36
   

Spill baby spill, slippery politics

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Fri 30 Apr, 2010 09:57 pm
Quote:
BP's 52-page exploration plan for the Deepwater Horizon well, filed with the federal Minerals Management Service, says repeatedly that it was "unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."

And while the company conceded that a spill would impact beaches, wildlife refuges and wilderness areas, it argued that "due to the distance to shore (48 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected."

Robert Wiygul, an Ocean Springs, Miss.-based environmental lawyer and board member for the Gulf Restoration Network, said he doesn't see anything in the document that suggests BP addressed the kind of technology needed to control a spill at that depth of water.

"The point is, if you're going to be drilling in 5,000 feet of water for oil, you should have the ability to control what you're doing," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100501/ap_on_bi_ge/us_louisiana_oil_rig_explosion

And our government should make sure that there is a realistic plan to address the worse case mistake before it allows the scheme to go forward near our shores.

Did our government do that?

**** no.

OOOps


And BP is STILL in charge of getting this under control even though they can't.....WTF is that all about??!! Are we totally outsourcing government responsibility now?
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Fri 30 Apr, 2010 10:09 pm
Quote:
A White House as politically attuned as this one should have been conscious of two obvious historical lessons. One was the Exxon Valdez, where a late and lame response by both industry and the federal government all but destroyed one of the country’s richest fishing grounds and ended up costing billions of dollars. The other was President George W. Bush’s hapless response to Hurricane Katrina.

Now we have another disaster in more or less the same neck of the woods, and it takes the administration more than a week to really get moving.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/opinion/01sat1.html?hp

THese boys have no clue how to prioritize, they would rather rip Arizona for a common sense law that is within their rights to address a federal failure on immigration than deal with what potentially could be a several hundred billion dollar economic damage oil leak caused by BP.

Way to go guys, I am so very impressed with my government NOW.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 01:46 am
Quote:
WASHINGTON " Suddenly, everything changed.
By CALVIN WOODWARD

For days, as an oil spill spread in the Gulf of Mexico, BP assured the government the plume was manageable, not catastrophic. Federal authorities were content to let the company handle the mess while keeping an eye on the operation.

But then government scientists realized the leak was five times larger than they had been led to believe, and days of lulling statistics and reassuring words gave way Thursday to an all-hands-on-deck emergency response. Now questions are sure to be raised about a self-policing system that trusted a commercial operator to take care of its own mishap even as it grew into a menace imperiling Gulf Coast nature and livelihoods from Florida to Texas
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100430/ap_on_bi_ge/us_oil_spill_what_went_wrong

No **** sherlock!
farmerman
 
  6  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 05:33 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Now questions are sure to be raised about a self-policing system that trusted a commercial operator to take care of its own mishap even as it grew into a menace imperiling Gulf Coast nature and livelihoods from Florida to Texas

I get a distinct impression that you are a "afir weather" conservative whose core belief in deregulation is a convenient shoutout when things arent going badly. Now, after BP has been shown to not know what theyre even doing, you realize that this is something that the Fed govt is good at and has the resources to commit.

It was the USGS engineers and The guys from Homeland Security who first blew the whistle to question whether BP's estimate of 1000b/d was an accurate measure.
When it was shown to be that BP was all wet, the govt took over. but still let BP try to stem flows at the well head.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 11:02 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
It was the USGS engineers and The guys from Homeland Security who first blew the whistle to question whether BP's estimate of 1000b/d was an accurate measure.
When it was shown to be that BP was all wet, the govt took over. but still let BP try to stem flows at the well head.
I don't get it...sometimes when someone starts a fire we send them the bill but it is the agents of the collective (fire department) who out out the fire. Why are we letting the corporations deal with this when they answer to themselves? Major threats to the citizens must be addressed by agents of the collective, by people who answer to the citizens. I am all for sending BP the bills, and they need to help fix what they did, but they should not be in charge.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 11:46 am
Bill McKibben of 350.org was the subject of a long interview that I listened in the car (shame on me for my wanderlust) on NPR last night. His view on the state of the planet and this disaster should be thrown into the mix.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 06:20 pm
@rosborne979,
Article from the Guardian (UK):

