|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Arthur_itus Date: 12 Aug 10 - 01:24 PM Well done BP, after a long struggle you succeded in blocking it. I don't suppose anybody in America will agree, but there you go. Maybe the yanks will calm down a bit now and maybe Obama will ofer an apology for being such a twat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: mousethief Date: 13 Aug 10 - 12:20 AM Bet this comes as no surprise to anybody: "Fake Fishermen" Compensation Claims Linkee no workee. Unless you wanted to direct us to the Torygraph 404 page. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Aug 10 - 10:13 AM ""The TV news showed a couple of them being arrested and hauled off to the hoosegow. Their fraud is despicable; sorting out false from legitimate claims delays compensation to those who deserve it."" That news item also confirmed (at least the BBC ran it) that I was right when I said that BP had been paying compensation on claims from the start. According to the news item, they've been forced by the fraudsters to stop doing so, and investigate every claim before paying. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 Aug 10 - 01:11 PM As of August 9, Bp had paid out only $319 million of the $20 billion supposedly available. Payments to the administration fund are quarterly, and could be stopped at any time. Look for BP to hold back on payments and encourage court actions on the part of claimants, dragging out the process and trying to limit actual compensation. Americans may be relieved that the oil flow has stopped, but don't expect applause. Lost fishing, loss of tourism, spending except for necessities limited, and everyone holding their breath about damage to the lower food chain and the future of the ecosystem. It may be years before trust in the safety of Gulf seafood and Gulf waters is rebuilt. Surface oil is being cleaned up, but the majority of the flow is still in deeper waters, along with toxic dispersants. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Arthur_itus Date: 13 Aug 10 - 01:27 PM Q without wanting to get into a slagging match, I would like to comment on this Quote As of August 9, Bp had paid out only $319 million of the $20 billion supposedly available. Payments to the administration fund are quarterly, and could be stopped at any time. Look for BP to hold back on payments and encourage court actions on the part of claimants, dragging out the process and trying to limit actual compensation. Americans may be relieved that the oil flow has stopped, but don't expect applause. Unquote Do all Americans ever question what they did in Iraq and what it has done to many many innocent civilians in that country. Are they being compensated for loss of life/houses/business etc etc? Peace |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Ebbie Date: 13 Aug 10 - 02:17 PM Sheesh, Arthur- bad as it is in Iraq and Afghanistan, that cannot fairly be equated with the Gulf of Mexico situation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Arthur_itus Date: 13 Aug 10 - 02:58 PM You must be joking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don Firth Date: 13 Aug 10 - 03:25 PM No joke, Arthur_itis. You're taking a cheap shot by trying to drag something extraneous into the discussion. If I wanted to dig back into Britain's recent history, I could come up with a number of similar items. But the whole discussion would degenerate into a pointless slagging match. It's not far from that now, as a matter of fact. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 13 Aug 10 - 04:17 PM The State of Alabama has filed suit against BP, Transocean, Cameron and Haliburton for the catastrophic oil spill. Anadarko and others also named. The state attorney general is suing them "for the amount it will take to make Alabama whole." The state seeks to recover lost tax revenues (a considerable amount for Alabama and Louisiana). The decision stems from fear that victims will not be adequately compensated. The timing was questioned by the governor, as well as the possible cost of outside counsel. Toronto Globe and Mail, Irish Times, Reuters. Adm. Allen says it is a time to "wait and see" if more work is needed to completely close the well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 14 Aug 10 - 02:55 AM The state attorney general is suing them "for the amount it will take to make Alabama whole." The state seeks to recover lost tax revenues Such an action will fail. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 14 Aug 10 - 01:37 PM Knowing juries in that area, they will convict and name a large amount, but it will be appealed through the courts for a few years before closure is reached for a fraction of the amount originally named in the suit. The action is partly political, not supported by the governor (an oil company supporter) and his wing of the party, and may get lost when the next batch of politicians is voted in. Its importance is in focus(s)ing the anger of Alabamans and its influence on future regulations controlling offshore Alabama industries. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Les from Hull Date: 14 Aug 10 - 01:43 PM The only winners here will be lawyers, right? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 14 Aug 10 - 08:09 PM Yes, business will be good for the legal clans for years to come. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 14 Aug 10 - 09:01 PM The state attorney general is suing them "for the amount it will take to make Alabama whole." The state seeks to recover lost tax revenues That action will fail |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: mousethief Date: 14 Aug 10 - 11:40 PM The state attorney general is suing them "for the amount it will take to make Alabama whole." The state seeks to recover lost tax revenues That action will fail Say it again, Teribus. Nobody read it the first 2 times. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 15 Aug 10 - 02:28 PM Numerous other suits have been filed, some on the part of fisheries and shrimpers. Cost of public services is subject of another. Loss of government revenue, loss of business revenue, loss of earning capacity, damage to real and personal property, loss of natural resources, environmental damage, are all subject to legal actions and determination by the courts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: chazkratz Date: 15 Aug 10 - 07:32 PM Q! You win! You kept trying and got the devil's number. Good on yer. Charles |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Greg F. Date: 16 Aug 10 - 09:05 AM Alabama whole? is the "w" a typo? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 24 Aug 10 - 10:48 AM A Company Press Release Eyewitness Macondo This spring and summer, the world's eyes have been focused on the Gulf of Mexico, where the Deepwater Horizon tragedy and subsequent oil spill from the Macondo well took place. Under BP's direction, several teams from Aker Solutions have been playing important parts during this period. Here you can read eyewitness accounts of how Aker Solutions employees have supported BP throughout these challenging days. http://www.akersolutions.com/Internet/MediaCentre/Featurestories/OilandGas/EyewitnessMacondo.htm A joint industry response Personnel onshore and offshore felt that the working relationship with BP and other contractors involved during these challenging months was a productive one. In the media BP has been criticised for not doing enough, or not doing things quickly enough. "Having worked closely with BP over these months, our impression was quite the opposite. We were impressed that we always got everything we asked for, usually faster than expected," says Holthe. "All resources were made available at any given time". BP was overall responsible for the operations, and in turn answered to the US Coast Guard. Many contractors and suppliers were involved both at the spill site and onshore. The feedback from Aker Solutions personnel is that BP was receptive towards advice and all suggestions were listened to, discussed properly and decisions were well founded and communicated. "That is how we in the field experienced it," adds Holthe. "It really was a team effort, where the entire Gulf coast oil and gas community pulled together," adds Erik Wiik. "I am pleased that our company could contribute to managing this emergency. Our specialist knowledge of subsea equipment and our experience in performing operations on the seabed in deep waters are at the very core of our business". Although Erik Wiik describes the last few months as "interesting and an incredible learning experience", he is not keen on repeating it. "The oil industry has learned a lot from this incident. We will learn even more from it in the aftermath, utilise this knowledge, improve and ensure such an incident like this never happens again," concludes Wiik. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 26 Aug 10 - 11:05 AM Now here is something interesting: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/7964890/Oil-spill-safety-valve-was-wrongly-plumbed-on-rig-says- Harry Thierens, BP's vice president for drilling and completions, told a US political hearing that the blowout preventer was connected to a test pipe, rather than the correct one. "It would mean that the pipe rams could not be closed," Mr Thierens said in evidence to a federal panel on Wednesday. "I was frankly astonished that this could have happened." On Tuesday, one of the survivors of BP's Deepwater Horizon explosion admitted to the hearing that his bonus was in part based on how quickly repairs were carried out. That now explains how our guys could not shut the bloody thing off on the 22nd April. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Alice Date: 26 Aug 10 - 11:15 AM "our guys"? Ah, so you ARE seeing this as Britain vs US. Pitiful. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 26 Aug 10 - 11:45 AM "our guys"? Ah, so you ARE seeing this as Britain vs US. Pitiful. Ehmm No actually Alice dear, by stating "our guys" I was referring to the crew onboard the BOA Sub C who arrived on the scene of the explosion at 02:00hrs on the morning of the 21st April, who after the initial search for survivors was called off were tasked with trying to operate the "Kill Rams" of the BOP using the Work Class ROV's onboard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 26 Aug 10 - 11:58 AM "Oil Industry's answers frustrate federal panel" "The lead investigator examining the Deepwater Horizon disaster appears to be losing patience with vague or nonresponsive responses from oficials including a BP vice president. "Since the hearings began in May, three BP officials with intimate knowledge of events leading up to the April 20 explosion ....have declined to trestify before a joint Coast Guard and Interior Department panel, which convened again Wednesday. .....Two invoked their constitutional right not to produce testimony that could incriminate themselves."