209109].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Lawrh

That pic from Summerview is part of a 38 turbine wind farm that produces 68 megawatts and powers 24,000 homes. They definitely work.

Do you know the cost of that per megawatt?

I've heard wind is more expensive, but I've always wondered how it's calculated and over what period of time. Wind mills have very few moving parts and don't take much maintainence. It would seem that the costs would decrease over time.

And maybe even more important is that community is self-sufficient and not dependant on a power grid, if it were to go down for some reason.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2209196].message }}

Lawrh

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Do you know the cost of that per megawatt?

I've had some trouble finding real costs. There is a lot of bullshlt published and sorting through it ain't easy. This link is to a government pdf about Summerview, it shows a cost breakdown of that particular project plus the revenues already generated. There are interesting things like landowners earning $11 million per year for hosting the wind mills.

http://www.canwea.ca/images/uploads/...ummerview2.pdf

Also, the power companies are currently spending an additional $124 million on 22 3 MW turbines to bring Summerview's output up to 136 MW.

An Alberta government document puts the cost of wind power between 4.5 cents and 14 cents per kilowatt hour. The broad range is likely due to the difference in projects and subsidies. For instance, a project under construction right now, in east central Alberta, got federal grants guaranteeing them minimum earnings of $10/MW hour for ten years. It's for 100 1.5 MW turbines.

Alberta energy, unfortunately, is deregulated and the price of electricity swings with the price of natural gas. This year electricity costs on average $40/MW hour, in 2008 it jumped to $89/MW hour.

Energy politics is really f*cked up. Disparities everywhere, mini nukes on the table, wind/solar combos, more natural gas than we could ever use locked in to world prices. Politicians, lobbyists, lawyers, activists, media airheads and on and on. Digging through all this crap is disturbing.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

â€œStrategy without action is a day-dream; action without strategy is a nightmare.â€ â€“ Old Japanese proverb -

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2212509].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Lawrh

I've had some trouble finding real costs. There is a lot of bullshlt published and sorting through it ain't easy. This link is to a government pdf about Summerview, it shows a cost breakdown of that particular project plus the revenues already generated. There are interesting things like landowners earning $11 million per year for hosting the wind mills.

http://www.canwea.ca/images/uploads/...ummerview2.pdf

Also, the power companies are currently spending an additional $124 million on 22 3 MW turbines to bring Summerview's output up to 136 MW.

An Alberta government document puts the cost of wind power between 4.5 cents and 14 cents per kilowatt hour. The broad range is likely due to the difference in projects and subsidies. For instance, a project under construction right now, in east central Alberta, got federal grants guaranteeing them minimum earnings of $10/MW hour for ten years. It's for 100 1.5 MW turbines.

Alberta energy, unfortunately, is deregulated and the price of electricity swings with the price of natural gas. This year electricity costs on average $40/MW hour, in 2008 it jumped to $89/MW hour.

Energy politics is really f*cked up. Disparities everywhere, mini nukes on the table, wind/solar combos, more natural gas than we could ever use locked in to world prices. Politicians, lobbyists, lawyers, activists, media airheads and on and on. Digging through all this crap is disturbing.

Yes, everything's the same as all the other industries, perhaps. I like the one about
landowners getting 11 million. Cool. Good for them, bad for you.

It all does sound pretty afu. I like the idea of fusion.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2213756].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

In the US, you COULD use eminent domain for this, but it may be complicated. You would usually pay for the property, or buy excess power. AND, especially if you buy excess power, there may be subsidies. so the US has the same uncertainties and problems.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2214693].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

I read recently that the wind turbine "farm" in the Atlanta off the NE coast had finally gotten approval - but haven't heard any more since then.

It's been proposed for years and held up by the rich,influential folks along the coast who think it would be "unsightly".

I've always though the wind machines were rather elegant to look at - and they work!

I like the looks of them too...They're like watching lava lights, waterfalls and fire places. I don't know what it is, but I find them relaxing to look at. And if future generations don't like them, they are easy to take down.

I wonder if it's feasible to put wind mills on barges in the Gulf and move them wherever the winds are best at that time/season? Or out of the way if there's a hurricane...

But my main point of posting the Denmark pics is because Denmark is the leading country when it comes to green energy and their economy is stronger than most.

Why can't we do the same and put the Gulf oil workers to work building and maintaining wind mills (on and off land) instead of oil rigs?

I saw the head of General Electric say he's ready to build wind mills as fast as needed, he just needs the orders.

People on this forum like to say that the oil companies will never do it...But for every BP, there's a GE that's ready and willing to make tons of money from wind.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2209183].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Nice Kurt, but they're all broken - not spinning.

Here...

Clean Fusion Breakthrough? | Mitchell Anderson

"This technique might open the door for clean cheap and unlimited power that would actually have less radiation emissions than many plants that burn coal, “which contains trace amounts of uranium," said Hora.

It would also reduce the effort needed to prepare the fuel source. "The hydrogen-boron fuel would not have to be compressed. This means it needs far less energy to start the ignition," he said.

"How close are we now to realizing controlled fusion? Researchers at Lawrence Livermore hope to power up their laser-powered plasma reactor as early as this summer. The research by Hora and his team may open the door for this technique to lead to commercially available clean fusion faster than anyone thought."

I wanna laser-powered plasma reactor.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2208966].message }}

Kurt 16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Nice Kurt, but they're all broken - not spinning.

That just means you're not drunk enough yet. Have another 6-pack of Miller Half Life or two, and they'll start spinning soon.
- Thanks
Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2209020].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Hey Kurt, I got curious about your question regarding cost per mW,
and found some info. It's a bit old, 03, and there's lots more info
around as you know.

But just skimming it, I can readily see why it's expensive. Seems there
are a lot of variables involved with each location. Check it out, it'll
give you a good idea why it's complex and all the things that are
involved.

The True Cost of Electricity from Wind Power

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2209215].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Hey Kurt, I got curious about your question regarding cost per mW,
and found some info. It's a bit old, 03, and there's lots more info
around as you know.

But just skimming it, I can readily see why it's expensive. Seems there
are a lot of variables involved with each location. Check it out, it'll
give you a good idea why it's complex and all the things that are
involved.

The True Cost of Electricity from Wind Power

Thanks Ken...

It seems a lot of those variables would also apply to drilling for oil.

I wish they would have given some specifics based on real world examples. Like, how much does it cost specifically for the wind mills Lawrence posted?

One variable discussed was that the energy created by the wind may not be at the same time it's needed. Israel and Denmark are addressing this by storing the electricity in batteries for electric cars, then building battery "changing stations" like I posted about in the electric car thread. The storing of electricity in car batteries makes the entire system much more efficient.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2209418].message }}

Edge88

16 years ago

BP is still profitable and still will be in the future, so they better pay every last penny. Ok it was an accident, still you are paying for it BP. As long as the American public demands it, they will have no way around it because they will be forced out of the country if they choose not to pay.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2215130].message }}

Mike Wright

16 years ago

Cameron International provided the failed Blowout Preventer (BOP)
despite having invented the BOP back in 1920.

Halliburton poured the concrete casing which cracked ... just like
it happened in the Timor incident.

Both companies are US owned.

BP is 40% British owned + 39% US owned + who knows.
Pension funds around the world have taken a hit from
the drop in BP share prices.

Technically, BP is treading a fine line trying to control the
leaking oil at pressures upto 7000 pounds per square inch
...without actually destroying the wellhead and
leaving an open well which could according to worst
estimates pour out oil for upto 40 years

The next hope is to drill one or more secondary wells to
relieve the flow and pressures in a controlled manner so
that the leaking one may be capped with a second BOP
or capped off and sealed permanently. No quick fix!

I would expect that BP may well attempt to recoup
at least some of the massive costs from the suppliers
of the faulty components and any insurers.

But as usual, its the little guys who will take the
real hit in all the political, economic and ecological
consequences. The legal vultures will make fortunes
and big oil will just carry on as usual.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2216943].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Wright

Cameron International provided the failed Blowout Preventer (BOP)
despite having invented the BOP back in 1920.

MAYBE you are right, but Transocean, a SWISS company, took the lead there. AND, the BOP didn't start out bad, and almost certainly wasn't certified at those depths.

Halliburton poured the concrete casing which cracked ... just like
it happened in the Timor incident.

Supposedly, they weren't allowed to do it RIGHT!

BP is 40% British owned + 39% US owned + who knows.
Pension funds around the world have taken a hit from
the drop in BP share prices.

One thing SO few realize!

Technically, BP is treading a fine line trying to control the
leaking oil at pressures upto 7000 pounds per square inch
...without actually destroying the wellhead and
leaving an open well which could according to worst
estimates pour out oil for upto 40 years

Yet ANOTHER problem few realize.

The next hope is to drill one or more secondary wells to
relieve the flow and pressures in a controlled manner so
that the leaking one may be capped with a second BOP
or capped off and sealed permanently. No quick fix!

I would expect that BP may well attempt to recoup
at least some of the massive costs from the suppliers
of the faulty components and any insurers.

But as usual, its the little guys who will take the
real hit in all the political, economic and ecological
consequences. The legal vultures will make fortunes
and big oil will just carry on as usual.

You're certainly right there

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2218970].message }}

the rebel reviewer

16 years ago

hi
I agree Bp should be responsible all the cost and should be fined for not having a back up plan to prevent this enviromental disaster. also should compensate all the businesses that suffered business losses especially fisherman and tourist industries and small cafes etc...
The problem is still here and damage hasn't stopped, what cheek to say only limit it $27m that a joke.
Obana wants $25bn put in a fund now to start dispensing funds to businesses and help cost clean up. I believe deepsea drilling is so dangerous it shoudl be stoped till they have in place ways to stop this disaster ever happening again.
must be able prove this to country where they drill before contracts are given out.
This company is a multi billion company that today still made billions in profit its first quarter. They can afford to pay big time

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2220476].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I'm just curious if any of you have heard of this -

1) Volunteers have been coming in by the busload to help clean up and they are constantly turned away. The people in charge claim it's because they need training but seriously, this is a huge problem, if the people running this fiasco were any sort of competent they would make it as easy as possible for volunteers to come in, get trained if needed, and go start help cleaning up a mess thats going to take years to fix.

2) Every time Obama comes down to the gulf coast, about 300 "workers" are brought in, they all look professional with hazmat suites and the like. They put on a huge show of cleaning up while the president is there, and then the second he leaves they magically disappear.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2221950].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I'm just curious if any of you have heard of this -

1) Volunteers have been coming in by the busload to help clean up and they are constantly turned away. The people in charge claim it's because they need training but seriously, this is a huge problem, if the people running this fiasco were any sort of competent they would make it as easy as possible for volunteers to come in, get trained if needed, and go start help cleaning up a mess thats going to take years to fix.

2) Every time Obama comes down to the gulf coast, about 300 "workers" are brought in, they all look professional with hazmat suites and the like. They put on a huge show of cleaning up while the president is there, and then the second he leaves they magically disappear.

Well, for #1, I heard a guy on the news basically pleading for people to research, call, etc... BEFORE coming down. You DO have a point, but having thousands just jump in is DUMB!
That is true of ANYTHING, EVEN picking up just normal garbage, or turning a screw.

For #2, I think everyone has heard that. I HOPE Obama goes down there WITHOUT letting anyone know. And the press should be on the lookout for such things.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2221990].message }}

DukkyMan 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Well, for #1, I heard a guy on the news basically pleading for people to research, call, etc... BEFORE coming down.

They do call, they apparently always end up getting lead to a dead end. It is dumb to let a bunch of people run around unsupervised and unprepared, but it is much more dumb to not give people who want to help a chance to help.

Obviously there are thousands of people out there who want to help, people who call in and try to organize it and get permission, they just get ignored or run off.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2222095].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Hold on. There are thousands of locals who have volunteered and not been used as yet.
  
  The problem is the work takes significant training - especially when it comes to saving wildlife or working directly with the spill in the water.
  
  The last thing we need are hundreds of people flocking here in the hope of getting a job - and we're seeing some of that. If you plan to sleep on the beach and beg for food - stay away. Our resources are stretched to the limit now.
  
  Everyone would like to help - and that's great. But the only people who can contribute are those with the training required to do the job.
  
  This spill is toxic and you can't have untrained and unequipped volunteers working with it or you create a whole new level of liability issues. That's the reality. I think many would have a reality check about volunteering after less than a hour of scooping sand in the sun with a heat index of 101 degrees.
  
  The volunteering we needed were the hundreds of skimmers offered by other countries at the time the spill began. We turned them down.
  
  kay
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2222342].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

LONDON — An influential ratings agency downgraded BP on Tuesday because of worries about the continuing Gulf of Mexico spill, sending the oil company's shares to a new low.

Shares in BP fell below 350 pence for the first time since the oil rig disaster, dropping 2.5 percent to 346 pence ($5.12) by midafternoon on the London Stock Exchange.

Fitch Ratings downgraded BP's long-term issuer default rating and senior unsecured rating to BBB from AA.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2221951].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

LONDON -- An influential ratings agency downgraded BP on Tuesday because of worries about the continuing Gulf of Mexico spill, sending the oil company's shares to a new low.

Shares in BP fell below 350 pence for the first time since the oil rig disaster, dropping 2.5 percent to 346 pence ($5.12) by midafternoon on the London Stock Exchange.

Fitch Ratings downgraded BP's long-term issuer default rating and senior unsecured rating to BBB from AA.

I earlier heard that some rating company changed from AAA to BBB. I mentioned here earlier how their costs skyrocketed. THAT was what I was aludding to. But if the shares fall TOO low, they probably HAVE to issue the dividend. If BOTH fall, it will REALLY hurt a lot of pensions. I guess the ADRs here reflect several shares of BP. As of this moment, the ADRs are selling for about 30.22 down .19 for the day. Down .62% for the day so far. Its 52week low was 29, and the high was 62.38. That doesn't bode well for the stock. Less than 50% of its 52w high, and within $2 of the low. BTW the low for the day was 29.85.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2222051].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

People coming down to volunteer don't have to be shipped out to the middle of the gulf to help, they could help local families effected by the spill, help at least spot animals effected by the oil and call the proper authorities, manual labor involved with the clean up doesn't have to mean wadding out into the gulf and scooping it up with your hands.

And I don't think that it would take to much training to instruct people how to scoop up oil thats washed on the beach. We're not talking about day one anymore here, its month TWO now, and the oil is on the shores of FOUR States. There should be a base of operations set up to train willing volunteers to at least collect the oil thats washing up on shore. I really have a hard time seeing how that could harm anyone.

And Kay I'm not talking about people coming down looking for work, any full time employment should be reserved for gulf coast residents who can't work anymore because of the spill.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2222475].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

People coming down to volunteer don't have to be shipped out to the middle of the gulf to help, they could help local families effected by the spill, help at least spot animals effected by the oil and call the proper authorities, manual labor involved with the clean up doesn't have to mean wadding out into the gulf and scooping it up with your hands.

And I don't think that it would take to much training to instruct people how to scoop up oil thats washed on the beach. We're not talking about day one anymore here, its month TWO now, and the oil is on the shores of FOUR States. There should be a base of operations set up to train willing volunteers to at least collect the oil thats washing up on shore. I really have a hard time seeing how that could harm anyone.

And Kay I'm not talking about people coming down looking for work, any full time employment should be reserved for gulf coast residents who can't work anymore because of the spill.

You're looking at this like you're only talking about a FEW people. That wouldn't be worth anyone's time. OK, let me demonstrate ONE little thing.... Let's say people are STARVING! And YOU have string beans. OK, you get everyone down there and feed a family, that may ALREADY have gotten assistance, STRING BEANS!!!!!! MAYBE all the delivery vehicles will hurt OTHERS in their zeal! Wouldn't it make MUCH more sense to have a place say who needs what, etc...? And I would imagine they would have equipment to clean up the tar and oil.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2222583].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I guess everyone seems to disagree with me. I'm sorry but after two months of this down here I don't see the logic in turning away willing volunteers. If anyone here thinks that they have enough people or "equipment" to clean up the mess down here, than they don't have a clue of the scale of this thing.

Of course someone should say who needs what, whether its STRING BEANS, or a guy with a shovel picking up tar balls. All I'm saying is that when I see hundreds of volunteers get turned away, I can only think of a lack of command, and a lack of a plan.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2222643].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I guess everyone seems to disagree with me. I'm sorry but after two months of this down here I don't see the logic in turning away willing volunteers. If anyone here thinks that they have enough people or "equipment" to clean up the mess down here, than they don't have a clue of the scale of this thing.

Of course someone should say who needs what, whether its STRING BEANS, or a guy with a shovel picking up tar balls. All I'm saying is that when I see hundreds of volunteers get turned away, I can only think of a lack of command, and a lack of a plan.

And THAT is why I said:

You DO have a point, but having thousands just jump in is DUMB!

Frankly, SOMEONE should have a LIST of those affected by gulf water disasters. It is a GIVEN they will happen and will be emergencies. AND, they could have that hooked to a list of employees/customers/vendors, and direct help properly.

But that is what the government is SUPPOSED to do, and it is EASY AND CHEAP to do today, so I guess it IS asking too much.

Without direction, more workers can actually make things WORSE!

BTW I created a site one time. I was EVEN invited to a meeting of people setup through Henry waxman's office (Here's where he is TODAY http://www.henrywaxman.house.gov/ ) to discuss it! OH, this is a pet anecdote of mine! But this is 100% TRUE! Some other members?

1. A policeman that spoke of a family he had trouble placing... It was late at night and they had a dog. MY SYSTEM WOULD HAVE HELPED!!!!!!!!!
2. A woman that kept stating what we needed to do, but just complained. I think she was there for the doughnuts!
3. A guy that spoke of how he was in the business of financing, ON COMMISSION, and how he would work to build a system like mine.
4. A person that represented a charity to the homeless, and the one that invited me.
5. A representative from henry waxmans office.

There WERE others, but they were far more quiet.

Oh yeah, and then there was ME!!!!!!! MY contribution? "HEY FOLKS! I have it DONE! IT IS UP AND RUNNING!!!!! I don't want ANYTHING for it! It has over 400 charities in it. PLEASE, can SOMEONE get me a list of charities to add?!?!?!?"

Yep, ALL those people involved, and I came in 100% altruistic, and asked for practically SCRAPS!

So WHY did they do that? OBVIOUSLY, SOME cared, one got doughnuts, and one ALMOST got a lot of MONEY! It was rumored that waxman was going to run for higher office. OBVIOUSLY, that was true.

Yet I never got that info. I later figured WHY BOTHER!?!?!?

Louisiana has the SAME sort of problem. 8-(

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2222693].message }}

Andie

16 years ago

and now there is a fire that halts it all.....geeesh. Such a clusterF***

June 15, 2010

Fire shuts down oil spill containment efforts

A lightning strike may have started a small fire on board the main drill ship that is collecting oil from the well that is spilling into the Gulf of Mexico, bringing a halt to the recovery efforts.
The fire on the top of the derrick of the Discoverer Enterprise was spotted at about 9:30 a.m. and quickly extinguished, BP said in a press release. There were no injuries but, as a precaution, the containment operations were shut down.
"Final safety and operational assurance inspections are underway and operations are expected to recommence this afternoon," the company said.
The Discoverer Enterprise had been collecting about 15,000 barrels of oil per day from the spill and is soon going to be supplemented by other ships that will increase the containment capacity to about 50,000 barrels.

Thanks

Signature

**Warrior KimW needs a kidney & YOUR support**

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2222963].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

The fire has been put out, they are waiting for weather to get better before they continue the collection process.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2223082].message }}

invreon

16 years ago

I don't think they should be allowed to do that... Just sayin...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2223154].message }}

DukkyMan 16 years ago

Originally Posted by invreon

I don't think they should be allowed to do that... Just sayin...

Allowed to do what?
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2223215].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

In a column for The Huffington Post actor Alec Baldwin endorses a boycott of BP.

And gives us this link...

YouTube - Arlo Guthrie & Pete Seeger/ This Land...

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2223460].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Congressman suggests if times were different, perhaps BP head should commit hari-kari...

YouTube - Congressman Cao says harakiri...

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2225611].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

SURPRISINGLY, their stock is UP for the day! They DID announce this right after the close! Anyway, I guess we will see TOMORROW!

News Default Page - FreeRealTime.com

BP cancels dividends, agrees to $20 billion escrow fund
BP cancels dividends, agrees to $20 billion escrow fund
WASHINGTON, Jun. 16, 2010 (McClatchy-Tribune News Service) -- The Obama administration has reached a preliminary agreement with BP (NYSE:BP) executives that would see the oil company pay $20 billion over several years into an independently controlled escrow account to be established to compensate Gulf of Mexico residents affected by the disastrous oil spill, and BP's board of directors has eliminated the company's stock dividend, at least temporarily.

The agreement on the escrow was negotiated in a meeting at the White House on Wednesday morning, the first face-to-face gathering between President Barack Obama and senior BP leadership. A White House official said that, under the terms of the deal, the fund would be administered by attorney Kenneth Feinberg, currently serving as the special master for executive pay under the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Feinberg ran a fund that compensated victims of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Immediately after the meeting, BP Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg said the oil company's board of directors has decided not to pay any more dividends this year.

BP has been under intense pressure from the Obama administration to cut or eliminate the $10.5 billion it distributes annually to shareholders. Svanberg, speaking to reporters outside the White House, didn't say how long the dividend would be suspended.

The meeting comes 57 days after the April 20 explosion at BP's Deepwater Horizon oil rig. Prior to Wednesday, Obama had yet to speak with BP Chief Executive Tony Hayward. Half a dozen other BP executives joined a phalanx of Cabinet and senior administration officials in the meeting in the Roosevelt Room. It was not yet known how long the president remained at the meeting. Obama was scheduled to address reporters in the Rose Garden on Wednesday afternoon.

Wednesday's session was the final piece in a choreographed three-day series of events intended to showcase Obama's handling of the gulf oil crisis. He made his fourth visit to the gulf region, with stops Monday in Mississippi and Alabama and Tuesday in Florida. After returning to Washington, he delivered his first address to the nation from the Oval Office, outlining what he called a "battle plan" for cleaning up the spill, providing assistance for those affected and, ultimately, to "make sure that a catastrophe like this never happens again."

BP executives were in Washington for several congressional committee hearings on the oil spill. Hayward is scheduled to testify Thursday morning at a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing specifically on the role of BP in the spill.

TOMORROW may be a BAD day for BP stock! To normalize it, it would have to drop about $.84 because it lost that much REAL value, and then there is the fact there might not be another dividend, and the security blanket is gone, and that could make it go even lower.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2227730].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Seems like BP has agreed to put up 20Bill into an escrow account to be administered by a 3rd party.

I'm very surprised it happened and thought BP would fight such a thing all the way, which makes me wonder.

If true, I think it's a good start.

But...

Some folks are against it.

Leading off the crazy was Michele Bachmann, who called the escrow fund a "redistribution of wealth fund."

She told Dave Weigel that she worried that BP was being "fleeced" by the Obama administration.

Mississippi's Governor chimed in with...

"the escrow fund was overly harsh, and could cause BP so much economic pain that it wouldn't be able to offer victims any compensation whatsoever."

Very interesting???

TL

Ps. BP is also reportedly setting aside a 100 million fund...

...to compensate oil rig workers laid off as a result of the admin six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2227816].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Well, this fund DOES represent over a YEAR'S profits! And it is money they CAN'T use for the cleanup, etc... ALSO, a lawyer is trying to start a class action lawsuit!

There is MORE talk about bankruptcy. Basically, this almost ENSURES attrition!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2228458].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I'm very surprised it happened and thought BP would fight such a thing all the way, which makes me wonder.

Actually, this possibility was mentioned weeks ago - by BP during a news conference. At that time they were setting up more claims centers along the coast but in response to a question Hayward said they did not rule out a dedicated compensation fund. It's only fair to acknowledge that when they were asked to do so (there wasn't any "kicking" according to insiders) they willingly agreed.

I know the popular view is we are to accept is that this happened overnight - but of course it didn't. Some on the news were even criticizing the BP Chairman's use of the word "small people" - which I thought was totally understandable considering he was speaking in English, not his native language. We say the "little guy" or "the working class" and I can't believe anyone would pick on something silly like that - but they do.

The other $100 million fund for laid off oil workers was offered by BP - and I think it's important to know that. BP is getting bashed everywhere and in most cases it's deserved...but many who are talking the loudest haven't even been to the Gulf to see the damage.

We don't want to run BP into bankruptcy or out of business - some 30% of their employees are US citizens! Some talking heads need to keep those heads level...or shut up.

The non-payment of the dividend may have been necessary for face saving reasons - but many hurt by that non-payment are also US citizens who are anything but rich.

There aren't any winners here - the point is to minimize the loss. The talk sounds good - and I trust the person put in charge of the fund - but talk only goes so far and it's cleanup that's needed.

The new fund is a good step - but only if this plan responds faster than BP has to get money to those who are losing week by week.

kay

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2228515].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

The thing is they had the CEO Hayward stop making public statements because of his gaffs or misstatements. So now they have the Chairman standing in front of Hayward making another gaff that may be small by itself but perpetuates the idea that BP is insensitive to the hardship and incompetent.

Originally Posted by Kay King

Some on the news were even criticizing the BP Chairman's use of the word "small people" - which I thought was totally understandable considering he was speaking in English, not his native language. We say the "little guy" or "the working class" and I can't believe anyone would pick on something silly like that - but they do.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2229075].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

OK, the swedish word is probably related to "smaa"(danish word meaning small or little). And people would be mennesker(sp?), which I guess may be a word that could translate as guy. STILL, maybe he should have researched it.

And YEAH, this stock is kind of a poorman's bond. when I was a kid, bonds seemed to be reserved for the rich. GRANTED interest rates were higher and more stable and some companies seemed like they would NEVER die. But bonds cost THOUSANDS of dollars, and I STILL remember being shocked at IBM being like $400, and it was the second highest priced stock, BY FAR! Berkshire hathway was hard to see since the cost was SO high they had to use a smaller font to have it fit.

Of course, there WERE savings bonds but purchased ones matured in like 5 years.

And YEAH, you could buy a bond FUND, but THEN you lose control. Bonds are SUPPOSED to be PREDICTABLE, unlike stock. But that is ONLY if you hold them until maturity. It is basically a loan in reverse. The amount you buy the bond for is loaned to the organization, they pay you back ONLY the interest and, when the bond matures, you get what you loaned them.

And BP stock dropped due to the depression, while the dividend stayed the same, so MORE bought it because it basically had a higher yield.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2228672].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

maybe he should have researched it.

A little tolerance, Steve. Researching English idioms is not something high on the agenda of the chmn of BP right now. Maybe we should be a little understanding....

The dividends were based on the quarter before the oil spill, I think - and before share prices dropped.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2229056].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

A little tolerance, Steve. Researching English idioms is not something high on the agenda of the chmn of BP right now. Maybe we should be a little understanding....

The dividends were based on the quarter before the oil spill, I think - and before share prices dropped.

Well, if he is working for a company run by an ENGLISH speaking country, maybe he should. Apparently, he is a good hockey player, and some have said that is good because they are skating on thin ice.

The dividends were as high at times when the stock was as low as this! They may have REDUCED the dividend because of the spill, but most energy companies pay GOOD dividends. It is almost a RULE! I bought one electric energy stock that, for a time, paid 18% dividends!!!!!!!

OH well.... For the MOMENT, BP stock is stable. Earlier buys may still be in the queue, and some may not have heard about the dividend. It might be interesting.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2230722].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

It was hilarious watching the Morning Joe crowd giving the admin muted & forced kudos for the 20 Bill...

... after having a field day on the prez's Tuesday night speech & insinuating weak leadership from the admin the morning before.

They spent the first 10 minutes of the show talking about the BP "small people" comment.

But not to get off message...

later in the show...

Rudi Guianinni dogged the admin out to no ends over the spill.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2230804].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP's Hayword is testifying on the hill right now...

He looks like he could be the older brother of the British actor who always plays Tony Blair in movies and also has a recurring role on 30 Rock as the "settle love interest" of Tiny Fey.

Henry Waxman is lighting into him.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2230858].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Another coo-coo...

Tom Price of Georgia, the head of the ______________ Study Committee in the House of Representatives.

“We all agree that BP should be held fully responsible for its complicity in the oil tragedy in the Gulf,” said Chairman Price.

“In fact, BP has already begun paying claims.

Any attempt by the company to sidestep that responsibility should be met with the strongest legal recourses available.

However, in an administration that appears not to respect fundamental American principles, it is important to note that there is no legal authority for the President to compel a private company to set up or contribute to an escrow account.

“BP’s reported willingness to go along with the White House’s new fund suggests that the Obama Administration is hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics."

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2230999].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

What he said was right, and he just wanted it on the record. HECK, some talk like BP is just some little US company that NOBODY depends on for ANYTHING! That is funny because NONE of that is true! It is a BIG UK company that pensioners and others depend on!

BTW even if the US got everyone to agree, and wrote in the constitution that the US president had such a power, it is NULL AND VOID, under INTERNATIONAL treaty! Of course, the US could plea with the UK and, failing that, leave the UN and go to WAR with the UK. Otherwise, they have no right!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231032].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

What he said was right, and he just wanted it on the record. HECK, some talk like BP is just some little US company that NOBODY depends on for ANYTHING! That is funny because NONE of that is true! It is a BIG UK company that pensioners and others depend on!

BTW even if the US got everyone to agree, and wrote in the constitution that the US president had such a power, it is NULL AND VOID, under INTERNATIONAL treaty! Of course, the US could plea with the UK and, failing that, leave the UN and go to WAR with the UK. Otherwise, they have no right!

Steve

Putting something on the record is one thing but...

...the crap about the admin not respecting fundamental American principles along with the Chicago stuff is over the top and silly but typical partisanship.

What about the people of the Gulf region????

Who's looking out for them????

Not BP.

BP stockholders...

That's the thing about owning stocks & investments in general.

You take the good right along with the bad.

War with the UK...

I seriously doubt we'd go to war with the UK over this.

Remember, they have nukes also.

Perhaps a financial war...

- BP's assets may be frozen. ( we love freezing assets )

- They'll have to look for and drill for oil elsewhere.

- BP's 10k gas stations will have a new owner.

Can't think of anything else right now.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231107].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Most stock holders don't even KNOW they are stock holders. YOU might be a stock holder! 40% are AMERICANS!

So if they DIDN'T have nukes you would go to war? What difference does it make that they have nukes? If we used nukes against THEM, it would be like using nukes against almost all the REAL allies we have! The UK is only one of MANY that would be affected!
So nukes should be out of the question!

Yeah, maybe we could freeze SOME assets. How many assets do you think they have here?

As for looking elsewhere for oil, etc... I imagine the offshore wells are all they have here. If so, then that is an empty threat, since they already have to do that.

BPs gas stations MIGHT have new "owners"(Actually that would be THEFT in anyone's books, and would hurt american residents, so I am sure you must mean suppliers) IN THE US! But THAT is FAR more complicated than you might think. They will have to be approved, and possibly upgraded, by another company. They are NOT generally company owned. And what until then? What if they aren't approved, or upgrades are too expensive? Do they just shut down putting maybe a dozen people(per station) out of work?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231165].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Most stock holders don't even KNOW they are stock holders. YOU might be a stock holder! 40% are AMERICANS!

So if they DIDN'T have nukes you would go to war? What difference does it make that they have nukes? If we used nukes against THEM, it would be like using nukes against almost all the REAL allies we have! The UK is only one of MANY that would be affected!
So nukes should be out of the question!

Yeah, maybe we could freeze SOME assets. How many assets do you think they have here?

As for looking elsewhere for oil, etc... I imagine the offshore wells are all they have here. If so, then that is an empty threat, since they already have to do that.

BPs gas stations MIGHT have new "owners"(Actually that would be THEFT in anyone's books, and would hurt american residents, so I am sure you must mean suppliers) IN THE US! But THAT is FAR more complicated than you might think. They will have to be approved, and possibly upgraded, by another company. They are NOT generally company owned. And what until then? What if they aren't approved, or upgrades are too expensive? Do they just shut down putting maybe a dozen people(per station) out of work?

Steve

I'm sure I'm not a shareholder of BP stock and what I said about BP shareholders stands.

You brought up war with the UK.

You don't understand what it means to have nukes??????

I think you'll agree that if we were to get into a conventional war with the Brits we'd win simply due to our population numbers and war industrial output.

We produced 160k planes during WW2!

We'd be way more of a threat to conquer and occupy them then they would us.

Having nukes prevents someone from coming into your territory period.

Case in point...

- North Korea ( who have nukes ) talks big smack to us - even to the ultra-tough Bush admin and all we can do is talk about perusing a diplomatic track because...

... they got nukes.

on the other hand...

- Iraq and Saddam had none and we gave Saddam 48 hours to get out of dodge.

Things are much different when you have nukes.

OK, the gas station owners may get a different supplier etc.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231277].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I'm sure I'm not a shareholder of BP stock and what I said about BP shareholders stands.

OH, OK, so you have NO pension funds, etc?

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

You brought up war with the UK.

YEP, because that is usually what happens when you tread on another country's sovreignty

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

You don't understand what it means to have nukes??????

When neither side can use them, they might as well not exist, so what DOES it mean?

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I think you'll agree that if we were to get into a conventional war with the Brits we'd win simply due to our population numbers and war industrial output.

We produced 160k planes during WW2!

We'd be way more of a threat to conquer and occupy them then they would us.

OK, but germany might have said the same thing in the 40s.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Having nukes prevents someone from coming into your territory period.

NOPE, NOT ALWAYS!

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Case in point...

- North Korea ( who have nukes ) talks big smack to us - even to the ultra-tough Bush admin and all we can do is talk about perusing a diplomatic track because...

... they got nukes.

That is different, they are FAR away, crazy, and don't care about any collateral damage. For the most part, near europe, the US should see nukes as a LAST resort!

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

on the other hand...

- Iraq and Saddam had none and we gave Saddam 48 hours to get out of dodge.

Gee, it DIDN'T work! REMEMBER? We had to hunt saddam down, etc...

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

OK, the gas station owners may get a different supplier etc.

You'd sign a different tune if YOU were one of the ones affected! Heck, people have complained about people boycotting them. Don't you think they would have switched to marathon, or some such if it were VERY easy?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231303].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Protesters disrupt hearing on Hill with BP dude that looks like Tony Blair.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231168].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

The $100 million fund to pay Oil Workers put out of work by the Moratorium IS A JOKE.
Let me explain how sad this is-

1) The Moratorium will go on for at least 6 months, many experts agree it could be much longer.
2) Oil rig workers make something around $50,000 - $80,000 a year.
3) In Louisiana alone 10,000 people are directly employed by Oil Companies, another 40,000 are employed indirectly.

Lets just say for the sake of argument that ONLY 10,000 workers would lose their jobs, and would rely on the $100 Million to provide for themselves and their families. That would mean that there would ONLY BE $10,000 PER PERSON.

Now, the numbers I put above apply to Louisiana ONLY. Honest and hardworking people will lose their jobs by the thousands, not only in Louisiana, but also many in Texas, and others in Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

Obviously there will be a lot more than just 10,000 people who lose their jobs because of this disaster, and this very foolish action by the Obama administration. The worst of it all is, even if it were only 10,000 people relying on the $100 Million to survive, there would only be $10,000 per person. These people make at least three times that amount in 6 months alone.

So tell me, does that $100 Mill sound good now?

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231319].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

The $100 million fund to pay Oil Workers put out of work by the Moratorium IS A JOKE.
Let me explain how sad this is-

1) The Moratorium will go on for at least 6 months, many experts agree it could be much longer.
2) Oil rig workers make something around $50,000 - $80,000 a year.
3) In Louisiana alone 10,000 people are directly employed by Oil Companies, another 40,000 are employed indirectly.

Lets just say for the sake of argument that ONLY 10,000 workers would lose their jobs, and would rely on the $100 Million to provide for themselves and their families. That would mean that there would ONLY BE $10,000 PER PERSON.

Now, the numbers I put above apply to Louisiana ONLY. Honest and hardworking people will lose their jobs by the thousands, not only in Louisiana, but also many in Texas, and others in Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

Obviously there will be a lot more than just 10,000 people who lose their jobs because of this disaster, and this very foolish action by the Obama administration. The worst of it all is, even if it were only 10,000 people relying on the $100 Million to survive, there would only be $10,000 per person. These people make at least three times that amount in 6 months alone.

So tell me, does that $100 Mill sound good now?

No one said there is a cap on that 100million fund just like there is no cap on the 20Bill.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231355].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

So tell me, does that $100 Mill sound good now?

The $100Mill is obviously to create TWO funds so one that is PURELY BP is separate from one which is due to OBAMA based on BP. NOBODY knows the impact of the money BP won't pay. Some person from michigan, for example, may work on a louisiana rig and stay at a louisiana hotel and eat food there. They may pay a louisiana company which then might have to pay license fees, etc..... SO, is $80,000 * .5 * 10,000 going to make everything alright? NO WAY! Even THOSE people will have different spending patterns! JUST restaurant losses could be over $50,000 a DAY!

BUT, for the OTHER affected people, such as restaurants, IF they can prove it, it will come out of the $20Billion. Of course, HOW do you prove that income you didn't make was indirectly due to something else?

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231356].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

The $100 million fund to pay Oil Workers put out of work by the Moratorium IS A JOKE.
Let me explain how sad this is-

1) The Moratorium will go on for at least 6 months, many experts agree it could be much longer.
2) Oil rig workers make something around $50,000 - $80,000 a year.
3) In Louisiana alone 10,000 people are directly employed by Oil Companies, another 40,000 are employed indirectly.

Lets just say for the sake of argument that ONLY 10,000 workers would lose their jobs, and would rely on the $100 Million to provide for themselves and their families. That would mean that there would ONLY BE $10,000 PER PERSON.

Now, the numbers I put above apply to Louisiana ONLY. Honest and hardworking people will lose their jobs by the thousands, not only in Louisiana, but also many in Texas, and others in Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

Obviously there will be a lot more than just 10,000 people who lose their jobs because of this disaster, and this very foolish action by the Obama administration. The worst of it all is, even if it were only 10,000 people relying on the $100 Million to survive, there would only be $10,000 per person. These people make at least three times that amount in 6 months alone.

So tell me, does that $100 Mill sound good now?

Here's the error in your math: Not every oil worker in LA is being put out of work.

My research shows that there are over 3500 operating wells in the Gulf. 33 are deep water wells, which are the only ones being shut down with the moratorium, this would be right around 1% of wells being closed.

Anyone have any other numbers of how many wells are actually being closed?

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2232873].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

And why on earth are you two arguing about the US and England going to war, or about nuking each other for that matter? That is just the silliest thing I have ever heard.

[ 1 ] Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231326].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

And why on earth are you two arguing about the US and England going to war, or about nuking each other for that matter? That is just the silliest thing I have ever heard.

I thought we were being hypothetical...

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231362].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

dukkyman -

I agree about the out of work oil workers. I think BP should be responsible for paying the rig workers out of work who are employed by BP.

The moratorium was a knee jerk reaction causing more damage to people in LA and along the coast. It wasn't imposed by BP.

We've had coal mines blow up and cave in - do they stop the coal mining in that state because there was an accident? After many of those problems in the mines we usually learn there were multiple safety violations that were recognized by inspectors...do they shut them all down?

Moratorium = Agenda

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231365].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

dukkyman -

I agree about the out of work oil workers. I think BP should be responsible for paying the rig workers out of work who are employed by BP.

The moratorium was a knee jerk reaction causing more damage to people in LA and along the coast. It wasn't imposed by BP.

We've had coal mines blow up and cave in - do they stop the coal mining in that state because there was an accident? After many of those problems in the mines we usually learn there were multiple safety violations that were recognized by inspectors...do they shut them all down?

Moratorium = Agenda

Moratorium = Agenda???

FYI...

Normally when you have a coal mining accident...

...It does not endanger the entire ecosystem of a very large body of water.

So with most people, there is a huge difference.

and...

Seems like there's a big conflict among the people of the Gulf themselves.

- The deep sea oil workers depend on the income but another spill could happen.

- The fishermen and just about everyone else along the coast are harmed by the oil spill brought on by the activities of the deep sea oil workers.

What is to be done???

If BP is picking up the tab of the deep sea oil people then what's the problem with a temporary moratorium??

Which is the larger group??

The deep sea oil workers or everyone else???

Are the activities of the non deep sea oil people a threat to the gulf???

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231503].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Seems saying the "moratorium is a knee jerk reaction" is a talking point of the right.

The moratorium stops new drilling in deep water. It doesn't stop all oil production in the gulf, so the analogy with coal mines doesn't work. If you had a coal mine disaster somehow cause the destruction of tens of thousands of jobs and cost close to $100 billion would you just let people keep building the same kind of coal mines? Of course not. Of course a coal mine disaster wouldn't ever become an environmental disaster even remotely comparable to this oil leak. Another reason the analogy fails.

We have been lied to about the safety of this type of drilling and the ability of the oil companies to respond to any problems. This should be painfully clear. They don't have solutions to leaks like these. This industry is under regulated and needs some rules.

Moratorium = common sense.

Originally Posted by Kay King

The moratorium was a knee jerk reaction causing more damage to people in LA and along the coast. It wasn't imposed by BP.

We've had coal mines blow up and cave in - do they stop the coal mining in that state because there was an accident? After many of those problems in the mines we usually learn there were multiple safety violations that were recognized by inspectors...do they shut them all down?

Moratorium = Agenda

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231721].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

And why on earth are you two arguing about the US and England going to war, or about nuking each other for that matter? That is just the silliest thing I have ever heard.

I simply said that WAR is the only thing the US could do to aquire or close a foreign company if the foreign country won't do it willingly. Some view NUKES as toys or relatively harmless weapons. GIVE ME A BREAK! With chernobyl, SWEDEN saw the effects before they heard about it!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231369].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Wow I have a lot of things to respond too -

Liberator - I know that they haven't put a cap on it, but that number is just pathetic, and is really nothing better than a PR stunt for people who look at $100 Mill and think wow thats a lot of money, they are actually doing something. Also I know y'all were being hypothetical, but even then it was just to silly for me.

Seasoned - Some people will have an extremely hard time proving that they lost money because of this. For example say a small hotel owner, that's on a beach with no oil but still is losing business because people are afraid, would have a hard time proving that the oil lost him his business (without written letters from customers saying they cancelled because of the oil). Also will they be paying people a year from now when they still are struggling because of this? And yes, Nukes = Bad, with the exception of Armageddon when they were actually pretty handy.

Kay Kind - My fellow Gulf native, I hope you are faring well these days. I think the old saying "never let a good crisis go to waste" applies for Obama, just like every other high ranking politician. He has his agenda and will use this disaster to see it through. Unfortunately Louisiana and the many other hard working residents of the gulf coast will have to pay the price.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231476].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

This is from the CSMoniter, so clearly my earlier posts numbers were off a little bit, it's even worse than I thought. Though like with everything, I've heard different numbers elsewhere.

"The oil industry employs about 58,000 Louisiana residents and has created another 260,000 oil-related jobs, accounting for about 17 percent of all Louisiana jobs. The average annual oil-industry salary is $95,000 – a very good income in Louisiana.

Moreover, in 2008, oil and gas made up 6.5 percent of Louisiana's revenue, more than five times the national average. As a result, Louisiana and offshore drilling have become synonymous.

"One third of the oil produced in this country comes from offshore, and 80 percent of offshore production comes from deep water off Louisiana," says Eric Smith, associate director of Tulane University's Energy Institute."

But that's not what I want to talk about right now. I hope everyone can take the three minutes it takes to read this article from the Local newspaper in New Orleans The Times-Picayune

BP acknowledges it never followed blowout preventer law, blames MMS | NOLA.com

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231606].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Congressman apologizes to BP dude for the alleged 20 billion dollar "shakedown".

YouTube - Rep. Joe Barton Apologizes To BP For...

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231624].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I am doing my best to refrain from cursing right now. But that sorry excuse for a human being should be forced to go down to Plaquemines Parish and explain to every last person there why they should apologize to BP. That piece of filth should get down his hands and knees to pick up all the dead Pelicans, and explain to them why the American Government and it's people need to apologize to Tony Hayward. While he's at it, maybe he can take a road trip down the gulf coast and wave a BP banner, and explain to the millions of people effected how BP is also the victim.

This idiot has no clue at all what is going on, and the fact that he is a leader and could say something so profoundly stupid is unbelievable. Did he honestly think people would agree with him?

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231670].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I am doing my best to refrain from cursing right now. But that sorry excuse for a human being should be forced to go down to Plaquemines Parish and explain to every last person there why they should apologize to BP. That piece of filth should get down his hands and knees to pick up all the dead Pelicans, and explain to them why the American Government and it's people need to apologize to Tony Hayward. While he's at it, maybe he can take a road trip down the gulf coast and wave a BP banner, and explain to the millions of people effected how BP is also the victim.

This idiot has no clue at all what is going on, and the fact that he is a leader and could say something so profoundly stupid is unbelievable. Did he honestly think people would agree with him?

They are slowly starting to come out of the woodwork.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231681].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

For anyone at work who can't turn on a video, heres the article.

Rep. Joe Barton Apologizes to BP's Tony Hayward for White House "Shakedown" (Video) - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231717].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Tim you make some good points but here are two things you should consider.

Look at my post #517, its only up a few, then tell me about something thats going to cost 10's of thousands of jobs.

BP admitted today to ignoring federal regulations on their blow out preventer, because the MMS didn't enforce it. I have that article provided in the same post. Because the thing about this disaster is, that it could have totally been prevented if BP just followed the rules.

I'm out for today, please everyone say a prayer for those effected by this disaster.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2231830].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

I'm not sure if anyone knows what the numbers are going to be. Over 5000 existing wells in the gulf will continue to operate. The Associated Press reported: "The moratorium put a halt to the 33 deepwater exploratory rigs in operation in the Gulf in addition to all new deep-sea drilling permits." So there's been some numbers thrown around that may not be accurate. Believe me, the President doesn't want to see any more job loses for various reasons including his and the Dems reelection hopes.

The moratorium may last less than 6 months and perhaps something could be done to keep the workers from the new drilling busy. How about start drilling relief wells NOW for every deepwater well in existence in the gulf? That would actually create jobs and solve the problem of having a possible repeat of this leak. There are countries that require a relief well to be drilled for every well. This should be an industry wide standard and should start now.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Tim you make some good points but here are two things you should consider.

Look at my post #517, its only up a few, then tell me about something thats going to cost 10's of thousands of jobs.

BP admitted today to ignoring federal regulations on their blow out preventer, because the MMS didn't enforce it. I have that article provided in the same post. Because the thing about this disaster is, that it could have totally been prevented if BP just followed the rules.

I'm out for today, please everyone say a prayer for those effected by this disaster.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2232228].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I suggested relief wells for every well several pages ago - but it's never come up in discussion by anyone outside this forum.

There have been no steps to requiring relief wells....no mention of adding the other shut off that other countries require...legislators aren't calling the people who approved those "walrus safety" submissions.

Here's what worries people here:

With an estimated 35 rigs idled in the Gulf of Mexico, Brazil is already receiving inquiries from companies looking to move their rigs here, where vast discoveries in recent years may soon turn the country into a major crude exporter.

Brazil is easing regulations for deepwater drilling - and the rigs aren't going to make money idle in the gulf. They are exploratory but that is almost full operation for many of them preparing to switch to production.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2232311].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

I didn't see that post Kay. I did find some people talking about this including Senator Lautenberg and Adm. Thad Allen of the coast guard:

"Adm. Thad Allen -- the man tasked with overseeing the crisis -- offered his support for a suggestion that has been bandied about on the Hill (among other places) as a way of potentially preventing the type of large-scale disaster now unfolding. Instead of waiting for an oil company to drill a relief well should a spill occur, the commission should consider requiring that company to have the relief well drilled in advance.

"I think that would be a legitimate point to be raised and put in front of the commission as they do their work," Allen said, when asked about the preemptive safety measure during a Monday White House briefing.

As far as costs making it not possible, well the highest profiting companies in the world are oil companies. Having a relief well at least started wouldn't seem to be beyond their means. It's done elsewhere from what I understand so it must be economically feasible.

Originally Posted by Kay King

I suggested relief wells for every well several pages ago - but it's never come up in discussion by anyone outside this forum.

There have been no steps to requiring relief wells....no mention of adding the other shut off that other countries require...legislators aren't calling the people who approved those "walrus safety" submissions.

Here's what worries people here:

Brazil is easing regulations for deepwater drilling - and the rigs aren't going to make money idle in the gulf. They are exploratory but that is almost full operation for many of them preparing to switch to production.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233261].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I think it's a great idea - the relief wells would only be partial because the angle has to be carefully calculated by engineers. However, they could be drilled to 2/3 of the well depth which would allow the company to much more quickly complete the relief well.

I think Thad Allen's time is limited. The run arounds are ridiculous with people being sent to BP for "permission" then BP has to send them to Allen and then who knows what happens. Somehow all suggestions and requests seem to get lost in multiple bureaucracies. Last I read there were NINE govt agencies involved in approving protections for the coast.

BP has indicated many times it's willing to approve and participate in whatever the "commander" of the crisis wants - but BP isn't allowed to make the decisions - and Allen doesn't seem to have the authority or the will to make them.

I'm not really knocking Allen - he's great at giving information and statistics and his uniform is always spotless. However, he's not good at hitting the ground, making quick decisions or going to bat for something. He's "in charge" but doesn't seem to be authorized to do very much.

I think if anyone has brains they'll remove allen and put Honore in charge - but I've been hoping for that since the beginning.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233296].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

I think that would be a good idea. I've liked what Honore did in Katrina.

One thing I'm glad they didn't jump on was the berms. The more I hear about them the worst it sounds. The Gulf has been messed with for decades and the coastline is receeding amazingly fast. These berms are not a well thought out plan regarding the environment and probably won't even help keep the oil away much.

Originally Posted by Kay King

I think if anyone has brains they'll remove allen and put Honore in charge - but I've been hoping for that since the beginning.

kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233353].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

I sort of agree at this point about the berms. Done quickly - they could have save a lot of wetland and marsh from contamination.

Now it seems like a useless waste of millions of dollars as there isn't much left there to preserve.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233377].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

As far as costs making it not possible, well the highest profiting companies in the world are oil companies. Having a relief well at least started wouldn't seem to be beyond their means. It's done elsewhere from what I understand so it must be economically feasible.

Originally Posted by Kay King

I think it's a great idea - the relief wells would only be partial because the angle has to be carefully calculated by engineers. However, they could be drilled to 2/3 of the well depth which would allow the company to much more quickly complete the relief well.

Because a well is profitable elsewhere doesn't mean it is in the Gulf. T Boone Pickens actually predicted the leak at at least 40,000 barrels a day, based on nothing but economics. He said if this well didn't product that much, then BP wouldn't make a profit and wouldn't have drilled in the first place. This well probably wouldn't have even been drilled if it required a second well.

If the price of drilling is raised in the Gulf, why won't those oil compainies move to Brazil like they're suggesting for the moritorium? I see an even bigger loss of jobs in the Gulf if relief wells are required.

Let's say there was already a relief drill at 2/3 depth...Right about now they'd just about be done drilling the rest of the well, going by the progress they're making on the real relief well. So at even 2/3s, we'd still have the problem we have up this this moment. No doubt a better situation than we have now, but still a disaster. Drill deeper and raise the costs.

I would also like to see a security plan for these wells, as they are HUGE military/terrorist targets and a legit national security issue. How much should we increase our Coast Guard/military budget to protect these wells?

We also need to include the health issues concerned with air pollution.

Like I said over and over, if you add up the REAL FREE MARKET COSTS of oil, wind and solar are a much better value.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233477].message }}

Bill Farnham

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

As far as costs making it not possible, well the highest profiting companies in the world are oil companies.

Tim,

I agree. What a lot of folks are not aware of is that on the average a barrel of oil cost the oil companies $20 per barrel of oil.

There is a HUGE potential for profit, and currently the oil companies are raking it in given the current price of oil.

They certainly have the means to create a safe environment for their drilling exploits if they only had the will.

~Bill

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233418].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Bill Farnham

Tim,

I agree. What a lot of folks are not aware of is that on the average a barrel of oil cost the oil companies $20 per barrel of oil.

There is a HUGE potential for profit, and currently the oil companies are raking it in given the current price of oil.

They certainly have the means to create a safe environment for their drilling exploits if they only had the will.

~Bill

This number is hugely subsidized by the US citizens in the form of tax breaks and free military protection.

If we agree that the war in Iraq was about oil, then add another $3 TRILLION dollars to the cost of oil. The $3 Trillion figure is the number projected to be the final costs after we pay for a lifetime of care for those injured in the war.

Would we have gone into Iraq if we were totally independant of foreign oil? IMO, we wouldn't have much interest in Middle Eastern affairs at all if it wasn't for oil. How much does that cost us in terms of lives and treasure?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233503].message }}

Bill Farnham

16 years ago

Actually, Kurt, the $20 figure is not burdened by what you are speaking about, it merely reflects the cost of the oil at the well head.

This is the cost to the oil company, and not to the citizens as you have rightly stated. There is no doubt we are paying a huge price for our energy habits.

What is appearent is that under no circumstances should any BP employee have been forced to cut back on safety measures, whether of his own doing or that of his superiors, to place our environment in jeopordy. Period.

They make enough money as it is to compensate them for being sure all good measures are taken to ensure a good outcome in what can only be described as an adventurous undertaking in the name of profit.

Shame on them. How greedy can you get. There are no monetary excuses for taking the actions they took that led to this debacle.

I'll stop here...

~Bill

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233550].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Bill Farnham

Actually, Kurt, the $20 figure is not burdened by what you are speaking about, it merely reflects the cost of the oil at the well head.

This is the cost to the oil company, and not to the citizens as you have rightly stated. There is no doubt we are paying a huge price for our energy habits.

What is appearent is that under no circumstances should any BP employee have been forced to cut back on safety measures, whether of his own doing or that of his superiors, to place our environment in jeopordy. Period.

They make enough money as it is to compensate them for being sure all good measures are taken to ensure a good outcome in what can only be described as an adventurous undertaking in the name of profit.

Shame on them. How greedy can you get. There are no monetary excuses for taking the actions they took that led to this debacle.

I'll stop here...

~Bill

Hey Bill,

I have some issues with this post.

First, a second well doen't reduce the occurance of a problem in any way. It can reduce the damage once there is a problem, but it doesn't make a problem with the original well any less likely.

It's also likely that having to drill two wells puts more workers at danger.

I'm also not defending BP. I've said in this thread I'd give them the death penalty. Exxon can buy them for all I care. I'm merely saying that NO ONE has shown any actual proof that it's finacially viable to drill two wells in the Gulf of Mexico. The real experts I've heard say just the opposite. Your quote of $20 a barrel isn't for oil in the US in the deep ocean.

And all the laws, rules and regulations anyone wants to add are fine...Except they won't apply to the other 200+ countries in the World. What's to stop a Mexican rig from polluting the Gulf?

What really frustrates me no end is if anyone would actually do the math, the answer is clear: Oil is NOT cheaper than alternatives and the only way to make sure a leak doesn't happen again is not to drill in the first place. Let's stop trying to fix something that can't be fixed.

I don't have kids and am starting to wonder why I even give a damn. You all want to keep drilling, go ahead, I don't have a horse in this race.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233616].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

What occurred to me the other day is that this oil platform blew up - but I wonder how many other companies have cut corners on oil rigs, in coal mines and in other production and building designs and got by with it because the worst didn't happen....yet.

It's part of the problem - cut a little here or there and nothing bad happens so that becomes normal and then later you cut a little more...until one day there's one mistake too many...and boom.

My thought about the relief wells is simple that they would be a head start on solving a problem before it happened - but I'm sure the cost would be exorbitant and in the end it might not help anyway.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233640].message }}

Bill Farnham

16 years ago

Kurt,

Now you're bringing up items I did not address in that post so I'm sitting here running my trigger finger up and down over both my lips at a rapid pace simply enjoying the rhythmic sound they make all the while bringing back happy memories of my childhood.

I used to get sent to the principals' office for that...

Basically what I was alluding to was BP already had enough profit potential with that well that a few days more (based on what I've heard, I wasn't there) to get things right would not have impacted their bottom line one iota.

Instead they took a gamble that didn't pay off for the sake of expediency and it came back to bite all of us.

~Bill

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233678].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Bill Farnham

Kurt,

Now you're bringing up items I did not address in that post so I'm sitting here running my trigger finger up and down over both my lips at a rapid pace simply enjoying the rhythmic sound they make all the while bringing back happy memories of my childhood.

I used to get sent to the principals' office for that...

Basically what I was alluding to was BP already had enough profit potential with that well that a few days more (based on what I've heard, I wasn't there) to get things right would not have impacted their bottom line one iota.

Instead they took a gamble that didn't pay off for the sake of expediency and it came back to bite all of us.

~Bill

Hi Bill,

Yes, I agree BP took a gamble and lost.