Quote:
Oil spill is BP's wake-up call
guardian.co.uk, Friday 30 April 2010 15.03 BST

As more oil drifts towards the Mississippi delta, we must hope that BP questions its future dependence on fossil fuels

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2010/4/30/1272612958813/Deepwater-oil-spill-006.jpg
Oil from the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion has reached the US coast. Photograph: Liz Condo/AP

Quote:


... As officials in Louisiana begin to face the reality of the spill that has now reached their fragile coastline, many will be asking if BP did everything in its power to prevent this kind of accident. Reports this week suggest that last year a senior BP executive lobbied against mandatory safety codes for offshore drilling, arguing that the regulation would be too onerous and would slow down the construction of new rigs. Industry pressure had the desired effect, but it will be up to accident investigators to decide if a code could have helped avoid the initial explosion last week.

What BP will never admit, among their glossy corporate brochures and extensive environmental assessments, is that its entire business model is predicated on an ever increasing demand for oil, decades into the future. These growth predictions rely on a world in which there is no collective action to tackle global emissions, no concerted effort to transfer clean technology to the developing world, and almost no chance of maintaining anything like a stable climate.

As more oil drifts towards the critical wetlands of the Mississippi delta, we must hope that the more thoughtful members of BP's board will now feel obliged to question the wisdom of a strategy that is, at its core, unchanged since the opening decades of the 20th century.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/30/oil-spill-bp
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 07:10 pm
@msolga,
msolga wrote:
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2010/4/30/1272612958813/Deepwater-oil-spill-006.jpg

Is that little red cord they've got strong out across the sand supposed to stop the oil from getting onto shore? I hope someone's got a better plan in mind than that, because something tells me that isn't going to cut it.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 08:33 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
Is that little red cord they've got strong out across the sand supposed to stop the oil from getting onto shore? I hope someone's got a better plan in mind than that, because something tells me that isn't going to cut it.


They're apparently called "floating containment booms" (described as "the last line of defense"), Rosborne. Those & other not-too-adequate containment measures were featured in this short video I posted earlier. (once again, pardon the advertisement at the start.)

http://media.theage.com.au/world/world-news/louisiana-wetlands-under-threat-from-oil-spill-1399328.html?from=newsbox
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 08:47 pm
Another video, posted this morning, from the same source:

Officials pressure BP on oil spill cleanup (01:38)
Federal officials and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal say they're worried that BP isn't doing enough to stop the leak.

http://media.theage.com.au/world/world-news/officials-pressure-bp-on-oil-spill-cleanup-1400513.html?from=newsbox
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  2  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 09:07 pm
What I find interesting is that no evangelist preaches that God is punishing mankind for using oil. That would seem like a consistent thing for many Christian fundamentalists.
hamburgboy
 
  4  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 07:34 pm
@plainoldme,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_drilling_rig_explosion#Oil_spill

Quote:
The BP well did not have any remote-control or acoustically-activated shut-off switch for use in case of an emergency such as the rig sinking. The countries of Norway and Brazil require them on all offshore rigs, but oil companies persuaded U.S. regulators that such backup devices were unnecessary


those socialist countries don't even give the oil companies a fair chance to let a blowout rumble on for a while . they make it so difficult for big oil to make a buck - all these safety regulations - who needs them - spill baby spill !
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 07:44 pm
@hamburgboy,
it strikes me as interesting that we don't have any clue what the failure is. Gotta think that BP and the feds know, but are not talking because it is privileged information. Hope I am wrong but stonewalling the public would be a huge problem for both the administration and BP. BP has liability problems that they want to protect themselves from, but I don't care. We should know why this happened to us, who did it.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 10:26 pm
Meanwhile, back at the white house:

Obama Pledges 'Relentless' Oil Spill Cleanup, Defends Federal Response

He promises relentless support in the clean-up effort (new , low paying jobs for illegal aliens)
while defending his lack of response to the crisis (a total lack of experience). Obama is lame.

