SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Banned Joined: Sep 13 2008 Posts: 3129

I'm pretty sure we've all heard about this...

http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/energy-resources/premier+pledges+stricken+Gulf+Coast/2976211/story.html
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/energy-resources/premier+pledges+stricken+Gulf+Coast/2976211/story.html

So apparently a BP oil rig off the coast of mexico sank releasing a dangerous amount of oil into the water.

Posted: May 03 2010 01:23 pm

It was sobotauge!!! Rush (The guy, not the band) claims that it was sunk by militant liberals trying to make the oil company look bad.

I am not kidding.

Posted: May 03 2010 01:24 pm

Don't worry. There's plenty more oil where that came from.

Posted: May 03 2010 01:34 pm

It's probably the same guy who killed Gunpei Yoki...
I heard about this in my Birds of prey class and surprisingly that was the first time I heard anything about it until Friday. All day the talked about this when finally it hit the shore and started damaging the wildlife and potential watersheds...

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Does anyone else feel like BP isn't taking this shit seriously?

I began to try and figure out why.

This is what I came up with.

The law Oil Pollution Act of 1990 provides a fine of $ 3,000 per barrel spilled in nature.
The number I keep hearing is that 5000 barrels of oil are being leaked per day.
The daily cost of this problem is $15,000,000.
The value of BP right now is $150,834,700,000
If this spill went on for 100 days the company would only stand to be penalized 1% of its value.

In fact, the company has lost more money on Wall Street with a 13% stock price decrease than it has in oil loss or repairs.

I think the penalties for this type of thing need to be more strict if we want to see future disasters avoided.

Posted: May 03 2010 01:45 pm

I kind of thought the same when I heard the news. If people cared they could have contained a brunt of the incoming oil and at least salvage some of the crude before the oil started to move. Instead it's like "oh it exploded, might as well think about handling it"

Posted: May 04 2010 06:13 am

The new shit they're talking about is now putting a Dome over the well? So they'll just drop a dome on it until it cracks or breaks and starts leaking again? It amazes me they STILL haven't capped this or stopped the leak. So the big plan is lining up Oil Booms across the states? They all seem to be more focused on stopping it from getting ashore than stopping the actual leak.

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

The weirdest thing is now Arnold Schwarzenegger says he doesn't support offshore drilling anymore because of this accident. Is that a smart stance, misguided or just dumb? I really can't figure it out.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

joshwoodzy wrote:

The weirdest thing is now Arnold Schwarzenegger says he doesn't support offshore drilling anymore because of this accident. Is that a smart stance, misguided or just dumb? I really can't figure it out.

It is smart if he is seeking renewable energy resources.
It is dumb if he just thinks oil will magically produce itself.

Posted: May 04 2010 10:51 am

werent they also thinking about burning the oil? making some sort of contained fire?

Posted: May 04 2010 11:15 am

They should just build some sort of big shell around it. Maybe two large structures each surrounded by smaller structures, and then connect them all with bridgeways.

I think it might work.

Posted: May 04 2010 11:28 am

Knyte wrote:

They should just build some sort of big shell around it. Maybe two large structures each surrounded by smaller structures, and then connect them all with bridgeways.

I think it might work.

Actually this is sort of what they're doing, as I understand it: building a huge concrete bunker around the leak, and then pumping out the oil as it fills.

Title: Titlating Joined: Dec 17 2007 Posts: 5042

Well over here there is constant fear about when not so much if it hits. And pensacola which is a big beach town will be fucked.

Posted: May 05 2010 12:34 am

SoldierHawk wrote:

Knyte wrote:

They should just build some sort of big shell around it. Maybe two large structures each surrounded by smaller structures, and then connect them all with bridgeways.

I think it might work.

Actually this is sort of what they're doing, as I understand it: building a huge concrete bunker around the leak, and then pumping out the oil as it fills.

lol im pretty sure he was referencing MGS2

Posted: Jun 06 2010 01:14 am

BP's oil spill unleashes an outpouring of angry fan art:
http://current.com/shows/upstream/92465583_bps-oil-spill-unleashes-an-outpouring-of-angry-fan-art.htm

http://io9.com/5552859/bps-oil-spill-unleashes-an-outpouring-of-angry-fan-art/gallery/

i like the mario one

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Jun 06 2010 09:32 am

This is still happening, and it pisses me off. And if you're pissing me off when a month ago I kind of didn't care, you're doing something very, very wrong.

I think Penny Arcade, however, can explain it:

Posted: Jun 06 2010 10:17 am

I just applied for a new job with BP. I'm guessing that everyone hates them right now and nobody else is applying to work with them.

Posted: Jun 06 2010 02:45 pm

Quote:

Gulf Spill Just A Drop In The Bucket Compared To What Happens Every Day, Everywhere Else

In fact, in Nigeria it happens all the time, dumping far more oil than the Deepwater Horizon has. Every single year. The WWF estimates that 1,500,000 tonnes have been spilled, more than 50 Exxon Valdez tankerloads. But hey, it is over there, not here.