My point is, everyone on this thread is focused on what's wrong with oil and trying to fix it, when the problem is OIL. It will never be fixed.

I've tried to talk about solutions, but everybody is stuck on this oil issue, instead finding a REAL solution to the problem. How can we ever move on if we can't even discuss moving on? The menality of this thread is the same mentality of this country...We'll never get off oil if we can't even talk about it.

And why should I care? There's enough oil, food, air and water to last my lifetime and I don't have kids. If people aren't concerned for the future of their decendants, neither should I.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233799].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

I think most here would admit that we need to go in a different direction as far as what energy we should be using in the future. However, how fast are we going to get there? We can't just stop our use of oil overnight. I agree with you that it should be as soon as possible, but I'm not sure the immediacy of this crisis will be solved by going green now.

Originally Posted by Kurt

My point is, everyone on this thread is focused on what's wrong with oil and trying to fix it, when the problem is OIL. It will never be fixed.
- Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2234005].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

I don't have kids and am starting to wonder why I even give a damn. You all want to keep drilling, go ahead, I don't have a horse in this race.

I know what you mean. When I went under for the dissected aorta operation, I was really kind of hoping I would just DIE! I could just relax knowing that whatever fate this world met, I wouldn't have to deal with it. Frankly though, I care more about the environment and OTHER animals than I do about most humans.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233718].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I'm not sure if anyone knows what the numbers are going to be. Over 5000 existing wells in the gulf will continue to operate. The Associated Press reported: "The moratorium put a halt to the 33 deepwater exploratory rigs in operation in the Gulf in addition to all new deep-sea drilling permits." So there's been some numbers thrown around that may not be accurate. Believe me, the President doesn't want to see any more job loses for various reasons including his and the Dems reelection hopes.

The moratorium may last less than 6 months and perhaps something could be done to keep the workers from the new drilling busy. How about start drilling relief wells NOW for every deepwater well in existence in the gulf? That would actually create jobs and solve the problem of having a possible repeat of this leak. There are countries that require a relief well to be drilled for every well. This should be an industry wide standard and should start now.

It costs too much. From what I've heard, it will cost $100-200 million per, which isn't economically feasible.

The bottom line truth is the REAL FREE MARKET cost of oil is being subsidized. Once we add in the environmental and military costs directly associated with oil, not to mention shipping $400 billion a year overseas for oil, the other energy sources are a lot more competitive.

This is the only real solution.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2233103].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

You know ME, I'm the one that always says the government spends too much time making up new senseless rules, and spends NO time enforcing those on the books.

BPs statements as an excuse are STUPID and meaningless, *****BUT***** they DO have a point! Following them was commonsense, so BP should have done it EVEN if such rules didn't exist. So they ARE guilty! The MMS, however, SHOULD have said "LOOK, follow these laws, or the coastguard will FORCE you out of the area and you may be banned from any waters near the US FOREVER!!"!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2232064].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

You know ME, I'm the one that always says the government spends too much time making up new senseless rules, and spends NO time enforcing those on the books.

BPs statements as an excuse are STUPID and meaningless, *****BUT***** they DO have a point! Following them was commonsense, so BP should have done it EVEN if such rules didn't exist. So they ARE guilty! The MMS, however, SHOULD have said "LOOK, follow these laws, or the coastguard will FORCE you out of the area and you may be banned from any waters near the US FOREVER!!"!

Steve

It's hard for a gov agency to enforce rules on corps if the people put in place at those agencies are put in place to not enforce the rules.

It goes hand in hand with the whole hands off philosophy.

For example...

The dude that used to run the SEC ( Chris Cox ) once declared that he wasn't enforcing anything.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2232155].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

It's hard for a gov agency to enforce rules on corps if the people put in place at those agencies are put in place to not enforce the rules.

It goes hand in hand with the whole hands off philosophy.

For example...

The dude that used to run the SEC ( Chris Cox ) once declared that he wasn't enforcing anything.

TL

But EVERYTHING the SEC does that isn't enforcement is there to facilitate their main purpose of ENFORCEMENT! HECK, Enron used securities to profit off manipulating the market, which was ILLEGAL! Milkin apparently didn't reveal the nature of his securities. I once bought a stock efhutton recommended and they "made the market" in it, but didn't reveal it. ALL should be prosecuted by the SEC.

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2232221].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Don't relief wells add ANOTHER point of failure? I mean they ARE wells to relieve pressure from the main one, right? Maybe relief wells aren't such a good idea as a precaution.

http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?...tentId=7061734

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2232312].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Congressman apologizes for apologizing to BP...

On Thursday afternoon, Texas Republican Congressman Joe Barton issued this statement...

"I apologize for using the term 'shakedown' with regard to yesterday's actions at the White House in my opening statement this morning, ...

...and I retract my apology to BP.

As I told my colleagues yesterday and said again this morning, BP should bear the full financial responsibility for the accident on their lease in the Gulf of Mexico.

BP should fully compensate those families and businesses that have been hurt by this accident.

BP and the federal government need to stop the leak, clean up the damage, and take whatever steps necessary to prevent a similar accident in the future.

"I regret the impact that my statement this morning implied that BP should not pay for the consequences of their decisions and actions in this incident."

Here's the apology he apologized for...

You Tube Large

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2232817].message }}

Patrician

16 years ago

Exactly - what the focus should be is mitigating the crisis we have right now.

Stopping the leak.
Cleaning up the mess.

Compensating the people who have lost their income as a result
Rescuing as many animals as we can.

We have plenty of time to do politics as usual and to do 'investigations' and 'research' about who did or didn't or should or shouldn't do WTF.

We do need to use alternative 'green' resources.

We need to use the resources we have (no moratorium and cut as much dependence on foreign oil as possible)

By the way where is FEMA again?

Thanks

Signature

Patricia Brucoli
Plug-In Profit Site Helpdesk

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2234055].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Kurt... have you seen this?

In 2008, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a report that examines the technical feasibility of using wind energy to generate 20% of the nation's electricity demand by 2030. The report, "20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply," includes contributions from DOE and its national laboratories, the wind industry, electric utilities, and other groups. The report examines the costs, major impacts, and challenges associated with producing 20% wind energy or 300 GW of wind generating capacity by 2030.

Wind and Water Power Program: 20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2234065].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Kurt... have you seen this?

In 2008, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a report that examines the technical feasibility of using wind energy to generate 20% of the nation's electricity demand by 2030. The report, "20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply," includes contributions from DOE and its national laboratories, the wind industry, electric utilities, and other groups. The report examines the costs, major impacts, and challenges associated with producing 20% wind energy or 300 GW of wind generating capacity by 2030.

Wind and Water Power Program: 20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply

Ken that got me thinking.
Remember back in the early 70's when we had that little problem with the Arab oil embargo? The one that caused all those gas shortages?
Well Nixon at that time said we had to reduce our dependency on oil and that we could do it by the 80's. Then every president since then has said the same thing but with a different time line.
Mean while Denmark said we are going to do something about our dependence on oil and they did Wind power pays well for Denmark / Nation at forefront of $4 billion industry - SFGate

I think it's about time, well over 40 years, that we stop doing reports and start actually doing something. This country is a joke when it comes to the environment and changing our dependency away from oil.
All talk, no action.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235282].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Ken that got me thinking.
Remember back in the early 70's when we had that little problem with the Arab oil embargo? The one that caused all those gas shortages?
Well Nixon at that time said we had to reduce our dependency on oil and that we could do it by the 80's. Then every president since then has said the same thing but with a different time line.
Mean while Denmark said we are going to do something about our dependence on oil and they did Wind power pays well for Denmark / Nation at forefront of $4 billion industry - SFGate

I think it's about time, well over 40 years, that we stop doing reports and start actually doing something.

This country is a joke when it comes to the environment and changing our dependency away from oil.
All talk, no action.

Sarah Palin does not seem to agree with you...

On the O'rielly Show...

"I kind of have a big beef with you too though, Bill,...

... if you don't acknowledge that President Obama is wrong on his call for a need for energy policy."

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235366].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Sarah Palin does not seem to agree with you...

On the O'rielly Show...

"I kind of have a big beef with you too though, Bill,...

... if you don't acknowledge that President Obama is wrong on his call for a need for energy policy."

If we where face to face I'd say "here's a quarter, call someone who cares"

My point is really that we have been talking about an energy policy for 40 years. Seems to me we should shut up and do something.
Think about that, 40 years. So who really runs things around here.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235730].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

If we where face to face I'd say "here's a quarter, call someone who cares"

My point is really that we have been talking about an energy policy for 40 years. Seems to me we should shut up and do something.
Think about that, 40 years. So who really runs things around here.

And my point sir is that...

Ms. P, is a very influential voice dedicated to convincing people that we don't need a new energy policy.

The nation is not going to move towards a smarter energy policy until we get enough people in the house and senate that will vote for one.

Without getting political... ( and I'm not trying to lecture you )

...the POTUS has actually proposed legislation to move us forward.

It's on the table.

Of course it ain't perfect and everyone's not going to agree with every part of it.

He's not a dictator so the congress must get involved.

A decent bill has been passed in the house but now it's stalled in the senate and may die there.

Thom,

If you want to point a finger at someone you can point it at those people in this country that continually send folks to D.C. that...

- don't believe in consumer protections:

- want to maintain the status quo on just about everything - including national energy policy.

BTW...

What are your national people doing to solve this energy problem????

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236143].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

And my point sir is that...

Ms. P, is a very influential voice dedicated to convincing people that we don't need a new energy policy.

The nation is not going to move towards a smarter energy policy until we get enough people in the house and senate that will vote for one.

Without getting political... ( and I'm not trying to lecture you )

...the POTUS has actually proposed legislation to move us forward.

It's on the table.

Of course it ain't perfect and everyone's not going to agree with every part of it.

He's not a dictator so the congress must get involved.

A decent bill has been passed in the house but now it's stalled in the senate and may die there.

Thom,

If you want to point a finger at someone you can point it at those people in this country that continually send folks to D.C. that...

- don't believe in consumer protections:

- want to maintain the status quo on just about everything - including national energy policy.

BTW...

What are your national people doing to solve this energy problem????

TL

So has every president since Nixon, who was the only one to accomplish anything.
My nation is your nation, so you tell me(sorry miss read that line).
I have no national people, I don't belong to any party or do I lean towards one over the other.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236176].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

So has every president since Nixon, who was the only one to accomplish anything.
My nation is your nation, so you tell me(sorry miss read that line).
I have no national people, I don't belong to any party or do I lean towards one over the other.

Thom,

Legislation is on the table and most political wonks consider it to be the most serious attempt to move the nation forward on a new energy policy to date.

It has passed the house and now it's stuck in the senate.

When I spoke of your national people...

... I should have been clearer meaning your national reps such as your 2 senators and your particular congressperson.

Where do they stand on this issue etc.??

I was not speaking of party affiliations.

I'm live in Maryland and have 2 senators and a congressperson who support the bill and the new direction.

My reps ain't holding things up.

What about yours???

All The Best!!

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236246].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Thom,

Legislation is on the table and most political wonks consider it to be the most serious attempt to move the nation forward on a new energy policy to date.

It has passed the house and now it's stuck in the senate.

When I spoke of your national people...

... I should have been clearer meaning your national reps such as your 2 senators and your particular congressperson.

Where do they stand on this issue etc.??

I was not speaking of party affiliations.

I'm live in Maryland and have 2 senators and a congressperson who support the bill and the new direction.

My reps ain't holding things up.

What about yours???

All The Best!!

TL

Mine are for it also, but they do what they are told by their party pretty much

I'm not saying the energy policy is bad, I don't know nearly enough about it to pass any type of judgment.
I live in New York, where bad politicians thrive.

Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239402].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

TLTheLiberator,

Palin supporters aren't as blind as you think. HECK, some liked palin, and STILL thought she, and/or mccain, was a bad choice.

And the government alone can't simply get this stuff going.

And HAVE YOU READ THAT BILL!?!?!?!? What is ITS number? Most bills are GARBAGE, and most good ones contain garbage. Most of the rest are just never enforced!

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236408].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP's chairman on the hill yesterday in 4 minutes...

Here's the link, if you're interested.

Scroll down the page for the video.

The Man Who Wasn't There: A Whole Day Of Tony Hayward's Obfuscating In Four Minutes

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235299].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I actually watched as much of that as I could stand. The questions were e often ridiculously posed for the cameras rather than to require an answer. Many were blatant attempts to get Hayward to admit wrongdoing - and honestly scum that he may be, he's smarter than most who were questioning him.

He was interrupted and shouted over when he did try to answer some questions. Long, theoretical questions were asked with the demand of a "yes or no".

I was embarrassed to say those people represent me. Not surprised at Huffington's take on it - but that's a rare spin compared to comments made right after what looked like a massive campaign photo op than any kind of serious questioning.

I don't know when I've been more disgusted or more ashamed - and finally had to turn off the TV. Our leaders postured, and preened and postulated and looked like a bunch of pompous idiots. It was so bad that Hayward came out looking collected and businesslike.

Ask a question - interrupt the answer to do a small oration- repeat the question and interrupt the answer again repeatedly - and then another small speech about how frustrated and appalled you are. And don't forget the (self) righteous indignation from those who wouldn't know a pelican if it bit them on the nose.

I can't imagine how anyone could have been proud or pleased with that circus and my feeling was that it was the largest public CYA attempt I have ever watched - and it was not Hayward doing the CYA this time.

There was nothing accomplished yesterday except a total loss of dignity. However, the farce is necessary so that we focus only on BP and not on those who were charged with oversight of BP. Did they really think Hayward could give "conclusions" while investigations of the incident are just getting started? That's a bit stupid when you consider how many of those participating have law degrees.

During the time I watched the mess yesterday - there was not one single "question" that Hayward was allowed to answer without being interrupted again and again. This wasn't an attempt to get facts - it was a campaign for votes. Otherwise, they would wait until the crisis is under control and the results of the investigations are available....but that might be too late, right?

The purpose seems to be what Huffington bought into - that anyone there could do a better job than Hayward. These are the same people charged with oversight of issuing permits for drilling who couldn't run their own regulatory agency efficiently...and none asked why inspections weren't completed or why rules were waived.

I usually look at things like this as a good show and laugh at the antics. This time I was simply ashamed to be associated with those people in any way.

kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235511].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Kay,

WOW, I guess I should have tried to watch the FULL exchange. It is MORONIC that so many figure ALL questions are simply yes or no. Sometimes a yes or no answer would simply be a LIE, so why even ask the question?

ALSO, I heard that the questions were prepared IN ADVANCE, and given to BP because, supposedly, they really DID want answers. That makes this all the more embarassing for everyone.

So I am not saying BP is innocent. FAR FROM IT! I want EVERY culpable person to PAY for this! But the government has to share in the blame somewhat. The Q & A should NOT be to CYA, but to find the culpable people and take away SOME nugget(s) of info that can help prevent disasters in the future. It is almost like people are trying to burn the plane, and not thinking about getting the little black box.

OH, I CSM....

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235879].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

I actually watched as much of that as I could stand. The questions were e often ridiculously posed for the cameras rather than to require an answer. Many were blatant attempts to get Hayward to admit wrongdoing - and honestly scum that he may be, he's smarter than most who were questioning him.

He was interrupted and shouted over when he did try to answer some questions. Long, theoretical questions were asked with the demand of a "yes or no".

I was embarrassed to say those people represent me. Not surprised at Huffington's take on it - but that's a rare spin compared to comments made right after what looked like a massive campaign photo op than any kind of serious questioning.

I don't know when I've been more disgusted or more ashamed - and finally had to turn off the TV. Our leaders postured, and preened and postulated and looked like a bunch of pompous idiots. It was so bad that Hayward came out looking collected and businesslike.

Ask a question - interrupt the answer to do a small oration- repeat the question and interrupt the answer again repeatedly - and then another small speech about how frustrated and appalled you are. And don't forget the (self) righteous indignation from those who wouldn't know a pelican if it bit them on the nose.

I can't imagine how anyone could have been proud or pleased with that circus and my feeling was that it was the largest public CYA attempt I have ever watched - and it was not Hayward doing the CYA this time.

There was nothing accomplished yesterday except a total loss of dignity. However, the farce is necessary so that we focus only on BP and not on those who were charged with oversight of BP. Did they really think Hayward could give "conclusions" while investigations of the incident are just getting started? That's a bit stupid when you consider how many of those participating have law degrees.

During the time I watched the mess yesterday - there was not one single "question" that Hayward was allowed to answer without being interrupted again and again. This wasn't an attempt to get facts - it was a campaign for votes. Otherwise, they would wait until the crisis is under control and the results of the investigations are available....but that might be too late, right?

The purpose seems to be what Huffington bought into - that anyone there could do a better job than Hayward. These are the same people charged with oversight of issuing permits for drilling who couldn't run their own regulatory agency efficiently...and none asked why inspections weren't completed or why rules were waived.

I usually look at things like this as a good show and laugh at the antics. This time I was simply ashamed to be associated with those people in any way.

kay

I feel the need...

the need to shed a tear for BP.

IMHO BP deserved a very through "public" lashing.

But I guess that's for you good people of the Gulf region to decide since you're affected more than anyone.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236558].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I agree - and they are getting bashed here every day. It's the farce that I objected to - and that's all it was.

This wasn't about the wildlife or the coast - it was about November. I didn't feel sorry for Hayward - just felt embarrassed by behavior of those asking the questions.

Just my take on it. One of my TV's died this morning - that's probably their fault, too

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236595].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Although BP is definitely one of the worst, if not worst, oil companies in regards to reckless behavior and "accidents", the problem is really industry wide. Here's one example:

The tricky process of sealing an offshore oil well with cement - suspected as a major contributor to the Gulf of Mexico disaster - has failed dozens of times in the past, according to an Associated Press investigation.

Yet federal regulators give drillers a free hand in this crucial safety step - another example of lax regulation regarding events leading up to the April 20 explosion on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig.

Federal regulators don't regulate what type of cement is used, leaving it up to oil and gas companies. The drillers are urged to simply follow guidelines of the American Petroleum Institute, an industry trade group.

Far more stringent federal and state standards and controls exist on cement work for roads, bridges and buildings.

While the chain of failures on Deepwater Horizon is under investigation, rig owner Transocean has singled out cement work as one likely fundamental cause of the blowout.

Gulf Oil Spill: Bad Cement Jobs Are Common Problem At Offshore Rigs

So, since the cement work isn't regulated and has been singled out already as one of the major contributors to this spill, it seems like the logical thing is to make sure these new deep water drillings have some guidelines on how to do this in the safest way possible. Why hasn't this been done in the past? Heavy lobbying from the oil companies to congress is my guess. So Obama somehow gets the blame for having to deal with this issue now because others haven't dealt with it in the past? Doesn't make sense. Also, how is the moratorium part of an agenda? It actually will hurt Obama and the Dems in November. From what I can tell, this was the wise thing to do and was not at all political.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236675].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Although BP is definitely one of the worst, if not worst, oil companies in regards to reckless behavior and "accidents", the problem is really industry wide. Here's one example:

Gulf Oil Spill: Bad Cement Jobs Are Common Problem At Offshore Rigs

So, since the cement work isn't regulated and has been singled out already as one of the major contributors to this spill, it seems like the logical thing is to make sure these new deep water drillings have some guidelines on how to do this in the safest way possible. Why hasn't this been done in the past? Heavy lobbying from the oil companies to congress is my guess. So Obama somehow gets the blame for having to deal with this issue now because others haven't dealt with it in the past? Doesn't make sense. Also, how is the moratorium part of an agenda? It actually will hurt Obama and the Dems in November. From what I can tell, this was the wise thing to do and was not at all political.

Tim,

I have to mention something. I just HAVE to! And NOPE, this is NOT political!

You said: "Far more stringent federal and state standards and controls exist on cement work for roads, bridges and buildings." I have two words to say to that!

BIG DIG!

Mass. crisis of confidence - The Boston Globe

Federal and state prosecutors began a massive investigation into the role of all the companies and government agencies involved in designing, constructing, and overseeing the Interstate 90 connector tunnel ceiling, where a 2 1/2-ton concrete panel held in place by steel hangers plummeted onto a car late Monday, crushing 38-year-old Milena Del Valle to death.

So PLEASE don't make it sound like throughways are SAFE! HECK, I have to go through here once a month, FINGERS CROSSED! It doesn't even LOOK safe!

Cement is as much an art as it is a science, ESPECIALLY when dealing with tight schedules, hostile environments, etc.... Even very skilled and experienced workers have told me so. With the additives to reinforce it, alter the PH, curing times, etc.... Of course, the major problem they have with the big dig NOW seems to be the epoxy, used to hold the cement together against the metal structures.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236712].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Showing that on land cement construction can fail only makes the statement you quoted even more disturbing.

Originally Posted by seasoned

Tim,

I have to mention something. I just HAVE to! And NOPE, this is NOT political!

You said: "Far more stringent federal and state standards and controls exist on cement work for roads, bridges and buildings." I have two words to say to that!

BIG DIG!

Mass. crisis of confidence - The Boston Globe

So PLEASE don't make it sound like throughways are SAFE! HECK, I have to go through here once a month, FINGERS CROSSED! It doesn't even LOOK safe!

Cement is as much an art as it is a science, ESPECIALLY when dealing with tight schedules, hostile environments, etc.... Even very skilled and experienced workers have told me so. With the additives to reinforce it, alter the PH, curing times, etc.... Of course, the major problem they have with the big dig NOW seems to be the epoxy, used to hold the cement together against the metal structures.

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2238541].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned here, but there is a larger BP oil well platform 100 miles off of Louisiana which is said to a disaster waiting to happen. It's the Atlantis and a whistleblower claims it lacks key safety approvals when it was built. Here's an interview with the whistleblower:

YouTube - B.P. Whistleblower Warns Congress About...
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2238573].message }}
seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Showing that on land cement construction can fail only makes the statement you quoted even more disturbing.

YEAH, and it is EARIE how similar that is to the latest BP disaster:

BIG DIG TUNNEL COLLAPSE

The main contractor worked fast, and used new "technology" one would think might be subject to failure, though others said it was the BEST choice, and THEY get blamed.

The SUB contractor, for the epoxy, LIED, was incompetent, and fought to reduce their liability.

BP DISASTER

The main contractor worked fast, and used "technology" in HOSTILE areas one would think might be subject to failure, though it was the only choice they were given, and THEY get blamed.

The SUB contractor, for the BOP, LIED, was incompetent, and fought to reduce their liability.

BTW I am just pointing out that the sub contractors are getting off too easy. In BOTH cases the ability to get recovery is in question. BOTH spark the potential for a major industry wide backlash.

BTW that atlantis rig sounds SCARY. But I view it like ataomic bombs. Once it is producing, let them produce, and try to make sure it is as safe as possible. Otherwise, there can be a GREATER chance for disaster.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239115].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

I agree - and they are getting bashed here every day. It's the farce that I objected to - and that's all it was.

This wasn't about the wildlife or the coast - it was about November. I didn't feel sorry for Hayward - just felt embarrassed by behavior of those asking the questions.

Just my take on it. One of my TV's died this morning - that's probably their fault, too

You can call it a farce...

... I call it a well deserved, very public tongue lashing for a company that has time and time again shown a healthy disdain for the public good in it's search for profits.

This time that healthy disdain has come back to bite us all in the ass - especially the people of the Gulf region.

Does BP not have over...

...600 willful safety violations when the other oil companies have less than 10???

They deserve every bit they get and some.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239160].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

You can call it a farce...

... I call it a well deserved, very public tongue lashing for a company that has time and time again shown a healthy disdain for the public good in it's search for profits.

This time that healthy disdain has come back to bite us all in the ass - especially the people of the Gulf region.

Does BP not have over...

...600 willful safety violations when the other oil companies have less than 10???

They deserve every bit they get and some.

TL,

You don't understand!!!!!!! I think Kay AGREES wiith EVERYTHING you said above! And I do ALSO!!!!! What she was calling a farce is that it wasn't done right!

The GOAL should be...

1. PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT
2. STOP THE LEAK!
3. CLEAN UP THE MESS.
4. LEARN what happened, and how to prevent it
5. CHASTISE Those responsible, and MAKE THEM PAY TO THOSE AFFECTED!

Yet the meeting seemed to be more along the lines of CHASTISE, and make them keep a fund.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239413].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

TL,

You don't understand!!!!!!! I think Kay AGREES wiith EVERYTHING you said above! And I do ALSO!!!!! What she was calling a farce is that it wasn't done right!

The GOAL should be...

1. PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT
2. STOP THE LEAK!
3. CLEAN UP THE MESS.
4. LEARN what happened, and how to prevent it
5. CHASTISE Those responsible, and MAKE THEM PAY TO THOSE AFFECTED!

Yet the meeting seemed to be more along the lines of CHASTISE, and make them keep a fund.

Steve

You don't seem to understand ( and once again, I'm not surprised )

Once again...

She can call it a farce because of bla, bla, bla...

( and you're most welcome to agree with her,...

... just like you also agreed with that idiot congressmen when he apologized to BP)

But IMHO...

... I call it a well deserved, very public tongue lashing for a company that has time and time again shown a healthy disdain for the public good in it's search for profits.

This time that healthy disdain has come back to bite us all in the ass - especially the people of the Gulf region.

Does BP not have over...

...600 willful safety violations when the other oil companies have less than 10???

They deserve every bit they get and some.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239451].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Yeah, I don't understand some of the sympathy and understanding that BP gets. These guys should be charged with manslaughter. Hell, they are still cutting corners when it comes to the safety of the cleanup workers and lying through their teeth like scumbags.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

You don't seem to understand ( and once again, I'm not surprised )

Once again...

She can call it a farce because of bla, bla, bla...

( and you're most welcome to agree with her,...

... just like you also agreed with that idiot congressmen when he apologized to BP)

But IMHO...

... I call it a well deserved, very public tongue lashing for a company that has time and time again shown a healthy disdain for the public good in it's search for profits.

This time that healthy disdain has come back to bite us all in the ass - especially the people of the Gulf region.

Does BP not have over...

...600 willful safety violations when the other oil companies have less than 10???

They deserve every bit they get and some.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239578].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Yeah, I don't understand some of the sympathy and understanding that BP gets.

These guys should be charged with manslaughter.

Hell, they are still cutting corners when it comes to the safety of the cleanup workers and lying through their teeth like scumbags.

If it wasn't so sad it would be hilarious.

I think a lot of it is a....

"kneejerk reaction""

... to anything the admin does by guess who and their sympathizers.

The admin and a certain party are against clearly against BP so what does the other side and their supporters do???

Find ways to support and/or sympathize with BP - of all people.

Some people have no idea of the total damage this thing is going to cause.

I hear that 20bill is just a drop in the bucket and pennies on the dollar and BP will be paying for a generation.

Item Of Interest...

Most people that watch Fox News may have no idea the congressman apologized to BP cause FN won't show it to their viewers - amazing.

Why???

Here's the link if you're interested...

http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/002739/

All The best!!

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239727].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Most people that watch Fox News may have no idea the congressman apologized to BP cause FN won't show it to their viewers - amazing.
TL

I read he had to apologize for apologizing, and his seat on whatever
committee was threatened by his party leaders if he didn't.

Don't know if that was on TV since I don't watch it.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239751].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

I read he had to apologize for apologizing, and his seat on whatever
committee was threatened by his party leaders if he didn't.

Don't know if that was on TV since I don't watch it.

He has done what could be big damage to the repubs in NOV.

The repub leadership jumped all over him as soon as they recessed.

The apology is already making a great video clip for the dems and I bet millions will be spent by NOV. on commercials showing,

Barton, Bachman, Limbaugh etc. sucking up/sympathizing with BP.

The clip of the apology to BP is earlier in this thread.

He issued a written apology and re-traction for sucking up to BP.

Dude has received over 1 mill in contributions from the oil lobby since 1990.

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239800].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

He has done what could be big damage to the repubs in NOV.

The repub leadership jumped all over him as soon as they recessed.

The apology is already making a great video clip for the dems and I bet millions will be spent by NOV. on commercials showing,

Barton, Bachman, Limbaugh etc. sucking up/sympathizing with BP.

The clip of the apology to BP is earlier in this thread.

He issued a written apology and re-traction for sucking up to BP.

Dude has received over 1 mill in contributions from the oil lobby since 1990.

TL

Right, there was a lot of that in the article I read, but just kinda
glossed over it. I'm sure that video will be around for quite a while.

I know people have made the following point before in this thread,
but the line of responsibility is long. I'm sure there's major butt-covering
going on in this one.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239853].message }}

highhopes

16 years ago

China overtakes US as world's biggest CO2 emitter | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Oh China is now the biggest polluter of the environment USA is into second place!
Oh dear!

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Ways to grow your online business. Earning online tips for the home worker and essential steps to take to earn money online.
http://wwwtheearninghub.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2242499].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by highhopes

Oh China is now the biggest polluter of the environment USA is into second place!
Oh dear!

High hopes, indeed.

Just read an interesting article about oil rigs, how they're viewed and treated
by countries, etc. It has a bearing on everything that follows. Seems offshore
oil rigs are treated as ships, under international law, and companies can
register them in places where ships are commonly registered. In the case of
the Deepwater Horizon, it was registered in the Marshall Islands. Also, this
process reduces the involvement of other countries, such as the US, when it
comes to enforcing things like safety standards, etc.

Amazingly, the primary responsibility for safety inspections and other processes
belonged to the Marshall Islands. How about that? Doesn't it kinda seem like
everyone knew the Marshall Islands wouldn't be exactly on top of everything? Or,
it was the process already in place, and everyone knew the truth due to the
existence of this system, so it was pretty convenient for all parties involved.

"Oh... well, safety inspections? Ummm, yeah... the Marshall Islands registry will
be taking care of it. It'll be ah'ight." (COUGH)

The Deepwater Horizon was registered in a category that allowed for the minimal
amount of operational staffing.

LA Times article...

Foreign flagging of offshore rigs skirts some U.S. safety rules - latimes.com

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2243515].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Interesting article in yesterday local paper. Investigative reporter found oil rigs (including deepwater rigs) are still being approved for the Gulf even though there is a moratorium in place.

What is shocking is they are approved with the SAME WAIVERS of environmental reports and inspections as the Deepwater Horizon was - approvals are being given by MMS.

Shell game?
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2243543].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Some local reporters have been investigating and testing some of the processes to remove oil - and some of them are impressive and inexpensive to use.
  
  There are several products with micro organisms that inventors claim are safe for the environment and wildlife that would seem useful for the affected marshes and wetlands. The organisms decompose the oil and the rest of the product absorbs it and can be remove or will decompose naturally in a small amount of time.
  
  And now - right now - would be an excellent time to be testing these products - all of them - on the oil to see WHICH ones really work. This won't be the last oil spill but we could at least learn something from it.
  
  kay
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2243562].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

High hopes, indeed.

Just read an interesting article about oil rigs, how they're viewed and treated
by countries, etc. It has a bearing on everything that follows. Seems offshore
oil rigs are treated as ships, under international law, and companies can
register them in places where ships are commonly registered. In the case of
the Deepwater Horizon, it was registered in the Marshall Islands. Also, this
process reduces the involvement of other countries, such as the US, when it
comes to enforcing things like safety standards, etc.

Amazingly, the primary responsibility for safety inspections and other processes
belonged to the Marshall Islands. How about that? Doesn't it kinda seem like
everyone knew the Marshall Islands wouldn't be exactly on top of everything? Or,
it was the process already in place, and everyone knew the truth due to the
existence of this system, so it was pretty convenient for all parties involved.

"Oh... well, safety inspections? Ummm, yeah... the Marshall Islands registry will
be taking care of it. It'll be ah'ight." (COUGH)

The Deepwater Horizon was registered in a category that allowed for the minimal
amount of operational staffing.

LA Times article...

Foreign flagging of offshore rigs skirts some U.S. safety rules - latimes.com

Interesting, I THOUGHT the marshall islands were a possession. They WERE until 1986! The old government STILL supports them. Which government is it? Well, one of their OFFICIAL languages is ENGLISH! The majority of the people are PROTESTANT. Give up? The country that basically USED to run EVERYTHING, and STILL supports them, via money and defense, is the US!!!!!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2243968].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

What's also interesting is that basically Barton was saying what was the GOBP party line except for the apology part. "A day before Barton's blunder, a high-ranking member of the GOP leadership, Rep. Tom Price of Georgia, accused the White House of "exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics." Several other GOBP members strongly crticized the $20 billion fund. By the way, polls have shown an overwhelming majority of Americans approve of the $20 billion fund. One poll had 80% approval.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Most people that watch Fox News may have no idea the congressman apologized to BP cause FN won't show it to their viewers - amazing.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239870].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Looks like the focus on Hayward is working. He went back to the UK for the first time - and today there are blogs and news sites complaining that he will attend a one day boat race in England this weekend and have some time with his family. The comments are that Hayward should not do anything except work on the leak - does anyone think he isn't available by phone if needed.
  
  If constant attention is necessary - wouldn't that apply to those who say they are in charge - but have time to play golf and campaign?
  
  Just sayin - it gets silly.
  
  No one - leader or CEO - should have to give up his entire life for months at a time. Often it's the time away from a problem that helps to focus on the perspective and the problem.
  
  kay
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239945].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

The thing is - BP gets tongue lashed here every day by those who are directly affected. But so does MMS and a few others.

It's not any sympathy for BP or for Hayward on my part. It's disdain for supposed leaders who are deliberately ignoring the trail of responsibility that leads in part to their door.

It's the deliberate attempt to get two minutes of sound bite expressing outrage asking the same question that you know cannot legally be answered at this time while investigations are ongoing. Mini-rants for the cameras and the public - "see how serious and outraged we are".

It was not a questioning session that was part of an investigation - it was grandstanding. Point all your fingers at one person in the hope that the public will forget that YOU knew for 3 years there were problems at MMS and did nothing.

When you have already done your sound bites touting a criminal investigation - do you really expect one of your targets to chat openly about what specifically happened?

It was a day when common sense rode in the back seat - and we've a lot of those lately.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239734].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Sounds like some damn good questions here. No grandstanding. Just trying to get important questions answered.

YouTube - Rep. Dingel Questions BP CEO Tony...

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239796].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Sounds like some damn good questions here. No grandstanding. Just trying to get important questions answered.

YouTube - Rep. Dingel Questions BP CEO Tony Hayward

Gee, he asked Tony the SAME question several times! He insisted YES/NO on a question that was CLEARLY not that way! Basically, what they said wanted was:

"We know that THESE are things that might have been done differently"

"We suspect they weren't done to save time/money"

"Tell us the time/money, so we can build our case and CONVICT YOU!"!

In other words, on my little priority chart, they are working on #5, and DAMN #4! What they SHOULD do is work on #4, and use THAT to build a case for #5!

So why didn't dingle just send the questions, so he would get the answers?

BTW one time my old boss started to tell a customer how he could save money/time by backing up a compressed disk. I told him "NO, *****NEVER***** tell your customer that!"! He asked me "WHY?" I said that he could use OTHER programs that may get BETTER compression, and backup via files. It would be a bit slower and MAYBE a bit more expensive, so WHY did I suggest it? Because if the other backup method had evven ONE bad byte, it could have wiped out the WHOLE backup! With the suggestion I made one bad byte could only hurt one file.

Sometimes the things that sound like they would help WON'T!!!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2240294].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Everyone on here who is strongly supporting the moratorium should ask yourself if you are willing to support it with more than just words. Demanding all these wells be shut down, and all these people be put out of work is an easy thing demand, but what sacrifices are you willing to make for it?

If you want the moratorium to be implemented right now as it stands, a 6 month ban, that WILL cost tens of thousands of people their jobs than you should have to make a sacrifice as well. Are you willing to stop driving your car to go to work, or stop using airplanes to travel the country, what about buy food from grocery stores that are only available because of the gasoline needed to produce and transport them, are you willing to part with the clothes that you wear, the appliances you use every single day?

If anyone here truly supports this moratorium than you should stop using all these things, and take the money you save to support the tens of thousands of men and women who will lose their jobs because of this. What's the point of demanding that all this oil production be put to a halt, if you are still going to go home and utilize it in every facet of your life.

This is not a fun little argument taking place over the internet for them, this is their lives. Most of them have worked hard their whole lives, and most of the companies they work for are guilty of nothing more than being in the oil business.

If you think that I am just some ignorant conservative (I don't like either political party) who cares nothing about the environmental impact of the oil, know this, that THIS IS MY STATE being effected. I've lived here my whole life, I love every part of it, whether it is the delicious sea food that is harvested from the gulf, the beautiful wetlands, the amazing wildlife, or the wonderful people that live here. I don't want any of these things to happen, I want to protect the wildlife and the jobs of hardworking people. Sadly there is not much I can do about it.

I want the rigs to be safe, I don't want to see Louisiana's wetlands destroyed or it's wildlife threatened, and I don't want to put thousands of people out of work because of one companies stupidity. I'm not stupid enough to think that we can live off fossil fuels forever, but I'm also not naive enough to think that we can just get rid of it overnight, it's a slow process, and ironically enough it is one that will require a lot of oil to be properly put into place.

So, in demanding such a harsh sacrifice from so many people, are you willing to make sacrifices yourself? Are you willing to give up the vital service that these people have been providing you for years? Are you actually going to do something about it, or are you just typing letters on a keyboard?

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235807].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Everyone on here who is strongly supporting the moratorium should ask yourself if you are willing to support it with more than just words. Demanding all these wells be shut down, and all these people be put out of work is an easy thing demand, but what sacrifices are you willing to make for it?

Well, I KNOW how machinery can be if it is just ABANDONED. And I have heard that even a few months could be risky. Let's lower the risk, by at least letting the existing ones continue normal non drilling operations.

If you think that I am just some ignorant conservative (I don't like either political party) who cares nothing about the environmental impact of the oil, know this, that THIS IS MY STATE being effected. I've lived here my whole life, I love every part of it, whether it is the delicious sea food that is harvested from the gulf, the beautiful wetlands, the amazing wildlife, or the wonderful people that live here. I don't want any of these things to happen, I want to protect the wildlife and the jobs of hardworking people. Sadly there is not much I can do about it.

I went there one time, to work for several months, and never even bothered to see mardigras. 8-( I don't live there, but I DON'T like the look, smell, feel, of oil, don't want it on beaches or animals, etc....

I want the rigs to be safe, I don't want to see Louisiana's wetlands destroyed or it's wildlife threatened, and I don't want to put thousands of people out of work because of one companies stupidity. I'm not stupid enough to think that we can live off fossil fuels forever, but I'm also not naive enough to think that we can just get rid of it overnight, it's a slow process, and ironically enough it is one that will require a lot of oil to be properly put into place.

AGREED!

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235913].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

Again, from what I have heard only 33 have been stopped. There are over 5000 still in operation. That's a small percentage.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Demanding all these wells be shut down,
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235954].message }}
- TLTheLiberator 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  Again, from what I have heard only 33 have been stopped. There are over 5000 still in operation. That's a small percentage.
  
  Does anyone know how many people are employed on average per each of these deep sea wells??
  
  How many jobs are we talking about???
  
  Is BP going to take care of those folks of the 33 wells while the moratorium is on??
  
  ( is that what the 100 million is for??? )
  
  and...
  
  If BP is going to take care of those deep sea folks while the moratorium is on ...
  
  what's the fuss??
  
  Why take any chances with another spill after what we already know?????????
  
  TL
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2235983].message }}
  
  TimPhelan 16 years ago
  
  That's the thing TL, I am suspicious of these numbers pundits are putting out there. Tens of thousands? For stopping NEW drilling? Whenever these numbers are brought up they talk about the ripple effect it has on the economy. Well, over 5000 wells will still be creating a pretty good ripple effect.
  
  Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator
  
  How many jobs are we talking about???
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  Over 50 Dating
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236042].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Tim, the ones that are in production in shallow water, only have very small crews, the large deep water rigs employ by far the most people. There are a lot more people involved than just the people on the rig. There are the boats that transport the oil from the rig, oil refineries, all the companies that provide equipment to these rigs, all the pipelines that transport the oil, and many more. And by the way, 1/3 of oil produced in the US comes from offshore, and 80% of offshore production comes from deepwater in Louisiana.

I don't know how many people you think are going to lose their jobs from this, I'm sure the media makes it seem like it will hardly have any effect on LA jobs at all, but people will lose their jobs, a lot of people. The rigs have already started leaving, pipeline companies are shutting down, oil shipping is running out of business. So please don't throw percentages around like they explain everything, it may be a small percentage of the total rigs in the gulf, but those deepwater rigs are by far the most important when it comes to production and employment.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236024].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Hey DukkyMan...

For whatever it's worth, I think you have a fine state. I agree.
It's been a long time since I've been there.

I went to tech school in Biloxi MS in 76-77 for almost a year. A
bunch of us went to Mardi Gras for a long weekend and had one
helluva good time. It was great, and the people there were
very friendly and nice.

My ex-sister in law is from Shreveport. I've known her since I was
9 yrs old. And I used to work with a guy from somewhere in Louisiana,
can't remember where. Randy Carpenter. He's an old-school union
guy who has worked in refineries and nuke plants all his life. I worked
with Randy for almost 11 yrs at a nuke plant.

He's a great guy, still has an accent from that area where he came
from. Has a million funny stories to tell. He's the kind of guy who'll risk
himself to help you. I've seen him do it. He's one of the few I would trust
my life with.

Ken

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236043].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Liberator, from what I've heard from some rig workers, some of the deepwater rigs, which are much larger in size compared to the shallow water rigs, employ around 1,000 people. Now I don't think that number means people that are on it full time, but people take helicopters/boats out to them all the time, so all in all around 1,000 people end up working directly with the rigs. Now that number does not include the thousands those rigs employ indirectly.

The explosion on the deepwater horizon happened because a BP official on board pressed on with production, even though numerous rig workers told him to shut it off. The workers on the rig knew that they were on the verge of a disaster, but the BP official wouldn't stop production. There are articles on this, I'm not sure where. Basically what this means to me is, if the rigs get inspected to pass safety regulations, and there is someone put in charge who is an experienced on rigs, and who doesn't answer to the oil company, than they know when to shut down a rig. This is the first time something like this has happened, and it's because a company was cutting corners to save money, this whole thing could have been avoided.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236064].message }}

butters

16 years ago

What I am confused about personally, the US banks messed up the world and they get away fairly easily personally and BP has a leak and they are the devil. So why are the banks getting away with what they did but BP is being made to pay every penny. I would say we depend on oil just as much as banks... (I am not saying that BP shouldn't pay etc, they should, I am just throwing in another question).

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236103].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by butters

What I am confused about personally, the US banks messed up the world and they get away fairly easily personally and BP has a leak and they are the devil. So why are the banks getting away with what they did but BP is being made to pay every penny. I would say we depend on oil just as much as banks... (I am not saying that BP shouldn't pay etc, they should, I am just throwing in another question).

Well, the US bank's garbage, REALLY actually from shady investments, is kind of HIDDEN! HECK, a finnish(?) city lost its shirt because they invested in "structured securities" that seemed like the CMOs that failed because of the paper banks shuffled around to make fees and spreads. So there loss was not DIRECTLY related, but INDIRECTLY. And companies WERE going to do things with that town and now CAN'T. AND some of the first hit KNEW what they were doing. They brought it on themselves.

FURTHER, people view it as a natural thing, or man made and easily recovered from. HECK, 1929 was the SAME way! Look at the two! HECK, 1929 was mostly due to a fantastic bull market(in stocks), free capital, and margin(loans on stock). 2008 was due to a fantastic bull market(in homes), free capital, and mortgages(loans on homes). NORMALLY the later wouldn't be THAT bad, but many of those mortgages were on worthless things, or for people that wouldn't pay. This is remarkable since around 1999, capital was all but STOPPED, but that caused a crash, and they have basically lowered it ever since.

With BP, the world saw it unfold and there are only a few they feel deserve the blame.

Yeah I know, it STILL sounds STUPID! Your question is STILL basically unanswered, but I figured I would add SOME things.

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236392].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Thanks Ken I'm glad you enjoyed your time here, it really is a wonderful place, and everyone should come to Mardi Gras (or Carnival as we call it) at least once.

Tim I don't know how I can make it any more clear to you than I did in my last post. If you think that people aren't losing their jobs over this than come on down and see for yourself. I have actually talked to people who are already being put out of work, and not just rig workers. One of my friends works on the onshore heli-port for one of the rigs, his jobs gone, I talked to a guy who has been in the oil pipeline business for 20 years, he now has to find an entirely new line of work. Rigs are already picking up and leaving. I can see that you like that 5,000 well number, but it is the deepwater wells that provide the most jobs, BY FAR. Please stop saying that it's not a big deal because of the numerous shallow water rigs, less informed people will think you are right.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236110].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Dukky,

I haven't said that there aren't jobs that will be lost because of the moratorium. Or that it isn't a big deal. I'm just saying that most of the oil production in the gulf is still ongoing. New deep water drilling has been suspended and it is prudent because of the catastrophic oil spill. Blame the causes of the oil spill for the moratorium. That's where it should be. Plus, as TL points out there is a $100 million dollar fund available for these job loses and that does not seem to have a cap.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Tim I don't know how I can make it any more clear to you than I did in my last post. If you think that people aren't losing their jobs over this than come on down and see for yourself. I have actually talked to people who are already being put out of work, and not just rig workers. One of my friends works on the onshore heli-port for one of the rigs, his jobs gone, I talked to a guy who has been in the oil pipeline business for 20 years, he now has to find an entirely new line of work. Rigs are already picking up and leaving. I can see that you like that 5,000 well number, but it is the deepwater wells that provide the most jobs, BY FAR. Please stop saying that it's not a big deal because of the numerous shallow water rigs, less informed people will think you are right.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236349].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Dukky,

I haven't said that there aren't jobs that will be lost because of the moratorium. Or that it isn't a big deal. I'm just saying that most of the oil production in the gulf is still ongoing. New deep water drilling has been suspended and it is prudent because of the catastrophic oil spill. Blame the causes of the oil spill for the moratorium. That's where it should be. Plus, as TL points out there is a $100 million dollar fund available for these job loses and that does not seem to have a cap.

The Oil production thats still allowed to go on the gulf only produces less than 20% of offshore oil, 80% of offshore oil comes from deepwater rigs in LA, and offshore oil makes up 1/3 of all oil produced in the US.

I'm going to Blame BP for the spill, they have admitted they didn't follow regulations, and their failure to do so, and ignore the warnings of workers on the rigs, is what led to the explosion. Why should all of the other rigs be punished? As of yet, none of them have been found to have done anything wrong. I will blame Obama and the federal government for the moratorium. I doubt it should take 6 months to send out inspectors to those rigs, make sure they are following safety protocol, and than even put extra precautions/supervisors in place. In his address to the nation he was talking like they had no idea what wrong on the rig, when workers from that rig have stated numerous times that BP kept pushing the rig on, when there were numerous warning signs to stop, some workers on that rig said they told their wives a week in advance that something bad was going to happen.

As I stated in an earlier post, rig workers make on average $75,000 a year in LA. Lets just say that only 10,000 people lose their jobs, that leaves only $10,000 per person from that fund. What happens when the number of people unemployed starts to increase? That $100 mill will quickly run out, and on top of clean up costs, paying damages to gulf coast citizens, and now having to pay unemployed rig and oil industry workers, how long will BP be able to avoid bankruptcy? What happens when they have no more money to pay for all this?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236476].message }}

highhopes

16 years ago

It seems the USA Government lives in big glass house! Nothing has changed
The USA Versus the Environment: Oil, Pollution and Kyoto

Thanks

Signature

Ways to grow your online business. Earning online tips for the home worker and essential steps to take to earn money online.
http://wwwtheearninghub.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236381].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

The only way anything will ever change is if the American people
demand it as a whole or at least a strong majority. I do believe there's
a gap, or chasm, that exists between what people want and believe
and what happens in DC.

Seems to me if you would stop and ask people on the street, they'll
say they would support measures to reduce dependence on oil, an
energy policy focused on cleaner or greener industries, etc.

As I see it, the major problem is there's a historical and chronic tendency
for stronger and more influential forces to shape policy decisions in DC. We
all can take a good guess at all the forces involved.

Just looking at it objectively, this has been going on for well over 100 years
in this country. It is an institutional problem, and the only force that is
greater is the united voice of the people. Nothing else will change the way
things are done.

This morning, for whatever reason, I was thinking about all the trillions that
have been spent on excursions into foreign countries. We all know this country
has the resources and financial ability to develop alternative energy industries.

Just off the top of my head, I am most impressed with depolymerization and fusion.
Others with proven potential are wind, solar, and thermal. Based on my experience
working in the nuke industry, it is significantly safer than fossil in many respects. One
valid issue people have with nuclear concerns spent fuel waste. But some years
ago I did some reading about research to recycle, or reconvert, spent fuel rods into
safer materials. Hardly no money is spent on that, though.

The thing about change on a massive scale is that it usually requires some kind of
event that is so great that it wakes up everyone. Unfortunately, change-inducing
events tend to be extremely unpleasant. This phenomena occurs on the micro and
macro levels, from individuals to society to the planet. I believe it may take something
like this to cause the kind of change we want to see regarding energy industries and
policies.

Hopefully that event won't kill most of the planet.

[ 3 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2236471].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Article about how the countries offering us aid all asked us for money in return.

I'm not sure exactly what to think of this. I can understand why some of the poorer countries on this list would ask for money, but there are other ones on here that are asking for money that is just ridiculous.

Props to Mexico for being the only one who asked for nothing in return.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2237258].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Article about how the countries offering us aid all asked us for money in return.

I'm not sure exactly what to think of this. I can understand why some of the poorer countries on this list would ask for money, but there are other ones on here that are asking for money that is just ridiculous.

Props to Mexico for being the only one who asked for nothing in return.

Well, Mexico may well get 100s of BILLIONS from us EVERY YEAR. Nobody really knows how much. BUT, if a neighbor has taken say 50% of EVERYTHING you ever made, you shouldn't laud them for being the only one that hasn't asked you for a dime! Besides, Mexico KNOWS they will start to get hurt before most of the US REALLY suffers. It is in their best interest,

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2237639].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Did you hear the LATEST garbage!?!?!? Some barges that were to help with the spill were orderred to STOP while the COAST GUARD!!!!!!! The COAST GUARD!!!!!! searched to validate that they had proper life vests, etc....

TALK ABOUT LACK OF PRIORITIES!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2237770].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

That's been the coast guard effectiveness for two months.

News tonight is that Hayward is leaving the coast and heading back to the U.K.

It's being presented as "being sent back" but I'll always wonder if that is a cover. Hayward didn't cause this leak and wasn't involved when the platform was built. Did anyone expect him to give a full accounting of the errors that led to the explosion - while there are multiple investigations already under way?

He worked well with Allen until it was announced that D.C. was in charge - and then Allen distanced himself from Hayward. Several people here as well as myself have wondered if there was a campaign to make Hayward a scapegoat - would take the attention off the other incompetents.

Maybe it's true that he was told to go home by the BP Chairman - but I have to wonder if hayward insisted on it after the exhibition yesterday.

The new guy has been around, too, but mainly in DC - forget his name but he's from the US. Now if we could get Allen replaced....

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2238233].message }}

myob

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

That's been the coast guard effectiveness for two months.

News tonight is that Hayward is leaving the coast and heading back to the U.K.

It's being presented as "being sent back" but I'll always wonder if that is a cover. Hayward didn't cause this leak and wasn't involved when the platform was built. Did anyone expect him to give a full accounting of the errors that led to the explosion - while there are multiple investigations already under way?

He worked well with Allen until it was announced that D.C. was in charge - and then Allen distanced himself from Hayward. Several people here as well as myself have wondered if there was a campaign to make Hayward a scapegoat - would take the attention off the other incompetents.

Maybe it's true that he was told to go home by the BP Chairman - but I have to wonder if hayward insisted on it after the exhibition yesterday.

The new guy has been around, too, but mainly in DC - forget his name but he's from the US. Now if we could get Allen replaced....

Hayward wasn't "sent back"; he's off to attend a yacht race.

As oil spews in Gulf, BP chief at UK yacht race

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239826].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

One more and that'll about be the end of it in a lot of ways. Won't
be surprised.

Humans sure know how to F things up pretty good.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2238793].message }}

TLTheLiberator 16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

One more and that'll about be the end of it in a lot of ways. Won't
be surprised.

Humans sure know how to F things up pretty good.

Don't blame the whole Human race.

Greedy Humans know how to F things up even better.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239023].message }}
- KenThompson 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator
  
  Don't blame the whole Human race.
  
  Greedy Humans know how to F things up even better.
  
  lol. Well, wasn't talking about you, TL.
  
  Maybe seasoned, but not you...
  
  Easy, Steve, that was a joke.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239038].message }}
  
  seasoned 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by KenThompson
  
  lol. Well, wasn't talking about you, TL.
  
  Maybe seasoned, but not you...
  
  Easy, Steve, that was a joke.
  
  STILL, why pick on ME?
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239148].message }}
  
  Kay King 16 years ago
  
  The Atlantis is interesting - and probably an example of rather strange management considering 35 wells or so are on a moratorium.
  
  There have been several whistleblowers claiming Atlantis is high risk of an accident - and rumors from rig workers, too. Yet Atlantis remains in full operation in the Gulf.
  
  The claims are being investigated by MMS (according to our local paper a while back) - not too reassuring.
  
  When Deepwater Horizon exploded the first thing I heard was from a rig worker I know who said "I'd have sworn it would be Atlantis".
  
  kay
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239178].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Well I got curious about Atlantis. Not good, folks. It's a time bomb.

"In 2008, a year after Atlantis started production, an internal BP e-mail states: "There are hundreds, if not thousands, of subsea documents that have not been finalized. For Atlantis, this could lead to catastrophic operator error."

In 2009 the whistleblower notified the Minerals Management Service, which regulates the energy business, about those documents.

Corrigan says MMS did nothing for a year.

"It was only after 19 members of Congress sent a letter expressing concern, that MMS finally launched an investigation this spring," Corrigan said."

If BP doesn't shut this thing down, I don't know what to say. I hate
to sound like such a gawd-awful old timer full of war stories, or worse,
but if that was a nuke plant it never would have gotten off the ground.
You have no idea of how little it takes for a nuke plant to voluntarily
either reduce power, to fix something, or shut down if necessary - or
else be forced to shut down with possible fines and other penalties.

Compared to nuclear, fossil regs are a total and complete joke. Accountability,
fossil isn't even in the same league.

Here's the rest:

BP urged to shut down ?Atlantis? oil rig amid safety concerns | khou.com | KHOU.com Home Page

Edit: Got to thinking about my radioactive days. You know, if an employee
is proven to purposely withhold any kind of information about any safety
issues, at the very least they'll be fired. The maximum is federal prison. And
that is for any employee.

I've seen things going on where people said, we have to make a decision or
call the NRC within the hour to report and then shut down. And there are lots
of scenarios in which no matter what happens, they have to self-report to
the NRC and INPO (Institute of Nuclear Power Operations - a nuke industry
internal oversight group).

That's why all of these revelations just blow me away. It's a joke. A sad one.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239281].message }}

rickdearr

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

BP sucks, and now they do not want to take responsibily for anything, and now they are asking a judge to limit their lawsuits to $27m bucks...If you are greedy on wallstreet, you crash our economy, if you want to save a buck, you sink a oil rig.

I do not care if BP has to take out a loan..our govt should make BP
to pay 100% of the cleanup...$27m is just damn insulting!!!!!!

BP wants to blame others, and not take liability....

They can't cap the spill, we can't cap the suit....

Thanks

Signature

Rick Dearr
RnR Marketing, LLC
Sandy, Utah 84070
http://www.winnerscircletraining.com/gonow
90 Second Video - Free Access

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239389].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Everyone needs a little down time, Paul.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239840].message }}

Dayor

16 years ago

If this were to be a third world country, they would have got away with it. Am sure if we check history, they have done worse else were and was coverd up while the residents are languishing.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2239918].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Dayor

If this were to be a third world country, they would have got away with it. Am sure if we check history, they have done worse else were and was coverd up while the residents are languishing.

NO THEY WOULDN'T! It is TOO BIG! I mean look at this, it has already started affecting much of the south coast of the US. If this happened elsewhere, some country would likely have investigated and acted just like we are NOW.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2240318].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Kurt - there's a pretty large wind farm in Goldendale WA. It's really awesome to go up there and drive around. There are also a lot of old abandoned farm houses, so you have the archaic mixed with the modern technology and it's really a surreal adventure to go there -- not unplesant, just surreal.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2240800].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

And people like you...

... who claim everything is a Super-Konspiracy and gov never has and never will do anything right scares the living s**t out of me as well.

( not really, since you're seriously outnumbered )

- You have stated on numerous occasions in this forum that this nation is toast and can't correct itself.

You're a real Yankee doodle dandy.

When it comes to HC , so-called end of life issues...

...I'm sure the fed gov will be 100X nicer about everything than the private corps you support whom have run roughshod over the American people.

Why?

The feds are not in it and shouldn't be in it for the profit - unlike the companies you support.