.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 10:50 pm
@H2O MAN,
somebody is out there chirping like a Pollyanna that we don't need to worry, because they have oil eating bacteria and dispersant's, no problem. Except that some experts think that the dispersant's are as toxic to the ocean as the oil is, and this particular oil is the worst kind to try to use the bacteria on.

Anything to keep the panic down, truth is optional.

The current idea is to take the faulty blow out valve off and try to put a new one on. This is how desperate they are, because the current chunk of metal is limiting the flow. If they take it off and cant get the new one on because the pressure is too high we are so totally fucked.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 3 May, 2010 11:38 am
@hawkeye10,
Bacterial cultures that eat up oil need to work from the lowest concentrations out to the higher. Severl strainf of boutique bugs dont have the ability to handle high concentrations of benzen so by seeding the spill areas they can watch to see whether the bugs "evolve a little". Still not the most efficient way to do a cleanup of this size.

I cannot, for the lifde o0f me, understqand why they would use dispersants AND oil booms. Its like putting a humidifier and a dehumidifier in the same room and let em fight it out.
I heard on a DC station (Diane Rheims Show ) coming on 70 this AM, there were several recognized scientists associated with spill cleanup reserch and applied engineering companies. They all agreed that dispersants and booms is a "lose /lose" situtaion.


Im watching carefully as one of the subs that was actually doing the drilling, was a company I had some past association with.
I once met "Sir Whatsizface", the past CEO of BP when I was doing some work overseas. HE was a pompous douche bag who thought that his English technology was superior. It wasnt, it was dated and valueless crap . All the good ENglish geologists moved to Canada or the US.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 May, 2010 11:41 am
@hamburgboy,
Quote:
The BP well did not have any remote-control or acoustically-activated shut-off switch for use in case of an emergency such as the rig sinking.
The problem with the BOP valves, wasnt that you could activate them acoustically from sensors, they couldnt get the damn valves to work AT ALL, it appears.
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 May, 2010 12:22 pm
Whether the oil comes ashore or not, it seems to me like this could be devastating to any of the critters that have to surface to breath. Sea Turtles in particular may not be fast enough, or smart enough to swim away from the slick. I don't know if there are any dolphins or whales in the gulf, but they would face a similar problem, although they could probably out-swim the slick assuming they pick the right direction to travel in.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Mon 3 May, 2010 12:24 pm
@rosborne979,
First thing I saw on the noon news today was turtles getting scooped into bags, dead.
0 Replies
 
hamburgboy
 
  2  
Reply Mon 3 May, 2010 12:28 pm
@farmerman,
from ABC NEWS

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/bp-official-open-heart-surgery-at-5000-feet-believes-cause-is-failed-equipment.html

Quote:
BP America Chairman and President Lamar McKay told me efforts to trigger the blowout preventer to stop the flow of oil from the sea floor are like performing “open heart surgery at 5,000 feet in the dark with robot-controlled submarines.” During my exclusive “This Week” interview, McKay said he believes the cause of the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that led the loss of 11 lives and to its eventual sinking was “a failed piece of equipment”. McKay added, “We don't know why it failed yet in this contracted rig.”

McKay said BP, oil industry and government partners are working on four fronts to manage the massive spill: 1) stopping the leak at the source, 2) working on a containment system to collect the oil below the surface and channel the flow through a pipe, 3) fighting to keep oil from washing up on shore and 4) dealing with the clean-up of any oil on and off shore.

A containment dome, McKay said, has been fabricated and is in the final engineering phase. McKay said he expects the dome to be deployed in 6-8 days.

Estimates of how much oil is emanating from the sea floor are “very difficult,” McKay said, “because you can’t measure [it] in any way accurately.” He added that “there is a large uncertainty range” around the estimate of 5,000 barrels per day that is said to be flowing from the well.


mr. mckay sure is a fast lerner . he knew little or nothing of the possible consequences of a BLOW , but now seems to know everything .

( btw the coastguard in-charge person said the the acoustical valve would have cost about $ 500,000 - and " likely " prevented the blowout from overwhelming the shutoff valve . seems that the oil companies are doing some gambling here .
norway and brazil seem not to favour gambling .)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2014 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 10/20/2014 at 04:48:44