backtop


Print 108 comment(s) - last by YashBudini.. on Jun 19 at 4:49 PM


  (Source: International Business Times)

  (Source: Newsweek)

  (Source: TIME)
Potential fines total up to $9 billion

After publicly criticizing BP Tuesday night for the way they've handled the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama is meeting with BP executives today at the White House to demand that they pay for the damages the leak has caused.

Obama spoke from the Oval Office last night calling this spill "the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced" and plans to tell BP Chairman Henric Svanberg to "set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed as a result of his company's recklessness." 

Obama, in addition to the Oval Office speech and today's forthcoming meeting with BP leaders, took a two-day trip to the Gulf of Mexico this week to once again assess the damage done by this massive spill. The president has decided that he wants BP to create a fund that will pay the billions of dollars needed to clean up the Gulf. 

"This fund will not be controlled by BP," said Obama. "In order to ensure that all legitimate claims are paid out in a fair and timely manner, the account must and will be administered by an independent, third party." 

Based on a $4,300 per barrel fine and tens of thousands of barrels spilling each day, estimates show that BP owes up to $9 billion in fines for the oil leak, and these numbers are rising. Also, BP may be losing out on a $7 billion deal with Devon Energy in an attempt to buy Brazilian assets and may continue losing government contracts as expanded production becomes "tougher to achieve as it draws more scrutiny from regulators for new projects." 

Siphoning operations had to stop temporarily due to a lightning strike, so the drill ship Discoverer Enterprise isn't helping BP's situation either. Before the delay, these drill ships were collecting 15,000 barrels of oil a day. To make matters worse, shares in BP have lost close to half their value since the spill started two months ago. 

BP executives said they were actually looking forward to their meeting with the president today saying, "We share the president's goal of shutting off the well as quickly as possible, cleaning up the oil and mitigating the impact."

The amount of crude oil spilling from the well, according to scientists, has increased by 50 percent and is leaking between a range of 35,000 to 60,000 barrels per day. The oil has spread to and ruined 120 miles of U.S. coast killing wildlife and seriously crippling the tourist/fishing industry.

A White House official said, "The president has authority under existing law to assure that the legal obligations of the responsible party have been satisfied. We are satisfied that the president can use this authority to accomplish the purposes served by an escrow fund and independent claims payment procedure."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Nice
By clovell on 6/16/2010 1:28:27 PM , Rating: 3
It's nice to see the executive branch stepping in here and executing in a way that helps speed the recovery. I think Obama dropped the ball earlier in this mess (see Louisiana Parish Presidents ordering cleanup activities in federally-protected wetlands and waterways without federal permission, after waiting on it for weeks). But, he's done good here.

The "Road Home" money that Bush got for Louisiana after Katrina was a disaster. That's only due in a small part to Bush. Governor Blanco decided to let the money sit in an account for a year while residents who were suffering waited. The interest earned on the money during that time was never accounted for. It took ~3 years to disburse the money.

Obama is stepping in here, leveraging the softer skill-set he has (face it, if BP wanted to, they could tie this up in court, but Obama has managed to get them into a corner where it's in their best interest to cooperate - like it or not, the public opinion counts here). Obama is doing well to be streamlining the compensation to the Gulf Coast businesses. If he can continue to execute like this, rather than how he did initially, there will be a sway from red to blue in that region.

BTW, I'll get rated down for this comment for two reasons:

#1 - I don't like Obama.
#2 - I think he's done good with this.




RE: Nice
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 6/16/2010 1:36:12 PM , Rating: 5
I don't know what to think of this whole thing.

1) On the one hand, I agree with others that say Obama should have stuck his head in sooner and made a much bigger deal out of this from the start... if only to "seem" involved. I also agree what he should have met with BP officials long ago. However, I don't really know how much he can do to solve the problem himself though which leads me to...

2) What expertise does the government have with capping something like this anyway? The fact that it hasn't been capped yet leads me to believe that the U.S. government doesn't know **** about this kind of stuff -- so it'd be kind of interesting to know what the government could actually do here...

Well, besides nuke it from orbit :)


RE: Nice
By Amiga500 on 6/16/2010 1:41:03 PM , Rating: 5
I think your second point answers your first.

The govt do not have the expertise or equipment to tackle this mess. The best thing they could do was wave a big stick at BP and tell them to get on with it, which is more or less what they ended up doing.

I don't see what Obama could have done differently to see this resolved quicker to be honest. I do like the idea of getting the compensation decisions out of BP's hands though.


RE: Nice
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 6/16/2010 1:49:39 PM , Rating: 3
Well, that's kind of my point. People want Obama to "seem" involved. They won't him to show up, show that he cares, and say lame, sappy isht like "We hear you" or "We understand" or "We're gonna get this idiots who did this and make them pay" or "We're on your side" bla bla bla.

People need to hear that for some reason -- even if the government can't really do a damn thing except for help with the cleanup efforts.


RE: Nice
By clovell on 6/16/2010 2:12:37 PM , Rating: 5
Well, the same side of the other coin is that BP knows full-well that the only proven, feasible (to discount nukes) way to stop the leak is a bottom-kill. The rest has been an exercise in PR and hoping for the best.

You're absolutely right that attitudes count for a lot, though. A lot of it has to do with what the region went through with Katrina (Rita, Wilma, Ivan, etc), and the feelings of disenfranchisement that resulted.

Obama is pretty much playing BP here. I doubt he has the clear-cut legal authority to do what he's doing, but he has manipulated the public opinion in such a way as to get this through. At the end of the day, what he accomplishes is getting money to the affected residents in a timely fashion (historically speaking), which counts for a lot.


RE: Nice
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2010 3:46:10 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
At the end of the day, what he accomplishes is getting money to the affected residents in a timely fashion (historically speaking), which counts for a lot.


LOL yeah, just like all that stimulus money that was spent? Oh, that's right, it's just a giant federal slush fund that isn't going to it's intended purpose.

And that's all that THIS will be. Another slush fund. Nobody is going to see that money man.


RE: Nice
By Suntan on 6/16/2010 5:02:34 PM , Rating: 1
Not true.

If any of the fishermen sitting around with nothing to do wants to get a good handful of this money, all they have to do is join the FUBP (Fisherman’s Union against British Petroleum.)

Because everyone knows Obama is pathologically engrained to take any money sitting around and hand it to over to union folk. Further, it is much easier for the President to just say “F-U-B-P” than to acknowledge that the administration (his administration, not the one from a year and a half ago) has a fair deal of the blame for how big of a SNAFU the cleanup is right now.

-Suntan


RE: Nice
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/16/2010 8:14:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
it's just a giant federal slush fund that isn't going to it's intended purpose.

