Gulf of Mexico oil spill

oil spill

I notice a lack of the word "accident " here, seems there is a great need to punish the wealthy regardless of circumstance, yet with all some will take whatever wealth is handed out with grateful hands and scream the loudest when it is felt the "handouts" were too low. Henceforth the opportunity to have "revenge" prior to the trial. Take 'em out and hengem high is the cry and if that don't work, change the law so it suits current thinking after all, what did the fathers of America know about today, I see there is a book on Amazon that actually reflects those thoughts and has a prefix with the caution that the words and wisdom of yesteryears do not neccessarily have validity today, ah, my friends, make change with great caution, going back is much more difficult than going forward.

This may have something to do with the resistance to using the word "accident" (Thank you Brian for posting the link).
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6490348n

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6490378n
As for those boats making "huge amounts of money" for laying boom and the people taking "handouts", that's wonderful, but what about the motels, gift shops, restaurants, etc., etc. and all the supporting industries who will lose those tourist dollars that they desperately need not to mention the taxes that the states and municipalities will lose. How about the oyster processors who are now permanently out of business after surviving more than 100 years until this. What about their employees. Compensation is not a handout and it is not revenge. You break it; you pay for it. Or should they get special treatment and forgiveness because they're "wealthy". If you pump fuel overboard do you get fined? So why should BP not be held responsible. That has nothing to do with "revenge". As for waiting for trial to hold their feet to the fire, I think it would be rather irresponsible of our country to wait 20 plus years before demanding that BP clean up its mess. By then the French Riviera may find their beaches well coated and their tourist dollars drying up.

oil spill

So, when BP says they will make it good...you do not believe them . That is a very poor attitude indeed. I see the accident in Arkansas with multiple deaths has not yet been blamed on the Fed. Ohhhhhhhh, that's an accident.

Hi,

And what makes you think some of them aren't now anyway?

BP has a consistant record of underestimating the amount of oil being released and downplaying the scope of the disaster, plus doing their absolute best to shift the blame. Yep, I don't trust them. As for the flash flood in Arkansas that raised creek levels 3' per hour to a 22' depth, that wasn't an accident. That was a local disaster created by an act of nature. I'm afraid that the one responsible is a little beyond our ability to exercise control over. However, the government representatives as well as volunteers were out looking for survivors the first day. Maybe you'd prefer if they litigated first.

Good point!

Oil spill

I was under the impression that any structure or living type areas used or built close to rivers were always suspect for safety, I think somewhere there was even a much higher power than the potus who warned us about that, I was also under the impression that the park was a Federal project.
Also, don't forget that BP is actually AMOCO, renamed, interesting that the media seems to ignore the connection to American Oil and point the finger at the UK.

I've seen a few fingers pointing at or at least trying to draw the UK into this, but those fingers belong oddly enough to proponents of BP. Seems they understand that public opinion is much more favorable towards our friends across the pond than a profiteering multi-national corporation who, along with others of their ilk, have been raking the world's populace over the coals for years. Personally, I wouldn't give a darn if the company were owned by my aunt Sally. I want the problem dealt with and the entity responsible held accountable. Talk of boycotts have been pushed by a few crackpots. I suspect they're related to the old 'freedom fries' crowd. I hope BP sells lots of fuel. That's the only way they'll be able to pay for this catastrophe and not ruin their innocent investors.

oil spill

Last week there were over four hundred thousand Americans boycotting BP stations. Put them out of biz. zero recovery, nowadays the majority of Corps realize that they cannot escape responsibility for accidents or errors, however, it is corporate responsibility to minimize exposure to fiscal disaster, after all, they represent many individuals life savings and thousands of employees mortgage payments to keep them above water...extrapolate from there....

oil spill

A man was driving down the road and ran out of gas. Just at that moment, a bee flew in his window.


The bee said, 'What seems to be the problem?'


'I'm out of gas,' the man replied.


The bee told the man to wait right there and flew away. Minutes later, the man watched as an entire swarm of bees flew to his car and into his gas tank. After a few minutes, the bees flew out.

