How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 What Obama Admin SHOULD have Done in Gul   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  ]
 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

What Obama Admin SHOULD have Done in Gulf Oil Crisis

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


100 posted 06-16-2010 11:53 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

"should you happen to find any old comments of yours lying around about the harmlessness of drilling or the necessity of drilling or anything like that, maybe you might pass those along as well?"

There has been one oil leak like this in the past 60 years. Nothing is completely harmless, Bob, not even airflight, even though there are those who will claim it's safer than driving. Do we close down all airports for months when there is an airline crash? Obama's response was idiotic.

"My understanding is that BP has been in charge and the Government has been giving support." - Bob

Your understanding is as accurate as it normally is. Perhaps you missed this part of his speech on Tuesday night..

"OBAMA: "From the very beginning of this crisis, the federal government has been in charge of the largest environmental cleanup effort in our nation's history." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100616/ap_on_bi_ge/us_oil_spill_obama_fact_check

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


101 posted 06-16-2010 11:56 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

A few more responses from FactCheck, a site you admire..

"___

OBAMA: "We have approved the construction of new barrier islands in Louisiana to try and stop the oil before it reaches the shore."

THE FACTS: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and local officials pleaded for weeks with the Army Corps of Engineers and the spill response command for permission to build about 40 miles of sand berms along the barrier islands.

State officials applied for an emergency permit to build the berms May 11, but as days went by Jindal became increasingly angry at federal inaction. The White House finally agreed to a portion of the berm plan on June 2. BP then agreed to pay for the project.

The corps was worried that in some cases such a move would alter tides and drive oil into new areas and produce more harm than good.

___

OBAMA: "Already, I have issued a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling. I know this creates difficulty for the people who work on these rigs, but for the sake of their safety and for the sake of the entire region, we need to know the facts before we allow deepwater drilling to continue."

THE FACTS: Obama issued a six-month moratorium on new permits for deepwater drilling but production continues from existing deepwater wells.
"

hmmmm...what does that mean, Bob? Another leak would possibly come from new deepwater drilling but not existing deepwater drilling? Makes about as much sense as everything else he says.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


102 posted 06-17-2010 12:34 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


     One oil leak like this in the last 60 years, is it?

     Would that be the recent one in Australia?  Perhaps the one in Mexico I mentioned above?  Or were you talking about some other leak?  Perhaps the Santa Barbara oil spill in 1968?

     Besides, you don't need to limit yourself to leaks when you can have oil spills, do you?  Like the spill in Massachusetts a few years back?  

     The oil executives just two days ago admitted on TV in front of Congress that they don't have the technology to clean up the oil they spill.  They don't even recognize or remember the name of the Ixtac oil spill in Mexican waters that went on nine months before being controlled by a relief well.

     You are in complete denial yourself that we need to stop drilling and start developing alternate power sources.  The oceans produce most of the planet's oxygen, Mike.  No oxygen, no people.   Oil on water prevents any oxygen exchange between the seawater and the sky.  The algae croaks and the oceans develop an anaerobic ecology.  This is good for anaerobic bacteria, not good for people and things that breathe oxygen for more than a hobby.

     I am in favor of breathing, Mike.  You can't breathe gold.  You can't even admire it for very long without air.

     Apparently, you're still in the Drill, Baby, drill mode, as I pretty much thought.  

      It may be I'm more upset about this than you are, on a realistic basis, since I don't want the drilling and I don't want the spill and I didn't like Obama okaying the drilling in the first place.  Far as you're concerned, it's a convenient issue to slam the man about, but the drilling is essentially what you want him to be doing, and BP and their pals should be doing more of it, and the accidents are no big deal.  According to you, there aren't as many spills and ruptures as there actually are on record, and it's no big deal, anyway.  Business is business.

     How do you deal with it when one business does a number on another business, then?  Oil, for example, seriously deals a blow to fishing and tourism, for example?

      
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


103 posted 06-17-2010 12:46 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

"You are in complete denial yourself that we need to stop drilling and start developing alternate power sources"

Cart before the horse, Bob. I'm all for alternative power sources. Develop them and then stop drilling, not before.

You still won't address Obama's refusal to allow 14 countries to help from the beginning. Well, you're not alone. There is only one news agency that has reported it..guess which one? The others won't touch it. The only way it would have made headline news for the network stations and Rhodes Scholar Rachel would have been if a Republican were president.What has she said about it, btw? I thought so...