I got an $8K first time home buyer tax credit, so at least some portion of the stimulus package went where it belonged.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying... :p


RE: Nice
By Fracture on 6/18/2010 8:46:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The president has authority under existing law to assure that the legal obligations of the responsible party have been satisfied


Anyone else concerned that legally the liability was purposefully limited to a low amount to ENCOURAGE offshore drilling?

BP has "satisfied the legal obligations" and are paying for good-will and press at this point. Yes, our legal system failed by not properly weighing risk vs reward, but it is illegal to retroactively raise liability so the president is really preaching impotently.

Can't wait till BP plays this card and their stock soars again.


RE: Nice
By thrust2night on 6/16/2010 3:47:46 PM , Rating: 2
It's funny how Obama is involved now that a spill is affecting the U.S. What I want to know is what he is doing about Chevron and the oil spill in Ecuador; a legal battle for which has been raging on for over 20 years.

Just because we are not affected by such a disaster, doesn't mean we should let an American company like Chevron get away with this. Hurting the environment, hurts us all.


RE: Nice
By invidious on 6/16/2010 3:54:51 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Just because we are not affected by such a disaster, doesn't mean we should let an American company like Chevron get away with this.
If you want to pay for the cleanup then go ahead, I dont want my tax dollars going to Ecuador.


RE: Nice
By thrust2night on 6/16/2010 4:21:52 PM , Rating: 2
Not sure how you inferred that.


RE: Nice
By tastyratz on 6/17/2010 10:37:52 AM , Rating: 3
that's what I saw too I know JUST how he inferred that.

The American based company is at fault for an international error. While people seem to think we should be the "world police" we really shouldn't be. It sucks and the environment is everyone's problem - but we have no jurisdiction or authority over there.

That would be like serving time in Mexico for a parking ticket in new jersey.
Sure you shouldn't have parked there, but is it Mexico's place to convict you?

We really need to stop butting in to be honest, debacle or not.


RE: Nice
By lothar98 on 6/16/2010 7:23:10 PM , Rating: 1
I would actually be very curious to see what might happen if the President was in full control and actually wanted to do everything that he could do. I for one really wonder what kind of deep water technology the US Navy has. Remember that they have had past sinkings of the Thresher and the Russian Kursk to worry about. I would assume that operating in deeper water than this someone has had to have thought about some kind of contingency plan long before this.


RE: Nice
By hiscross on 6/16/2010 5:44:10 PM , Rating: 2
"I don't see what Obama could have done differently to see this resolved quicker to be honest." Either could Bush stop Katrina, but look at all the crap he took for it. It is true FEMA screwed up, but so did LA governor and NO Mayor, but they got free passes. Tell you the truth, Barry can't run anything. If he could, he would have known how to work this mess. He still doesn't. Talk is cheap


RE: Nice
By clovell on 6/16/2010 6:12:40 PM , Rating: 2
Hah - the Louisiana Governor during Katrina didn't get a pass from Louisiana residents. Thankfully, her term was up not long afterwards, and she knew better than to even try to run again.


RE: Nice
By retrospooty on 6/16/2010 7:43:05 PM , Rating: 2
Both prez's took too much flack for the disasters that werent their faults...

Bush's problem was he put his friend Brown into the head of FEMA and he had zero experience or qualifications. At least on this spill, Thad Allen is in charge of the govt efforts, who is qualified for it. See the difference?


RE: Nice
By straycat74 on 6/16/2010 11:33:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
he had zero experience or qualifications.

That was the argument against Obama. Funny how it isn't OK for FEMA, but just fine to be President.


RE: Nice
By retrospooty on 6/17/2010 8:17:17 AM , Rating: 2
There is no job that readdies you to be the most powerful man in the world. There just isnt, and its not an appointed job, its elected. Say what you want about that, he is still miles better than the idiot he replaced. The Bush presidency was like a 8 year long slow bus circus.


RE: Nice
By knutjb on 6/17/2010 12:14:30 PM , Rating: 3
Governor. That is the closest Gov job. Executives are another. Both of which our lackluster president doesn't have.

He hasn't done a good job and the "boot to the neck of BP" comment from HIS staff show incredible lack of understanding for the problem. He doesn't know how to run the clean up. Sure BP should be doing clean up too but with all of the possible ways to clean up the mess FEW of those ideas have even been considered. They "need to do studies" is the usual BS answer. This IS the time to do real world studies with all of the ideas IN the Gulf.

Obama is floundering miserably through HIS own incompetence.


RE: Nice
By retrospooty on 6/17/2010 12:39:30 PM , Rating: 2
floundering miserably? LOL too funny.

You act like there is anyone or anything on the planet that can stop this leak. Gross negligence on safety protocalls happened on BP and the production company's end that casued the explosion, but once it happened, there isnt anything POTUS can do. Getting angry doesnt clean up oil. Policy, speaches, appearances, politics, none of it stops the leak. There isnt anything any prez could do other than manage the media circus that seems to thik a prez can do something.

Get a grip already.


RE: Nice
By knutjb on 6/17/2010 3:02:45 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
You act like there is anyone or anything on the planet that can stop this leak.
I didn't imply Obama could stop the leak, that IS BP's job. It is the inept clean up efforts that disturb me. When the Governor of LA has to beg for permission to to place sand bars to block the oil and is ignored, then told we have to study the negative impact from said sand bar is one problem. Obama failed to waive the Jones Act, Bush did it for Katrina, to allow foreign operated vessels to help.

The Jones Act for those who don't know is a Union protectionist act from the 20s. The dredgers in the US are operated by Union members and we don't have enough of them to create the required sand bars.
quote:
Getting angry doesnt clean up oil. Policy, speaches, appearances, politics, none of it stops the leak.
I don't want anger but that is all I see from his Admin i.e. "Hold our boot to BP's neck" is that not anger? My point is he is more focused on appeasing those who put him in office than actually working on the problem of cleaning up the oil. After the Exxon Valdez the FEDs were supposed to allocate money to buy the required supplies and they didn't. Wasn't he a Senator who could have proposed such oversight and related bill? You can't keep blaming Bush for that too.

His WH speech the other night was a blatant attempt to push Cap & Tax and other legislation before we even know what went wrong and the processes that caused it. Combine that with his spending $15,000,000.00 for an investigative body that doesn't have even one drilling expert on the panel, they ALL have direct ties to environmental activist. He has stopped all new drilling until they report back. When oil goes over $100 a barrel thank Obama.
quote:
There isnt anything any prez could do other than manage the media circus that seems to thik a prez can do something.
Uh... you don't get it. Obama CAN and MUST help with the clean up efforts and he HAS NOT. The Fed's response to date on the clean up are pathetic.

I am not concerned at the moment with whose fault and whose ass he needs to kick. All of that can come later when the investigations are completed. For now he must get all resources on the job and he hasn't because he is too busy bypassing our traditional methods of fixing the problem then pointing the finger as needed. He is working hard at collapsing BP for political gains. A bankrupt BP won't pay any bills and likely ruin relations with the UK. Obama is capable of being nothing more than a community activist thug.