'Try it now,' said one bee.


The man turned the ignition key and the car started right up. 'Wow!' the man exclaimed, 'what did you put in my gas tank'?



The bee answered

Wait for it.wait for it..


You're just gonna love this


I see you smiling.


BP

I don't believe that any thinking person wants BP out of business for exactly the reasons you cite. Personally, I think that any boycott at this time is premature, however it is a very good tool to use as a warning to an unresponsive company.
As for your joke, don't quite your day job, but very cute. Hope you don't mind if I pass it along to friends.

Sometimes the short term costs of wise decisions, and savings from poor decisions, seem like a mere drop in the bucket when weighed against the cost of the consequences of substituting folly for wisdom. Unfortunately those some times are too often the times viewed in hindsight.

The few hundred thousand, or even few million, the extra precautions so scrupulously avoided may have cost, there will be far more spent in cleaning this mess up over the years it will take to restore the area, never mind the ultimate cost in goodwill and the inevitable re-restriction of offshore drilling. How much will that cost the entire industry, all for a few dollars in the grand scheme of things?

There are ways to do things right and ways to do things wrong. When you're making a good profit, it always pays to do things right.

As a parting thought, even I, as an ardently pro-business individual, can see the irony in this...

$

Like my respected peers here on YachtForums.com, K1W1, NYCAP123, dennismc etc. are all senior members here, just as airship is/was...labelled as a senior member. Yet "senior members" amongst us all, has not stopped other "senior members" from simply ridiculing the contents of my posts without producing any real arguments against - unless mere rhetoric has become a valid argument?!

No, and I won't continue to let the usual protagonists (so help me, your God...), get away easily with their too often incoherent mumblings. Our armed-forces/ personnel suffer grevious injuries and deaths in Iraq and Afghanitan today, propulsed by simlilarly convuluted arguments. And everytime the USA launches a missile from a Predator UAV, with the usual effects, the numbers of of our terrorist enemies, willing to sacrifice their lives only grows exponentially.

I'm not sure exactly which of my previous posts to this thread resulted in replies of this nature:

*

*

The worst environmental threat to the SE USA of recent times is not a result of the actions of BP Plc.

A very long time ago, well before Obama, GWB etc., the USA instigated a policy of foreign diplomacy etc. and which, apart from a few minor changes, is always applied today, pretty much regardless of the people, the country or their religiouis beliefs.

That's why hardly anyone claims with joy that NATO forces (read US) in Afghanistan or Pakistan "may have eliminated an Al-Qaeda leader" etc. etc. in a surprise attack. Whilst not quite acknowedging that the salme attack resulted in the deaths of perhaps 10-50 other "innocents", and without definite confirmation that the "original target" was "'hit"...?!

Is that the way "the law" is applied in the USA today - I don't believe so? Whatever, we in Europe could never accept a foreign nation (however benign - and with all the gratitude that many European countries owe to the USA re. WWI and WWII ), it's not acceptable, nor desirable that such "freedom of military action" is authorised and/or exercised without due regard. There will be severe repercussions, for all of us. Hopefully merely from the governments which in time, will conclude that these actions were wholly or mainly counter-productive. Unless of course, the Russians left behind a few "nucs" during their hasty retreat encouraged by the combined US / Taleban team...?!

I'm pretty sure that a few contributors here might well have considerd working with a Taleban-lead government in Afghanistan (albeit one which expunged all contacts with Al-Qaeda...?! So far as I"m aware, when the Taleban ruled Afghanistan, there was much less drug-trafficking than nowadays (which should be important to the USA, where merely $40 billions in taxable revenues remain unclaimed...?!

To be entirely frank, my main concern, is just who the USA is going to go after nex>...?!

IMHO, everyone situated outside of the USA should be posting comments like "we'll stand by you all" currently. The rude reality of the yachting profession means that the usual (International) yachting agencies and intermediaries consider posts to this forum as a means and devote efforts to disrupt (all and any of these initiatives). And after the commisions come in, noone is a complete stranger as to what really goes on...?!