But you were/are all for all that crap continuing.

Thanks to reckless people like you,...

... it's highly possible that tens of millions of families will have end of life health, family, legal, estate and financial problems amplified because of your reckless scare tactics...

... all over a free and voluntary consulting session - every 5 years.

It's not even in that final bill anymore - thanks to folks like you.

You and that stupid-ass lady from Alaska - on the same page...

... is all I need to know.

- But I suspect, your real opposition to the HC bill revolves around the mandate.

Like a lot of self-employed people...

You're probably not paying for a formal HC service plan now and the mandate will change that situation.

If you are, I stand corrected.

( BTW, it's none of my business and I'm not trying to make you air your business in public - so don't bother responding with your personal details )

In regards to the cap & trade energy bill...

- I can find plenty of people who are lots more qualified than you to refute your claims about the carbon/emissions etc.

- And there's plenty of evidence that your fears about a massive new tax on Americans won't be realized.

- And the fed gov can accelerate our nation's move to alternate energy sources by decades instead of the piecemeal progress you site in your pleas for the feds to leave us alone.

I think we have another example of the "Anti-Obama, "kneejerk reaction -in action" ...

...going on here but with you...

... it goes a bit deeper as it seems like any fed gov action on anything scares the _________ out of you.

Have a nice day!

TL

I won't even dignify some of that crap with an answer. I can imagine you foaming at the mouth when you wrote it, though.

You can "take it" any way you want it. I see more than a slight knee-jerk reaction in that spiel, too. I didn't see anything that made sense, though. Just a lot of ranting.

I'm betting you've never talked to a real scientist face to face in your life.

For every one that supports your idea of CO2 there are several who don't. My stance goes along with those that don't. So prove them wrong. It's a lot more solid to do so than to rant garbage about someone destroying the lives of millions of people because they are in opposition to you.

I will say I think there was a lot of behind the scenes deals made in the contracting of BP for this drill - they have a disastrous track record yet they were allowed to do this drill. Sorry - hiring a company that has explosions and leaks all throughout their history, and an incident of stabbing the US in the back on oil sales doesn't make sense to me in the least when there are a lot of very safely operating companies to choose from.

I might be a nut case but on the energy bill - there is a more than 50% majority that doesn't want it. So you have a lot more hate posts to make -- there are a lot of people you will want to call nuts etc. that don't read this forum. If the public majority and scientific majority has their way there will not be a cap and trade legislation - at least revolving around CO2.

Being that you want energy legislation though -- this one will mandate that we cut carbon emissions to a rate that hasn't been seen since the 1800's. Would you like to tell us how you see that happening with a population 3 times what it was back then? And please give examples of ways that aren't being undertaken already.

So far on the list we have Japan's technology for replanting desertificated ground (which happens to be one of the most pressing environmental issues of our time, even though the press isn't talking about it).
We have solar plants being planned - wind farms - electric cars.
Japan is developing plastic made from water (they have the soft plastic already and are now working on hard plastics).
We have a whole team of scientists working on using aglea farms on desertificated soil for ethanol and to fix the desertificated soil so it can be planted again.
Helium 3 is being discussed.
Bacterias that eat some pollutants are being used.

Seems the word is already out and about that we need to get alternative energies and solutions to ecological damage out real fast. It seems that the answers we're finding are pretty good solutions, too.

What we really need to concentrate on now is cleaning up after BP and stop giving contracts to companies that have proven to cause problems because they wanna save a dime just because they have friends in the right places.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2240802].message }}

Paul Myers

16 years ago

Sal,

We have a whole team of scientists working on using aglea farms on desertificated soil for ethanol and to fix the desertificated soil so it can be planted again.

There's a guy here in Erie who's got some interesting stuff going in that area. He grows the various strains of algae on vertical plates, if you can picture that. Streams water from sewage in, and that feeds the algae.

I asked him questions about it for a couple of hours, and heard some of the most innovative thinking I've run into in a long time. The range of applications for this stuff is surprising. And the cost of his process is way lower than most algaculture experiments to date.

Paul

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

.
Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2240847].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

Sal,There's a guy here in Erie who's got some interesting stuff going in that area. He grows the various strains of algae on vertical plates, if you can picture that. Streams water from sewage in, and that feeds the algae.

I asked him questions about it for a couple of hours, and heard some of the most innovative thinking I've run into in a long time. The range of applications for this stuff is surprising. And the cost of his process is way lower than most algaculture experiments to date.

Paul

Paul - sounds like the same thing the team I was talking about is doing but they want to see it used on desertificated areas because it will strip the saline/sulfurs out of the depleted soil and also fertilize it so it can be replanted later. I can't remember who all in in that team - University of Oregon for one........you're guy might have connections with them somehow. That's why I chose their leader for the Nobel Peace Prize in that thread about "quit bitching unless you have a better nominee".

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246621].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

"quit bitching unless you have a better nominee".

Not to be political. SERIOUSLY, I would say the SAME thing if it were walt disney, or the guy that invited wiperblades.

A prize, such as the nobel prize, should NOT be given to someone because nobody better exists. ICSSMM!!!!!!!!!!

The prize should be given to the one MOST DESERVING OF THE PRIZE! Not only the BEST candidate, but one that actually DID something worthy of it. To do anything less would devalue the prize and lessen the prestige of all past and future winners.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246850].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Maybe I shouldn't say this, but geraldo, ON FOX, is talking about Tony Hayward. They are ALSO talking about barton's apology.

Anyway, Tony went to take part in a yacht race and said that so far he is lucky and hasn't been hurt physically but, as he says, he is a BRIT, so they can't hurt him.

OR, as a kindergartener would say, and he tried to say in part.... "NA NA NANA nA, YOU CAN'T HURT ME! Sticks and stones may break my bones but words won't hurt me".(He actually tried the say the sticks and stones part!)

Supposedly, his boat's name is BOB, and the brits generally DON'T feel sorry for BP, and view tony as clueless.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2241539].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

In related nausea, quite similar to... nevermind...

Did you know? There's been an oil spill in Nigeria that is estimated
to be the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez once a year...

for the past 50 years. Fifty... Five Oh, and not Jack Lord, either. Or
Dano.

In Nigeria, Oil Spills Are a Longtime Scourge - NYTimes.com

Think the Gulf is bad, have read a few books about the general rape
and carnage that has been going on Africa for quite a while. Involves
a lot of companies and agencies. A real production, and it's unimpeded
because it's Africa.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2243534].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Steve,

Don't get your boxers all choked up. Not sure about your point,
just posting an article.

Doesn't matter who supports them. If it's registered there, and
doing that restricts responsibility to them, then it does.

Are you upset about something?

If you want to get pissed off, read the article about Nigeria and
get pissed off about that, too.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2243991].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Steve,

Don't get your boxers all choked up. Not sure about your point,
just posting an article.

Doesn't matter who supports them. If it's registered there, and
doing that restricts responsibility to them, then it does.

Are you upset about something?

I'm not wearing boxers right now and am comfortable, except my knee still hurts. 8-(

Hey, I just thought it was interesting. NOPE, I'm not upset. Though, now that you mention it, WHY are they registering ships?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2244000].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

I'm not wearing boxers right now and am comfortable, except my knee still hurts. 8-(

Hey, I just thought it was interesting. NOPE, I'm not upset. Though, now that you mention it, WHY are they registering ships?

Steve

Why are the Marshall Islands registering ships? LOL, you're asking the wrong
guy, Steve. Why would anyone register ships? Seriously... no idea. No clue.

But good to hear you're not upset. Not worth getting upset about.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2244012].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

It's kind of hard to TELL sometimes if Steve is *********Angry********* or not BECAUSE of heavy use of the CAPS KEY!!!!!!!!! and Exclamation MARKS!! With me it's a little easier to tell usually. 8-)

Originally Posted by KenThompson

But good to hear you're not upset. Not worth getting upset about.
- Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2245336].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

And YEAH, the rigs ARE past waters that are generally recognized to be US waters. *****BUT***** they ARE affecting US waters. One would think that that would mean they are violating international law. In any event, NO decent person would DARE to claim the US has no rights in the matter. After all, if china sends up a conventional warhead, they are violating NO international laws. when it invades the airspace of another country, they basically have the right to shoot it down and complain. If the warhead lands on foreign soil, they have the right to retaliate. BP has done the same sort of thing with the OIL.

HEY, there are laws against causing waves in certain waters. I bet the coastguard or whatever would get on your case EVEN if your boat was outside their jurisdiction, because you are STILL breaking the law.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2243994].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Well yeah, I understand. That's similar to situations where a company, or
whoever, causes harm in a nearby state, country, etc.

Not sure how it works. Have to go yell at a lawyer, or somebody else.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2244007].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Hey, I just HAPPENED to read barron's a bit. Today's paper calls Hayward the new Sgt Schultz! Just so everyone understands, they ARE talking about the "hogan's heroes"! version! Hogan's Heroes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia He was probably the smartest "nazi" on the series, as he was the only one that knew what was going on, but every other nazi considered him a DOLT. Apparently they called Hayward this because he, like schultz said "I see NOOOOOOTHING. I know NOOOOOTHING.". Of course, Schultz always dreamed of making toys, and didn't like being a guard. I guess Tony just dreams of ships, and wouldn't touch oil if not for the undoubtedly BIG salary!

Note to paul. This has NOTHING to do with Godwin's theory. It is merely a funny coincidence.

steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2245722].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Kay's Gov in action...

JACKSON, Miss. -- Mississippi's Republican governor, Haley Barbour, said on Sunday that the temporary moratorium on offshore drilling imposed by the Obama administration is...

... worse than the catastrophic oil spill caused by the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig.

"Governor, what's worse,...

... the moratorium or the effects of this spill on the region?" asked "Meet the Press" host David Gregory on Sunday.

Barbour responded, ...

..."Well, the moratorium... the spill's a terrible thing, but the moratorium is a terrible thing that's not only bad for the region, it's bad for America."

As the Washington Monthly's Steve Benen notes,...

... "what Barbour neglected to mention is that Obama got BP to commit to a $100 million fund to compensate unemployed oil rig workers affected by the closure of other deepwater rigs."

Tough call!!

Here's the video...

YouTube - Former RNC Chair Says Drilling...

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246474].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Dukkyman's Gov in action...

Louisiana Governor Asks Judge to Lift Deepwater Drilling Ban

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and state Attorney General Buddy Caldwell asked a U.S. judge to lift a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico within 30 days to avoid “turning an environmental disaster into an economic catastrophe."

The drilling ban may cost Louisiana’s economy, “which was already weakened by Katrina and is now crippled by the Deepwater Horizon disaster," almost 11,000 direct and indirect jobs in five months, Caldwell said in papers filed yesterday in federal court in New Orleans.

“Even after the catastrophic events of Sept. 11, the government only shut down the airlines for three days," Caldwell said in support of Hornbeck Offshore Services LLC’s lawsuit seeking to end the moratorium.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246563].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Jindal has been a hero to many - he's out in the mess himself, talking to people and directing services. I don't claim Barbour who is in Jackson unless there's a film to be made on the coast.

Jindal is focused on finding solutions and getting out of work people paid - Barbour is focused on maintaining tourism and getting money for the state.

Just my opinion.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246598].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Jindal is trying mostly to restore his reputation so his political career will overcome his infamous rebutal speech of Obama's speech on the economy a year ago when Jindal was ridiculed widely and compared to Kenneth from 30 Rock. His is an opportunist who is good at making photo ops but his big idea of having berms built was perhaps the worse idea to come out of this disaster yet. Jindal reminds me of another political opportunist after a terrible disaster Rudy Giuliani who ran for President as a front runner until people actually had a chance to hear him speak about other things besides 9-11.

Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by Kay King

Jindal has been a hero to many - he's out in the mess himself, talking to people and directing services. I don't claim Barbour who is in Jackson unless there's a film to be made on the coast.

Jindal is focused on finding solutions and getting out of work people paid - Barbour is focused on maintaining tourism and getting money for the state.

Just my opinion.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246708].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Jindal is trying mostly to restore his reputation so his political career will overcome his infamous rebutal speech of Obama's speech on the economy a year ago when Jindal was ridiculed widely and compared to Kenneth from 30 Rock. His is an opportunist who is good at making photo ops but his big idea of having berms built was perhaps the worse idea to come out of this disaster yet. Jindal reminds me of another political opportunist after a terrible disaster Rudy Giuliani who ran for President as a front runner until people actually had a chance to hear him speak about other things besides 9-11.

Just my opinion.

When did jindal say the economy was doing GREAT!?!? When did Obama say the economy was SO bad? Frankly, Jindal has done MORE than he was allowed to. As bad as things are, they would probably be WORSE if he hadn't acted, and CERTAINLY would have been better if he were allowed to act.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246870].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

When did I say Jindal said the economy was doing GREAT!?!?! When did I say that Obama said the economy was doing SO bad?

Originally Posted by seasoned

When did jindal say the economy was doing GREAT!?!? When did Obama say the economy was SO bad?
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247113].message }}
- seasoned 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  When did I say Jindal said the economy was doing GREAT!?!?! When did I say that Obama said the economy was doing SO bad?
  
  Oh! You implied otherwise. Sorry.
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247206].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Hey everyone I just thought I would make a request. As we have discussed over and over there are 1000's of people that have and will lose their jobs because of this. The seafood industry has obviously taken a big hit, and they can use your help. Despite popular belief, a majority of Louisiana's seafood is fine, and still is some of the best in the world, but many out there think that it is all dangerous and effected by the oil. I'd ask you to consider the next time you go out to eat or go to the grocery store to request Louisiana seafood, in an effort to help out the local fishermen who have lost their way of life. I understand if you don't feel comfortable with that, its simply a request, and I am doing my best to help them out down here.

I know I may have been harsh and rude with some of you, I'm sorry about that, I just am at my wits end down here, so many days of sorrow and despair has all but removed the better part of me.

No matter what side of the argument you take on this whole thing, I am confident that I speak for Louisiana in that we appreciate that you have not forgotten about us. You know it seemed like things were finally getting better down here, people were moving back, businesses were up and running, hell even the Saints won the super bowl. And than this happened. I'm sure Kay feels the same way about Mississippi.

The country came together to save us before, and to see everyone do it again, really inspires in me more hope and warmth than any empty promise from a politician ever could. Thank you all for your concern and your constant vigil over this disaster, we need you now more than ever.

God bless

[ 2 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246721].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Rep. Phil Gingrey (Ga.), who sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee that grilled BP CEO Tony Hayward last week, said that he has had knowledgeable people advised him that the solution could cap the leak.

“For the life of me, I can’t understand why BP couldn’t go into the ocean floor, maybe 10 feet lateral to the – around the periphery – drill a few holes and put a little ammonium nitrate, some dynamite, in those holes and detonate that dynamite and seal that leak. And seal it permanently," he told Atlanta's WABE radio.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246748].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Rep. Phil Gingrey (Ga.), who sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee that grilled BP CEO Tony Hayward last week, said that he has had knowledgeable people advised him that the solution could cap the leak.

"For the life of me, I can't understand why BP couldn't go into the ocean floor, maybe 10 feet lateral to the - around the periphery - drill a few holes and put a little ammonium nitrate, some dynamite, in those holes and detonate that dynamite and seal that leak. And seal it permanently," he told Atlanta's WABE radio.

HECK, why don't they just bring in a backhoe, and fill it in!?!?!?!? OH YEAH, it is over a MILE under water, there is TONS of pressure on both sides, and NO AIR!!!!!!!!

To those that can't figure it out, I was giving another suggestion in joke form and then saying why it can't work. The ammonium nitrate, or dynamite, solution has the SAME problem. It might work on land. MAYBE they could do it in shallow water near the coast, but THERE!?!?!?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2246901].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

HECK, why don't they just bring in a backhoe, and fill it in!?!?!?!? OH YEAH, it is over a MILE under water, there is TONS of pressure on both sides, and NO AIR!!!!!!!!

To those that can't figure it out, I was giving another suggestion in joke form and then saying why it can't work. The ammonium nitrate, or dynamite, solution has the SAME problem. It might work on land. MAYBE they could do it in shallow water near the coast, but THERE!?!?!?

Steve

I'm just reporting the news.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247053].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I'm just reporting the news.

I was making fun of HIM, not you. Here is more news:

London's Sunday Times, without citing any sources, said BP planned to raise $10 billion from a bond sale, $20 billion from banks and $20 billion from asset sales over the next two years to cover the cost of the spill.

BP said last week it would suspend dividend payments to its shareholders and increase the pace of asset sales to $10 billion this year to offset liabilities from the spill, which began after an explosion on an offshore rig that killed 11 workers.

The Financial Times reported BP is considering doubling the $10 billion asset sale program as part of a push to strengthen the company's liquidity as it comes under financial pressure.

BP said 21,040 barrels of oil (883,680 gallons/3.34 million liters)) leaking from the well was collected by its siphoning systems Saturday. A large amount of oil continues to leak into the sea from the ruptured well a mile below the ocean surface despite the BP containment systems.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247163].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Anything new about stopping the leak? Haven't been following it.

I'm just reporting the news.

Dangerous hobby. People don't care who they shoot. Turns the
mild mannered into drooling zealots.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247071].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

As someone who is under the leadership of both Jindal and Obama, I would say that Jindal is doing a far better job than Obama. Jindal has been on top of this since day one, which the President has not been despite what he claims.

I hope Obama puts his promises into action from his presidential address, but Jindal has actually taken action, and without permission from the horrifically slow federal government.

Like with every politician Jindal has his faults, but at least in this time of crisis he has the stones to take decisive action, even when the red tape is everywhere.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247150].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

As someone who is under the leadership of both Jindal and Obama, I would say that Jindal is doing a far better job than Obama. Jindal has been on top of this since day one, which the President has not been despite what he claims.

I hope Obama puts his promises into action from his presidential address, but Jindal has actually taken action, and without permission from the horrifically slow federal government.

Like with every politician Jindal has his faults, but at least in this time of crisis he has the stones to take decisive action, even when the red tape is everywhere.

Of course you would a take Jindal over the POTUS.

Could Jindal have helped BP pony up the 20billion and the 100million anytime soon???

Congress couldn't do it.

The states couldn't do it.

What if Jindal's disastrous idea of the berms would have come to pass??

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247194].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Of course you would a take Jindal over the POTUS.

Could Jindal have helped BP pony up the 20billion and the 100million anytime soon???

Congress couldn't do it.

The states couldn't do it.

What if Jindal's disastrous idea of the berms would have come to pass??

TL

TL,

The rumor is that BP was PLANNING on setting aside 20billion! HECK, the NEW rumor is FIFTY billion! So maybe you can stop implying otherwise.

What was so bad about the berms, etc???

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247226].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

TL,

The rumor is that BP was PLANNING on setting aside 20billion! HECK, the NEW rumor is FIFTY billion! So maybe you can stop implying otherwise.

What was so bad about the berms, etc???

Steve

I'm sure the rumors started flying when word got out that the admin was after them to pony up.

Sure BP was going to put up the money without any pressure from anyone - sure.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247515].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Of course you would a take Jindal over the POTUS.

Could Jindal have helped BP pony up the 20billion and the 100million anytime soon???

Congress couldn't do it.

The states couldn't do it.

What if Jindal's disastrous idea of the berms would have come to pass??

TL

I don't understand on what grounds your labeling the berms as disastrous? They are making them by the way, so we will see eventually just how effective they are, and even if they don't stop the oil they are still a form of hurricane protection.

It took Obama 6 months to get that money from BP, and I don't know how much credit he deserves, they were more than willing to put that money aside. I am grateful to the President for his part in that process though.

Do you have any problems with Bobby J other than the fact that he is a Republican? Or the fact that he has shown more leadership in this disaster than the President? He has shown repeatedly through this event that he is willing to take action, and to take it quickly.

This is why I hate politics, because we are sitting here comparing these two leaders actions on the grounds of their Political affiliations, instead of the action they have taken to combat this spill in any way possible. If we were to look solely at who has done more, the winner as of now is Jindal, whether or not it will stay that way remains to be seen.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247498].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I don't understand on what grounds your labeling the berms as disastrous? They are making them by the way, so we will see eventually just how effective they are, and even if they don't stop the oil they are still a form of hurricane protection.

It took Obama 6 months to get that money from BP, and I don't know how much credit he deserves, they were more than willing to put that money aside. I am grateful to the President for his part in that process though.

Do you have any problems with Bobby J other than the fact that he is a Republican? Or the fact that he has shown more leadership in this disaster than the President? He has shown repeatedly through this event that he is willing to take action, and to take it quickly.

This is why I hate politics, because we are sitting here comparing these two leaders actions on the grounds of their Political affiliations, instead of the action they have taken to combat this spill in any way possible. If we were to look solely at who has done more, the winner as of now is Jindal, whether or not it will stay that way remains to be seen.

Sure, they were more than willing to put the money aside without any pressure on them what-so-ever.

Sure...

You injected politics into this discussion by equating the moratorium with some sort of agenda or you agreed when someone else did so.

I remember.

I wonder how fast those claims would have been paid without the admin jumping into the mix??

We'll see...

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247552].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

BP suggested setting up a fund for payouts that would be administered by a third party - many weeks ago. It was in a locally televised news conference and I heard it myself.

The 100 million fund was not requested - it was suggested by BP and that was acknowledged by the pres. it's good that both funds were addressed and I give credit for that - but it wasn't the overnight miracle some are thinking. Don't believe everything you hear - from either side.

Jindal is doing a great job - and suggesting otherwise or attributing it to an agenda shows a serious lack of understanding of what's going on down here. If you mold every fact so it seems to reflect well on your "person", it's not helpful and ends up not fact, either.

The problem is bad enough without people using it to promote agendas and pass on slanted facts.

The original plan for the berms was turned down by the corps of engineers who said the effect would be to route the oil onto MS coasts. That's why a smaller plan is being built - but I don't see how it will help at this point.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247601].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Sure, they were more than willing to put the money aside without any pressure on them what-so-ever.

Sure...

You injected politics into this discussion by equating the moratorium with some sort of agenda or you agreed when someone else did so.

I remember.

I wonder how fast those claims would have been paid without the admin jumping into the mix??

We'll see...

The way I read it, they put up the $20 Billion without any fuss. But you are right that you can't believe everything the media says, though I'm pretty sure the media would have had a field day if there had been any argument on BP's part when it came to putting the money forward for paying for damages.

When did I inject Politics into anything? I stated my opinion. Does the fact that I support the Berms and Oppose the Moratorium all the sudden make me Political? I believe I was stating my Gods honest opinion on what I think is the best course of action, and I could give a rats ass what any Jack Ass or Elephant in a nice expensive suite has to say about it.

Why does it have to be about POLITICS, do you see a "W" bumper sticker on my post, am I talking about "Change" we can all believe in? It comes down to doing what needs to be done, this damn thing is ruining people's lives and destroying the environment, I don't care if every last politician involved in this thing never sees office again after this is all done.

This is the state of mind that American's are in today. It's all political affiliations and hidden agendas, whose voting for who and who is to blame. When did it turn into a popularity contest and stop being about doing what is best for the country, and not for your re-election?

You've inspired me though. Check out my upcoming campaign that I have that is funded billions of dollars by big oil, tobacco, and environmentalists groups.

Brice for King of the North part of America "Give me money, and I'll make sure that I do what's in your best interest, as long as I can get re-elected"

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247608].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

The way I read it, they put up the $20 Billion without any fuss. But you are right that you can't believe everything the media says, though I'm pretty sure the media would have had a field day if there had been any argument on BP's part when it came to putting the money forward for paying for damages.

When did I inject Politics into anything? I stated my opinion. Does the fact that I support the Berms and Oppose the Moratorium all the sudden make me Political? I believe I was stating my Gods honest opinion on what I think is the best course of action, and I could give a rats ass what any Jack Ass or Elephant in a nice expensive suite has to say about it.

Why does it have to be about POLITICS, do you see a "W" bumper sticker on my post, am I talking about "Change" we can all believe in? It comes down to doing what needs to be done, this damn thing is ruining people's lives and destroying the environment, I don't care if every last politician involved in this thing never sees office again after this is all done.

This is the state of mind that American's are in today. It's all political affiliations and hidden agendas, whose voting for who and who is to blame. When did it turn into a popularity contest and stop being about doing what is best for the country, and not for your re-election?

You've inspired me though. Check out my upcoming campaign that I have that is funded billions of dollars by big oil, tobacco, and environmentalists groups.

Brice for King of the North part of America "Give me money, and I'll make sure that I do what's in your best interest, as long as I can get re-elected"

Here are your words buddy...

Kay Kind - My fellow Gulf native, I hope you are faring well these days. I think the old saying...

... "never let a good crisis go to waste" applies for Obama, just like every other high ranking politician.

He has his agenda and will use this disaster to see it through.

Unfortunately Louisiana and the many other hard working residents of the gulf coast will have to pay the price.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247646].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I don't understand on what grounds your labeling the berms as disastrous? They are making them by the way, so we will see eventually just how effective they are, and even if they don't stop the oil they are still a form of hurricane protection.

It took Obama 6 months to get that money from BP, and I don't know how much credit he deserves, they were more than willing to put that money aside. I am grateful to the President for his part in that process though.

Do you have any problems with Bobby J other than the fact that he is a Republican? Or the fact that he has shown more leadership in this disaster than the President? He has shown repeatedly through this event that he is willing to take action, and to take it quickly.

This is why I hate politics, because we are sitting here comparing these two leaders actions on the grounds of their Political affiliations, instead of the action they have taken to combat this spill in any way possible. If we were to look solely at who has done more, the winner as of now is Jindal, whether or not it will stay that way remains to be seen.

Couldn't agree more. If there is any time politics should not even be mentioned it's now.
From what I've seen on the news, Jindal seems very concerned and is trying to do whatever is possible to save the coast and wetlands.
I believe the president is also concerned and trying to do what he can. Problem is there are people on both sides of the aisle who are muddying his efforts with politics. Not to mention his advisers and staff who set up his photo opt visits.
Already there is more coverage of that congressman apologizing to BP and how the repub's and dem's are either trying to come up with damage control or ways to use it in the nov. elections. All that was needed was for one person to tell him he's an idiot, then end of story back to fixing the leak.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247564].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2248637].message }}
- Paul Myers 16 years ago
  
  So, which would you folks prefer? That I delete a very useful 660 post thread, with lots of info on a big problem? Or that I start banning people for posts that even hint at partisan politics?
  
  Apparently, quietly deleting the posts that went over the line wasn't the right approach. Hints rarely are, here. Let me state this in explicit terms:
  
  Discussing the effectiveness of the actions of various elected officials is a legitimate part of this thread. As soon as you get into other things that do NOT relate to their handling of the oil spill, or start talking about "agendas," or making thinly veiled references to assassinations, you're over the line.
  
  The next one that brings up that last point is gone. Do not try to debate that one with me. Don't explain, don't justify, and don't bring any part of it up again. I hope that is VERY clear.
  
  For those of you who are new to the forum, yes, I am a moderator, and yes, I can and will remove anyone who steps over certain lines. The rules for this section are posted, and they're not ambiguous in the least.
  
  To the senior people: Do I have to go back to the policy of deleting any thread that has to do with current events outside the pop culture arena?
  
  Given how much one can learn from this thread, that would suck. But not as much as letting the crap start again in this section. Do not doubt that I'll do just that if there isn't some restraint shown.
  
  Paul
  
  [ 3 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  .
  Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2248666].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

After that rage against my sanity, TL -- I got ya a link so you can see I'm getting my info from science, not scare sites. If you don't think these scientists are credible, that's your problem...not my sanity.

American Thinker: Heartland Conference Establishes Post-Climategate Consensus

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247169].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Ok, that's me badmouthing him for his agenda? I'm not a fan of either political party, does that mean that I can't criticize them?

The statement above was a reply to your response on my post right before it, the one you have quoted there is old. Aside from that, my question was why does me talking about how I support the Moratorium, or even as you quoted above me stating that I oppose Obama and his apparent agenda, have anything to do with Politics?

I would oppose what he is doing if he was Republican or if he was nothing at all. If you read what you quoted from me carefully above, you will see that I have the same disdain for "every high ranking politician".

Why does this have to become a political argument just like every other thing in America, its ridiculous.

-I don't like the way Obama has handled this
-I do like what Bobby Jindal has done
-I oppose the Moratorium
-I want to protect the environment
-I support homosexual marriage

I can go on with all the things I believe in, non of which have anything to do with politics, I can believe in whatever the hell I want, I don't remember coming into this world as human and having to sign a binding contract that said I was only allowed to make decisions based on the political makeup of the society I live in.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247699].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I don't remember coming into this world as human and having to sign a binding contract that said I was only allowed to make decisions based on the political makeup of the society I live in.

What's this?

You never ((((((((( SIGNED ))))))))) the contract?

Oh man, shoulda never said anything. I'm tellin' ya.
Watch ur back, buddy. (They're everywhere.)

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247741].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

does that mean that I can't criticize them?

No - it means you can't either criticize or support "them" HERE - it's a rule. (Thought I agree with your list myself).

You never ((((((((( SIGNED ))))))))) the contract?

Ken - I think they only began offering those contracts a few years ago - so maybe he missed out (I know I missed it, too - shucky darn)
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247769].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

HEY, my father laughed when I told him I was a tree hugger at heart, but I AM! I agree with Dukkys position except "I DON'T support homosexual marriage".

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247738].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

However you do support Man/tree marriage?! Watch out for those splinters!

Originally Posted by seasoned

HEY, my father laughed when I told him I was a tree hugger at heart, but I AM! I agree with Dukkys position except "I DON'T support homosexual marriage".

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247766].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Oh my god Ken, thank you for brightening my mood.

And seasoned, that's fine that you don't, that's your opinion which you are entitled too. I just think it's ridiculous that we get forced into these political niche's where suddenly we don't have opinions anymore.

I was just trying to demonstrate how I have multiple viewpoints that belong to both political parties, does that make me some political hybrid, no it makes me human being.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247770].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Oh my god Ken, thank you for brightening my mood.

And seasoned, that's fine that you don't, that's your opinion which you are entitled too. I just think it's ridiculous that we get forced into these political niche's where suddenly we don't have opinions anymore.

I was just trying to demonstrate how I have multiple viewpoints that belong to both political parties, does that make me some political hybrid, no it makes me human being.

OH, I wasn't saying ANYTHING against you, or trying to start a political argument. I was essentially saying the SAME thing as you.

I knew a person once that ENVIED his brother since his brother's kid ALWAYS did everything his father said, WITHOUT question etc... I told him it was better to have a decent child that questioned and maybe disobeyed, than one that BLINDLY followed.

And it is sick how some people feel that if you don't accept something you are deficient, evil, or RACIST. SORRY, but obama is NOT perfect! It would be racist to claim he IS, simply because he is black. SO, if someone finds fault with Obama, that does NOT mean they are racist. HECK, MOST republicans disliked clinton, but democrats didn't call THEM racist!

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247937].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

OH, I wasn't saying ANYTHING against you, or trying to start a political argument. I was essentially saying the SAME thing as you.

I knew a person once that ENVIED his brother since his brother's kid ALWAYS did everything his father said, WITHOUT question etc... I told him it was better to have a decent child that questioned and maybe disobeyed, than one that BLINDLY followed.

And it is sick how some people feel that if you don't accept something you are deficient, evil, or RACIST. SORRY, but obama is NOT perfect! It would be racist to claim he IS, simply because he is black. SO, if someone finds fault with Obama, that does NOT mean they are racist. HECK, MOST republicans disliked clinton, but democrats didn't call THEM racist!

Steve

You said above...

And it is sick how some people feel that if you don't accept something you are deficient, evil, or RACIST. SORRY, but obama is NOT perfect! It would be racist to claim he IS, simply because he is black. SO, if someone finds fault with Obama, that does NOT mean they are racist. HECK, MOST republicans disliked clinton, but democrats didn't call THEM racist!

I say...

This is a sick canard that you've used over and over again since you probaley borrowed it directly or indirectly...

...from a very popular radio talk show host - who was rejected by the NFL and...

... it is no more valid today as when you first started sprouting it over a year ago.

You have never heard me or Tim say that you can't criticize Obama because he's black.

Never.

You never heard me or Tim suggest he's perfect - especially because he's black.

No Obama supporter on the national level has ever suggested anything of the sort and anyone that does is out of their minds period.

Tim suggested that Jindal sucks for various reasons.

Duckyman responds that Jindal has done Ok and then he added that Jindal has done more for the crisis than Obama...

...who did not have to be brought into the comments regarding Mr. Jindal.

But Duckyman did...

Just because Tim & I responded does not mean we're saying no one can criticize the prez...

Where on Earth you got all that - baffles the crap out of me. ( but I'm not surprised )

We just responded within the confines of this discussion.

All you blatherings about race, black this and that, obama's not perfect has nothing to do with anything in this discussion.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251575].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Seasoned don't worry, I never thought you did. I know what you were saying.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247953].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Dukkyman -

I'm the same way - agreeing with some points and disagreeing on others. I've always thought of it as making up my own mind and deciding what I believe is right.

Doesn't make it right for anyone else - but what works for me is to agree with parts of both sides arguments and disagree with some of what both sides do, too. It does mean I never belong to one group and I may support someone for a while and then change my mind based on what is happening.

It's my mind and I insist on making it up all by myself.:p

kay
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2247983].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

HEY, Hayward is giving me a lot of nostalgic memories. One newspaper yesterday said he was a sargeant schultz! NOW, I read an article that says he should pull a giligan and "for the love of god, GET LOST!"!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2248841].message }}

Paul Myers 16 years ago

Steve,

Just for the record... Comparing someone to Sergeant Schultz is not even close to a Godwin violation.

Paul
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

.
Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2248878].message }}
- seasoned 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Paul Myers
  
  Steve,
  
  Just for the record... Comparing someone to Sergeant Schultz is not even close to a Godwin violation.
  
  Paul
  
  Yeah, but who can say WHAT Godwin supporters may say. I even put "nazi" in quotes when I referred to Schultz. HE represented the kind of guy that was basically live and let live and just drafted. In several episodes he spoke of working at his brother's(?) toy shop after the war. And he really knew a LOT about what was going on, but never told anyone else. In fact the "I see NOOOTHING" was almost like a warning... "I see what you are doing, so PLEASE be careful, I'll just ignore it".
  
  Of course, even that last meaning is not good for hayward's relations in the US. Of course, gilligan wasn't bright AT ALL. He may have been closer to any of the others than they cared to admit, but he still wasn't that great. And HEY, that yacht race COULD have been 3 hours! What a NICE time to "pull a gilligan"!!!!
  
  Hogan's heroes montage(Schultz is the heavy set guy with the round german helmet, who at one pont hides his rifle and claims he lost it. Sadly, it doesn't have his famous tagline.)
  
  YouTube - Hogan's Heroes Part 1 of 2
  
  And HERE is a description of gilligan
  
  YouTube - Gilligan's Island - Before the three...
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2248986].message }}
  
  Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Ken -
  
  I listed to the video and heard nothing about berms. I know the link says berms but he's giving the steps BP has been taking.
  
  There a local grocery in town. The old is an old guy whose family has been well known here for generations. He has a habit of putting quirky things on the marquee meant to advertise outside the store. It's one of those old time signs where you just change the letters to say what you want.
  
  I noticed it first when I drove past a few years ago and the sign said "come in for a free banana". He doesn't do it often but when he does, it's good.
  
  Yesterday the sign had been changed from the usual grocery ads. It now says
  
  "Breaking news: penguin found on Horn Island with walrs"
  
  (guess he only had one "u".
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2249214].message }}
  
  KenThompson 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  Ken -
  
  I listed to the video and heard nothing about berms. I know the link says berms but he's giving the steps BP has been taking.
  
  Kay, I'll call them and give them hell about it. Just for you.
  
  "Breaking news: penguin found on Horn Island with walrs"
  
  (guess he only had one "u".
  
  Two? Penguin and found.
  
  Don't hate me, Kay. lol
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2249348].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Ok folks...

Here's the latest from BP about what they're doing...

"Update on Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill Response - 21 June 2010. Two systems continue to collect oil and gas flowing from the MC252 well and transport them to vessels on the surface. The first is the lower marine riser package (LMRP) containment cap located on top of the Deepwater Horizon's failed blow-out preventer (BOP). A second system, which started on June 16, is connected directly to the BOP and carries oil and gas through a manifold and hoses to the Q4000 vessel on the surface."

BP Global | BP

And there's a link about berms that leads to a nice video...

Mike Utsler Update - 11 June 2010

This is Ken Thompson reporting for the vacationing Christiana
Amanpour...

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2248910].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Guess who wants to drill for oil in the Arctic????

Here's the story from reuters...

Canadian legislators grill BP over Arctic drilling | Reuters

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2250730].message }}

MikeAmbrosio

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Guess who wants to drill for oil in the Arctic????

Here's the story from reuters...

Canadian legislators grill BP over Arctic drilling | Reuters

Where's the surprise in that? They are an oil company.

Be interesting to see how it plays out.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2250753].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Some interesting points brought up yesterday in a discussion about the moratorium on drilling. Provides food for thought - if you're the thinking type.

Lost jobs estimation: 150,000 (25 platforms had to shut down)

Side effects of the moratorium: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencein...ceanograp.html

An interesting point made by a former platform supervisor (now out of work):

BP is the oil company with the poor safety record and the spill. Other oil companies have followed the rules, taken no shortcuts, and had few if any safety violations - but all are shut down. Companies that have routinely been adhering to all regulations were shut down because one company screwed up.

According to a drilling expert, drilling is safe IF the regulators do their job and the oil company follows correct procedures. If the oil company cuts corners AND the regulators don't regulate or inspect, this is what happens.

After the Challenger exploded the team hired to investigate the accident was comprised of scientists - some of the best minds in the country.

The "team" put together to study drilling in the Gulf is made up of environmentalists who have expressed their anti-drilling views, activists who want to force green energy by cutting back on oil production, etc.
Non-partisan scientists say there is a "stacked deck" carefully designed to push a big program for alternative energy now.

I'm not against pushing for green energy - but we're broke and if we don't stop the spending, we're toast. Sometimes you have to face facts - and when you are borrowing money to pay the interest on money you borrowed you're in trouble. Doesn't matter how big you are.

The fear is the moratorium will be 18-36 months, not six months. It is possible, but not like, the moratorium will be struck down by the courts.

Very important - according to legal minds, BP is not responsible for paying the claims of companies and people out of the business due to the moratorium. BP didn't cause that or order that - so guess who might be paying for it?

kay

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2250799].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Some interesting points brought up yesterday in a discussion about the moratorium on drilling. Provides food for thought - if you're the thinking type.

Lost jobs estimation: 150,000 (25 platforms had to shut down)

Side effects of the moratorium: Moratorium Shuts Down Oceanographer's Research on Deep-Sea Life - ScienceInsider

An interesting point made by a former platform supervisor (now out of work):

BP is the oil company with the poor safety record and the spill. Other oil companies have followed the rules, taken no shortcuts, and had few if any safety violations - but all are shut down. Companies that have routinely been adhering to all regulations were shut down because one company screwed up.

According to a drilling expert, drilling is safe IF the regulators do their job and the oil company follows correct procedures. If the oil company cuts corners AND the regulators don't regulate or inspect, this is what happens.

After the Challenger exploded the team hired to investigate the accident was comprised of scientists - some of the best minds in the country.

The "team" put together to study drilling in the Gulf is made up of environmentalists who have expressed their anti-drilling views, activists who want to force green energy by cutting back on oil production, etc.
Non-partisan scientists say there is a "stacked deck" carefully designed to push a big program for alternative energy now.

I'm not against pushing for green energy - but we're broke and if we don't stop the spending, we're toast. Sometimes you have to face facts - and when you are borrowing money to pay the interest on money you borrowed you're in trouble. Doesn't matter how big you are.

The fear is the moratorium will be 18-36 months, not six months. It is possible, but not like, the moratorium will be struck down by the courts.

Very important - according to legal minds, BP is not responsible for paying the claims of companies and people out of the business due to the moratorium. BP didn't cause that or order that - so guess who might be paying for it?

kay

You said...

I'm not against pushing for green energy - but...

...we're broke and if we don't stop the spending, we're toast.

Sometimes you have to face facts - and when you are borrowing money to pay the interest on money you borrowed you're in trouble.

Doesn't matter how big you are.

FYI...

The new energy direction will more than likely be paid for with new taxes on utility companies and companies that pollute etc.

Not borrowed money.

OK, then of course, these utility companies etc., will try to find ways to pass on the new expense to the consumers right??

I hear it may be as much as another $10-$20 per month per household - after the utility companies etc., find a way to pass the cost on to the average consumer.

Critics and opponents of course, say it's going to cost the average household a whole lot more - like at least $100 per month - maybe more.

But FYI...

...your belief that the nation is going to borrow money to pay for the new energy direction is flat out incorrect.

Of course, this all depends on whether the legislation ever becomes law.

Hope This Helps!!

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251109].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

FYI...

The new energy direction will more than likely be paid for with new taxes on utility companies and companies that pollute etc.

And *****WHERE***** do you think that money comes from!?!?!?

OK, then of course, these utility companies etc., will try to find ways to pass on the new expense to the consumers right??

I hear it may be as much as another $10-$20 per month per household - after the utility companies etc., find a way to pass the cost on to the average consumer.

For the average consumer MAYBE, but on average it WILL be higher! Besides, $10 to some people is a LOT of money, and there ARE associated costs that can cause trouble.

Critics and opponents of course, say it's going to cost the average household a whole lot more - like at least $100 per month - maybe more.

Let's say you WERE right.... 330,000,000 people, assume ALL are hooked up and paying from what they earn, which we KNOW is not true. Figure an average of 3 people per household.... 110,000,000 households. That is $2,200,000,000 or 2.2Billion. Do you REALLY think that is enough? BTW, better reduce that by over $660,000,000 or 660Million to allow for JUST the unemployed(due to this depression) and a few others. NOW, what about Welfare, social security, etc? OOPS, that 2.2Billion is now a LOT smaller, maybe a good deal less than 1Billion. WATCH OUT for misplaced modifiers, bad grammar, and odd words! The average family will pay is NOTHING like families will pay on average! And what of the government pork, etc?

But FYI...

...your belief that the nation is going to borrow money to pay for the new energy direction is flat out incorrect.

Of course, this all depends on whether the legislation ever becomes law.

Hope This Helps!!

TL

YEAH RIGHT!(sarc)

WHY IS IT that SO many will believe the current administration EVEN after having been told the same lie from every administration before it?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251195].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Kay,

If BP weren't paying for it, taxpayers would. It is called the unemployment insurance/"social security trust fund"/welfare ponzi fiasco!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2250913].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

That's my point, Steve. The loss due to the moratorium is estimated at $300,000 million per week just for the rigs and there's more in lost wages. 25 rigs were shut down - 800-1100 workers per rig lost their jobs. This is an economic hit to a region of our country already reeling from job losses.

Legally - this appears appear not to be BP's problem - and we can't afford it. We're waiting today for a judge's decision that might overturn the moratorium. Remains to be seen if he has the guts to buck the administration. If he does, will he be summoned for a chewing out?

There's also a kickback growing on the coast responding to the constant efforts to damage the credibility of BP and Hayward in the press. We know where the fault lies for the spill but we need BP's participation to fix the problem. Those who have been trying to control the oil have been working around the clock nonstop. Most working this problem are locals and are respected for their efforts - those who just talk get little respect.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2250985].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Hey Tim, sorry I was off for the day by the time you posted that.

I work in an office, and while I may have enough time to come into this part of the forum and post about this topic a few times a day, I can't read that whole thing right now. But I'll try to say at least something.

Obviously Obama can and has technically "done" more, he is the president of the United States, Jindal is the governor or one state, and not a particularly large or powerful state.

Obama doesn't deserve credit for the things the agencies under his control have done, like the coast guard immediately doing search and rescue, that is the job of the coast guard they would have done that anyway.

My problem with Obama is that all of his decisions have been slow, and he has not made it easy for Louisiana to take action to protect itself. He has visited and made speeches, addressed the nation, mitigated a $20 billion fund from BP, put the national guard into action, and of course demanded a moratorium.

He has done good and bad things, but until very recently, he really hadn't done that much to help us out down here, the red tape was everywhere and it just literally was a mess.

Jindal doesn't have the power or the resources to do as much as the President, but he took what was given to him and has been making decisions and taking action from day one, and I don't care what your lengthy post says, Obama has not been on top of this since day one, he just hasn't. I've been here the whole time, I see with my own eyes what is going on, and this is more than just a news story to me.

There was a reason I said as of now Jindal had done more than Obama, because with the mounting pressure of course Obama is going to have to act more. Remember that he has a worse approval rating on this than Bush did with Katrina, the guy just didn't take action fast enough.

As I've stated many times before I don't have a political affiliation, so I'm not saying this just because he is a democrat, I'm saying it because he was not there for my state in the early days of the crisis and Jindal was. I hope Obama can make up for his mistake, and I want more than anything to be able to look back at this and say "you know he messed up early but he really made up for it."

Unfortunately the most serious action he has taken so far is the moratorium, which really just hurts my state, the gulf, and the US as a whole.

This is just my opinion, everyone is entitled to one.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251012].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

You mean physically? If so, that would be pretty obvious why since Jindal is the governor there. My point is the admin and federal government have actually done a lot more than Jindal behind the scenes and out of the spotlight. From the very beginning.

Jindal speaks about the berms which likely would be ineffective, costly, take months to build and only continue to hurt the sensitive ecosystem in the gulf which I am sure you are aware has been in serious trouble and under attack for decades. It's a good thing that dumb idea was stopped with red tape you complain about imo, although some berms were approved.

The Prez is the head of the coast guard and national guard so anything that gets done by them and the other agencies is under his command. Read what I posted and you will see they were heavily involved early on.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I'm saying it because he was not there for my state in the early days of the crisis and Jindal was.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251172].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

You mean physically? If so, that would be pretty obvious why since Jindal is the governor there. My point is the admin and federal government have actually done a lot more than Jindal behind the scenes and out of the spotlight. From the very beginning.

Jindal speaks about the berms which likely would be ineffective, costly, take months to build and only continue to hurt the sensitive ecosystem in the gulf which I am sure you are aware has been in serious trouble and under attack for decades. It's a good thing that dumb idea was stopped with red tape you complain about imo, although some berms were approved.

The Prez is the head of the coast guard and national guard so anything that gets done by them and the other agencies is under his command. Read what I posted and you will see they were heavily involved early on.

I hear Mr. Jindal waited 9 days before declaring a state of emergency.

Jindal is doing a great job at appearing to be doing a lot and...

.. he better cause he can't be seen as not doing as much as humanly possible with a election upcoming in 2011 - I think.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251204].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Ok I mean it's pointless for either of us to argue this. You are basing everything you are saying on "behind the scenes" work and what you're being told by the media, which if we're going to be totally honest leans heavily towards the left.

I'm making my entire argument over what I see here in Louisiana every day, what I watch on Local news, read in the paper, hear on talk radio from the actual people effected. You can go down to Plaquemines Parish and ask them just how much Obama did for them in the early weeks of this disaster, I promise you they will tell you literally nothing. Of course my whole argument is ruined by the fact that I can't prove any of this to you, but really your argument is no different in that you can't prove that the president actually was so involved early on, he can say he was and so can the press and all those nice words you have listed above, but that does not make it fact.

We are basing our entire debate on two totally different forms of information. So while what you are saying is right according to your sources, it is dead wrong according to mine.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251206].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Actualy what I posted above shows facts if you would bother to read it. Ex:

Total response vessels: more than 1150
Containment boom deployed: more than 1.73 million feet
Containment boom available: more than 275,000 feet
Sorbent boom deployed: more than 730,000 feet
Sorbent boom available: more than 1.25 million feet
Total boom deployed: more than 2.46 million feet (regular plus sorbent boom)
Total boom available: more than 1.52 million feet (regular plus sorbent boom)
Oily water recovered: more than 10.24 million gallons
Surface dispersant used: approximately 685,000 gallons
Subsea dispersant used: approximately 100,000
Total dispersant used: approximately 785,000
Dispersant available: more than 340,000 gallons
Overall personnel responding: more than 22,000

That was from May 23rd. One fact to point out is the 10.24 million gallons of oily water recovered. Now I do remember seeing Jindal out on a 12 foot boat with a wetvac sucking up a fell gallons a minute, but I'm not sure if that really impresses me much. Now, what does look very promising is that machine Kevin Costner is selling to BP. Those can really make a big difference. Wetvacs? Not so much.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

...but really your argument is no different in that you can't prove that the president actually was so involved early on, he can say he was and so can the press and all those nice words you have listed above, but that does not make it fact.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251306].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Actualy what I posted above shows facts if you would bother to read it. Ex:

Total response vessels: more than 1150
Containment boom deployed: more than 1.73 million feet
Containment boom available: more than 275,000 feet
Sorbent boom deployed: more than 730,000 feet
Sorbent boom available: more than 1.25 million feet
Total boom deployed: more than 2.46 million feet (regular plus sorbent boom)
Total boom available: more than 1.52 million feet (regular plus sorbent boom)
Oily water recovered: more than 10.24 million gallons
Surface dispersant used: approximately 685,000 gallons
Subsea dispersant used: approximately 100,000
Total dispersant used: approximately 785,000
Dispersant available: more than 340,000 gallons
Overall personnel responding: more than 22,000

That was from May 23rd. One fact to point out is the 10.24 million gallons of oily water recovered. Now I do remember seeing Jindal out on a 12 foot boat with a wetvac sucking up a fell gallons a minute, but I'm not sure if that really impresses me much. Now, what does look very promising is that machine Kevin Costner is selling to BP. Those can really make a big difference. Wetvacs? Not so much.

That's a pretty good summary of federal gov actions Tim.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251321].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

So by your thinking Tim isn't Obama also responsible for the Mineral Management Agency?
That's a Federal agency, right?
Even though the corruption in that agency was know and documented before this leak, nothing was done about it till after the leak.
So that would make him as responsible for the leak as BP.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251405].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

He has taken responsibility for the failure of the MMA. One of the leaders was fired. Does that make him as responsible as BP? I don't see the logic in that equation really.

Originally Posted by ThomM

So by your thinking Tim isn't Obama also responsible for the Mineral Management Agency?
That's a Federal agency, right?
Even though the corruption in that agency was know and documented before this leak, nothing was done about it till after the leak.
So that would make him as responsible for the leak as BP.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251862].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

He has taken responsibility for the failure of the MMA. One of the leaders was fired. Does that make him as responsible as BP? I don't see the logic in that equation really.

I never expected you to Tim.

Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251879].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Can neither of you remember in the early weeks when Obama repeatedly said this was BP's deal, and that all he could say was that he was holding them responsible?

I bet if we could actually look at those numbers and the items provided, most of them were probably provided by BP, for their containment process. Now that he is in charge of the situation, I'm sure that there is a substantial amount he has contributed.

Tell me right now, did Obama step up the day after the disaster and start directing the response? Was he doing everything he could? Using every resource?

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO

His policy for like the first two or three weeks was "We are holding BP responsible, and uhm, we will make them pay, to eh the American people"

At the beginning there was the coast guard, and there was BP. You can believe whatever you want, I don't really care, I'm obviously not going to be able to convince you of anything else other than what you already believe.

But if you were actually down here, where it's not computer fantasy world, and asked the people involved and effected, they would tell you that the president did nothing in the early weeks.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251428].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Tim -

I'm not arguing your politics - we well know where you stand and the facts or the experiences of people here have no effect on you at all.

There is nothing to be gained by posting news items unless you think others are too stupid to read. But presenting the official version ignores what is happening here.

Clearly, your agenda is to damage this thread or get it locked.

If you don't live in Louisiana, what Jindal does doesn't affect you in any way.
In that state, his efforts are truly appreciated.

Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251530].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by jandermile

I think $27 million cap would be rediculous. BP needs to stop blaming others and clean it up themselves.

Funny, I never heard BP blaiming anyone else. They COULD have legitimately done so much more along those lines MONTHS ago, but apparently DIDN'T! Let's accuse them of what they are actually guilty of. Oh, and the POTUS is not the government. He may be the last guy in the executive branch, and the military, and the head "dignitary", but that is IT!

Every soldier in the United States military has a distinct chain of command that he must know and follow. This chain of command is defined by the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986. All decisions are expected to be made at the lowest level possible, but if required, can be taken all the way up the chain to the Commander in Chief. To get a job done, you must pass information up the chain where decisions are made. Once decisions are made, orders are given, and the duties are carried out by those lower in the chain. Below is a top-down summary of hierarchy as used in the military branches of the US.

President of the United States of America - acting with his power as Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces. Appointed by an electoral vote based on a national election. (See also Presidential Line of Succession)

Secretary of Defense - acting as the principle defense policy advisor to the POTUS. Appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. All military action taken by the president goes through this Cabinet position.

Secretaries of the Military Departments - the following secretaries are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate:

Secretary of the Army
Secretary of the Navy (who is also in charge of the Marine Corps and Coast Guard)
Secretary of the Air Force

Joint Chiefs of Staff - consists of the following members all appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. Their primary duties are to advise the Chairman and the National Security Council, and they have no authority to command any combatant military unit.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Chief of Staff of the Army
Chief of Naval Operations
Chief of Staff of the Air Force
Commandant of the Marine Corps

Unified and Specified Operations Commander - Commanders of unified commands are military officers who are placed in command of two or more services assigned under one command (i.e., one general in charge of a combined Army/Air Force task force)

Combined Operations Commander - Commanding Officer of the militaries of two or more nations working together toward a common objective. This single group is commonly referred to as an alliance or a coalition.

Unit Level Military Chain of Command - After this, each branch has its own unit level chain of command and/or NCO Support Chain. (See also United States Military Ranks)

United States Army (writeup contains unit level chain of command)
United States Marine Corps (writeup contains unit level chain of command)
United States Navy
United States Coast Guard
United States Air Force

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251552].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

News....

The judge has just ruled against the moratorium so it's...

Drill baby drill!!

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251658].message }}

Paul Myers 16 years ago

Kay,

Clearly, your agenda is to damage this thread or get it locked.

If Mr Phelan steps over the line, it won't be the thread that gets locked.

Steve,

Every time I've seen President Obama mentioned in this section of the forum, you find some reason to bring his skin color into it. Every time. If you wish to discuss the impact of race in modern American politics, please do it elsewhere. It has nothing to do with an objective assessment of his handling of this problem.

TL,

You're pushing the line with the jingoistic references to Rush, et al. That sort of "insult by association" tactic is every bit as political as an outright partisan bashing. Please rein that in.

Paul
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

.
Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251820].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Thank God, so many hard working people don't need to fear for their jobs, at least for a little while. This is not over yet, this battle is going to be long and fierce. The sad part of it is, that both sides are right in their own way, they need to put more effort into finding a middle ground.

And liberator, if your so against oil and want green energy, please turn off your computer, or is yours special and runs on fairy dust and love? As well as your car?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251769].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Thank God, so many hard working people don't need to fear for their jobs, at least for a little while. This is not over yet, this battle is going to be long and fierce. The sad part of it is, that both sides are right in their own way, they need to put more effort into finding a middle ground.

And liberator, if your so against oil and want green energy, please turn off your computer, or is yours special and runs on fairy dust and love? As well as your car?

Dude,

I never said I was against oil,

I have maintained that the country needs to slowly but surely move towards a newer 21st century energy policy.

I know it's gana take 20-30 years to get that done.

I just want us to get moving.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252160].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Dude,

I never said I was against oil,

I have maintained that the country needs to slowly but surely move towards a newer 21st century energy policy.

I know it's gana take 20-30 years to get that done.

I just want us to get moving.

TL

When I was a kid, I heard of photovoltaic cells. It seemed almost NOBODY used them. They didn't even really start to appear on consumer goods until like the late 1970s. But they were TINY ones. Well, NOW, some people have them on roofs. The pentagon has a solar farm with them. AMAZON.com has ones for the home, etc... MAYBE if the US government makes things good for business, the US will take more of a leadership role. So it WAS moving! This happened BEFORE obama. And cars have started moving away from gasoline.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252232].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Looks like Hayward has handed over cleanup affairs to BP's managing
director.

At this point, my impression is they're doing as much as humanly possible
about this. In the following AP article, BP said they hope to contain as
much as 90% over the next few weeks. Not sure if they're talking about
the total spilled, or what.

I'm glad the moratorium is lifted. Here's the story...

The Associated Press: Judge blocks Gulf offshore drilling moratorium

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251771].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

It's hard to find humor in this mess - but saw some today.

After weeks of Hayward bashing (here on the coast as well as nationally), Hayward leaves. Today the complaints are "he promised to stay till this was over".

Human nature is hilarious sometimes:p

TL -

You are right that increases to energy producers will be passed on to consumers. A local fight (that the public lost) may be an indication of things to come.

A local electric utility company got permission to charge more to customers NOW for a new plant to be built in several years....about 20-30% more each month. They openly stated that when the new plant is operational many years from now there will more increases in the rates and more increases may be required before the plant is built.

I can't even think of an analogy to that! I guess it's pay now - get later, maybe.