I'd get a grip but its slathered in oil...


RE: Nice
By retrospooty on 6/17/2010 7:15:24 PM , Rating: 2
"Uh... you don't get it. Obama CAN and MUST help with the clean up efforts and he HAS NOT. The Fed's response to date on the clean up are pathetic."

What exactly do you want him to do FFS...??? Give some specifics.


RE: Nice
By knutjb on 6/19/2010 12:05:35 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Jones Act for those who don't know is a Union protectionist act from the 20s. The dredgers in the US are operated by Union members and we don't have enough of them to create the required sand bars.
As I said the sand bars which, by the way, are in the Coast Guard's plan. Maybe not stopping LA from sucking up oil out of the wetlands because they weren't sure how many fire extinguishers were supposed to be onboard the barges because they couldn't get a hold of the manufacturer. Or FEMA could poke their nose into this disaster, the head of FEMA has not been seen.

How about trying all of those who have various ways to soak up the oil. Is there not a better "test lab" to see what works and what doesn't? There is hay, weaved wood fibers, recycled carpet fibers, NASA's micro balls, and... Sadly its easy to pick but a few of possibilities than any success of the president.


RE: Nice
By rdawise on 6/16/2010 11:16:42 PM , Rating: 1
Amiga really deserves a +6 for this response. If Obama would have acted earlier, then he would have just gotten backfire from opponents who thought he was "intruding" on the private sector again since it was there mess to clean up. Not saying that the steps he took were correct, but I understand what happened.


RE: Nice
By knutjb on 6/17/2010 3:23:47 PM , Rating: 2
I don't understand why he waited so long. He should have acted earlier. Claiming they were on it from the start is only saying the Coast Guard responded to the fire. There is no evidence he has done what could have been done from the beginning.

What goes missed with complaints on Katrina was that Bush had to pressure the Governor and the Mayor of NO to tell people they had to leave. His failure was he wasn't proactive enough. Even worse here Obama repeatedly criticized Bush for not acting proactively enough and what does he do here?

If Bush had taken charge and pushed the Governor and Mayor aside he would have broken the law and violated the Constitution in doing so.

This crisis emanates directly from Federal properties and IS his direct responsibility to take proactive clean up action. He even fired his own appointee to MMS, a lawyer not a minerals expert.

Better to bring too many resources to ensure a quick clean up than flounder like we are now. It is easier to justify putting too many resources in play than sitting on yuor hands.

Obama simply doesn't have the executive skills for his job as President.


RE: Nice
By mattclary on 6/16/2010 2:11:11 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
The fact that it hasn't been capped yet leads me to believe that the U.S. government doesn't know **** about this kind of stuff


It's a given, I think, that the government knows nothing about how to fix this. We are equipped to wage wars and put men in space, but sealing a well isn't on their skills list.

BUT , what the government does have is money, power, and anyone's ear they want. Want the well plugged? Tell all oil companies that the first one to get it capped will get an exclusive 30 year lease in some choice location. Or how about just using the incredibly vast resources at your fingers to FIND some people with some good ideas?

When alien plagues or rogue asteroids are headed our way, does the president solve the problem himself? No, he sends people to the trailer park in the middle of nowhere to get the loony scientist who predicted the problem 20 years ago before he was laughed out of the establishment by "the consensus".

Why did it take a month to read that Kevin Costner had a freaking oil cleanup machine he dreamt up after the Exxon Valdez!? And when they make this into a movie, I think he should play the crazy scientist in the trailer.


RE: Nice
By retrospooty on 6/17/2010 8:18:44 AM , Rating: 2
"Want the well plugged? Tell all oil companies that the first one to get it capped will get an exclusive 30 year lease in some choice location."

Wholly crap... Thats actually a great idea. +1


RE: Nice
By straycat74 on 6/16/2010 2:24:32 PM , Rating: 2
What expertise does the government have in solving the crisis of a devastating hurricane? They provide support. The problem with this country now is just like the people after Katrina, standing in knee-deep water crying for the government to get them out of there. Start friggin walking!

The President shouldn't be out capping the well. What he should have done is made it his priority (no vacations, not Paul McCartney parties) to get every available resource and MANAGE the process. I don't have to be able to physically build every phase of a home to be a builder. I just have to be able to coordinate the project and make sure it is done correctly.

Instead he does what he knows. He wants to point fingers and start a law suit. And let's not forget about his community organizing skills. He did send the national guard to help fill out claim forms.

He compares oil spill to 9/11?

He pushes BP and says "they will pay!" Question, When did BP ever say they wouldn't pay?

Why Did Obama Refuse the Dutch Oil Skimmers The Day After the Oil Well Blow-Out? UNIONS. By the way, Bush waived the Jones act for Katrina.

Obama is going to use this to push cap and trade and non-existent alternatives (green economies have failed everywhere BTW)

Do you need more reasons? Try looking past CNN and MSNBC for news. What would you liberals have said about Bush if he were in charge of this? You guys got all bent because of the 5 min. he spent in the classroom. Let's not forget about beg blamed for a Katrina whemn the state and local governments refused to evacuate after he suggested it.


RE: Nice
By Amiga500 on 6/16/2010 2:38:48 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The President shouldn't be out capping the well. What he should have done is made it his priority (no vacations, not Paul McCartney parties) to get every available resource and MANAGE the process. I don't have to be able to physically build every phase of a home to be a builder. I just have to be able to coordinate the project and make sure it is done correctly.


See right now - the last thing the engineers need is yet more fucking managers. From my own perspective in my own area of work, we would get twice as much done in half the time if we didn't have those useless hot air bastards looking for trackers on this, that and the fucking other, if we didn't have them instigating stupid processes that are useless and require yet more time that could be spent working the problem.

Keep the managers away, let the engineers solve it. Give them complete control, including procurement*, and this thing will be solved pronto.

*which is no. 1 on the list of useless, unproductive and obstructive manager interference.


RE: Nice
By rtrski on 6/16/2010 2:41:04 PM , Rating: 2
The gov't shouldn't be coordinating the FIX. They should be coordinating the mitigation (cleanup) for what's already leaking as it spreads away from the site.

And should have been on this since they approved the relief wells, in case those relief wells did prove to be the only way this leak will be stopped.

That's what they can manage: mobilizing work crews, pushing thru permits, waiving necessary legalities (Jones act), etc.


RE: Nice
By SpartanJet on 6/16/2010 2:49:58 PM , Rating: 2
I suppose we should get our news from an unbiased source such as FOXNEWS?

/sarcasm off


RE: Nice
By straycat74 on 6/16/2010 5:16:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I suppose we should get our news from an unbiased source such as FOXNEWS?