PS. Feck the French, the Belgians, the Germans, and MS Windows. Feck you all OK?!

Airship, you may have missed the banner atop this page so let be remind you that this is YACHT Forums. Rambling like that belongs in a letter to your political representative. This thread is about an oil spill caused by the reckless actions of BP employees and executives (and possibly their sub-contractors) and you suggest that the UK should invade the U.S. militarily and now you've moved the thread to the war in Afghanistan. Yours is a very disturbing post.

Greetings,
Getting back to the topic at hand and NOT pointing fingers at anyone, I have been reading about other concerns that I hadn't thought about.
Levels of H2S were found to be upwards of 1,192 ppb (Safe limit <5-10 ppb) in some areas of the Gulf. Levels of benzene, a known carcinogen, were found to be 3X higher than what OSHA deems safe. Add to this the tens of thousands of gallons of dispersant atomised into the air by arial drops and you've got quite a toxic soup to be breathing. Further, add in the products of combustion.This is going to, if it hasn't already, be carried westward across FL by prevailing winds affecting not only clean up crews but land based folks as well.
Another thing to consider is land values. I'll bet you waterfront will be going cheap not just around FL, but up the whole east coast as well I supect for the next few years or so and seafood prices will be going in the other direction.
If the relief well is not successful, what other option is there? I've read everything from high explosives to nukes! Due to the very high pressures the oil is being expelled at, there will be very few options left.
Hurricane season has already started, bringing yet another set of variables into the equation.
This stuff is going to get into the Gulf Stream and spread through all of the Atlantic and eventually to European shores as well.
Thanks for reading these idle thoughts.
Peter.

Everybody seem fairly certain that the second well will stop the flow, but that won't happen until late August. The problem is how many millions of barrels will pour forth between April and then.
On a related note "BP will set aside $20 billion to pay the victims of the massive oil spill in the Gulf" http://www.verizon.net/newsroom/por...ewsroom_portal_page__article&_article=2868777

Bp

Just saw an excellent commercial put out by BP. In it they used an affable man who has lived and worked in the affected area all his life as spokesman. The fellow volunteered for the job. In the commercial BP took responsibility for the spill and promoted their claims number and website, promising to do the right things. Good for you BP. The boss may not need that asbestos suit tomorrow. Anybody can screw up, especially with huge profits at stake. Sounds like BP is realizing that, although they're going to lose a bunch of money, in the long run they can come out as good neighbors. That's a strategy that could get them a lot of new customers making them quite profitable in the not too distant future.

You kill me.

Unless I'm very much mistaken, I raised the following points in my earlier posts? And if any of you really give a ****e about this oil spill, you'll trawl back to the beginning of this thread, instead of wallowing in and pursuing your own personal vendettas against so-called "anti-US interests" hitherto expressed on this forum:

1) On 30/05, I posted: http://www.yachtforums.com/forums/104466-post28.html

When I suggested that the actual oil spill was far more important than had previously been announced.

2) On 01/06, I posted this reply: http://www.yachtforums.com/forums/104594-post35.html.

But everyone preferred to consider my post and replies with complete disrespect.

Now that the US government (authorities) today consider that the BP oil spill may have really reached the flow rates that I suggested back on 30/05, yachtforum contributors, but especially NYCAP123 might have accorded me some leeway.

But no, so many people on this forum have their own agenda/s. The oil spill per se doesn't worry some of them directly. They are merely concerned about the fall-out. I suggest that they're often here on this forum, either as active and remunerated agents or, merely "dumb" agents, with their "dumb" posts and inconsiderate replies within these threads.

The overwhelming number of "vitriolic posts" compared to the far fewer measured replies to date are perhaps indicative that a true debate on the subject in question is impossible.

Until Carl or other responsable yachtforums.com representative intervenes, I shall not allow those individuals spout out anything they like in this thread without receiving a response.

Mostly, I've liked every American I've ever met. Same goes for every Iranian, Iraqi, Pakistani or Afghani over the past 20-30 years. Should I be worried about this?

Whatever, I'm not about to let some current or other aspiring "world-superpower" of the 20th /21st century (with due consideration of all the other previous superpowers that "reigned supreme" over vast tracts of the globe over the past 1,000 years. I'm 49 years old, hope to live to about 60 or 70 (or whenever France grants me an old-age pension).

If the USA wants to basically bankrupt BP today, then we might also ask why they saved AIG and numerous other financial institutions on and off Wall St. just a few months ago? I would suggest that "interests" are not always declared, whether or not these are the interests of elected public-officials or mere contributors to a yachting discussion here on yachtforums.com...?!

Me thinks maybe that problem has been resolved . . .

rocdiver, I believe that I could drink all afternoon, perhaps consuming 1/2L of (admittedly cheap) Scotch, and I could still come across as someone to be treated seriously, or at least in an everyday situation, whether or not in an internet discusssion forum...?!

In what way did your last post contribute to this thread?

This thread is about the oil spill in the gulf of Mexico, in case you needed reminding...

If you want to insult me personally, I believe that you can send me a PM or email instead. Which would be more appropriate perhaps...?!

Since you've apparently zero to contribute concerning the BP oil spill (the subject of this thread)...

PS. Are you a friend of NYCAP123 per chance? Sorry if you're not. Simply, referring to someone else in these discussions, who instead of dealing with any arguments, prefers to neglect any real serious discussion on the subject, and hides behind accusations of supposedly "anti-American" sentiments instead of engaging in any serious reply...

Here is how I suggest North Americans should vacation in 2010, as an example of my good-will:

Come to Europe for your vacation this summer. The €uro is going down, your US$ will go further. You don't even have to visit France (though you should), the US$ is welcome throughout the 25-nations of the EU. And I can just about guarantee you and your entire family complete security against crazed-attacks by lone-gunmen equipped with military-type automatic weapons (Bosnia, Montenegro, souithern Italy etc excepted). In some parts of Europe today, you can still light off a few fire-crackers in celebration of a birthday or wedding, without the risk of being targetted by a Predator-launched missile...?!

I'm not too sure how long the present situation will continue for however.

The beaches in the Mediterranean are pretty-much oil-free, though I would never use the term "pristine". Instead of taking the risk of spending summer vacation in Florida / Louisiana etc. this year, why don't American families fly over to Europe instead if they can be botherd to apply for passports?! BA and/or Emlirates etc; are offering great deals I understand.

You see, I'm really quite harmless. And I really wouldn't care that unscrupoulous individuals attack me personally on this forum, attacking me instead of my arguments etc. - being lazy / tee-total etc. is not yet a crime in the USA so far as I understand.

But I do worry about all the sea creatures in the Gulf - the bigger ones who get ashore and then get rescued by the aid agencies, surely they're a very small percentage. And what about all the other wildlife that merely "disappear", unnoticed, unrecorded etc. When I talked about the human-beings involved previously, well, I believe that they will receive substantial compensations for their losses, sooner or later, but perhaps not in time to assure their perenity. Whatever BP as a company is forced to pay out, I believe that the eventual pay-out, worth some $20 billion today, will not (unlike Heineken lager) reach all the parts that the compensation is supposed to reach.

With such huge sums involved, even elected politicians, intermediaries etc. must already be licking their lips in anticipation of hitherto unknown opportunities to fill their offshore bank accounts (though not their Swiss bank accounts) which the Swiss have apparently conceded finally to divulge full details of these accounts with the US IRA etc.

Someone let me know when a single dolphin (perhaps by decree of a Florida court) later this year is awarded "damages" of US$ 100 or more, and how that's spent. Or perhaps some court in Louisiana will award US$ 10 million to the Gulf shrimp...?!

Those who really suffer never get any true recompense...whether they're shrimp or dolphins in the Gulf, or GIs serving in Iraq / Afghanistan who come home severely injured if they're lucky, or in body-bags if not.

When you consider that the USA is apparently using more resources in prosecuting BP, compared to the ostensibly "real war" in Afghanistan currently, well, what more can anyone say?