Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

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


Recommended Posts

But we now see the huge environmental disaster resulting in one single oil rig. No matter how many oil rigs are in US waters , once is too many.

A freak occurance shouldn't result in knee-jerk overreactions. It'd be like a call to stop flying after a bad plane crash.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 537
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A freak occurance shouldn't result in knee-jerk overreactions. It'd be like a call to stop flying after a bad plane crash.

It will turn out to be negligence of some kind. And I have yet to see an airplane crash causing this kind of environmental disaster that could have lasting effects for the next 30 years. This has the potential to demolish the fishing industries around the Gulf, and not just the US.

For this you need to have a knee-jerk reaction. Alaska is still seeing the impact of the Exxon Valdez.

Your comparison is absolutely retarded. But, that's par for you Shady. Willfully blind and ignorant.

Even if they manage to close off that well today, the damage has already been done.

Edited by GostHacked
Link to post
Share on other sites

But we now see the huge environmental disaster resulting in one single oil rig. No matter how many oil rigs are in US waters , once is too many.

So does this mean that the Hibernia platform should never have been built? The risk of blowouts was known long before that.

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to post
Share on other sites

It will turn out to be negligence of some kind.

Or, it could have just been an actual accident. You do realize that sometimes accidents happen, without any negligence.

Regardless, offshore drilling will continue. Our economies needs the energy, and the jobs. And technology has evolved significantly. Oil rigs such as the one related to this particular incident are a thing of the past. You shouldn't close your eyes to new and better ways of doing things.

You're just part of the same idiocy that led to a complete halt to any new nuclear power production after Three Mile Island back in the 70's. Today, other countries get an overwhelming portion of their electricity through it, producing no carbon emissions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again this spill would have been stopped if the Bush Admin didn't block the 500,000 dollar fail safe system that EVERYWHERE else in the world it is required. THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED IF IT WASN'T FOR BUSH and his deregulation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does this mean that the Hibernia platform should never have been built? The risk of blowouts was known long before that.

Irrelevant. This was a preventable situation and the safety measures were not in place. And knowing the risk exists does not make it any less important, it should make it more important. Regardless of what happened on the rig, the last fail safe was never installed.

I would hope Hibernia's safety measures will prevent a situation like this. And I would hope BP now get's their collective asses kicked and made to put the valves in place or shut down until it is installed. All oil rigs around the planet should have those valves.

The cost to get all those valves in place and tested and to create a body to oversee that will be far less than the cost of cleaning up the environment let alone an oil rig.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471204575209331720726738.html

If this is the case, then BP is going to be paying out huge. They may have had a cut off valve, but was not the one that was up to regulation. There does not seem to be a remote way to shut off the valve. No matter what went down on the oil rig, there are things in place already to prevent the oil from filling the gulf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again this spill would have been stopped if the Bush Admin didn't block the 500,000 dollar fail safe system that EVERYWHERE else in the world it is required. THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED IF IT WASN'T FOR BUSH and his deregulation.

Nonsense....Bush is gone....and nothing is truly "fail safe".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Must be why it IS REQUIRED EVERYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD, but Bush didn't want to make his oil buddies pay up to fix their old rigs.

It is not required everywhere else in the world....do I have to find another blowout just to prove you wrong?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not required everywhere else in the world....do I have to find another blowout just to prove you wrong?

I am sorry you are right they are only required by such world leaders as Brazil and Norway you really want to admit your government is so far behind on regulation that an oil rig in Brazil is safer to work on?

Yes these rigs blow out, you can find another there was one last year in Australia more the reason to require these switches, but the Bush Admin killed that regulation because it goes against the FREEMARKET!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry you are right they are only required by such world leaders as Brazil and Norway you really want to admit your government is so far behind on regulation that an oil rig in Brazil is safer to work on?

Not a problem for me....but it's your government too if you truly are an American citizen as claimed....busted! ;)

Yes these rigs blow out, you can find another there was one last year in Australia more the reason to require these switches, but the Bush Admin killed that regulation because it goes against the FREEMARKET!!!!

More silliness....Bush is long gone, but not the history of spilling oil into the environment:

http://www.pollutionissues.com/Co-Ea/Disasters-Oil-Spills.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a problem for me....but it's your government too if you truly are an American citizen as claimed....busted! ;)

More silliness....Bush is long gone, but not the history of spilling oil into the environment:

http://www.pollutionissues.com/Co-Ea/Disasters-Oil-Spills.html

Yep it is good thing I didn't vote for Bush, Cheney the guys who saw a report in 2002 that said 50% of all rigs shut of switches didn't work and instead of fixing the problem deregulated it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep it is good thing I didn't vote for Bush, Cheney the guys who saw a report in 2002 that said 50% of all rigs shut of switches didn't work and instead of fixing the problem deregulated it.

