|
Subject: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: Bobert Date: 27 Apr 10 - 08:10 AM Well, well, well... Wonder what Ms. Sarah is sayin' now??? (Of course, the usual cast of partisan Repubs will put this all on Obama...) B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: kendall Date: 27 Apr 10 - 08:42 AM Of course they will. He has this history thing. Other disasters such as the Plague,the Johns town flood,Hiroshima,The Smoot/ Hawley tariff act. He's bad news alright. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: Riginslinger Date: 27 Apr 10 - 11:01 AM One thing about it, it's a terrible development. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: Bill D Date: 27 Apr 10 - 11:59 AM Anyone care to get specific on this? Maybe a link? I see nothing new on any of MY usual news links. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: Riginslinger Date: 27 Apr 10 - 12:06 PM http://chattahbox.com/us/2010/04/27/louisiana-oil-spill-now-the-size-of-rhode-island-and-headed-for-shore/ best I could do |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: Bill D Date: 27 Apr 10 - 12:29 PM Well, that is nasty and terrible...but what does it have to do with Palin? Is she making political statements about it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: Riginslinger Date: 27 Apr 10 - 12:39 PM She championed off-shore oil drilling. Of course, so did Obama and a number of other folks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: Bobert Date: 27 Apr 10 - 12:44 PM She went beyond just championing... She urned it into her campaign slogan... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: gnu Date: 27 Apr 10 - 02:23 PM The Montreal Gazette says drilling a relief well could take months and the "spill" is at a rate of 1000 bbl per day. Oh... my... goodnees. Truly sad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... From: Bill D Date: 27 Apr 10 - 02:35 PM I see..... I was aware of the serious oil rig explosion and spill, and I do not favor extended off-shore drilling, but as much as I dislike Sarah and her skewed logic and sound bytes, I have to say that this disaster has only limited bearing on her policies. In the Gulf, and in the North Sea...etc., much oil HAS been acquired from these platforms. Folks are taking a calculated risk, which has been barely worth the problems and cost. It is no as if Sarah was out there alone advocating obviously stupid ideas....she is just one voice among many hoping that speculative drilling will get us a few months more supply. It is time to extract what oil has already been located, and spend all that money on alternative energy....Sarah doesn't 'get' it, but she doesn't deserve special notice for that. *sigh*...I suspect Obama is playing a VERY complex practical/political game in allow some 'limited' exploration. I wish I knew the details so I could go yell at him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Ebbie Date: 27 Apr 10 - 05:42 PM And, of course, 'Spill, baby, etc is a takeoff on Palin's 'Drill, baby, Drill' which was/is her mantra. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 27 Apr 10 - 09:41 PM Well, gol danged... I knew that Eb would get it!!! Sheeesh... The rest of ya'll half-heimerz folks I worry about!!! I mean, ain't too long a drive from "Drill, Baby, Drill" to "Spill, Baby, Spill"... Nevermind... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bill D Date: 27 Apr 10 - 10:12 PM Fortunately, I'm a past master at that 'neverminding' stuff. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 27 Apr 10 - 10:19 PM Fortunately, Obama just endorsed off-shore drilling, so he can't stand back and just point fingers. He'll really have to do something. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 27 Apr 10 - 10:33 PM Go back and reread the first post, Rigs... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 27 Apr 10 - 10:57 PM Yeah, well, maybe it works for Republicans, but it ain't gunna work for me. He's as quilty as she is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 27 Apr 10 - 11:11 PM He's a patchwork, all right. I think "drill baby drill" was referring specifically to ANWR. But clearly the current technology for offshore drilling is sadly lacking in emergency recovery ability. We're making holes in the ocean floor over pressurized oil deposits but have no way of capping them if our slender pipes to the surface should come loose. Otnay Ootay Ightbray. BTW I started a thread with this title on another forum before I saw yours -- does this mean we're great minds? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Donuel Date: 28 Apr 10 - 09:11 AM Palin be damned, she is not relevent. The spill off Louisiana will become the world's largest at the current rate. Two sets of figures are still floating around. Politicians and oil execs say 1000 gallons a day and the Coast Guard says 42,000 gallons a day. In 3 months that is over 3 million gallons. They are pouring detergent over the pill now. Thats not the tide, THats Tide! Soon they will set the spill on fire. Google the spill and view it from orbit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 28 Apr 10 - 12:47 PM No, Rigs... He is not *as guity*... He didn't build his entire campaign around "Drill, Baby, drill"... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bill D Date: 28 Apr 10 - 01:27 PM I, for one, hopes he backs off that 'limited drilling' idea now that we see some of the obvious dangers. You realize they need to drill ANOTHER hole beside this one to relieve the pressure? That will take 3 weeks if nothing goes wrong, goes wrong,goes wrong,goes wrong,... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: gnu Date: 29 Apr 10 - 09:24 AM Oh my... NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (AFP) - A giant oil slick threatened Thursday to pollute the fragile wetlands of Louisiana, as officials warned that toxic crude was pouring from a ruptured well into the Gulf of Mexico five times faster than previously estimated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 29 Apr 10 - 10:28 AM Has anyone heard what caused the explosion in the first place? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: michaelr Date: 29 Apr 10 - 03:27 PM I just read that Palin will host a nature show on the Discovery channel... That's like having Dr Mengele host a medical program. Bizarre! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Apr 10 - 03:44 PM Another incorrect set of statements from Donuel "Two sets of figures are still floating around. Two sets of figures are still floating around. Politicians and oil execs say 1000 gallons a day and the Coast Guard says 42,000 gallons a day. The FIRST set of COAST GUARD numbers were 1000 BARRELS per day. The NEW set, based of further observations BY THE COAST GUARD is 5000 BARRELS per day. BOTH sets of figures comne from the Coast Guard. So, If Bush is to blame for Katrina, Obama is to blame for this spill. Otherwise, it is not Obama's "fault". NOR is it Palin's, or the Republicans, or Pelosi's, or Reid's... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Apr 10 - 04:22 PM more here "NEW ORLEANS — Government officials said late Wednesday night that oil might be leaking from a well in the Gulf of Mexico at a rate five times that suggested by initial estimates. In a hastily called news conference, Rear Adm. Mary E. Landry of the Coast Guard said a scientist from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration had concluded that oil is leaking at the rate of 5,000 barrels a day, not 1,000 as had been estimated. While emphasizing that the estimates are rough given that the leak is at 5,000 feet below the surface, Admiral Landry said the new estimate came from observations made in flights over the slick, studying the trajectory of the spill and other variables. An explosion and fire on a drilling rig on April 20 left 11 workers missing and presumed dead. The rig sank two days later about 50 miles off the Louisiana coast. Doug Suttles, chief operating officer for exploration and production for BP, said a new leak had been discovered as well. Officials had previously found two leaks in the riser, the 5,000-foot-long pipe that connected the rig to the wellhead and is now detached and snaking along the sea floor. One leak was at the end of the riser and the other at a kink closer to its source, the wellhead. But Mr. Suttles said a third leak had been discovered Wednesday afternoon even closer to the source. "I'm very, very confident this leak is new," he said. He also said the discovery of the new leak had not led them to believe that the total flow from the well was different than it was before the leak was found. The new, far larger estimate of the leakage rate, he said, was within a range of estimates given the inexact science of determining the rate of a leak so far below the ocean's surface. "The leaks on the sea floor are being visually gauged from the video feed" from the remote vehicles that have been surveying the riser, said Doug Helton, a fisheries biologist who coordinates oil spill responses for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in an e-mail message Wednesday night. "That takes a practiced eye. Like being able to look at a garden hose and judge how many gallons a minute are being discharged. The surface approach is to measure the area of the slick, the percent cover, and then estimate the thickness based on some rough color codes." Admiral Landry said President Obama had been notified. She also opened up the possibility that if the government determines that BP, which is responsible for the cleanup, cannot handle the spill with the resources available in the private sector, that Defense Department could become involved to contribute technology. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: gnu Date: 29 Apr 10 - 04:36 PM "So, If Bush is to blame for Katrina, Obama is to blame for this spill." How odd. Bush wasn't to blame. And I won't address the pathetic response by Bush... the Canuck Navy and a Canuck rescue team from BC beat Bush to the site. The Canuck navy had over a million MRE and were NOT ALLOWED to distribute them due to the possibilty of Mad Stupid Fuck Disease. Oh, nevermind... it still tears me up. All of the past politicians were aware that the US Army Corps of Engineers could have raised the level of protection but the politicians are the ones who write the cheques... ALL of the past politicians had the pen... none of them wrote the cheques. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Apr 10 - 05:11 PM Gnu, Learn to read entire posts. "So, If Bush is to blame for Katrina, Obama is to blame for this spill. Otherwise, it is not Obama's "fault". NOR is it Palin's, or the Republicans, or Pelosi's, or Reid's... " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: gnu Date: 29 Apr 10 - 05:39 PM My bad. Messed up. Sorry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 29 Apr 10 - 09:14 PM Yeah, Bush was blamed for huffing and puffing after 9/11 how his team was ready to respond to the next disaster... He even touted his National Response Plan (see KatrinaGate thread) as the Bush team's readiness plan... Katrina called Bush's bluff... According to the evening news the leakage is more like 4000-5000 gallons a day and the spill is ony 3 miles off the Lousiana coast line... BP says it will drill a second well in attempts to shut off the current well... That could take months according to the new this evening... Tjis is a terrible disaster... Is it really worth the 6 days of supply that we get from it??? I mean, if everyone would just cut out one trip a week that would go a long way toward not hagving to take these chances... How much is this going to cost US in terms of lost revenues from the fishermen not being able to fish??? I mean, I don't think we've begun to see just what effects this is going to have on US overall... One thing fir sure is that if you like shrimp, the price is going to go up real fast so go out and stock up... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 29 Apr 10 - 09:36 PM I'll bet Obama's sorry he signed on for this... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,TIA Date: 29 Apr 10 - 10:58 PM Oh, I must have been time travelling. I forgot that oil drilling in the gulf of mexico started under the obama administration. More stupid asshat twisting above. nobody said that katrina was bush's FAULT (learned the caps from bruce btw). but his (bush's) sorry-ass response WAS his fault. is obama's response sorry-ass? now THAT is the question. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:06 AM Some people have no vision! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:12 AM Some people have no brain. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 30 Apr 10 - 07:48 AM Well, seems as if the oil has now reached the Mississippi and Lousinana coats... This is going to make the Valdez look like a walk in the park... I mean, no end in sight to capping the well... I'm a tad disappointed that the Obama administartion has bought the crap that BP's CEO has telling folks on the TV news about severity of this disaster... I'm not sure that had the feds jumped on this a little earlier that it would have made any difference but I would like to have seen a little more effort on the administration's part... The problem is that with the anti-government culture that the Tea Party and Repubs have nurtured it's hard for any president to be too proactive on any front... That's not making excuses but just observations... One thing that I believe the nation will clearly understand from this disaster as it continues to wreck havockl on the Gulf Coast is that "Drill, Baby, Drill" as an answer to teh country's energy needs is a purdy stupid and ill-thought-out answer... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: VirginiaTam Date: 30 Apr 10 - 08:35 AM I am getting flashbacks of Pelican Brief, now. Wonder if the oil reserves are nearing end and owners are thinking to buy up and then develop the ruined nature preserve. conspiracy theorist in da house |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 30 Apr 10 - 08:45 AM "He didn't build his entire campaign around "Drill, Baby, drill"... " No he didn't ... his campaign was on 'change' this current eco disaster spill is just prove that it is the "same old, same old" ... nothing has changed. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 30 Apr 10 - 08:53 AM .. what get's me about this thread is everyone pointing fingers at Palin, she's out of the game plan .... while Obama endorsed off shore drilling, he holds the current seat of power. now continue with the thread kids ... keep pointing fingers at Palin biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: gnu Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:56 PM It's all about risk. Now, what is the oil company gonna do to mitigate, resolve and reverse the damage? If they cannot clean up the mess, will that impact the policies? Quite a poser, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:51 PM Number6: No he didn't ... his campaign was on 'change' this current eco disaster spill is just prove that it is the "same old, same old" ... nothing has changed. Huh? Obama didn't cause the oil spill. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 30 Apr 10 - 07:05 PM mousethief ... never said he did cause the oil spill, and as far as I know Palin didn't cause it either. biLL ;) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: DougR Date: 30 Apr 10 - 07:23 PM No, Bobert, it's Bush's fault. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Stilly River Sage Date: 30 Apr 10 - 07:46 PM Oil Spill Silences Once-Raucious 'Drill, Baby, Drill' Camp "Drill, baby, drill" is now, "Hush, baby, hush." The Republican battle cry that crystallized the growing popularity of offshore drilling has dropped from view since the Deepwater Horizon rig sank last week and the well it drilled started shooting crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico. As Democratic opponents of the oil industry stepped up their attacks and demands for a sharp turn away from drilling, Republican leaders in Congress have slipped out of rapid-response mode and are generally holding their tongues. Ha! Follow the link to read the rest at the New York Times. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 30 Apr 10 - 08:06 PM Thank you, SRS... That was my original intent here in starting this thread... Here we had all these eager little Tea Baggers attending the Palin rallies screaming "Drill, Baby, Drill" as if it was the Holy Grail/paneca for all that ails America??? I mean, how friggin' stupid... No, Obama didn't run on drilling and has only somewhat reluctantly offered it as a possibility to move the Repubs toward a rwal energy policy... But Obama knows very well that all of the off shore oil will only meet about 2% of the demand... Yet, because we have all these Tea Baggers screaming "Drill, Baby, Drill" and we have the Dick Cheney's of the world screaming the same thing (but for different reasons), hey, part of what Obama promised to do in tamping down the screamers and raw partisanship he has found himself in a bad way... Best of intentions... Lousy timing... Face it, Obama oughtta just tell the right wing to go fuck themsleves and quit trying to be a uniter prersident... Uniter presidents are no longer possible... The right wing media giants, including Rupert Mrurdock, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh are going to see to it that there will be no uniter presdients... So now Obama is stuck... But at least his administartion has been on top of the spill since Day One but now, I guess, the Tea Baggers will blame Obama for the oil spill??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 30 Apr 10 - 08:57 PM so who gives a rat's ass if right wing Tea baggers are now silent. The left wing tree huggers are royally pissed off at the current administration for endorsing the off shore drilling and rightfully so ... even if Obama "reluctantly offered it as a possibility to move the Repubs toward a rwal energy policy" ... that doesn't make him 'not guilty' .. as he went ahead and endorsed it .... and it looks like he isn't going to back off. off shore drilling to continue biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 30 Apr 10 - 09:37 PM Agreed, he is guilty... That is not the issue here... What is the issue is that so much of the '08 campaign by the McCain/Palin side was on just this issue... I mean, take away Joe the Plumber, and this was purdy much the McCain/Palin strategy... Where are the Tea Baggers now who were calling for Obama to be killed with one breath while screaming "Drill, Baby, Drill" with the next... That is the issue... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 30 Apr 10 - 09:40 PM Oops, baby, oops. Obama should use this to do a volte face on drilling. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 30 Apr 10 - 10:06 PM Ok ... get your point but why waste time, energy, and scoffs at Palin ... she is a non player ... a has been. the Tea baggers and Palin don't hold the seat of power ... they are not the issue. why not direct your energy, frustration in the democratic process and and target Obama and the current administration ... they promised change ... and that meant change from the old guard in direction of energy policies, change in direction concerning the environment. What's happened ... nothing really. It's giving in to the old oil corporations .. so much so they gamble on the fragile ecosystems ... all in the name of corporate $money$ that's the issue same old, same old ... everyone in washington is shouting "$drill$, baby $drill$" ... even as the at oil spill sludge moves closer and closer to shore. that's the issue biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 30 Apr 10 - 11:11 PM Two Transocean Drilling Rigs (one in place and ready to start) will be used to control the 'leak'- which is a giant prospect. The leases were obtained some time ago and discovery was announced in September, so this play has been underway for about a year, in U. S. controlled territory! (See NY Times announcement of the discovery, Sept. 3, 2009, "BP finds giant oil field ....") This was back in Bush time; Obama's go-ahead was for the east coast-Florida area. (I want to find out more about these leases- they seemingly were granted well before most of us knew about it- ) There is sufficient discovered reserve, without the Gulf-Atlantic U. S. area, to last 30-50 years; in other words until alternate energy sources can be developed, and hydrocarbons reserved for the plastics industries. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 30 Apr 10 - 11:52 PM Learning a bit more. The leases were let in 1999 or slightly earlier. BP is producing 400,000 bbl/day from their leases in the Gulf. The Kaskida field has approx. 3 billion bbl reserve; the Tiber discovery is in a field thought to be much larger by some Gulf oil men. The Thunder Horse field (1999) was the first in the area by British Petroleum, the platform is producing 300,000 bbl/day, but over that ten-year period, there have been many engineering problems. The Gulf of Mexico accounts for one fourth of U. S. oil production. Working mostly in Canada, and looking at the Alberta-Saskatchewan oil sands which alone can supply North American needs for 50 years, I haven't paid much attention to what has been going on in the offshore. I think Canada made a mistake letting China buy into the oil sands. Drilling a 35,000 foot hole (sealevel to base) is difficult on land, let alone offshore where part of the pipe is in storm-tossed waters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 01 May 10 - 12:09 AM My son spent well of the year 2007 down in the gulf off of Louisiana working as a commercial diver. Mainly fixing submerged pipelines. The quality of safety standards were so low he would never work down there again even for the high amount of $dollars$ he was paid. He found it appalling. He's not surprised about this latest tragic incident. These days he would rather dive for sea urchins for university research, find the odd propeller, or untangle fishermen's nets here in the Bay of Fundy for much, much less pay. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Sorcha Date: 01 May 10 - 12:37 AM Can I just insert 'alternate energy' here? REDESIGN one heck of a lot of things to it. Solar, wind, water.....STOP being so damn dependant on carbon sources!!! It can't be that difficult....can it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 01 May 10 - 12:44 AM It can and is. Building the infrastructure for wind, solar, tide, etc. power production is a massive x massive x massive undertaking. Let alone the power grid able to carry that much more energy. But electric energy for portable devices (cars, planes, trains, boats, Rush Limbaugh's mouth) is no small problem. Current battery technology is woefully insufficient. Nothing carries as much energy in as small a space as coal or petroleum-based fuels. And battery production at this point is very dirty. What is needed is a paradigm shift in energy storage. None seems on the horizon. Our great-grandchildren, after we run out of petroleum, will marvel at pictures of airplanes and wonder how they ever were able to fly through the sky, and not believe it really happened. Like people are starting to doubt the moon landing. Only with better cause. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Sorcha Date: 01 May 10 - 01:10 AM Alex, you are assuming we even HAVE great grandchildren. (smile....) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 01 May 10 - 01:30 AM Nothing carries as much energy in as small a space as coal or petroleum-based fuels. Well, and plutonium. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 01 May 10 - 07:14 AM No, Plain and McCain don't hold the seat of power and looking at what's going on in the Gulf, that a good thing... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 01 May 10 - 10:35 AM well Bobert since they aren't in power I guess we can sit back and relax 'cause everything is ok in the Gulf right now. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Charley Noble Date: 01 May 10 - 10:46 AM Certainly looks like a major environmental mess to me. I remember quite well the BP long term ad campaign which touted the safely of their deep-sea drilling technology, their redundant back-up systems that could safely deal with any imaginable emergency. The ad campaign made a significant impression on the general public and on public policy including the Obama Administration. All the back-up systems have failed in this instance, the remote underseas cut-off valves and all the rest. And we're left with a continuing environmental and economic disaster of unprecedented dimensions. Palin is not the issue here but it would be gracious if she expressed some concern. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 01 May 10 - 10:53 AM They are still trying to debug their emergency shot-off system which is supposed to be able to clamp down in several different ways, and which failed massively after the accident. Presumably it was structurally damaged. They have RC subs dow there trying to skunk it into operation since it would be the must direct way of shutting off the flow. No easy task. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 01 May 10 - 11:15 AM The news media is calling it Obama's Katrina. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: open mike Date: 01 May 10 - 11:26 AM i wish they could find a way to capture the oil somehow and separate if from sea water and refine it. burning it will cause other disasters meanwhile,not seeing this thread i started another when i heard that: Even as the oil slick from the ruined Deepwater Horizon creeps onto the Lousiana shoreline, Reuters is reporting that another offshore drilling rig has overturned- this time among the inland waters near Morgan City, LA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 May 10 - 02:05 PM Last night a professor from Rice University made some damning accusations concerning the spill, British Petroleum and the U. S. regulatory mechanisms, and why the best in well control equipment (blowout preventers, etc. were not on the platform. (Aired on CNN last night but not repeated in later telecasts). The offshore wells in Norway and Brazilian waters have the 'state-of-the-art equipment. The professor said the oil companies interested in Gulf offshore prospects said that the preventer equipment was too expensive and not necessary. The government regulators went along with their opinion. Public safety and the public's livehood should be the primary concern of government regulators- whether the products are oil and other natural resources, food products or drugs prescribed for ills. Safety should not be a matter of politics left or right- This should be a primary concern of all governments and their regulatory divisions. When the well failed and the platform caught fire, it was already too late to apply immediate measures; all corrective action would depend on getting the proper equipment and personnel to the site- this would take a few days and an additional drilling rig is still on the way. The Professor from Rice also faulted British Petroleum's record, citing another major spill, the Texas deadly refinery fire, several violations of safety regulations and the current disaster, which could make the Valdez spill look like an oil stain on the garage floor. BP's assets in the United States should be frozen- the possible disaster could put many thousands out of work for several years. And Sorcha, it will take up to 50 years to make alternative energy sources an important part of energy generation. Mousethief has judged it correctly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 01 May 10 - 02:30 PM The blowout preventers --if we are talking about the same things--were on the seafloor around the well casing. They failed to actuate, even when triggered by the redundant backup switching system. Yet they had been tested only ten days previously. This indicated the accident (whatever it was) damaged them so they couldn't operate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 01 May 10 - 03:26 PM Or they were sabotaged. Remeber, this whole thing started with an explosion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: pdq Date: 01 May 10 - 04:14 PM Nah, Rigs...you aren't suggesting that this oil rig disaster was "accidentally on purpose" do you? Another one in the same are goes over today. Nah, just a "quinky dinky". Must be. Like that South Korean ship that sank a week or so back, killing a hundred people or more. Must have been pilot error or simpt'n. That talk about a torpedo must be scare tactics. Problem is, you prob'ly listen to Fox News. That's yer probl'm. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 May 10 - 04:42 PM Amos, my ignorance of the equipment is showing. The equipment described by the Rice professor is not the type of blowout preventer used in the Gulf. I have been trying to find his comments but no luck so far. The shear ram failed to sever the pipe to control the flow. The head of the Well Control School in Houston said the shear ram is the last resort. If it had worked to prevent the pressure surge, "they wouldn't have lost all those people and the rig." "If the blowout preventer fails to control the pressure shooting up from the well, the hydraulically powered shear ram is supposed to sever the pipe and close it off to protect the rig and work crews from the flow of explosive oil and gas, Bohuslavicky said." The slick is twice the size of Maryland. A professor of Mechanical Engineering at Rice said the pressure surge that triggered the fire and sinking of the rig platform may have damaged the valves near the sea floor so that they can't be completely shut. Still looking for the comments about better equipment used off Norway and Brazil. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: gnu Date: 01 May 10 - 04:56 PM But, shouldn`t the shear ram be held back by the primary and emergency power supply on a delayed basis, which would mean that it should work after both power supplies were cut... unless the structural failure... nevermind... we shall see, hopefully. Oh, BTW, I am assuming that the shear ram was a double circuit failure device, also being executable by an open circuit override. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 May 10 - 05:04 PM The find at the Macondo oil well is est. at 100 million bbls. The well was spudded Oct. 2009. The original plan called for the well to be spudded in April 2009. "Mar. 2009- BP submitted an Initial Exploration Plan to MMS for its Macondo prospect in the GOM to drill and temporarily abandon two exploration wells (A & B). The company plans to use a semisubmersible, possibly Transocean's Marianas, to spud the wells in April 2009." "....the prospect, which was acquired at the MMS Lease Sale # 206 in March 2008." From "SUBSEAIQ, Offshore Field Development. www.subseaalq.com Anadarko owns a 25% share of the well, another company owns 10%; BP at 65%; BP is operator. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 May 10 - 05:14 PM It didn't work, gnu. On paper it should do as you suggest, but it failed. Looks like it won't be fully controlled until a new rig drills an offset. Hence the three month estimate. Depth 18000 feet and cased and cemented (fully?) when the blowout occurred, the subsequent fire finished the damage and sunk the rig. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 May 10 - 05:26 PM The blowout in the Pemex well. "The blowout preventers were closed on the pipe but could not cut the thicker drill collars, allowing oil and gas to flow to the surface, where it ignited and engulfed the Sedco rig in flames. The rig collapsed and sank onto the wellhead area on the seabed, littering the seabed with large debris such as the rig's derrick and 3000m of pipe." ....... "Two relief wells were drilled to relieve pressure and the well was eventually killed nine months later." This was the biggest spill so far, .... 3.5 million bbls oil released. Extensive damage on the Texas coast. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Joe Offer Date: 01 May 10 - 06:18 PM Apparently, the "Spill, Baby, Spill" phrase has caught on - (click). Please, somebody tell me that Bobert isn't the one who invented the phrase.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 01 May 10 - 07:04 PM Sorry, Joe, he did. It may hav been also coined by others, though. As for remedies, what happens if they jam an explosive down into the sea floor and light it off? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: open mike Date: 01 May 10 - 07:48 PM what does it mean to "spud" a well? is this like stiking a potatoe over the pipe to stop it? like you do to an exhaust pipe... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 01 May 10 - 07:54 PM Well, Joe, I hate to say it but while "Spill, Baby, Spill" might have been in someone elses head at the same time it was in my head before I even knew that anyone else had come up with it... Might of fact, I didn't realize that anyone, other than me, had come up with it until reading yer post... But it ain't rocket surgery... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 01 May 10 - 08:08 PM Spudding is initiating drilling operations, like the first cut of the peeler into a dirty brown Idaho |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 May 10 - 09:26 PM Interestng map from U. S. Department of the Interior, MMS (Minerals Managamant Service) showing Gulf of Mexico Lease Map. All of these offshore lease and drilling sites were authorized before the recent call to 'drill, baby, drill'. Green = active lease. http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/lsesale/mau_gom_pa.pdf ["Drill, baby, drill," was said by Michael Steele during the 2008 Republican National Convention in Minnesota (of course it follows from "Burn, baby, burn"). Palin was quoting him.] |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 01 May 10 - 10:00 PM Amos, Amos, Amos.... Are you trying to say that we oughtta be pluggin' that well with a tater??? Was that Plan B for PB??? Well, sheet fire, I think it is brillent... I mean. like Menza stuff... Why didn't I think of it??? But nevermind all that stuff... According to Q this entire thing is all on Obama... Maybe they oughtta have him suit up and do the dive with the tater??? BTW, don't taters float??? I was kinda thinkin' somethin' that don't float... Remember back in the 60's an' folks would put cow manure in their radiators to stop leaks??? Maybe whale manure into the well??? I donno... I ain't really a manureologist... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 May 10 - 10:32 PM Found a picture of Bobert the other day. Drool, baby, drool! Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 01 May 10 - 11:30 PM That ain't me... Ya' got the wrong guy... I don't know who he is but he's creepy... The Ms. Sarah pic on that page is hot, however, dontcha'll think??? I mean, she is a hottie... Dumb as a box of creek rocks but hot... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 01 May 10 - 11:39 PM From a town hall meeting in South carolina on April 2nd ... the following is Obama's response when challenged that his "decision to allow offshore drilling could have the effect of chilling investment into alternate sources of energy." While recognizing that "energy efficiency and renewable, clean energy" is his "biggest priority," "I don't agree with the notion that we shouldn't do anything. It turns out, by the way, that oil rigs today generally don't cause spills. They are technologically very advanced. Even during Katrina, the spills didn't come from the oil rigs, they came from the refineries onshore." BTW .... Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Caused 124 Offshore Spills For A Total Of 743,700 Gallons. Clean energy should be the biggest priority. Democrats or Republicans ... nothing has changed ... same old bar stool, same old beer, same old song playing in the juke box ... "drill, baby drill" biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 01 May 10 - 11:49 PM oil rigs don't cause spills well ... generally they don't cause spills. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 01 May 10 - 11:53 PM So spills cause Oil Rigs... O K . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 02 May 10 - 10:29 AM The problem here with folks trying to put Katrina around Obama's neck is that it isn't grounded in reality but rather partisn mythology... George Bush had to be forced to fly over New Orleans (3 days afterwards) before he understood that it really happened... That's a bad thing when the president thinks that what he is watching on TV and folks are telling him is like a fictional movie... Then his response was pathetic... After 9/11 he and his boys huffed and puffed about how his team had put together the "National Response Plan" (Google it up for laughs) that would protect Americans if the US had another disaster... Well, here we are, several years later still waiting to see exactly what was in that plan... No, reality is that Katrina called Bush's bluff... Fast forward to what the Obama administration has done and there is a world of difference... It has been involved since Day One, has sent 3 cabinet level people there and is engaged... Engaged, IO think, is the operative word here... Now, as for the spill itself and Obama's fig leaf to the right on off shore drilling??? You can take it to the bank that he ain't gonna play "The Decider" game that Bush played on Iraq... No, you'll see a change of course... Bush was in Eintsien's words, "Insane" because Bush "The Decider" was too inflexible to change his mind when he saw that things weren't working... Obama ain't gonna repeat a behavior expecting a different result... Like I said, you can take that to the bank... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: bseed(charleskratz) Date: 02 May 10 - 01:39 PM A couple of notes on things nobody above seems to have caught: 1. Rush Limbaugh suggested that since the disaster began on Earth Day, that "liberals" might be guilty of having sabotaged the platform to cause the disaster so people would turn against off-shore drilling. 2. During Cheney's still secret energy policy meetings at the start of Bush's presidency, Cheney assured oil companies drilling in U. S. waters that they wouldn't have to use the expensive "fail safe" well capping techniques that are standard on off-shore sites in the seas around the rest of the developed world. So BP's Gulf platforms are not so equipped. I heard both of these on progressive radio, so I don't have print or internet sources to direct you to for verification, but I the Limbaugh thing was a sound bite in his own voice and not someone saying he said it. Charles |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: pdq Date: 02 May 10 - 01:51 PM "I heard both of these on progressive radio, so I don't have print or internet sources to direct you to for verification..." The world according to KPFA? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 02 May 10 - 01:55 PM This will be one of the worst eco disasters since the Valdez. Obama has been slow to respond ... this has been spewing oil since when? ... April 21st .... The white House announced it will escalate its response to the spill on April 29th. Today on May 2nd (1 month btw after he stated oil rigs are safe)he decides to go down and see for himself. I gotta say the current administration certainly has a more efficient PR team the last one. Pointing the finger at BP and all that ... hey, up until this rig blew the oil companies where friends of big government. I guess they still friends since the white House has only put a temporary ban on off shore drilling. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 02 May 10 - 02:03 PM What exactly would you have expected Obama to do that he hasn't done, biLL??? Put on a diver's suit and plug it himself??? I mean, let's get real here... Yes, this is a major eco disaster... I find it amuzing, no, rather sad that alot of people hate the fed government and think it is incompetent but when something like this happens think that the federal governement has all these plans and resources at ahnd to deal with stuff that, frankly, is of a magnitude that none has ever had to deal with??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 02 May 10 - 02:34 PM Bobert is right on this one. Nothing could be done after the blowout preventer clamps failed. Even that would only have limited but not have stopped the flow from the high pressure formation that the drill encountered. Until rigs are in place to drill relief wells, the hydrocarbons will continue to flow. Three months may be insufficient time; the one in the Bay of Campeche took nine months, and the flow was smaller. Bseed is right that the US offshore wells lack the state-of-the-art "fail-safe" techniques. I believe this stupid decision by the regulatory agency pre-dates Cheney and Bush, but it should have been red-flagged and corrected regardless of the admin. in power. It was a cost-saving decision- these are often wrong. The Gulf is dotted with many wells, but when a 'giant' is encountered, the best equipment may not be enough. I spent my life in petroleum exploration; the many thousands of professional and technical workers make recommendations based on sound knowledge and experience, but some executives and politicians can override their cautions. I believe petroleum will remain important; in some 50 years much can be done to bring 'clean' energy sources into play, but energy is only part of what petroleum is used for. Look around you at all the plastic materials used to make much of our goods today- they can be replaced but mostly with other materials based on natural resources. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 02 May 10 - 02:54 PM Of course Obama can't just go down there and fix the problem .... and the same goes with Bush during katrina ... but in such catastrophic and tragic events such as these just haveing and seeing their presence at the scene means a lot to the nation, if not the world. This current disaster regarding the oil rigs, and Katrina in regards to the levees ... both of such magnitude that seem incomprhensible on how to deal with ... well, there were warnings and concerns about both the rigs failing, and the levees failing. Do you really feel confident on Obama's statements on April 2nd that the rigs are so technically advance that they could not fail .. that we would never have to worry about or even conceive on having to clean up such an environmental mess ??? biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 02 May 10 - 03:16 PM Yeah, Obama owns this one! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 02 May 10 - 03:21 PM If Obama made such a statement it was based on incorrect advice. As noted in threads above, cost-saving decisions prevented use of state-of-the-art equipment in U. S. leased offshore wells, although it was installed in Norwegian and Brazilian leased areas; perhaps other areas but I have not looked this up. This is not the first giant field found by BP on their leases in the Gulf; perhaps they were lucky and the pressures encountered were not as great. (I am guessing here). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 02 May 10 - 03:27 PM How does Obama own this one? Because he was president while it happened? You might as well say he owns a flood. What Bush fucked up on with Katrina was not the fact that he let it happen -- he had no choice about that. It's the fact that FEMA was utterly worthless at responding to it. People were going hungry, sleeping rough, holed up in evacuation centers with insufficient supplies, etc. The Salvation Army got there tout de suite and started helping out immediately. Where was FEMA? The response that the government should have made was days or weeks late, and absurdly misguided. And of course the head of FEMA at the time, appointed by Bush, was a man who had absolutely no experience in emergency management at all, except that time when his daughter got a splinter in her finger and he found the tweezers and pulled it out. THAT is what Bush has on his record regarding Katrina. So. How do you respond to an oil rig blowing up? What should Obama be doing that he isn't? Please be specific. Write small. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 02 May 10 - 03:29 PM "If Obama made such a statement it was based on incorrect advice." come on Q ... I think we've heard that excuse before ... like in the previous administration. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 02 May 10 - 03:52 PM There is a major difference in not only attentiveness but action between Katrina and this spill... Only a true partisan trying to make political points based on mythology would try to lump the Obama administration's handling of this to the absolute mess that the Bush administartion made of Katrina... But the problem here is systemic in that since deregulations of the 90's the corportaion have (and continue) been given free reigns to "police" themselves... Same problem with the mine disater in Wes Virginia a couple three weeks ago... What we have here is the corportists calling too many of the shots... Think Golman Sacks, Halliburton, Blackwater, Exxon, BP... And the corportists are so scared that Obama will force regulations bacvk on their specfic industries that they are paying lots of $$$$ to lobbiest and PR firms to send a subtle message: Do you want big government in your life??? The phraseology is that "even a caveman" would shout an astounding , "NO!!!"... That is the problem and it's taken US 30 years to get to the point where the nation is in decline because profits have trumped good policy... So the oil industry (Google A.P.I.) here has spent a ton on money getting their point accross and that point is, in the words of my late father-in-law who was an A.P.I. lobbiest, "Don't worry, be happy"... Well, "Don't worry, be happy", in the words of Dr, Phil, ain't workin' for US... What will come out over the next few weeks is that BP was blowing smoke up the Obama's ass on how it had things under control and how little oil was actually leaking... Remember the 1000 barrels a day??? BP had to know... They knew the size of the well and the pressure... Ain't rocket surgery here when you have engineers who go to school to learn these kinds of things... Yet, until it became apparent that BP was blowin' smoke, there really wasn't much that the feds could legally do against BP... This ain't Katrina where there were clear opportunities for the feds to over-ride state and local goevrenments (again, Google National Response Plan)... This is a new ballgame for which their isn't a clear path... Katrina was easy compared to this because we had the resources, the laws and more importantly the knowldge and experience, to do recovery... So let's just leave this bogus claim that this oil; spill is Obama's Katrina where it belongs... On the trash heap... If anything, this is Obama's 9/11... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 02 May 10 - 04:00 PM Not an excuse. See previous posts. The cost-cutting decisions were made before Bush and Obama set by the regulatory agency. Many people assumed that they were the right decisions, but cost-cutting in engineering decisions are based on statistics and the next one may be the "exception that proves...." and is a killer! Obama, Bush and their predecessors must base their decisions on the advice of the regulatory agencies in charge- they are not engineers or food safety or whatever specialists. If advice from the agencies that set and enforce the regulations is wrong, administrators get blamed when something occurs, but the howl from the public that the administrator is to blame is useless and clueless. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 02 May 10 - 08:30 PM Exactly correct, Q... That is my point in observing that during the last 30 years the corporations have used mindless or badly mis-informned voters to vote in pro-corportae politicans who have made "regulation" some kind four letter word... And look where it has gotten US??? Cutting corners is the corporate way because in the short term it usually means more profits for Boss Hog and the Fat Cats... Problem is that the beginning of deregulation and the downward spiril of the average American worker can be graphed and they run paralell paths... In other words, the corporation lay off people to maximize profits and therefore leave a smlller workforce to do the same amount of work and then folks are surprised when shit ahppens??? I mean, this deregukation is a recipe for shit happening... Be in coal mines, airplanes, oil rigs, even our dumbass wars... It's no wonder that the US is slipping in just about every measurable category in comparasion to it's competitors... Life expectancy??? Down... Obesity??? Up... Unemplyement and underemployement??? Up??? Standard of living??? Down... Infant mortality??? Up... But, hey, we got NASCAR!!! (spit) B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 02 May 10 - 09:10 PM "If anything, this is Obama's 9/11" That is good Bobert .... I agree. I only hope better decisions are made in the aftermath ... unlike the insane decisions made in that 'other 9/11' biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 02 May 10 - 09:16 PM Bobert, you mean our good friends in China, South Korea, Japan, Germany, don't have the same smear of problems? They do. China looks in some ways like the US run away development a hundred years ago. The main difference is that they have a government that can tell the average citizen where to go and what to do. They can push some industries (sometimes damaging the health of both workers and consumers) and hold back others. Their advantage is that their leaders can decide on a plan of action that they think is for the greatest good of China- in other words they channel and direct their capitalism and as a result have a consumer economy that is outstepping that of the West. So parts of the country are left behind- sooner of later they will catch up, but the young head for the city and the old folks and their ways die off. Like it or not, our system (and theirs) is built on growth. OK, growth must be channeled to preserve our world, but the clock cannot be turned back. Small is no longer where it's at. You can try to go back to that little grass shack in Kealakakua, Hawai'i, but the Big M has replaced the fish and poi. The little shack has been replaced by a Walmart. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 02 May 10 - 09:41 PM Surely there must be something in between going back to little grass shacks, and letting the gigacorporations ruin the planet as they see fit, so that a handful of obscenely rich people can get richer? Of course eventually if they keep dumping on the little people, the little people will wake up and we'll have another revolution, this time along the lines of the French or the Russians, rather than our quaint little dust-up in 1777. I hope it doesn't happen in my lifetime. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 02 May 10 - 10:39 PM "Like it or not, our system (and theirs) is built on growth. OK, growth must be channeled to preserve our world, but the clock cannot be turned back. Small is no longer where it's at." Logically, since we cannot endure or even consider a stop or even limits to that growth, eventually it always leads to a dead end obliteration. And the 'growth' you refer to is 'exponential'. Year 1 total = year 0 total + x% of year 0 total Year 2 total = year 1 total + x% of year 1 total now what happens is that although the x% remains the same number in each year, when you compare it back to year 0 , the % of the year 0 expressed as a number climbs, slowly at first, then rapidly. If you have a desktop calculator, you can play with this yourself until you become convinced. If you have a scum that doubles its area on a pond every day, it will take X days to fully cover that pond - size irrelevant. How many days will it take to cover half of the pond? X-1. that's the power of uncontrolled exponential growth. No matter how small the % growth, eventually you just run out, and will always fill the entire space - and if you have a few billion years of 'future', the % need only be miniscule. For us to survive on earth, we only have 2 mutually exclusive options 1) Zero % growth. 2) population culling. The 'culling' will make space for future obsession with growth, and will either be 'Natural' or 'deliberately man induced'. The equation is also applicable to 'resources' needed - of any and all type. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 02 May 10 - 10:40 PM 100! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 02 May 10 - 10:43 PM Oh - and "If you have a scum that doubles its area on a pond every day, it will take X days to fully cover that pond - size irrelevant. How many days will it take to cover half of the pond? X-1." If you have a scum that doubles its area on a pond every 1000 days, it will take X days to fully cover that pond - size irrelevant. How many days will it take to cover half of the pond? X-1000. You can do the population calculations yourself, with assumptions of just much land area on average to a person - and don't forget to allow space for food growth amd resource mining. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 03 May 10 - 10:31 AM Glad to see you're on top of this, troupe. Who gets culled and who doesn't is what they're discussing now down on the Arizona border. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 03 May 10 - 02:14 PM "BP is working on three possible solutions to stop the oil that is flowing from the bottom of the sea. First, the company is trying to repair the valve that was supposed to prevent the well from leaking. Hayward compared that operation to "conducting open heart surgery about 5,000 feet beneath the seabed." The company is also trying to drill a relief well parallel to the leaking one, but that could take three months. The fastest fix would be to place rectangular steel boxes, that weigh 74 tons, over the leaking pipe and then funnel the oil up to a ship. The boxes are expected to be on location next weekend. Napolitano said BP has seen some success in using underwater dispersants and will conduct a review of the method this morning. " (ABC) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 03 May 10 - 02:32 PM I wonder what all the dead sea turtles are going to cost them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: gnu Date: 03 May 10 - 02:35 PM Amos... beneath the seabed? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: pdq Date: 03 May 10 - 03:04 PM "I wonder what all the dead sea turtles are going to cost them." Hard to tell there, Rigs. After all, in New Orleans many of them vote. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 03 May 10 - 05:31 PM LOL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 03 May 10 - 06:50 PM A series of dramatic on-site photos of the explosion and collapse of the rig. (BNET.com) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: beardedbruce Date: 03 May 10 - 07:27 PM Bobert, Bobert, Bobert... " Remember the 1000 barrels a day??? BP had to know... " IT WAS THE COAST GUARD THAT SAID 1000 barrels originally. IT WAS THE COAST GUARD that revised it up to 5000 barrels, after NEW DATA came in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: beardedbruce Date: 03 May 10 - 07:35 PM It seems to me that BP is acting in an appropriate manner, so far. "On Monday, BP said it would pay "all necessary and appropriate clean-up costs" from the disaster. Referring to the drilling rig that collapsed April 22 after a fire and explosion, causing the well it was drilling to leak, the company said: "BP takes responsibility for responding to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. We will clean it up." BP, which was leasing the Deepwater Horizon rig, has been working with an array of government agencies and private companies but has been unable so far to stop the flow of crude from the well. " From Amos's favortite news source "A device known as a blowout preventer, a towering stack of heavy equipment at the wellhead, 5,000 feet below the surface of the gulf, was supposed to seal the well quickly in the event of a burst of pressure, but it did not work when the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded. " THAT is what needs to be looked at. This is the first time one has ever failed- but I do not know how many times they have been tested of activated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: beardedbruce Date: 03 May 10 - 07:40 PM " Despite plan, not a single fire boom on hand on Gulf Coast at time of oil spill By Ben Raines May 03, 2010, 12:09PM If U.S. officials had followed up on a 1994 response plan for a major Gulf oil spill, it is possible that the spill could have been kept under control and far from land. The problem: The federal government did not have a single fire boom on hand. But in order to conduct a successful test burn eight days after the Deepwater Horizon well began releasing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf, officials had to purchase one from a company in Illinois. When federal officials called, Elastec/American Marine, shipped the only boom it had in stock, Jeff Bohleber, chief financial officer for Elastec, said today. At federal officials' behest, the company began calling customers in other countries and asking if the U.S. government could borrow their fire booms for a few days, he said. A single fire boom being towed by two boats can burn up to 1,800 barrels of oil an hour, Bohleber said. That translates to 75,000 gallons an hour, raising the possibility that the spill could have been contained at the accident scene 100 miles from shore. "They said this was the tool of last resort. No, this is absolutely the asset of first use. Get in there and start burning oil before the spill gets out of hand," Bohleber said. "If they had six or seven of these systems in place when this happened and got out there and started burning, it would have significantly lessened the amount of oil that got loose." In the days after the rig sank, U.S Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mary Landry said the government had all the assets it needed. She did not discuss why officials waited more than a week to conduct a test burn. (Watch video footage of the test burn.) At the time, former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration oil spill response coordinator Ron Gouguet -- who helped craft the 1994 plan -- told the Press-Register that officials had pre-approval for burning. "The whole reason the plan was created was so we could pull the trigger right away." Gouguet speculated that burning could have captured 95 percent of the oil as it spilled from the well. Bohleber said that his company was bringing several fire booms from South America, and he believed the National Response Center discovered that it had one in storage. Each boom costs a few hundred thousand dollars, Bohleber said, declining to give a specific price. Made of flame-retardant fabric, each boom has two pumps that push water through its 500-foot length. Two boats tow the U-shaped boom through an oil slick, gathering up about 75,000 gallons of oil at a time. That oil is dragged away from the larger spill, ignited and burns within an hour, he said. The boom can be used as long as waves are below 3 feet, Bohleber said. "Because of the complexity of the system and the obvious longer production time to build them, the emphasis is on obtaining and gathering the systems," he said. Bohleber said his company has conducted numerous tests with the Coast Guard since 1993, and it is now training crews on the use of the boom so workers will be ready when they arrive. " Mississippi Press, Shared - Birmingham, Shared - Huntsville, Top Stories |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 03 May 10 - 07:42 PM It sounds like Obama's Katrina is going to be worse than Bush's and Brownie's. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 03 May 10 - 07:47 PM Actually, as I understand it the emergency blow-out preventers were tested routinely ten days before the explosion and passed muster. From the looks of the explosion (see my link to images) a HUGE amount of force was unleashed. I am not sure anyone knows how the explosion occurred. In any case the whole prevention system was crushed or torqued past operation, it appears. If they're lucky they'll be able to drop some huge steel boxes on top of the well head and pump the oil out of them. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 03 May 10 - 07:53 PM You have it completely wrong, Rigs... This is Obama's 9/11 and will provide him alot of cover to get some tough overdue regulations in place... Just as Bush used 9/11 in the opposite way... Katrine, this ain't... See Katrinagate thread for the real deal about the complete and utter failings of the Bush administration post 9/11 tpo put together the planning and resources to deal with a catastrope for which we knew how to deal with... Like I said, You are dead wrong here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Alice Date: 03 May 10 - 08:29 PM Over 1800 people died from hurricane Katrina. This oil leak is an ecological disaster, but it is different than hurricane Katrina. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 03 May 10 - 08:31 PM Now it's: Spin, baby, Spin. The Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks will try to make this out as Obama's fault. And the teabaggers, possessing no critical thinking skills at all, will lap it up like milk for their tea. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 03 May 10 - 08:44 PM Sad, but true, mouse... Seems as if we're seein' a little of the previews here allready... But Obama ain't gonna let the tea baggers tea bag him on this one 'cause it's way too easy to turn around on them... Like 9/11 he's gonna get his way on alot of stuff over this... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 03 May 10 - 09:25 PM Not the first time blowout preventers failed in the Gulf- see my post of May 1. That smaller blowout in the Bay of Campeche took two rigs and nine months to seal off. Much loss of wildlife and destruction of fish and shellfish. High formation pressure, as was the case here, puts a hell of a lot of hydrocarbon up around the rig if systems fail; a spark (almost inevitable) can ignite it. Booms are of limited value; their volume is too small and winds disrupt their use. A diagram I saw on TV last night shows a large containment cylinder above the flow; from it oil can be drawn off into tankers. BP was considering installation. Efficiency was judged at not over 50%, however. BP operation in Gulf of Mexico: "BP is the leading operator in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico. We are the biggest producer, the leading resource holder and have the largest exploration acerage position. "Thunder Horse is now the largest single producing field in the Gulf of Mexico [GOM]. ....it has enabled us to grow our GOM production from 240,000 bbl....in 2007 to more than 400,000 bbl....in 2009. "During the year we started production......Atlantis Phase 2, Dorado and King South. The Tiber discovery, a giant GOM find in 2009. The blowout occurred at yet another of these deepwater GOM prospects, another giant discovery. BP has replaced its reserves by 129% in 2009. Above from the Annual Report for 2009 (bp.com). These new discoveries are in poorly known deepwater and thick sediment areas, total depths some 35,000 feet. Some rethinking of the equipment and precautions needed seems necessary. If unexpected formation pressures are encountered at these great depths, current technology may not always be able to cope. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 03 May 10 - 09:38 PM I guess you're right, Bobert. The only thing that's died from this so far is a bunch of fish, birds, and sea turtles. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,saulgoldie Date: 03 May 10 - 09:47 PM Energy costs resources: land, water, air, and people. Reduce the number of people or their energy appetites, and their will be fewer dead miners, less slimey oil where it shouldn't oughtta be, and less nuclear contamination. G-d didn't put so many people on this earth--we overbred--and didn't tell each of us to gobble up so much energy. Saul |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 03 May 10 - 10:12 PM Hear, hear! I'm with you, Saul. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 03 May 10 - 10:31 PM God's the one that told us to fuck like bunnies. Or how did He put it? "Be fruitful and multiply." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 03 May 10 - 10:46 PM Yeah, okay, so Saul... Who is at the top of your list for the gas chambers??? I mean, let's get friggin' real here... This is the palnet we have... This is the population we have... If anyone here in Mudburg thinks there are too many people then let's hear yer solution... BTW, Hitler also thought thewre wewre too many people: Jews... This is an immoral argument that does not deal with the realities that we Earthlings face... I would agree that population control should be a goal here but it isn't the entire story... We are a very wastefull planet and we are a very culturally steeped planet... Those two aspects can be dealth with alot easier than trying to limt the number of people... I mean, look at the energy that is wasted... I'd be willing to bet that we could cut our dependency on energy considerably by just adjusting our life styles... And where we work... And community/urabn planning... I mean, wy do we have to drive 20 miles to work??? That is stupid!!! (But, Boberdz, that is one of the cornerstones of the Cheney "Energy Policy"... You know, consume to yer heart's delight...) Well, that is some very messed up thinking... We don't have to consume so much energy.... We don't have to consume so many animals... We erally don't... Amino acids are the base of life and it is not required that we derive them from eating animals... Animals consume more amino acids and protiens to make one pound of food than if we just ate what we feed the animals!!! That's right... It takes 16 pounds of amino acids/proteins to make 1 pound of beef??? That's very messed up... Yeah, we have time to try to figure out how to control our populations but while we are at it the things that are alot easier, energy and food regulations, seem politically out-of-bounds??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 03 May 10 - 10:54 PM Of course cows and other ungulates can eat grass growing on scrubland that can't be used for crops. But Noooooo. We feed them corn. Why? Because the cornglomerates spend a lot of money on politicians, because people want beef that's marbled just-so, because cows develop faster and can be marketed sooner when fed corn. And let's not talk about the methane. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 04 May 10 - 07:59 AM Some say Obama wanted a spill: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/03/michael-brown-obama-wante_n_562004.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Ron Davies Date: 04 May 10 - 08:21 AM What strikes me--don't think I've seen the point yet--is that in the US we have now had two disasters, in rather quick succession. Both caused by pressure from private industry to cut corners on safety in order to maximize profit. First the WV coal disaster. Massey CEO Blankenship has been quoted along the lines of "breaking federal law and regulations is unavoidable in the mining of coal". That mindset must change. And in the oil rig disaster, safety features which should have been in place were not. So now maybe the pendulum will start swinging back in public opinion--towards advocating more, not less, muscle in federal regulation. That would not be good news for the "Tea Party"--or dear Sarah. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 04 May 10 - 08:54 AM "That mindset must change" so true .... and that means all of us .... not just the Tea Party, Palin, Obama, Dems, Reupublicans or whomever/whatever. $Corporate$ priority and influence over the government has to come to an end. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,TIA Date: 04 May 10 - 10:37 AM SaulGoldie is right on. Follow any of these environmental and human disasters to their source, and you will find human overpopulation. As Bobert points out, there is no easy solution to this. But, don't worry - if we do not find a solution, nature will. As will all species in the history of Earth that have overexploited their niche, we will be rendered extinct (or at least insignificant) by a plague, famine, or some other population-crash-causing event. There is no easy solution, but not choosing a solution is, in fact, choosing a solution. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 04 May 10 - 11:56 AM You're right, TIA, human population growth is at the heart of any number of our current problems. Probably the best first step would be to prevent people from over populated, fast growing areas from migrating to areas that are not quite yet over populated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 04 May 10 - 12:49 PM "G-d didn't put so many people on this earth--we overbred" Hmmmmmm .... maybe we should sterilize our children, and grandchildren. who wants to be the first to go and do this? I don't think the western world is overpopulated .... we just have a unquenchable thirst for consumption without any regards to the consequences .... oh, and don't forget the greed factor. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 04 May 10 - 05:49 PM Yet we have a certain very vocal and militant group that thinks that childbirth is this glorious thing... Of course, once the kid is born then it's tough luck, Charley... We can and will have to get around to this problem... But it will take genetaions of some very severe family planning to bring dwon the population, or even stabilize it... In the interim we have to deal with the reality and energy, water and food all need some serious rethinking... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST Date: 04 May 10 - 06:10 PM >>What strikes me--don't think I've seen the point yet--is that in the US we have now had two disasters, in rather quick succession. Both caused by pressure from private industry to cut corners on safety in order to maximize profit. I thought you were going to bring up the sub prime crisis and the banking crash. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 04 May 10 - 06:12 PM No, the population explosion is by far the greater problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Donuel Date: 04 May 10 - 08:42 PM The population has fallen far below the projections of the last 10 years. Population is actually becoming less of a threat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 05 May 10 - 01:16 AM Number6: $Corporate$ priority and influence over the government has to come to an end. From your lips to God's ears. Now, how do we bring this about? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: katlaughing Date: 05 May 10 - 07:22 AM I love this guy's take on the whole thing: CLick Here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 05 May 10 - 07:46 AM The problem with population, Rigs, is that people who study population don't see any quick fixes that meet with the overall moral codes of mankind... Even if the US, for instance, were to limit one child per family, al la China, the population would still expand... Then there is also the realities of porportions of age groups where you wouldn't want like 50% of yer population being over 60 years old because that would not leave enough work force to produce for itself and it aging population... So to say that population is the greatest problem may be correct but the one that can only be solved over generations... And then only after one takes on the people who believe that birth control is a sin... Until then, the planet's most immediate problems are food, water amd energy... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 05 May 10 - 09:08 AM Actually, Bobert, America brought its population growth under control in the early 1970's. Most of the growth since that time has been from immigration. And if something isn't done about it, food, water, and energy will always be a problem--and in the near future, you can add air to the list. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 05 May 10 - 02:34 PM Yeah, throw air into that mix, too... But back to immigartion... For those folks who are sceaming for reform that throws alot of people back to Latin America they might want tyo rethink that because of the demographics that will provide a larger pool of younger workers as we Baby Boomers become a pain in the ass to our kids... lol... Lotta intricacies involved here other than the thoughless Tea Party folks most of whom would like almost all the immgrant of the last 20 years to go home... These Tea Partiers don't realize that if that were to happen our economy would literlly implode... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 05 May 10 - 06:42 PM I think I'd rather save the planet than worry about the economy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 05 May 10 - 08:50 PM Okay, Rigs... You are in charge... Who gets killed??? Old people first??? Kids??? Left handed people??? Black people??? Jews??? Lutherins??? Germans??? Indonesians??? I mean, if yer into this planet saving thru population reductions then someone has to make the decision as to who get's killed... Question #2... What kind of palnet are we going to have after Rigsagetton and a couple billion people are hilled to make the planet this hunky doorey place for those that made the cut... Oh wait... Maybe a lottery system... Question #3... How are ya' gonna kill that many folks, Rigs??? Lethal injection??? Nukes??? Well, ya can't use nukes if ya' use a lottery system... No, maybe we just make it countries... But what if the US loses??? Are we gonna nuke oursleves or have someone else do it??? I mean, I really think we should have the balls to do it ourselves... The Ruskies could botch the job and leave half of us to die a slow painfull death... No, I trust the good ol' USA when it comes to nuking folks... Hey, we got a resume'... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 05 May 10 - 09:19 PM Bobert, that one child /family does cut the population down. Two are needed to keep a level keel. Of course this has to go on long enough so that the old folks die off. China boldly tried the one child solution, but something happened. Someone noticed that not enough young'uns were coming along to take care of the old folks in an aging population. They are making adjustments. My solution- each of us make a list of those we don't like, and submit the lists to a tribunal, which will deepsix those on the lists. Pretty soon only the tribunal will be left. Of course I will be boss of the tribunal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 05 May 10 - 09:54 PM 1. You limit tax credits for children to two per couple, any more than that, and they don't get a free ride. That way, if Hispanics want to invade America through the birth canal, they'll at least have to pay for it. 2. You don't kill anybody, if a country can't control their birth rate, everyone who lives there stays in the filth and swaller until that country brings their population growth under control. After all, nobody else wants them. 3. You make hiring an illegal alien a fellony, and if they get caught, they go to Pelican Bay. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 05 May 10 - 09:59 PM I know who would be first on my list.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 05 May 10 - 10:21 PM Well, well, well, Rigs... The problem with you and Q's arguments are that people who are out there who do nuthin' but study population and demographics say that it will take generations to effect any measurable change and that any changes, if not carefully planned can end yer country in a real pickle... Picture a triangle with its point pointed downward and two sides speading out like like a man hold his arms upward and at 45 degrees... If you have this picture in yer mind and that is the way you population is in terms of age then it means that very few are having to work to support very many... It ain't as easy as saying one family, one child... What you end up with is excatly what I just described with a wrok force having the shouldeer tyhe load for a bunch of old fogies... You know, like most of the folks here... The problem is that there is a breaking point... The US is just about there because our Baby Boomin' parents were like bunnies and the generations afterwards weren't... So that is the real story... Yeah, it's easy to talk about contolling population but very hard to actually pull it off responsibly so that you don't kill off a country or twelve in the process... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 05 May 10 - 11:55 PM Nobody said is was going to be easy, Bobert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 06 May 10 - 01:10 AM Says the ant just before he is squashed by the elephant he thinks he can lift. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 06 May 10 - 07:13 AM Some of us think the planet is worth saving. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 06 May 10 - 07:23 AM Yes, Rigs, we all agree on that... But saving the planet will have to come down to people willing to listen to "elitists" who bother to get themselves educated up and know what the hell they are talking about as opposed to ignorant people who think that policy should be tailored to their particular emotions or someone else's profits... Until we achieve that major "change" we won't make any strides towrd saving the planet... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Donuel Date: 06 May 10 - 01:38 PM It seems that Palin has been temperate regarding this spill. She has made statements which are not drill baby drillesque at all but rather pursuing caution without over reaction. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 06 May 10 - 05:00 PM See, some people are smart enough to learn! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 06 May 10 - 08:13 PM Good point, Rigs... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,JTS Date: 06 May 10 - 08:24 PM Relax Donuel, Jon Stewart has her on tape saying "Drill baby drill!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 06 May 10 - 10:37 PM See, an old bitch can learn new tricks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 08 May 10 - 09:50 AM The deadly blast on board the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico was triggered by a bubble of methane gas, an investigation by BP has revealed. Spaw is obviously feeling better. He's taken up scuba diving! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 08 May 10 - 03:50 PM Does the methane theory hold water? Would some other explanation be more damaging to BP? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 08 May 10 - 04:59 PM The dome collection device has run into difficulties. Methane Hydrates (methane, water sludge that forms at low temperature and high pressure) have clogged the device. Methane hydrates have been suggested as an energy source but never used, the use is theoretical. Methane hydrates also are found over parts of the Arctic Sea, where Shell is preparing to drill offshore this summer, off Alaska. The difference is that the Shell leases are in much shallower water. The BP well in the Gulf, as I have noted, was drilled at the limits of engineering knowhow, hence in many ways is entering the unknown. It cannot be compared with the many Gulf wells drilled in shallow water, into offshore equivalents of known sedimentary columns. BP and its associates have entered a new realm- I think before the knowhow about safe procedures for exploration have been developed. The drilling rig was not equipped with the latest in blowout preventers, but those have never been tried out under actual conditions; they also may have been inadequate to control high pressure methane gases coming from the oil-bearing formation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 08 May 10 - 05:08 PM Talk about a 'methane bubble' in the media suggests something new, but it is methane and other light hydrocarbons that drive the oil in a high-pressure formation. Some formation pressure is desirable, because the hydrocarbon will rise to the surface without the need for pumps. Too much pressure will cause a 'gusher' that, if strong enough, overwhelms the valves and cutoffs in the drill pipe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 08 May 10 - 05:21 PM Methane Hydrates, a simple explanation and map of known occurrence: Hydrate |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 08 May 10 - 10:53 PM ... and still nuthin' from Ms. Sarah??? I mean, lets get real here... There is a good chance that BP will never cap this well and that every bit of oil that is trapped in that cavern will just be part of our new 'n very unimproved planet's water??? This is a real scenerio!!! Shrimp: $200 a pound??? Not that farfetched until, of course, there are no more shrimp anywhere... I donno??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 09 May 10 - 07:59 AM There's no reason for Sarah Palin to say anything, because Obama had already given his blessing to off-shore drilling. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 09 May 10 - 08:19 AM Not quite what one would call a "blessing", rigs... Kinda a political fig leaf to try to get the Repubs to participate in the democratic process... Hardly a blessing... BTW, who was it that made "Drill, Baby, drill" the centerpiece of her campaign??? Hmmmmmmmm??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 09 May 10 - 01:19 PM When, since November of 1980, have the Republicans given any indication they're interested in the democratic process? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 09 May 10 - 01:27 PM None of the politicians, red, blue or polka dot, understood the problems of drilling at the limits of capability and knowledge- but they are beginning to learn. Let us hope that the similar Chevron prospect off the East coast of Canada will be not be drilled until better methods are developed. It took nine months and two rigs to subdue the Pemex Gulf well blowout (Bay of Campeche). I hope that this BP well can be tamed quickly but I am afraid it may not be. Yeah, Bobert, I buy only North American shrimp (I am afraid of the Asian). I prefer East or West coast oysters, but this spill will play hell with the Gulf oysters and put pressure on other areas. Yep, big price increases seem inevitable. And red snapper- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 09 May 10 - 07:00 PM Not for calorie counters- red snapper stuffed with shrimp, a favorite in Texas. How long? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 09 May 10 - 07:36 PM It's really sad what is does for the fishing industry there, and it's on the ropes all over the world, too. Just too many people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 09 May 10 - 08:07 PM Many of the oysters are farmed on leased areas nowadays, so some carefully tended shellfish sources could be destroyed. The costs to fishermen and shellfish harvesters could run into many millions as well as putting a lot of people out of work. There are 3500 oyster harvesters in Louisiana. In 2006, Texas oysters generated $17 million in sales. Now they are considering trying to plug the hole with trash. I dunno, the formation has a lot of pressure. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 10 May 10 - 07:16 PM The Gulf Oil Spill Litigation Group is advertising for clients. Call toll free 866-313-1973, and ask for attorney Elizabeth A. Alexander. Tourist areas are already hard hit, with sales in some areas already down 50 percent and more. Florida shrimpers, sportsfishing operators and seafood companies have filed a class action lawsuit against BP, PLC, BP America, Transocean, Haliburton (engaged in cementing the well) and Cameron International (provided the blowout preventers which failed to activate). Alabama groups also have filed a class action suit against the same defendents. NOAA reports more than 10,000 people are active in response to the spill. NOAA issues trajectory maps twice a day, based on satellite imagery and aircraft tracking. A portion of the spill is impinging on Atchafalaya Bay today (Monday). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: dick greenhaus Date: 10 May 10 - 10:47 PM Well, two things, at least are perfectly clear: The most modern offshore drilling technology can fail disastrously. The most modern mitigation systems don't work. Now, if one postulates that we can't afford the kind of damage that occurs from an unmitigated failure, the conclusion seems pretty obvious. There is no plan B. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 11 May 10 - 01:01 PM Dick G- right, not really a plan A either, when disaster strikes on a project that is at the limits of known capability. People don't like to admit that this was the real problem. At Congressional hearings today, BP is trying to slough off some of the blame to Haliburton and Cameron, as well as rig owner Transocean. BP's statement about paying clean-up costs has holes in it; and nothing has been said by them about compensation to businesses which are losing or will go bust. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Greg F. Date: 11 May 10 - 02:46 PM BP is trying to slough off some of the blame to Haliburton In light of Halliburton's track record they doubtless DESERVE some of the blame. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 11 May 10 - 05:52 PM The blame game doesn't help. BP, as operator, oversaw and would have approved the work of participants, but all were working together. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,TIA Date: 11 May 10 - 08:50 PM Yes, the blame game does not help the reality of the situation right now. But I am all in on the blame game if it makes others in the future think twice about risking long-term environmental catastrophe in the hopes of short term profit. I *definitely* want blame to be placed. The whole plante loses if we walk away saying "Shazam, who knew? Act of God! Not foreseeable! Let's drill some more because lightning doesn't strike twice." Yeah, right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 11 May 10 - 10:30 PM Also cost of cleanup should be distributed properly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 12 May 10 - 12:00 AM How would cost of clean-up be distributed properly? This undoubtedly would (or will) occupy attorneys for some years! Some blame also attaches to the government regulatory body which approved the well which was drilled at the limits of capability. This was not the garden variety of Gulf well, of which there are many, drilled to reasonable depths in sediments which have been studied for years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 12 May 10 - 01:16 AM This undoubtedly would (or will) occupy attorneys for some years! As if it wouldn't otherwise? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 12 May 10 - 02:26 PM "Senator Barbara Boxer, chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, said that the agency [MMS] had granted BP an exemption from filing an environmental impact statement for the well that blew up, accepting company assurances that the chances of a major spill were remote. Such waivers are routinely granted when an impact statement has already been filed for a wider drilling area, but some environmentalists contend that a statement should be filed for each well." Senate hearing, NY Times, article: "U. S. to Split Up Agency Policing the Oil Industry," John M. Broder, May 11, 2010. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 12 May 10 - 10:31 PM Repeating behavior expecting different results = insanity... Seems change is in the air... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 12 May 10 - 11:57 PM Well, it looks like Barbara Boxer will be gone soon, so once this mess is cleaned up we're less likely to experience another one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 13 May 10 - 07:20 AM Oh??? So the chances of another massive oil spill won't be because regs are tightened but because Boxer may get voted out??? Hmmmmmm, Rigs??? We're gonna have to respectfully ask you to pee in this little plastic cup... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 May 10 - 11:36 AM Safety should not be politicized. Barbara Boxer, in recent statements, is one of those supporting tightening of the regulations. After seeing Rinks posts on ethnic suppression, he has put himself up for bigot of the year. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 14 May 10 - 01:53 AM I support enforcing the regulations. As it is now, the industry itself writes and enforces its own regulations. This is true of many industries in the US since the Republicans over the last 8 years have been putting industry moguls in strategic offices (I remember the faint squeak about a meat baron taking over the USDA some years back, for example). Teddy Roosevelt is spinning in his grave. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 14 May 10 - 07:45 AM Ya know, this thing about Halliburton being involved in this spill scares the living crud outta me... I mean, Halliburton??? Halliburton could mess up a wet dream (pun intended)... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 14 May 10 - 05:52 PM Halliburton is everywhere. It's the antichrist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 14 May 10 - 06:14 PM Haliburton, Slumberger, are the two most used well service companies and have been in business for 70 year or more. Haliburton has been involved in 50 leases and 100 wells in the deep water, salt water canopy Gulf, and claim to be the leader in deepwater completions. www.haliburton.com Slumberger offers services in "high-risk deepwater prospects" and estimates deepwater rigs will quadruple in number by 2012. www.slb.com The two companies are the most advanced in technology and thus are at the top of the list for well service. All major companies have them on contract. To service your well, who do you call? Either Haliburton or Slumberger. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 14 May 10 - 06:32 PM Ah, competition. It's the American way, you know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,TIA Date: 14 May 10 - 11:53 PM Several academic (gasp!!!=socialist liberal media elite Nazis) who have spent their lives studying this shit (but are clearly motivated by the gigantic dollars that are available in education as opposed to industry) are saying that the spill may be 10X as bad as BP is telling us. I.e an EXXON Valdiz every *four days* (do the math you tool-head, ass-hat, Faux-News groupies) instead of over the 11 months we are being told. Holy shit. Biggest mand-made environmental catastrophe ever. Does that make you pause at all? Yes, you, you dickheads that I clash with regularly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 15 May 10 - 07:53 AM Yer speakin' Greek to 'um, TIA... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Greg F. Date: 15 May 10 - 08:34 AM Speaking of the Exxon Valdez, the shit from that spill is still fouling the coast of Alaska. The "cleanup"[sic] was cosmetic at best. BP's new advertising slogan: "Oil Spills Are Forever". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Ron Davies Date: 15 May 10 - 11:57 AM Three explanations I heard on why MMS did not enforce safety regulations. 1) MMS, by taxing the oil and gas industries, has been the #2 source of all income for the government, after the IRS. So there is huge pressure to sign off on industry ideas---to maximize income for the government. 2) In drilling and maintaining deep-water wells, industry has the expertise; the MMS did not. So they deferred. 3) The revolving door. At least with the splitting of the two MMS functions, #1 may be addressed. Still the revolving door must be slowed, if not blocked. But obviously with the huge deficits facing the government, the pressure for income will continue, to say the least. Somebody will have to ride herd on the taxing function of the former MMS. And against the pressure for income, good luck. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 15 May 10 - 01:18 PM A "transforming event." BP CEO. I suppose by now we all have pondered his meaning. Ken Salazar is suposed to speak today. MMS does generate a lot of money. Ron is correct. The customer may voice his wishes, but he should never run the store. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Ron Davies Date: 16 May 10 - 10:26 AM It depends on who is the customer and who is the store proprietor. It would not surprise me if industry sees itself as the proprietor, and the government as the customer. As I noted, industry has the expertise in drilling and maintaining deep-water wells; the government does not--partly since the government no doubt does not pay the salaries paid to the top expertise in this field by industry; thus can't attract and/or keep top talent. But as we've just seen dramatically illustrated, here the customer (government) must override the store (industry) sometimes---for safety and environmental reasons. So maybe the customer/ store model doesn't exactly work here. But the main problem in the government/industry relationship in this issue, as I indicated, is that the pressure for income will probably never go down--so the pressure to let industry have its way--in order to maximize production, and hence oil and gas taxes--will also never decline. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 16 May 10 - 11:07 AM The store wants to please the customer. The MMS shouldn't want to please the oil companies; the other way, surely. This is a regulator/regulated relationship. You might as well say the magistrate is the store and the accused criminal is the customer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 16 May 10 - 12:17 PM just remember guys .. "oil rigs today generally don't cause spills. They are technologically very advanced" Obama said that .... just a few days before this oil rig blew, and subsequently causing the worst man-made environmental catastrophe ever biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 16 May 10 - 12:50 PM What Obama said is true. There have been many advances and drilling is much safer than it was in, say, the 1920s or so. Few 'spills' (generally the result of high pressure causing a 'gusher') and many fewer deaths and injuries among the workers on the drilling platform. Improvements have continued to be made. I believe he was ignorant, however, of the dangers in deep water drilling and drilling in general- as we all are except those in the industry or concerned closely with the industry. He also was ignorant of MMS policies, relying, as leaders do, on what his adwisors said. That being said, he must now see that improvements are made in the regulatory bodies and that they make 'informed' decisions, and that dangerous situations are recognized and avoided. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 16 May 10 - 05:56 PM Hmm. Did the word "generally" escape someone's attention? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 16 May 10 - 08:09 PM Just finished watching an excellent "60 Minutes" piece about this and it seems that BP execs pushed too hard for completeion... Even after pieces of the seal (which apparently was broken 5000 feet below) came up thru the shaft??? If that is the case and BP went ahead without a sufficient seal for the pipe, whoes contents were under pressure, then this one is all BPs... b~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 16 May 10 - 08:36 PM Missed the 60 minutes, but maybe I can catch the west coart airing. Did they say where the information came from? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 16 May 10 - 08:41 PM There were two main interviewees, Q... One was in charge of the electronics and computers on the rig...The other, an engineer... It was reported that BP sent in some of their heavy hitters just the week before and there were heated discussions about the fact that the sealing ring had broken and that other equipement below was not operational... According to the accounts, BP won the arguments... I was kinda hopin' that Halliburton would be the fall guy but not this time... Loooking, at least for now, that BP was in too big a hurry and took alot of risjs just before the rig blew... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 16 May 10 - 10:13 PM Make that, "BP took alot of risks just before the rig blew..." And, ahhhh,... ...200, fir grins... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 16 May 10 - 11:06 PM The 60 Minutes report was damning. And believable. Ordering the removal of the mud column before the seals were finished is something I would not have believed. And operating with a faulty BOP is inviting trouble when high pressure is likely. Even more worrying are the accusations about the Atlantis platform, which is 'home' to several deep water wells and with more planned. BP already is a principal supplier of liquid hydrocarbons to the United States. Canada supplies more hydrocarbon in volume, but the sources are largely the tar sands and large gas deposits. BP wishes to displace the Canadian hydrocarbons with cheaper Gulf oil. Makes me wonder if they are so anxious to do so that they have thrown caution to the winds, to use the old cliche. They were heavily fined for shortcomings in the refinery fire and mention is made of other 'accidents', obviously their operations should be thoroughly investigated. The tar sands are destructive to the boreal forest (in which they are located) but damage to the Gulf hurts hundreds of thousands of people who directly or indirectly make their livlihood from the Gulf waters and shore. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Alice Date: 16 May 10 - 11:17 PM CBS News 60 Minutes - Deepwater Disaster |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Ron Davies Date: 17 May 10 - 12:01 AM "MMS shouldn't want to please the oil companies..." Not the point. Point is: the more drilling, the more income for the MMS--and the government. MMS no doubt wants to show a trajectory of increasing income--that was probably a measure of its success--and a much more tangible one than safety. The desire for income more and more outweighed the other, contradictory function of the MMS--safety (and possibly also environmental concerns). That's part of the reason for this tragedy. We hope the problem of the contradictory functions will be lessened by the splitting of MMS----but you can bet the government will still want as much income as possible--especially because of the worsening deficits. And historically, as I noted, MMS has been the #2 source of income for the US government--right after IRS. So there will still be pressure to sign off on industry plans--not to please oil firms but to maximize income for the federal government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: GUEST,Fishy Date: 17 May 10 - 03:53 AM A waiter at a Gulf Coast diner is overheard saying to his customers, "Would you like some Gulf Coast shrimp cooked in it's own oil?" Will that be 30 weight or light crude? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 17 May 10 - 09:14 AM Thanks for the link, Alice... I was absolutely spellbound watching that report... I mean, I couldn't believe what I was hearing... If this all turns out to be the way things went down then there are gonna be alot of people very pissed off with BP... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 17 May 10 - 02:10 PM Thanks from me too, Alice. There were parts I wanted to re-hear, but print is better. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Alice Date: 17 May 10 - 02:19 PM Yes, I read the print script. I could absorb all of the details better than listening. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 17 May 10 - 03:05 PM I mentioned in an earlier post the threat that would be posed if this huge oil spill were to drift far enough NE to be picked up by the local Gulf loop and carried around the Florida peninsula up the East coast. Turns out in this story that a bottle with a note in it made exactly this voyage many years back, and landed on the Florida shore thirty miles south of Cape Kennedy, having been launched in the Gulf of Mexico not far from where the Deep Horizon well later stood. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 17 May 10 - 03:17 PM Gulf of Mexico drilling- In March, Shell announced that its deepwater Gulf wells, Appomatox prospect, has hit pay. These wells are in 7000-8000 feet water depth (more than the BP well which blew out) and were drilled to a total depth of about 26,000 feet. This adds to the other Shell-Nexen discoveries, Shiloh and Vicksburg, at similar depths. Gulf offshore oil- U. S. area 1.7 million bbl/day 30% of domestic production. 3500 production platforms, many with multiple wells 35,000 workers engaged in exploration and production. Most of these wells are in shallower water and were drilled to much less depth. Gulf oil- Mexican area Pemex has many wells in their portion of the Gulf. A portion of this production goes to the U. S. Data from the magazine Offshore and Ny Times article, May 2, 2010, Jad Mouawad |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 17 May 10 - 03:44 PM At the last Gulf lease sale by MMS, Anadarko picked up 48 tracts. It and Mariner bid $52.5 million for the Walker Ridge block; in all, Anadarko paid $128 million for leases. Maersk made bids totaling $97 million, Shell $89 million, Chevron $79 million. Maersk is known for container shipping, but it also is into petroleum exploration. Chevron has ordered a drillship from Pacific Drilling, the ship being built in South Korea. It is capable of drilling in 12,000 feet of water and to more than 35,000 feet depth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 17 May 10 - 03:48 PM Oh boy!!! Ya' know the stpidest thing is that the US has an estimated 2% of the worlds petroleum reserves so it does make ya' wonder if off-shore drilling is worth it??? I mean, 2% ain't jack... Especially seein' that fish are a renewable resource... Or, better put, were... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 17 May 10 - 04:57 PM It seems to me that it would be cheaper and safer for the U. S. to get its oil from elsewhere. In spite of those who forcast only 20 years (or whatever) reserves left, more is being discovered all over the globe. New discoveries of natural gas in Canada have led some oil pundits to say that the reserves are sufficient for 100 years. Tar sands can supply the US and Canada for 50 years. Big discoveries off Brazil and Nigeria and you name it- why drill in sensitive areas? Why encourage it? (Obama, Palin, and the guy next door). Wind solar nuclear hydrogen are coming slowly, but should be strong in 30 years or so (And why is China becoming the leader?). Even BP is a leading producer of solar panels and Exxon-Mobil-Ford-GM-BMW etc. research in storage batteries and hybrid technology are producing results. In the meantime it seems that the world will be subject to more 'accidents' in risky drilling operations. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Donuel Date: 17 May 10 - 09:36 PM This Sunday on CBS 60 minutes you will learn exactly why and how the oil diaster occured. BP argued to eliminate putting in the 3rd plug of drilling mud to seal the well with the weight of filling the pipe with mud. Halliburton argued that the well haed had broken due to an explosive gush of gas 2 months earlier so they did not know how much pressure was in the pipe since the valve had shattered and had come out the top of the pipe in pieces. With no way to know the pressure Halliburton argued that a total sealing of the pipe was necessary. BP said that filling the whole mile long pipe wioth mud would take too much time when they were ready to pump oil. BP won the arguement. This entire argument actually took place aboard the oil rig that blew up 3 hours later killing eleven people and set into motion a oil diaster that could spread across two oceans. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 17 May 10 - 10:23 PM See link to text of program posted by Alice, above. 16May 11:17. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 17 May 10 - 10:27 PM Donuel< That show allready occured... I posted my thoughts on it... Alice has put a link to it... Dude!!! Yer behind a week... Must be nice... lol... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Riginslinger Date: 28 May 10 - 11:36 AM It's definately Obama's Katrina now. He just fired his own version of Brownie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: katlaughing Date: 04 Aug 10 - 02:17 PM She may get her oil spill in AK afterall if BP isn't stopped: BP is at it again! Despite the catastrophe in the Gulf, BP is moving forward with a controversial project to drill in the Arctic. In order to get around the Obama Administration's moratorium on off-shore drilling, BP has built "Liberty Island" three miles off the Alaskan Coast and plans to drill two miles under the sea and then six to eight miles horizontally to tap an underwater reserve. An oil spill in the Arctic would be far worse than what continues to unfold in the Gulf. There is no proven technology for cleaning up oil in icy water and the nearest emergency and relief supports are thousands of miles away. Ignoring the lessons of this most recent disaster, Federal regulators even allowed BP to write its own environmental review for the project. We cannot allow for history to repeat itself. Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar, has the ability to STOP this catastrophe before it happens and YOU have the ability to influence Secretary Salazar. Tell Secretary Salazar to stop BP's dangerous and unregulated drilling in the Arctic Sincerely, Robert Greenwald and the Brave New Foundation team |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: gnu Date: 04 Aug 10 - 02:58 PM Ahhhh... I would like to see the plans for that. When ice is pushed by wind and you couple that with freeze-thaw and currents, Mother Nature can be a bitch. My main qusetion would be about the height of the top of the 400m diameter island above sea level. Secondly, about the assessment of the seabed to withstand, over time, the horizontal shear force at the base of the island radiating from the centre... about 2000m or more. That's a lot of seabed. If it lets go in one direction in future, or if the island settles differentially over time, the remedial actions taken in the Gulf of Mexico won't even be an option. But, I am sure BP has ther top peeps on it and there are no worries. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: katlaughing Date: 04 Aug 10 - 07:36 PM Makes ya wonder, huh, gnu? There are a lot of articles which show up in a google search. Here's just ONE of them. I wonder how many of the "common folk" don't know about this. It says they're going to test the first well this Fall. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 04 Aug 10 - 10:05 PM The Liberty prospect on the Alaska side of the Beaufort is matched by similar prospects on the Nunavut (Canadian) side. G. MacKay, director of petroleum resources for the Nunavut government, says value of reserves may be as high as $3 trillion. Imperial Oil back 30 and more years ago researched and pioneered the construction of offshore islands in the Beaufort Sea. The 'feet' of the rigs will be on the islands, but that does not necessarily mean that the wells are safer. A blowout would soon overwhelm the small area of the artificial islands. The cold climate guarantees that any spilled oil would be around much longer than it would be in the Gulf where biodegradation is faster. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 04 Aug 10 - 10:17 PM Maybe Obama should extend the ban on new drillin' a few months... 'Er years??? I mean, we get, what... 5% of our oil from our own sources??? What's the hurry if takin' a little time and doin' stuff right means not messin' up our other resources... I mean, resources are rescources... If ya kill off $50B in fish to maybe extract $20B in oil then it don't take the Wes Ginny Slide Rule to tell ya' that yer gamblin' against "the house"... Don't take too many of those bad bets and we have the bad results of "risk" passed onto the taxpayer... This ain't rocket surgery here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Amos Date: 04 Aug 10 - 11:44 PM For five hundred million they could drill oout to it from the shore line, fer cry-i. Modern directional drilling techniques don't usually go that far, true--but where there are trillions at stake... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 05 Aug 10 - 02:00 AM I mean, we get, what... 5% of our oil from our own sources??? What's the hurry if takin' a little time and doin' stuff right means not messin' up our other resources... I mean, resources are rescources... If ya kill off $50B in fish to maybe extract $20B in oil then it don't take the Wes Ginny Slide Rule to tell ya' that yer gamblin' against "the house"... Don't take too many of those bad bets and we have the bad results of "risk" passed onto the taxpayer... You fail to understand. The people who make money off the fish are by and large private fishermen, processors, and small restaurant owners. The people who make money off the oil are multibillionaires in air-conditioned offices in New York with multimillion-dollar golden parachutes to fall back on should they f*** up. Drill, baby, drill. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 05 Aug 10 - 12:32 PM I wish I could forget that, mouse... Our country is in a real pickel with these corporatists having their way with any and everything... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 05 Aug 10 - 04:15 PM Bend over, Bobert. You're next. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: Bobert Date: 05 Aug 10 - 04:30 PM No thanks, mouse... They've allready nailed me big time this year with their across the board policy of not lending to small businesses... Someone elses turn... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Spill, Baby, Spill... (Palin & oil spills) From: mousethief Date: 05 Aug 10 - 08:51 PM Small business being the driving force behind employment in this country (did I already say that?). Of course Big Biz never met a Small Biz it didn't want to drive out of business and/or buy up. |