I don't get Fox News. I am saying that the news should report things, and not tell you what they think happened, or what was most likely. How about the news just shows a time line, what happened, offers of help that were made and refused, requests from local and state authorities to start doing something to stop the oil, all next to the response of the administration. That's all. If you are defending Obama at this point, it says that he can do no wrong. That's all. It seems as though even when he screws up, people say he means well. That isn't good enough.


RE: Nice
By retrospooty on 6/17/2010 8:25:30 AM , Rating: 2
"He compares oil spill to 9/11?"

BS about you and Fox news (or some other right wing source). He didnt "compare" the spill to 9/11. He said it is a disaster will end up shaping our energy policy the way that 9/11 shaped our security policy. Not the same thing, although that is how FOX, Beck and other right wing infopushers are making it out.

Clearly, you are just out to badmouth him. I am not impressed with all that he has done, but badmouthing everything he does like a republican talking point memo just makes you appear to be agenda driven and biased. Lets not forget how we got in this current mess - many years of republican control of congress and White house.


RE: Nice
By knutjb on 6/17/2010 3:53:05 PM , Rating: 2
Oh and no one on the left ever bad mouthed Bush... He is just as much of a political football as Bush, it goes with the territory.

To compare this spill with 911 is moral relativism and they do not really have much in common as disasters. The comparison, no matter the intent, is insulting to many, including me. So why is it wrong to express that thought? If I see him doing something right I will comment on it but for now he is doing a pathetic job.

For now his and many in the media's claim that he is just not getting his message across and if the people could only see that then they would see he is oh so wonderful. I heard how great of communicator he was during the election campaign. Apparently he is not the great communicator. If he and the media keep falling back on this complaint that the public just doesn't understand him as if its their fault and not his is elitist and insulting.


RE: Nice
By straycat74 on 6/17/2010 7:07:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
or some other right wing source


My Bad. I guess the only 'real news' is libral bias.


RE: Nice
By retrospooty on 6/17/2010 7:16:15 PM , Rating: 2
nice deflection. very nice.


RE: Nice
By wiz220 on 6/16/2010 3:32:07 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
leads me to believe that the U.S. government doesn't know **** about this kind of stuff


This situation leads me to believe that BP doesn't know **** about this kind of stuff either! :)


RE: Nice
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/10, Rating: -1
RE: Nice
By notfeelingit on 6/16/2010 4:18:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's obvious to me that, just from the way he talks, Obama believes he knows more about any given thing that anyone else on the planet. He's quick to judge things he doesn't know about (like saying those cops "acted stupidly"), quick to second guess someone without all the facts, and can expertly both take responsibility while simultaneously shrugging all accountability.


Wow, you can get all of that just from the way he talks? Impressive.

I wonder what other people find obvious about you from your spectacular insights.


RE: Nice
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/10, Rating: 0
RE: Nice
By retrospooty on 6/17/2010 8:28:48 AM , Rating: 2
"Obama is the best leadership training money can't buy. He perfectly illustrates that exact WRONG way to lead. "

That was Bush, and the 14 years of rep controlled congress that landed us in our current predicament.

YOu may not like Obama, but if you cant at least see that he is miles better than the previous doofus, you either arent paying attention or just arent that bright.


RE: Nice
By clovell on 6/17/2010 10:24:44 AM , Rating: 3
This particular sub-thread is going places.


RE: Nice
By bigdawg1988 on 6/17/2010 1:00:17 AM , Rating: 2
Uh, the regulations you talk about puts the oil company in charge of the cleanup and reparations since the plan they filed says they have the capability. They lied about their capabilities, they slacked off on the precautions they were supposed to take, so how is that the governments fault?


RE: Nice
By Reclaimer77 on 6/17/2010 1:35:21 AM , Rating: 2
SIgh... Jesus Christ...

It's not the Government "fault". Did I say that? Is anyone saying that?


RE: Nice
By Uncle on 6/16/10, Rating: 0
RE: Nice
By Solandri on 6/16/2010 4:30:09 PM , Rating: 2
The number has been going up as the partly-closed valves in the BOP get eroded by sediment in the oil. Strictly from the pressure of the reservoir, diameter of the annulus at the bottom of the well, and the length of pipe, this is a 25,000-35,000 bbl/day spill. The BOP valves managed to partially close, and the riser which was originally attached was was creating backpressure which lessened the flow. Initially, it probably was a 5,000-15,000 bbl/day spill. Since then, they've cut off the riser and the BOP valves have eroded (continuously sandblasted for ~60 days) thus increasing the flowrate of oil.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6611#more

While I do agree the earliest 1,000 and 5,000 bbl/day figures were lowballed, this isn't some grand conspiracy to hide the true size of the spill. The number of barrels/day coming out is increasing over time because that's what these things do.

BTW, 60,000 bbl/day would make this among the most productive wells ever in U.S. history.


RE: Nice
By Dribble on 6/16/2010 1:48:17 PM , Rating: 5
It's all political manoeuvring to keep Joe Public happy.

Q: Why not go after the (American) company that actually owns the well?
A: Because that company has paid a senator to *protect* their interests and he's obviously doing a good job.

Q:Equally if it's so important that a company pays for it's mistakes how come an American company has avoided paying properly for the death of 25000 Indians and the exposure of 1/2 million? If they were American what do you think the pay out would be - America has gone to war for many less deaths?
A:They are not American, they don't really count. There's still an International arrest warrant for the head of the company that caused the disaster which America refuses to honour - protecting their own.

Hence don't really have a lot of sympathy with all the screaming and shouting Obama is doing.


RE: Nice
By amanojaku on 6/16/10, Rating: 0
RE: Nice
By fic2 on 6/16/2010 5:57:22 PM , Rating: 1
Maybe because the gov't of India didn't protect it's own people? You are basically saying that the U.S. gov't should hold U.S. companies libel for things the company did in another country. Pretty sure that is not enforceable. Why did the 7 people convicted in India only receive a $2,000 fine and two years in prison?

They probably haven't gone after the American company that owns the well because all the sh*t that went bad was because of BP's decisions since they were in charge of the well and responsible. By your logic Exxon would not have had to do anything about the Valdez spill because it is an American company.


RE: Nice
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2010 3:49:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Obama is stepping in here, leveraging the softer skill-set he has (face it, if BP wanted to, they could tie this up in court, but Obama has managed to get them into a corner where it's in their best interest to cooperate


What are you talking about!?? On day ONE, BP announced they are taking full responsibility and would be paying the FULL amount of the cleanup and fines. They have done nothing BUT cooperate. The President makes it seem like there is some kind of fight here when there is none.


RE: Nice
By straycat74 on 6/16/2010 3:59:01 PM , Rating: 2
Stop paying attention please.