What did you think about the Dutch agencies stating that Obama was not acting like a president, with regards to this crisis? They are not Republicans, just people who can apparently see things a lot clearer than you and other left-wingers can. They don't understand.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


104 posted 06-17-2010 02:31 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Multiple issues, here, Mike, as I believe you know.

     You claim to be a free market kind of guy, but you shriek when somebody suggests the actual price of petroleum products be passed along to the public.  As does most of the rest of the Republican party.  That price includes the actual cost of clean-ups like this one and of the ecological damage the use of these high carbon fuels do to the economy and the ecology.  An actual economic  reckoning would price these fuels at a place where it would be a serious luxury item.  This is one of the Free Lunch exceptions that the Republican Party has built into its free market ideology.  When anybody makes an attempt to toss a little bit of reality into the price structure, the party squeals like a stuck pig.

     It is paid to squeal like a stuck pig, truth be told, as is a large part of the Democratic party.  That doesn't make it right.  It's even less right for Republicans, because the Republicans worship at the altar of the market, and this is a major betrayal of their primary religious practice.

     A real-market price for gas and oil would make alternative fuels much more competitive and would encourage research in alternative fuels at a pace that would likely result in some serious cost-effective break-throughs.  The twenty-billion dollar fund that BP is supposed to be setting aside this year to supplement the funds to pay for economic damages for the gulf states may help.  It would be a greater help all around, in the long run, if the costs were passed along to the consumers to reflect at least for a short while the real cost of the fuel that people are using everyday.  I'm not holding my breath, though, also in the long run, that might be something of a help as well.

     Long as the finest legislators money can buy are willing to stack the deck against safer power sources, the world is in big trouble, and your comment about the alternative-fuel first before cutting back drilling will actually have the superficial sound of sense.  It does have that, I concede.  It is also less than useful and suicidal in effect for the reasons I've gone over.

     And, for what it's worth, a betrayal of the Republican idea of the Market Economy.  That doesn't particularly bother me, since I think the market frequently needs management help, but it ought to be a serious burr under your saddle, that is if you take your ideals seriously.

     As for your comments about international help, I don't know.  You may have missed my comments earlier where I spoke about critical path stuff and the difficulty in knowing what stuff was important at which points in time, and how in retrospect the critical path and the appropriate choices seem much more clearly marked.

     That was a response to what you were talking about.  It's why I never felt that President Bush was particularly to blame for not identifying Saudi flight students despite being told by the FBI that there were strange things afoot.

     I blame him for other things, of course, but there was no way he could have known that he had to look at that particular set of messages to get to the right conclusion at the right time.  

     Besides, he had a war he was planning at the time, and he was busy with that.  I'm reasonably sure, though, that he would have stopped 9/11 if he could have.  He'd have probably preferred a bloodless provocation, could he have found one.  In my opinion.

     I should probably research the Dutch paper more thoroughly myself and see what I can make of the story.  It's unfair of me to ask you to do it for me at this point, I feel.  I think there's probably something to the story, but I'm still pretty curious about it and it seems a bit  odd to me in ways I can't put my finger on.  It could be the nature of the American politics, the nature of President Obama or the nature of the Republican opposition, I simply don't know.  I can say that I thank you for bringing the story to my attention.

     Inquiring minds, and all that.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


105 posted 06-17-2010 02:42 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

I have a question for threadbear. Okay, it might end up being a few?

Do you stand by your initial starting post, or have you, as most of us have, learned new things as the sad saga of raging oil unleashed progressed?

and, um, what is your political affiliation? It doesn't really matter to me, because I'd really like to know if you are for lessgoverning government or...are you like, gung ho capitalist no regulations-only-the-strong-survive?

And one more simple question open to all--if dropping a cig butt out of a window causes a wildfire that burns down ten thousand plus trees is a felony--should we give extra consideration to a corporation, who, in light of recent evidence totally ignored all the alarms, bells and whistles of oil rig safety? Why should they not be held accountable? (And if thney were sold a faulty seal by Haliburton? Let them sue Haliburton--um--Let Justice be done though the heavens may fall<--who said that?

ah ...right. Kevin Costner.

And Mike? I don't know if you're right or wrong on this one (regarding that Obama refused aid from other nations) but surely it can't have slipped your mind that the Bush administration also refused billions of dollars of relief monies-- because, because, and this ought to make you proud, the United States still has no agency to handle charity from foreign countries. (That was the reasoniong of the Bush administration anyhow--I must confess, I have no clue what's going on anymore.)