To Paul Myers: If I was contributing to the problem earlier, my apologies. I'll try to watch my fingers....

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251842].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

It's hard to find humor in this mess - but saw some today.

After weeks of Hayward bashing (here on the coast as well as nationally), Hayward leaves. Today the complaints are "he promised to stay till this was over".

Human nature is hilarious sometimes:p

You mean you didn't like the references to schultz and gilligan!?!?!? 8-(

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251903].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

the facts or the experiences of people here have no effect on you at all.

Wrong.

There is nothing to be gained by posting news items unless you think others are too stupid to read.

So anyone who posts news items thinks people are too stupid to read?

Clearly, your agenda is to damage this thread or get it locked.

Wrong. I don't like to see threads locked, people banned, threatened to be banned etc...

If you don't live in Louisiana, what Jindal does doesn't affect you in any way.
In that state, his efforts are truly appreciated.

I actually appreciate his efforts, but they are small really compared to what the federal government has done and his berms idea was a terrible idea. He also was/is a "drill baby drill" guy who bought the whole line that deep oil drilling is perfectly safe. He is also against big government and wants a small federal government. Now that there is a terrible leak he is complaining about how the federal government is too slow to help.
- Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251971].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

It's hard to find humor in this mess - but saw some today.

After weeks of Hayward bashing (here on the coast as well as nationally), Hayward leaves. Today the complaints are "he promised to stay till this was over".

Human nature is hilarious sometimes:p

TL -

You are right that increases to energy producers will be passed on to consumers. A local fight (that the public lost) may be an indication of things to come.

A local electric utility company got permission to charge more to customers NOW for a new plant to be built in several years....about 20-30% more each month. They openly stated that when the new plant is operational many years from now there will more increases in the rates and more increases may be required before the plant is built.

I can't even think of an analogy to that! I guess it's pay now - get later, maybe.

To Paul Myers: If I was contributing to the problem earlier, my apologies. I'll try to watch my fingers....

Many utility companies can not raise rates/costs unless the local politicians give the OK.

That's how it is in my neck of the woods.

I think it will be a case by case situation and in some sits, local companies will just have to eat that ( what I think may be ) small loss of profits.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252650].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Many utility companies can not raise rates/costs unless the local politicians give the OK.

That's how it is in my neck of the woods.

I think it will be a case by case situation and in some sits, local companies will just have to eat that ( what I think may be ) small loss of profits.

TL

DREAM ON! BTW ONE word for your claim!!!!!! CALIFORNIA! If THAT doesn't make enough sense, how about ANOTHER word? ENRON! REMEMBER!?!?!?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252778].message }}

TLTheLiberator 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

DREAM ON! BTW ONE word for your claim!!!!!! CALIFORNIA! If THAT doesn't make enough sense, how about ANOTHER word? ENRON! REMEMBER!?!?!?

Steve

I'd love to see my local utility company try to raise rates over a measly 2-5% loss of profits because they have to pay some sort of surtax for the energy policy for the nation.

I'd love to see my county council politicians try it.

It will be a local decision.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252820].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

LB,

OK, Paul doesn't want me mentioning it, though I didn't start it. So I guess I can't begin to say what I was going to. I will say that my retort to people that say things like what JIMMY CARTER was on the news saying, was NOT from ANYONE else! I don't simply parrot stuff. HECK, I was once accused of stating something simply because a talkshow host said it EVEN though I said it for years prior to my knowing of his existence.

HECK, if I DID listen MINDLESSLY to that host, I would probably be here saying the environment would recover, BP will solve the problem, etc... Maybe he doesn't like Jindal, due to Jindal's statements about the environment and BP, but I DO like Jindal! HECK, I know that host was on Fox a little bit yesterday, and I didn't even hear him THEN. I have heard him maybe 20 minutes in the past 12 months, because he was on another program.

Ken,

According to some, they are claiming that they should soon be able to clean up at a rate EXCEEDING the supposed spill rate. If true, BOTH can happen at once! Don't hold your breath though. These are CLAIMS! We ALL know that the expectation is for nothing to really happen for like 4 months, so they have to keep our hopes up to keep the heat off.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2251823].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

To go back to our arguments earlier, I remember when many were accusing Jindal of being a small government guy begging for the federal government to step in and help. This was back when the feds were doing nothing more than pointing their finger at BP and saying "thats a bad oil company, very bad oil company."

The only reason anyone could ridicule Jindal for asking for help from big government, is because he WASNT getting any help from big government. Obama sits in the big chair, in the big office with his big government. But he has been on top of this since day one right, or was it week one...or month one?

An update on Kevin Costners (spelling?) centrifuge machine - There are apparently 6 or so of them in the gulf right now and are working better than expected. There are 32 total and apparently they are on their way to the gulf. So that's a little bit of good news.

Hey Paul, how come posts on here don't count towards my post tally? I'd have like 5,000 if it did

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252152].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Tim,

If government were smaller, and worked on what it was SUPPOSED to work on, it would be FASTER and better! So your statements that , because he wants smaller government, he is a hypocrite are just WRONG! Heck, look at the latest moves deval patrick has made in massachusetts and say bigger federal government is better. I won't tell you what to look for ONLY because that would be too political, and there are better venues, but you can guess! You can bet everyone will waste time and money to try to get back SOME of what was LOST in that debacle!

And the idea that you should avoid a major defense against a KNOWN major threat because there MIGHT be an unknown minor one is DUMB. I earlier equated this to not closing a firebreak door, between you and a fire, because you don't know if it is up to code. WHO CARES!?!?!? If it is an emergency, USE IT, and be happy you have THAT!

BTW that oil drilling represents 16% of their business, and a LOT of domestic production, so supporting it was almost a requirement of the job. It COULD have been safer. Personally, I would have liked it closer, etc... but laws wouldn't allow that. Heck, even FISHING can be dangerous. I recently heard of a person that started to eat strawberries(or were they cherries?) and came close to dying! Dangers exist everywhere. EVEN when oil rigs run RIGHT and don't leak, people can get hurt or even KILLED.

Again, I don't like the idea of oil or gas, but the world runs on them.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252156].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

And this is in regards to what statement I made?

Originally Posted by seasoned

And the idea that you should avoid a major defense against a KNOWN major threat because there MIGHT be an unknown minor one is DUMB. I earlier equated this to not closing a firebreak door, between you and a fire, because you don't know if it is up to code. WHO CARES!?!?!? If it is an emergency, USE IT, and be happy you have THAT!

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252437].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Turns out the judge who just stopped the oil moratorium had holdings of up to $15,000 in Transocean in 2008. He has also recently owned stock in offshore drilling or oilfield service providers Halliburton, Prospect Energy, Hercules Offshore, Parker Drilling Co., and ATP Oil & Gas. He was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1983.

What a surprise ruling.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252492].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Turns out the judge who just stopped the oil moratorium had holdings of up to $15,000 in Transocean in 2008. He has also recently owned stock in offshore drilling or oilfield service providers Halliburton, Prospect Energy, Hercules Offshore, Parker Drilling Co., and ATP Oil & Gas. He was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1983.

What a surprise ruling.

Well, MAYBE the judge SHOULD have recused himself. Then again, maybe all should. And HEY, what if the one that got the biggest donation recused himself? OICSAWLM!!!!!!

Of course, 2008 and recently don't really mean much! In fact, it implies the PAST! HEY, I recently owned some of that ALSO, but don't NOW!

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252558].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

OICSALMABIMGBBTPPMWADSPAAPYAFUADGAS!!

Originally Posted by seasoned

OICSAWLM!!!!!!
- Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252657].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

But isn't that the practice now - if you can't win look for ways to discredit the person you lost to?

The bets here were that the judge would not overturn the moratorium - the ruling was a surprise.

To win a preliminary injunction motion, the party filing the motion has to show four things:
"(1) the likelihood that the party seeking the preliminary injunction will succeed on the merits of the claim;
(2) whether the party seeking the injunction will suffer irreparable harm without the grant of the extraordinary relief;
(3) the probability that granting the injunction will cause substantial harm to others; and
(4) whether the public interest is advanced by the issuance of the injunction."

The govt has already said it will appeal. To have a moratorium that eliminates 150,000 jobs and will close many businesses who rely on those rigs for business - while at the same time issuing more permits for new drilling platforms which allow oil companies to BYPASS the environmental and safety inspections with waivers....is not in any sense logical.

The failure of MMS to apply the laws and regulations that are in place is what allowed BP to cut corners. No one was watching - no one was listening to warnings....too busy partying with oil companies while taxpayers paid their salaries.

We don't need more commissions appointed and long studies done - we need the regulators and those responsible for oversight to DO THEIR JOBS.

kay

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252668].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Turns out the judge who just stopped the oil moratorium had holdings of up to $15,000 in Transocean in 2008. He has also recently owned stock in offshore drilling or oilfield service providers Halliburton, Prospect Energy, Hercules Offshore, Parker Drilling Co., and ATP Oil & Gas. He was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1983.

What a surprise ruling.

Crony capitalism shouldn't be a surprise - that's how BP got the bid for this damned project in the first place. I'll try to find the link because I know you'll find it a very interesting read. Sorry - it's not on Alex Jones, so I have to actually search back for it. It may take awhile. In the meantime I might just take off my tinfoil hat and shape it into a pipe. I need a break.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253034].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

Ahh, I see. Now it all makes sense. ;-)

Originally Posted by HeySal

In the meantime I might just take off my tinfoil hat and shape it into a pipe. I need a break.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253173].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Sounds like a case of "we'll show you".
  
  After announcing earlier today they would fight the overturning of the moratorium on appeal - Salazar just announced another moratorium will be issued "that can't be broken".
  
  In other words - "we don't care what the people need or want and we don't care what the law (judicial branch of the government) says". Absolute arrogance and it won't go down well here. It's one thing to appeal the court's decision - quite another to decide to bypass it.
  
  T Boone Pickens has some interesting things to say on the topic.
  
  Thanks
  
  2 replies
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253224].message }}
  
  KenThompson 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  T Boone Pickens has some interesting things to say on the topic.
  
  Yes he does.
  
  Gulf Oil Spill Reflections On T. Boone Pickens, Politics, Obama, Bureaucrats, Rule Of Law And Anarchy | The Moderate Voice
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253283].message }}
  
  seasoned 16 years ago
  
  Yeah, FORGET the three branches of government. It is a THREE RING CIRCUS! NOBODY actualy SAYS the words "Protect the constitution against all enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC." They merely PARROT them to make the noise, and that is all it is. Perhaps they don't even know the meaning of the term domestic. MAYBE they think it means there should be no enemy maids!
  
  The president is supposed to be able to veto most bills from congress, the congress is supposed to be able to veto most actions by the president, and the supreme court is supposed to be able to override many things from the other two, if they are overly invasive or against the constitution, law, or precedent. So the president is not supposed to be able to do ANYTHING that "can't be broken".
  
  BTW hopefully people see a little levity here. I WISH I could say it were only the current admin, or one party, but it isn't. I echo, in a somewhat comic way, what others have before.
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253286].message }}

SebringWarrior

16 years ago

When is everyone going to realize that big oil and the government are buddys.
BP will get what they want and the government will make it look like they are doing something while they continue to undermine our economy.
This oil thing is just the tip of the iceberg for what this country is going to face in the near future. If you think this oil spill, Great Depression, and 911 were something you haven't seen nothing yet. Its headed for something far worse than all of those combined and multiplied.
Sad but true.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253244].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I think we'll worry about the next crisis when it gets here - right now we've got a big one to deal with right here....right now. No need to predict doom and gloom when you are looking at it.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253293].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

I think you are moving across that line Mr Myers drew for us Kay. Please stop making this discussion political. I really don't want to see this thread deleted or have you banned. ;-)

Originally Posted by Kay King

When an elected leader repeatedly ignores the will of the public to push through one mandate after another - we have a problem unprecedented in this country.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253320].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Tim -

You are absolutely right - so I changed it. Got carried away - or maybe I should be carried away....one or the other.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253413].message }}

Paul Myers

16 years ago

I think you are moving across that line Mr Myers drew for us Kay. Please stop making this discussion political. I really don't want to see this thread deleted or have you banned. ;-)

Well, it's nice to see that everyone has gotten their sense of humor back.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

.
Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253432].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Well, Kay admitted she was wrong Mr Myers. No need to rub it in you know. I hope you can spare her. She's been a longtime member at this forum and only ocassionally gets political or pissed. But watch out when she does!

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

Well, it's nice to see that everyone has gotten their sense of humor back.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253458].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Oh Tim - you know me so well!

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253504].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Hey Dukkyman -

What do you think of the latest on the LA berms?

Shut down again by yet another agency. I think they may as well forget it - and you can't blame them for wondering who is in charge. This was approved by the pres in a speech - but it wasn't - then it was definitely approved in the next speech - partly - it was finally started - and now it's stopped because it needs to be moved a couple miles (according to another govt agency).

This is perhaps the best example of what we're up against down here - even when you get a "yes" answer, it ends up being a "maybe".

Federal Gov't Halts Sand Berm Dredging - New Orleans News Story - WDSU New Orleans

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253602].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Hey Dukkyman -

What do you think of the latest on the LA berms?

Shut down again by yet another agency. I think they may as well forget it - and you can't blame them for wondering who is in charge. This was approved by the pres in a speech - but it wasn't - then it was definitely approved in the next speech - partly - it was finally started - and now it's stopped because it needs to be moved a couple miles (according to another govt agency).

This is perhaps the best example of what we're up against down here - even when you get a "yes" answer, it ends up being a "maybe".

Federal Gov't Halts Sand Berm Dredging - New Orleans News Story - WDSU New Orleans

I know Kay, honestly I don't even know what to say anymore. I know its still uncertain just how effective the berms will be, but I like them because even if they don't play a big impact on the oil, they serve a dual purpose as a barrier island, which helps protect us from Hurricanes.

For everyone arguing about the judge and his Oil investments let me just ask a question. It's unclear whether he has holdings in those companies as of now (at least that's what I hear), but lets ASSUME that he does.

He stands to lose a lot of money if the rigs leave the gulf, obviously he would want to protect his investment. But doesn't he stand to lose just as much money if the rigs he is so invested in are unsafe, and one of them leads to another leak? If he voted for them to stay, that means that from the evidence shown, he had enough confidence in the overall safety of the rigs to rule on them staying. If they were all unsafe, why would he vote on them to keep production in the gulf? If it blew up and started pumping out oil, he has just as much money to lose as a shareholder. Maybe my logic is a little flawed, but it is food for thought.

Also, no one responded to my question about Salazar's committee that he himself brought in to look over gulf disaster. NONE of them supported the moratorium. I've been listening to a lot of local talk radio since this started, and have even heard two of the men on that committee talk about it. They said they never supported the moratorium, and that Salazar falsely reported that they did. If we aren't going to take the experts advice, than whose advice are we taking?

It seems more and more like the feds don't really care about anything than what they already have planned. Miles of red tape for the gulf states to cut through in order to protect themselves, falsely posting the advice of experts that THEY brought in, and now putting out a new moratorium after their original was over ruled in a court of law. Seriously what is going on. I'm not the type who likes to shout out crazy accusations and blindly scream we have a despot in charge just because I don't like what's going on, but this is really really scary to me.

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2255616].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I know Kay, honestly I don't even know what to say anymore. I know its still uncertain just how effective the berms will be, but I like them because even if they don't play a big impact on the oil, they serve a dual purpose as a barrier island, which helps protect us from Hurricanes.

For everyone arguing about the judge and his Oil investments let me just ask a question. It's unclear whether he has holdings in those companies as of now (at least that's what I hear), but lets ASSUME that he does.

He stands to lose a lot of money if the rigs leave the gulf, obviously he would want to protect his investment. But doesn't he stand to lose just as much money if the rigs he is so invested in are unsafe, and one of them leads to another leak? If he voted for them to stay, that means that from the evidence shown, he had enough confidence in the overall safety of the rigs to rule on them staying. If they were all unsafe, why would he vote on them to keep production in the gulf? If it blew up and started pumping out oil, he has just as much money to lose as a shareholder. Maybe my logic is a little flawed, but it is food for thought.

Also, no one responded to my question about Salazar's committee that he himself brought in to look over gulf disaster. NONE of them supported the moratorium. I've been listening to a lot of local talk radio since this started, and have even heard two of the men on that committee talk about it. They said they never supported the moratorium, and that Salazar falsely reported that they did. If we aren't going to take the experts advice, than whose advice are we taking?

It seems more and more like the feds don't really care about anything than what they already have planned. Miles of red tape for the gulf states to cut through in order to protect themselves, falsely posting the advice of experts that THEY brought in, and now putting out a new moratorium after their original was over ruled in a court of law. Seriously what is going on. I'm not the type who likes to shout out crazy accusations and blindly scream we have a despot in charge just because I don't like what's going on, but this is really really scary to me.

Well, let's go over this.

1. If he has NO oil investments, he COULD side with the moratorium, and maybe buy them later at a CHEAP price! MAYBE!

Otherwise, options seem CLOSED!

OK, let's say he DID have oil investments!

2. He could side WITH the moratorium, and MAYBE buy later at a cheaper price, but his current investments would likely remain the same. The moratorium has already been factored into the price.
3. He could go AGAINST the moratorium, and MAYBE see a minor spike, MAYBE. Oil rigs might continue, MAYBE, BUT, if they win on appeal, etc... the oil industry could get hurt WORSE.

BTW it is INCREDIBLY easy to determine if there are holdings, etc... The SIPC handles insurance, and may well have records! Any holdings over about 5%(?) have to be REPORTED upfront. AND, they generally pay dividends, which are reported to the IRS! AND, if he were to do this, he would likely trade between when he was assigned the case, and made the decision. GRANTED, there ARE ways to hide it, or obfuscate it, but that is true of ANYONE. And the broker would probably not be prevented from calling attention to investments.

Besides, if he judges incorrectly, and can't explain it, and he DOES trade or has trades, he could lose his job, get disbarred, have bad PR like crazy, be fined, etc.... ALSO, his ruling would get thrown out. This isn't really anything requiring much knowledge of the law, etc... There is really no precedent, etc... to be dealt with!

SO, would it be worth it to lose EVERYTHING!?!?!?

But these rigs have been out there for up to DECADES, and abandoning them could be BAD.
And those scientists have said the SAME!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2255844].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

As the problem continues it's easy to get lost in the daily news reports and maneuvering. I went back again to research from when this began. It's an interesting timeline.

An email from the original task force made up of experts looking at the oil spill in the Gulf. Task force was appointed by Salazar at end of April.

A group of those named in the Secretary of Interior's Report, "INCREASED SAFETY MEASURES FOR ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ON THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF" dated May 27, 2010 are concerned that our names are connected with the moratorium as proposed in the executive summary of that report. There is an implication that we have somehow agreed to or "peer reviewed" the main recommendation of that report. This is not the case...
...We believe the report does not justify the moratorium as written and that the moratorium as changed will not contribute measurably to increased safety and will have immediate and long term economic effects. Indeed an argument can be made that the changes made in the wording are counterproductive to long term safety.
The Secretary should be free to recommend whatever he thinks is correct, but he should not be free to use our names to justify his political decisions.

Timeline:

April 20 - DW explosion

May 6 - Salazar issues verbal moratorium on deep water drilling

May 22 - Pres announces oil spill commission

May 27 - Salazar task force releases report

May 27 - Pres extends moratorium for six months
- Email released from task force (quoted above)

June 14 - 5 more appointments to pres commission

In the days since President Obama announced a moratorium on permits for drilling new offshore oil wells and a halt to a controversial type of environmental waiver that was given to the Deepwater Horizon rig, at least seven new permits for various types of drilling and five environmental waivers have been granted, according to records.

The records also indicate that since the April 20 explosion on the rig, federal regulators have granted at least 19 environmental waivers for gulf drilling projects and at least 17 drilling permits, most of which were for types of work like that on the Deepwater Horizon shortly before it exploded, pouring a ceaseless current of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

So it would seem that while coastal residents are out of work from the shutdown of about 30 platforms in the Gulf - the oil companies are still getting what they want in the form of waivers of regulations.

Looking back 3 months with the reality of now - it's chilling.

New York Times on May 23:

The administration is proposing to open vast expanses of water along the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska to oil and natural gas drilling, much of it for the first time, officials said Tuesday.

The proposal — a compromise that will please oil companies and domestic drilling advocates but anger some residents of affected states and many environmental organizations — would end a longstanding moratorium on oil exploration along the East Coast from the northern tip of Delaware to the central coast of Florida, covering 167 million acres of ocean.

The amazing thing about the digital age is "the people" can ignore obfuscation and following the timeline.

This isn't a criticism of any one person - it's the combination of events that boggles the mind. There were no plans at any level of business, politics or in the minds of the public for this worst case scenario. Only a very few scientific minds talked about the potential of such a disaster and none of us at any level listened to them or believed it would happen.

I have to add this must totally frustrating for those in charge at BP and in the govt. Those in high positions are accustomed to issuing orders and having them followed - but mother nature doesn't listen.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2255918].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

As the problem continues it's easy to get lost in the daily news reports and maneuvering. I went back again to research from when this began. It's an interesting timeline.

An email from the original task force made up of experts looking at the oil spill in the Gulf. Task force was appointed by Salazar at end of April.

Timeline:

April 20 - DW explosion

May 6 - Salazar issues verbal moratorium on deep water drilling

May 22 - Pres announces oil spill commission

May 27 - Salazar task force releases report

May 27 - Pres extends moratorium for six months
- Email released from task force (quoted above)

June 14 - 5 more appointments to pres commission

So it would seem that while coastal residents are out of work from the shutdown of about 30 platforms in the Gulf - the oil companies are still getting what they want in the form of waivers of regulations.

Looking back 3 months with the reality of now - it's chilling.

New York Times on May 23:
The amazing thing about the digital age is "the people" can ignore obfuscation and following the timeline.

This isn't a criticism of any one person - it's the combination of events that boggles the mind. There were no plans at any level of business, politics or in the minds of the public for this worst case scenario. Only a very few scientific minds talked about the potential of such a disaster and none of us at any level listened to them or believed it would happen.

I have to add this must totally frustrating for those in charge at BP and in the govt. Those in high positions are accustomed to issuing orders and having them followed - but mother nature doesn't listen.

kay

Del - I say no.

I'm willing to bet that there won't be any drilling off Maryland's shores.

Virginia - Maybe

North Carolina - Wouldn't surprise me

South Carolina - Wouldn't surprise me

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2255949].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Salazar admits the experts didn't approve of the moratorium:

"An Interior Department spokeswoman agreed that the experts had not given their blessing for a moratorium, and said the department did not mean to leave the impression they had. In fact, she said, the experts were merely asked to review 22 safety recommendations in the report.

"We didn't mean to imply that they also agreed with the moratorium on deepwater drilling," the spokeswoman, Kendra Barkoff, said. "We acknowledge that they were not asked to review or comment on the proposed moratorium and that they peer-reviewed the report on a technical basis. The moratorium on deepwater drilling is based on the need for a comprehensive review of safety in deepwater operations in light of the BP oil spill."

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Also, no one responded to my question about Salazar's committee that he himself brought in to look over gulf disaster. NONE of them supported the moratorium. I've been listening to a lot of local talk radio since this started, and have even heard two of the men on that committee talk about it. They said they never supported the moratorium, and that Salazar falsely reported that they did. If we aren't going to take the experts advice, than whose advice are we taking?

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256213].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Turns out the judge who just stopped the oil moratorium had holdings of up to $15,000 in Transocean in 2008. He has also recently owned stock in offshore drilling or oilfield service providers Halliburton, Prospect Energy, Hercules Offshore, Parker Drilling Co., and ATP Oil & Gas. He was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1983.

What a surprise ruling.

I hear that he may still own those stocks.

If true, that's against the law and someone should be in big trouble.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2254928].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I hear that he may still own those stocks.

If true, that's against the law and someone should be in big trouble.

TL

The judge's financial disclosure report for 2008, the most recent available, shows holdings in at least eight petroleum companies or funds that invest in them, including Transocean Ltd., which owned the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig that blew up. The report shows that most of his holdings were valued at less than $15,000; it did not provide specific amounts.

It was not clear whether Feldman still has any of the energy industry stocks. Recent court filings indicate he may no longer have Transocean stock. The 2008 report showed that he did not own any individual shares in big companies such as BP, which leased the rig that exploded, or ExxonMobil.

Feldman did not immediately respond to a request for more information about his holdings.

According to the second paragraph, they apparently REALLY have reason to believe he DOESN'T have any holdings, though they apparently REALLY want him to. And NOTE how they say "funds that invest in them". These really ARE, or were, popular stocks!

And there is no talk of how large the total investment is. As much as $120K DOES sound like a lot, but that is apparently the MAXIMUM, and may be a drop in the bucket if he has 10s of millions. In any event, one saving grace is that his word is certainly NOT the last, so it would be foolhardy to trade based on such a decision.

I agree that he should recuse himself IF he has such investments, but doubt he does.

BTW I STILL remember a show where the defendant's lawyer went to the judge, and said that the case should be thrown out for lack of a judge as she must recuse herself. SHE was in SHOCK! It turned out she was part of a partnership that had a controlling interest in a company that enlisted a firm as a consultant that had the defendant as a key player. SHE only knew about the partnership! BP is such a stock. TO is also, BTW.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2255255].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Ok Liberator my bad, whenever I hear anyone use the "drill baby drill" slogan in reference to oil, I can't help but think of people who so strongly oppose Oil but still use it in every facet of their life, I was wrong to accuse you of that.

I am actually of the same belief as you, the technology for a feasible switch from Oil to any form of Green Energy just doesn't exist yet, but I think we're getting there.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252336].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Ok Liberator my bad, whenever I hear anyone use the "drill baby drill" slogan in reference to oil, I can't help but think of people who so strongly oppose Oil but still use it in every facet of their life, I was wrong to accuse you of that.

I am actually of the same belief as you, the technology for a feasible switch from Oil to any form of Green Energy just doesn't exist yet, but I think we're getting there.

Duckyman,

Those people don't oppose oil.

They oppose the drill baby drill crowd's insistence that we can drill our way out of all our energy problems and...

... their attitude ( held by most of them ) that we don't need to bother with a new energy policy for the nation.

That's a 20-30-40 year project.

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252802].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

What is your response to the scientific committee who was brought in to look at the facts about the gulf spill, and on the idea of the moratorium, and the fact that all of them said they DID NOT support the ban? They said that Salazar reported false information by saying that they supported the moratorium, and that the economic impact of the ban could be worse than the environmental impact. Your thoughts?

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252683].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

Drilling in the gulf is retarded. After watching this thing puke oil into the gulf for the last couple months, if anyone still wants to drill there, they need smacked.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252809].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Motley

Drilling in the gulf is retarded. After watching this thing puke oil into the gulf for the last couple months, if anyone still wants to drill there, they need smacked.

Well Mike...

There are a lot of jobs involved.

I've read as low as 35k to as high as 150k.

The real danger are the deep sea wells. ( 1,000+ feet )

But with much stronger regulations and inspections in place hopefully nothing else will happen.

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252849].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Well Mike...

There are a lot of jobs involved.

I've read as low as 35k to as high as 150k.

The real danger are the deep sea wells. ( 1,000+ feet )

But with much stronger regulations and inspections in place hopefully nothing else will happen.

TL

No, the real danger is turning the gulf into a sludge pit. Every state that touches the gulf makes money from the gulf. There are still morons in this state (fl) that STILL think its a good idea to have wells as close as 3 miles off the coast.

People dont come to florida to visit the cows in the middle of the state, they come for the beaches. When the beaches are gone, everything from the fishermen that work in the gulf, to the beach hotels and bars, to the shops that sell touristy crap go down. When those go down, people dont pay bills. While im really worried about the whole 36,000 people working on the 3800+ oil rigs in the gulf, I'm a little more concerned with the 5 states worth of gulf oriented industries and the 100's of thousands of businesses that are connected to them in those states, and the MILLIONS of jobs. And thats just in the gulf...we havent seen the best part of this yet. Just wait until the first hurricane hits the gulf or just a little bit longer until the slick really gets larger and gets in the gulf stream and all this crap runs all the way down florida's gulf coast, around through the keys (which primarily depend on their beaches for probably around 95% of their area's income) and back up the east coast. Then this turns into 8-10 states affected by this.

I'm not a mathmetician, but i'd venture a guess that the combined revenue of what is going to be ultimately lost here is going to far exceed the lost wages of those that work on the oil rigs, and is going to last for a decade or better.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2252899].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Michael, I was actually just wondering today where you have been and what you would think about this moratorium issue. I know we haven't always agreed on things in the past ( to say the least ), but in this instance as someone who lives in Florida and may be affected by this spill directly, you make a hell of a lot of sense and said some things I probably couldn't have being someone living on the other side of the country.

Originally Posted by Michael Motley

No, the real danger is turning the gulf into a sludge pit. Every state that touches the gulf makes money from the gulf. There are still morons in this state (fl) that STILL think its a good idea to have wells as close as 3 miles off the coast.

People dont come to florida to visit the cows in the middle of the state, they come for the beaches. When the beaches are gone, everything from the fishermen that work in the gulf, to the beach hotels and bars, to the shops that sell touristy crap go down. When those go down, people dont pay bills. While im really worried about the whole 36,000 people working on the 3800+ oil rigs in the gulf, I'm a little more concerned with the 5 states worth of gulf oriented industries and the 100's of thousands of businesses that are connected to them in those states, and the MILLIONS of jobs. And thats just in the gulf...we havent seen the best part of this yet. Just wait until the first hurricane hits the gulf or just a little bit longer until the slick really gets larger and gets in the gulf stream and all this crap runs all the way down florida's gulf coast, around through the keys (which primarily depend on their beaches for probably around 95% of their area's income) and back up the east coast. Then this turns into 8-10 states affected by this.

I'm not a mathmetician, but i'd venture a guess that the combined revenue of what is going to be ultimately lost here is going to far exceed the lost wages of those that work on the oil rigs, and is going to last for a decade or better.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253161].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Michael, I was actually just wondering today where you have been and what you would think about this moratorium issue. I know we haven't always agreed on things in the past ( to say the least ), but in this instance as someone who lives in Florida and may be affected by this spill directly, you make a hell of a lot of sense and said some things I probably couldn't have being someone living on the other side of the country.

The powers that be dont even fully know the what the effects are going to be yet. A 'town hall' type meeting the other night raised an interesting point. There are a couple nuclear power plants on the gulf coast that pull water to cool the towers straight from the ocean, whats going to happen when the tarballs that are in Pensacola already start clogging up the inlets? Nobody knows because its never been something that has happened before. The 'best case' scenario is that the plants shut down. Thats 3 full nuclear plants shut down.

17% of Tampa's drinking water comes from desalination plants. I'm more than a little sure that crude oil and drinking water dont mix.

No power, no water, the dead of Florida summer, yeah that shouldnt be a problem at all. Add to that we are right now in the middle of our rainy season, beginning our hurricane season with daily lightning/thunderstorms that have a nasty habit of starting wildfires in the large areas of florida underbrush...and this could get really stupid really quick.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253630].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Motley

The powers that be dont even fully know the what the effects are going to be yet. A 'town hall' type meeting the other night raised an interesting point. There are a couple nuclear power plants on the gulf coast that pull water to cool the towers straight from the ocean, whats going to happen when the tarballs that are in Pensacola already start clogging up the inlets? Nobody knows because its never been something that has happened before. The 'best case' scenario is that the plants shut down. Thats 3 full nuclear plants shut down.

There are several layers of filtering on the water intakes, and there would have
to be a tremendous number of tarballs to totally clog them. Plus there are other
things they can do if there are a lot of tarballs.

Smaller ones can get through, though, and that would be a problem. Also, if it gets
to the point where actual oily water is present, then that would present a worse
problem. I would imagine that is being monitored closely, and they'll shut down before
that kind of water hits the intakes.

There are different kinds of reactors. Not all have those huge cooling towers. The water
they draw is used to accomplish different things, and of course one of them is for
cooling. Anything like that contaminating the water will decrease the ability to provide
the expected cooling effect. So that's another reason they would shut down. That
plus to prevent systems from being contaminated with oil.

At least that is what I would expect from them.

For electricity, it'll be all right because they can buy power elsewhere. So I wouldn't
worry about that being interrupted, but I would be concerned about the higher cost
if they do have to buy power. They routinely buy power from all around the country
and serve it up.

If that scenario came to pass, it would probably raise electric costs for other areas
of the country. More scarce commodity - higher prices.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253684].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

There are several layers of filtering on the water intakes, and there would have
to be a tremendous number of tarballs to totally clog them. Plus there are other
things they can do if there are a lot of tarballs.

Smaller ones can get through, though, and that would be a problem. Also, if it gets
to the point where actual oily water is present, then that would present a worse
problem. I would imagine that is being monitored closely, and they'll shut down before
that kind of water hits the intakes.

There are different kinds of reactors. Not all have those huge cooling towers. The water
they draw is used to accomplish different things, and of course one of them is for
cooling. Anything like that contaminating the water will decrease the ability to provide
the expected cooling effect. So that's another reason they would shut down. That
plus to prevent systems from being contaminated with oil.

At least that is what I would expect from them.

For electricity, it'll be all right because they can buy power elsewhere. So I wouldn't
worry about that being interrupted, but I would be concerned about the higher cost
if they do have to buy power. They routinely buy power from all around the country
and serve it up.

If that scenario came to pass, it would probably raise electric costs for other areas
of the country. More scarce commodity - higher prices.

Oh i know they will be shut down before there would be a meltdown. And im looking forward to the 97 deg. days with no ac, as im sure are the huge amount of retirees in the state. Nothing says summer fun like a state full of geriatrics with rolling power outages and heat strokes by the ton on a daily basis.

And by the time that the oil reaches the plants...its all over with but the crying at that point. It will probably mean increased power bills on people that are already or soon to be unemployed. Unemployment in this state pays $275 a week, regardless of your previous pay. That doesnt go far when you're power bill jumps 20-30%. And this will also no doubt affect the water bill of most people too. Something that was just raised by 8% not too long ago.

Broke, hot, rolling blackouts, increased bills, decreased work and a noticeable lack of drinking water that will be made up for by pulling on the aquifer underground. In this state, that means the already increased demand that drains the aquifer will increase even further. Around here, when the aquifer gets drained by drought and farmers start pulling on it hard to keep crops alive, sinkholes start forming all around the coast. There is a town in the northern part of my county called New Port Richey. NPR is famous for sink holes. People dont know that under most of new port richey is a extensive system of caverns underground that are fed directly from the gulf. I wonder what is going to happen to NPR when those caverns get filed with this oil slick.

This has the potential to get really really crappy for this state

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253783].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Welcome back, Michael -

17% of Tampa's drinking water comes from desalination plants. I'm more than a little sure that crude oil and drinking water dont mix.

I think you're on to something there. When you think of the various problems this could realistically cause for months or longer, it boggles the mind. I know mine has been boggled for weeks.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253787].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Motley

No, the real danger is turning the gulf into a sludge pit. Every state that touches the gulf makes money from the gulf. There are still morons in this state (fl) that STILL think its a good idea to have wells as close as 3 miles off the coast.

People dont come to florida to visit the cows in the middle of the state, they come for the beaches. When the beaches are gone, everything from the fishermen that work in the gulf, to the beach hotels and bars, to the shops that sell touristy crap go down. When those go down, people dont pay bills. While im really worried about the whole 36,000 people working on the 3800+ oil rigs in the gulf, I'm a little more concerned with the 5 states worth of gulf oriented industries and the 100's of thousands of businesses that are connected to them in those states, and the MILLIONS of jobs. And thats just in the gulf...we havent seen the best part of this yet. Just wait until the first hurricane hits the gulf or just a little bit longer until the slick really gets larger and gets in the gulf stream and all this crap runs all the way down florida's gulf coast, around through the keys (which primarily depend on their beaches for probably around 95% of their area's income) and back up the east coast. Then this turns into 8-10 states affected by this.

I'm not a mathmetician, but i'd venture a guess that the combined revenue of what is going to be ultimately lost here is going to far exceed the lost wages of those that work on the oil rigs, and is going to last for a decade or better.

Does Florida have any offshore rigs at all???

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2255588].message }}

Michael Motley 16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Does Florida have any offshore rigs at all???

Physically only really around the panhandle. However thanks to the gulf stream which essentially turns the gulf into a big toilet bowl every state 'has' oil rigs in the sense that if one busts, everyone gets a slice of that poo pie.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2259686].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Ok Michael...

Did some quick checking and found that Turkey Point nuke plant, south
of Miami, has a closed cooling water system - so no problem. Also, Crystal
River nuke plant is already shut down for repairs, probably an outage - normal.

No worries, man. You'll be all right. Here...

CORRECTED - U.S. coastal power plants monitor spreading oil | Reuters

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253813].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Ok Michael...

Did some quick checking and found that Turkey Point nuke plant, south
of Miami, has a closed cooling water system - so no problem. Also, Crystal
River nuke plant is already shut down for repairs, probably an outage - normal.

No worries, man. You'll be all right. Here...

CORRECTED - U.S. coastal power plants monitor spreading oil | Reuters

Progress energy has crystal river shut down to prepare. Anclote key is another one that is possibly going to be an issue and then there is the Bartow plant. Im not even concerned with the Miami. Its likely they wont have any issues because they are so far down and away from the problem..for now.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253835].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

I dont think that 'months' will even cover it. We are already down to 37% of the gulf that can't be fished in, i dont see that getting any better any time soon. First there's the oil, and then there is the chemical dispersants. Once either one of those is firmly in the foodchain of the gulf, its going to take quite some time for it to get out. Probably atleast 3-4 years for fishing.

On top of that, its not like most of the 'workers' being hired are anything more than rent-a-drunks from the local employment agencies. Whatever the oil isnt getting, these morons are destroying by their very presence. There are already reports of these mongoloids destroying nesting areas and killing animals.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253819].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

On top of that, its not like most of the 'workers' being hired are anything more than rent-a-drunks from the local employment agencies.

What's reported here is these are outsourced cleanup companies - most of the workers are brought in. There have been complaints that they haven't been hiring locals so maybe that's changed.

They are clueless about the value of the wetland and wildlife and totally unused to the heat here. They are slow, rest more than they work - but to be fair have to admit I couldn't work on the sand in the sun this time of year with protective clothing covering me.

For Florida especially, I think the underwater plumes may be highly dangerous for your environment - just my take on it.

40 cleaned brown pelicans released in Texas this week - hard to find a place where it's safe to release them. The first few were released in Florida but that quickly stopped. It was wonderful to watch the video as they were released and flew off over the water.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2253845].message }}

John Henderson

16 years ago

Tony Hayward hands over control of Gulf situation to Bob Dudley.

BBC News - BP names new chief of oil response team

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2255891].message }}

TLTheLiberator 16 years ago

Originally Posted by John Henderson

Tony Hayward hands over control of Gulf situation to Bob Dudley.

BBC News - BP names new chief of oil response team

One of Kay's own...

Mr Dudley will head BP's restoration organization "effective immediately".

Mr Dudley, who grew up in Mississippi, had a "deep appreciation and affinity for the Gulf Coast", BP said.
- Thanks
Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2255912].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I've been hearing about this a lot recently, and it seems shadier every time I hear about it.

Obama Finances Offshore Drilling in Brazil

Apparently George Soros invested heavily in the main Oil company down there a few weeks before the explosion on Deepwater Horrizon. With this Moratorium, a lot of the rigs in the gulf are heading to Brazil.

I'm assuming that the article is accurate since it came from the WSJ, but I can't remember where I heard about the Soros investments. Though I have heard nothing but bad things about that guy.

Anyone know more about this than I do?

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2255993].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I've been hearing about this a lot recently, and it seems shadier every time I hear about it.

Obama Finances Offshore Drilling in Brazil

Apparently George Soros invested heavily in the main Oil company down there a few weeks before the explosion on Deepwater Horrizon. With this Moratorium, a lot of the rigs in the gulf are heading to Brazil.

I'm assuming that the article is accurate since it came from the WSJ, but I can't remember where I heard about the Soros investments. Though I have heard nothing but bad things about that guy.

Anyone know more about this than I do?

I'm not sure why the presidents' name is attached to this story but with the WSJ - I'm not surprised.

The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) is the official export credit agency of the United States federal government.

--- It's an independent agency:

It was established in 1934 by an executive order, and made an independent agency...

... in the Executive branch by Congress in 1945, for the purposes of financing and insuring foreign purchases of United States goods for customers unable or unwilling to accept credit risk.

It was re-chartered in 2006:

The Bank is chartered as a government corporation by the Congress of the United States; it was last chartered for a five year term in 2006.

[1] Its Charter spells out the Bank's authorities and limitations.

Among them is the principle that Ex-Im Bank does not compete with private sector lenders, but rather provides financing for transactions that would otherwise not take place because commercial lenders are either unable or unwilling to accept the political or commercial risks inherent in the deal.

Its current chairman is Fred Hochberg.

Perhaps a word from congress and the pres can stop this transaction??

But it's an independent agency etc. ???

I'm not sure what's going on here.

Are you implying that the moratorium is designed to force rigs to re-locate to Brazil.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256157].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

I know it's a year old story, the WSJ is owned by Murdock now and this doesn't have much to do with the BP spill.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Anyone know more about this than I do?
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256158].message }}
- TLTheLiberator 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  I know it's a year old story, the WSJ is owned by Murdock now and this doesn't have much to do with the BP spill.
  
  Yeh Tim,
  
  The WSJ would have hated O before, but now since it's owned by Murdock, it's amplified.
  
  but Duckyman seems to imply that the moratorium is somehow connected.
  
  TL
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256195].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I wasn't Implying it was, I was just stating how sketchy it was.

Also I've heard that the Ex-Im bank gets something like $1 billion in tax payer money every year, but than I've also heard statements like yours that say it doesn't.

Regardless of whether it does or doesn't, if the part about Soros putting a large amount of funding into Petrobras in Brazil right before the explosion is very very sketchy. Considering that it got funds from the Ex-Im bank and now the rigs are all moving there.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256217].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

There's a lot of weird stuff out there about Soros. Some claim he is a big part of the conspiracy theory New World Order. A main member of the Illuminati. Do a search of Soros Illuminati or Soros New World Order and you will see what I mean. I'm not saying he wouldn't exploit a situation to make money, but I don't see any connection to the moratorium and Soros.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I wasn't Implying it was, I was just stating how sketchy it was.

Also I've heard that the Ex-Im bank gets something like $1 billion in tax payer money every year, but than I've also heard statements like yours that say it doesn't.

Regardless of whether it does or doesn't, if the part about Soros putting a large amount of funding into Petrobras in Brazil right before the explosion is very very sketchy. Considering that it got funds from the Ex-Im bank and now the rigs are all moving there.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256245].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

There's a lot of weird stuff out there about Soros. Some claim he is a big part of the conspiracy theory New World Order. A main member of the Illuminati. Do a search of Soros Illuminati or Soros New World Order and you will see what I mean. I'm not saying he wouldn't exploit a situation to make money, but I don't see any connection to the moratorium and Soros.

OH, there IS a connection, between the moratorium and Soros, EVEN if it wasn't planned. THAT much is FACT! ICSM!

And you don't need any of the real wierd Illuminati type conspiracy theories. The truth is MORE than enough!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256261].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

OH, there IS a connection, between the moratorium and Soros, EVEN if it wasn't planned. THAT much is FACT! ICSM!

And you don't need any of the real wierd Illuminati type conspiracy theories. The truth is MORE than enough!

Steve

You can PM me with your info.

Oh I get it.

As soon as the rig blew up etc. Mr. S. correctly antisipated that there would/may be some type of temp moratorium on further drilling and...

... some rig companies would not want to wait out the moratorium and go south to Brazil etc.

So he would allegedly place himself in a position to profit by getting involved with Brazil's drilling etc. hoping rigs would leave the Gulf etc.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256297].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

That connection is understandable. What I meant was I don't see the moratorium decision being done to help out Soros. I believe that was being implied.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

You can PM me with your info.

Oh I get it.

As soon as the rig blew up etc. Mr. S. correctly antisipated that there would/may be some type of temp moratorium on further drilling and...

... some rig companies would not want to wait out the moratorium and go south to Brazil etc.

So he would allegedly place himself in a position to profit by getting involved with Brazil's drilling etc. hoping rigs would leave the Gulf etc.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256602].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

The connection is interesting but wasn't that investment originally made in 2008?

Not surprising that some position themselves to the "far left" and advocate public policies that redistribute wealth for the masses while positioning their own corporate interests for maximum personal profit.

Brazil is openly courting the oil rigs that were shut down - and Soros is doing his share of that courting.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256630].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I wasn't Implying it was, I was just stating how sketchy it was.

Also I've heard that the Ex-Im bank gets something like $1 billion in tax payer money every year, but than I've also heard statements like yours that say it doesn't.

TL even said "The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) is the official export credit agency of the United States federal government.", so it IS financed by tax payers!

Regardless of whether it does or doesn't, if the part about Soros putting a large amount of funding into Petrobras in Brazil right before the explosion is very very sketchy. Considering that it got funds from the Ex-Im bank and now the rigs are all moving there.

I could say a LOT about Soros here, but I'll spare this thread. He invests in MANY things. 8-( Talk about conflict of interest!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256253].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

And Tim, I wasn't bringing that up because he reported false information, I brought it up because the experts brought in by the federal government, all opposed the moratorium. And they clearly know more about it than you, me, or anyone else on this thread.

Unless of course one of them happens to be sneaking around on here as we speak.

You Never Know :x

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256227].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Hey guys I have a quick off topic question for you.

I work for a company and it is relatively new only like 2 years old. We just had an article come out about us in Entrepreneur magazine, and it is a really good article.

I posted it in the general forum first, but it got deleted right away.

The article talks about all the innovative things my company is doing, and it all pertains to marketing, and most of what we do relies heavily on Internet Marketing of a sort, but we have revamped it. I thought everyone would be interested to read about it, especially since were a small company getting our first article, and Entrepreneur even called some of the stuff we are doing "The Future" of marketing.

I just want to know why a post like that got deleted since its not an affiliate link since I work for the company. Did I just post it in the wrong forum, or am I never allowed to make posts like that on here?

Sorry for asking this on here, but I didn't really know where else to ask since you can't message the Mods, and I didn't see anything in the FAQ's sections. Thanks.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256277].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Hey guys I have a quick off topic question for you.

I work for a company and it is relatively new only like 2 years old. We just had an article come out about us in Entrepreneur magazine, and it is a really good article.

I posted it in the general forum first, but it got deleted right away.

The article talks about all the innovative things my company is doing, and it all pertains to marketing, and most of what we do relies heavily on Internet Marketing of a sort, but we have revamped it. I thought everyone would be interested to read about it, especially since were a small company getting our first article, and Entrepreneur even called some of the stuff we are doing "The Future" of marketing.

I just want to know why a post like that got deleted since its not an affiliate link since I work for the company. Did I just post it in the wrong forum, or am I never allowed to make posts like that on here?

Sorry for asking this on here, but I didn't really know where else to ask since you can't message the Mods, and I didn't see anything in the FAQ's sections. Thanks.

It probably looked too much like advertising. Things like that ARE deleted.

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256311].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Ok well I guess I don't really know how I could post it without it looking like advertising, even though I'm confident most people would be really interested to read it.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256333].message }}

CJ.Online

16 years ago

Hahahaha,
That's so funny! It's like they assume they're going to mess up and just want to be able to calculate the risk($27m) to profit ratio! lol what jerks!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256347].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Dukky,

You're probably right, but there is a LOT of spam in here as it is.

CJ,

The title is wrong. TO was the one trying for the 27M TOTAL limit. For BP, it used to be 75M PER+1BIL(cleanup)+so much per spilled barrel of oil. So it was NEVER going to be CHEAP for BP. NOW they plan to raise it significantly.

Anyway, a robot meandered around that BOP, and BUMPED THE CAP! They HOPE to get it fixed soon, though this happened about 5 hours ago!

NEW ORLEANS – Tens of thousands of gallons more oil gushed into the Gulf of Mexico on Wednesday after an undersea robot bumped a venting system, forcing BP to remove the cap that had been containing some of the crude.

It was yet another setback in the nine-week effort to stop the gusher, and it came as thick pools of oil washed up on Pensacola Beach in Florida and the Obama administration tried to figure out how to resurrect a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling.

When the robot bumped the system just before 10 a.m. Wednesday, gas rose through the vent that carries warm water down to prevent ice-like crystals from forming, Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen said.

Crews were checking to see if crystals had formed before putting it back on. BP spokesman Bill Salvin could not say how long that might take.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256479].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I am not a fan of conspiracy theories, and was not implying that there was a connection.

I said that it looked shady, and then asked for more information about it.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256631].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

By the way I've noticed that those who support the moratorium have repeatedly avoided answering my question about what they thought about Salazar's committee opposing the moratorium. That's the question I want answered.

A committee of experts put together by the federal government (not state government, not BP, not the Oil industry, not environmentalists) said that the Moratorium is not a good idea, and that the economic impact would be devastating.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256662].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

I did reply on the previous page at the end. Maybe you didn't see it. BTW, I think the moratorium could have been done in a better fashion. Some other law maker came up with a good idea on how to go about it in a way to get the new rigs safely approved. I think the admins viewpoint is they need to find out what the best procedures are and since the public and the gov have been lied to by the oil companies it can't be done quickly and safely. Those experts agreed on 22 safety measures but didn't agree on the moratorium. Salazar admits this. Was he being deceitful or just sloppy in how he described their involvement is up for debate.

Also, regardless of what others say I don't support everything Obama does. In fact I could make a long list of things the admin has done that I don't agree with, including the March decision to end the oil moratorium on the east coast, the Mexico Gulf and off Alaska.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

By the way I've noticed that those who support the moratorium have repeatedly avoided answering my question about what they thought about Salazar's committee opposing the moratorium. That's the question I want answered.

A committee of experts put together by the federal government (not state government, not BP, not the Oil industry, not environmentalists) said that the Moratorium is not a good idea, and that the economic impact would be devastating.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256758].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I never said that you did Tim.

And you did answer my question just now, and I agree with that response. I'm not concerned with the fact that Salazar claimed that he had their support (I know that he made it quite clear recently that he was wrong for doing so, if it was by accident or on purpose who knows), I just wanted to know what everyone thinks about the fact that these experts oppose the moratorium, but the feds have chosen to ignore them.

I will disagree on the whole Oil Companies lying to the public thing, from what I've been hearing and reading, it's really just BP who has been doing most of the bad stuff, apparently the other rigs and the companies that own them don't have nearly as many violations as BP. Really if that holds to be true, they should be rewarded for upholding high standards of safety, while the Oil Giant was running rampant ignoring rules and regulations left and right. Instead they are all being punished.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256806].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Others here pretty much think I have no mind of my own, I just go read the left talking points and come here and repeat them. From my point of view this isn't true although I do readily admit I am very left leaning overall. Usually my disagreements with obama is that he is too far to the right on many issues, but I knew he was a centrist when he ran.

Regarding the lying to I am more referring to how prepared the oil companies are to deal with these leaks in deep sea drilling. They have said that these rigs are safe and if anything ever did happen they could solve the problem quickly by capping the well. Well, that isn't true as we are painfully finding out. The whole industry deceived us and the gov. Obama definitely bought it because of his announced end of the oil moratorium I mentioned.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I never said that you did Tim.

And you did answer my question just now, and I agree with that response. I'm not concerned with the fact that Salazar claimed that he had their support (I know that he made it quite clear recently that he was wrong for doing so, if it was by accident or on purpose who knows), I just wanted to know what everyone thinks about the fact that these experts oppose the moratorium, but the feds have chosen to ignore them.

I will disagree on the whole Oil Companies lying to the public thing, from what I've been hearing and reading, it's really just BP who has been doing most of the bad stuff, apparently the other rigs and the companies that own them don't have nearly as many violations as BP. Really if that holds to be true, they should be rewarded for upholding high standards of safety, while the Oil Giant was running rampant ignoring rules and regulations left and right. Instead they are all being punished.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256936].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Others here pretty much think I have no mind of my own, I just go read the left talking points and come here and repeat them. From my point of view this isn't true although I do readily admit I am very left leaning overall. Usually my disagreements with obama is that he is too far to the right on many issues, but I knew he was a centrist when he ran.

Regarding the lying to I am more referring to how prepared the oil companies are to deal with these leaks in deep sea drilling. They have said that these rigs are safe and if anything ever did happen they could solve the problem quickly by capping the well. Well, that isn't true as we are painfully finding out. The whole industry deceived us and the gov. Obama definitely bought it because of his announced end of the oil moratorium I mentioned.

If I remember right Tim, they have safety devices in place when they build the wells. The one for this well took a crap 2 weeks before the explosion and BP didn't want to take the time to replace it.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257078].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

The reality for today - Pensacola beach covered with oil now.

Young dolphin washed ashore and though people tried to remove the oil to save it, it died a few hours later.

I know some people think "just a fish or mammal" but the people who tried to save the small dolphin said "he seemed to be crying" and offshore the rest of the pod of dolphins were leaping and vocalizing like crazy. Don't tell me they don't communicate! They were responding to his cries.

Some days I can get into an analytical mode that looks at certain people or companies or agencies related to this accident. But then something like this brings it home and it breaks my heart to see the damage we've caused.

kay

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257265].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

The reality for today - Pensacola beach covered with oil now.

Young dolphin washed ashore and though people tried to remove the oil to save it, it died a few hours later.

I know some people think "just a fish or mammal" but the people who tried to save the small dolphin said "he seemed to be crying" and offshore the rest of the pod of dolphins were leaping and vocalizing like crazy. Don't tell me they don't communicate! They were responding to his cries.

Some days I can get into an analytical mode that looks at certain people or companies or agencies related to this accident. But then something like this brings it home and it breaks my heart to see the damage we've caused.

kay

I know YOU know better, but a dolphin is CLEARLY a mammal. They can drown and probably do have the ability to cry. It is SICK that such a nice and beautiful creature is treated with so much carelessness. And I am sure it would try its best to stay in water, etc... so it was probably as good as dead before it was beached. 8-( And yeah, the POD is a small society. The young dolphin may have even had a mate that now has to move on. 8-(

And florida is STILL trying to say everything is FINE!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257376].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

I just saw a congressman say that there should be a cap for BP and the US taxpayers should pay anything above the cap. Asked if this was a "bailout" for BP he said "No". 8-)

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257637].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Hopefully the marine life that is able to escape will know things
are not right, and they'll head somewhere out of the danger.

I don't know if that's a possibility for aquatic life though dolphins might get it. They don't encounter things like this in the ocean as a rule. Wild creatures on land become conditioned to escape at the smell of fire or to hole up in bad weather. I've never read of aquatic creatures moving away from dangerous waters but hope they can.

The problem for dolphins, sea turtles and birds is they don't know the threat is there until they are in it. The dophins and sea turtles come up for air and find themselves in a slick of oil - birds diving for fish find oil instead. I guess that's obvious but it must be a nasty surprise for them.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257654].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Tim - That's interesting because BP hasn't ask for a cap. It's odd they keep talking about caps when BP publicly says they will pay ALL damages of the spill.

The one to watch (to me) are damages from the moratorium. Some legal eagles are saying we might be on the hook (taxpayers) for that. BP put in $100 million for a fund for that but the estimates of the cost of shutting the rigs down is in over a hundred million a month (can't vouch for the estimates but that includes rig maintenance, lost jobs and service businesses).

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257680].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Tim - That's interesting because BP hasn't ask for a cap. It's odd they keep talking about caps when BP publicly says they will pay ALL damages of the spill.

The one to watch (to me) are damages from the moratorium. Some legal eagles are saying we might be on the hook (taxpayers) for that. BP put in $100 million for a fund for that but the estimates of the cost of shutting the rigs down is in over a hundred million a month (can't vouch for the estimates but that includes rig maintenance, lost jobs and service businesses).

kay

If *I* were BP, I woulld pay $100M for the moratorium, but it would be a good will gesture, NOT an admission of guilt or responsibility, so I might balk at $500Mil. You shouldn't COUNT on that lasting. And BP can't pay ALL damages, so who knows what the limit may be?
After all, HOW do you pay that young dolphin back?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257733].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

It's very, very sad what is happening to animals and humans.

Originally Posted by Kay King

The reality for today - Pensacola beach covered with oil now.

Young dolphin washed ashore and though people tried to remove the oil to save it, it died a few hours later.

I know some people think "just a fish or mammal" but the people who tried to save the small dolphin said "he seemed to be crying" and offshore the rest of the pod of dolphins were leaping and vocalizing like crazy. Don't tell me they don't communicate! They were responding to his cries.

Some days I can get into an analytical mode that looks at certain people or companies or agencies related to this accident. But then something like this brings it home and it breaks my heart to see the damage we've caused.

kay

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257850].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Salazar admitted he had no support only when the task force made their lack of support public. The decision for the moratorium was made because that's what the administration wanted. There have been no changes in MMS policies and only one person who resign from there.