I don't think you could have voted anyway....spills happen...just so you can drive a car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you could have voted anyway....spills happen...just so you can drive a car.

Too young to vote in 2000 but I voted in 2004. I understand spills happen however when they do and not every measure was taken to prevent it someone gets the blame. It falls on BP and BUSH this time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but the Bush Admin killed that regulation because it goes against the FREEMARKET!!!!

You keep spewing your trash, but you fail time after time to back up any of your assertions. Give it a rest, you're wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Too young to vote in 2000 but I voted in 2004. I understand spills happen however when they do and not every measure was taken to prevent it someone gets the blame. It falls on BP and BUSH this time.

Not every measure is taken for a lot of things....blaming President Bush is just more BDS long after he has left office. Maybe I should blame JFK for Cuba, even though he is quite dead.

Politicizing this oil spill will not clean up one drop of contamination, or prevent more in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not every measure is taken for a lot of things....blaming President Bush is just more BDS long after he has left office. Maybe I should blame JFK for Cuba, even though he is quite dead.

Politicizing this oil spill will not clean up one drop of contamination, or prevent more in the future.

NO we have to look at how we got to this point. Who knew what when, and now we know the Bush admin knew that these switches were tested and they failed they had to make a decision ask the oil companies to update their rigs, OR ignore it. They chose ignore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NO we have to look at how we got to this point. Who knew what when, and now we know the Bush admin knew that these switches were tested and they failed they had to make a decision ask the oil companies to update their rigs, OR ignore it. They chose ignore.

You're wasting your time on that....obviously it wasn't ignored.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right they actively deregulated so that those rigs would not have to be maintained and now we see what happens.

The rig was over 20 years old....the knowledge about potential failures preceeded Bush's tenure by many years as well:

Citing a Minerals Management Service report, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said there were 117 failures of blowout preventers during a two-year period in the late 1990s on the outer continental shelf of the United States.

"To find out the ultimate failsafe weapon doesn't work is surprising," said Cantwell, who as chairwoman of the Senate Commerce Committee's oceans, atmosphere, fisheries and Coast Guard subcommittee will play a roll in any congressional investigation of the Gulf oil spill and the drilling rig fire that caused it.

The unclassified version of the 1990 report
said the failures involved 83 wells drilled by 26 rigs in depths from 1,300 feet to 6,560 feet.

A similar report released by the agency in 1997 found that between 1992 and 1996 there were 138 failures
of blowout preventers on underwater wells being drilled off Brazil, Norway, Italy and Albania.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/30/93250/us-report-found-failure-of-offshore.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rig was over 20 years old....the knowledge about potential failures preceeded Bush's tenure by many years as well:

Citing a Minerals Management Service report, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said there were 117 failures of blowout preventers during a two-year period in the late 1990s on the outer continental shelf of the United States.

"To find out the ultimate failsafe weapon doesn't work is surprising," said Cantwell, who as chairwoman of the Senate Commerce Committee's oceans, atmosphere, fisheries and Coast Guard subcommittee will play a roll in any congressional investigation of the Gulf oil spill and the drilling rig fire that caused it.

The unclassified version of the 1990 report
said the failures involved 83 wells drilled by 26 rigs in depths from 1,300 feet to 6,560 feet.

A similar report released by the agency in 1997 found that between 1992 and 1996 there were 138 failures
of blowout preventers on underwater wells being drilled off Brazil, Norway, Italy and Albania.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/30/93250/us-report-found-failure-of-offshore.html

These reports point to a different problem which again highlights Bush inaction. This deals with the preventer of the blowout not the safety mechanism to shut off the oil at the ocean floor. It does however highlight another problem with DRILL BABY DRILL doesn't? Glade that Palin, McCain, and Obama were all such experts when they were arguing about this subject. DRILL HERE DRILL NOW!

Link to post
Share on other sites

These reports point to a different problem which again highlights Bush inaction. This deals with the preventer of the blowout not the safety mechanism to shut off the oil at the ocean floor. It does however highlight another problem with DRILL BABY DRILL doesn't? Glade that Palin, McCain, and Obama were all such experts when they were arguing about this subject. DRILL HERE DRILL NOW!

Why do you persist with such nonsense? President Bush didn't take office until January 2001. America will keep drilling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep spewing your trash, but you fail time after time to back up any of your assertions. Give it a rest, you're wrong.

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...

Edited by Jack Weber
Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Preferable to the "ethos" of communists and socialists.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NO we have to look at how we got to this point. Who knew what when, and now we know the Bush admin knew that these switches were tested and they failed they had to make a decision ask the oil companies to update their rigs, OR ignore it. They chose ignore.

You keep pushing this lie, but repeating it over and over isn't going to make it true. Give it a rest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...