We've decided to just go by experience.

Cancelled the papers, quit watching the news, and so far? The seafood is still good.

And the blues is just mo bettah bluze...

I don't wanna start no mentalisms or nuttin'.

LMAO :rolling"

Repubs? Democrats?

Ya'll all look alike to me. Right now I just wish I were in the clique that used to phone me to tell me that some hot jazz was going on impromptu downtown, uptown, WHEREVER, and yanno?

Ya'll are gonna know what it means to miss New Orleans too.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


106 posted 06-17-2010 08:21 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer


" You may have missed my comments earlier where I spoke about critical path stuff and the difficulty in knowing what stuff was important at which points in time, and how in retrospect the critical path and the appropriate choices seem much more clearly marked."

The difficulty in knowing what stuff was important, Bob? You have countries, one in particular, well-versed in fighting oil spill with equipment, ship and procedures the US doesn't have, ready and willing to offer immediate assistance and you have to decide if that's important? If you are having heart surgery and the surgeon has handles many such operations, all successful, with Operating room equipment and technology other hospital are lacking, so you say, "Well, I'll evaluate your request to operate on me and get back to you"? Bob, you are simply trying to excuse the inexcusable along political lines.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


107 posted 06-17-2010 08:27 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

And Mike? I don't know if you're right or wrong on this one (regarding that Obama refused aid from other nations)

It would be simple for you to know if you care enough to research it, Karen. It's all there.

but surely it can't have slipped your mind that the Bush administration also refused billions of dollars of relief monies-- because, because, and this ought to make you proud, the United States still has no agency to handle charity from foreign countries.

You may have seen in the preceding posts reference to the Jones act, which basically allows the government to suspend an archaic law and allow foreign countries to come in with aid in case of emergencies. Bush suspended this law for Katrina. Obama has not for the oil spill and that has kept countries from being able to contribute.

[This message has been edited by Balladeer (06-17-2010 09:41 AM).]

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


108 posted 06-17-2010 10:38 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Bob, your friend Rachel came up with an interesting program concerning Obama's speech to the nation concerning the oil leak. She finds it strange that he was saying what we need to resolve the crisis is prayer.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/37744753#37720373

Also, in his speech, one can hear one of the most blatant lies ever muttered on National TV.


One of the reasons we are drilling in 5000 feet of water is that we have run out of places to drill on dry land.

Incredible sentence...worthy of Gore, Kerry, the Viernam vert who wasn't, and Blago.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


109 posted 06-17-2010 11:27 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

It is a game of ommission.
The correct sentence would be:

"One of the reasons we are drilling in 5000 feet of water is that through legislation we have run out of places to drill on dry land."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vsht3-Hiu-w&feature=related
.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


110 posted 06-17-2010 10:35 PM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell


Oil Funded Governor Protects BP http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMjmkTciKWo


VP Biden on Rep. Joe Barton's Apology to BP http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABToOl-xbHE
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


111 posted 06-18-2010 02:44 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

     I'd be pleased to have Ms. Maddow as a pal, Mike.  One of the reasons that I'd be pleased is exactly her reaction to the wimpy Presidental oval Office address.  She doesn't particularly care if any given folly is Republican or Democrat, and she's certainly given the President a fair amount of criticism.  She's more or less got her own sense of values.  Prayer is often useful, but I'd rather my politicians offered more concrete solutions to be carried out at the same time.  The power of prayer may be wonderful, but a little appropriately applied elbow grease will often help that prayer along wonderfully.  For those who don't believe in prayer, the elbow grease applied in a purposeful fashion may well substitute quite well, actually.

     Kerry was a Vietnam Vet., Mike.

     He got medals there.  You were upset that he gave the medals back, so you actually know that he was there, don't you?  

     He also has some friends who kept him company through his presidential campaign who were there with him.  "There" in this case being Vietnam.   You might consider why the phrase "to swiftboat" somebody is considered synonymous with the verb "to smear" in some circles. If you believe Kerry is not a Vietnam Vet, then I challenge you to prove it with appropriate references.

     Wiki has an interesting discussion of the use of the term which you might find illuminating,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiftboating

[This message has been edited by Bob K (06-18-2010 03:16 AM).]

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


112 posted 06-18-2010 07:56 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

"Gore, Kerry, the Viernam vert who wasn't, and Blago."

