Eh, the cap did not work. Now what?
They’re going to try again.
They’d better stop this. The health of the oceans (which we ultimately depend on for our survival) is at stake.
It’s when you use a lot of spices, tomatoes and stuff in your sausage and shrimp stew. Or something like that.
[quote=“Chris”]They’re going to try again.
They’d better stop this. The health of the oceans (which we ultimately depend on for our survival) is at stake.[/quote]
No! Too many spices in the oceans already.
[quote=“Center for Reponsive Politics”]
BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the company’s political action committees — $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individuals. BP also took the step of hiring the Podesta Group, the lobbying firm headed up by Obama confidant John Podesta and his brother Tony, paying the firm $720,000 since 2008. All told, BP has spent just shy of $20 million on federal lobbying over the last two years [/quote]
politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html
Hope, change and oil spills! 
It’s not just the large number of donations from BP to Obama’s campaign and the lack of due diligence for the environmental assessments, Obama’s tax policy changes for foreign offshore oil workers have also resulted in an exodus of well-trained, experienced Brits from the Gulf. 
I’m all for offshore drilling, but relacing foreign specialists for cheaper Mexican and American regional workers and fast tracking assessments? Due diligence was not done here and it has Obama’s fingerprint on it.
What a pathetic attempt to shift the blame. 
I blame Aaron Tippin
Pathetic attempt? You have a company that was a huge contributor to Obama, you have a company that pushed for fast-track assessment with Obama’s DOI, and you have tax policy changes that caused inexperienced US and Mexican workers to replace international specialists…how is that not Obama’s responsibility?
I’m all for offshore drilling as the US needs to diversify its reliance on Middle East oil, but I’m also for due diligence at all times. Looks like it didn’t happen here.
But continue with your rants against Republicans.
[quote=“Chewycorns”][quote=“Center for Reponsive Politics”]
BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the company’s political action committees — $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individuals. BP also took the step of hiring the Podesta Group, the lobbying firm headed up by Obama confidant John Podesta and his brother Tony, paying the firm $720,000 since 2008. All told, BP has spent just shy of $20 million on federal lobbying over the last two years [/quote]
politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html
[/quote]
wow ChewEy, you really do cherry pick portions of articles to suit your specific need. Very sad.
lets look deeper into the same article shall we?
[quote]During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant
[/quote]
[quote]“President Obama didn’t accept a dime from corporate PACs or federal lobbyists during his presidential campaign,” spokesman Ben LaBolt said
[/quote]
they say his BP cash came from individuals within the company, not the corporation.
[quote]The top congressional recipients of BP campaign cash include Republican Rep. Don Young of the oil-intensive Alaska delegation, who has received almost as much as Obama, raking in $73,300
[/quote]
[quote]In 2008 alone, BP gave $37,000 to members of the House Energy Committee and $106,501 to members of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, which deals with security issues facing the nation’s oil supply.
[/quote]
[quote]In 2000, the company gave almost 39 percent more to Republicans than to Democrats.
[/quote]
All those quotes are from the same article you cite. Hmmm…you share the same ‘Fairness and Balance’ that your favorite news outlet does.
[quote=“Jack Burton”]
BP is saying also the fault may lie with the seller/manufacturer of the rig/equipment, a certain Transocean.[/quote]
They now think it was a methane gas bubble that caused the explosion. We’ll see what the reports say about the quality of the rig/equipment and whether it was faulty/not meeting standards or a freak accident.
[quote]The original blowout was triggered by a bubble of methane gas that escaped from the well and shot up the drill column, expanding quickly as it burst through several seals and barriers before exploding, according to interviews with rig workers conducted during BP PLC’s internal investigation. Deep sea oil drillers often encounter pockets of methane crystals as they dig into the earth.
As the bubble rose, it intensified and grew, breaking through various safety barriers, said Robert Bea, a University of California Berkley engineering professor and oil pipeline expert who detailed the interviews exclusively to an AP reporter.[/quote]
Singapore has a lot of oil working and ship builders. Don’t know if this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but I was told that one reason so many people survived was that many were in an awards ceremony for safety. :ohreally:
Also, they were saying that gas presure went up too fast for anyone to react causing it to blow. When it blew the drill slurry pipes, along with all of the control lines broke. Apparently there is a device like a knife that cuts the well-head off if the pressure gets too high. When the drill and slurry pipe broke, the controls for this cut-off broke as well. So apparently this is very hard to fix and will take several months.
Mind this is just what I can recall from a discussion at the bar. Opinion at the bar seems to think that this is the end of the GoM.
It was just a giant fart.
[quote=“lbksig”]They now think it was a methane gas bubble that caused the explosion. We’ll see what the reports say about the quality of the rig/equipment and whether it was faulty/not meeting standards or a freak accident.
So was this a known possibility? If so, was the equipment properly designed to deal with it, and did the company have adequate backup responses should such equipment fail? If the answer to either of the latter two questions is no, both the legal system and consumers should give those responsible the maximum possible penalties.
I (and many others) put Exxon and its Esso and Mobil brands on a permanent boycott list after the Exxon Valdez crime; looks like BP and its ARCO and ampm brands might be going on the list too.
Was this a known possibility? From what I’ve read yes it is a known and constant danger whenever you are drilling into the seabed there are pockets of methane gas.
Was the equipment properly designed to deal with methane pockets? It sounds like it. According to Robert Bea, the UC Berkeley engineering professor quoted in the previous article, the workers were installing a cement seal around the bottom of the well. The chemical reaction from the cement setting released heat which caused the crystalline methane to sublime. That caused more methane to sublime in a uncontrolled reaction, rather than slowly releasing the methane. The sublimation of the methane crystals created an overpressure that blew out all the safety barriers, launched seawater in the drill tube 240 feet in the air (followed by gas and oil) and then caused the explosion when the methane found an ignition source.
There will be an investigation into why the two backup systems, the blowout preventer and the automated Deadman system, failed. I don’t know if they were inadequate or it was a freak accident but we’ll find out as the investigations roll on.
[quote]
I (and many others) put Exxon and its Esso and Mobil brands on a permanent boycott list after the Exxon Valdez crime; looks like BP and its ARCO and ampm brands might be going on the list too.[/quote]
That’s your choice but I don’t think it was very effective. Exxon is still here and still making quite a bit of money. It’s sad but occasional oil spills are the price we pay for A) being a petroleum based society and B) shipping oil in from overseas. The oil will disperse after they get control of the spill and life will go on.
maybe a bit of good news
edition.cnn.com/2010/US/05/16/gu … ll/?hpt=T1
crazy graphic here
edition.cnn.com/2010/US/04/29/in … index.html
wow god loves Louisiana so far. like one of those Philippine typhoon graphics from last year in reverse
I don’t know if this has been posted before; I searched but didn’t find anything. Here’s the link to the live stream.
There is an option to use a nuclear bomb to close it. BP doesn’t want to lose the well.
I’d head that. It’s unbelievably greedy.
The video stream is fascinating because you can see fish swimming around in the crap that is just POURING out of that pipe, and even swimming in and out of other bits of broken pipes and toubing.
But wouldn’t a nuclear bomb have it’s own hazzards? Couldn’t it backfire and cause even more problems than we have already?
It’s probably too late now anyway. They’ll plug it in a few days.
[quote=“housecat”]I’d head that. It’s unbelievably greedy.
The video stream is fascinating because you can see fish swimming around in the crap that is just POURING out of that pipe, and even swimming in and out of other bits of broken pipes and toubing.
But wouldn’t a nuclear bomb have it’s own hazzards? Couldn’t it backfire and cause even more problems than we have already?[/quote]
It’s own hazards like spreading nuclear contamination throughout every ocean that the current travels through? Raising cancer rates, mutating ocean life, completely destroying every ecosystem it touches?
The oil spill is bad but nuclear radiation would be an absolute nightmare. Maybe it isn’t just greed as to why they aren’t deploying a nuclear weapon on the bottom of the ocean. Think Chernobyl style contamination for the gulf coast.