John Vidal of the Guardian writes of an oil spill in Nigeria a few years ago, touring the disaster:

Forest and farmland were now covered in a sheen of greasy oil. Drinking wells were polluted and people were distraught. No one knew how much oil had leaked. "We lost our nets, huts and fishing pots," said Chief Promise, village leader of Otuegwe and our guide. "This is where we fished and farmed. We have lost our forest. We told Shell of the spill within days, but they did nothing for six months."

The scale of the pollution is mind-boggling. The government's national oil spill detection and response agency (Nosdra) says that between 1976 and 1996 alone, more than 2.4m barrels contaminated the environment.....With 606 oilfields, the Niger delta supplies 40% of all the crude the United States imports and is the world capital of oil pollution. Life expectancy in its rural communities, half of which have no access to clean water, has fallen to little more than 40 years over the past two generations. Locals blame the oil that pollutes their land and can scarcely believe the contrast with the steps taken by BP and the US government to try to stop the Gulf oil leak and to protect the Louisiana shoreline from pollution.

There is nothing new or surprising in the current disaster; it is happening all over the world. The only difference here is that it is American soil being fouled, and we are learning the real price of our addiction, that much of the world has been paying for years.

More in the Guardian: Nigeria's agony dwarfs the Gulf oil spill. The US and Europe ignore it

http://current.com/news/92468875_gulf-spill-just-a-drop-in-the-bucket-compared-to-what-happens-every-day-everywhere-else.htm

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/06/gulf-spill-just-drop-in-bucket.php

Posted: Jun 06 2010 07:56 pm

In case anyone couldn't tell by my post to the Ke$ha thing in Television (which really segued into here), I'm pretty fucking furious about the whole thing. It just shows, in graphic detail, how willing the government is to suck the dick of big oil or any other corporation. Not to mention the fact that a lot of Florida judges have pretty tight ties to oil, which'll make the likelihood of a lawsuit from the state or cities therein fall into the either slim or none categories. Considering that this dwarfs the Valdez spill, yeah... it's some serious shit, and BP's just like "Well, we'll take care of her when we get to her, guhdurka durka."

It's unconscionable, and their assets should be seized to try and clean up what we can, but in some places the damage is already done too much. And again, as GPFontaine pointed out, it's not going to hurt them financially in the least. Meanwhile, the generations of people on this board, our kids, our fucking grandkids five times down the line of greatness, we're going to be stuck holding the goddamn tab.

Wizard Joined: Jun 12 2009 Posts: 4209

aeonic wrote:

Meanwhile, the generations of people on this board, our kids, our fucking grandkids five times down the line of greatness, we're going to be stuck holding the goddamn tab.

Hell, some already are.

Posted: Jun 06 2010 08:53 pm

GPFontaine wrote:

I think the penalties for this type of thing need to be more strict if we want to see future disasters avoided.

Yeah, you know, because BP was sitting around one day and thought "Hey, let's cause an oil spill".

Here are some reasons why BP should be - and is - motivated to fix this problem:

1. They can make more money selling that oil than watching it flow into the ocean.
2. It's a PR nightmare.
3. As you already said, it has ruined market confidence in the company.

Bigger fines and criminal penalties are not the answer. Our economy is already in the toilet, the last thing we want are fines so steep that they drive the company out of business or hurt them in some meaningful way. You know why? Because the spill itself is already hurting the company. And the bigger the fines, the more jobs the company will be forced to cut. And then that's more people unemployed.

Fines are meant to be a nuisance, not a game-changing penalty. Think of it this way. Your local police don't want you speeding. It endangers people around you. Should you been fined 1% or more of your annual income every time you're caught speeding? No. That's not fair. And if a course of action isn't fair when taken against the average citizen, it's not fair when it's taken against a corporation or an especially wealthy citizen. Just because they have more doesn't mean they should lose more. We need to be equitable. Our Constitution demands it.

The question to be asked here is this: were the federal regulations currently in place being reasonably followed?

If the answer is yes, then there is a failure of our government. The regulations should have been stricter. And we can't punish BP retroactively for policing themselves using the regulations that were in place because we've suddenly decided those regulations weren't sufficient.

What happened is awful. It is tragic. But it's our fault for not demanding tougher regulations. And now our tax dollars are going to have to pay for it.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Wizard Joined: Jun 12 2009 Posts: 4209

I find it ironic how we've been going through an oil shortage and now that this spill is suddenly active, we're scared about how much oil is going in the ocean. We need to think of a way to convert this oil to our needs, which I'm sure they're already doing. Or something.[/b]

Posted: Jun 08 2010 08:46 pm

The idea of an oil shortage is total horseshit. There's plenty, or enough at least to last for the next fourty-fifty years. That's more than enough time to put alternate energy systems in place, but then, so is five to ten years. The real question is, for the government and oil companies and other involved persons, cui bono?

Wizard Joined: Jun 12 2009 Posts: 4209

Oil companies control a large part of the market. They won't want to go down without a fight... which is the ONLY reason alternative energy hasn't taken off yet.