Salazar has been watching which way the political winds blow and trying to save his job. His fall from "doing a great job" to "Salazar did not understand the job" - came last week.

He's out soon - should have been out the week after the explosion.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2256985].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

"Doin a great job down here Brownie" makes me wish Salazar had a funnier last name.

Seriously though, the audacity of him to come out and declare right after the Judges ruling that he was just going to issue a new Moratorium that would make everyone see why drilling had to be stopped is just insane. I'm fine with the feds appealing it, but that whole statement is plain crazy, just think about what he's saying. "I know that I was just over ruled in a court of law, but I'm going to just make another rule that you can't overturn and everyone has to agree with"

Before the other side of the argument starts debunking my statement, I know that's not what he said exactly, but it does sound like it. By the way is it even legal for him to do that, the courts just said the first moratorium is not legal, so he is just going to make another one? So even if the courts keep ruling against the moratorium, he can just keep making them until were on moratorium #529?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257073].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Hopefully the marine life that is able to escape will know things
are not right, and they'll head somewhere out of the danger.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2257632].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Speaking of Dolphins, did anyone happen to catch that documentary "The Cove"?

If you haven't seen it you have to, its the best documentary I've ever seen.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2259781].message }}

Michael Motley 16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Speaking of Dolphins, did anyone happen to catch that documentary "The Cove"?

If you haven't seen it you have to, its the best documentary I've ever seen.

Oh my god a buddy turned me on to that on day. I'm not even an animals rights person and that just pissed me straight off. Very powerful movie.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2259845].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

I saw previews of it on a DVD I rented last weekend. Sometimes I see things
like that, and I don't even want to tell you what goes through my mind.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2259853].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Well here we go.........It's raining oil in LA.

It is raining oil in Louisiana!

And we haven't even started to think about how the housing industry is going to be smacked by this thing. If someone wants to sell a house in oil inundated areas - exactly where will they find someone to buy it? How many people are now losing on that investment?

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2260219].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Hmm that's weird I haven't heard about that anywhere, and have not experienced any Oil rain yet myself. Though I'm looking into it now, and will report anything I find out.

By the way everyone one of my friends reminded me last night that me and him met Billy Nungessar at a restaurant in New Orleans about a year ago. He overheard a conversation we were having, came over and introduced himself, and turned out to be a really nice down to earth guy. Gave us his card in case we were ever in Plaquemines Parish and needed anything. Just figured some of you might find that interesting.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2260310].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

I was skeptical about nungessar when he seemed to kowtow and change his views after a meeting with the President. But I checked into him and agree he's a good guy. He cares a lot for the people he represents and he loves Louisiana. I think he was momentarily awed by access to high office - but that quickly passed when the promises made weren't kept.

I laughed at his CNN interview after his meeting with the President - when he said "the president chewed me out and told me to talk to him before talking to the media" - I could almost hear the moans in D.C. over that comment:p Damn those straight talking southern folks.

I feel sorry for Nungessar and for Jindal - they are trying so hard and are being blocked and second guessed day after day by people who have no clue and are incapable of being decisive.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2260399].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Yes but I just read an article where Billy said he really appreciates Obama, and that now things are actually getting done. Which makes me feel a lot better. Apparently after all his accusations of Obama saying he would do things and not coming through, he has finally gotten to the pres. I hope they continue to work well together, and that this isn't another short lived moment of light in the 60+ days of darkness.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2260544].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

May depend on when the article was written with Nungessar

I had an interesting conversation with my son this morning. He's based in southern ohio but has been working in D.C. for several weeks. He was in a breakfast meeting where the oil spill came up.

He said he almost had to leave the room. Said the discussion was totally removed from the reality he knows after living along the MS coast for several years.He didn't blame the people at the meeting but said it was like discussing something from a textbook and it upset him.

He said he started telling them how the pelicans fish and what a crane refuge looks like when all the white birds are nesting. He talked about shrimpers and independent lifestyles and bayou music and the kindness of the people in this region - he said he felt like he was lecturing but those who were there told him it made a difference in how they saw the spill's effects. He said the only problem is several of them want to know where they can download his zydeco tunes.

That's just the sort of thing he would do. I'm damned proud of that boy!!!

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2262033].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

And it sounds like you should be proud of him

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2264596].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

He grew up living with me - don't know how he turned out so good

His brother is no slouch, either - wish I'd been as focused as they are when I was younger.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2264631].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

FYI...

Seems like LA. Gov Bobby Jindal is at odds with the Feds over deployment of National Guards to fight the spill etc.

Summary...

Questions are asked by CBS as to why the full 6,500 LA National Guards have not been activated... ( only about 1,100 have been activated )

- Jindal says Feds won't/didn't release guards:

- But Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the national incident commander in charge of the government's response to the spill, said Jindal is just flat wrong.

"There is nothing standing in the governor's way from utilizing more National Guard troops," Allen said.

In fact, the Coast Guard says every request to use the National Guard has been approved, usually within a day.

Now Jindal's office acknowledged to CBS News the governor has not specifically asked for more Guard troops to be deployed.

Why not???

Most of the other Gulf states Gov's are in the same position as Jindal.

Here's a short video from CBS news on the story...

Spill Guard Deployment Holdup - CBS News Video

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2264911].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Wow! So Jindal complains about the fed not using all the resources and he has 5000 additional guardsmen he hasn't bothered to deploy?! Incredible! Hypocritical also.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2264959].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Wow! So Jindal complains about the feds not using all the resources and he has 5000 additional guardsmen he hasn't bothered to deploy?! Incredible! Hypocritical also.

Could this be simply a gotcha story by CBS???

Could it be just a mis-understanding on Jindal's part??

If so, it's a biggie.

All the Govs of the region are not taking advantage of this resource.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2264986].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

FYI...

Seems like LA. Gov Bobby Jindal is at odds with the Feds over deployment of National Guards to fight the spill etc.

Summary...

Questions are asked by CBS as to why the full 6,500 LA National Guards have not been activated... ( only about 1,100 have been activated )

- Jindal says Feds won't/didn't release guards:

- But Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the national incident commander in charge of the government's response to the spill, said Jindal is just flat wrong.

"There is nothing standing in the governor's way from utilizing more National Guard troops," Allen said.

In fact, the Coast Guard says every request to use the National Guard has been approved, usually within a day.

Now Jindal's office acknowledged to CBS News the governor has not specifically asked for more Guard troops to be deployed.

Why not???

Most of the other Gulf states Gov's are in the same position as Jindal.

Here's a short video from CBS news on the story...

Spill Guard Deployment Holdup - CBS News Video

Rebuttal
National Guard troops fan out along Louisiana coast to combat Gulf oil spill | NOLA.com

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265200].message }}

TLTheLiberator 16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Rebuttal
National Guard troops fan out along Louisiana coast to combat Gulf oil spill | NOLA.com

So, there's nothing Jindal can do with 5,000 more National Guard troops with BP picking up the tab???

Nothing??

TL
- Thanks
Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265215].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP is picking up the tab for the deployment of the National Guard troops in the Gulf states.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265109].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

What would jindal do with them? So far, it seems the coastguard has been more a hindrance, than anything else. They aren't there to clean up, deploy barriers(Though it is kind of too late now ANYWAY), or stop the leak apparently. They DID stop the barges though! 8-(

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265183].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

I don't know, why don't you ask him. You are obviously assuming that there are a ton of things he could be using the NG for.

Did you ever consider that he is saving some jobs for the thousands of fishermen and Oil Workers who have been put out of business?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265467].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

I don't know, why don't you ask him. You are obviously assuming that there are a ton of things he could be using the NG for.

Did you ever consider that he is saving some jobs for the thousands of fishermen and Oil Workers who have been put out of business?

There is a ton of things the NG could be used for. In a problem like this, there is no such thing as having too many bodies to throw at the problem. There are daily calls for private boats because there arent enough fisherman to either get involved or they dont want to.

I'd imagine that the fisherman who are jumping on this money havent yet run into things like whats going to happen when they start to go back to fishing with a boat and gear thats coated in oil. Surely cleaning a fishing boat down to the wood for oil can't be a big deal right?

the more warm bodies on this, means the faster it gets cleaned up, which means the faster recovery can start.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265726].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Well just think about it this way, what possible reason could he have for not deploying the National Guard, if he there was need of them? He already deployed 1,100 so why would he have reservations about another 5,000? I'm sure there is a good reason for not deploying the remaining NG troops, or it would happen. Really I want to know why Jindal wouldn't do it, if he needed them.

There has been serious concern with people flooding in from all over the country, or even out of the country, looking for work, and the State is trying to save as many jobs possible for local displaced workers, it just makes sense. The 1,100 deployed right now are being used for very specific jobs, that they have special training for. Hopefully whatever doesn't require special training is being given to locals, and that is what has been happening.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265767].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

There is a ton of things the NG could be used for. In a problem like this, there is no such thing as having too many bodies to throw at the problem. There are daily calls for private boats because there arent enough fisherman to either get involved or they dont want to.

That's not really true. There are hundreds of fisherman and charter boat owners with boats who have signed up, trained and have not yet been called to help out. What we lack are a sufficient number of skimmers - and offers to provide those by other countries were declined .

The U.S. Government has apparently reconsidered a Dutch offer to supply 4 oil skimmers. These are large arms that are attached to oil tankers that pump oil and water from the surface of the ocean into the tanker. Water pumped into the tanker will settle to the bottom of the tanker and is then pumped back into the ocean to make room for more oil. Each system will collect 5,000 tons of oil each day.

One ton of oil is about 7.3 barrels. 5,000 tons per day is 36,500 barrels per day. 4 skimmers have a capacity of 146,000 barrels per day. That is much greater than the high end estimate of the leak. The skimmers work best in calm water, which is the usual condition this time of year in the gulf.

These systems were developed by the Dutch as a safety system in case of oil spills from either wells or tankers. The Dutch have off shore oil development and also import oil in tankers. Their economy, just like ours, runs on oil. They understand that the production and use of oil has dangers and they wanted to be ready to cope with problems like spills. The Dutch system has been used successfully in Europe.

The Dutch offered to fly their skimmer arm systems to the Gulf 3 days after the oil spill started. The offer was apparently turned down because EPA regulations do not allow water with oil to be pumped back into the ocean. If all the oily water was retained in the tanker, the capacity of the system would be greatly diminished because most of what is pumped into the tanker is sea water.

As of June 8th, BP reported that they have collected 64,650 barrels of oil in the Gulf. That is only a fraction of the amount of oil spilled from the well. That is less than one day's rated capacity of the Dutch oil skimmers.

Using the Dutch skimmers should have prevented most of the oil from ever getting even close to shore. The Dutch skimmers work best close to the source of the spill where the oil is more concentrated. Outside of that circle, dispersants could be used. Additional smaller skimmers could be used closer to shore to pick up patches that might get through the first 2 rings. The less oil that reaches shore, the less there is to clean up. The less oil that reaches shore, the faster the environment will restored by natural cleaning processes.

The NG is another thing and I'm not sure how they could be used unless for beach cleanup.

I may be wrong but I think Jindal wanted to use NG for cleanup and was told they couldn't do that because it was under BP's responsibilities. That was a while back.

The biggest hassle of beach cleanup is BP hired outside contractors to hire people to clean the beach....initially the companies brought in their own people but at BP's orders began hiring locals instead.

BUT - then there's OSHA with regulations stating that at a certain temperature and humidity combination....outdoor workers should only have to work 10 minutes out of each hour. That's what they are doing. The rove around slowly with large shovels for 10 minutes then go back to the shade.

In hindsight, the one glaring problem in the govt response has been one thing: The lack of decisiveness of anyone to take charge and make decisions, and SUSPEND all the thousands of tiny regulations by multiple agencies that have slowed the response to a crawl.

Heat and humidity are the norm here for months out of each year. Construction workers work all day and road crews work all day - but OSHA jumps in now to prevent heatstroke. How stupid?

Agencies might run into each others regs for the first week - but this goes on two months later. It's common for one agency to approve a request only to have it disapproved two days later by another agency.

The fish sold now is listed as safe because it's inspected carefully - but does it really need to be inspected by four different agencies? That's what's happening.

I heard a comment on a news show where there agency person was sorry that things had been a bit "tied up" by the rules of various divisions - but then said "we'll know how to do it better next time".

THIS isn't over - it is still worsening by the day. What he's saying is that without months or years to hire studies and talk about it - nothing changes. "Stop it while I think about what to do" isn't the answer.

Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265841].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Besides, try throwing 6 people into making a bowl of soup, or 1000 for building a deck. YEP guys, there IS such a thing as too many people. Nine women can NOT have a baby in 1 month!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265832].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Funny. First it was "where is the help". Now it's "there's too much" and "we can't use all the people".

I think Michael is more correct on this one. The NG can be used somehow. Jindal saying he wants to wait until he has the right thing for them to do doesn't make sense either. He can always shift them around from one project to another.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265859].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Funny. First it was "where is the help". Now it's "there's too much" and "we can't use all the people".

I think Michael is more correct on this one. The NG can be used somehow. Jindal saying he wants to wait until he has the right thing for them to do doesn't make sense either. He can always shift them around from one project to another.

GREAT IDEA!!!!!!! Lets close down all the elementary schools, and have all the little kids help!!!!!!! They'll LOVE IT! And WHAT doctor shortage? They can do THAT also!

FANTASTIC!

In case you can't see my point, they do NOT need people! They need HELP!!!!!!!!! If we could have ONE robot put a cap on that well and seal it, that would be ALL that is needed.

If throwing people at it was ALL we needed, we would have NO problem. HECK, maybe CHINA could help, since we give them so much business, they could use the oil, and it is THEIR world also. ALAS, it is NOT that simple.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266634].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

Well Steve, that just isn't correct and you know it. Even if the leak were stopped today the problems would exist for decades afterwards.

Originally Posted by seasoned

If we could have ONE robot put a cap on that well and seal it, that would be ALL that is needed.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2267403].message }}
- seasoned 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  Well Steve, that just isn't correct and you know it. Even if the leak were stopped today the problems would exist for decades afterwards.
  
  Well, YEAH, NOW! But if it were so simple, it could have been done MONTHS ago! My point was simply that we don't need people, effort, etc.... We need the job DONE! If it could be done with one person, one person would be all we need. NOT a 7 year old, NOT a nobel prize winner, NOT a physicist, NOT a summa cum laude doctor, NOT a brain surgeon, NOT a rocket scientist! NOPE, we need THE person or object that can do the job! EVEN if it is some overweight 300 pound 70 IQ person that flunked out of the 4th grade, that is 60yo and can hardly breath.
  
  As for the cleanup, once the well is capped? We can get skimmers, people, etc.... and clean up maybe 80%+ of the oil. Of course, there is some oil NOBODY will be able to cleanup. We would have to drain the oceans, run them through special filters, etc... to even ATTEMPT it. So that, of course, is out of the question. We would have to SETTLE, and hope things slowly recover through chemical reactions, and biological degredation. And THAT WOULD take decades! It may even be a decade before people START to forget, and new kids don't have to be told to be careful, or told WHY things are as they are.
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2267934].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

The thing about the OSHA and working 10 minutes every hour is ridiculous if thats true.

Before I switched to the IM world, I worked in the construction business, first as a ditch digger, than as a foreman. And would work from 7 am to 5 pm every day, in New Orleans. During the summer here the humidity is through the roof, and the heat index can go up to 110. Really I managed all this and I'm not even in that great of shape. What has the world come to, where people can only work for 10 minutes in the heat out of every hour? We are going to de-evolutionize (i'm pretty sure I just made this word up, but you get what I'm saying) into nothing but a blob of goo.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265857].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Well that's not exactly the stance I'm taking.

I said use the NG for all things that requires their training, to be completed. For everything else use those displaced by the disaster/moratorium, so they can have some sort of job. The NG troops are going to get paid regardless if they are helping with the clean up or not. Do we need some to come help with the disaster? Hell yeah. But unless it is a task that only they can complete, than give it to another hardworking gulf coast resident who can't work otherwise.

Funny, isn't it. Do you want to try again?

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2265943].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

The problem with beach cleanup is twofold:

It's cosmetic and the workers are only taking the top crude that shows and that's what they were told to do.

Tyvek suits are like wearing plastic bag - complete with boots and heavy gloves - in 90+ degree heat with high humidity.

What's odd is to see locals walking on parts of beaches in shorts and sandals with an area nearby roped off for cleanup workers who wear fully protective gear. Very odd.

A recent OSHA release stated:

* Deficient site controls: OSHA says that training sites are not properly secured to protect workers from potentially angry and violent individuals, and that many of the workers do not have the proper training to deal with contaminated work areas and toxic materials."In fact, the Agency found over 800 personnel at one of the Biloxi sites without the required training," Michaels said, warning that the disorganization and vulnerabilities of the operations would grow alongside the oil spill.

* Heat stress: OSHA said that deadly heat stroke is a concern for workers because BP hasn't provided proper shade and hydration for workers exposed for hours to hot temperatures and direct sunlight. The agency said that several heat-related injuries are reported every day. On Dauphin Island, Alabama, six workers suffered symptoms of heat stroke and one was hospitalized.

To protect workers from individuals? Someone is delusional at OSHA.

How much training does it take to put on a yellow suit and pick up crap with a shovel to dump it into a plastic bag?

Every work area I've seen on the beaches has large shade tends and is filled with water for the workers.

The 10 minute rule was on the news this week so can't verify that - an OSHA report states that wearing protective clothing, workers must work 20 minutes and rest 40 minutes - but the news report said that work time was reduced due to heat.

Honestly, the heat on the beach is ferocious and reflected by the sand - the humidity is not nearly as bad now as it will be in another month. I couldn't work in one of the silly protective suits.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266014].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Workers get sick without the protective suits:

Chemicals and vapors, both from oil and dispersants, can pose serious health risks. They can inflame the nose, throat and lungs, and aggravate asthma.

When absorbed in the bloodstream, oil compounds like benzene or toluene can cause headaches and dizziness and could have long term toxic effects on the brain, liver and kidneys after prolonged, direct contact.

Oil Spill Clean-Up Crew Members Getting Sick - CBS Evening News - CBS News

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266056].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Well that's not exactly the stance I'm taking.

I said use the NG for all things that requires their training, to be completed. For everything else use those displaced by the disaster/moratorium, so they can have some sort of job. The NG troops are going to get paid regardless if they are helping with the clean up or not. Do we need some to come help with the disaster? Hell yeah. But unless it is a task that only they can complete, than give it to another hardworking gulf coast resident who can't work otherwise.

Funny, isn't it. Do you want to try again?

Really? And who what resident do you want to give it to? Lets take a look at the selection.

First of all, this is the gulf region...so your selection of workers who arent already working is made up of:

The fattest in the country

The stupidest in the country

Illegal aliens

And there is still a question of what the NG could do? Yeah, why would we need in shape, trained nationalized citizens cleaning up the oil...that would be just crazy

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266554].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Motley

Really? And who what resident do you want to give it to? Lets take a look at the selection.

First of all, this is the gulf region...so your selection of workers who arent already working is made up of:

The fattest in the country

The stupidest in the country

Illegal aliens

And there is still a question of what the NG could do? Yeah, why would we need in shape, trained nationalized citizens cleaning up the oil...that would be just crazy

Don't most of the LA NG people come from LA!?!?!? And CONGRATS, you just insulted Kay's and dukky's states along with many others, etc... Besides, if ONLY such criteria were so absolute. They AREN'T.

HECK, most people don't even have their fat measured. A person that weighs 245 could be fat, just soso, or SKINNY! So I am wondering. Since most people do NOT have their fat measured, how does anyone know what state is the fattest? And colleges vary a lot. Did you hear about the one that recently decided to raise everyone's grades by 30%? Have a 3.0? NO PROBLEM! NOW you have a 4.0!!!!! And what KIND of college degrees? AA? PHD MD?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266650].message }}

DukkyMan

16 years ago

Alright everyone, it's been fun, but this is my last post in this thread. I just can't even talk about this any more its so damn depressing.

Kay I hope MS and LA and can make it through this, God knows we have had our fair share of disaster already.

Seasoned thanks for the back up.

Tim and TL, while I don't agree with you're views, I still appreciate your attention to the disaster, no matter how poorly informed you both are (couldn't help myself).

Good bye everyone, and remember that this is people's lives were talking about here, not just fun argument time in Internet World.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266057].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Take care Dukky. Wish you the best and I really do feel for all the people and animals affected by this terrible event. Lets hope the relief wells work soon. I hear they are at least ahead of schedule.

Originally Posted by DukkyMan

Alright everyone, it's been fun, but this is my last post in this thread. I just can't even talk about this any more its so damn depressing.

Kay I hope MS and LA and can make it through this, God knows we have had our fair share of disaster already.

Seasoned thanks for the back up.

Tim and TL, while I don't agree with you're views, I still appreciate your attention to the disaster, no matter how poorly informed you both are (couldn't help myself).

Good bye everyone, and remember that this is people's lives were talking about here, not just fun argument time in Internet World.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266202].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

Im in florida chief...also a gulf state if you didnt know. So i know what kind of people are in this area. Theres nothing 'insulting' about stating a fact.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266662].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Motley

Im in florida chief...also a gulf state if you didnt know. So i know what kind of people are in this area. Theres nothing 'insulting' about stating a fact.

OK, just explaining that things aren't always as they appear. I have my own ideas about the area, but I'll keep my mouth shut there. Besides, I was only in like 2 citys in LA(New orleans, as I recall, in a VERY nice hotel. The area was busy, but clean. Baton Rouge in a part of town that looked kind of seedy. Even the building I was in, which was a CIA building as I recall, wasn't all that great.), and only about 2-3 in FL. Hey, I'm originally from california, and THAT area looks different depending on the area you are in.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266720].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

And sometimes are EXACTLY as they appear.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266743].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Ever see a fat shrimper? I haven't - it's hard work and they stay in shape. I agree, though, there's a lot of overweight people here - that shocked me when I moved here. I'm not one of them, thank goodness.

I don't think you need a college degrees to fish or shovel sand - at least last I heard. The poorest states in the nation will always have more obesity (poor diet) and less education.

Are you on the Gulf Coast of Florida?

In some areas in AL the people are praising the cleanup workers - they are all locals working on the beaches and islands and they are working very hard. That's becuase they live here - and they care. The problem with the crews have been mainly with people hired outside the area and they are gradually being replaced.

In the coastal county where I live unemployment a year ago was 7.9% - in May this year it was 10.1%.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2266956].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

It could also be the cuisine. I had neighbors from Naches Mississippi and they cooked Jumbalaya, Gumbo, and all that southern cooking. I might weigh 350 if I lived there.

Originally Posted by Kay King

The poorest states in the nation will always have more obesity (poor diet) and less education.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2267446].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

It could also be the cuisine. I had neighbors from Naches Mississippi and they cooked Jumbalaya, Gumbo, and all that southern cooking. I might weigh 350 if I lived there.

Yeah, the traditional diet is really nothing like fast food. The CLOSEST thing typical fast food has to any cajun cooking is probably popeyes, which says it is from louisiana. Even most of that is better than most fast food. But cajun food, and I think southern food in general, isn't known for being lean and low on calories.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2267946].message }}

MikeAmbrosio 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

But cajun food, and I think southern food in general, isn't known for being lean and low on calories.

Steve

But DANG, it sure is good!
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2269421].message }}
- TimPhelan 16 years ago
  
  Yeah, that was my point. I would get fat because it's hard to stop eating good cajun cooking. :-0
  
  Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio
  
  But DANG, it sure is good!
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  Over 50 Dating
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2269573].message }}
  
  MikeAmbrosio 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  Yeah, that was my point. I would get fat because it's hard to stop eating good cajun cooking. :-0
  
  I love cooking it too, although mine is not NEAR as good as you can get down there.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2269870].message }}

Michael Motley

16 years ago

Yep..im in st. pete..im literally about 2 blocks from water, around 1 mile from the mouth of tampa bay.

If everyone on the gulf coast were shrimpers..i'd agree with you, and so would the statistics.

No you dont need a college degree to fish or shovel sand, but you do need the ability to learn. High schools shove kids through, educated or not. Educated kids tend to know that a college education is a good idea.

So if they arent smart enough to know you can't live on fried balogna sandwiches without straining the fabric of their bibed overalls, or that a college education gives you the ability to get a job that lets you buy more than balogna to fry, then it might be possible that a shovel and trashbag might be hard to grasp as well.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2267278].message }}

ForumFun10

16 years ago

NO CAP for BP. I am in FL and it is going to kill the economy.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2267910].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

I won't say specifics, because I don't want this to get political BUT, there are ALREADY actions in the government that say that they ARE trying to do what I said they probably would! That $100Million might not ever go up, and they are talking about TAX PAYERS paying for some cleanup and the moratorium!

ALSO, the current storm MAY become a mitigating factor, in BPs legal culpability, as it is considered an "ACT OF GOD". AND, even if the storm NEVER comes near the coast, actions have ALREADY been taken, in preparation for it, that exacerbated the situation. THAT may be considered an act of god since it was done to prepare for one.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2268409].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Too bad all our politicians aren't scientists instead of financial hawks. That's about all I can conclude from every mess we've gotten ourselves into yet.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2268609].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Too bad all our politicians aren't scientists instead of financial hawks. That's about all I can conclude from every mess we've gotten ourselves into yet.

Ever notice how HISTORICALLY MOST have been "educated" as LAWYERS? Let's see what lawyers tend to do, as a GROUP!

1. LIE
2. TWIST THE TRUTH
3. STATE ONLY ONE SIDE, EVEN IF THE MORE PREVALENT SIDE IS AGAINST THEIR POINT
4. ARGUE
5. CONTEST EVEN IF THE HAVE NO CASE/CHANCE
6. STATE WORDS WITH PLANNED AMBIGUITY
7. CHANGE THE MEANING OF WORD
8. ASK FOR A LARGE PIECE

IT IS NO WONDER WE ARE IN TROUBLE!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2269346].message }}

Greg guitar

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Ever notice how HISTORICALLY MOST have been "educated" as LAWYERS? Let's see what lawyers tend to do, as a GROUP!

1. LIE
2. TWIST THE TRUTH
3. STATE ONLY ONE SIDE, EVEN IF THE MORE PREVALENT SIDE IS AGAINST THEIR POINT
4. ARGUE
5. CONTEST EVEN IF THE HAVE NO CASE/CHANCE
6. STATE WORDS WITH PLANNED AMBIGUITY
7. CHANGE THE MEANING OF WORD
8. ASK FOR A LARGE PIECE

IT IS NO WONDER WE ARE IN TROUBLE!

Steve

Gosh, are you sure you aren't describing marketers? Seriously, I always like to point out when people engage in the popular pastime of lawyer bashing, that there are many noble reasons for joining that profession, not the least of which is to defend the best thing about American government-our constitution and bill of rights.

There is probably a good and bad side to every profession, but I have known a good many lawyers that are impassioned defenders of the weak-often volunteering to work for free, for clients who they believe have been railroaded, and have no funds to hire a good defense. Many lawyers hold the deep belief that everyone is entitled to a strong defense regardless of their ability to pay-and they walk their talk.

Lawyers have risked (and often lost) their lives to defend innocent victims of racially biased, or otherwise wrongful convictions-it used to be as easy as cutting melted butter to finger a black man in the south for a crime he didn't commit, and though it's vastly improved, racial bias in both convictions and sentencing still exists. The best friend of the wrongly accused, and wrongly convicted is his/her lawyer

For that matter, without lawyers working on behalf of the public, what chance do we have of getting BP to really pony up for the damages they've caused? None.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281961].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Greg guitar

Gosh, are you sure you aren't describing marketers? Seriously, I always like to point out when people engage in the popular pastime of lawyer bashing, that there are many noble reasons for joining that profession, not the least of which is to defend the best thing about American government-our constitution and bill of rights.

There is probably a good and bad side to every profession, but I have known a good many lawyers that are impassioned defenders of the weak-often volunteering to work for free, for clients who they believe have been railroaded, and have no funds to hire a good defense. Many lawyers hold the deep belief that everyone is entitled to a strong defense regardless of their ability to pay-and they walk their talk.

Lawyers have risked (and often lost) their lives to defend innocent victims of racially biased, or otherwise wrongful convictions-it used to be as easy as cutting melted butter to finger a black man in the south for a crime he didn't commit, and though it's vastly improved, racial bias in both convictions and sentencing still exists. The best friend of the wrongly accused, and wrongly convicted is his/her lawyer

For that matter, without lawyers working on behalf of the public, what chance do we have of getting BP to really pony up for the damages they've caused? None.

OK, MARKETERS may do the same also. But LAWYERS, ironically, got laws passed making it illegal for marketers to do it. If marketers go too far, they get some agency breathing down their necks. And YEAH, SOME lawyers are good. I said as a GROUP. And politicians, like lawyers, made laws to protect themselves against the pesky laws marketers are supposed to put up with. As for marketers, SURE many break the law. But sometimes those laws ARE enforced, and THEY pay.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2283778].message }}

Zach Booker

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Too bad all our politicians aren't scientists instead of financial hawks. That's about all I can conclude from every mess we've gotten ourselves into yet.

I only wish politicians were a little bit more financially savvy.

... Maybe my money would be put to better use than (and less of it, too).

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

How I Flipped a Site for $5,999 and How YOU Can Do The Same!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2269988].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

OUr luck ran out today in Mississippi

Louisiana's fragile wetlands have been hardest hit by the oil but Mississippi had escaped damage until Sunday, although some oil had tainted its barrier islands. Oil has also come ashore in Alabama and Florida's Gulf coast.
Oil from the spill hit two tourist beaches at Ocean Springs, about 10 miles east of Biloxi, Mississippi, and a beach used by fishermen close to an inland marsh.
Mississippi state officials and the U.S. Coast Guard, who said they expect more oil to arrive, were waiting on BP contractors to start cleaning up.
"We cannot clean up or catch the oil until BP gets here. They have all of our people," said Earl Etheridge, a spokesman for Mississippi's Department of Environmental Quality.

I live in Ocean Springs - the shoreline a block or two from my house isn't coated yet but found tar balls this morning for the first time. Along that beach is a small area where herons are nesting.

This came at us very quickly and the back bay was closed this morning due to oil. In my subdivision there are canals through the area which will also likely be carrying oil inland to some extent.

In a discussion with about a dozen friends this morning the overriding comments were about what a totally disjointed effort is happening all along the coast. The accident with the Deepwater Horizon was horrendous but the failure to control the damage is inexcusable.

Not one skimmer in sight today.

kay

Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2273450].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Zach Booker

I only wish politicians were a little bit more financially savvy.

... Maybe my money would be put to better use than (and less of it, too).

Oh don't make the mistake that I said they were savvy - I said that is all they care about is the bottom line as it pertains to their own wallets and interests.

Tim -- LOL. Let everyone feel sorry for you now because I am going to pm you a cajun recipe that takes only about 15 minutes to cook and is loaded to the brim with calories -- and you won't care. You can eat it on the nights you aren't eating jambalaya or however you spell it. Had my last ex been worth anything dead, I'd have just fed him to death. LOL.

I'm so sick about this whole thing I could spit --- and I think nothing has been done because everyone is too worried about how to use it to advance their own agendas instead of worrying that they are destroying a planet. How's those fumes doing for the human population btw? I just saw that there is chemical ladden rain in S. Carolina. The article, blog, whatever said they weren't making a scientific statement, or laying any blame anywhere, but their rain is seeming to have something oily in it. The people responsible for this aren't even good enough for a firing squad. Give them a beach house and make them survive where the oil is worst - make them eat what they can catch in the sea.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2273701].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I just saw that there is chemical ladden rain in S. Carolina.

I think they may be getting carried away. The video from louisiana last week was reported later as an algae bloom carried the rain. It rained here earlier today and I was out in it - saw no oil, smelled nothing. Looked like standard rain to me.

I think the initial reaction of "how can this crisis be used" has turned into a lot of people reluctant to make a bad or wrong decision - so they make no decisions but just pass the problem on to the next level.

Declaring this a national emergency would have cut through the red tape but that hasn't been done as yet that I know of. Maybe it doesn't qualify for that.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2273775].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Declaring this a national emergency would have cut through the red tape but that hasn't been done as yet that I know of. Maybe it doesn't qualify for that.

kay

I read something a few weeks ago, roughly, that said this has been declared
a threat to national security - I think - and that's why everything has to go
through homeland security, first.

Maybe someone can confirm that.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2273860].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Only thing I know of is the spill was said to be "an assault on our shores" and that's when homeland security head, Napolitano, was sent down here.

Declaring an emergency would allow people to cut through some of the stupid laws.

Example - the most efficient skimmers take up huge amounts of oil/water mix, allow the water to settle and then release the water back into the gulf.

They can't be used even though they have been proven to remove about 98% of the crude oil at the site of a spill.

Why? Because of a law that says no polluted water can be released into the Gulf. So removing 98% of the oil couldn't be done with skimmers such as the ones offer to us FREE by the Dutch (we turned it down 3 days after the DH exploded) becuase the water returned might still have 1-2% oil content. Now we're told "we are evaluating to see if we might use those skimmers without violation of the...."

Idiotic laws that impede cleanup could be suspended if a national emergency were declared - at least that's what I've read about it.

I think this is tied in with the desire to keep this as a BP problem rather than a national problem - but it is a national problem no matter what anyone says.

kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2273907].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Only thing I know of is the spill was said to be "an assault on our shores" and that's when homeland security head, Napolitano, was sent down here.

Declaring an emergency would allow people to cut through some of the stupid laws.

Example - the most efficient skimmers take up huge amounts of oil/water mix, allow the water to settle and then release the water back into the gulf.

They can't be used even though they have been proven to remove about 98% of the crude oil at the site of a spill.

Why? Because of a law that says no polluted water can be released into the Gulf. So removing 98% of the oil couldn't be done with skimmers such as the ones offer to us FREE by the Dutch (we turned it down 3 days after the DH exploded) becuase the water returned might still have 1-2% oil content. Now we're told "we are evaluating to see if we might use those skimmers without violation of the...."

Idiotic laws that impede cleanup could be suspended if a national emergency were declared - at least that's what I've read about it.

I think this is tied in with the desire to keep this as a BP problem rather than a national problem - but it is a national problem no matter what anyone says.

kay

Yeah, that is CRAZY! Is ANY purification system 100%? NO honest person has ever said 100% PURE gold or silver! EVEN with distillation, some liquids may condense or the timing may be wrong and they may evaporate such that they are not 100% pure. HECK, I would be satisfied with maybbe even 20%(in this case) if I figured that is the best that could be done. AND, the skimmers won't be as efficient because this is CRUDE oil, and they used those dispersion chemicals. They KNEW the ability to purify 100% would be disrupted by the dispersion chemicals when they used them. THAT is what they are for! They break up the oil to HOPEFULLY give creatures better access to the water and allow microorganisms to break down the oil further.

BTW Florida had opened up a season early, and one guy was down there with his family. He said he was worried when he saw oil in the water, but he found it was from HIS BOAT! OK, I guess boats should stay out ALSO, because THEY can pollute the water. And forget about people swimming(sweat). And what of FISH? Ever hear what THEY do? YEECH! We ought to get THEM out of the water ALSO! Yep, I guess 100% pure is a nice thought, but it will never happen.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2274544].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

It's just one more example of what's been going on since this started on April 20.

I had the dubious honor of finding my first tar balls today - on the beach near my house.

A storm blew in from the gulf earlier this morning (weather is pretty stormy today) and I was just leaving home in my car - it was just rain. No oil, no gunk - just plain old rain from the sky.

Ran into three wildlife management guys when I walked out on the pier this morning. They are monitoring the heron refuse as the gulf has channel that flow right through it and on up into this subdivision. They weren't optimistic but have put out a yellow rope thingie that has green long strands that looks like thick seaweed to try to keep the oil from the refuge.

Again no boats or skimmers in sight anywhere. I wanted to walk on the bridge across the bay this morning but the weather was too stormy to do it. The bridge is 95 ft over the water in the middle - not a good place to be during lightning:rolleyes:

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2276212].message }}
- TimPhelan 16 years ago
  
  I saw some stats today about BP. In the last three years BP made $58 billion in profits, spent $28 million on drilling safety ( less than 1% of profits by a long shot ) and, get this, zero on research into cleaning up oil spills!
  
  BP also had a request by the state of Louisiana a month ago for $10 million in aid for 6 months mental health services for those affected by the spill. BP still hasn't agreed to pay this. People are depressed and so far two people may have committed suicide because of this spill.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  Over 50 Dating
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2277909].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

OK, I've been looking into this story the last couple of days because it seemed kind of murky. From what I found out the offers from the Dutch came 10 days after the explosion. The offer included proposals to sell equipment as well as offers of technical advice.

It wasn't offered for free. That doesn't make sense.

Three weeks later BP bought three sets of these sweeping arms. It wasn't like these boats were all ready to come over here for free and start skimming because they love the US. No, they were selling something and BP bought them. The technical advice offered is still being considered.

So this story that is out there that Obama personally rejected this offer 3 days after the disaster seems to be false. The story going around saying he finally accepted the offer 50 days after the offer also seems to be false. He didn't accept them, BP bought the arms 23 days later. I haven't seen one thing that confirms that EPA is in the way of these arms from being used besides this story which is repeated on dozens of sites. I found one guy who is trying to find out this specific answer using the freedom of information act.

I suspect these skimmers are being used now since they bought them on May 23rd. From what I have also read over 400 skimmers are in use ( maybe not now because of the storm ) and many more are being added.

There's also a story out that says the Jones Act is keeping ships from coming to aid in the gulf. This isn't true. Thad Allen says the Jones act has not stopped one ship from helping. The criticism was that Obama could wave the Jones Act like Bush did after Katrina, but it isn't neccessary at all because these are different situations. The admin said it would wave the Jones act if waivers were requested, but that "there are no pending requests for foreign vessels to come into the Gulf."

There is also another story about how red tape has kept one company from making oil boom in Maine. The truth is the company didn't start making the boom until after the spill and the boom failed quality control tests.

Did red tape get in the way of the berms being built? Yes, and it's a good thing from what I have read. It was a terrible idea. Sometimes it isn't a good idea to just do something. A billion dollars to build berms that wouldn't last through one hurricane, would get precious sand from places that it is needed and would only divert the oil into another direction at best.

So, yes, there has been delays, but also much misinformation and myths. Even Republican Gov Haley Barbour of Mississippi said the feds are doing more things right than wrong.

If BP had spent just a fraction on it's tens of billions in profits on research and investment into cleaning up spills and if the local states had the foresight into making sure these businesses were prepared for such leaks then we wouldn't have to be figuring this stuff out as we go. In fact, the whole disaster could have been avoided. Red tape and stupid EPA laws were not the cause of the leak and aren't the reason oil is coming onto beaches. It's lack of oversight, leadership, foresight by the companies and government. Mostly local government in my opinion since they don't seem to like the federal government meddling in their affairs until they need them.

Originally Posted by Kay King

Only thing I know of is the spill was said to be "an assault on our shores" and that's when homeland security head, Napolitano, was sent down here.

Declaring an emergency would allow people to cut through some of the stupid laws.

Example - the most efficient skimmers take up huge amounts of oil/water mix, allow the water to settle and then release the water back into the gulf.

They can't be used even though they have been proven to remove about 98% of the crude oil at the site of a spill.

Why? Because of a law that says no polluted water can be released into the Gulf. So removing 98% of the oil couldn't be done with skimmers such as the ones offer to us FREE by the Dutch (we turned it down 3 days after the DH exploded) becuase the water returned might still have 1-2% oil content. Now we're told "we are evaluating to see if we might use those skimmers without violation of the...."

Idiotic laws that impede cleanup could be suspended if a national emergency were declared - at least that's what I've read about it.

I think this is tied in with the desire to keep this as a BP problem rather than a national problem - but it is a national problem no matter what anyone says.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281463].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

From the dailygator on June 14

Three days after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch government offered to help. ( My mistake - the offer was turned down on the 10th.)

It was willing to provide ships outfitted with oil-skimming booms, and it proposed a plan for building sand barriers to protect sensitive marshlands.

The response from the Obama administration and BP, which are coordinating the cleanup: “The embassy got a nice letter from the administration that said, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’” said Geert Visser, consul general for the Netherlands in Houston.

Now, almost seven weeks later, as the oil spewing from the battered well spreads across the Gulf and soils pristine beaches and coastline, BP and our government have reconsidered.

U.S. ships are being outfitted this week with four pairs of the skimming booms airlifted from the Netherlands and should be deployed within days. Each pair can process 5 million gallons of water a day, removing 20,000 tons of oil and sludge.

The announcement made this afternoon was "the US has decided to accept the offers of help from 12 countries to combat the oil spill"

This is Day 70.

Simple fact is that for several weeks the response to the oil spill was "we can handle this - it's not that bad" - and that didn't come from BP but from our government. "We" also turned down an offer from Britain to airlift half of it's supply of fresh dispersants to the US AT COST - but bought dispersants instaad from Saudi. Within a few weeks after the UK offer - the news was filled with dire warnings of "may not be enough dispersant available".

At the time the Dutch offer was reported as having no financial strings attached. Several of the offers received offered equipment at cost - much of it equipment we don't have in the U.S.

More info on help offered - and declined.

Why Did The U.S. Refuse International Help On The Gulf Oil Spill? | Daily Markets

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281610].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

The problem with "boycott BP" is that the gas stations are not owned by BP but are owned by small business people who are locals.

Putting more people out of jobs and out of business is just stupid.

I see blogs where people have the goal of making BP "go under" - how's that going to help anything now? It would add more damage to the people on the coast and to the national debt - because someone has to pay the costs and I'd prefer it to be BP.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281632].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

The problem with "boycott BP" is that the gas stations are not owned by BP but are owned by small business people who are locals.

Putting more people out of jobs and out of business is just stupid.

I see blogs where people have the goal of making BP "go under" - how's that going to help anything now? It would add more damage to the people on the coast and to the national debt - because someone has to pay the costs and I'd prefer it to be BP.

kay

Kay - it might financially rock us a bit, but no matter what way we move right now the economy is being assaulted. BP has been causing environmental catastrophes since at least the Valdez Spill - Mexico explosion, Texas explosion Valdez itself, Alaska pipeline spill + stabbed us on sales. We need to get rid of that company. It's cancerous and it's making the world ill. It just needs to be gone. Screw the finances - if you add up all the damage they are doing, the financial impact is a small price to pay to see them gone -- and MONSANTO right along with them.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281672].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

From the dailygator on June 14

[B]The announcement made this afternoon was "the US has decided to accept the offers of help from 12 countries to combat the oil spill"

This is Day 70.

Actually, they accepted help several weeks ago and the list of countries offering to "sell" their services and products that that site showed was online weeks ago. Nothing new.

At the time the Dutch offer was reported as having no financial strings attached.

Reported by whom? I think that is incorrect.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281842].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Actually, they accepted help several weeks ago and the list of countries offering to "sell" their services and products that that site showed was online weeks ago. Nothing new.

That begs the question of why the hell they ever refused help with it in the first place. This thing has been spewing oil for 70 days - there is NO excuse for for that in-action from the very first.......and I don't care WHO's action - if someone wanted to claim they had the authority and charge of the situation they should have been damned well doing it. It's half past time to have the military take some scientists and engineers in or whoever it takes and FIX that thing no matter who is pooping their didies over "being in authority over it".

This kind of inaction to a crisis of this magnitude is not excusable, for ANY reason at all. Refusing aid when our country is so strapped and when our country most likely will not be the only one effected - and with the eco-balance of a very large area at stake - --there is no excuse to refuse aid for any amount of time.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281884].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Sal, they didn't refuse aid really. All offers were/are accepted or under consideration. The Dutch offer was accepted and bought by BP in three weeks. Not 50 days, or 70 days.

People have to remember, BP were/are the experts and didn't have much oversight. Thats the way the gulf states wanted it and that's what they got. You know: "free market is the best". "We don't want regulation and interference". "Government isn't the solution, it's the problem". Comes down to it BP didn't know what the hell they were doing in regards to cleaning up spills. Spent zero dollars on spill cleanup research. Zero! Out of tens of billions in profit. However, they said they were the experts and there would be no problem if there was a leak.

Guess what? They lied.

Originally Posted by HeySal

That begs the question of why the hell they ever refused help with it in the first place. This thing has been spewing oil for 70 days - there is NO excuse for for that in-action from the very first.......and I don't care WHO's action - if someone wanted to claim they had the authority and charge of the situation they should have been damned well doing it. It's half past time to have the military take some scientists and engineers in or whoever it takes and FIX that thing no matter who is pooping their didies over "being in authority over it".

This kind of inaction to a crisis of this magnitude is not excusable, for ANY reason at all. Refusing aid when our country is so strapped and when our country most likely will not be the only one effected - and with the eco-balance of a very large area at stake - --there is no excuse to refuse aid for any amount of time.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281954].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Sal, they didn't refuse aid really. All offers were/are accepted or under consideration. The Dutch offer was accepted and bought by BP in three weeks. Not 50 days, or 70 days.

People have to remember, BP were/are the experts and didn't have much oversight. Thats the way the gulf states wanted it and that's what they got. You know: "free market is the best". "We don't want regulation and interference". "Government isn't the solution, it's the problem". Comes down to it BP didn't know what the hell they were doing in regards to cleaning up spills. Spent zero dollars on spill cleanup research. Zero! Out of tens of billions in profit. However, they said they were the experts and there would be no problem if there was a leak.

Guess what? They lied.

Bull the rigs where and are under federal regulations.
The federal agency in charge of regulating them has been corrupt for years.
You know it, I know it, and so does everyone else.
Even a spokes person for Obama said today that in hindsight if they cleaned up that agency when they first took office this may have been prevented. Of course he also said that there where other more pressing issues to deal with like the economy.
I tend to agree with him. Not knowing this was looming in the future, with the problems this country already had I can see why cleaning up corrupt agencies wasn't the top priority, but it should of at the least been a priority.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2282032].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

You are right. I agree, but the gulf states do have many people in congress who definitely are pro oil and that is part of the reason they are there.

Anyways, I do think things could be done a lot better than they are now. Red tape and outdated laws are a problem. There's a lot of blame to go around, I just think most of it should be on BP and the pro oil crowd.

I also have heard some people recently say there's a good chance that the relief wells may not work because the pipes may have been damaged too much. This is a worse case scenario but very possible.

Originally Posted by ThomM

Bull the rigs where and are under federal regulations.
The federal agency in charge of regulating them has been corrupt for years.
You know it, I know it, and so does everyone else.
Even a spokes person for Obama said today that in hindsight if they cleaned up that agency when they first took office this may have been prevented. Of course he also said that there where other more pressing issues to deal with like the economy.
I tend to agree with him. Not knowing this was looming in the future, with the problems this country already had I can see why cleaning up corrupt agencies wasn't the top priority, but it should of at the least been a priority.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2282625].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

You are right. I agree, but the gulf states do have many people in congress who definitely are pro oil and that is part of the reason they are there.

Anyways, I do think things could be done a lot better than they are now. Red tape and outdated laws are a problem. There's a lot of blame to go around, I just think most of it should be on BP and the pro oil crowd.

I also have heard some people recently say there's a good chance that the relief wells may not work because the pipes may have been damaged too much. This is a worse case scenario but very possible.

Absolutely. Just keep in mind the top dog in D.C. is part of that crowd.
Despite pre election promises he gave the green light for more off shore drilling just before this happened.
At this point in time I think who's to blame isn't important.
What's important is getting this stopped and cleaned up. There's plenty of time to figure out who's fault it is later.
If anyone who has any power to fight this spends any time now trying to figure out who's fault it is, they are wasting time and are part of the blame.
But I'd say the blame lies with the agency overseeing off shore drilling and BP. The agency for allowing them to cut corners and BP for cutting corners.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2284026].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Well, his March announcement that he was ending the offshore drilling moratorium was a surprise and I didn't like that decision at all, but I don't think he broke any promises. He had political reasons for that decision: to get Republicans to get behind the energy bill. He said he might be willing to do something like that in the campaign actually. I think it was a bad decision because it wouldn't really get any help from the opposition party for the energy bill.

Is he pro oil? That is debatable. Many in the oil industry would disagree.

Originally Posted by ThomM

Absolutely. Just keep in mind the top dog in D.C. is part of that crowd.
Despite pre election promises he gave the green light for more off shore drilling just before this happened.
At this point in time I think who's to blame isn't important.
What's important is getting this stopped and cleaned up. There's plenty of time to figure out who's fault it is later.
If anyone who has any power to fight this spends any time now trying to figure out who's fault it is, they are wasting time and are part of the blame.
But I'd say the blame lies with the agency overseeing off shore drilling and BP. The agency for allowing them to cut corners and BP for cutting corners.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2286412].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Well, his March announcement that he was ending the offshore drilling moratorium was a surprise and I didn't like that decision at all, but I don't think he broke any promises. He had political reasons for that decision: to get Republicans to get behind the energy bill. He said he might be willing to do something like that in the campaign actually. I think it was a bad decision because it wouldn't really get any help from the opposition party for the energy bill.

Is he pro oil? That is debatable. Many in the oil industry would disagree.

Like I said Tim, it isn't important.
All that's important currently is stopping the leak and cleaning up the mess.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2286435].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Personally I want to know everyone who is to blame. ASAP. We can do that and clean up this mess at the same time.

Originally Posted by ThomM

Like I said Tim, it isn't important.
All that's important currently is stopping the leak and cleaning up the mess.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2286499].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Check the bolded part at the end. The barges owners asked the coast guard to inspect the barges to make sure they were safe. Are we now calling the coast guard pinheads? Interesting. That's our military who defends us.

Sixteen crude-sucking barges are back in the Gulf of Mexico working to clean up oil, but the Coast Guard is defending its decision to ground the vessels because it couldn't verify whether there were fire extinguishers and life vests on board.

"The Coast Guard is not going to compromise safety ... that's our No. 1 priority," Coast Guard spokesman Robert Brassel told The Daily Caller.

[...]

Brassel said the barges are now "back in operating order."

On Thursday night, the Incident Commander in Houma, Roger Laferriere, decided with the captain of the port in New Orleans to inspect the barges when they realized the ships did not have a certificate of inspection to demonstrate safety equipment on board. Thursday morning, the ships were inspected and grounded because they did not have the proper fire-fighting and life-saving equipment. There were also concerns about the stability of the barges. During the day Thursday, the problems were fixed, and the barges are back out on the water today.

A June 17 statement from the Deepwater Horizon Incident Joint Information Center stated that the "vacuum barges were temporarily removed from service after safety concerns occurred including stability and the lack of lifesaving and firefighting equipment." A June 19 statement said that "the owner/operator of the barges asked the Coast Guard to inspect the vessels, some under construction, to ensure they were safe" and that "The Coast Guard inspectors made recommendations to the owner/operator regarding lifesaving and firefighting equipment, vessel stability and egress issues, leaving the decision to continue construction and operations with the owner/operator."

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2286540].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Personally I want to know everyone who is to blame. ASAP. We can do that and clean up this mess at the same time.

The Minerals Management agency and BP.
There that was easy.
BP owned the rig and the agency allowed them to do what they want.
Trying to put more into is a waste of time.
Why is trying to blame someone now so important?
Anyone who has the power to punish them has the power to expedite the cleaning. There is plenty of time to lay blame after the problem is fixed.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2286648].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

OK, originally I used the word blame in connection to the oil cleanup/containment because that is what a large part of this thread has become: blaming people because they can't stop the oil. I said BP because they didn't have a plan or the technology for a disaster like this. They and every other oil company said they did and everyone believed them. They lied. They are still lying.

Originally Posted by ThomM

The Minerals Management agency and BP.
There that was easy.
BP owned the rig and the agency allowed them to do what they want.
Trying to put more into is a waste of time.
Why is trying to blame someone now so important?
Anyone who has the power to punish them has the power to expedite the cleaning. There is plenty of time to lay blame after the problem is fixed.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2286773].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Yes, they are still lying - and they aren't alone. The example above of what happened with the CG and skimmers is a sample of what has been happening now for 2 1/2 months.

There is an incident - those who were involved in causing it say "we decided to examine this as permits were not in order" and then a few days later they say "the CG found it necessary to check the life vests and fire protection system..."

Two weeks later, the story changes and now it's "the owner/operater asked the CG to inspect..."

No one living here would believe an owner/operator would take on a crew and then ask for his boat to be stopped - thus losing $5000 in pay.

We watch as the news is rewritten weekly, as the reasons are changed in hindsight. This has been going on since the beginning. It's odd as you can go back to the original comments and see what was said in the local news briefings.

The internet doesn't allow local events to remain local - so "managing" information is the name of the game. Cynical? Guilty as charged.

The CG, BP and residents agree that the death toll of wildlife is largely hidden as dolphins and turtles slip beneath the sea. Audubon report today is 1200 birds dead, almost 600 turtles dead, over 50 dead dolphins found. About 400 birds have been cleaned, 102 turtles saved, two dolphins were retrieved but only one survived. The numbers are now doubling and tripling every few days and represent only a small percentage of the real toll.

I think perhaps it's time to join dukkyman - I can't do this anymore.

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2287038].message }}
- seasoned 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  No one living here would believe an owner/operator would take on a crew and then ask for his boat to be stopped - thus losing $5000 in pay.
  
  ESPECIALLY since firestations are often thought of first for fire extinguishers, and products COME with a statement of compliance listed right on the product, EVEN if it is made in CHINA!!
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2287766].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

A good quote on TV tonight from Louisiana. After Katrina, General Honore was disgusted with red tape and made the comment "we're stuck on stupid". Seems like that part wasn't fixed after Katrina.

The discussion where this was brought up was the recent skimmer problem. Skimmers sent out by Gov Jindal were ordered to stop work by the CG ...because...

The barges were stopped in mass for a reason that Jindal found frustrating along with the rest of America. Wait for it-The Coast Guard needed to confirm that there were fire extinguishers and life vests on board, and then it had trouble contacting the people who built the barges.

ALL 16 skimming barges were stopped for 24 hours on June 10th, during which time the oil just kept flowing. They couldn't just count the vests and fire extinguishers? The CG doesn't know how many vests are required without contacting the BUILDER of the boat? If it were not so sad and so dumb - some of this would be quite funny. I left out the part about the "brilliant federal pinheads"....:rolleyes:

kay

Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2286486].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

People have to remember, BP were/are the experts and didn't have much oversight. Thats the way the gulf states wanted it and that's what they got. You know: "free market is the best". "We don't want regulation and interference". "Government isn't the solution, it's the problem". Comes down to it BP didn't know what the hell they were doing in regards to cleaning up spills. Spent zero dollars on spill cleanup research. Zero! Out of tens of billions in profit. However, they said they were the experts and there would be no problem if there was a leak.

Guess what? They lied.

Gee - maybe the idiots that gave them the contract might have known that they were clueless about clean up about 3 spills and 2 explosions ago -- and that they might renege on a contract after selling Alaska oil meant for the US overseas.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2282290].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

They should have known. I agree.

Originally Posted by HeySal

Gee - maybe the idiots that gave them the contract might have known that they were clueless about clean up about 3 spills and 2 explosions ago -- and that they might renege on a contract after selling Alaska oil meant for the US overseas.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2282575].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

"Actually" - they began outfitting two ships a week ago and two media outlets reported this afternoon that they had just been informed that the previous decision had been changed and we are now accepting help from twelve countries.

they accepted help several weeks ago and the list of countries offering to "sell" their services and products that that site showed was online weeks ago.

If you compare the list of countries we are now taking help from and that list of "countries that want us to pay them" - you'll see they aren't the same.

If a country offers help in the form of equipment your country does not have - and offers that equipment at cost...I don't have a problem with that. Isn't the assumption that BP would be paying?

The scope of the problem was not clear at first even on the coast. After we knew here the problem was quickly spiraling out of control it still took some time for it to be recognized as a true crisis by legislators. For almost the entire first month everyone was relying on the info coming from BP and waiting to see how long it would take to cap the well.

I think everyone assumed that "we" had everything we needed to solve the problem. That may be why some things were turned down quickly - but doesn't explain the long delay in changing that decision.

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281996].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Greg - I was with you most of the way but your view of the south is a bit behind the times
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2282028].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Yes, I read that in an earlier post, and also that the offer to use the
Dutch skimmers was turned down. But it seems to me that water with
2% oil is much better than the alternative. It also seems to me that
some kind of emergency decision could be made bypassing that and
allowing the skimmers to be used. I really don't understand why that
hasn't been done. Too much hassle?

It also seems common sense to amend that law to allow for skimmers
to be used in this kind of situation. So ok, 2% or even 5% of the water
returned has oil in it. Well... that's a lot less oil that will reach the shores
and otherwise enter into the biosystem. Or is my thinking screwed-up?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2273931].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Declaring this a national emergency would have cut through the red tape but that hasn't been done as yet that I know of. Maybe it doesn't qualify for that.

Actually, considering the size of the leak, that should have been done the first week. The spill is not only a bio-hazard - it is also an economic hazard during a time of recession. Of course, the fact it even happened at all is so far into bizarre that it's just too weird for science fiction.