RE: Nice
By HotFoot on 6/16/2010 4:06:38 PM , Rating: 2
Very true on this point, and I'm sad to see him doing it. It's political posturing. His advisor are telling him that looking angry will resonate well with the voters, because otherwise he looks apathetic to the situation. It's 100% posturing, and, as you said, BP hasn't been shirking responsibility.

I'd like to see two things from the government on this front, and neither of them is anger.

1) Protect the shores. Deploy military, hire contractors to skim the oil - whatever is necessary. BP has all but offered to foot the bill at the end of the day what the government could do is help coordinate and provide manpower.

2) Follow up on the investigation of what went wrong, and apply the lessons learned. Maybe this means more inspections, maybe it means more thorough risk analysis for deep-water drilling.


RE: Nice
By clovell on 6/17/2010 10:30:10 AM , Rating: 1
You realize that we can both be right here, eh? Obama can have them in a corner, and they can be cooperating because they want to.


Don't focus too much on BP
By hyvonen on 6/16/2010 1:29:36 PM , Rating: 2
I just hope that this renewed regulatory focus on BP doesn't mean less focus on other oil drilling companies.

I'm sure BP's shareholders are already keeping an eye on BPs operations because of this disaster, and it's likely BP will have better safeguards in place in a near future just to keep shareholders happy.

Meanwhile, I'm not so sure if Exxon et al. are being looked at carefully enough...




RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By brshoemak on 6/16/2010 2:25:38 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Meanwhile, I'm not so sure if Exxon et al. are being looked at carefully enough...


Don't say that, tighter government regulation will lead this great country down the path of communism with total government control. Oh.....what? Oil spill? Why weren't we regulating the sh!t out of that industry. I can't believe the government wasn't in total control. It's a good thing I got my political shortsightedness checked out by listening to talking heads and thankfully my hindsight turned to be 20/20.

Those who hold political beliefs regarding the degree of government regulation, that sway in the face of the consequences of looser government control which exclusively favor a free and capitalist driven economy, never originally held those beliefs in my opinion. Those are beliefs born from party alignment, subject to change as a matter of convenience.

Don't worry, we will forget about all of this in 10 years and history will repeat with more political flip-flopping to ensure.


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By hyvonen on 6/16/2010 4:46:18 PM , Rating: 1
You are a bit too focused on party lines, and not enough on what's good for everybody.

quote:
Don't worry, we will forget about all of this in 10 years and history will repeat with more political flip-flopping to ensure.


This is scaring me. You're actually OK with this happening AGAIN??!

Say what you will, some degree of regulation is necessary, or all hell breaks loose. Pure free market is a positive feedback system that rails in an extreme or another. Stability requires some level of control, checks & balances etc.

I myself am NOT OK with this happening again. This sort of sh*t needs to be prevented somehow. And I'm NOT OK with you being OK with these things happening. Your talking heads are causing your shortsightedness.


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2010 5:01:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is scaring me. You're actually OK with this happening AGAIN??!


Don't you know that this has NEVER happened in 65 years of domestic drilling in the Gulf? You guys are acting like this happens every week or something. He's not saying he's "OK" with it, but you're an idiot if you think all accidents can be prevented. Or that we don't have a stellar track record of domestic drilling. 65 years man!

quote:
Say what you will, some degree of regulation is necessary, or all hell breaks loose. Pure free market is a positive feedback system that rails in an extreme or another. Stability requires some level of control, checks & balances etc.


It's regulated out the ass already! Were regulations supposed to stop accidents from happening? Well oops, so much for that.


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By ClownPuncher on 6/16/2010 6:13:56 PM , Rating: 1
Didn't BP management basically just say "fuck the regulations, we need to cut corners!"?


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By straycat74 on 6/16/2010 6:22:47 PM , Rating: 2
I'm more concerned with the government that says "we don't have to be efficient with how we spend your money, give us more."

Which regulations pertaining to the accident did they cut? They might have, I don't know. Would the regulations have stopped the spill? I know one that wouldn't. The one which sent them out to 5000' deep water.


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By ClownPuncher on 6/16/2010 6:54:34 PM , Rating: 2
The Deepwater Horizon was designed to operate with waters as deep as 8000 feet.

From what I understand, this wiki quote details it a little-

quote:
Attention has focused on the cementing procedure and the blowout preventer, which failed to fully engage.[266] A number of significant problems have been identified with the blowout preventer: There was a leak in the hydraulic system that provides power to the shear rams. The underwater control panel had been disconnected from the bore ram, and instead connected to a test hydraulic ram. The blowout preventer schematic drawings, provided by Transocean to BP, do not correspond to the structure that is on the ocean bottom. The shear rams are not designed to function on the joints where the drill pipes are screwed together or on tools that are passed through the blowout preventer during well construction. The explosion may have severed the communication line between the rig and the sub-surface blowout preventer control unit such that the blowout preventer would have never received the instruction to engage. Before the backup dead man's switch could engage, communications, power and hydraulic lines must all be severed, but it is possible hydraulic lines were intact after the explosion. Of the two control pods for the deadman switch, the one that has been inspected so far had a dead battery.[267]

Just hours before the explosion, a BP representative overruled Transocean employees and insisted on displacing protective drilling mud with seawater.[268] One of the BP representatives on the board responsible for making the final decision, Robert Kaluza, refused to testify on the Fifth Amendment grounds that he might incriminate himself; Donald Vidrine, another BP representative, cited medical reasons for his inability to testify, as did James Mansfield, Transocean's assistant marine engineer on board


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2010 7:16:36 PM , Rating: 2
Yes well that doesn't mean this spill wouldn't be much easier to contain if they were more shallow. Are you having a problem following logic today?


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By ClownPuncher on 6/16/2010 7:50:42 PM , Rating: 2
Not at all, and I agree that point. The problem I have is that you're focusing on the spill and I'm focusing on what caused it. It seems corners were cut, which begs the question "would we have had a spill at all had the proper procedures been followed?".


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By straycat74 on 6/16/2010 8:17:02 PM , Rating: 2
Accidents happen, no matter what precautions are made. THAT is the big problem.


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By YashBudini on 6/19/2010 4:38:15 PM , Rating: 1
"Accidents happen, no matter what precautions are made. THAT is the big problem. "

What precautions in this case? Stay on the subject.


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By YashBudini on 6/19/2010 4:40:39 PM , Rating: 2
Take a look at today's NYT, even scumbag Halliburton was none too happy about BP's corner cutting.


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By Aloonatic on 6/17/2010 5:17:19 AM , Rating: 2
The thing is, there is probably going to be a lot more of this sort of high risk, difficult to access oil exploration and drilling going on in the near future.

quote:
It's regulated out the ass already! Were regulations supposed to stop accidents from happening? Well oops, so much for that.
You can flip that over and say that the free market, quest for profit etc would stop accidents from happening (as they are not very profitable now are they?) and... Oops, so much for that.


RE: Don't focus too much on BP
By brshoemak on 6/16/2010 7:20:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
quote: Don't worry, we will forget about all of this in 10 years and history will repeat with more political flip-flopping to ensure. This is scaring me. You're actually OK with this happening AGAIN??!


Did you even read my post? Most of it was sarcastic. I'm not at all OK with anything like this happening again. I'm saying that after incidents like this there is immediate outcry for regulation and greater oversight (which I wholeheartedly support), then time passes, priorities change, regulations weaken due to lobbying and energy needs (such as the dramatic rise in off-shore drilling prior to this tragedy), and the possibility that something like this happening again in the oil or another industry increases dramatically.

The passage of time seems to cause a loss of focus/memory from past tradegies - look at New Orleans after Katrina, after 5 years much of the promised work to rebuild the city have not materialized due to changes in priority. I would prefer the government to focus more on nuclear energy production but after Three Mile Island there was no growth in the nuclear sector. If an accident of similar scope occurred with nuclear power we would return to that state again, I want growth but with a lot of regulation in that industry.

I also fully support bipartisanship, especially in issues that affect the entire nation when I would rather have politicians on the front line instead of party lines. It saddens me that so much of this issue has become a political issue (and a soapbox for critics of the current administration to stand on), instead of the environmental disaster than should easily transcend party lines.

Just to clarify, I hate talking heads with a passion. They represent the laziness of a lot Americans who take their opinion as gospel because they like what they hear and are too lazy to get the facts and form their own opinion on issues. Some people are apparently too busy to think for themselves and prefer to be spoonfed "their" opinion by news-tainment shows more focused what inflammatory comments they can create to increase ratings. If you actually watch a news network for a day (take Fox News for example) there are only 4 hours of FACTUAL news out of 24 hours in day, the other 20 hours are opinion shows full of "experts". That's because facts don't get rating, but a graphic of Obama next to a USSR hammer and sickle flag (read: communism) helps with ratings.

By the way, if you couldn't tell by my rant I am tired of all the BS, assigning blame to unrelated parties and news coverage more concerned with who can present the most inflammatory statements. This was a horrible accident and has become the worst environmental disaster in the history of the United States - does this response from news channels and political critics illuminate how far we as a people have come in 200+ years. Kinda sad if you ask me.


It's time...
By xpax on 6/16/2010 1:27:58 PM , Rating: 1
... to shut down the leak once and for all. Place a small tactical nuke by the wellhead, and detonate. Should seal it off quite efficiently.




RE: It's time...
By Amiga500 on 6/16/2010 1:42:53 PM , Rating: 2
If that doesn't work, you'll never seal the thing.

Better to try all other alternatives before going nuclear and trying an option (that may or may not work) but rules out any subsequent action.


RE: It's time...
By xpax on 6/16/2010 2:05:42 PM , Rating: 1
I don't know -- it looks like they've already tried a large number of options that don't work.

At the rate they're going, all the oil will be in the ocean before they find a solution.


RE: It's time...
By Amiga500 on 6/16/2010 2:34:37 PM , Rating: 2
It has been a couple of months hasn't it? They will have relief wells drilled in another month or two.

What you propose *could* (can't say would - if tried it might work!) leave the well dumping oil out for years.


RE: It's time...
By Samus on 6/16/2010 3:24:00 PM , Rating: 2
I keep seeing these words referring to nuclear weapons..."Tactical" "Precision" "Tiny"

Why don't we just call in the Battlestar Galactica while we're living in lala-land...

We don't have the know-how to build a suitable bomb for the job in the allotted time-frame. Bottom-kill will be completely successful by late August. 2 months away. Even if we'd started engineering this new bomb the day the rig exploded, we wouldn't have it complete and tested by then, and the smallest we have available is a weapons grade W54 10-ton warhead, which is 9.5 tons too much. Let's not even begin on the theoretical fallout aftermath of the ocean bed, environmental impact, or the possibility of igniting the oil. This isn't TNT, it's a fission explosion that is immensely hot and while nuclear explosions have been tested underwater, they've never been tested in a highly polluted oil bath.


RE: It's time...
By monomer on 6/16/2010 5:41:02 PM , Rating: 2
All you have to do is call it a shaped charge. Shaped charges can fix anything.


Wow
By Chiisuchianu on 6/16/2010 3:11:01 PM , Rating: 2
He's going to "make" BP pay for damages they already agreed to pay for? What a bad ass! It's amazing how he was quick to bring out the lawyers and to talk about his communist Cap 'n Trade bill, but it took him weeks to acknowledge the crisis, a month to start relief and containment efforts, and months just to begin communicating with BP, denied help from countries all over the world, didn't allow states or companies to help or to donate help, and still hasn't engaged all our resources to prevent and clean up damages.

Worst President ever.




RE: Wow
By hyvonen on 6/16/10, Rating: -1
RE: Wow
By straycat74 on 6/16/2010 6:34:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No, sorry, that was George W. Bush.


Carter was worse.


RE: Wow
By YashBudini on 6/19/2010 4:42:53 PM , Rating: 1
Carter didn't defecate on the Constitution, whereas the puppet regime.....


RE: Wow
By Samus on 6/16/2010 7:18:41 PM , Rating: 2
If by 'he' you mean Henric Svanberg and by 'President' you mean Chairman, then yes, you're entire statement is correct.

This is not the President of the United States or any US departments RESPONSIBILITY. Even it if were, what the hell do you expect the US Government to do to stop the oil leak or clean up the mess? We're not in the oil drilling/oil cleanup business. BP is. And they were directly related to the disaster, so this falls on them by process of elimination.


RE: Wow
By hyvonen on 6/17/2010 3:04:07 AM , Rating: 1
Cap'n'trade is "communist"? To me it sounds like the most free-market like idea ever.

"Yeah, we're going to have a 'market' for pollution, and 'market' forces are going to make it profitable to reduce the production of pollutants"

Try to be at least a little less biased, m'kay? And go read a dictionary to learn what the C-word means before dropping it everywhere.


RE: Wow
By YashBudini on 6/19/2010 4:46:55 PM , Rating: 2
Cap and trade is taught in economics classes, the birth place of capitalism.


By PAPutzback on 6/16/2010 1:31:06 PM , Rating: 2
Besides 6 billion was probably their profit, for a quarter. If you think mercury was a problem with fish now, wait until all these dispersants get ingested throughout all the marine life in the Atlantic. Heck we should be at 0% unemployment until this is cleaned up, load up the buses with the unemployed Americans before all the illegals come running over, and then stay.




By Solandri on 6/16/2010 4:11:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you think mercury was a problem with fish now, wait until all these dispersants get ingested throughout all the marine life in the Atlantic.

The common name for "dispersants" is "detergent" or "soap". If you're going to argue that civilization should stop using soap because it's dangerous to marine life, well, good luck with that.


nothing changes yet.
By Uncle on 6/16/2010 4:33:54 PM , Rating: 2
Try this and make up your own mind, thirty years later.
http://www.wimp.com/oilspills/




RE: nothing changes yet.
By straycat74 on 6/16/2010 11:38:03 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry, but I can't watch her smarmy expressions long enough. I did try.


One word
By masamasa on 6/16/2010 5:40:57 PM , Rating: 2
Accountability!

It's nice to see, even as a non-American, that Obama is serious about accountability. I agree that there should be an audit and compensation/cleanup fund administered through a third party. Too many companies, countries, and renegade individuals, who should be held accountable for their actions, get away with far too much. Not this time!




RE: One word
By YashBudini on 6/19/2010 4:49:33 PM , Rating: 2
"It's nice to see, even as a non-American, that Obama is serious about accountability."

Even if the government itself doesn't accept any? Who allowed them to get away with all this corner cutting? Ralph Nader?


Who pays.
By Uncle on 6/16/2010 3:36:56 PM , Rating: 1
BP isn't going to pay. Consumers will pay, not only at the pumps, but through the loss of their lively hood. You think these people want to go on welfare. Then their is the long range problems. That oil plume is traveling on a current and guess who is going to be eating the after effects of this for years to come. We are all ready finding toxins of one sort or another in the food coming out of the ocean.
A little off topic. Next time some one from the cancer agency come around, you might as well hold on to your hard earned money. This idea that cancer can be defeated is an illusion since it is the corporation who keep concocting all the cancer causing agents by will full creations or by an accident such as this blow out. nough said.
You want changes. Charge the CEO and all the Directors for negligence. Change the laws so that can be done. Other wise this will continue. As we speak they are continuing to drill off the east coast of Canada and it is deeper then the BP well. Not to minimize but why do they have to drill where our fish food is created. I would ban all off shore drilling. Just remember you can't eat oil. The risks are to great.




RE: Who pays.
By straycat74 on 6/16/2010 5:55:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A rolling “dead zone” off the Gulf of Mexico is killing sea life and destroying livelihoods. Recent estimates put the blob at nearly the size of New Jersey. Alas, I’m not talking about the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. As terrible as that catastrophe is, such accidents have occurred in U.S. waters only about once every 40 years (and globally about once every 20 years). I’m talking about the dead zone largely caused by fertilizer runoff from American farms along the Mississippi and Atchafalaya river basins. Such pollutants cause huge algae plumes that result in oxygen starvation in the Gulf’s richest waters, near the delta.

http://article.nationalreview.com/436399/oil-the-r...


Bama will make tax payers PAY !
By Beenthere on 6/16/2010 7:43:32 PM , Rating: 2
If you think BP is going to pay for this damage you're a fool. Consumers will pay and tax payers are already paying. Bama talks thru his arse all the time and the gullible sheep actually believe him.




By stilltrying on 6/17/2010 12:22:12 AM , Rating: 2
what a bunch of lame actors. The whole world is a stage and we are all its actors. What a joke, if this isn't theater at its worst then I dont know what could be. The jokes on us. Get with it.




Dear Obama...
By Estee on 6/16/2010 8:17:15 PM , Rating: 1
Action first, then speak later....really tired of the same rhetoric. It took him this many days to finally contact BP management while marine life and the locals take a hit?!




Sickening
By MeesterNid on 6/16/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sickening
By psenechal on 6/16/10, Rating: 0
RE: Sickening
By clovell on 6/16/2010 1:30:18 PM , Rating: 2
If his post was evidence that sh!t rolls uphill in politics, then yours was confirmation of that fact.

Chalk up another kill for irony.


RE: Sickening
By rtrski on 6/16/2010 2:26:49 PM , Rating: 5
Blame him for the spill? Nah, clearly BP and/or Transocean's fault for incorrect decoupling procedures, BOP being ill-repaired or improperly installed, etc. Possibly compounded by MMS approving deviations from normal decoupling procedure without thinking.

As for the rest of your misdirection, yes, anyone with half a frakking brain does blame O-bambi for:

...not accepting help from other countries immediately
...not immediately suspending the Jones Act to allow that foreign support
...2-3 day administrative delay before EPA approving relief well drilling (they were concerned the drilling operations would be releasing carbon, you know those rigs burn fossil fuels to generate their power after all)
...subsequent 2-3 day administrative delay at MMS before approving relief wells (no freaking idea what their BS excuse was...probably busy arse-covering). That's a week wasted before BP was even permitted to start the only for-sure 'fix'.**
...delays approving sand berms
...delays and only partial approval of those berms once the word finally came back (Jindal said "f-you" to the feds and is authorizing the whole hog, good for him)
...sideshow "criminal investigation" announcements rather than paying attention to getting things fixed FIRST and pointing fingers later
...appointing an MMS czar whose main purpose was political green energy pushes and took their eye off enforcement cleanups already begun under eebil-old-GWB
...crapping all over BP publicly (and inaccurately, constantly referring to them as British Petroleum), tanking their stock for his approval ratings, and saying not a word about Halliburton, Transocean, and the others involved, as if it was all the hostile act of a foreign government entity.
...making 9/11 comparisons, furthering that latter view
...bowing down to the greenies and only approving drilling in outer, deeper water where everything is more risky in the first place
...knee-jerking a moratorium on all off-shore drilling (even in shallow water) as one of his first farked up steps to pretend he was on top of this (then trying to extort money from BP to pay lost wages for it)

As for the whole 'escrow' thing: BP has already accepted culpability, is already on the hook for huge fines, and was already paying claims. One can make whatever accusation of slowness or inefficiency one wants in how they're administering claims. But I want you to with a straight face, and memory of FEMA following Katrina (they're still trying to account for how badly they got scammed with crap claims) tell me the government will handle that better.

I mean, really. BP are on the hook already. Saying the gov't is going to step in and "run" this huge $20B slush fund and that's in any way shape or form taking care of the problem, is grandstanding.

The one thing I've heard done so far that I approve of from the govt: when BP wanted to drill the relief wells, they said "drill TWO in parallel in case one misses". That's the one bit of forethought I've heard about in this whole fiasco.

**Incidentally, the relief well is going to be the only fix. All evidence points to the bore being improperly cased, with fractures in the cement sheathing below the seafloor. Hence the top-hat has to be carefully balanced by venting as they collect not only because too much pressure will blow it off the pipe...but will make those fractures below worse, such that the pipe itself is no longer the main source of the leak. Until the relief wells can intersect the bore below the probable fracture points and re-create a hydrostatic pressure head with drilling mud, this one's going to keep going.


RE: Sickening
By FrankJBones on 6/16/2010 2:56:09 PM , Rating: 1
You are quite the curmudgeon aren't you?