You misunderstood me, Bob, which happens frequently. In this case I can understand how you read it differently. My sentence referred to four people....Gore, Kerry, Blago, and the Vietnam vet who wasn't, referring to the whatchamacallit congressman whose name didn't come to mind who was just blasted for lying about his time in Vietnam. Now, before you correct that, I understand that anyone serving at that time is considered a Vietnam vet. His problem was lying about serving IN Vietnam. I should have said it more clearly to avoid a misunderstanding.

Speaking of lying, what are your thoughts on the "running out of places to drill on dry land" comment, the part of the entry you didn't comment on?
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


113 posted 06-18-2010 11:48 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

The 6th month moratorium was not 'peer reviewed' and agreed upon by the scientific experts:
http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/06/experts_seek_to_clarify_their.html
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


114 posted 06-18-2010 12:03 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

The puzzle pieces are falling into place. Obama's friend George Soros stands to gain considerably from the destruction of Gulf Oil Production from the 6th month moratorium:

The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars to Brazil's state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil's Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil's planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574346610120524166.html

But now Obama may start hearing cries of "foul" after the U.S. Export-Import Bank promised Petrobras, Brazil's state-owned oil company, $2 billion in loan guarantees to help finance lucrative drilling off the shores of Rio De Janeiro.
Some see a contradiction in an executive branch agency, independent but with board members appointed by the president, facilitating abroad the very kind of energy exploration Obama opposes domestically.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Thursday he wasn't prepared to address the issue.

"I have not seen the story," he said. "I'd have to take a look."

Then there is the George Soros angle.

The New York-based hedge fund firm controlled by the billionaire philanthropist and backer of Democratic causes and campaigns bought and sold millions of shares in Petrobras -- the largest of the firm's holdings -- prior to public disclosure of the Export-Import bank's offer of new credit guarantees to the Brazilian energy giant.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/20/loan-brazilian-oi l-company-riles-conservatives-favor-offshore-drilling/


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


115 posted 06-18-2010 12:50 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Why Am I not surprised?
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


116 posted 06-18-2010 01:37 PM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

Top Republicans Offer BP Apologies, Tips to Avoid Accountability
by John Nichols

“Just to be clear, it was BP that caused what is now generally recognized as the worst environmental disaster in American history.

It was BP that provided unsound information about the crisis and its aftermath, creating a false sense that the spill could be more easily contained than was reasonable to imagine.

It was BP that tried to prevent monitoring of the spill that so threatens the Gulf Coast and the environments and economies of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida.

So now that President Obama is getting a little tougher on the company-and it should be emphasized that the White House remains far too cautious a player-who are key Republicans in Congress feeling sorry for?”

BP.


John Nichols - The Nation
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs: "I think Republicans are going to have to ask themselves whether Congressman Barton should be the ranking member of a committee that’s doing what it’s doing today, given the fact that he believes we owe an apology to BP rather than BP owing an apology to the Gulf."


Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


117 posted 06-18-2010 02:27 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


“Just to be clear, it was BP that caused what is now generally recognized as the worst environmental disaster in American history."


How long was BP plannng to do it?
Why did they chose to do it now?


.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


118 posted 06-18-2010 04:34 PM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

BP has paid less than 12 percent of claims

“WASHINGTON (AP) - The House Judiciary Committee says data it has
collected shows that BP has paid less than 12 percent of claims
submitted by people and businesses arising from the Gulf oil spill.
The committee said in a statement Friday that only $71 million
out of an estimated $600 million had been paid as of Tuesday. In
addition, the panel said that BP didn't make any payments in the
first two weeks following the explosion and oil spill.
Michigan Democratic Rep. John Conyers said he's concerned that
BP "is stiffing too many victims and shortchanging others."
The committee said BP hasn't made a single payment for bodily
injury or diminished home property value. BP officials did not
immediately respond to a request for comment.”
http://www.katc.com/news/bp-has-paid-less-than-12-percent-of-claims/
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


119 posted 06-18-2010 07:08 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

It's a given that far more people
will claim whiplash than were on the bus . . .

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


120 posted 06-18-2010 07:21 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I have a lot to respond to here, Mike.

     First, thank you for clarifying the matter about Senator Kerry.  I appreciate your good will in this.