........... Coast Guard lead inestigator expressed particular agitation at answers given by BP vice president for drilling Harry Thierens, ......" Thierens could not recall any details about past accidents at Thunderhorse (Gulf area). "Investigators were also dissatisfied about the confusing chain of command aboard the rig. "Thierens said he lacked a "thorough understanding" of the command structure, a response that left Nguyen unhappy. "Someone has got to be in charge," Nguyen said about the three-legged stool command aboard the rig. Thierens testified that he was not notified of changes made in the blowout preventer.... "the changes hampered efforts to take control of the well, he said." In other testimony, a Transocean supervisor denied testimony by rig electronics technician Mike Williams. Los Angeles Times, August 26, 2010. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 26 Aug 10 - 12:18 PM Wall Street Journal- Aug. 26, 2010 "BP Casts Blame for Failure of Device" "Undocumented changes to the blowout preventer that should have shut down BP PLC's runaway Gulf well slowed efforts to stop the flow of oil, a BP official [Thierens] testified Wednesday. After spending days trying to use underwater robots to trigger the blowout preventer, ...... workers discovered that it had been modified........ "The controls that the robots were trying to use that were supposed to close the valves were actually connected to a testing device that couldn't shut off the well, he said," ......."Even after they learned of the modifications, workers still couldn't make the blowout preventer work. "BP has said that Transocean bears at least partial responsibility .....because of the equipment's failure, and the companies have been casting blame on each other." "...Transocean said that the blowout preventer had passed numerous tests.......and the modifications had no impact on efforts to shut down the well afterward." I am quoting excerpts, because reports can be withdrawn. The report in the Telegraph linked by Teribus can't be accessed now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 27 Aug 10 - 01:06 PM The State of Florida has thanked BP for their contributions 26 million US$ for advertising that they say has "Saved their Summer", resulting in bookings and visitor figures up 6% on last year. Now what did Obama, or any member of his administration do? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: gnu Date: 27 Aug 10 - 01:33 PM Barry swam in the gulf. Worth a lot more than $26M advertising. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: gnu Date: 27 Aug 10 - 01:35 PM BTW... I haven't been following the story. Am I to understand the vast majority of the spilled oil just vanished? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 10 - 03:51 PM It doesn't seem to be making that many oil slicks on the surface anymore, but that was one helluva lot of oil that came gushing out of that hole. It's still drifting around down there doing all kinds of unpleasant stuff to the ecosystem of the Gulf. That much oil doesn't just disappear! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: gnu Date: 27 Aug 10 - 03:57 PM But, Don... I thought I read a while back that "they" were baffled as the ecosystem just seemed to take care of it. I was wondering if that kinda bullshit was still being proffered. There just might be a giant oil eating clam in the deep blue, but I am sure it would take at least several to digest all that oil. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 27 Aug 10 - 04:03 PM As previously pointed out, marine scientists at the University of Georgia Univ, South Florida, and others are worried about the effect on microplankton and bottom of the food chain organisms of the oil in plumes at depth in the Gulf. The oil didn't just go away, much is in deep water and thus unseen. BP and the government don't mention or assign little attention to these concerns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: gnu Date: 27 Aug 10 - 04:42 PM That's my point Q. It didn't just disappear or was "taken care of" as stated in a few articles I read a while back. That is the time I stopped following the media reports. I found it too disturbing... as if there was a conspiracy to distance BP from future responsibility and liablility for the oil... to bolster up stocks and give the rich more time to get out while the getting was good. I could be all wet about it but I don't believe in magic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 10 - 04:43 PM It ain't over yet! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 27 Aug 10 - 04:53 PM It is being munched away at by microbes even as we speak, according to reports from the US. Oh dear not quite the disaster everybody was predicting. And GfS is right it ain't over yet we still have all those law suits to get through, you know the ones where people have actually got to prove they lost something. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 10 - 06:29 PM Does BP have some special blessing when they screw up, Teribus? I'm quite sure they just wish it would all go away, and they seem to be trying to simply pull a bag over their head and blythly walk away, whistling a merry little tune. But there are a few itty-bitty questions that remain. Such as: How come Prince William Sound is still an ecological disaster area some twenty-two years after the Exxon Valdez oil spill? Almost 20 years after the spill, a team of scientists at the University of North Carolina found that the effects are lasting far longer than expected. The team estimates some shoreline Arctic habitats may take up to 30 years to recover. Exxon Mobil denies any concerns over this, stating that they anticipated a remaining fraction that they assert will not cause any long-term ecological impacts, according to the conclusions of 350 peer-reviewed studies. However, a study from scientists from the NOAA concluded that this contamination can produce chronic low-level exposure, discourage subsistence where the contamination is heavy, and decrease the "wilderness character" of the area.And there was one helluva lot more oil that gushed into the Gulf than was spilled in Prince William Sound. We haven't seen the end of this. And we won't for some time to come. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 28 Aug 10 - 05:00 AM OK Don answer the question yourself. What are the points of difference between Prince William Sound and the waters of the Gulf of Mexico? In the two instances you wish compare how did the oil get there? In the two instances you wish to compare is it true that oil occurs naturally through seabed seepage in one location but not at the other? In the two instances you wish to compare is it true that in one location because of millenia of crude oil seepage microbes naturally exist and evolve that literally eat and break down the oil, and that such microbes are totally absent at the other location? What are the points of difference in the characteristics of the oil being transported through Prince Edward Sound and that escaping from the Macondo Well? Does BP have some special blessing when they screw up, Teribus? I'm quite sure they just wish it would all go away, and they seem to be trying to simply pull a bag over their head and blythly walk away, whistling a merry little tune. You are talking here I presume Don about the Major International Oil Company who: 1) IMMEDIATELY faced up to their responsibilities from the outset; 2) Voluntarily declared that they WOULD NOT hide behind the US$75 million ceiling on liability from the outset; 3) Who then proceeded to do everything in their power to mitigate the damage caused and seal off the well. Now if you want comparisons Don shall I go into how Exxon behaved after the Valdez incident dropped off the radar, how Dow Chemicals (Union Carbide) has behaved after Bhopal; or Occidental Oil behaved after the Piper Alpha. By fresh revelations each day it becomes clearer and clearer that this accident was caused not by BP but by the actions of the specialist contractors that they employed, both predominantly US Companies - OK now let us see President Barack Obama hold their feet to the fire, lets see that political "light-weight" keep his boot on their necks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil From: Stringsinger Date: 28 Aug 10 - 04:04 PM Arthur, the American people have not had the influence in Washington that a true democracy requires. It's true that BP has been given carte blanche by the regulatory agencies and this is one of the big deceptions of the Obama Administration. Still, to blame American citizens who may wind up paying taxes and job losses for BP's malfeasance is the height of lack of charity. If it happened in Britain, I doubt the reaction on the part of the citizenry would be much different than here in the US. BP screwed up and wrecked the Gulf of Mexico and put fishermen and other tradespeople out of business. And you want to blame them for it? BTW they are not honoring their debts to the working people of the Gulf as we knew they wouldn't. They are chiseling out by perverting the regulatory system and unfortunately they are allowed to get away with it. The American people are being short-changed by this crooked goliath. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: toadfrog Date: 28 Aug 10 - 04:27 PM Teribus: 1. BP was in control of the rig, and made the decisions. The people from Transocean were ignored. 2. It is not as if this were the first time BP cut corners on safety, with disastrous effects. Cutting corners on safety is its modus operandi. This has been notoriously so for years, BP unquestionably has the worst corporate culture of any of the oil majors. Exxon had a big oil spill, cleaned up its act, and has little trouble since. It has become the best run of the major oil companies. 3. Brown, the old CEO of BP, expanded by buying up competitors and cutting costs--notably safety, relentlessly. Then came the Texas City explosion. Tony Hayward, when he took over, said words to the effect safety would be his number one priority. He didn't. There were additional, ongoing spills in Alaska. 4. I do not know which, if any, American companies have rigs in the North Sea, but would think that if Americans had a really bad oil spill there and destroyed the coast of Scotland, the Brits would have harsh things to say about that firm. And I would not necessarily attribute that to bigotry, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: gnu Date: 28 Aug 10 - 04:41 PM Just a comment... it does NOT matter ONE IOTA about anything BP may or may not have done re costs or safety or ANYTHING else. They owned the rig. They drilled. They spilled. They have to pay. Period. This bullshit about the oil disappearing is an attempt to NOT PAY in future and it is wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: pdq Date: 28 Aug 10 - 04:49 PM The oil spill in Alaska fouled beeches and wound up between and under rocks. The Gulf oil spill was kept off beeches for the most part so it was not trapped. The main reason that the oil spilled in the Gulf is dissapearing is the water temperature, which is (just a guess) about 20 degrees F warmer than the cold Pacific Ocean waters of Alaska. The important microbes don't thrive in cold water. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 28 Aug 10 - 05:41 PM ""And there was one helluva lot more oil that gushed into the Gulf than was spilled in Prince William Sound."" OK Don F, granting you that one, would you like maybe to give us the comparative water volumes of Prince William Sound, and the Gulf, and how the oil volumes compare when the difference is accounted for? You know! How many gallons per cubic kilometre, or how many tonnes per million tonnes of seawater. It seems to me both facile and probably inaccurate to compare the quantity of oil without taking into account the water volumes involved. Does that sound reasonable to you? Don T |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Alice Date: 28 Aug 10 - 05:57 PM The Gulf oil went into the marshes, not just onto beaches. The marshes are nursery habitat for the marine animals and birds. It has been devastating. The oyster beds were devastated by the gulf oil disaster. 100% mortality reported in some oyster beds |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 28 Aug 10 - 06:09 PM Oysters, prawns, crabs and other bottom organisms are limited in distribution by depth/oxygen content of water/food availability/water temperature and other factors. They are not spread across the Gulf but are in a zone nearshore; many fish are limited by food supply/ oxygen content of water, temperature, etc. as well. Marine scientists are worried that the oil plumes might affect the zones with valuable food supplies, reducing oxygen content, micro-organisms on which seafood species depend, and other needs of species harvested in the Gulf. The total area and volume of the Gulf is not pertinent. The area concerned is near-offshore Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida and perhaps Cuba. Mexico seems to be well away from plume projections. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: pdq Date: 28 Aug 10 - 07:51 PM I hope this link works. It is a... NASA satellite photo of oil plume |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 29 Aug 10 - 03:19 AM gnu: Just a comment... it does NOT matter ONE IOTA about anything BP may or may not have done re costs or safety or ANYTHING else. They owned the rig. They drilled. They spilled. They have to pay. Period. This bullshit about the oil disappearing is an attempt to NOT PAY in future and it is wrong. Already had much of this discussion with Q and eventually in the end he had to concede that I was correct. Point 1: "They (BP) owned the rig" - Completely wrong the Deepwater Horizon was owned by a Company called Transocean Drilling - That is a matter of fact. Point 2: "They (BP) drilled" - Again completely wrong those responsible for drilling on the Transocean Deepwaer Drilling Rig Deepwater Horizon were all Transocean employees. These were the personnel responsible for operating and maintaining the BOP which failed (It now looks as though the BOP was subject to unauthorised modifications and that it had been connected in such a way as to prevent it working by Transocean employees). These were the personnel responsible for by-passing safety systems and shutting off alarms onboard the Deepwater Horizon. Point 3: "They (BP) spilled" - Most certainly they did, then made every effort possible to mitigate the effects of the leak - accomplishing that inside three months operating in waters and drilling depths right at the forefront on technology (XTOC 1 - another "Transocean" drilled well in the Gulf of Mexico - in far shallower water took nine months) Point 4: "They (BP) have to pay" - No doubt and that is what they have stated all along so what is your comment? They could have hid behind the 75 million ceiling but did not voluntarily, they have always stated from the outset that they would pay all legitimate claims (and they have already been inundated by many fraudulant claims). I have seen nothing on this thread or in any publication where anybody has said that they should not pay. BTW they are not honoring their debts to the working people of the Gulf as we knew they wouldn't. They are chiseling out by perverting the regulatory system and unfortunately they are allowed to get away with it. The American people are being short-changed by this crooked goliath. Stringsinger Examples please? Or is this just something else you fling about without substantiation and expect people to accept it because it is what they want to hear? The Gulf oil went into the marshes, not just onto beaches. The marshes are nursery habitat for the marine animals and birds. It has been devastating. Alice Very little of the oil from the Macondo Well actually made it to shore, lost of marine life was minute compared to the Exxon Valdez incident. By the way Alice did you accept who I meant when I said "our guys" in the previous post of mine that you commented on, or are you above owning up to your own mistakes? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 29 Aug 10 - 03:24 AM Marine scientists are worried that the oil plumes might affect the zones with valuable food supplies, reducing oxygen content, micro-organisms on which seafood species depend, and other needs of species harvested in the Gulf. Oxygen content of the water within the subsea plumes has been measured and found to be non-critical - outside the plume 67% oxgenated within the plume 57% - no effect on marine life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 29 Aug 10 - 06:40 AM ""The total area and volume of the Gulf is not pertinent."" True to form, ducking a pertinent point with a personal opinion presented as fact. I was not one of those who initiated comparisons with other spills, but, since those comparisons are being used to blacken BP with accusations of causing greater damage than any others, a comparison of the water volumes in proportion to the volume of the spill is not only pertinent, it is necessary in order to make your case stand up. The size of the Gulf is not pertinent, nor is the size of Prince William sound. What is pertinent is the volume of water in each case which was polluted, and the volume of pollutant in each case. I started out my working life as an analytical chemist, and am fully conversant with the concept of dilution, for which the two parameters are required. By the tone of your response, You are not. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 29 Aug 10 - 10:36 AM From New Scientist this week Terry Hazen, a microbial ecologist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, says that he has studied the same plume as the Woods Hole team. His results show that microbes were eating up the plumes rapidly - so fast, he says, that the oil must already have vanished (Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.1195979). He is adamant: "The plume is no longer there. It's gone." Other microbial biologists, including Gary King of Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge and Jay Grimes of the University of Southern Mississippi in Ocean Springs, agree with Hazen's rates of degradation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 29 Aug 10 - 03:17 PM Dr. Jay Grimes discussed the NOAA report, saying it is the best available so far, but also said the most inconclusive variable is the amount of oil that decomposed at sea. He has said nothing about plume analysis. Many scientists suspect "the figure for oil remaining in the water is much higher than the report's estimates, and complain that federal officials have refused to reveal the algorithms used to derive the calculations that relied on measurement and estimates provided by Gulf response teams in daily operational reports." The Times-Picayune, August 17, 2010. Charles Hopkinson and researchers, Univ. Georgia and Georgia Sea Grant, said "Almost 80 per cent of the oil has not been recovered, they say. They took particular issue with the NIC's dismissal of dispersed oil hidden below the surface. "one major conception is that oil that has dissolved into water is gone and, therefore harmless," says Charles Hopkinson. At stake here is the toxicity of dissolved oil in water. Several teams [including Univ. Georgia] have plans to travel to the Gulf and look for oil trapped in deeper waters. New Scientist, August 21, 2010, article by Sujata Gupta, "Gulf Spill: Is the Oil Lurking Underwater?". Early on, I made a mistake about the drilling crew on the floor (Transocean, not BP) when the gusher destroyed the rig. Terribus greatly expands on this. Nothing, however, changes the fact that BP, as principal, had charge of operations and was either complicit in or failed to direct the rig operator and others in the conduct of the operation. This was the thrust of my posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: gnu Date: 29 Aug 10 - 03:31 PM Teribus. My apologies. I stand corrected. But, are they still liable as they were the ones who paid to have the rig drill and stood to profit from it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill) From: Teribus Date: 29 Aug 10 - 04:36 PM 700 Up |