The video of the rain in S. Carolina did look bad -- but as the person openly stated, they couldn't give a scientific statement on it. Could be from something local going on -- It could be coal residue, it could be a lot of things - but there was definitely chemical in that rain. Just because the spill is the catastrophe everyone is focused on at that moment doesn't mean it's the only ecological crap going on. Rain isn't supposed to be filmy - and I can't say it looked "oily" - just not right. The person never hinted that they thought it was oil from the gulf either. They know something isn't right where they are and didn't know WHAT to think of it. Wondering if it's related to the spill was my idea........so I was asking what people were experiencing there.

I've heard people say the oil stench is making people sick - I have heard some say they don't notice it. I'm at least 1,500 miles from there.......so I am listening to what people say who are there, because they (you) are the only ones any of the rest of us have to tell us the truth about their experience of what's going on.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2274054].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Well Tim, I love stats too.

Did you know... lol, BP's profits from 2001-2009 were 163 Billion, and 5.6 Billion
in the first quarter of 2010. I want to start an oil company.

Here...

The Exxon Valdez spill was in 1989, they still, 21 years later, have not paid the [full] amount awarded in court (a mere $500 million) to those affected and in fact over 8000 people have died while waiting for compensation. Exxon is still in appeals

Blood pressure a little low, today? This will fix that...

Held Up Without a Gun

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2278101].message }}

highhopes 16 years ago

An Australian view of the BP oil spill!

YouTube - BP Oil Crisis.wmv
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Ways to grow your online business. Earning online tips for the home worker and essential steps to take to earn money online.
http://wwwtheearninghub.com
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2278473].message }}
- seasoned 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by highhopes
  
  An Australian view of the BP oil spill!
  
  YouTube - BP Oil Crisis.wmv
  
  BEAUTIFUL! About as true and open as you can express here, and nobody can really dispute it. I think the "shopping center" idea has the best chance of working, they just forgot about the pressure and temperature, so it had a high chance of failure. as for the relief wells, you can say a LOT about THAT idea, one wonders why nobody has. 8-(
  
  steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2279020].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Well Tim, I love stats too.

Did you know... lol, BP's profits from 2001-2009 were 163 Billion, and 5.6 Billion
in the first quarter of 2010. I want to start an oil company.

Here...

The Exxon Valdez spill was in 1989, they still, 21 years later, have not paid the [full] amount awarded in court (a mere $500 million) to those affected and in fact over 8000 people have died while waiting for compensation. Exxon is still in appeals

Blood pressure a little low, today? This will fix that...

Held Up Without a Gun

Well, I saw a show a few days ago that spoke about how the price of gas really hasn't gone up. THEY said that is because this is such a MINOR puddle in the scheme of things, with regard to the amount of oil they get from the gulf. THAT raised my blood pressure more. The wells are the VERY first source. From source to pump it could take MONTHS to see the real effect. AND, if the maybe 20%, llike tim, are right about this only affecting 2-3 dozen wells, that arren't even producing yet, it could take longer.

The little bit BP has already paid is obviously insignificant in the scheme of things.

BTW with regard to BPs profits, those are profits they COLLECTED! The amount they actually KEPT was a little less than half of that. So the 163 billion was closer to 80 billion. STILL respectable, but not quite as high. That 5.6 is ALSO high. In fact, they already paid out THAT dividend. The LAST quarter(Q2) they will effectively make NO profit, because they won't pay the dividend, but are expected to fund the 20Billion dollar escrow account. That 20 Billion will be, on average, about the profit for the entire year, WITHOUT considering that paid for dividends.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2279059].message }}

Victoria Kelley

16 years ago

I watched a Video that is being passed around on Facebook yesterday.
According to sources the video, has now been banned off You Tube.
You are welcome to go to the link and watch it, if you wish.
A crew of Aussies who came to the gulf to report the oil problems filmed it. It was heartbreaking. The "stuff" we never see on TV. Fishermen's lives have been ruined and it may take up to 50 years for this disaster to recover in the gulf, according to the experts. Wildlife is dying and the oil is reaching into the swamp lands, that supports other types of life forms too. I worry for continued existence of the bottle nosed dolphins and the sea cows now.
It saddens me that so many beautiful beings of all species, are suffering at the hands of greed and power.

Love and Blessings
Victoria

Thanks

Signature

Do you need a beautiful cover made for your kindle book? I also know how to format and edit your kindle Manuscript. I am a children's book author and kindle publisher. Ask me...

Special offer for Warriors here...

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2279492].message }}

MarkAndrews IMCopywriting

16 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280080].message }}

Paul Myers 16 years ago

Mark ... No more posts like the one I just edited. Take that stuff somewhere else.

Steve, you should know better than to encourage that.

Paul
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

.
Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280526].message }}
- seasoned 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Paul Myers
  
  Mark ... No more posts like the one I just edited. Take that stuff somewhere else.
  
  Steve, you should know better than to encourage that.
  
  Paul
  
  OK, I'll ask PM from now on, sorry.
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280603].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Steve you're so wadical.

Check this out... something is eating the boat hulls of the people
trying to clean-up the oil. They're thinking it's Corexit. Apparently
BP has said they'll reimburse the volunteers.

This is a crazy affair. If it really is Corexit, then what about life? Will
parts of the gulf and inland become sterile?

I'd like to read the MSDS (Material Safety & Data Sheet) for Corexit.

The EPA won't allow the Dutch skimmers to return water with a little
bit of oil in it back into the environment. But it's ok to use Corexit?

What am I missing, here?

G4: Corexit/oil eats through boat hulls, kidneys (PHOTOS/VIDEO) | Florida Oil Spill Law

Had to do it:

Corexit 9527 MSDS - 38% is 2-butoxyethanol?* INDEX on Subject

PDF MSDS for Corexit.

http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse....SDS.539295.pdf

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280673].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Cleanup efforts were just stopped due to the severe weather in the gulf. This is probably going to be true for several days.

Waves were running at 5 feet this morning and there's a heavy chop in protected waters today. That makes berms ineffective and skimmers can skim in the waves. Higher waves are predicted for at least three days due to the storm in the Gulf.

The oil came ashore here last night - and I stood with 30-40 of my neighbors at the end of the pier. No one said much but there were few dry eyes. One of the wildlife management people working to keep the oil from the heron refuge told me that right now 20 species are in danger of extinction.

Corexit is said to be 4x more toxic than oil. Look for the links to a former BP board member, to Blackstone Group, to Goldman Sachs and to Apollo management. Follow the money and you'll see why it's used. Another dispersant, Dispirsit, has been shown by the EPA to be twice as effective and a third less toxic.

Not including links as it might lead to prohibited comments here - but you can find the money trail if you search.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280863].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Ken,

It is ABHORANT that they would use a product with warnings like:

Eye and skin irritant. Repeated or excessive exposure to butoxyethanol may cause injury to red blood cells
(hemolysis), kidney or the liver. Harmful by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed.
Do not get in eyes, on skin, on clothing. Do not take internally. Use with adequate ventilation. Wear suitable
protective clothing.

If I were a dolphin, and drowned, I would probably be HAPPY that I didn't live through the torture those chemicals would put me through. Of course, other creatures would suffer the same torture.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280767].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Super skimmer from Taiwan to be tested soon. This is a a newly retooled super taker.

With residents of four states complaining about the dearth of skimming vessels off their shores, the 10-story tall, 372-yard long Taiwanese-owned behemoth -- called A Whale -- could be an enormous boon to the region.

Or it could be a really, really big disappointment.

Nobu Su, the CEO and founder of Taiwan Maritime Transport (TMT), told reporters in Norfolk on Friday that on account of the special holes he had cut in its sides, his vessel would roll across the Gulf "like a lawn mower cutting the grass."

Though the ship and the process are entirely untested, Su insisted A Whale could ingest and process some 15 million gallons of oily water a day. By comparison, the entire emergency response since BP's Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on April 20 has collected 28 million gallons of oily water.

Like the Dutch skimmers this one will also process the water/oil and pump the slightly polluted water back into the ocean. They will likely have to get approval from the epa.

Gulf Oil Spill: 'A Whale' Of A Skimmer Offers Up Its Services

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280890].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

They will likely have to get approval from the epa.

.....and the Coast Guard, and MMS and Wildlife Management and Fish and Game and Homeland Security and....at least one of those agencies will find some reason it must appoint a panel or commission to "study before implementation". (seriously, that's only part of the list).

And we've been waiting for permission now for some time. What we need is one person who can say "do it" - but we haven't had that since this started.

(The word cluster comes to mind - use your imagination).

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280920].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Yes, Kay, regarding corexits use, etc. I had a sinking feeling about
the reason why.

Seems like if there are so many species threatened with extinction,
maybe some entity, I don't know who, could gather them up and
move them or put them somewhere to protect them.

If I had the money I would see to it.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280959].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

I hear Facebook deleted the boycott BP page.

People went apes**t and Facebook restored the page.

Facebook claims it was all an honest mistake.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281559].message }}

ThomM 16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I hear Facebook deleted the boycott BP page.

People went apes**t and Facebook restored the page.

Facebook claims it was all an honest mistake.

TL

Not just the boycott BP page, but the guys personal account and his daughters.
- Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281562].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

WHOAH --- DON'T CLICK THAT LINK IN KAY's POST!

I just tried to get to that link and it set my avast off like 4th of July.

Kay - you might wanna scan your machine!

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281643].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Yeah, I read your warning after clicking her link. Had to close firefox down. Thanks anyways.

Originally Posted by HeySal

WHOAH --- DON'T CLICK THAT LINK IN KAY's POST!

I just tried to get to that link and it set my avast off like 4th of July.

Kay - you might wanna scan your machine!

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281812].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

There's a pop-up at the bottom of the page plus a timed pop-up
after the page loads. I don't think there's anything to worry about
with the link.

But whatever makes anyone comfortable...

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281659].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Nice point about some marketers, Greg. Just like some lawyers, but I do
agree with what you said. It was a good post. Refreshing after the
occasional semi-hysterical rants that this thread attracts.

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281979].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Speaking of turning down help...How come Haley Barber was sent 6000 National Guardsmen, but only deployed 58 of them, which is less than 1%?

Also, a boycott of BP may hurt BP related workers, but it isn't like it won't help the other local companies. People that work for BP will have to find jobs elsewhere. I'm not willing to support a company that's had something like 750 violations, while Conoco, Exxon and Shell each had no more than 8 violations, and I think Shell only had one during the same time period. Screw BP.

BTW, oil spilling isn't limited to just the Gulf. Here's an article about oil spills in Colorado over just the past 2.5 years:

Oil and gas companies have reported almost 1,000 spills to Colorado regulators over the past 2 1/2 years, totaling 5.2 million gallons of drilling liquids and oil.

Millions of gallons spilled in Colo. over 2 year period - The Denver Post-

Colorado is about #25 in population, so let's call it "average". If we do the math, that's 50,000 oil spills and 250,000,000 million gallons of oil that's been spilled on land in the US over just the past couple of years.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2282176].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

BTW I heard a rant on the news that basically said what I have some time here. You guys are mitigating this, etc... GRANTED, sometimes I follow along, BUT.....

This is NOT a 2 dimensional spill! So why is everyone calling it a spill?

It is a THREE dimensional GUSHER! It is FAR worse than a spill. If it were really a spill, we would simply speak of cleanup and, hopefully, it would have been done by now. And YEAH, I KNOW it is TOO LATE now! What COULD maybe have been a few hours/days if it were a spill is now a job that can take DECADES or forever.

That is typical of spills though. If a little water spills on the floor, it could take MINUTES to cleanup, with a towel. Wait a few hours and, if things aren't sealed right, etc..., and you don't clean it up, it could go into the joists and studs and become a HUGE effort to clean up, by basically tearing down the wall and who knows what else, because of mold, insects, etc...

Of course, I am not belittling the danger to wildlife. A human has maybe about 5 minutes to breath. Take longer, and damage could set in. Obviously, dolphins have a longer period, but it isn't like they can call 911 either.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2283833].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Sal - That site has been online since 2003 - and doesn't set off AVG - today it's loading faster so there must have been a problem. The text is below.

U.S. Refused Help on Oil Spill
According to Foreign Policy, thirteen entities that had offered the U.S. oil spill assistance within about two weeks of the Horizon rig explosion. They were the governments of Canada, Croatia, France, Germany, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Republic of Korea, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United Nations.

The U.S. response - Thank you, but no thank you, we've got it.

"..While there is no need right now that the U.S. cannot meet, the U.S. Coast Guard is assessing these offers of assistance to see if there will be something which we will need in the near future."

Blame It On The Jones Act?
Separately, a Dutch news site De Standaard also reported Belgian and Dutch dredgers have technology in-house to fight the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, but the Act Jones forbids them to work in the U.S.

A Belgian group-DEME- contends it can clean up the oil in three to four months with specialty vessel and equipment, rather than an estimated nine months if done only by the U.S. The article noted there are no more than 5 or 6 of those ships in the world and the top specialist players are the two Belgian companies- DEME and De Nul - and their Dutch competitors.
The U.S. does not have the similar technology and vessel to accomplish the cleanup task because those ships would cost twice as much to build in the U.S. than in the Far East. The article further criticizes this "great technological delay" is a direct consequence of the Jones Act.

What Is The Jones Act?
The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 is a United States Federal statute that regulates maritime commerce in U.S. waters and between U.S. ports. Section 27, also known as the Jones Act, deals with coastal shipping; and requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried in U.S.-flag ships, constructed in the United States, owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents.

The purpose of the law is to support the U.S. merchant marine industry. Critics said that the legislation results in increased costs moving cargoes between U.S. ports, and in essence, is protectionism, Supporters of the Act maintain that the legislation is of strategic economic and wartime interest to the United States. .

European Service Sector - Offshore Subsea Specialist
As discussed in my analysis of the oil service sector, the European companies typically possess the knowhow in offshore and subsea; whereas their North American counterparts excel in onshore drilling and production technologies.

So, it is more than likely that European firms do have the expertise to clean up the spill quicker and more effectively as DEME asserts.
Since the Jones Act means the Belgian ship and personnel cannot work in the Gulf, it does seem the Act has inhibited technology and knowledge exchange & development, and possibly prevented a quicker response to the oil spill.

Jones Waiver Time
On the other hand, waivers of the Jones may be granted by the Administration in cases of national emergencies or in cases of strategic interest. It would appear the U.S. government's initial refusal to foreign help most likely stemmed from a mis-calculation of the scale and deepwater technological barriers for this unprecedented disaster, and/or perhaps ..... pride.

Whatever the rationale, and if De Standarrd's claim that the Jones Act forbids the European companies to help fight the spill is true, it is high time the U.S. government grant the Jones waiver, and let this be an international collaborative effort.

It's always better late than never.

Tim, your comments about the states are ridiculous and ignore reality. States were told they were protected by fed regulation - and they weren't That is clear and must be addressed even if it's uncomfortable or sheds a less than shining light on leaders. This cuts across party lines and occurred over several administrations. Our legislators don't need us to protect them and deflect blame from them - they owe it to us to respond to a crisis in a timely and effective way...all of them.

I agree the vast majority of the blame for the spill lies with BP - but to ignore other culpable agencies and leaders is ridiculous. When we know one agency was totally riddled with problems - should we ask if other agencies are operating the same way?

Barbour is roundly bashed on the coast for his own pollyanna approach to this crisis. As for Thad Allen, most here think he says what he's told to say. There have been many press conferences where the info given by Allen was proven wrong within minutes after the announcement.

An example of Allen's organizational abilities - the "vessels of opportunity" (that name is met with contempt here) were not issued radios so they could contact each other and coordinate activities in oil cleanup. Those radios are locally available but are only now being implemented. Hundreds of boats in the water with no way to communicate with them or for them to communicate with each other - Thad Allen's decision.

TODAY (a few minutes ago) it was reported that skimmers and other help are grounded due to red tape - this was on MSNBC.

Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2284124].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

AP just reported that BP is also being fined 5.2 million for false production figures at a Colorado site of theirs. Seems drilling isn't the only thing that this company has problems with.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2284356].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Sal -

I think this is going to be an interesting "read" in history a few years from now.

The closer you look at various parts of this crisis and the more you dig into "facts" - the more errors, bad numbers and deliberate misinformation seem to pop up.

If an honest final report is ever issued (doubtful) it will be an interesting read.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2285377].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Oh and it just keeps getting better all the time.

I sure hope this is paranoid scare tactic bull ****. CA is already tanking. So just send everyone where another state can be destroyed real fast by an evac. Yeah -- that makes dandy sense.

California Notified of Gulf Evacuation Plans | Before It's News

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2286580].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

The good news is that BP is now covering the oil spill with it's own reporters. Here's part of one report where BP takes credit for increasing hotel business in the Gulf.

Much of the region's [nonfishing boat] businesses -- particularly the hotels -- have been prospering because so many people have come here from BP and other oil emergency response teams," another report says. Indeed, one tourist official in a local town makes it clear that "BP has always been a very great partner of ours here...We have always valued the business that BP sent us.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2286602].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

World's largest skimmer arrives and is anchored waiting for Fed approval and BP contracts - go figure.

World’s largest skimmer finally arrives in Gulf, but still needs federal approval | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

The most upsetting part of this whole thing is the way BP is getting away with acting like they OWN the WHOLE gulf. Once that oil left their own little drill area they should have no say about cleaning up whatsoever - even if it's them that gets the bill. Who is giving them the right to pollute the whole world and refuse clean up?

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2289526].message }}

sarahberra

16 years ago

BP doesn't want to crash the economy. The government has been strying to crash the economy for quite some type. They are trying to take over so many industries and they want wallstreet to fail.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Affordable Health Insurance

Click here for a: Fast Cure for Any Type of Flu Virus!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2289856].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Sal -

I was just reading more about "A Whale". Amazing fellow who retrofitted the ship just for this crisis.

The contract with BP shouldn't take too long - but both the Coast Guard and the EPA say they need to "make reports" to decide it A Whale can be used.

Honestly, if BP hadn't started handling cleanup, it wouldn't have happened at all. That's the fact.

I hope I'm wrong but I predict BP will get the contract done with A Whale and we'll still be waiting for the govt agencies to "study" it. Want to see if it works? Put it out in the gulf and find out!

Some good comments about "A Whale" at BP Oil Spill, A Whale Skimmer Ship Waits For Government Approval

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2291504].message }}
- TimPhelan 16 years ago
  
  Do you work for the new BP oil spill news magazine? If not, maybe you should.
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  Honestly, if BP hadn't started handling cleanup, it wouldn't have happened at all. That's the fact.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  Over 50 Dating
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2291614].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Well Kay - if anyone still doesn't understand that bigger isn't better when you talk about gov -- these guys have regulated themselves right out of the ability to handle emergencies at all. They actually turned down some help (you mentioned it earlier) because it couldn't clean to the damned percent that was legislated. They finally just pitched that one in, too - - finally realized that the legislation could do more disaster than anyone ever imagined. In an actual free market, BP couldn't have gotten this contract - they wouldn't have existed to even bid. They just screwed themselves out of a lot of money from cap and trade (natural gas) that they were hedged for, too.
I don't think anyone is going to wash the oil off any of these duckos. The only way this could get any more freakin' bizarre would be if BP asked for, and was given bail out. LMAO. Now that would be fun to sit back and watch for sure.

Anyhow - it's sure good to see that there are sweepers coming in to the gulf now. By this time of the crisis, it might take a world full of them to make much of a dent. Especially if there is any truth to the fact that they CAN'T fix the leak. I think if I was one of the culpable parties in this fiasco, I'd just bail and go hide on a deserted island somewhere until nobody would recognize me when I finally came back, LOL.

Hope things are holding up at your shoreline.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2291656].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

Well, it's not a fact but it seems to be a possibility. Worse case scenario would start probably if the relief wells don't work.

Originally Posted by HeySal

Especially if there is any truth to the fact that they CAN'T fix the leak.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2291764].message }}
- HeySal 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  Well, it's not a fact but it seems to be a possibility. Worse case scenario would start probably if the relief wells don't work.
  
  Yeah, it's not fact - I worded that pretty badly. It should have read truth to the idea. I've also heard a few worst case scenarios. A few sound pretty realisitic - a few are beyond Asimov.
  
  Seriousmny -- I saw that the plans have been drawn for evac. Not sure what the conditions will be before an evac is called for - but lets all just pray it doesn't go there. If it does, they better pick a state besides CA to send everyone to - this place is ready to implode already.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Sal
  When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
  Beyond the Path
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2293194].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Well Kay - if anyone still doesn't understand that bigger isn't better when you talk about gov -- these guys have regulated themselves right out of the ability to handle emergencies at all. They actually turned down some help (you mentioned it earlier) because it couldn't clean to the damned percent that was legislated.

GEE, I wish they would give me all that "impure" gold and silver!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2293301].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

I saw that the plans have been drawn for evac.

Got to call you on that one - evacuation for whom, from what?
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2298941].message }}
- HeySal 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  Got to call you on that one - evacuation for whom, from what?
  
  Oh hell, Kay - I have no clue, LOL - - I just read that "they" (for lack of remembering who exactly the article cited) had plans for evacuation. Probably for a worst case scenario - hurricane + spill. It didn't say they were actually evacing anyone right now- just that they had the plans and they are ready. If an evac is called - they think they are sending up to hundreds of thousands to California. LOL - wanna talk another state that will tank real fast if they do that? They are already losing about 6 bil a year to illegals and there are more streaming in from AZ right now. Unemployment is up to 1/3 in some locations and is hovering around 18% in many (and thats just the "official" figures). Yep - bring the whole SE to California -- be sure to wear some flowers in your hair........
  
  As long as they don't evac people just to prove they're doing something and just have the plans in case, you can't really fault them for that. Now what would happen if some huge freaking hurricane formed and they had no plan? Yeah - these "authorities" are about as dumb as they come, but they aren't suicidal.
  
  On a more positive note -- the A Whale has been let loose and some others, too, now that Alex is done causing more consternation.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Sal
  When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
  Beyond the Path
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2299046].message }}
  
  Kay King 16 years ago
  
  The only evac plan that are in place here are the standard hurricane season evaluation routes and timelines.
  
  This is a normal part of early summer - but this year it's even more important because of the spill.
  
  Here's an example of something that happens that doesn't make the news (at least the accurate reporting the news).
  
  Thad Allen of the Coast Guard (who is "leading" the effort here) has announced a new rule. No one may come within 65 feet of any of the workers cleaning the beach or any of the boats being use to attempt to control the oil or the people running boats. Do it and you will be arrested and the fine for breaking this "new law" is $40,000.
  
  It's not unusual to see tourists walking a beach where cleanup workers are - local reporters have tried to ask questions of cleanup crews when they are on break sitting under their canopies.
  
  Allen says this is "for safety" - no one believes that. It is to further limit access to what is going on - limiting both the media and the public. Allen announced this as his new rule - and said BP had no knowledge that he was going to impose this.....yet what he has done is limit media access to BP workers.
  
  This type of announcement has been S.O.P. - but this one is raising many eyebrows about the intent of "central command".
  
  kay
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2300145].message }}

seriousmny

16 years ago

I feel really bad about this whole oil spill situation. I myself was a part of a class action lawsuit and I am very bitter about it. The lawyers got most the money off the top and left us with just change.

Out of a multimillion dollar lawsuit, each of my family members including myself got 5 grand after it was divided amongst the thousands of people involved. There was a cap on the amount awarded and the company that polluted my town goes on and my childhood homes are unlivable.

They scraped the ground a couple of feet and say that's enough. If that was the case, then we could go back there, but we cannot. Unfortunately, I think the people on the coast line need to just pack up and start over.

It's going to be a long time before they receive any compensation for their trouble and even if they do, there are so many people involved, it will just be pennies.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2291780].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Geez Kay and they think it's best that we don't know? Wonder what else is going on around the country that isn't "transparent".

If this spill isn't worst case scenario or heading in that direction.......you think they'd be more willing to talk about what's going on. I think they are making one grave mistake handling this like a covert war mission.

Sure - people can get in the way, and if they had mobs of people standing in the way yacking at the workers it would make sense to keep them away - but a few people strolling a beach is a threat of some sort? Good grief. I don't like the look, sound, or feel of the silence. I don't like the way it feels like we have dictators in charge. They need to just stop the BS, lighten up on the "secrecy".

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2300453].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Do you guys realize that the earliest claim of the next major attempt to stop the REAL problem is STILL about 30 days away!?!?!?!? The latest is more like 120-150 days away. And when is the REAL deadline!?!?!?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2300800].message }}

Charles Harper

16 years ago

If you bankrupt this company, there will be lots of regular folk hurt too:

1.) employees

2.) pensioneers

3.) 401 K Holders/403b Holders

4.) Bondholders

So yes on the one hand, BP has to come up to the three point line.

On the other hand, wanting to see them crippled is not a good thing. Because even if they suffer, whether a little or a lot; there will be quite a few people caught in the crossfire.

I think about this when I see people saying BOYCOTT BP. I think to myself, they are protesting outside of the service station of a service employee who needs that job. I also realize how much I hate television and the take of the commentators on everything.

CT

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Video Training on Internet Marketing and PLR

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2300838].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

CT -- boycotting this company should have started a couple decades ago. If we had put them down when they first started causing problems, we'd more than likely not be going through this right now. This company has gotten by via crony capitalism for decades and they have caused deaths, spills, and explosions everywhere they go. Sure people will be hurt if the company goes under -- but how many more incidents like this do we need before we can see they really need to be turned off?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2301317].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Yeah, this company is like a serial killer without a conscience. In California they have the three strike rule. BP is way past the three strikes and should be put away for good and not allowed to do business in the US again. That is after they pay for cleaning up this mess.

Originally Posted by HeySal

CT -- boycotting this company should have started a couple decades ago. If we had put them down when they first started causing problems, we'd more than likely not be going through this right now. This company has gotten by via crony capitalism for decades and they have caused deaths, spills, and explosions everywhere they go. Sure people will be hurt if the company goes under -- but how many more incidents like this do we need before we can see they really need to be turned off?

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2301425].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

CT -- boycotting this company should have started a couple decades ago. If we had put them down when they first started causing problems, we'd more than likely not be going through this right now. This company has gotten by via crony capitalism for decades and they have caused deaths, spills, and explosions everywhere they go. Sure people will be hurt if the company goes under -- but how many more incidents like this do we need before we can see they really need to be turned off?

Charles is RIGHT though. Judging by the stability in price, I would bet that they STILL have a lot of pension funds that own them.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2301428].message }}

HeySal 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Charles is RIGHT though. Judging by the stability in price, I would bet that they STILL have a lot of pension funds that own them.

Steve

Um....corporate history would indicate pensions aren't really much of a consideration. Companies figured out ways to steal pensions a long time ago. BP's main concern right now is that they were hedged to make one hell of a killing with the cap and trade. They just messed that one up very possibly fatally for themselves. I would think this would be the perfect time to get into the alternative energy fields...gonna be a lot of jobs in that field before too long. I'm just wondering if they will be private sector or gov. jobs.
- Thanks
Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2302138].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Heysal,

I don't know what company you are talking about. If you are talking about the company managing the persons account, those fees have limits and are for the WHOLE account!
The actual fund fees have limits, and are for the WHOLE account. Trading for securities have DISTINCT limits. If securities are not properly allocated, etc... the securities law actually allows for ALL civil and CRIMINAL punishments as well as monetary values of the value of everything(at the point of discovery or incident) plus 6%!

and BP has NO control of how dividends are allocated. If it is the SAME class and ticker of stock, the dividend paid per share is the SAME!

BESIDES, let's say a person stole 50% of the dividend, and stock value. If the components of the stock were reduced by 50%, there would STILL be a loss in the account!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2302973].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

BP's main concern right now is that they were hedged to make one hell of a killing with the cap and trade.

I'm confused on that, I guess.

Where would the killing be on that for big oil? Oil companies and coal conglomerates have fought cap in trade for over a year - and now this crisis is being used to justify need for passing a huge energy bill INCLUDING cap in trade.

From what I understand of it, cap in trade is nothing more than redistribution of wealth on an advanced scale. One area that produces more emissions pays more and those that produce less emissions profit more. Maybe I'm missing something as I haven't studied it thoroughly.

I've seen the "pay more" being proposed by cap in trade as a pass through - charges to fossil energy producers will only be passed on and paid by consumers.

That is one big concern - that this oil crisis will be used to pass more economically crippling spending programs that will only cost consumers more for energy. This has already been pushed since the DH exploded on April 20. As Rahm Emmanuel has said to the media "never let a good crisis go to waste."

The idea that after so many years of ignoring energy and having policies developed behind closed doors (that benefit oil companies) - we have to dive in fully and correct energy problems NOW - is opportunism to me. Why not cut some of the tax breaks the huge corps get - and use that money to begin subsidizing solar and wind energy production?

We need to move forward to better energy sources, but in a planned way that gradually eases the demand for fossil fuels and turns us toward better energy sources. We've been talking about alternative energy for 40 years - and yet weeks before the DH accident, our energy plan was "drill more".

Energy policies need to be dictated by long term goals that will wean us from oil dependence. Going from "drill, baby, drill" in March to "we must have alternative energy right now" three months later is not action - but reaction.

We need long term energy policies and plans with milestones that cut across election cycles for the good of the country - we don't need knee jerk legislation that adds to our huge debt without a cohesive plan that can be followed no matter which side is taking a turn in power.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2303147].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

OK - I found the "evauation" warnings (a/k/a crapola)

PLEASE - if you see some over the top pronouncement, look closely to see where the info is coming from. This is how stuff gets spread throughout the country as fact....passing on info without verifying it.

Wayne Madsen - has claimed the govt has a hit out on him, has disclosed "inside info" to one conspiracy after another - birth certification conspiracist, said he knew Bush admin was "behind" 9/11, calls himself an "investigative reporter" - and is on the level of the grocery tabloids.

These leeches are all over the crisis in the gulf - and the goal is only attention to themselves. At least one of the blogs that blindly published this guy's opinions without verifying the info - published this retraction today:

Officials have informed the news media that reports of emergency plans to evacuate several Gulf Coast cities, including the Tampa Bay region, prior to setting fires in the Gulf of Mexico to burn off oil leaking from the damaged Deepwater Horizon well are false.

The reports, including an earlier story on this site, originated with an article with a Tampa Bay-area contributor to Examiner.com. Fox Tampa Bay quotes Hillsborough County Emergency Operations Center Manager Larry Gispert as saying the freelance writer who wrote the original article "dreamed up" the scenario.

An article written by a freelance writer named Maryann Tobin from Examiner.com claims FEMA has an emergency evacuation plan in place if the oil spill makes it to Tampa Bay area.

The article, which has since been pulled from the website, claims that several cities, including NewOrleans, Houston and the Tampa Bay area, plan to evacuate people with respiratory problems before officials begin burning surface oil near the coastline.

When I found the original claim of mass evacuation (complete with photos from Katrina) I thought it odd that several coastal cities in MS were not mentioned when the "evacuation numbers" were added up. Guess the writer didn't bother to check a coastal map?

Madsen is another kook - and writes a doomsday prediction and bloggers reprint it without any thought or care as to accuracy. When the public sees that same info on mutiple blogs - it adds believability. It's the great downside of the internet as a news source.

Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2303265].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

I WOULD speak on C&T, and even quote a PROPONENT of it that said something DAMNING AGAINST it, but....

Anyway, BP is now saying the cleanup costs have passed the $3Billion mark. SO, if everything were proportional, the total cost will now likely be in the TRILLIONS of dollars. I don't know if it is proportional, but I wanted to relate how HIGH $3billion sounds, compared to what has been done.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2303264].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Kay - when I wrote about the evac - it was mostly glib. Now I have no doubts there are emergency plans for evac, as I said they'd be stupid not to have one -- but the one I cited said that up to hundreds of thousands may be evaced to CALIFORNIA. LOL -- I figured people would "get it" just from that.

Steve - when I said corporate history - I meant history in general, not one company in specific. Companies have out rightly stolen pensions before. It was becoming enough of a practice that it was finally legislated that companies are not allowed to touch employee pensions (yes they actually had to legislate that it was illegal to steal from employees)
BP isn't 100% American, so are you sure of what the laws are on pensions for an international CO that goes broke?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2303645].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Steve - when I said corporate history - I meant history in general, not one company in specific. Companies have out rightly stolen pensions before. It was becoming enough of a practice that it was finally legislated that companies are not allowed to touch employee pensions (yes they actually had to legislate that it was illegal to steal from employees)
BP isn't 100% American, so are you sure of what the laws are on pensions for an international CO that goes broke?

OH, OK, YOU didn't understand! Stealing from pension funds has ALWAYS been against the law! There was, and IS, the issue of "FIDUCIARY DUTY". SOME companies, like ENRON, got out on a technicality. What ENRON did was buy a company, which AUTOMATICALLY changed the stock for that company to ENRON. ENRON then tried to make everyone believe the stock was STRONG, ETC... and encourage people to buy LOTS of it. There HAVE been laws passed to make such actions less likely. Ironically, since they(enron) now owned the assets of the strong companies they bought, they could use them to finance the gambling, etc... and basically destroyed the value, and made the stock worthless. Unfortunately, to this day, the US allows such things to go on.

AND, when a company goes bankrupt, it is pretty much an international thing that stock holders are paid LAST! The FIRST to be paid are the lawyers, and the bond holders have to be paid in full BEFORE the stock holders. In fact, the company doesn't really pay the stock holders, unless they want to go private and stay in business, or have dividends, etc.....

BP USED to be a relatively stable stock. I mean energy is not wildly exciting. With biomedical or technical stock, a single approval could make it skyrocket. It ALSO has a dividend that is stable and high. So pension funds DO invest in it.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2303745].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

BTW....

Oil now pollutes 1/3rd of the gulf! Arsenic is now accumulating.

OH, apparently some IDIOT wanted BP to issue more stock to get money. I don't even think that is legal, but it is unethical, etc... BP declined.

Last I heard, that whale is STILL not allowed to try cleaning things up.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2309312].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Also revealed in the past couple days:

In 2007, both the Marine Management Service and the Fish and Wildlife agency issued "reports" stating that even should there be an oil spill or leak in the Gulf of Mexico, the harm to wildlife, fish and birds would be "negligible".

The stupidity just went on and on.

Almost 1400 birds dead
50 dolphins dead
400+ turtles dead

....and those are only the ones we know of that died on the beach. Estimates are that several times that number have quietly disappeared into the waters of the Gulf.

For the fish and wildlife, it gets worse every week and there's no relief in sight. BP has to be responsible - but we can't let the responsibility stop there. We were paying those in the agencies who decided to play ball with big oil instead of putting the safety of our land, waters and people ahead of profit. They need to be held accountable, too.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2310282].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Also revealed in the past couple days:

In 2007, both the Marine Management Service and the Fish and Wildlife agency issued "reports" stating that even should there be an oil spill or leak in the Gulf of Mexico, the harm to wildlife, fish and birds would be "negligible".

The stupidity just went on and on.

Almost 1400 birds dead
50 dolphins dead
400+ turtles dead

....and those are only the ones we know of that died on the beach. Estimates are that several times that number have quietly disappeared into the waters of the Gulf.

For the fish and wildlife, it gets worse every week and there's no relief in sight. BP has to be responsible - but we can't let the responsibility stop there. We were paying those in the agencies who decided to play ball with big oil instead of putting the safety of our land, waters and people ahead of profit. They need to be held accountable, too.

kay

I forgot to say, in my earlier post, SOME on the news are starting to talk about the possibility of severe EXTINCTION, like I have. I hadn't even considered the arsenic. I hope they get this fixed SOON! I KNOW they won't, but I hope they do.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2311614].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Some of the oil is reaching the Florida coast right now, too and they are PO'd.
I saw somewhere that they are cleaning up beaches that they are accusing BP of dumping sand over the oil to hide it instead of cleaning it up. Good grief - I'm going to start copy/pasting URLs LOL. There's a lot of news circulating for a supposed blackout to be going on. The only ones who AREN'T talking is the WH and BP.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2310317].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

You are right about who isn't talking - but I've seen a lot of rumor and misinformation online, too.

The relief wells are both ahead of schedule - so we can cross out fingers that one of them will go where it's intended and might work. Otherwise, we're screwed for the long term.

Don't know how "a whale" is doing - it was only tested a few hours when the water was too rough for other skimmers. Nothing more has been released but now they are talking another big boat skimmer - but again it's "wait for EPA, etc approval". These boats are not quick fixes and need to be tested over a period of days when the water is fairly calm. BP was supposed (according to their estimates a couple weeks ago) to be collecting much more of the oil now but no further reports on that either.

I don't think any of those involved - bp or govt - is telling the truth.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2310451].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

You are right about who isn't talking - but I've seen a lot of rumor and misinformation online, too.

I don't think any of those involved - bp or govt - is telling the truth.

kay

Seems to be a lack of transparency besides that coming from the fed gov and BP:

I don't see how this lack of transparency is doing anyone any good. So what if we're in a worst case scenario? We'll figure it out sooner or later without being told. I'm also worried if the lack of transparency is going to be used for another power grab of some sort. Why else would they be so foaming at the mouth furious to hide info from us?

Another thing I heard is that there is a fema like medical center set up to treat clean up workers that get sick. It's barb wired and guarded. Go figure.

And the last thing I read was something that wasn't being discussed - is that there is supposedly a dead zone of some huge size (can't remember how big, but it was big - caused not from the oil spill but from the run off of nitrates (nitrites?) from the corn farming - the article was discussing that oil wasn't LA's worst nightmare.

Sounds like a freaking battle zone down there - media blackouts, everything covert - reports from citizens, people being slapped in jail for cameras, Gov and BP saying nothing but KEEP OUT.

Man - I wish I had the cash to make a movie -- this would be best selling conspiracy/science fiction/disaster combo of the century.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2310800].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

And the last thing I read was something that wasn't being discussed - is that there is supposedly a dead zone of some huge size (can't remember how big, but it was big - caused not from the oil spill but from the run off of nitrates (nitrites?) from the corn farming - the article was discussing that oil wasn't LA's worst nightmare.

Fertilizer Runoff Overwhelms Streams and Rivers--Creating Vast "Dead Zones": Scientific American

Says this is happening in many places because in the best case bacteria STILL convert less than half the waste. THEIR solution? We stop eating meat,

from scientific american

In fact, the scientists wrote this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the only way to increase ethanol production from corn and reduce nitrogen runoff would be for Americans to stop eating meat, thereby freeing up corn used as livestock feed for other uses.

so cows get less corn, so farmers start to starve, and decide to grow something else. STUPID idea! WHY?

1. Not all meat is from cows.
2. They DON'T need to eat corn.
3. Corn is subsidized, so the market doesn't matter.

Here's a BETTER idea! Switch to more natural fertilizers, or just cut back! The runoff is excess that isn't used, so controlling runoff will allow you to get the SAME effect with LESS fertilizer! EVERYONE benefits!

Sounds like a freaking battle zone down there - media blackouts, everything covert - reports from citizens, people being slapped in jail for cameras, Gov and BP saying nothing but KEEP OUT.

Tell me about it. But cameras can now be HIGHLY covert!

Man - I wish I had the cash to make a movie -- this would be best selling conspiracy/science fiction/disaster combo of the century.

Well, if you plan to, maybe I can help in some way.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2311678].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Here's something else to worry about: 27,000 abandoned wells in the Gulf which aren't inspected.

More than 27,000 abandoned oil and gas wells lurk in the hard rock beneath the Gulf of Mexico, an environmental minefield that has been ignored for decades. No one -- not industry, not government -- is checking to see if they are leaking, an Associated Press investigation shows.

The oldest of these wells were abandoned in the late 1940s, raising the prospect that many deteriorating sealing jobs are already failing....

There's ample reason for worry about all permanently and temporarily abandoned wells -- history shows that at least on land, they often leak. Wells are sealed underwater much as they are on land. And wells on land and in water face similar risk of failure. Plus, records reviewed by the AP show that some offshore wells have failed.

Experts say such wells can repressurize, much like a dormant volcano can awaken. And years of exposure to sea water and underground pressure can cause cementing and piping to corrode and weaken.

AP IMPACT: Gulf awash in 27,000 abandoned wells - Yahoo! News

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2311721].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

I don't think any of those involved - bp or govt - is telling the truth.

I knew that early on...BP has been hiding and lying, then they get
caught with their pants down....no comment on the govt..they been
lying for years, and cover up what they want when it fits their needs.

What is the update on the spill...I have been offline for a few days
due to moving...so it is not capped yet? I know in the start they
said it would take 90 days to get another rig up...are we near the
90 day mark yet? Is there a rig going up? or did they lie about this too?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2310482].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Seems to be a lack of transparency besides that coming from the fed gov and BP:

... local criticism of Gov. Bobby Jindal's handling of the oil spill. One line of that criticism -- anger that Jindal vetoed legislation that would have opened all of the state's records of how it handled the spill. The governor argued that the legislation would have weakened the state's position in future liability claims. State Sen. Robert Adley, a Republican who sponsored the bill in the Senate, called that "disingenuous and ludicrous."

"It's absurd," he said. "People can eventually issue subpoenas and get these records. All he's doing is preventing the people of Louisiana from seeing the records, while BP will get to see them."

Adley, who endorsed Jindal in 2007, called the BP transparency veto the latest example of Jindal making "one ethics rule for himself and another from everyone else." Rep. Wayne Waddell, another Republican and the supporter of the transparency legislation in the House, took that further.

"He wants to preach that he's brought to the state more transparency and ethics than any other governor," said Waddell. "At the levels below the governor's office, he has. But the governor should represent the gold standard, and right now it's just gold-plated."

Neither pol argued that Jindal had been negligent at any level in his handling of the BP crisis. The problem, they said, was with how difficult that question was to answer. Questions about whether the National Guard members Jindal asked for have been fully deployed have been basically blown off with spokesmen criticizing the federal government.

"I don't know if anything is being done incorrectly," said Adley. "I just want it to be done in public."

"We don't really know if anything's gone wrong," said Waddell. "Unless you open up the records how do you know? Unless you're open about how the National Guard is being used, or how the money BP owes is being used, how do you know? Is the money going to be used to plug a hole in the budget?"

Waddell hoped that more media exposure of the transparency issue would get Jindal to think about his own "national ambitions" and revisit it. Adley just wanted to get it right.

"When I leave the legislature," he said, "on each and every issue I want to find myself on the right side of history, if possible."

Republicans knock Jindal on BP transparency :: Dave Weigel

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2310567].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Obama administration requests reinstatement of deepwater moratorium...

The Obama administration has filed its appeal to District Court Judge Martin Feldman's decision blocking the administration's temporary ban on new exploratory drilling in water deeper than 500 feet.

The deepwater drilling moratorium, announced in May, would have impacted 33 projects. Feldman announced his decision on June 22.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2312471].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Sal -

The medical center is a clinic for BP workers who are doing cleanup, etc - and the fuss, in my opinion, is unwarranted. Many employers here offer a private clinic for their employees and none of them want a bunch of reporters and politicians clamoring for patient information - that's private.

The fuss about it is coming mainly from the media who seem to be running out of new prolems to focus on. I think it's ridiculous to expect a medical clinic to be giving out patient info and the fencing was added to keep those reporters from trying to interview patients at the clinic.

The abandoned wells have been piling up since the late '40s - considering what's going on with one well right now - I don't care anything about the others. The time to look at that is later (well, actually, should have been years ago but obviously hasn't happened). Right now, not a priority.

It's things like the failure to monitor abandoned wells, etc that points clearly to this not being a partisan problem - it's a national problem that NO ONE of any party affiliation has paid attention to for years.

It's not really a battle zone at all - there are some stupid regulations but they affect most of the people here. The reporters here from all over complains loudly about not having access to everything - but some of the questions they ask are so stupid, who cares?

The focus for us is on WHO will ever take charge - WHO will have the guts to cut through the red tape and stop bowing down to multiple agencies as they delay and discuss and argue with each other.

Eventually people here will be focused like a laser on watching whether or not those who allowed this to happen (both in BP and in the Government) are allowed to just make excuses and walk away, keep their jobs, or not.

You wouldn't have runoff problems from livestock if they were allowed to graze as they were intended by nature - instead of being confined in small spaces and stuffed with grain for fast-to-market. Been saying that for several years - but again nothing will be done until the practice causes a major crisis that people can't ignore. That seems to be how we run things now and have been for about 30 years or so.

If this crisis isn't a wakeup call to get our act together - I don't know what it's going to take.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2314367].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Gee, Hipaa is a federal law that mandates, in part, patient secrecy. It is against the law to even mention someone's blood was tested for IRON!!!!!! OBVIOUSLY, declaring the patient was even there is likely illegal.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2314561].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

HEY, have you heard the LATEST LAST plan?
WOW, I guess they retracted it or something, it WAS in yahoo news, about moving oil from the bad well to ones 2-10 miles away! Considering the distance, the seals needed, all the work, and the fact that they have to reduce pressure in the old well(the best way is to pump it!), I have to ask WHAT makes them think they can do it, let alone have it work.

Steve

OLD HL: Transferring oil from broken well an option for BP - Yahoo! News
NEW HL: New cap, ships could contain Gulf leak by Monday

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2321925].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

They seem to have this overly optimistic, unrealistic view of their technical capabilities. BP also has an oil drilling planned in Alaska which will start on land, go down 2 miles and then go six to eight miles horizontally into deep sea area. They are all excited about about it because it's something that has never been done before. Isn't that great? I really don't feel comfortable about BP drilling even a simple well on land, besides some sort of first time ever type deal into the deep sea.

Originally Posted by seasoned

I have to ask WHAT makes them think they can do it, let alone have it work.

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2323997].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

The announcement about the new cap was interesting - though it had been mentioned earlier, I thought the idea had been dropped.

What's funny (in a sick sort of way) is the outcry about "if you remove this cap to replace it, there will be more oil flowing for a while".

Well, yeah, that's true. But we've tried doing nothing and that's not been working too well. If they have a better cap, I say let'em put it on.

It will work or it won't - just like every other bright idea that's been tried. The idea of BP drilling experimentally in Alaska scares the crap out of me.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2324063].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

They seem to have this overly optimistic, unrealistic view of their technical capabilities. BP also has an oil drilling planned in Alaska which will start on land, go down 2 miles and then go six to eight miles horizontally into deep sea area. They are all excited about about it because it's something that has never been done before. Isn't that great? I really don't feel comfortable about BP drilling even a simple well on land, besides some sort of first time ever type deal into the deep sea.

Exactly why we need to kill this beast as quickly as possible. This company has wreaked havoc in Alaska already -- and everywhere else they touch. I think it's really just beyond reality to think that we aren't going to get pinned with a lot of the cost on this one..and that's just the financial nightmare of it.

If people had acted against this company in the first place when they started screwing up decades ago this nightmare wouldn't even have happened...........and now it's "oh but we have to keep them alive to pay for this." Bull **** -- we have to get them off the planet before they have a chance to kill everything living on it. Yeah it's expensive, but so is allowing one company to cause ecological nightmares all over the globe -- especially when they start becoming the size of this one. We have to stop this company from drilling again no matter what the cost. They are nothing but a traveling devastation freak show.

Kay - barbed wire around a medical facility? Number one - releasing patient records isn't even an issue. Reporters never were legally able to walk into a medical facility and get patient records. How many hospitals do you know of with barbed wire around them and guards at the gate?

"They don't want reporters..........." Ya know, it's really getting to be just tough sh*t about what they want. If a patient wants to talk to a damned reporter - it's called the first amendment and let that patient talk. If the patient doesn't want to, they don't have to. I've never seen a medical facility that you could just walk into and badger or even see someone that doesn't want to be seen either - and they don't need barbed wire and military guards to manage that one. I'm not comfortable with the military taking over the medical in this one. I don't understand why the medical community isn't taking care of the sick -- are there that many or is this just military enforced silence about what they are seeing out there or is it about what the illnesses being experienced are?

I'm not comfortable any time people are put in barbed wire. Thinking that any silence in this issue is okay is exactly the attitude that brought us the amounts of corruption, incompetence, and control grabs we're seeing today. We might learn sometime that if we don't monitor everything "they" do - "they" will not be acting in ways that are going to be benefiting us.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2331868].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

...
Bull **** -- we have to get them off the planet before they have a chance to kill everything living on it.

They HAD their chance! If the well is big enough, this COULD kill everything on it! IMAGINE an ocean COVERED with crude, and oil up several yards on the beaches and coasts. It doesn't take all that much. Luckily, it WILL take a very long time. The south and east coasts of the US will be among the first affected though.

I'm not comfortable any time people are put in barbed wire. Thinking that any silence in this issue is okay is exactly the attitude that brought us the amounts of corruption, incompetence, and control grabs we're seeing today. We might learn sometime that if we don't monitor everything "they" do - "they" will not be acting in ways that are going to be benefiting us.

The US doesn't even allow it in some areas that are warranted! WHY allow it HERE!?!?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2331934].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

They HAD their chance! If the well is big enough, this COULD kill everything on it! IMAGINE an ocean COVERED with crude, and oil up several yards on the beaches and coasts. It doesn't take all that much. Luckily, it WILL take a very long time. The south and east coasts of the US will be among the first affected though.

No kidding. Of course - if they didn't manage this time, they can always improve their destructive capabilities up North, eh? THey are laughing at us now. "People are afraid to boycott us now because of the money issue -- perfect time to set up another destruction unit in the Northern regions."

The US doesn't even allow it in some areas that are warranted! WHY allow it HERE!?!?

Steve

Again - no kidding. What the hell are they doing in that place? If the workers are getting sick, sooner or later anyone in that environment will get sick. So what are they doing? Monitoring so they can set up more facilities for a major health crisis (to be handled by sticking people in barbed wired, guarded facilities)?

What happens if one of them is a civilian and wants out - either to go home or to their own doctor? Will they be disallowed to leave? There's no excuse for this type of thing to be going on -- if it were military personnel in there only maybe -- but to put a civilian behind barbed wire? At that point, no matter what it is called - it is a concentration camp. You do not put a citizen behind barbed wire with guards....period. I don't care who they don't "want" someone talking to. There should be reporters there - and there should be cameras there - and there should be some very damned potent questions being asked. A military industrial complex of any fashion should not exist on American shores. PERIOD. Barbed wired and guarded facilities should not be allowed except to house convicted criminals. Any time a civilian who has not committed, and been convicted of a crime is put behind barbed wire, unless they can leave at will, we have government sanctioned interment camps.

My question is -- are the guards just there to keep reporters out -- or are those people being disallowed to leave when they want to?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2332005].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

There's no excuse for this type of thing to be going on

How is it different from the new rules imposed by Allen of "staying 65 ft away from any cleanup personnel?"

If there were no fencing and guards at the medical clinic, the door would be blocked by reporters and there would be no privacy for the workers using the clinic. If reporters couldn't get past the door they would be trying to get photos through windows or any time the door opened - and would also be bugging the medical care personnel for comments. That's how it is.

There would also be the danger of vandalism and theft if a temporary medical clinic were easily accessible. If there's some underhanded stuff going on I doubt it would be long before someone blew the whistle.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2332845].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

How is it different from the new rules imposed by Allen of "staying 65 ft away from any cleanup personnel?"

If there were no fencing and guards at the medical clinic, the door would be blocked by reporters and there would be no privacy for the workers using the clinic. If reporters couldn't get past the door they would be trying to get photos through windows or any time the door opened - and would also be bugging the medical care personnel for comments. That's how it is.

There would also be the danger of vandalism and theft if a temporary medical clinic were easily accessible. If there's some underhanded stuff going on I doubt it would be long before someone blew the whistle.

kay

If those people are allowed to communicate with people outside or can leave when they wish to, I have not a problem with guards and barbed wire. IF they are being kept "quarantined" I don't care what the logic, they are not patients, they are prisoners. So far as of yet I have heard nothing about a family member being refused contact -- but if that is what is going on, people need it stopped whether there are reporters or not. Basically that's what I want to know - are they patients or prisoners. One is a good thing - the other is an outrage to humanity that needs to be trounced. Since BP has such a steady record of being expert at creating outrages to humanity and the earth itself -- I think it is a situation that should be watched very closely.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2341628].message }}

Lawrh

16 years ago

I'm sure some will find this interesting.

BBC News - Russian sub 'could stop oil leak'

Thanks

Signature

â€œStrategy without action is a day-dream; action without strategy is a nightmare.â€ â€“ Old Japanese proverb -

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2326145].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

LMAO - LMAO - LMAO

AP - Underpromising with hopes of overdelivering, BP said Sunday that it is making progress on what could prove its most effective effort yet to contain the Gulf oil leak, but cautioned that the verdict could be several days away.

Could prove its most effective effort yet...........

Um excuse me? What even semi-effective effort are you imagining among the other "effective efforts?" or was that just a typo for "Affected"?

LOL. Yep. Wonder what the hell their PR dept got paid for that one? Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2329794].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

LMAO - LMAO - LMAO

Could prove its most effective effort yet...........

Um excuse me? What even semi-effective effort are you imagining among the other "effective efforts?" or was that just a typo for "Affected"?

LOL. Yep. Wonder what the hell their PR dept got paid for that one? Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Their CLAIM is that this will be near, or be, perfect. If you ask me, they can not POSSIBLY be underpromising, unless this comes with a perfect tried and true permanent off switch, and we ALL know THAT isn't the case. BUT, for the sake of the world, I hope they are right about it being so close to perfect. That would me that, with any luck, maybe in a decade or two we can start trusting the food again.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2330537].message }}

nmarketing

16 years ago

BP needs to worry more about capping the leak, then a cap on the damage the leak did.

Thanks

Signature

Hello.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2332922].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

COULD IT BE!?!?!?!? Apparently, they just capped the well! I guess we'll have to wait to see how long it holds.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-...12-712632.html

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2334289].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

COULD IT BE!?!?!?!? Apparently, they just capped the well! I guess we'll have to wait to see how long it holds.

BP: New Cap On Leaking Oil Well In Place - WSJ.com

Steve

Kewl - Good time to take up prayer?

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2341649].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

COULD IT BE!?!?!?!? Apparently, they just capped the well! I guess we'll have to wait to see how long it holds.

Steve

Testing temp on hold for reasons unknown. The testing
involves pressure checks. Multistage valves to modulate
the pressure... analogous to slowly applying brakes rather
than a hard full-stop to reduce chance of further damage
to the well.

UPDATE: BP halts relief well to test new cap | HeraldTribune.com

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2341750].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

The testing is on hold because the govt told BP to "slow down" and postpone the testing of the new cap. Allen and the govt scientists want to "study further" to see what "might happen".

Apparently they didn't study while this was being planned last week. News outlets were complaining today about BP not informing them some hours ago that tests were postponed - but it wasn't BP's decision. Allen didn't notify the media - or the people here either. He has a local update coming up in a little while.

For us here - looks like "same old". Push for something to be done - and then delay it so it can't get done.

The testing is critical - but the oil can't be stopped if they don't do the testing. So - as usual - the answer is "let's think about it".

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2341901].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

The testing is critical - but the oil can't be stopped if they don't do the testing. So - as usual - the answer is "let's think about it".

kay

REAL testing is IMPOSSIBLE! Even trying to do a standard test could take MONTHS to setup, UNLESS..... UNLESS.... they do a REAL test! THAT can only be done on THAT well. THAT was what they were trying to do. So when they say test, are they saying a generic test like to sell these mass production? OK, we need a tank filled with water to perhaps a mile deep, and a well putting out something like crude oil at....? Did they ever find out what the pressure is?

WOW, that could take a LOT of work.

HECK, even testing out drugs, etc... isn't really meaningful unless done on that species, etc.... Look at what happened to the first artificial heart recipient. You know what killed HIM? A little blood was damaged a little bit, started clotting, and he had a STROKE! Without real blood in a real living body, they may NEVER have found out about that.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2341959].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

In this case, Steve, the testing is very careful measuring of the pressure from the well as the vents on the new cap are slowly closed.

High pressure indicates the cap may be working, lower pressure indicates leak is not being controlled. It's sensitive testing but can be done in a few hours.

What we run into again are some who are afraid trying to cap the leak will cause more problems. At some point you have have to take a calculated risk or simply sit back and let the oil continue to flow.

We've been over a week now lowering and positioning this new advanced cap - at some point the worrying about "what might happen" is just more slow down. We've now had almost three months of oil flowing into the gulf and still people want to stop and study instead of proceeding. I suppose I'm impatient but we've seen this same delaying so many times now.

Meanwhile, though BP and official sources don't want to discuss it - the local news today stated "A Whale" has collected over 6 million gallons of oily water in the past three days - but it would be more effective it allowed to move into areas where the heaviest crude is. It's still "undergoing testing" before getting approval to go full speed ahead. That testing was supposed to be one or two days - and is now starting week 2.

There has been some progress in getting the oil out of the gulf - but every step is met with resistance from one department or another.

kay

Edit: CNN just reported BP has announced it is going to begin the testing unless it receives further word from govt scientists and is told to stop.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2342006].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

There has been some progress in getting the oil out of the gulf - but every step is met with resistance from one department or another.

kay

Edit: CNN just reported BP has announced it is going to begin the testing unless it receives further word from govt scientists and is told to stop.

Kay,

I would imagine that everyone, maybe almost everyone, is so paranoid about
something being screwed-up that they're being ultra anal. Hence all the "testing." lol

Sometimes it all reminds me of the military. Hurry up and wait.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2342039].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Allen's speech today can be read at

Transcript of Thad Allen's Tuesday briefing on the BP oil leak July 13, 2010 - Environment - MiamiHerald.com

It's interesting becuase everything in his announcements is what "we are doing" - and there is little if any mention of BP.

After this press conference, I will be meeting with Secretary Chu from the Department of Energy, Marcia McNutt from the U.S. Geological Survey, Tom Hunter from Sandia Labs and our other representatives of the technical community. And we will discussing how we will resolve issues that are going to come up as we get pressure readings and try and understand what is going on.

This is what we are seeing daily - but truth is if the BP people working on the problem (most of whom are locals) walked off the job, nothing would be done because they are doing the work....while for the past month or so any positive signs have been credited to "we" by Allen. He's a good guy and has learned the jargon and I know he cares - but he's not operating as a leader but as a representative.

Any good manager knows that sharing credit and acknowledging the effort of those on the front lines is necessary for morale - it's just as true here. Bad management looks for ways to take the credit for themselves. Basic management 101.

Meanwhile - keeping my fingers crossed (damned things are bruised after all these weeks).

kay

Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2342121].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Kay,

I know what BP was PLANNING, but things made it look like they removed the cap, etc... to wait for the government for SOMETHING.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2342079].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Testing temp on hold for reasons unknown. The testing
involves pressure checks. Multistage valves to modulate
the pressure... analogous to slowly applying brakes rather
than a hard full-stop to reduce chance of further damage
to the well.

UPDATE: BP halts relief well to test new cap | HeraldTribune.com

WHAT? You mean it worked SO well and now it is back to FULL BORE POLLUTION? AGAIN!?!?!? Since there aren't 14 months in a year, and there IS a slash, assuming that the picture was taken this month, it means today, which is what they imply. The article seems to imply that it is holding at points. OK, WHAT IS IT!?!? I'm not seeing anything that makes it clear, or says WHY whatever happened.

OK, THIS seems to be the clearest report:

All work to plug BP's spill halted in Gulf | McClatchy

In short, from what I have read, the GOVERNMENT ASKED them to remove the cap, and stop the relief wells because one relief well is supposedly only 4 feet(About 1.3M) from its mark, and they are worried that the cap might increase the pressure too much and hurt the drilling of the relief well. At least that is what it looks like.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2341920].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

YouTube - Hero woos commission with soulful...

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2341049].message }}

Victoria Kelley

16 years ago

Someone I know sent me to a page 2 days ago that had banned media pictures of the Gulf. I was horrified as would be millions of Americans would be if they saw these photographs too.
Because I believe that everyone has the right to see these heartbreaking pictures I made a video of them. You are welcome to look. I made the video because the TRUTH should be shown to all people. Friends on my FB have been passing the video around and it is being viewed.
I am not showing this to anyone because I can make videos or anything else. I am placing this video here because it needs to be shown.
Victoria

YouTube - Victoria Kelley Banned Oil Pictures

The Actual Video is below, I'm still sleepy this morning ...

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Do you need a beautiful cover made for your kindle book? I also know how to format and edit your kindle Manuscript. I am a children's book author and kindle publisher. Ask me...

Special offer for Warriors here...

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2341133].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Steve,

From what I read the other day, what I wrote above regarding testing
the cap is what is being referred to when testing is mentioned.

That is my understanding.

I didn't pull that out of my... back pocket. I read on BP's site that one
indicator that the plug/cap is holding is there should be a certain pressure,
or actually different pressures, inside this cap assy.

Like I said, they're using a number of stages each with its isolating valves
to make the seal. Each stage should have a certain pressure within it. I
also read that a lower pressure, lower than their engineers calculate, would
mean the seal is not good. A high pressure, according to their propellor heads,
means it's a good seal.

Edit... redundant info. Kay, we posted at the same time.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2342025].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Steve,

From what I read the other day, what I wrote above regarding testing
the cap is what is being referred to when testing is mentioned.

That is my understanding.

I didn't pull that out of my... back pocket. I read on BP's site that one
indicator that the plug/cap is holding is there should be a certain pressure,
or actually different pressures, inside this cap assy.

Like I said, they're using a number of stages each with its isolating valves
to make the seal. Each stage should have a certain pressure within it. I
also read that a lower pressure, lower than their engineers calculate, would
mean the seal is not good. A high pressure, according to their propellor heads,
means it's a good seal.

Edit... redundant info. Kay, we posted at the same time.

Yeah, but we aren't talking about yesterDAY. We are talking about last NIGHT and TODAY.
And yeah, the pressure from the oil is going to be relatively constant, if you shut the valve. If there is a leak anywhere, or even a bulging pipe, it increases the area which lowers the pressure. Pretty basic, really. I DID hear they had several valves, I guess it makes sense the have sensors at each level, etc...

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2342098].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Yeah, but we aren't talking about yesterDAY. We are talking about last NIGHT and TODAY.
And yeah, the pressure from the oil is going to be relatively constant, if you shut the valve. If there is a leak anywhere, or even a bulging pipe, it increases the area which lowers the pressure. Pretty basic, really. I DID hear they had several valves, I guess it makes sense the have sensors at each level, etc...

Steve

My goodness Steve... just for you,

, when I googled for information I read
the info that said it was only 45 minutes old - today. Hope that helps in some
small way.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2342150].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

The reason they are being careful is because if the pipe was damaged already from the initial explosion and then breaks further from the added pressure, then the leak may not be fixable even with the relief wells. So I think it's good to make sure they do this part extremely carefully. If the pipes are damaged and there are cracks in the earth around the pipes this thing could leak for years from what I have heard.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2342515].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

I just watched the former president of Shell oil talking with Chris Matthews...

He said a couple of interesting things...The first being that he agrees with holding off on the testing. He says that if any of the 13,000 ft well has been damaged and the added pressure from the cap could cause the well to fail at any point...And if it does fail, it's "game over".

Instead, he suggests to wait until the relief wells are ready, then do the testing.

Something else I found interesting...Matthews asked him if BP had any reputation with the insiders of the oil industry. The guy tried to be as polite as possible, but plainly indicated that there was a heirarchy of the reputations of the oil companies concerning their tech and safety, and he said that BP was down the list. He implied that Exxon was atop the list as far as safety and tech go.

Again, this was a former president of Shell Oil.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2342982].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Yeah, I understand and agree with the idea to be safe. It just looked like they had taken it off and it was going full bore.

Kurt,

Interestingly, I believe they both USED to be Standard Oil. It was nice of him to say though. I WISH I could remember the other one, but I saw list a couple months ago. ONE was close to BP in the number of accidents, and the others were NOWHERE NEAR THEM! They had like 1/10th as many accidents, or LESS. There were like 8 on the list. Shell, Exxon and, of course, BP WERE on the list.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2343434].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

One more interesting thing the former pres. of Shell pointed out was that this was the first time our Feds over-ruled a tech decision by BP. When asked why, he said it was because the Admin hired 3rd party experts and were no longer listening to BP.

Based on BPs handling of this incident, their past record of infractions and now the former president of Shell saying BP lacks safety and tech standards, the decision not to let BP just do want they want is making sense.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2343804].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Back seat driving is HORRIBLE! If they want to micromanage what BP is doing, they should STOP, and do it THEMSELVES! As they say, too many cooks spoil the broth.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2343960].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

As the Shell person said - the govt has just called in oil experts to advise them and announced that Chu (who has been called the main expert for almost 3 months) has no oil or drilling experience. Silly me - I assumed the govt was already using oil experts to advise them - as they don't have oil experience.

Yes, there's a risk - and the risk has been there all along. The Shell person said the government feels "waiting doesn't cause any harm" - so now it's fine to keep the oil flowing into the Gulf? Ten days ago the president announced in his "update" that he "instructed" BP to contain XXX oil by the next Monday.

It's the same problem - everyone wants to be seen as "the leader" - and no one is willing to take responsibility of making decisions. We've seen it now for three months.

The valves are being closed and tested tonight by BP - after the media got all the "be afraid" sound bytes, just before dark Thad Allen told BP they could continue. So far, the oil flow has been reduced. We'll see how it goes tomorrow.

CNN complains "BP didn't tell us right away when the govt ordered them to stop" - so why didn't Allen tell them? He's supposed to be in charge. Anderson Cooper on CNN is complaining that BP should be narrating the undersea photos so the world knows what's happening. They want a more effective reality show???

BS - BP needs to be closing the leak. That's ALL they should focus on at the moment. They broke it - they need to fix it. But you can't stop them to "think" every few hours and it isn't ok to let the oil flow till the relief wells are ready next month. There's no guarantee those will work anyway - just a good chance.

kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2344153].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

He didn't say they "just" brought in oil experts. He didn't say when they were brought in, so your initial assumption isn't wrong. Plus, I've never heard anyone refer to Chu as the "main expert". He's the secretary of energy, a brilliant guy and rightly should be involved.

Originally Posted by Kay King

As the Shell person said - the govt has just called in oil experts to advise them and announced that Chu (who has been called the main expert for almost 3 months) has no oil or drilling experience. Silly me - I assumed the govt was already using oil experts to advise them - as they don't have oil experience.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2344370].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Yes, there's a risk - and the risk has been there all along. The Shell person said the government feels "waiting doesn't cause any harm" - so now it's fine to keep the oil flowing into the Gulf? Ten days ago the president announced in his "update" that he "instructed" BP to contain XXX oil by the next Monday.

The context of this was "harm to the well", not the Gulf. If that well doesn't hold up and breaks due to too much pressure, there's nothing that can be done about the leak other than trying to implode it, according to the former Shell president.

And imploding it has a lot of risks too, T Boone Pickens said it would be stupid to implode the well when Bill Clinton suggested it.

Some experts are saying that if the well can't be plugged, oil could gush from that well for 4 years...We better be sure, as we may only get one shot.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2344436].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

The context of this was "harm to the well", not the Gulf. If that well doesn't hold up and breaks due to too much pressure, there's nothing that can be done about the leak other than trying to implode it, according to the former Shell president.

And imploding it has a lot of risks too, T Boone Pickens said it would be stupid to implode the well when Bill Clinton suggested it.

Some experts are saying that if the well can't be plugged, oil could gush from that well for 4 years...We better be sure, as we may only get one shot.

Well, at least my estimate for damage is far greater than 4 years, though I think 4 years COULD hurt the entire US coast, given the right? situation. Still, obviously 4 years is 4 years too long.

As for imploding, there is a LOT of constant pressure. It is more than likely that an explosion WOULD make it worse.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2346195].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Yeah - BP is really worried about the whole thing - they are off getting into new areas of energy now, at high prices.

http://blog.stunmedia.com/techcrunch/bp-buys-verenium%E2%80%99s-biofuel-business-for-98-million/

Don't ya wonder what new terror they can construct for us in new fields? All the money they need for this spill and instead of fixing their long history and string of destruction, they are still growing. They remind me of Monsanto caused super weeds. Get this company OFF the planet!

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2346817].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

For the first time since April 20 - THERE IS NO OIL FLOWING INTO THE GULF.

It may be temporary and may require adjustment - but it's happened!

I've been watching it (while working at the same time) for several hours.

Interesting point that shows in part why I'm so disgusted with the leadership on this problem. Quite some time after the progress had been announced locally by Suttles of BP and by Allen, the president gave a speech about the finance bill.

He was asked at the end what he thought of the progress in the gulf. His comment "it's a positive sign - we're still testing - I'll have more to say tomorrow". Those close to the president told a reporter an hour later - we are hoping the solving of the spill will help turn things around for the administration. Yup - that's the priority, isn't it?

It's not over - it may be another 48 hours before they know if the fix will hold - another month before the relief wells can be utilized and years before the cleanup of the gulf is done.

But it's more than we've had in three months so I'm celebrating!

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2347615].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  When asked why for the first time since the spill the govt was over-ruling BP on a decision (by delaying the testing) the Shell guy's response was -
  
  they have brought in some of their own expertise that is talking only to the govt
  
  I know that in May there were nuclear experts sent here to see about blowing up the well (didn't go over well with residents here) - and other than that Chu has always been referred to as the "govt scientific expert" though he has no oil or drilling experience. I'll leave the interpretation of timing to someone else.
  
  Either way - it was a short delay and changed nothing but did allow more seismic testing. We still have pressure tests and seismic tests before this is a done deal but it's hard not to be optimistic after so long.
  
  But - BP has control of the well for the first time. That's a biggie.
  
  kay
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2347789].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Yeah, some landlocked residents just DON'T understand or care. Frankly, just all the red tape is enough to have me hate it.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2347997].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Great news on stopping the leak! I hope it stays plugged until the relief wells are done.

By the way, from Obama's June 15th speech:

Because there has never been a leak of this size at this depth, stopping it has tested the limits of human technology. That is why just after the rig sank, I assembled a team of our nation's best scientists and engineers to tackle this challenge - a team led by Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and our nation's Secretary of Energy. Scientists at our national labs and experts from academia and other oil companies have also provided ideas and advice.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2348972].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Great news on stopping the leak! I hope it stays plugged until the relief wells are done.

By the way, from Obama's June 15th speech:

So we say YAY because the leak is plugged and he thinks he can now talk insolent trash to us? Like we're gonna forget this one real soon - no problemo, it's over? LMAO

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2349003].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

?? No comprende. That speech is from a month ago.

Originally Posted by HeySal

So we say YAY because the leak is plugged and he thinks he can now talk insolent trash to us? Like we're gonna forget this one real soon - no problemo, it's over? LMAO

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2349025].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP BUYING UP GULF SCIENTISTS

Oil Giant Hiring University Experts To Aid Its Defense Against Spill Litigation

Here's the story if you're interested...

Oil Spill Lawsuits: BP Spending Big To Acquire An Army Of Expert Witnesses

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2351426].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Here's the latest news from the coast:

Mobile's WKRG tested water along all the Alabama beaches. The beaches are open, kids are digging in the sand, people are swimming because the body of oil moved back away from the AL coast over a week ago. The water looks normal and everyone assumes it's safe. Actually - people are being told it's safe....by the CG, by the STATE officials, etc.

The tests were conducted by an independent chemist with 30 years of testing experience.

The standard testing of oil/grease in a sample of gulf shore water would be undetectable in PPM according this expert.

Water was collected along the beaches of Mississippi - and from the water naturally welling up in holes dug away from the water line by a couple kids (I thought that was a good idea to test that).

The chemist said he was expecting to find about 5 PPM due to the oil leak.
These are the Parts Per Million that were found in testing.

16 ppm of oil/petroleum
29 ppm
66ppm
211 ppm in the sand tested (dry sand on the beach away from the water line)

from a hole kids dug in sand: 51 ppm
second kid's hole dug 221 ppm

A sample taken on Dauphin Island was near a piece of boom that had come loose and was left floating near the shore. About 1 second after the testing began, the glass beaker exploded.

The Chemist said he had never seen it happen - and was probably due to methane or dispersants in the water.

Why aren't the states themselves - or the Coast Guard - or BP - testing the water for contamination. Why are they allowing children to swim in that water? According to the chemist who did the testing "I wouldn't get in that water."

It's a common sight here to see BP workers in full protective gear picking up oil while people play in the water 100 feet down the beach. BP has a mixed message - saying it's safe while requiring full protection in 100 degree heat for the workers.

Then yesterday the director of the EPA told a Congressional committee she didn't know if the dispersant was safe - excuse me? They've allowed 1 1/2 million gallons of the stuff to be added to the gulf - told BP to stop using it - then said it was safe - and now they don't know? Wow, just wow.

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2352271].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

I'm not sure anyone has mentioned this yet or if this is confirmed...

( copied from a news story )

NEW ORLEANS — A giant oil skimmer brought in from Portugal is too big to be used in the Gulf cleanup effort.

The Taiwanese vessel "A Whale" was deployed last week along the oil-slicked Gulf Coast. But it's been determined the skimmer didn't collect enough oil.

The U.S. Coast Guard says it was too big to maneuver around the smaller patches and ribbons of oil on the water.

Smaller, more agile vessels have been more useful in getting at the oil.

Nearly 33 million gallons of an oil-water mix have been recovered.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2356818].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

David Cameron is arriving next week to tell Obama to calm down the rhetoric. David Cameron will assure President Obama that all those that have been inconvenienced will be compensated. He will also make the point that BP is an important payer of dividends to stockholders in the UK, many Stockholders rely on these dividends as useful income . I hope President Obama will take cognizance of these concerns.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2357065].message }}

KenThompson

16 years ago

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

David Cameron is arriving next week to tell Obama to calm down the rhetoric. David Cameron will assure President Obama that all those that have been inconvenienced will be compensated. He will also make the point that BP is an important payer of dividends to stockholders in the UK, many Stockholders rely on these dividends as useful income . I hope President Obama will take cognizance of these concerns.

Is this British understatement?

People have been "inconvenienced"? ... inconvenienced?

Go to Louisiana and other places along the Gulf. Have a town hall meeting, and
tell the people you know they have been inconvenienced. See if you get out alive.

Useful income? Useful income compared to losing all your income?

You're a real piece of work, dude.

Ken

[ 6 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2357125].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

Is this British understatement?

People have been "inconvenienced"? ... inconvenienced?

Go to Lousiana and other places along the Gulf. Have a town hall meeting, and
tell the people you know they have been inconvenienced. See if you get out alive.

Useful income? Useful income compared to losing all your income?

You're a real piece of work, dude.

Ken

Perhaps inconvenienced is the wrong term, all those that have lost livelihoods maybe better. nevertheless anyone in this position will be fully compensated, they will not lose out.

Regarding dividends, it is a misconception to think that all BP stockholders are all rich individuals, they aren't, there are many old age pensioners who rely on the BP dividend for their basic living costs.

BP pays out 7% of all dividends on the UK stock exchange and many poorer pensioners rely on it as their basic income. A bankrupted BP, or one taken over, by a Chinese company will do no one any good. It is in both the US and UK governments interest to sort this out amicably which I think is what they are doing.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2357216].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

I'm not so sure about this. I've heard story after story where someone who was making a certain amount have only received a small fraction of that from BP. Or others who say they haven't received anything yet. I don't trust BP at all.

Originally Posted by madison_avenue

nevertheless anyone in this position will be fully compensated, they will not lose out.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2357250].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I'm not so sure about this. I've heard story after story where someone who was making a certain amount have only received a small fraction of that from BP. Or others who say they haven't received anything yet. I don't trust BP at all.

They have set aside an initial $20 billion fund for compensation. These sorts exercises are notorious for taking time. We will only know in few months how much has been paid out. Anyway I'm sure the US government will, quite rightly, ensure that BP sticks to it's word.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2357286].message }}

alldaylinks

16 years ago

There is no way it will be less than a billion in fines. No way.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2357453].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Well, last I heard, the limit was $1 billion. But that is the MAIN fine! There is also the court cases, and the per barrel fee. THOSE might add up to $10 billion or more, the limit is PER, but PER could be 1(which it has already WELL exceeded), or MILLIONS. BP estimated earlier that this whole ordeal would cost about $30 Billion, and I don't think that counts administration, taxes, and fees.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2357615].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

My opinion is = screw the fines. Where does that money go? Anyone know?

I'm concerned with money for people here - and in getting the mess fixed if it takes 10-20 years to do it. Once all of that is done - then they can fine all they want. People first - and then government.

Many people in the US and UK rely on BP for jobs and for retirement income. We may hate the company but trying to drive it out of business is stupid. I think Madison Avenue is just voicing a concern of many people. I doubt those in the UK realize just how big this problem is here - and it's hard times for many to lose money.

The memo sent by Allen was posturing to me. Releasing it to the media - even though it says little except for demands.

Allen wants BP to submit (immediately) a plan to remove the cap quickly if necessary. Excuse me? Wouldn't you think that plan would have been requested BEFORE putting the cap in place?

Demanded any anomaly in the gulf be investigated by BP and a report generated to him (Allen) within 4 hours. Is that time frame even possible?

Allen talks about "anomalies" in the wellhead - but BP reports the tests are proceeding slowly and carefully. The only odd thing is the pressure didn't go as high as expected - but that may be the huge amount of oil released in three months has reduced the pressure in the oil field. Especially considering none of the geniuses can agree on how much oil was flowing.

There's some game playing going on - but I can't figure out why it's happening right now.

kay

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2359337].message }}

TimPhelan 16 years ago

It goes from BP to the US government. Perhaps you don't like that idea, but I personally like it. BP is a foreign company. The US government is part of the USA. It actually is us. We aren't the enemy here Kay. Your constant defending of BP is puzzling to say the least.

Originally Posted by Kay King

My opinion is = screw the fines. Where does that money go? Anyone know?
- Thanks
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2359415].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

My opinion is = screw the fines. Where does that money go? Anyone know?

Yeah, it goes to "pay off the debt", having been "paid off", the government then feels free to "fund" even MORE "projects". It may actually be cheaper to NOT give them the money!

Originally Posted by Kay King

I'm concerned with money for people here - and in getting the mess fixed if it takes 10-20 years to do it. Once all of that is done - then they can fine all they want. People first - and then government.

Hopefully EVERYONE here can agree with that!

Originally Posted by Kay King

Many people in the US and UK rely on BP for jobs and for retirement income. We may hate the company but trying to drive it out of business is stupid. I think Madison Avenue is just voicing a concern of many people. I doubt those in the UK realize just how big this problem is here - and it's hard times for many to lose money.

Yeah. Talk about "too big to fail". And did you hear about the CUBAN company that is having a platform built in China that will likely start drilling off the coast of FLORIDA, as close as 45 miles!?!?!?

Originally Posted by Kay King

The memo sent by Allen was posturing to me. Releasing it to the media - even though it says little except for demands.

Allen wants BP to submit (immediately) a plan to remove the cap quickly if necessary. Excuse me? Wouldn't you think that plan would have been requested BEFORE putting the cap in place?

Demanded any anomaly in the gulf be investigated by BP and a report generated to him (Allen) within 4 hours. Is that time frame even possible?

Allen talks about "anomalies" in the wellhead - but BP reports the tests are proceeding slowly and carefully. The only odd thing is the pressure didn't go as high as expected - but that may be the huge amount of oil released in three months has reduced the pressure in the oil field. Especially considering none of the geniuses can agree on how much oil was flowing.

There's some game playing going on - but I can't figure out why it's happening right now.

ACTUALLY, they were supposed to ask for those plans BEFORE permission to drill was granted! And they never really knew the pressure. People are making demands now to try to look proactive, That would have been NICE if they did it BEFORE the rig was built.

Steve

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2359987].message }}

Kurt

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

My opinion is = screw the fines. Where does that money go? Anyone know?

I'm concerned with money for people here - and in getting the mess fixed if it takes 10-20 years to do it. Once all of that is done - then they can fine all they want. People first - and then government.

Many people in the US and UK rely on BP for jobs and for retirement income. We may hate the company but trying to drive it out of business is stupid. I think Madison Avenue is just voicing a concern of many people. I doubt those in the UK realize just how big this problem is here - and it's hard times for many to lose money.

The memo sent by Allen was posturing to me. Releasing it to the media - even though it says little except for demands.

Allen wants BP to submit (immediately) a plan to remove the cap quickly if necessary. Excuse me? Wouldn't you think that plan would have been requested BEFORE putting the cap in place?

Demanded any anomaly in the gulf be investigated by BP and a report generated to him (Allen) within 4 hours. Is that time frame even possible?

Allen talks about "anomalies" in the wellhead - but BP reports the tests are proceeding slowly and carefully. The only odd thing is the pressure didn't go as high as expected - but that may be the huge amount of oil released in three months has reduced the pressure in the oil field. Especially considering none of the geniuses can agree on how much oil was flowing.

There's some game playing going on - but I can't figure out why it's happening right now.

kay

I watched an interview with another oil expert who was asked last week "why is BP doing what they are doing?" and the response was something like "I'm not really sure. The only thing I can think of is that they don't want the Feds to be able to accurately tell what the pressure of the leak is, because then they will be able to figure out what the fine is".

In my opinion, the expert was being honest and sincere.

It's pretty obvious BP's been playing games to avoid billions of dollars in fines, as they are liable for a per gallon (or per barrel).

The reason the "geniuses" can't figure it out, is because BP's geniuses won't let them.

When in doubt, follow the money.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2360387].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

We'll NEVER know completely what went on, Kay - unless wikileaks gets ahold of something.

I agree, too, that the Gov doesn't need any of BP's money. Hell, they'd probably just give themselves another raise if they got it.

Compensate the people and clean up - buy back all stocks from the stockholders and close the damned thing down before they get a chance to drill again. Sorry that people depend on those stocks - but stocks are a gamble, why are people putting their whole future into a stock? And should the whole planet have to risk them again because some people bought their stock? Make them pay the stockholders out and let them invest elsewhere before we decide they are "too big to fail". They do fail - and they keep failing. If we don't close em out I, for one, will remember the chance we had to get them off the planet, and didn't take it because people had money in them. Remember they are headed to Alaska for a new drill real soon if we don't close em now. Is it really worth the risk? The blood is on a lot of hands besides theirs next time if they do it again after we don't shut them down because of finances.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2359407].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Joe the Plumber (not that one) says he helped stop Gulf oil spill leak:

A Kansas man says he's the 'mystery plumber' who influenced the BP containment cap design that stopped the Gulf oil spill leak.

BP says Joe Caldart's sketch may have been one of many it's used.

Here's the story if you're interested...

Joe the Plumber (not that one) says he helped stop Gulf oil spill leak - CSMonitor.com

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2360320].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Yeah. Talk about "too big to fail". And did you hear about the CUBAN company that is having a platform built in China that will likely start drilling off the coast of FLORIDA, as close as 45 miles!?!?!?

That should be scary for Florida - the oil rig is being "made in China"! We know what those safety standards are, don't we?

[ 3 ] Thanks

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2360350].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Joe the Plumber (not that one) says he helped stop Gulf oil spill leak:

A Kansas man says he's the 'mystery plumber' who influenced the BP containment cap design that stopped the Gulf oil spill leak.

BP says Joe Caldart's sketch may have been one of many it's used.

Here's the story if you're interested...

Joe the Plumber (not that one) says he helped stop Gulf oil spill leak - CSMonitor.com

It's a shame that he didn't get any credit/respect. HEY, some scientists are all fluff. How many do their own plumbing? Plumbers DO have to know something about pipes. The way I see it, the HARD part is merely PRESSURE. And Joe didn't even really say he designed it, but merely said HOW to design it, so the need for any pressure calculations never even came into play.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2360473].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Kurt - That's probably good way to put it. I know when I see experts with no dog in the hunt (not making money either working for BP or speaking for the gvt - I tend to believe them when they are qualified.

Today is another confusing one. Robert Gibb announced oil is leaking at the cap- but he seems to be the only one who knows about that.

The other leak turns out to have been not related and was 2 miles away - that was cleared last night according to local news.

Thad Allen mentioned "seepage" in his news conference today but always before he has been specific about every detail of technical info - today only talk about the letter this weekend, mention of the anamoly 2 miles away (but not mentioning that it was found to be connected) and the word "seepage" which is vague. Given a choice, I'll take seepage over "flow".

According to BP's site, the test are continuing - but I expect the cap to be removed in the next week on orders from the govt. Not sure why - but that seems to be where they're going with this.

Will be interesting to see local news today to see if anyone knows what is going on.

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2361913].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Just had the TV update of Thad Allen's. The original "anomaly" now is said to be 3 miles from the well and not related.
  
  There may be slight seepage from a flange but not a concern. A few bubbles at base of blowout protect may have been there (says allen) from the beginning but were not visible due to oil in the water - again, not dangerous.
  
  Allen stated BP would be "allowed" to continue with the containment cap as long as they respond to his letter from yesterday and meet his demands. Does that mean if BP can't meet his demand, he orders the oil to start flowing again? Was one of the strangest news blrubs he's done.
  
  I know it's a complex process they are undertaking (for everyone involved) but seems like it is being made more frightening for the public than is warranted.
  
  kay
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2361999].message }}

Willmarathon

16 years ago

I have about 7 very long posts on my 2nd blog with many videos about what the media is not telling the public. Here are some of what I posted:

"I predicted that the oil would rise into the atmosphere and would rain
down on everyone as the winds of the Gulf of Mexico sweep over the southern United States. This seems to confirm what I had predicted to my colleagues at the Dept. of Homeland Security. An EPA official also confirmed that he thought this would happen. I believe the investigators may find lead poisoning to be occurring from the lead in the oil that has risen into the atmosphere around the Gulf."

"Here is another video confirming that it is actually raining oil on the streets. British Petroleum may have created the largest environmental disaster the world has seen since the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. BP are corporate terrorists. Does that seem harsh? Well,all they cared about was saving $500,000 for some saftey fixture and now the Caribbean ,Southern USA and Mexico will bear the consequences of dying crops, animals and eventually people."

"There is a top secret program with some oil companies and the US government called "Deep Water Drilling" and the well that was being drilled was one of those. Even though it was at least one mile below the sea floor the whole well that was tapped may have been 5- 6 miles deep into the mantel of the Earth and the kind of pressure from that being tapped is something that will destroy attempts to cap the well."

"Cassitation is a super-sonic implosion. A bubble may come up and sink every ship and platform within a 50 mile radius. The well has been at 100,000 lbs. per square inch pressure. That is why they have took so long capping the well.
Chris Landowe has written 2 papers about predicting that things like this could happen before it happened. All these wells may crack the ocean floor and have a volcano erupt under water, like Mt. St Helens under water
and then a tsunami would obliterate Florida,basically put it under the ocean."

"Toxic Oil Spill Rains Warned Could Destroy North America
Corexit 9500 molecules will be able to "phase transition" from their present liquid to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and allowing their release as "toxic rain" upon all of Eastern North America contaminating water & food supply etc... Excerpt: A dire report prepared for President Medvedev by Russia's Ministry of Natural Resources is warning today that the British Petroleum (BP) oil and gas leak in the Gulf of Mexico is about to become the worst environmental catastrophe in all of human history threatening the entire eastern half of the North American continent with "total destruction". Russian scientists are basing their apocalyptic destruction assessment due to BP's use of millions of gallons of the chemical dispersal agent known as Corexit 9500 which is being pumped directly into the leak of this wellhead over a mile under the Gulf of Mexico waters and designed, this report says, to keep hidden from the American public the full, and tragic, extent of this leak that is now estimated to be over 2.9 million gallons a day. Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured "Beyond Repair" Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured "Beyond Repair" By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers A dire report circulating in the Kremlin today that was prepared for Prime Minister Putin by Anatoly Sagalevich of Russia's Shirshov Institute of Oceanology warns that the Gulf of Mexico sea floor has been fractured "beyond all repair" and our World should begin preparing for an ecological disaster "beyond comprehension" unless "extraordinary measures" are undertaken to stop the massive flow of oil into our Planet's eleventh largest body of water. Most important to note about Sagalevich's warning is that he and his fellow scientists from the Russian Academy of Sciences are the only human beings to have actually been to the Gulf of Mexico oil leak site after their being called to the disaster scene by British oil giant BP shortly after the April 22nd sinking of the Deepwater Horizon oil platform. BP's calling on Sagalevich after this catastrophe began is due to his being the holder of the World's record for the deepest freshwater dive and his expertise with Russia's two Deep Submergence Vehicles MIR 1 and MIR 2 [photo 2nd left] which are able to take their crews to the depth of 6,000 meters (19,685 ft). According to Sagalevich's report, the oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico is not just coming from the 22 inch well bore site being shown on American television, but from at least 18 other sites on the "fractured seafloor" with the largest being nearly 11 kilometers (7 miles) from where the Deepwater Horizon sank and is spewing into these precious waters an estimated 2 million gallons of oil a day. Interesting to note in this report is Sagalevich stating that he and the other Russian scientists were required by the United States to sign documents forbidding them to report their findings to either the American public or media, and which they had to do in order to legally operate in US territorial waters. However, Sagalevich says that he and the other scientists gave nearly hourly updates to both US government and BP officials about what they were seeing on the sea floor, including the US Senator from their State of Florida Bill Nelson who after one such briefing stated to the MSNBC news service "Andrea we're looking into something new right now, that there's reports of oil that's seeping up from the seabed... which would indicate, if that's true, that the well casing itself is actually pierced... underneath the seabed. So, you know, the problems could be just enormous with what we're facing." Though not directly stated in Sagalevich's report, Russian scientists findings on the true state of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster are beyond doubt being leaked to his longtime friend, and former US President George W. Bush's top energy advisor Matthew Simmons, who US media reports state has openly said: "Matthew Simmons is sticking by his story that there's another giant leak in the Gulf of Mexico blowing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. On CNBC's Fast Money, he says he'd be surprised if BP lasted this summer, saying this is disaster is entirely BP's fault."

Thanks

Signature

Best Internet Web Success Home Businesses:Work at Home to Make Money Online,Stay Healthy & Travel the World
Make Affiliate ClickBank Sales & Profit Online

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2363699].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Willmarathon,

I never heard of distilled oil. How does that work? And why doesn't oil ever seem to evaporate? I mean you see stains on concrete, etc... oil slicks.... Odd. I mean it has to evaporate and stay in the air to actually rain, right? Apparently NOAA agrees. Several sites say they do, and they DON'T talk about oil rain. They talk about oil, and their business is the WEATHER, but they don't talk about oil RAIN! BTW YES, tornados, etc... CAN lift up and drop oil, but they can do the same with homes, cars, and YES, EVEN "Cats and dogs"!!!!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2364729].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP photoshops fake photo of crisis command center, posts on main BP site:

What's the deal???

Here's the story if you're interested...

AMERICAblog News: BP photoshops fake photo of crisis command center, posts on main BP site

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2365821].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Rep. Joe Barton lost more than $154,000 on investments of his campaign funds during the last three months, according to a CQ MoneyLine study of campaign finance reports

The Texas Republican’s campaign fund losses are due in part to drops in energy company stocks, including BP.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2366116].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

LB,

You and tim, shouldn't be making such implications about such a senator's or representative's investment practices, as it would be hypocritical. Still, a LOT of people own BP without even knowing about it.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2366183].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

LB,

You and tim, shouldn't be making such implications about such a senator's or representative's investment practices, as it would be hypocritical. Still, a LOT of people own BP without even knowing about it.

Steve

How would it be hypocritical???

Maybe he knew, maybe he didn't.

It is a news story --- is it not???

Are you mad because I forgot to take out the mention of Joe B. being a republican???

Or are you mad about your and friends sticking up for Joe B's infamous apology to BP and looking extremely bad in the process???

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2366487].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

How would it be hypocritical???

Maybe he knew, maybe he didn't.

It is a news story --- is it not???

Are you mad because I forgot to take out the mention of Joe B. being a republican???

Or are you mad about your and friends sticking up for Joe B's infamous apology to BP and looking extremely bad in the process???

TL

One of YOUR most BELOVED friends, and incidently NOT a republican, received ******THE******* largest donation of ANYONE in ALL of the government from BP!

HEY, I didn't say ANYTHING like this until you spoke about MONEY!

Incidently, HE is speaking against Barton ALSO, and ridiculing him, and trying to use him to attack the republicans, but at least he seems to be staying away from talk about money. If I have anything against him being a republican, or apologies he made to BP, I can't say anything against YOU for it. I am appaled, but it is against him, and others, not you. ICSM along those lines, but this is already too political. I am merely answering you, and hopefully all realize that I just want fairness here.

BTW NONE of my "friends" supported him. I THINK palin tried to make the same point, but everyone else told him to recant, and he did.

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2367178].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Matthew Simmons is sticking by his story

He's a quack without any scientific, geological or oceanographic training. He estimates the peak point at which oil fields begin to decline.

He has a reputation for predicting doom and gloom that stretches back for years. His theory is only a theory based on guesswork by an overactive imagination.

He's in the oil banking business - and has probably never been to the gulf in the first place.f

I've stood in the rain as it swept in from the gulf - and it has not rained oil.

It gives people something to blog about - whether what they say is right or wrong. They get more attention with doom and gloom than with facts.

As for "who" owns BP stock - it's in the portfolios of thousands of people with 401k for one thing. Those who invest in managed portfolios may not know they own it unless they search.

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2367197].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Tim -
  
  You keep repeating that I defend BP - so I assume you haven't read much of what I've written.
  
  I don't defend BP - but I have concerns for middle class people around the world who own that stock. They own the stock because it was one of the largest income companies in the world.
  
  I include government bumbling in this mess because I've seen it happen. BP can fail or not - but failure would hurt a lot of people. BP will not be the same company when this is over - thank goodness.
  
  But - as you point out, our government represents US. We have a right to ask why there are regulations that we thought provided safety and were not enforced. We have a right to know why after 3 months the EPA still hasn't decided if the 1.5 million gallons of dispersant used is safe or not.
  
  We need to know why, in an emergency, no one will make a decision or provide an answer for weeks at a time.
  
  The government represent us and is it is not doing the job, WE are the only ones qualified to question why the job wasn't done.
  
  Or we can defend our partisan view by finding reasons that what happened didn't happen. I don't blame the current admin for a great part of this - because we know both parties have been in charge while these waivers and ignorance have been going on.
  
  What I'm saying is that WE deserve better from the government we pay for - and I'll stand by that. You take every govt criticism as a slash at "your guy" - and it isn't. But he isn't blame free on this either. I have no problem with letting the chips fall where they may - I have a big problem with trying micro manage the facts and timelines.
  
  kay
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2367215].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

TL's friend didn't take any PAC money. All the money he received was from employees of BP. He received almost $800 million in contributions from over 4 million people. These contributers usually have employees and the contributions are connected in this way. Simple. So your implication that BP itself contributed to TL's friend, as you say, is ***************COMPLETELY***************** WRONG!

You have alluded to this many times. Too bad you were uninformed about the facts. I'm glad I can help out though.

Originally Posted by seasoned

One of YOUR most BELOVED friends, and incidently NOT a republican, received ******THE******* largest donation of ANYONE in ALL of the government from BP!

HEY, I didn't say ANYTHING like this until you spoke about MONEY!

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2367264].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

HECK, I don't even know if a fund has to report its holdings more than once a year. ALSO, there is a SCAM in the MF industry in that they may have "INSTITUTIONAL" funds! They may seem in EVERY way externally to be the same thing, but the NAV is different, etc... I once tried to get details, and they didn't ever give them to me. ALSO, it is possible that a company can buy and sell to get the dividend. So it is possible that even searching may not prove anything. And WHO KNOWS? I mean RIGs income can be affected by BP, for example. We have seen how BP can affect louisiana.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2367213].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Well Tim, I figured there would be an excuse. NO SURPRISE.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2367454].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

By the way, some people were really pushing for the sand berms to keep out oil. Scientists said they didn't think they would do much good and could even harm the gulf. Part of the reason they thought they wouldn't do well was because the scientists thought they wouldn't last long. Well, here are some photos of a berm along the Chandeleur islands:

photo taken 6-25-10

photo taken 7-2-10

photo taken 7-7-10

As you can see by the last photo not only are the berms disappearing, but so are the bulldozers! People like Gov Jindal and Parish President Billy Nungessor were practically foaming at the mouth criticizing the fed for not approving these berms quickly. The original plan was for almost a trillion dollars to be spent building these sand berms. The fed gov gave in and approved a smaller plan and although even that was a wrong decision, thank goodness they didn't approve the whole plan. It was a bad idea on many levels, besides the obvious fact that they don't last long.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2367989].message }}

MikeAmbrosio

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

As you can see by the last photo not only are the berms disappearing, but so are the bulldozers! People like Gov Jindal and Parish President Billy Nungessor were practically foaming at the mouth criticizing the fed for not approving these berms quickly. The original plan was for almost a trillion dollars to be spent building these sand berms. The fed gov gave in and approved a smaller plan and although even that was a wrong decision, thank goodness they didn't approve the whole plan. It was a bad idea on many levels, besides the obvious fact that they don't last long.

You just can't fight Mother Nature it seems

As a species, we tend to think we can - then she just ups and proves us wrong. Again and again! LOL

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2367999].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

As you can see by the last photo not only are the berms disappearing, but so are the bulldozers! People like Gov Jindal and Parish President Billy Nungessor were practically foaming at the mouth criticizing the fed for not approving these berms quickly. The original plan was for almost a trillion dollars to be spent building these sand berms. The fed gov gave in and approved a smaller plan and although even that was a wrong decision, thank goodness they didn't approve the whole plan. It was a bad idea on many levels, besides the obvious fact that they don't last long.

Ya know - this kind of buffoonery could be extremely entertaining.....except for the ecological damage......and the lives lost..............and the financial chaos.

Funny as hell from one perspective though. I'd prefer to stick to the Marx brothers for this kind of comedy, though.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2368012].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

I forgot BP owned Arco Arena home of the Sacramental Kings of the NBA.

Want free passes to NBA games and concerts? Just call the world's most hated oil company. (If you're a California politician.)

According to Mother Jones ...

For more than a decade, BP has operated a hush-hush phone line that California lawmakers can call to request box seats to NBA games and concerts at the Sacramento stadium named after its West Coast subsidiary.

Here's the story and you can listen to the hot line recording if you like...

BP's Secret Ticket Request Line | Mother Jones

( scroll down the page a bit for the recording )

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2372118].message }}

Patrician

16 years ago

Well I am a little bit in shock right now - Wanted to share something off topic to this topic but very much related - oil and environmental criminals. Was going to point out an oil company with a very bad rep (I worked for them in their refinery analytical lab for 4 years between bank jobs)

... only to find out they are no more! Yes their crimes really overcame them and they were a 125 year old very famous oil and gas producer. You would recognize the big Orange Ball with '76' (Union Oil of California dba Unocal) at every Nascar race.

They were disbanded in 2005 and I didn't even know it (the refinery is right across the bay and I did know it is now Conoco Philips but somehow I didn't ever think that Union 76 would now be a 'wholly owned subsidiary of Chevron' (they are all right across the bay in what is known as 'The Toxic Corridor'.

... And I thought their worst crime was the time they knowingly let diluent (a petroleum derivative) leak in 90 places underground for 3-4 decades until they ruined a whole TOWN (Avila Beach, California)

... Only to learn they are also accused of torture, enslavement, and RAPE in Burma where they had projects, and the one that nearly made me choke, trying to do business with the Taliban in Afghanistan. WTF!?!?

Anyway for a good handle on the scandal if anyone is interested.

Wapedia - Wiki: Unocal Corporation

... and don't feel sorry for all the Americans that lost jobs - they all will retire very, very rich whether union or management = stocks. *

Oh man...

edit: p.s. * This in no way means I want a single employee of BP Oil to lose their job - I realize if they are not old enough to retire that they have to survive until. As bad as some companies are, they are still our only source of income and if they fall we fall right along with them.

Thanks

Signature

Patricia Brucoli
Plug-In Profit Site Helpdesk

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2373063].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Transparency my sweet A**
Is BP Hiding Seriously Ill Clean-Up Workers? SpeakEasy

I feel the same way -- there is far too much secrecy on the health issues. It appears that the dispersal toxin they are using causes the same symptoms as danang fever. What the heck is going on in the treatment center and with the sick workers?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2373131].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

As you know:

Tony Hayward is OUT!

of course his comp package is $18 million dollars.

He screws up on TV and gets a huge comp package.

These compaines never learn.

BP is not paying their claims, but tony hayward
gets paid even as he is booted out of BP.

BP surely knows how to take care of their own,
but screw anyone else that isnt on their team.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2395686].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by dsimms

As you know:

Tony Hayward is OUT!

of course his comp package is $18 million dollars.

He screws up on TV and gets a huge comp package.

These compaines never learn.

BP is not paying their claims, but tony hayward
gets paid even as he is booted out of BP.

BP surely knows how to take care of their own,
but screw anyone else that isnt on their team.

They didn't really boot him out. HECK, I don't know if there IS a limit, but it probably WILL end up being roughly 18million. He will get, on average, at todays exchange rates, almost $1million per year. He is approximately 53 years old. So, figure he is likely to live another 17-27 years, on average. At todays exchange rate, $18mill will last about 19.50 years, roughly. It doesn't start for I guess another 3 months! That's a pretty nice retirement!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2395840].message }}

dsimms

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

They didn't really boot him out. HECK, I don't know if there IS a limit, but it probably WILL end up being roughly 18million. He will get, on average, at todays exchange rates, almost $1million per year. He is approximately 53 years old. So, figure he is likely to live another 17-27 years, on average. At todays exchange rate, $18mill will last about 19.50 years, roughly. It doesn't start for I guess another 3 months! That's a pretty nice retirement!

Steve

He did get booted from this current project or he is stepping
down, either way he is out. Even though he will still be
working for BP (I think) he will be on his way to russia...

Tony Hayward can explain to the russians how he wants
his life back.

Famous BP quote:

"I just want my life back"
By: Tony Hayward BP Loser

Enjoy that comp package and your future earnings
that your oil victims probably will never see.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2399397].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Whoever is in charge - the company is now reneging on its payments to victims. gee - who'd have thought?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2396101].message }}

dsimms 16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Whoever is in charge - the company is now reneging on its payments to victims. gee - who'd have thought?

BP has violations/fines in the alaska pipeline upwards of
one million dollars (not paid)

BP's fine on this current spill has not come out yet, but they suspect
it could between 5-20 billion dollars. I guess they have to factor
in all sorts of stuff to come out with this fine.

BP has also sold or getting ready to sell at least
30+ billion dollars of their assets.

of course if I am wrong, feel free to correct me.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2399430].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

From what I can see, hayward was simply replaced, and asked to go to siberia. As I implied, they are playing musical executives. WE get the one russia kicked out, and they basically get the one we hated. And he has decided to retire, probably after prompting, albeit 3 years after he COULD have.

And YEAH, I LOVE IT! Dudley is making BP sound like a viable company, but there is MORE talk that CHINA may buy them, and they have sold parts. Every such move DECREASES the value of the company, and there is really NO impact on the stock price yet. When THAT happens, the stock could plummet QUICKLY! Especially with NO dividend to hold it up.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2399547].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

From news reports:

BP attempts...

Oil Spill Static Kill!!!

The oil spill 'static kill' attempt is officially underway, as BP seeks to plug the oil spill with mud and cement to stop flow once and for all.

PBS NewsHour tweeted that the static kill attempt began officially today around 4 p.m. EST.

BP has described the static kill as a chance to stop the oil spill leak without the relief wells it previously insisted were necessary.

Either way, BP Senior Vice President Kent Wells said relief wells would be installed at some point to ensure "the well is dead."

AOL News reports that this is potentially "one of the final steps to permanently stopping the flow of oil."

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2425383].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

WOW, TWO news agencies. ONE saying the sttatic kill was started at least almost 2 hours ago, and one saying they just started testing. Oh well, the former site ALSO said:

BP is accelerating damage payments, saying today it recognizes “frustration” from small-business owners as it transfers authority over claims to an independently administered fund. The company said it processed 2,600 claims during the past three days under an expedited system that eased documentation requirements.

The company has issued a total of 93,000 checks for $277 million in damage claims. Some claims will be deferred until later this month, when the $20 billion Gulf Coast Claims Facility run by Kenneth Feinberg will begin operating, BP said.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2425432].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Rumors are the feds are about to announce...

1: That 75% of the BP spill of oil in the gulf is gone, cleaned up, evaporated etc.

2: That seafood from the gulf is safe.

Is there anyway either of these statements can be true??

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2428663].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

We're told seafood is safe and the testing seems to be rigorous.

Oysters not so sure myself (but don't eat them anyway) - osyter fishermen say it will be next year before we know how the oyster beds were affected.

Some of us who live here are baffled, to - so you are not alone. We've had month of "destruction of the fishing industry" and now within 2 weeks time the official word is "everything is fine".

The problems caused in the marshes and wetlands will take years to clean up - that's not arguable. What needs to be asked is if the oceans are more tolerant to spills than previously thought. We know the wildlife can't tolerate it.

Lots of testing going on here to see where the dispersant "went". Booms are being removed as no longer needed in most areas but this is partly because we are entering the highest risk season for hurricanes and booms could add to damage in a storm.

We're told the top kill is working and that's great news. Now we know HOW to stop a leak like this - question is will all drilling companies/oil companies be required to have a top cap like the one that proved successful built and available before they start drilling? Will they be required to partially drill a relief well when they drill for oil?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2428797].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

We're told seafood is safe and the testing seems to be rigorous.

Oysters not so sure myself (but don't eat them anyway) - osyter fishermen say it will be next year before we know how the oyster beds were affected.

Some of us who live here are baffled, to - so you are not alone. We've had month of "destruction of the fishing industry" and now within 2 weeks time the official word is "everything is fine".

The problems caused in the marshes and wetlands will take years to clean up - that's not arguable. What needs to be asked is if the oceans are more tolerant to spills than previously thought. We know the wildlife can't tolerate it.

Lots of testing going on here to see where the dispersant "went". Booms are being removed as no longer needed in most areas but this is partly because we are entering the highest risk season for hurricanes and booms could add to damage in a storm.

We're told the top kill is working and that's great news. Now we know HOW to stop a leak like this - question is will all drilling companies/oil companies be required to have a top cap like the one that proved successful built and available before they start drilling? Will they be required to partially drill a relief well when they drill for oil?

I'm totally blown away by these announcements.

It's a big claim that 75% of the oil that was in the Gulf is now not there anymore.

50% would be amazing.

There were a lot of ships involved - hundreds I think, in the cleanup and it's been going on for quite some time but still...

Nothing personal to any Gulf residents or fishermen but...

I'm going to wait many, many moons before I eat something from the gulf.

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2429124].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

I think much of the seafood may be coming from areas of the gulf that were not impacted by the oil - and there were such areas that were closed because ships had to go through the spill to get to those areas and that wasn't allowed.

The oyster beds will take time - keeping the oil out of the beds was partially done by sending MS river water out to push the oil-laden waters away. But the fresh water killed young oysters. Will take three years at least to recover, and perhaps more.

Shrimp I wouldn't worry about as much - the testing is rigorous so what is getting to the market I would assume is safe. There is too much potential liability for any processing company or brand to promote shrimp that might be unsafe.

I'm so bad today - my grass needs cut desperately - but the heat index is about 110 and I just can't make myself go outside and pull out the mower. Maybe I need to rent a couple goats for a few weeks?

Yes, I know I can hire someone but every year I do that they stop showing up when the heat is the worst - so I just do it myself. Good exercise - but not at 100+ degrees!
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2429202].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I'm totally blown away by these announcements.

It's a big claim that 75% of the oil that was in the Gulf is now not there anymore.

50% would be amazing.

There were a lot of ships involved - hundreds I think, in the cleanup and it's been going on for quite some time but still...

Nothing personal to any Gulf residents or fishermen but...

I'm going to wait many, many moons before I eat something from the gulf.

TL

Spill milk on the floor. HECK, spill OIL! Getting the bulk of it is EASY! Just put a towel on it, wait a few seconds, and lift the soaked towel up. HECK, if you were to drop toothpicks, the last ones are hardest to find, and recover.

Lets say it was 90% of 4 million gallons. YOU say GREAT, GOOD JOB! I say WOW, we only have 400,000 gallons left. Pick THAT up, and we can call it a day.

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2429236].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Rumors are the feds are about to announce...

1: That 75% of the BP spill of oil in the gulf is gone, cleaned up, evaporated etc.

2: That seafood from the gulf is safe.

Is there anyway either of these statements can be true??

Apparently, they ALREADY announced it. IT IS A LIE!

Even people on the Gulf, that KNOW first hand but would LOVE to say it is gone, are saying IT IS A MESS!!!!!!

On point 1, they have mitigated it. It WAS that it is gone. NOW they say cleaned up, dispersed, evaporated. Well, MOST of it will NEVER evaporate. Oil doesn't evaporate, only things like the gas in it do. and the dispersant is considered BAD, and how long will IT stay there?

As for the "What you can't see can't harm you"? BULL! Actually, if the oil were ONLY on the top of the water, the fish would probably be ok. It is mixed with the water, so the fish will ingest it! That ALSO means that the skimmers and other gadgets WON'T WORK! So they can't clean it up.

So the BEST thing would be to wait till it is diluted and/or oil eating organisms gobble it up. How long will THAT be?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2428820].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

I may seem over cautious - but I remember too many instances where the public was told "crisis is over" - "everything is fine" only to have health problems show up months or years later.

I do think the seafood getting to market from the coast is safe because serious testing is going on. What I don't know is how much seafood is being discarded as "unsafe" from the testing...if any.

However, dolphins are seen again, healthy pelicans are flying here and baby turtles that hatched on the shores were relocated for their safety.

We may not know for years what the environmental toll is from this leak but we question whether BP will be forced to stay until full cleanup is done as they are making "all fixed" comments now that aren't sitting well here.

The financial toll is easy to see as so much was broadcast about the crisis it will take the fishing industry a long time to get back in business and regain public trust about the safety of the food chain.

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2428920].message }}
- seasoned 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  However, dolphins are seen again, healthy pelicans are flying here and baby turtles that hatched on the shores were relocated for their safety.
  
  Well, when the sniffers start replacing dogs for searches, I might START to believe how good they MIGHT be. I think the baby turtles hatching is a good sign. I think they tend to be among the first affected.
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2429036].message }}

madison_avenue

16 years ago

Good news from the Gulf:

The US government said today that most of the oil that leaked into the Gulf of Mexico has been cleaned up as BP reported that a "static kill" blocking procedure was stopping more crude pouring into the gulf.

The White House energy adviser, Carol Browner, said a new assessment had found that about 75% of the oil had been captured, burned off, evaporated or broken down in the Gulf.

"It was captured. It was skimmed. It was burned. It was contained. Mother Nature did her part," Browner said of the Gulf oil spill. She added that about 25% remained.

Lets hope they can clear up the remaining 25% in short order.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2429394].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Thankfully, even some media are asking where these numbers are coming from.

3% skimmed
5% burned off
17% captured by BP with original cap

25% remains

so, supposedly, 50% of what is now estimated to be 205 million gallons of oil leaked just....disappeared.

But the govt spokesperson says it's so.....bless her heart.

kay
- [ 2 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2429454].message }}

Patrician

16 years ago

Well I don't know where they are looking but I have seen several things on TV when going to marshes and little areas nobody has touched in LA.

The last guy was rescuing an animal by boat in a small area of completely black water, and when he put his hand in the 'water' - he came up with a fistful of pure black muck. Seemed to be more oil than water.

... must be part of that mysterious 50% - add to 49.9% pure SPIN -

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Patricia Brucoli
Plug-In Profit Site Helpdesk

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2429529].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Lots of questions being asked by local newspeople. The "oil remaining" is being judged by oil on top of the water - no one wants to talk about the plumes that were floating under water and they aren't looking for those.

I'd love to believe the oil just got eaten up by mommy nature - but it's hard to swallow that scenario. Sounds to me like a way to claim "victory" and say problem is solved.

I'm reminded of the big sign saying "mission accomplished" - and we know how that turned out....but I'm not sure what entity is driving the "it's over" scenario.

As for the argument at the top of the page - I think Reuters is a fairly substantial news source...right?
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64420A20100505

Not that I think it matters - because everyone who could potentially help the oil companies is a target for their largesse. Nothing new or wrong with that (our laws allow it) - until you start saying it didn't happen. It's the same with drug companies, insurance companies and Wall Street companies - nothing new ...just business as usual in D.C.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2431682].message }}
- TimPhelan 16 years ago
  
  Yeah, they are a fairly substantial news source and these substantial sources can be wrong at times. Fact is Obama didn't receive any money from BP PACS or directly from BP. Yes, from employees, but not from the company itself. Here's one source that was after that article you posted.
  
  Fox News is BP oil spill misinformation clearinghouse | Media Matters for America
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  As for the argument at the top of the page - I think Reuters is a fairly substantial news source...right?
  Obama biggest recipient of BP cash | Reuters
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  Over 50 Dating
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2431802].message }}

Profit123

16 years ago

They broke it, they must fix it! A $27 million cap is absurd-their pockets are plenty deep to cover all damages.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

One of the Best Resources for making money online. http://bit.ly/dnsOjO

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2439976].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Found on factcheck.org - and you're right - neither side took PAC money - and the "other" side got much more in BP contributions - exception there was more to Obama from BP's execs but nothing near what the original article stated.

That's good. I like to have the truth whatever it is - but I don't trust all sources and I doubt you do, either.

kay
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2440037].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Newsflash!!

After a few games of basketball with top NBA players and some former stars...

... some of the players joined the POTUS and a group of his friends for a barbecue at the White House, capping the president's 49th birthday week.

A small tent and tables decorated with sunflowers and yellow and white tablecloths were being set up on the South Lawn when Obama returned from playing basketball.

The menu... ( why I posted this story in this thread??? )

The White House said the meal will include shrimp from the Gulf of Mexico.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2448263].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

We Asked an Expert: Is Gulf Seafood Safe to Eat? | Sustainable Food | Change.org

Interesting article in the link above.

There are areas of the gulf that were not affected - or have not been affected yet.

I guess serving Gulf shrimp is a great media move - but I expect that's some shrimp that has been tested four ways from Sunday. Maybe all of the seafood being sold is being widely tested - but we don't know that right now.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2448328].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

We Asked an Expert: Is Gulf Seafood Safe to Eat? | Sustainable Food | Change.org

Interesting article in the link above.

There are areas of the gulf that were not affected - or have not been affected yet.

I guess serving Gulf shrimp is a great media move - but I expect that's some shrimp that has been tested four ways from Sunday. Maybe all of the seafood being sold is being widely tested - but we don't know that right now.

Well, no one had to use shrimp from the Gulf.

As far as a media move...

The POTUS can't realistically be expecting to pick up any votes from the folks in the states between Texas and Florida.

Not after how these states voted in the 2008 prez election and now his handling of this BP crisis.

It think it's a very nice gesture of free publicity and confidence in the shrimp of the gulf and sure it's probably been tested 4 ways from Sunday.

And it probably will result in more folks having confidence in seafood from the gulf.

As I said earlier in this thread, I'm more than happy waiting quite a while before I get involved with seafood from the gulf.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2448468].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

A small tent and tables decorated with sunflowers and yellow and white tablecloths were being set up on the South Lawn when Obama returned from playing basketball.

The White House said the meal will include shrimp from the Gulf of Mexico.

JUST SHRIMP? And WHEN, and precisely WHERE, were they harvested and who will eat them? THAT is the REAL story!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2448330].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

A small tent and tables decorated with sunflowers and yellow and white tablecloths were being set up on the South Lawn when Obama returned from playing basketball.

The White House said the meal will include shrimp from the Gulf of Mexico.

JUST SHRIMP? And WHEN were they harvested and who will eat them? THAT is the REAL story!

HEY, ever see the simpsons episode where they get burns to start to eat fish tainted by his nuclear plant? The story wasn't REALLY that there were fish from the region, but that there was a TAINTED fish, and he would EAT it. As I recall, he ended up spitting it out.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2448351].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

The fishermen say they won't eat the fish = that says more to me than any news item from anywhere.

BP is in the process of hiring (read that "buying") scientists to support their agenda. They seem to feel that the only way to really keep the reality under wraps is to keep the scientists quiet -- and there's only one way to do that. Pay them.

Now - considering that they aren't paying off their debt on this fiasco in any way shape or form...........how much do ya think that they owe us is going to keeping scientists from speaking out? It's going to be the climate thing all over again - paid scientists spewing agenda crap, and real scientists with real science to provide being suppressed.

This is just one more major problem being caused by corporations that are "too big to fail" that we are going to eat, no matter if it kills us to do so or not.

I like capitalism - in it's raw form -- but this crony capitalism that we've developed was the downfall of a few societies. We NEED to put this company under and we need to do it fast. The amount that will be hurt financially by a bankruptcy really pales in consideration of what this company has done already - what it owes already that will never be paid - how much damage they have done in the last 20 years -- and in light that they are actually being considered for a very technologically new form of drill in Alaska.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2448523].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

The liberator,

You like saying POTUS. Well, the US INCLUDES every state that DIDN'T vote for him also. And you know as well as I that his supporters are in every state ANYWAY. So it IS his job to help the economy of THEM also! So yeah, it IS kind of expected that they use fish from such a region if it is considered edible.

Heysal,

Calling that behavior capitalism is basically calling thievery capitalism. The fact is that thievery is capitalism's ENEMY! Think about it!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2448754].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Newsflash...

From AP Story:

Texas Sues BP:

State Accuses Oil Giant Of Illegally Emitting 500,000 Pounds Of Toxic Pollutants:

(AP) - The Texas attorney general has sued BP, charging the company illegally emitted nearly 500,000 pounds of air pollutants at its Texas City refinery for more than a month this spring.

The suit charges that BP's poor operation and maintenance for 46 days in April and May were the primary cause of the toxic emissions.

BP could be fined up to $25,000 per day for each violation.

The Texas City refinery is the nation's third-largest, about 30 miles south of Houston.

Last week, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality released findings that BP's multiple violations are "egregious" and the company has a poor compliance history.

The state regulatory agency turned those findings over to the attorney general.

A BP spokesman did not immediately return messages left for comment. Last week, spokesman Scott Dean denied the allegations from the TCEQ's report.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2453196].message }}

CJ.Online

16 years ago

Hahahaha, that's freaking hilarious

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2453225].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP Make 1st Deposit On The 20 Billion...

Washington (CNN) -- The Justice Department announced Monday that the details have been completed for establishing a $20 billion escrow account that BP has promised to fund.

The money will pay for claims to those who suffered from the effects of the Gulf oil spill.

After BP announced it had made a $3 billion dollar deposit into the account, Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli issued a statement confirming the action.

"We are pleased that BP made an initial contribution and has taken an important step toward honoring its commitment to the President and the residents and business owners in the Gulf region," Perrelli said.

According to the initial deal, BP was to deposit $3 billion initially followed up by another $2 billion in two quarters.

It agreed to deposit $5 billion in each of the following three fiscal years, bringing the total to $20 billion.

Kenneth Feinberg, who administered the 9/11 victims fund, will administer the claims fund.

BP had been dragging its feet on paying claims while the final details of the escrow account were negotiated, but with the fund now in place, Gulf Coast residents will have a way of obtaining compensation for their economic losses.

As the Washington Post reports, that compensation is more critical now than ever, especially for fisherman:

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2455093].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP's starting to come up with the cash and they won't have control over who gets it and how much they get.

See above.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2458145].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

The POTUS can't realistically be expecting to pick up any votes from the folks in the states between Texas and Florida.

That is offensive to me. When the campaign is never ending, leadership is an illusion. Maybe that's why leadership at times looks only like high level lobbying efforts.

No wonder we appear to be coming apart at the seams.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2458216].message }}

myob 16 years ago

The worst US environmental disaster on record prompted Washington to impose a moratorium on deep-water drilling while BP has said it has learned its lessons from the Gulf of Mexico disaster so as to avoid any repetition. They plan to start drilling in the Gulf of Sirte off the coast of Libya by the end of the year.

BP to start drilling in the Gulf of Sirte this year
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2458743].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

That is offensive to me. When the campaign is never ending, leadership is an illusion. Maybe that's why leadership at times looks only like high level lobbying efforts.

No wonder we appear to be coming apart at the seams.

I'm not sure how it is offensive to you when all I was doing was responding to this comment of yours...

"I guess serving Gulf shrimp is a great media move."

My response was simply that...

... it can't be a media move designed...

.... to pick up votes from the people in the states between florida and texas.

He's an eternal optimist but he's not freaking crazy.

His numbers were already dismal in that area of the country...

...and I don't see any reason why they won't get lots worse after what has transpired with this BP stuff.

He's an eternal optimist but he's not freaking crazy.

So I'm not sure what you're talking about regarding never ending lobbying, campaigning, leadership etc.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2458821].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Wonder how much perverted little Uncle Sammy will suck out of it for "admin fees". LMAO.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2458205].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

TL,

All I will say is that there are 50 states, and some people want to see the WHOLE country succeed. Frankly, I can sympathize with the dolphins and other wildlife around the region. I never even met kay, but I feel for her as well. And we ARE talking about a fair amount of US coastline. People in the gulf are certainly NOT the only ones that care about it.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2459611].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

TL,

All I will say is that there are 50 states, and some people want to see the WHOLE country succeed.

Frankly, I can sympathize with the dolphins and other wildlife around the region.

I never even met kay, but I feel for her as well.

And we ARE talking about a fair amount of US coastline. People in the gulf are certainly NOT the only ones that care about it.

Steve

All I will say is...

This is the 2nd time in this thread that you may have inferred that I wish ill on the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of fellow citizens.

Nothing could be further from the truth and where that perception comes from - I have no clue.

I was inclined to not bother answering you but thought that others may incorrectly pick up on your opinions etc regarding this matter.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2462172].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

TL, I wasn't implying ANYTHING about YOU! I wish all citizens would at least care about the country as a whole, especially if they are really PAID to do so.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2462247].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

TL, I wasn't implying ANYTHING about YOU! I wish all citizens would at least care about the country as a whole, especially if they are really PAID to do so.

Steve

Do you have info or a feeling that someone who is paid to care about the whole country does not??

You seem to be implying that you do.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2462274].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

On Saturday the POTUS went for a swim in the gulf ...

... although it wasn't anywhere near water zero.

He swam off the coast of Florida.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2477401].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Whoopee - Now look at where florida beaches WERE affected by oil.

Map of Florida Beaches Affected by Oil - Florida Oil Free Beaches

See Carabelle on the right BEYOND where oil reached Florida? Just above that is Alligator Point.

The visit proves what? That safe beaches are still safe? I notice he didn't swim in areas of the Gulf that were washed with oil, did he? Don't blame him - I wouldn't. But I wouldn't go to a beach never affected and say "look, it's fine" either.

The impact of the oil spill has not affected florida beaches beyond northwest florida. All other beaches are free of oil [in Florida]"
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2477972].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

And you notice that he didn't let ANY third party even take a picture. And the ****ONE**** picture I saw didn't have ANYTHING to show where it was taken. NO coastline, buildings, or even boats.

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2478081].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

I'm just reporting the news:

Like I said earlier in this thread the man's not crazy.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2478706].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I'm just reporting the news:

Like I said earlier in this thread the man's not crazy.

TL

OK, I was just pointing out something that I have heard NOBODY, INCLUDING FOX by the way, mention. I'm kind of shocked. I mean either they are hiding something in the picture or the picture is really pretty MEANINGLESS. AGAIN, I am not being political, just stating the case.

BTW The idea is SUPPOSED to be....

Person can swim anywhere he wants!
He is not crazy.
He is swimming in an area that people considered tainted.

SO, if you believe all three, the area must be OK.

Of course, even if he DID swim in the gulf, people don't generally drink the water, and they swim in water that isn't necessarily all that clean.

Frankly, I would want to see him eat fish from the region but, since I would have to catch, cook, and present it to him, that will never happen. So there is nothing HE could do to convince ME! Besides, one meal only proves trust. It can't prove it is safe.

SO, to people, like kay, from the region, sorry! I'm going to wait a long time before I think of intentionally taking such fish. I may not live that long. And I know that OTHERS feel as I do. I might try to find a nearby trout farm, and start fishing there. Some trout farms have a mini lake where you can do that. I did that earlier and loved it, and always wanted to start doing that again. I at least know THEY are probably clean.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2479120].message }}

Chris1203

16 years ago

I am appalled that BP has the nerve to make such a request. They have never taken responsibility for this tragedy and they never will!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2479583].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Chris1203

I am appalled that BP has the nerve to make such a request. They have never taken responsibility for this tragedy and they never will!

You know, someone should REALLY change the title! I doubt BP EVER asked this! It does not make ANY sense! The original maximum liability was 75million, NOT 27 million, and I NEVER heard of such a thing outside of this forum! ***ON THE OTHER HAND*** it is apparently ******FACT****** that Transocean ASSERTED that THEIR original maximum liability of $27 should be MAINTAINED!

Gulf oil spill rig owner Transocean seeks to limit liability to about $27 million | al.com

BTW the date was may 13th! Is this just some weird COINCIDENCE!?!?!? WHICH is more likely? That BP wanted their limit lowered to 27million, from 75million, after a disaster, or that transocean wanted to assert theirs?

BTW apparently TO got its wish. Everyone is blaming ONLY BP! If TO had to pay the 27million, they actually PROFITED! TO owned the rig by the way.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2481143].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

The only way I will say this is 100% fact is if I was there.
But I wasn't so I'll just put it out there for you all to decide if it's real or not.

YouTube - Fishermen find oil and dispersants on...

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2481681].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

That is accurate and it's being reported by many people here.

But the govt says it isn't real - and with that authority behind them, BP agrees "oil is gone". I honestly don't know if anyone has the ability to remove more of the oil - but saying it doesn't exist is a lie.

Anyone who believes that amount of oil and dispersant just magically disappears is a fool or has an agenda. What took me by surprise after Katrina was how long the problems have continued. Many here will never fully recover from either Katrina or from the oil spill. That's just how it is.

An oyster takes three years to develop before harvesting and there's no telling how the oysters will be next year or in two years - or more.

Two months after being announced as a "solution" - the big claims fund is not operational - Feinberg is still giving speeches about it. The details were only finalized by the administration on Aug 9 so no telling when the "fund" will start making payouts.

Feinberg fusses about claims from 50 states but says he will "look at all of the claims" - I'd suggest he start with the claims from the coastal states first. This fund was announced as to be set up and operational in 30-45 days - 60 days now and still seems to be in the speechifying stage.

kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2481744].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Feinberg fusses about claims from 50 states but says he will "look at all of the claims" - I'd suggest he start with the claims from the coastal states first. This fund was announced as to be set up and operational in 30-45 days - 60 days now and still seems to be in the speechifying stage.

kay

Maybe you realize it, but this killed a good part of several INDUSTRIES! Some place in FRANCE could have been hurt by that spill! If they specialized in US tours, especially around the coast or cruises, a lot of their business could be hurt. So maybe all 50 states have legitimate claims.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2481828].message }}

ThomM 16 years ago

I thought it would be closer to the truth then a lie.
When the BP commercials I see say the removed over 34 million gallons of oil and water, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that's not all the oil. Plus I still want to know how much of that is oil and how much is water:confused:
I also know that because of the way shellfish like clams and oysters filter water to feed that they are susceptible to pollutions quicker then fish and mammals. If the dispersant is pushing the oil to the bottom, it could be years if ever before the oysters are really safe to eat.
- Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2481848].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Yeah, on FOX(say what you will), they said that about 87% of the oil is STILL THERE in the water, on land, or in the sand at the beach! They went on to say that the official position is that only about 25% of the oil is left and the rest is mixed with the water, evaporated, or just disappeared.

I said all along they could never clean up all of it, and it would take longer than this. There BEST bet would have been to NOT use disspersants, cap the well QUICKLY, and skim the oil BEFORE it reached land.

COME ON! They have seen really OLD items that have oil on them. Oil does NOT evaporate. THAT is why people rub oil on simple tools like hammers, or guns. It leaves a film that keeps water out so things won't rust. And oil is used to cook because it has a HIGH boiling and burning point. And if it DOES get too hot, it STILL leaves a healthy residue. That residue represents parts that would NEVER evaporate. At least not at temperatures we have ever seen in nature on this planet, outside of volcanoes. Even the THIN residue from a persons body can stay on a surface a long time, which is why you can take fingerprints.

I was worried about this the whole time. Those dispersants took a lot of the oil and made it mix with water so it is harder to recover and detect. It ALSO makes it easier for sand to absorb it. Maybe that would be ok if the dispersants weren't toxic. But if you can SEE 25%, you can BET there is FAR more than that!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2481808].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

I think the ONLY way they could estimate the oil is to determine the pressure against that cap BEFORE the mud, and extrapolate the oil released at that time times however long it has been. The number would be off, maybe off a LOT, but should be close to the potential minimum amount. At this point, FORGET IT! We may NEVER have a CLUE!

As for the oil water mixture? I bet at least 20%(about 7 million gallons) is water! If it were much less, I bet they would have said OIL!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2482211].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Steve this article was from May, but the meter at the beginning is interesting.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/...of-mexico.html
The estimate there is 190,120,055 gals. of oil leaked into the Gulf as of today from this.
So over 34 million of oil/water mix is still a small amount even if it was 99% oil.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2482383].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Steve this article was from May, but the meter at the beginning is interesting.
How Much Oil Has Leaked Into the Gulf of Mexico? | The Rundown News Blog | PBS NewsHour | PBS
The estimate there is 190,120,055 gals. of oil leaked into the Gulf as of today from this.
So over 34 million of oil/water mix is still a small amount even if it was 99% oil.

Yep, I probably should have added that. And 190million is a LOW estimate from what I have heard. I've heard of estimates over TWICE that!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2482773].message }}

ThomM 16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Yep, I probably should have added that. And 190million is a LOW estimate from what I have heard. I've heard of estimates over TWICE that!

Steve

I know I've heard estimates all over the board.
Sadly we'll never know.
That video I posted shows how easy it is to still find oil.
In fact it was so easy it's why I said this.

The only way I will say this is 100% fact is if I was there.
But I wasn't so I'll just put it out there for you all to decide if it's real or not.

I knew Kay could say how real it was.
It's sad when fisherman can drop a grappling hook with a cloth on it and find oil, yet BP says they can't find anymore. Maybe they should look where the oil is and not off the coast of Fl. where O went swimming.
- Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2482924].message }}

Patrician

16 years ago

There was at one time a "president" of a Parrish in LA who was on TV - I am embarrased I don't know names but I did see it.

He said not one person from the Govt or BP had ever contacted him (back- in over 3 months) and he had resorted to going to HOME DEPOT to buy contraptions to skim the oil - He had a whole fleet of these little deals on small boats going up and down in the pools of black oil all along his shoreline and marshes.

Wonder if they ever got around to that one?

There is nothing worse than SPIN when it is done purposely to hide the truth (DEFRAUD).

Once again they (corps) are pandering to the (BP) stockholders with their cheery little updates and the hell with the victims.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Patricia Brucoli
Plug-In Profit Site Helpdesk

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2483219].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

There is a scientific group doing a long term study (I don't know WHO they are yet, though).

The shrimp may well be fine this year - but oysters take three years to grow so we don't know how those beds will be affected for several years.

The big danger is the amount of oil/dispersant mix floating under the water - much of it near the Gulf's floor. Plankton are disappearing as the oil mix is killing them.

These don't concern us this year but they are one of the first links in the food chain of the Gulf. The amount of damage caused by mass killing of these tiny creatures will show up in the next few years if the food chain has been severely disrupted.

There is sheen on the water in various places but I'm not sure that can be removed. The part that most concerns me is the mix under the water and what it might do in future years.

The study so far has found oil/dispersant mix spreading to the east beneath the water - think "Gulf Stream". Maybe that's the only way to get rid of it - if it catches the Gulf Stream and ends up in the larger Atlantic.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2483258].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

Found a new link - this is the study I heard of earlier today.

Scientists: Up to 80% of Gulf Oil Remains - CBS News

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2483809].message }}

ThomM 16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Found a new link - this is the study I heard of earlier today.

Scientists: Up to 80% of Gulf Oil Remains - CBS News

Now that sounds closer to the truth.
Here's an article I found discussing the seafood being safe.
Skeptics Wary of Seafood Safety as La. Shrimping Season Opens in the Gulf - ABC News
Notice the amount of fish, shrimp, etc. tested and the note from the Texas tech Institute of Environmental and Human Health's director who did the testing and wasn't mentioned in the FDA's press release.
It's on page 2.
- Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2483832].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

From that article:

"commercial shrimpers out for the first trip of the season since the spill indicated their catch was plentiful and free of oil.

"We're not seeing any oil where I'm at. No tar balls, nothing," said Brian Amos, a 53-year-old shrimper who trawled in his 28-foot skiff, The Rolling Thunder, in a bay near Empire."

Originally Posted by Kay King

Found a new link - this is the study I heard of earlier today.

Scientists: Up to 80% of Gulf Oil Remains - CBS News

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2483962].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

From that article:

"commercial shrimpers out for the first trip of the season since the spill indicated their catch was plentiful and free of oil.

"We're not seeing any oil where I'm at. No tar balls, nothing," said Brian Amos, a 53-year-old shrimper who trawled in his 28-foot skiff, The Rolling Thunder, in a bay near Empire."

I'm sure that every sq. ft. of the Gulf isn't polluted. It also stands to reason that the shrimp would be plentiful in areas not polluted.
Their food source would be some of the first life forms there to die off in polluted water so the shrimp that could would naturally migrate to clean water where the food is.
Look at that video I posted earlier where the fisherman drops a clean cloth covered grappling hook into the water and pulls it out. It is covered in oil spots. Also read the link I posted, on page two it tells you how much seafood was tested to deem it safe and read the note the guy who did the testing wrote that wasn't mentioned by the FDA.
What one man says about fishing in one bay doesn't mean Gulf seafood is safe by any means.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2483984].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

I agree. I just posted that to show another view by a fisherman as opposed to the guy taking a random oil test out in the gulf. You know I hate BP and what they have done in all this. I'm not defending them.

Originally Posted by ThomM

What one man says about fishing in one bay doesn't mean Gulf seafood is safe by any means.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2484283].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I agree. I just posted that to show another view by a fisherman as opposed to the guy taking a random oil test out in the gulf. You know I hate BP and what they have done in all this. I'm not defending them.

I knew that Tim.
I should of worded it differently.
My rant was really aimed at the article not you.
By the way I owe you an apology for what I said in the PM's.
I was out of line and should of just kept my mouth shut.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2484364].message }}

ThomM 16 years ago

Well it seems some scientists found some of the oil.

YouTube- CNN BOMBSHELL: Seafloor Covered in Oil...
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2487995].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

Yes - they are saying that ...those that are taking their boats out.

I think a lot of the shrimp beds farther out are fine. But remember, too, they have to sell those fish. They aren't going to say "it's bad" when they know that will kill their sales.

There's one thing I don't understand and that may change in the next week. Boat owners have been complaining of being laid off by BP - but that article says they are working for BP rather than shrimping.

The complaint for months has been that BP pay (up to $5000 a day depending on size of boat) is "not nearly what we can get fishing".

It was good, though, to look out from the pier and see shrimp boat on the horizon.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2483991].message }}
- Kay King 16 years ago
  
  Big fuss tonight on the local news - fishermen confronted the Dept of Marine Resources.
  
  The fishermen charged that DMR is downplaying oil that remains in the water and not responding to reports of oil found by fishing boats.
  
  An earlier confrontation went on in the Governor's meeting - when a woman demanded to know why the commission on "saving the coast's reputation" did not include any fishermen or conservationists.
  
  The people here are speaking up - I think that's great.
  
  kay
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2484235].message }}

coachoutlet

16 years ago

BP sucks,I do not care if BP has to take out a loan.our govt should make BP
to pay 100% of the cleanup.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2483974].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

WHO would have thought that oil mixed with dispersants could have EVER sunk to the oil floor! 8-) Of course I am kidding because many suggested that, and the dispersants ARE used to drive the oil down. But it is starting to become clearer to more people WHY BP wanted to use them.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2488676].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

News today:

Feinberg is ready to start accepting BP claims - but everyone who filed must now RE-FILE. The "seamless takeover" promised isn't going to happen. 63% of the claims submitted to BP so far have had no action taken on them - and now everyone has to start over.

One problem - the forms printed in Vietnamese aren't correctly translated and some of the words don't exist. (These are the govt forms).

Thad Allen said he will order the final bottom kill "when I'm ready" - though it was supposed to be completed days ago. It hasn't been started. Allen said he doesn't want to set schedules and have to explain them to the public. Have to wonder - true colors? Thing is - we aren't complete safe until the bottom kill is completed. We know that - but not sure anyone else does. The top kill is holding - but adding the bottom kill is the failsafe...or so we've been told.

Univ of Georgia scientists say 70-79% of the more than 4 million barrels of oil are still in the Gulf. They blamed the media for "misleading reporting" and the govt for adding an upbeat spin rather than correcting reporting errors.

According to the report, one big different was the govt study counted oil as "leaked" that did not leak as it was piped directly from the well after the first cap was in place. The optimistic numbers given two weeks ago included 800,000+ barrels of oil that didn't spill but was collected.

The scientist said the evaporation % is inaccurate because it's based on averages of sweet crude evaporation on the surface of the warm waters.
Much of oil is beneath the surface trapped under the dense salinity and temperature layers that are a fact in the Gulf waters.

In another study, U of So Florida found oil droplets spreading east up the continental shelf and settling in DeSoto Canyon which is shallow and a big spawning area for fish.

Petitions began yesterday calling for removal of the head of Dept of Marine Resources. Fishermen claim he ordered opening of fishing waters that should not have been opened because plumes of oil are being found there and that he bowed to pressure to declare "all clear" when it wasn't.

Looks like the aftermath will be as messy as the leaking oil, doesn't it?

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2489059].message }}

Patrician

16 years ago

You are reading my thoughts Kay - I have been sitting here all day saying to myself am I more mad about the oil or the way they have 'handled' (mishandled) the recovery.

One was an 'accident' due to many factors including reckless endangerment and negligence, and the rest is FRAUD due to CAVALIER ARROGANCE and L-A-R-C-E-N-Y.

Yeh. I think it is the latter.

p.s. they are L-I-A-R-S - the whole lot of them -

That is my analysis of the situation.

(it's been one of those days)

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Patricia Brucoli
Plug-In Profit Site Helpdesk

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2489088].message }}

RachelJackson

16 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2489434].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by RachelJackson

This travesty is absolutely appalling. Being near the gulf myself I have gotten to know many people who work out there or have their livelihood depend on the gulf's well-being.

Heck, the gulf is connected to all that water that WE depend on in ways that aren't immediately apparent. So even people in australia should be concerned! GRANTED, it could have taken decades or longer to affect them, but STILL, they aren't THAT isolated! And how much of their stuff is imported from here?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2490551].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

OK, FORGET whatI said about fish from the gulf! Maybe I just won't eat wild fish ever again!

Thousands of Dead Fish Line East Coast, Second Time this week. | Coastal Care

http://coastalcare.org/2010/06/stunn...und-in-whales/

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2491918].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

I just won't eat wild fish ever again!

LOL, Steve - so you are only eating tame fish now? Would those be goldfish?

I still have about 5 lbs of shrimp in the freezer (pre-oil shrimp) so guess once that is gone, I'll be eating something else myself.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2492290].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

LOL, Steve - so you are only eating tame fish now? Would those be goldfish?

I still have about 5 lbs of shrimp in the freezer (pre-oil shrimp) so guess once that is gone, I'll be eating something else myself.

I didn't say tame, I said not wild. There ARE trout, and other fish, farms that have been raising fish almost like goldfish, but to EAT! Since they aren't in the tainted water, they are better. of course, I don't know if ANYONE sells them as farmed fish so, if I want them, I may have to get them MYSELF. 8-(

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2492338].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

I didn't say tame, I said not wild. There ARE trout, and other fish, farms that have been raising fish almost like goldfish, but to EAT! Since they aren't in the tainted water, they are better. of course, I don't know if ANYONE sells them as farmed fish so, if I want them, I may have to get them MYSELF. 8-(

Steve

If I remember right from my cooking days, practically all the trout you buy is farm raised. Same for Catfish, I believe.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2492503].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

If I remember right from my cooking days, practically all the trout you buy is farm raised. Same for Catfish, I believe.

You MIGHT be right. I HOPE so! 8-) I was told they do it primarily to stock lakes, etc... Some lakes are TEAMING with fish but probably wouldn't have any if they weren't put there.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2492507].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Well Trout and Catfish are fresh water fish.
The only real Trout that runs in the seas are Steelhead which spawn in fresh water like Salmon and migrate to the oceans.
I'm not really a fish eater myself, but I do love my shellfish like Crab and Shrimp.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2492528].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Well Trout and Catfish are fresh water fish.
The only real Trout that runs in the seas are Steelhead which spawn in fresh water like Salmon and migrate to the oceans.
I'm not really a fish eater myself, but I do love my shellfish like Crab and Shrimp.

Good point! I'M SAVED! 8-)

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2492539].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Geez, now we're getting it up here in NY.
First there was a fish die off in Coopers Lake from a lack of oxygen in the water, and today this.
Shepard Park Beach closed because of fuel spill

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2492757].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

LOL - today Thad Allen "ordered" BP to start testing the blowout thingie for the first relief well. The announcement was made in a forceful, demanding way.

Gee - would that be the same testing Allen ordered BP to stop last week?
Why, yes, it is.

Gameplayers, inc.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2493792].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Very interesting and informative article about Thad Allen and the BP oil well. Might give you a different perspective on Admiral Allen that is not seen in the msm much:

Three Cheers for Thad Allen - walterrhett - Open Salon

But Wednesday, July 14, 2010, Thad Allen got the science right and issued his most important command. He order the planned cap seal installation and well integrity tests halted for 24 hours. The call took guts. It was seen by many as another example of being overly cautious, bureaucratic, prodding, and informed by fear. In reality, this single bold call will stand with one of the great decisions of American leadership

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2493966].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Well, NOAA and the admin do have some explaining to do it seems:

Back at the report's unveiling on August 4, Lubchenco spoke of a "peer review of the calculations that went into this by both other federal and non-federal scientists." On Thursday afternoon, she told reporters on a conference call: "The report and the calculations that went into it were reviewed by independent scientists." The scientists, she said, were listed at the end of the report.

But all the scientists on that list contacted by the Huffington Post for comment this week said the exact same thing: That although they provided some input to NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), they in no way reviewed the report, and could not vouch for it.

NOAA Claims Scientists Reviewed Controversial Report; The Scientists Say Otherwise

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2496940].message }}

Kay King 16 years ago

That's a good link, Tim - and pretty accurately reflects what we feel down here.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2497361].message }}
ThomM 16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Well, NOAA and the admin do have some explaining to do it seems:

NOAA Claims Scientists Reviewed Controversial Report; The Scientists Say Otherwise

It seems NOAA has a lot to explain as does the FDA.
I'm starting to like this guy from Mass.
This is the second time I've seen him and he seems pretty intent on making these agencies and companies do the right thing.

YouTube - FDA admits NOT testing for MERCURY,...
- Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2500079].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Your Lover

Oh my god, is that true?

They generally made LESS than 40Billion a year. So 8% is LESS than 3.2!
The CURRENT earnings estimate is -.51PS!!!!!! That is a LOSS of 1,597,313,880.!
So a LOSS of almost 1.6Billion! I am unsure if that is per year or quarter.

In any event, they ARE hurting.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2500616].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

They generally made LESS than 40Billion a year. So 8% is LESS than 3.2!
The CURRENT earnings estimate is -.51PS!!!!!! That is a LOSS of 1,597,313,880.!
So a LOSS of almost 1.6Billion! I am unsure if that is per year or quarter.

In any event, they ARE hurting.

Steve

Keep on mind Steve, that's net profit.
Most companies would be happy to have the profit they lost

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2500698].message }}

seasoned 16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Keep on mind Steve, that's net profit.
Most companies would be happy to have the profit they lost

HECK YEAH! I KNOW! I DID invest in them EARLIER, and would have been happy with the SMALL portion of the dividends. If I got ALL the dividends they paid out in a QUARTER in the past, it would set me up for life and I would be on the forbes list! HECK, maybe I would buy a few mcdonalds and yum franchises! Why the heck not It would hardly make a dent in my net worth.

YEP, they DID make a LOT.

But patrician is right. At this point, BP is one of the ONLY stocks in the energy industry to have NO dividend. AND, though they have fewer assets and they are worth less, they are selling off parts of the company.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2500910].message }}

Patrician

16 years ago

To put it into the proper perspective what are WE losing -

jobs, fish (both represent food) environment, etc etc etc

POISONED food chain that may go on for decades.

This is in addition to the $111 BILLION we are spending per year on services for illegal aliens.

So tough petooty if these environmental criminals lose a paltry $8 Billion.

They should lose their 'shirt' - not just because of the spill caused by their negligence but because of their mishandling of the recovery which has increased our losses exponentially.

... not to mention all the dead animals.

Originally Posted by Your Lover

Oh my god, is that true?

Thanks

Signature

Patricia Brucoli
Plug-In Profit Site Helpdesk

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2500749].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Brad Pitt: I Would Consider Death Penalty For BP

Brad Pitt has harsh words for BP in Spike Lee's new documentary about New Orleans.

'If God Is Willing and Da Creek Don't Rise' is a four-hour followup to Lee's 2006 film 'When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts.'

Lee landed an interview with Pitt, who owns a home in New Orleans with partner Angelina Jolie and whose Make It Right organization has built homes post-Katrina.

From a review of the film in USA Today:

Reflecting on those responsible for the oil spill, Pitt can barely contain his contempt.

"I was never for the death penalty before," he says. "I am willing to look at it again."

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505842].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Study: Petroleum-eating microbes significantly reduced gulf oil plume

The Gulf of Mexico ecosystem was ready and waiting for something like the Deepwater Horizon blowout and seems to have made the most of it, a new scientific study suggests.

Petroleum-eating bacteria - which had dined for eons on oil seeping naturally through the seafloor - proliferated in the cloud of oil that drifted underwater for months after the April 20 accident.

They not only outcompeted fellow microbes, they each ramped up their own internal metabolic machinery to digest the oil as efficiently as possible.

Rest of story here...

washingtonpost.com

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2515526].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Very interesting. One of the things that article said that surprised me was that these microbes are able to do a good job even at lower depths where the water is colder. I had read somewhere else that they didn't think this would happen.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Study: Petroleum-eating microbes significantly reduced gulf oil plume

The Gulf of Mexico ecosystem was ready and waiting for something like the Deepwater Horizon blowout and seems to have made the most of it, a new scientific study suggests.

Petroleum-eating bacteria - which had dined for eons on oil seeping naturally through the seafloor - proliferated in the cloud of oil that drifted underwater for months after the April 20 accident.

They not only outcompeted fellow microbes, they each ramped up their own internal metabolic machinery to digest the oil as efficiently as possible.

Rest of story here...

washingtonpost.com

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2515664].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Study: Petroleum-eating microbes significantly reduced gulf oil plume

The Gulf of Mexico ecosystem was ready and waiting for something like the Deepwater Horizon blowout and seems to have made the most of it, a new scientific study suggests.

Petroleum-eating bacteria - which had dined for eons on oil seeping naturally through the seafloor - proliferated in the cloud of oil that drifted underwater for months after the April 20 accident.

They not only outcompeted fellow microbes, they each ramped up their own internal metabolic machinery to digest the oil as efficiently as possible.

Rest of story here...

washingtonpost.com

These falls in with a question I have.
First what happens to the contaminated sand, soil, and vegetation, after it is removed?
Second what type of bloom will these oil eating bacteria leave when there is a massive die off.
I know in lakes for example if sewage leaks into the lake it causes a rapid growth in bacteria and algae (bloom). This causes a rapid increase in nitrogen in the water causing rapid growth in other aquatic plants. When the sewage is consumed, it causes a chain reaction of first the algae and bacteria dieing and then the other aquatic plants dieing. The whole process decreases the oxygen in the water causing the fish to suffocate.

Another thought I just had. Will this increase the heavy metals in fish that are higher up on the food chain?
The bacteria won't digest everything and there are organisms above them who feed on them and so on.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2515848].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

These falls in with a question I have.
First what happens to the contaminated sand, soil, and vegetation, after it is removed?
Second what type of bloom will these oil eating bacteria leave when there is a massive die off.
I know in lakes for example if sewage leaks into the lake it causes a rapid growth in bacteria and algae (bloom). This causes a rapid increase in nitrogen in the water causing rapid growth in other aquatic plants. When the sewage is consumed, it causes a chain reaction of first the algae and bacteria dieing and then the other aquatic plants dieing. The whole process decreases the oxygen in the water causing the fish to suffocate.

Another thought I just had. Will this increase the heavy metals in fish that are higher up on the food chain?
The bacteria won't digest everything and there are organisms above them who feed on them and so on.

GOOD POINTS! Heck, the desired plants are often the ones that DON'T grow the fastest!

Africanized honey bees become africanized because african queen bees hatch earlier. The first thing they do after hatching is kill off competition, which will tend to be more european, so the bees will become more and more africanized.

DISCLAIMER! African honey bees are PROVEN to be far more agressive and larger, and are called killer bees for a reason. Given the opportunity, they will risk EVERYTHING to kill what they see as a threat! European Honeybees are prefered because they are docile, easy to control, and want to stay near the hive. They WILL give up. So please don't read anything else into that.

The same is true of weeds, as far as growing, and strangling competition, etc...

I'm hearing more people say that they feel as I do about wanting to stay away from this. Some person had a choice, and picked gulf fish! People didn't feel he was too bright, etc... He said:

1. It was bigger!
2. It tasted better!
3. I didn't die!

Who knows, maybe because predators were weaker or smarter, they stayed away. Bigger doesn't mean better. Many poisons can kill or do harm before they are tasted. And NOBODY said 1 dose will kill you. But who knows? Maybe 100 or 1000 will cause severe illness, etc....

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2516201].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

GOOD POINTS! Heck, the desired plants are often the ones that DON'T grow the fastest!

Africanized honey bees become africanized because african queen bees hatch earlier. The first thing they do after hatching is kill off competition, which will tend to be more european, so the bees will become more and more africanized.

DISCLAIMER! African honey bees are PROVEN to be far more agressive and larger, and are called killer bees for a reason. Given the opportunity, they will risk EVERYTHING to kill what they see as a threat! European Honeybees are prefered because they are docile, easy to control, and want to stay near the hive. They WILL give up. So please don't read anything else into that.

The same is true of weeds, as far as growing, and strangling competition, etc...

I'm hearing more people say that they feel as I do about wanting to stay away from this. Some person had a choice, and picked gulf fish! People didn't feel he was too bright, etc... He said:

1. It was bigger!
2. It tasted better!
3. I didn't die!

Who knows, maybe because predators were weaker or smarter, they stayed away. Bigger doesn't mean better. Many poisons can kill or do harm before they are tasted. And NOBODY said 1 dose will kill you. But who knows? Maybe 100 or 1000 will cause severe illness, etc....

Steve

It's physics 101, for every action there is a reaction.
As for the killer bees, that's because they came from an area in Africa with sparse plant life. They needed to be aggressive in finding and protecting their food source when they found one. A beekeeper in South America thought he could breed them with the more docile German Honey Bees which are the primary honey bees used in honey production to create a hybrid that would be docile like the German bees yet produce honey like the African bees. It didn't work

(Can you tell I studied Entomology in college also

)

Oil sheen has not been seen there since July 29, and scientists found no oil or dispersants on samples of the area's shrimp and finfish.

So if they look ok they must be safe?
I can pull fish out of the Hudson all day that look great, but I still wouldn't eat one, Mercury poisoning's a bitch.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2525310].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

It's physics 101, for every action there is a reaction.
As for the killer bees, that's because they came from an area in Africa with sparse plant life. They needed to be aggressive in finding and protecting their food source when they found one. A beekeeper in South America thought he could breed them with the more docile German Honey Bees which are the primary honey bees used in honey production to create a hybrid that would be docile like the German bees yet produce honey like the African bees. It didn't work

(Can you tell I studied Entomology in college also

)

YEP! But, for the record, we agree. I was just saying how the bad can and often does outweigh the good. Yeah, in africa they have more nasty predators than in europe or most places in america, so I guess it is good for them that they are so aggressive.

As for the beekeeper, it would have been nice if he studied how the queens mature. For a beekeeper wanting to breed the good aspects into them, that should have been a GIVEN! The queen probably selects her mate, and the hive will tend to have more traits from the queen. Let's see... Bad trait? AGGRESSIVE! Goes along with QUICK hatching? NO THANKS! In nature, given that relationship, the bad trait would get CLOSER to the original African bee.

So if they look ok they must be safe?
I can pull fish out of the Hudson all day that look great, but I still wouldn't eat one, Mercury poisoning's a bitch.

Yeah, and mercury poisoning is only ONE possibility. And THAT likely won't kill with the first dose EITHER! NEITHER will radioactive materials(for the most part). Only a few radioactive materials are SO dangerous that one little molecule can kill you relatively quick.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2525460].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Can you tell I studied Entomology in college also

)

Yes I can!

By the way, I was watching something today about how the dragonflies flourished in the New Orleans area after Katrina as a result of all the mosquitoes produced from the flooding. People were afraid at the time of getting diseases from mosquitoes. So the dragonfly is revered now in New Orleans.

I have also heard of how birds have flourished in times of locust swarms.

Perhaps these petroleum-eating microbes are the equivalent of the dragonflies and birds.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2534035].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Yes I can!

By the way, I was watching something today about how the dragonflies flourished in the New Orleans area after Katrina as a result of all the mosquitoes produced from the flooding. People were afraid at the time of getting diseases from mosquitoes. So the dragonfly is revered now in New Orleans.

I have also heard of how birds have flourished in times of locust swarms.

Perhaps these petroleum-eating microbes are the equivalent of the dragonflies and birds.

Yep same idea, smaller critters

I just wonder if there is any transference of heavy metals or other toxins from the microbes to whatever eats them. I figure there is the possibility, but there is also the possibility that there is not.
Also it depends on what parts of the oil particles the microbe eat and what happens to the parts they don't eat.
Remember this all happens at a level we can't see unless we use a microscope.

Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2535155].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

I sure hope these folks know what they're talking about.

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2515725].message }}

TimPhelan

16 years ago

Well, it comes from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California which is a very prestigious lab. Here's 25 breakthroughs by the lab that changed the world:

Berkeley Lab - 25 Breakthroughs

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I sure hope these folks know what they're talking about.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2515893].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Well, it comes from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California which is a very prestigious lab. Here's 25 breakthroughs by the lab that changed the world:

Berkeley Lab - 25 Breakthroughs

I'm very impressed by that list of accomplishments.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2516145].message }}

savingstuffnow

16 years ago

As usual big corporation will try to slide and wiggle there way out of a sticky situation. The oil spill in the gulf got alot of media attention but I feel that the hype (concern) around the spill is slowly fading out.

As the media and peoples concerns are fading away so is the responsibility factor that is surrounding BP. BP should pay for the damage that they caused, but also for the suffering towards the animals, environment and also workers that relay on the Gulf.

Simply put... BP are douche-bags

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2515889].message }}

healthconverter

16 years ago

Originally Posted by savingstuffnow

As usual big corporation will try to slide and wiggle there way out of a sticky situation. The oil spill in the gulf got alot of media attention but I feel that the hype (concern) around the spill is slowly fading out.

As the media and peoples concerns are fading away so is the responsibility factor that is surrounding BP. BP should pay for the damage that they caused, but also for the suffering towards the animals, environment and also workers that relay on the Gulf.

Simply put... BP are douche-bags

Unfortunately this is the case. Problem is, you can't really put a dollar value on animal and human suffering, which is to BP's advantage here. Besides, Big Oil is at the advantage because they can hire huge in-house lawyers.

Thanks

Signature

HealthConverter.com - The Premiere Health And Beauty Affiliate Network - Visit Us At Our Blog

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2516589].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

News Report...

NEW ORLEANS — The U.S. government is reopening more federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico for commercial and recreational fishing that had been closed because of the massive oil spill.

Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told reporters Friday that the government is reopening 4,281 square miles of federal waters off the coast of western Louisiana.

Oil sheen has not been seen there since July 29, and scientists found no oil or dispersants on samples of the area's shrimp and finfish.

Twenty percent of federal waters in the Gulf remain closed.

Meanwhile, oil giant BP is preparing to permanently kill its undersea well.

First, engineers plan to raise the failed blowout preventer, a key piece of evidence in ongoing investigations.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2524051].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Key BP engineer refuses to testify at hearing:

HOUSTON — A BP drilling engineer who was a key decision maker at the rig in the Gulf of Mexico that blew up in April has refused to testify before a federal panel investigating the incident.

Mark Hafle exercised his constitutional right not to testify on Friday.

The U.S. Coast Guard and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulations and Enforcement have been holding hearings since Monday in Houston.

Their goal is to determine what caused the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig that led to the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history.

The panel also will make recommendations to prevent such a catastrophe in the future.

BP drilling engineer Brett Cocales is testifying before the panel on Friday.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2524201].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP Said to Fault Own Engineers for Misinterpreting Well Data:

BP Plc’s internal investigation of the Deepwater Horizon rig disaster pins some of the blame on the company for mistakes made when finishing the oil well,...

... including misreading pressure data that indicated a blowout was imminent, according to a person familiar with the report.

Here's the rest of story...

BP Said to Fault Own Engineers for Misinterpreting Well Data - Bloomberg

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2535392].message }}

ThomM 16 years ago

And here's an article that explains how both BP and the Govt. have been lieing about no oil in local waters off Pensacola Fl.
Oil spill: BP reverses, admits there's oil in local waters | pnj.com | Pensacola News Journal
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2535472].message }}
- ThomM 16 years ago
  
  This was uploaded to Youtube Sat., the 28th. From Long Beach, Ms.
  
  YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
  Getting old ain't for sissy's
  As you are I was, as I am you will be
  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2535718].message }}
  
  ThomM 16 years ago
  
  Degraded oil in Mississippi Sound tests positive for dispersants, says lawyer | al.com
  
  "Throughout the response period, we have worked hand-in-hand and under the direction of the Coast Guard and EPA on the use of dispersants."
  
  Didn't the EPA tell BP it couldn't use those dispersants in the being and they did anyway?
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
  Getting old ain't for sissy's
  As you are I was, as I am you will be
  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2540425].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

BP seems to be walking out of this unscathed. I'm not sure that half the population even remembers there was a spill. After all, it was a couple of weeks back.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2540966].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

WTF????

Another Oil Rig Explodes In The Gulf Of Mexico:

One Day Before Its Gulf Oil Rig Exploded, Mariner Energy Said Obama ‘Is Trying To Break Us’ With Moratorium :

Here's the story...

Think Progress One Day Before Its Gulf Oil Rig Exploded, Mariner Energy Said Obama ‘Is Trying To Break Us’ With Moratorium

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2549434].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Interesting, but I wonder where we can find the REAL story! That site is biased, and there was talk about the moratorium affecting such places. I said myself here earlier, I BELIEVE in this VERY thread, that stopping use of wells, etc... could lead to problems, LIKE THIS!

We all like to blame BP for not acting on the warning signs and test results, etc... How much worse might it have been if NOBODY was there!?

Speaking of bias, I didn't know who palin was until SHE was nominated. I knew of Margaret Thatcher, best known as a conservative UK prime minister, perhaps only a bit after ronald reagan was elected. And it IS in another country. So maybe it is a bit unfair to make fun of palin for not knowing all the big shots. HECK, how many americans are likely to know who the canadian prime minister is, let alone the current UK P.M!?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2549516].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Interesting, but I wonder where we can find the REAL story! That site is biased, and there was talk about the moratorium affecting such places. I said myself here earlier, I BELIEVE in this VERY thread, that stopping use of wells, etc... could lead to problems, LIKE THIS!

We all like to blame BP for not acting on the warning signs and test results, etc... How much worse might it have been if NOBODY was there!?

Speaking of bias, I didn't know who palin was until SHE was nominated. I knew of Margaret Thatcher, best known as a conservative UK prime minister, perhaps only a bit after ronald reagan was elected. And it IS in another country. So maybe it is a bit unfair to make fun of palin for not knowing all the big shots. HECK, how many americans are likely to know who the canadian prime minister is, let alone the current UK P.M!?

Steve

You can find the "real story" and get back with us.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2549604].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

You can find the "real story" and get back with us.

Well, I wasn't claiming to know where it is. If I did, I would go THERE. HECK, just last night a talk show host that says she WORKED near that place in NY that has gotten so famous says it IS closer than 5 blocks! We used to poke fun at RUSSIA(or rather the USSR) for having such problems. Oh well, even that polish plane that went down is rumored to have happened in a different manner.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2549789].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Well, I wasn't claiming to know where it is. If I did, I would go THERE.

HECK, just last night a talk show host that says she WORKED near that place in NY that has gotten so famous says it IS closer than 5 blocks! We used to poke fun at RUSSIA(or rather the USSR) for having such problems. Oh well, even that polish plane that went down is rumored to have happened in a different manner.

Steve

That is the "real story".

1: Another rig explodes in gulf.

2: 13 crew members are not dead - no deaths.

3: Just yesterday Mariner Energy ( owner of the rig ) staged a protest against the Obama administration's offshore drilling policy, saying the White House is "trying to break" the oil and gas industry.

Those are the essential facts as reported in the link I used.

Which one of those facts are incorrect???

Just because the link was to a site that is left-leaning does not mean that the story - as they reported - is false.

Speaking of bias (so-called ) reporting...

- which cable news channel recently made a 1 million dollar contribution to the repub governors association?

- which cable news channel has spent a total of about 20 seconds making that fact known to it's viewers?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2550155].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

That is the "real story".

1: Another rig explodes in gulf.

2: 13 crew members are not dead - no deaths.

3: Just yesterday Mariner Energy ( owner of the rig ) staged a protest against the Obama administration's offshore drilling policy, saying the White House is "trying to break" the oil and gas industry.

Those are the essential facts as reported in the link I used.

Which one of those facts are incorrect???

I doubt THAT is false. It is innuendo, etc... that I question. What REALLY caused it? Did anything make it more or less likely? And how big WAS the scope of the moratorium?

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Just because the link was to a site that is left-leaning does not mean that the story - as they reported - is false.

I NEVER said it did! And YEAH, I realize people may misinterpret something or exagerate.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Speaking of bias (so-called ) reporting...

- which cable news channel recently made a 1 million dollar contribution to the repub governors association?

- which cable news channel has spent a total of about 20 seconds making that fact known to it's viewers?

You know what? They ALL do that sort of thing! I ran a domain name site at one point, and one day a customer called me BITTER and ANGRY and downright THREATENING! You know why!?!?!? Because he bought a domain for his boss, his boss was a VERY big contributor to the DEMOCRAT party, and the domain, though EXPIRED and DELETED, STILL had his bosses name, etc.... HE wanted me to somehow obfuscate the ownership.

WHY!?!?!? WHAT reason did he give? Because it might show that his boss ALSO did conservative things.

A LOT of people on BOTH sides have done that, and MOST don't spend even ONE second telling the general public.

HECK, one person invited me to a special city council meeting. When I told someone about it, she mentioned he was probably running for something. He is now a US representative. I guess she was right!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2551579].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

From AP:

NEW ORLEANS, La. -

The Coast Guard is saying that a mile-long oil sheen is spreading from the site off an offshore petroleum platform that exploded in the Gulf of Mexico off Louisiana.

The site of the explosion is west of where BP's massive spill occurred.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2549737].message }}

R Hagel

16 years ago

At least this one seems to be in shallow water. If it's spewing, hopefully they can cap it a whole heckuva lot faster.

Becky

p.s. When I saw the headline of the new explosion, the first thing that popped into my mind was, "Uh oh, here we go again..."

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2549763].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by R Hagel

At least this one seems to be in shallow water. If it's spewing, hopefully they can cap it a whole heckuva lot faster.

Becky

p.s. When I saw the headline of the new explosion, the first thing that popped into my mind was, "Uh oh, here we go again..."

Yeah, I meant to mention that it is like 340 feet, or half a mile(depending on story), as opposed to over a mile. So this is the moment of truth, CAN they do it? They will NOT be given the freedom BP was, NO WAY!

uh oh...

Scientists are studying sonar images of a shipwreck loaded with 3.5 million gallons of crude oil in the holds of a tanker that lies 4 miles off the scenic Central California coast like a rusting time bomb.

The American tanker Montebello was torpedoed by a Japanese submarine Dec. 23, 1941, only 16 days after the attack on Pearl Harbor, and sank in 900 feet of water. The Montebello has lain on the bottom ever since.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...#ixzz0yOnThr00

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2549807].message }}

ThomM 16 years ago

Coast Guard reports mile-long oil sheen from burning Gulf platform -
- Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2550025].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

BP Says Limits on Drilling Imperil Oil Spill Payouts:

BP is warning Congress that if lawmakers pass legislation that bars the company from getting new offshore drilling permits, it may not have the money to pay for all the damages caused by its oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

The company says a ban would also imperil the ambitious Gulf Coast restoration efforts that officials want the company to voluntarily support.

Here's the rest of the story...

The New York Times > Log In

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2553648].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

BP Says Limits on Drilling Imperil Oil Spill Payouts:

BP is warning Congress that if lawmakers pass legislation that bars the company from getting new offshore drilling permits, it may not have the money to pay for all the damages caused by its oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

The company says a ban would also imperil the ambitious Gulf Coast restoration efforts that officials want the company to voluntarily support.

Here's the rest of the story...

The New York Times > Log In

You know that's just a log in link, right?
Anyways it sounds like BP is trying the blackmail game.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2553736].message }}

TLTheLiberator 16 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

You know that's just a log in link, right?
Anyways it sounds like BP is trying the blackmail game.

On my computer the link goes to the story.

The New York Times > Log In

TL
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2553903].message }}
- ThomM 16 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator
  
  On my computer the link goes to the story.
  
  The New York Times > Log In
  
  TL
  
  Well on mine it goes to the log in just like your link says.
  Try logging out of the Times and clearing your cookies, you'll end up at the same place as me.
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
  Getting old ain't for sissy's
  As you are I was, as I am you will be
  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2553939].message }}

Gary Pettit

16 years ago

Wow! Feedback or what? This issue is hot, apparently.
Like my brother (a little more "left" than I might admit to being) says:
"We elected Obama because he promised 'transparency,' 'no backroom deals,' 'everything broadcast on CSPAN.' " And if I ever object, he says, "The point is, at least we can now TRUST the government."
Um... Okay.
I'm sure BP is devoted to doing the Right Thing.
Right?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

** CLICK BANNER NOW FOR FREE DOWNLOAD **

USE ON FACEBOOK, TWITTER, PINTEREST, BLOGS, WEBSITES, VIDEOS, INSTAGRAM, ETC.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2554386].message }}

ThomM

16 years ago

Originally Posted by sparkie2260

Wow! Feedback or what? This issue is hot, apparently.
Like my brother (a little more "left" than I might admit to being) says:
"We elected Obama because he promised 'transparency,' 'no backroom deals,' 'everything broadcast on CSPAN.' " And if I ever object, he says, "The point is, at least we can now TRUST the government."
Um... Okay.
I'm sure BP is devoted to doing the Right Thing.
Right?

Of course BP is devoted to doing the right thing, how can anyone even question that.
You do mean the right thing for BP's profits right

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2554477].message }}

Kay King

16 years ago

The resolution being proposed is looking back at problems that were visible all along and ignored - and then designing legislation to close the barn door now.

How about a resolution requiring govt agencies to follow the regulations already in place instead of partying with big companies and giving away waivers?

I think the timing of this proposed resolution has more to do with November than with oil. So far, BP has been paying out a lot of money and has funded the first part of the govt run compensation plan.

I don't like BP but I'm not too thrilled with those who want to whip up public sentiment to look tough on BP before the elections. We'll see a lot more of this kind of stunt in the next month or two, I'm sure.

No problem with a policy of running off any large companies that knowingly put their workers or the environment at risk for the sake of fast profits. But the time for that kind of talk is after the coast is cleaned and people are reimbursed.

No sense in proposing this now as no permits are being issued anyway. As for unemployment filings being low - there are a couple reasons for that.

Many people got temp jobs in the BP cleanup effort - many others in the coastal fishing industry don't qualify. It's often a cash business - deck hands may move from boat to boat and many don't qualify for benefits of any kind. Bloggers examining unemployment number as a way to judge the impact of the spill usually have no idea how the fishing industry really works.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2554662].message }}

seasoned

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Many people got temp jobs in the BP cleanup effort - many others in the coastal fishing industry don't qualify. It's often a cash business - deck hands may move from boat to boat and many don't qualify for benefits of any kind. Bloggers examining unemployment number as a way to judge the impact of the spill usually have no idea how the fishing industry really works.

kay

Just from what I have seen on TV, and the little I know about the society, I imagine it is much like the small farms USED to be. The ocean being the land, the fish being the crop, and the boat basically being the farm house, stable, or whatever.

My point is that the owners basically own the boat and relationships, much like a farmer ones the land and the relationships, and fishermen that help may be neighbors or farm hands, of a sort.

But YEAH, the income can vary greatly. That is one reason people get jobs. They guarantee a certain salary.

This year MIGHT have been the best one ever, or the worst one ever. We will NEVER know, and you don't know how BP can be VERY fair. But they DID damage things FAR into the future. If I were them, I would pay the fishermen at least an average of the past 3 years, and insist they pay the workers they had just before the spill and any new ones hired. A company in business LESS than 3 years might not have been viable, etc....

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2554805].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

The rig that just exploded wasn't even in operation. It had been damaged in the hurricane and was being fixed. Because it wasn't pumping it had a build up of gas and parafins in the pipes and they were cleaning that out -- so they were actually trying to FIX it so they could pump safely.

As far as BP - sure they will blackmail. I've said it once and I'm going to keep saying it. BP is into Crony capitalism with our admin up to their necks and the only thing we can do for the greater good of everyone is boycott them until they die. This company will just keep being the center of this kind of crap until we put them down. They still haven't completely cleaned up and paid for their Alaska mess - how did people get so naive that they thought that suddenly this company was going to do the right thing?

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2554600].message }}

TLTheLiberator

16 years ago

Deepwater Horizon's Blowout Preventer Pulled From Gulf, FBI Present:

Here's the story...

Key oil spill evidence raised to Gulf's surface - Yahoo! News

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2564241].message }}

BP wants $27m lawsuit cap!!!

Trending Topics

Google Adding Ads to AI?

What if we banned Google?

I burned through a $550 budget

Local SEO for Healthcare Clients in 2026 - Looking for Advice & Real World Insights

How to make affiliates sell my product??