     The other guy, while a Vietnam era vet., was not a Vietnam vet. and was certainly wrong to have made that claim.  It was a lie, and an offensive one, and it's damaged the man himself and the Democratic Party as well.

quote:
John responds to a comment by Jennifer, which comes first, below:


“Just to be clear, it was BP that caused what is now generally recognized as the worst environmental disaster in American history."


How long was BP planning to do it?
Why did they chose to do it now?



     All the information seems to be reaching a loud gabble at this point:  There seems to be a great deal of it.  Halliburton has apparently said that BP refused to follow safety recommendation regarding use of slurry and mud, and refused to allow the cement in the well time to cure.  I'd need to check Rachel Maddow's blog to see if I've got the right source there.  BP and Halliburton have been trading charges back and forth for a while now, though, at least since the blow-out...

     I would suggest that BP would have started planning for this disaster at least at the time when they turned in their plan for dealing with potential disasters in the gulf.  Indications, such as their listing of dead men for those to call in case of disaster to be first responders, would indicate that they didn't take the disaster planning seriously.  Indications such as their inclusion of Walrus and otter  among the gulf species which required special protection would indicate that the plan was one that had been pretty much lifted whole from some cold-water drilling site without adaptation.

     Being willing to deploy booms but not to maintain them in operating condition following the spill itself would suggest that the planning for the spill was lax and impromptu.  How long planning to wing it had been the plan of action , I can't tell you, but an examination of what has actually been done doesn't seem to show any in-depth — you should pardon the use of the term — response had been in place prior to the spill at all, and that the firm's basic consideration was to low-ball the size of the spill and to minimize the amount of the damages for which they would be found liable.

     Failure to commit money to further research into dealing with oil spills since roughly 1989 might suggest that planning for exactly this sort of disaster has gone back at least that long, and that the policy certainly has seemed to be to amortize the cost of the cleanup over time rather than to do the research and put into practice the activities needed to prevent such an event from happening.

     It is sad that it is BP to which this has happened, because BP is one of the companies that has put research funding into alternative power sources, and as such much be considered, at least marginally, one of the good guys.  It simply didn't put money into safety and blow out prevention and clean-up technology.  Or at least it hasn't put enough money in recently enough.

     That would be my thinking on the matter, John.  What about yours?
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


121 posted 06-18-2010 07:41 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     If I understand correctly, the draft findings of the committee were pretty much in agreement.  I, for one, would like to know what those were.  I'd find that of interest.

     The six month moratorium had to have been a political decision.  It wouldn't have made, to my mind, any scientific sense at all.  Stop underwater drilling until we have safe cleanup methods available — that would make sense, if one were looking for a defensible strategy; but a six month stop does basically nothing.  So I'd have to say, it's sort of an impossibility that it could be a peer reviewed solution.

     It would have to be an ethics decision, and not even a terribly good ethics decision at that.  I'd object to having somebody confuse an ethical decision with a scientific one as well.

     What were the things that the panel did sign on to, though?  That would be interesting.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


122 posted 06-18-2010 07:53 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Have we run out of places to drill on dry land?

     I don't know?

     I guess that would depend on where The President was talking about and what conditions he was describing.  While there might be lots of new places on dry land to drill, I don't know that there are lots of them on the continental United States.  Is that what he was talking about?  Not having heard anything but occasional snippets of the speech, I can't tell you.  

     And there may even be places on the continental United States where we could drill, but where it wouldn't be cost effective to drill.  Drilling in oil shale or in oil sands might be possible, but the price of the processing might make the the whole thing prohibitive.  It would be cheaper to mine coal.

     I don't think this would be a lie, though.  I wouldn't try saying it was, at least without reading the speech.

     If he were trying to say that we couldn't get oil from wells in Iraq, though, I'd have to be pretty dubious about that claim.

     I notice that you have only provided a very narrow piece of the speech and nothing that might offer any context, so without that context, this is the best I can offer you, Mike.

    
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


123 posted 06-18-2010 09:42 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

You have the whole speech, Bob. It was his address to the nation that the link pertained to.

Of course he was referring to the United States and of course it was a blatant lie. if you are not willing to acknowledge that, then there is no reason to even attempt to overcome such bias.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


124 posted 06-18-2010 10:03 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Here is the Salazar report, Bob, that the experts reviewed. Since the experts claimed that the 6 month moratorium language was added after they signed off on the report, and that was the only point that they took exception with and disagreed with, I can only assume that they didn't have a problem with the rest of the recommendations in the report.
http://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&PageID=33598
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> What Obama Admin SHOULD have Done in Gul   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors