British Petroleum....had better cough up the cash!

[bush_cheney2004]

It can easily get there, many industries that are in the gulf area will no longer exist. It won't be apparent at first, and you would be short sighted to say it won't reach a trillion. BP is not the only one that is screwed here.

Contamination of the Gulf Coast area will have an economic impact, but not "trillionS" as stated. Figure at least one order of magnitude less based on actuals from other spills, not wild ass guesses.

[ToadBrother]

Contamination of the Gulf Coast area will have an economic impact, but not "trillionS" as stated. Figure at least one order of magnitude less based on actuals from other spills, not wild ass guesses.

It won't be trillions, but it will be billions. No one really knows what the impact will be. They don't even know how much oil is puking out of the well right now, and realistically, it will be at least a month before they can hope to cut it off.

As bad as the Exxon Valdez was, even if this incident doesn't release as much oil, it's capacity for wide spread damage, possibly up the Atlantic coast if the Gulf Stream catches some of the oil, means that a number of very important industries are at risk. The Gulf Coast fishery is one of the most important fisheries in the world. To see it wiped out for even a year would have a devastating impact on the region, and it could be worse than that. There are a lot of people out there facing, at least in the short term, the destruction of their livelihoods.

Then we need to consider the impact on ecosystems in the region. As a number of people have pointed out, if this gets into the swamps and smaller tributary systems around the Mississippi, cleanup may very well be impossible. The poisoning of wildlife could be enormous and have numerous and long-term impacts on health and economic viability in the area.

So this sort of backwards defense by saying some of the estimates are wait out there still minimizes the damage that is being done. I'm willing to give BP the benefit of the doubt on the case, because no one is really at the stage where they're really looking for what happened, but if it does turn out that BP was ultimately responsible for the accident, BP should pretty much be fined out of existence in my view. There have been warnings for years that Gulf Coast drilling could lead to a catastrophe, but the need for oil and the unwillingness of anyone to seriously try to find alternative ways to produce energy has basically given oil companies a blank check. They can drill wherever they want, and anyone who questions it is some sort of Green Luddite and an enemy of free enterprise, capitalism, liberty and so on and so forth. Maybe Obama will be damaged by this, but I wonder how often will hear that moron Palin shouting "Drill baby drill!" now as a fishery that provides between 30-40% of the United States' seafood is wiped out.

[Shady]

Again I think we all need to be reminded of reality. Especially since there's so much knee-jerk hyperbole flowing around this thread.

There's over 3500+ offshore drilling sites in operation around North America and the Gulf of Mexico. The last time there was a similar type incident was 40 years ago.

Now everyone take a deep breath before you decide to make some ridiculous/hyperbolic post using your petroleum constructed keyboards, and computers.

[ToadBrother]

Again I think we all need to be reminded of reality. Especially since there's so much knee-jerk hyperbole flowing around this thread.

There's over 3500+ offshore drilling sites in operation around North America and the Gulf of Mexico. The last time there was a similar type incident was 40 years ago.

Now everyone take a deep breath before you decide to make some ridiculous/hyperbolic post using your petroleum constructed keyboards, and computers.

That's rather like having toxic waste trucked past your house. Yeah, maybe there will never be an accident, but it only takes one. The law of averages suggests that the more of some action you do, the more likely a worst case scenario happening grows.

I wonder how you would feel about offshore drilling if you were one of the shrimp fishermen who has effectively been wiped out this year, and nobody can say how many more.

Edited May 3, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Shady]

These are the emotion-based, logic-free, ridiculous/hyperbolic ideas I'm talking about...

BP should pretty much be fined out of existence in my view.

What a great idea. Cut off your nose to spite your face.

There have been warnings for years that Gulf Coast drilling could lead to a catastrophe, but the need for oil and the unwillingness of anyone to seriously try to find alternative ways to produce energy has basically given oil companies a blank check.

Any type of activity can lead to accidents. The fact is that there hasn't been an incident like this in North America for 40 years.

They can drill wherever they want

Um, no they can't. In fact, there are several places on land that could be tapped for oil. But instead, knee-jerk environmentalist zealots like you, force such activity offshore.

but I wonder how often will hear that moron Palin shouting "Drill baby drill!"

Drilling doesn't just mean offshore.

now as a fishery that provides between 30-40% of the United States' seafood is wiped out.

Which fishery is this?

[ToadBrother]

These are the emotion-based, logic-free, ridiculous/hyperbolic ideas I'm talking about...

I think when an oil spill threatens a wide area of coastline and economically important activities, some criticism is in order.

What a great idea. Cut off your nose to spite your face.

Heck, the government can pay for the cleanup by selling of bits of BP's US operations. I'm sure some competitors wouldn't mind grabbing it up.

Any type of activity can lead to accidents. The fact is that there hasn't been an incident like this in North America for 40 years.

The fact is that it only requires one. Clearly, apart from whatever caused the explosion, the issue as to why the system designed to cap off the well failed indicates a technological and engineering failure.

Um, no they can't. In fact, there are several places on land that could be tapped for oil. But instead, knee-jerk environmentalist zealots like you, force such activity offshore.

Oh look, I'm to blame for this.

Drilling doesn't just mean offshore.

I never said it does.

Which fishery is this?

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-29/oil-spill-imperils-gulf-coast-fishing-industry-update1-.html

This gives some numbers.

[bush_cheney2004]

As bad as the Exxon Valdez was, even if this incident doesn't release as much oil, it's capacity for wide spread damage, possibly up the Atlantic coast if the Gulf Stream catches some of the oil, means that a number of very important industries are at risk. The Gulf Coast fishery is one of the most important fisheries in the world. To see it wiped out for even a year would have a devastating impact on the region, and it could be worse than that. There are a lot of people out there facing, at least in the short term, the destruction of their livelihoods.

It won't be completely "wiped out"....and the entire season will not be lost. Farmers manage this kind of risk every year, not every 40 years. Frankly, I was surprised to learn just how much oil is spilled each year as a matter of routine operations and natural "burping".

Then we need to consider the impact on ecosystems in the region. As a number of people have pointed out, if this gets into the swamps and smaller tributary systems around the Mississippi, cleanup may very well be impossible. The poisoning of wildlife could be enormous and have numerous and long-term impacts on health and economic viability in the area.

Could be...may be...we just don't know yet.

Edited May 3, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

I see the twentysomething girl from Regina is getting nervous that people are catching on to the ruse.

Rhasida from Regina has been outed!

[Jack Weber]

It also underlines the failure of rightwing ideology that calls for either no regulation or regulators that rubberstamp whatever plans a corporation wants to follow. The $500,000 acoustic backup switches wouldn't have been of any value in this case if the wellhead was destroyed, as experts now seem to believe, but just the fact that a relatively inexpensive backup system was rejected by an oil company and the regulators fell in line, tells a lot about the incestuous relationship of large corporations and the politicians they've bought and paid for.

Incidentally, the main cause of the disaster may turn out to be that the concrete cap around the wellheadwasn't strong enough...and that cap was built by Haliburton! Now, if BP runs out of money, Haliburton has lots of money to pay for the cleanup.

hehehe...

This needs repeating one more time,as this is the future we may be looking at not all that long from now...

Puchased regulators...

Edited May 3, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Jack Weber]

I see the twentysomething girl from Regina is getting nervous that people are catching on to the ruse.

"I'm better than you...God bless Dick Cheney and Milton Friedman!!!"

Edited May 3, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Shady]

hehehe...

This needs repeating one more time,as this is the future we may be looking at not all that long from now...

Puchased regulators...

How about you stop posting the incredibly insane Keith Overbite, and I'll never reference Rush Limbaugh as proof for anything?

[Jack Weber]

How about you stop posting the incredibly insane Keith Overbite, and I'll never reference Rush Limbaugh as proof for anything?

Fair enough..By the way,I agree that Olbermann gets a little over the top.However,instead of shooting the messanger,why not deal with the scary possibility that unfettered money in any electoral system will absolutely corrupt it in favour of the side with the most money?

[WIP]

Well stated.

There is no way (this my area of expertise)any liability insurance policies BP has will be sufficient to

cover the money BP will be held responsible for in terms of compensation. They will easily excede any liability limits.

I heard today that the maximum liability BP could face is 10 billion dollars, so regardless of what Obama says about BP getting the bill, as soon as the total tops 10 B that's it...and no doubt they will have an army of lawyers to negotiate the final settlement down significantly, just like Exxon did with the Exxon Valdez. Just as in the banking meltdown, profits go to the corporations, but as soon as they are faced with losses, it becomes a collective responsibility of that government that they want to reduce in size.

The oil rig off St. John's if it breaks will do the same disasterous thing. Oil rigs up North in the will do the same thing. It is just a matter of time until they break down.

You can't put these things in the ocean and thing man is stronger and smarter than nature and can resist the wind, the water pressure, the storms.

Nothing humans make can be assumed to be fool proof. Time and time again we have destroyed huge chunks of this planet with this insane notion that we are superior to the planet and can do whatever we want to it.

I've heard some oil industry analysts state that Canada has a worse record than the U.S. at applying safety regulations for offshore oil development. Whether or not it's true, it seems obvious that we are most at risk with these Arctic Ocean developments. It's bad enough trying to stop a blown well under water without having to deal with freezing water and ice.

[WIP]

Because of the energy density of petroleum...much higher than any BTUs we can hope to get out of social program recipients.

Greed trumps all in so called free market economics!

[bush_cheney2004]

Greed trumps all in so called free market economics!

How many BTUs do you use each year? What will you give up to end the hydrocarbon economy?

[waldo]

Looks like Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are ahead of the curve on this one. They've already started blaming Obama for the oil leaking into the Gulf. Nothing new to see here....this is the same strategy they used on the subprime mortgage meltdown -- as soon as Barack Obama was elected president...even before the Inauguration, it was all his fault, and George Bush never existed!

Breaking News!!! Limbaugh has it on good authority....

I want to get back to the timing of the blowing up, the explosion out there in the Gulf of Mexico of this oil rig....Now, lest we forget, ladies and gentlemen, the carbon tax bill, cap and trade that was scheduled to be announced on Earth Day. I remember that. And then it was postponed for a couple of days later after Earth Day, and then of course immigration has now moved in front of it. But this bill, the cap-and-trade bill, was strongly criticized by hardcore environmentalist wackos because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling and nuclear plants, nuclear plant investment. So, since they're sending SWAT teams down there, folks, since they're sending SWAT teams to inspect the other rigs, what better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig? I'm just noting the timing here.

[Jack Weber]

Breaking News!!! Limbaugh has it on good authority....

Shady...I take it back about Olberamann...He might be a little over the top sometimes,but he's not looney tunes over the top like this!!!

Rush Limbaugh...High Priest of the Loyal Order of Tin Foil Hats...

[Moonlight Graham]

The U.S. considered requiring a remote-controlled shut-off mechanism several years ago, but drilling companies questioned its cost and effectiveness, according to the agency overseeing offshore drilling. The agency, the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, says it decided the remote device wasn't needed because rigs had other back-up plans to cut off a well. Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device

A deadman switch, that was supposed to automatically close the valve, didn't work and nobody knows the reason why yet. But why was the owner or the company leasing the oil rig too cheap to spend $500,000 for an acoustic backup switch, and why didn't the regulators demand that they add an additional backup that could have prevented this disaster?

This is a VERY important issue in this whole disaster. There should have been an acoustic backup switch installed to cap the oil in just such an emergency. It costs $500,000 to install one on a rig, but that is peanuts to an oil company and it will cost billions to clean up this mess now.

Hopefully, all rigs will now require having one of these backup acoustic switches from now on. A penny's prevention is worth a pound of cure! Aaarrrgg!

Edited May 3, 2010 by Moonlight Graham

[punked]

I heard today that the maximum liability BP could face is 10 billion dollars, so regardless of what Obama says about BP getting the bill, as soon as the total tops 10 B that's it...and no doubt they will have an army of lawyers to negotiate the final settlement down significantly, just like Exxon did with the Exxon Valdez. Just as in the banking meltdown, profits go to the corporations, but as soon as they are faced with losses, it becomes a collective responsibility of that government that they want to reduce in size.

I've heard some oil industry analysts state that Canada has a worse record than the U.S. at applying safety regulations for offshore oil development. Whether or not it's true, it seems obvious that we are most at risk with these Arctic Ocean developments. It's bad enough trying to stop a blown well under water without having to deal with freezing water and ice.

Actually Bush's Daddy capped all Liability oil companies face in these situations at 75 million.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i-Bq4GrZpMDSMrtPh6TBPh6-bHdAD9FFKT880

Bush the gift that keep on giving not only do they cause the spill but they make it so that no one will get any payment from it.

Edited May 3, 2010 by punked

[WIP]

He may be wrong about the timeline,however there is ample evidence that the Friedman/Hayek vision of economics is one sided,pro-corporate vision....Deregulating things to make profitability easier seems to be the underlying ethos of the followers of the Friedmanite vision...

I used to buy in to the basic right wing premise that a collection of individuals motivated solely by greed and self-interest will reach mutual accommodation for the benefit of society as a whole, without any outside interference in commerce or markets. But this is simply a libertarian fantasy and doesn't stand up to scrutiny, account for irrational behaviour in business and financial markets, and worse of all -- it doesn't deal with the fact that most people focus on short term interests, and cannot rationally deal with longterm, slowly building crises like Climate Change. And this is where government (government that is brave enough to risk the wrath of the public) has to step in and try to get the majority to look beyond short term gains and losses.

It would have been nice if America elected a president who came in as an outsider and remained an outsider - refusing to be co-opted by the powerful special interests...but they didn't! Instead, they got a president who compromized with the health insurance companies that feed off of illness to get a health care bill passed, and compromised with the most powerful investment banks to propose a timid financial reform, and on this front, President Obama was willing to compromise with the oil industry and it's political backers to get a bill supposedly for cutting CO2 emissions? Now that the dangers of offshore drilling are coming home to Republican free enterprizers that live around the Redneck Riviera along the Gulf, maybe now some real leadership can focus people's attention beyond narrow short term interests and phase out the Age of Oil. It will take real leadership to get real energy conservation policies in place, along with shifting energy sources away from oil to nuclear, wind and solar energy, but the costs of failure to change the present course could mean extinction of the human race in a few generations.

[WIP]

Actually Bush's Daddy capped all Liability oil companies face in these situations at 75 million.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i-Bq4GrZpMDSMrtPh6TBPh6-bHdAD9FFKT880

Bush the gift that keep on giving not only do they cause the spill but they make it so that no one will get any payment from it.

Gee, why am I not surprised! Yesterday on the news, they had a short segment on some of the 700 fishermen who were to be hired by BP for the cleanup operation, and at the last minute BP presented them with a waiver that they were told they would have to sign. This little contract clause would release BP from any financial obligations for health problems suffered by cleanup workers. After a near riot, BP retracted the waiver, since this whole tactic of hiring the fishermen is a PR move to begin with and they didn't want the bad optics of breaking windows and rioting fishermen.

It just goes to show that for all of the public promises that they will pay the costs for damages, behind the scenes they are already using any and every maneuvre to minimize their losses. An oil cleanup expert on As It Happens last night said that many cleanup workers and residents around the area of the Exxon Valdez disaster have never been compensated for their long term health problems. It's just one more "cost of doing business" that becomes the responsibility of the state and local charities. As in the Banking scandal, profits are private, but losses are the public's problem!

[bush_cheney2004]

It would have been nice if America elected a president who came in as an outsider and remained an outsider - refusing to be co-opted by the powerful special interests...but they didn't!

Nice for who? The US president and Executive Branch of government expressly cannot remain an "outsider". Interests must compete for support, funding, and enforcement.

Instead, they got a president who compromized with the health insurance companies that feed off of illness to get a health care bill passed, and compromised with the most powerful investment banks to propose a timid financial reform, and on this front, President Obama was willing to compromise with the oil industry and it's political backers to get a bill supposedly for cutting CO2 emissions?

The Americans got exactly what the politics can deliver....advocates for action on climate change are just another special interest group with their own agenda.

Now that the dangers of offshore drilling are coming home to Republican free enterprizers that live around the Redneck Riviera along the Gulf, maybe now some real leadership can focus people's attention beyond narrow short term interests and phase out the Age of Oil.

Why is this an American responsibility?

It will take real leadership to get real energy conservation policies in place, along with shifting energy sources away from oil to nuclear, wind and solar energy, but the costs of failure to change the present course could mean extinction of the human race in a few generations.

Complete nonsense...this is not even possible without hunting down and killing all females of child bearing age. Hell, we have aborted more human fetuses than will ever be killed by climate change.

[BubberMiley]

Hell, we have aborted more human fetuses than will ever be killed by climate change.

It's amazing how much you say and how little you know what you're talking about.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's amazing how much you say and how little you know what you're talking about.

This hasn't been a barrier for you, so why should I be so encumbered?

[WIP]

The Americans got exactly what the politics can deliver....advocates for action on climate change are just another special interest group with their own agenda.

So trying to prevent ecological disaster is a special interest! Maybe if all the people living in the year 2050 are a special interest -- they will likely see it differently.

Why is this an American responsibility?

In the short term, the "drill baby drill" crowd are seeing their chickens come home to roost since they carelessly disregarded the warnings against more deep water drilling. This was an accident that was bound to happen, and the more deep water drilling rigs, the greater the odds.

A climate websiteI check regularly posted a link to this oilpatch site that featured an interview with a survivor of the fire on the Transocean Horizon. He noted the safety awards as evidence that this rig's operation were considered by regulators to be exemplary, and blamed the high wellhead pressures (30,000 to 40,000 p.p.sq. inch) as the cause of the explosion. The caller "James" claimed that gas gets kicked up frequently and has to be vented before drilling can resume, and for that reason, equipment on the floor of the rig has to be non-sparking. But in this case, because of the high pressure, there was such a high volume of gas coming up so fast that it engulfed the rig and could have been sparked by anything.

Long story short, if this rig was supposed to be among the safest and best operating, then this disaster was something that can be expected when drilling for oil at these depths, and not mere negligence or a freak accident that will not be repeated.

Complete nonsense...this is not even possible without hunting down and killing all females of child bearing age. Hell, we have aborted more human fetuses than will ever be killed by climate change.

I'll assume this convoluted statement has something to do with population growth, which wasn't what I was talking about, but is the central problem in environmental issues, since an increasing population demanding higher standards of living will make all other efforts futile.

As for that abortion red herring -- thanks in part to the efforts of Republican administrations since Reagan, U.N. sponsored birth control programs have been seriously damaged. Today, more than a quarter of the world's population is under 15, so we can expect another surge in population growth when these children come of age....especially since there is a decline in availability of birth control and legal abortion over the last 30 years. And this is how concern over fetuses, such as expressed recently by our idiot prime minister, adds to the crisis.