Also, clue me in please as to what BP stands for if British Petroleum is incorrect? Don't say Beyond Petroleum, it'll make you sound like an advertiser's mouthpiece.

How did the PotUS make BP's stock tank? That's another tenuous claim you present.


RE: Sickening
By MeesterNid on 6/16/2010 3:04:47 PM , Rating: 2
Let's see...did Transocean unilaterally build the rig with 0 government oversight, agency approvals, permits, etc, etc, etc. CRAP FREAKING NO WAY! I bet every single step took government commissioners and supervisors and Czars and whatever not to look over and approve. I mean, you can't add a freaking bathroom to your house without getting permits and inspections! So all in all at least 1/2 of the responsibility of this goes squarely on the shoulders of this government and if you'd notice Obama is the face and leader of the aforementioned government.

I'm not here to defend BP, but it sure pisses me off when Obama, who hasn't done one freaking thing from the onset of this (and arguably stalled the efforts of people trying to mitigate this disaster by taking forever to respond to Jindle in Louisiana and basically turning back the offers from other nations to help in the clean up), is criticizing the people who are at least doing something. I'm going to be hitting the "Undo Last Change" button in the next election...this guy is a disaster!


RE: Sickening
By rtrski on 6/16/2010 3:34:07 PM , Rating: 2
Hm, so the only point you'll contest is related to the stock price? Nice, so you concede the administration has bollixed everything else mentioned?

quote:
Also, clue me in please as to what BP stands for if British Petroleum is incorrect? Don't say Beyond Petroleum, it'll make you sound like an advertiser's mouthpiece.


So you bothered to read the Wikipedia article saying that's their tagline, and that they even say the "BP" in the name is NOT intended to point to that tagline. Which means you also know they merged with the US company Amoco quite some time ago.

Which means you also know "British Petroleum" is a FORMER company name - and to refer to them by that, now, is either (a) lazy, (b) incorrect, and/or (c) an intellectually dishonest attempt to point blame at a "foreign" company as opposed to a transnational with significant US ties. I'll take all of the above for $1000, Alex.

They should be referred to by their name, "BP" It no longer "stands for" anything. (Clearly not admirable environmental stewardhsip, either - you'll note I've said not one word that lets them off the hook for being the instigator of the blowout, whatsoever.)

Wanker.

Yes, their stock would've taken a dive regardless. But with the Prez -- who has shown an amazing disdain for the rule of law with his administration's handling of the GM reorg, if nowhere else, demonstrating to investors that he'll find some way to extort money from them above and beyond what is legally permitted (even suggesting passing retroactive punitive laws to do so) -- there's no doubt he's exacerbated the slide and is using it for political capital and leverage. Do a little reading: I'm hardly the first to imply this. WSJ, Telegraph, etc. etc....


RE: Sickening
By Uncle on 6/16/2010 7:37:26 PM , Rating: 1
BP tried that for three weeks, it doesn't work.


Ouch
By Dorkyman on 6/16/10, Rating: -1
RE: Ouch
By Gul Westfale on 6/16/2010 1:24:04 PM , Rating: 1
maybe it's mick writing under another name...

and why on earth does the US let a private company (the same one that caused the mess in the first place) try to fix the biggest environmental catastrophe we have ever seen by itself, instead of intervening?


RE: Ouch
By MrBlastman on 6/16/2010 1:31:11 PM , Rating: 4
As the old saying goes, "You break it, you buy it," BP has broken it and thus, "bought it."

They made the mess, they should pay to clean it up. This is not a government operation. Repeat after me:

The Government is not our keeper.
The People can act for themselves.
The Government is not responsible for fixing every mess people or companies make.

A fine is justified here. For every month that goes by and BP does nothing, the fine increases. For every month that goes by and BP DOES work on cleaning up the spill, the fine remains level at where it last rose to.

This is how it should work. We aren't communists here. We don't need "mother government" helping us all, all the time.

BP broke it, now they bought it--let them fix it. About the only thing I think the Government could add to this right now is a nuke. That is a completely different debate though as to whether it would work or not.


RE: Ouch
By callmeroy on 6/16/2010 1:34:20 PM , Rating: 2
Because WTF does the US government know about the oil drilling business?

I know I know all the stupid jokes you can say about what BP knows if they caused the leak...but they are a bit more experienced in the business than the US government.

And that was the theory/reasoning everyone was using with allowing BP to do the clean up and stop the leak...

Kind of like you have two people and two people ONLY to fix your broken Heat Pump on a hot summer day...the HVAC tech who broke in in the first place or your town mayor.

Who do you go with? Most sane people would say let the HVAC guy have a crack at it....


RE: Ouch
By dragonbif on 6/16/2010 1:54:43 PM , Rating: 2
I would get a diffrent HVAC guy or have the current one work for free.

But what I realllllllly want to know is why they dont look for a way to plug the hole and not just collect the oil? They did try mud but that was it.


RE: Ouch
By Gul Westfale on 6/16/2010 2:06:25 PM , Rating: 1
i agree that BP should be held financially accountable, but i do not understand why your government doesn't fix the leak itself, or gets someone else to do it. BP is obviously dishonest (and there are may reports saying that they prevent journalist's access to certain sites in the affected areas), and should not be trusted to do this without supervision.


RE: Ouch
By SublimeSimplicity on 6/16/2010 2:33:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but i do not understand why your government doesn't fix the leak itself


Well we would, but currently we're fresh out of pixie dust. To complicate matters the giant we have, who could plug the pipe with his pinky finger can't swim. So as you can see, we're in a bit of a bind.

This is the way it would go if the government tried to fix it:
Obama : Fix the oil spill.

Underling : I don't know how to fix the spill.

Obama : Stop the pipe from leaking.

Underling : How?

Obama : Somehow! I can't be bothered with those details, just get it done.

The same conversation would happen all the way down the chain of command. The same thing happens at BP. The only difference is that someone in the chain there, will act like they know what they're doing and try one of the many bazaaro plans we've seen.


RE: Ouch
By rtrski on 6/16/2010 2:35:57 PM , Rating: 2
The bore is most likely fractured below the seafloor. Otherwise the mud attempt might've had a hope of working.

Right now, they're stuck in a balancing act. Close too many vents on the top-hat and don't siphon hard enough, create too much backpressure there, the top-hat pops off (it's just a slip-fit anyway, not strongly connected to the pipe).

But beyond that, even if they could magically just "pinch" the pipe shut, it would probably blow open the fractures below worse than they already are. Leaving them with the same leaking well, and no pipe to even try to cap off and attempt to mitigate the flow in any way.

But of course most of the dumb public (not you personally...this is something others have said) thinks they're just trying to "produce" the well as long as they can, while they wait for the relief drills to complete.


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki