Something I learned about the oil spill...

[MtnTeaching]

Bear with me on this. I’ve been doing some research and have tried my best to find reliable sources on the following info. I have to say, it’s scared me. I know we have scientist members on the board and, hopefully, someone will be able to dismiss my fears by telling me none of this is true. I am certainly not trying to be some fear monger, just trying to be informed and to pass on what I learned. Someone please let me know if I was out of line in posting this info. I am certainly not trying to be political.

Everyone’s probably heard about BP using a dispersing chemical as one of the ways they are trying to minimize the effects of the oil spill. What I found that I didn’t know, is that BP is both pumping underwater and spraying into the air, more than a million gallons (I found varying numbers) of a toxic “disperser†called Corexit to try and break up the oil. According to the EPA, Corexit 9500 is highly toxic to animals, plants and humans. It is actually, 4 times MORE toxic than crude oil and it’s use has been banned in the UK for a decade. It disperses the oil into tiny droplets which then sink to the floor of the ocean and become a permanent part of the food chain. This isn’t “cleaning up†the oil spill, it is just masking the oil so it doesn’t look so bad on the surface. Remember the talk about the plumes under the surface?

Layers of microscopic oil droplets are being dispersed all over the Gulf’s fragile floor. There’s no way to skim the droplets when it is dispersed like this. The toxic chemicals remain in the ocean. The fear (of some scientists and other countries) is that eventually the Corexit will be carried by the Gulf Stream all around the globe, destroying the ocean life as it goes. There are reports that crops in the coastal area are already showing yellowing spots, possibly from the overspray. Some scientists believe that this chemical mix could possibly evaporate into the air or be churned there by a storm and Dixie will be drenched in toxic rain (like acid rain). Other scientists believe that the molecules are not proportioned correctly and will be unable to do this.

The interesting part is that a month ago, the EPA ordered BP to stop dispersing Corexit and to find something less toxic. (Supposedly, there is a chemical (Dispersit) that is much less toxic and that has been shown to be much more effective at dispersing the kind of oil that is in the Gulf area, but of course I don’t know this for sure.) But BP has continued to use the toxic poison, Corexit. Why would they do this when they know it’s toxic? One reason could be that BP and the company that manufactures Corexit are monetarily connected?? Right again!

My question is – why are people and other nations who really want to help, being denied the ability? Is it the toxicity or a cover-up? Why are BP contractors and the Coast Guard not allowing reporters (CBS) to film the spill and are threatening to arrest those who do? Why?? There is a You Tube entitled “Arrest For Filming Oil Spill, BY BP CONTRACTORS: BP's Rules, NOT OURS†that shows that CBS film crew being threatened with arrest.

There’s an article from the European Union Times that is very interesting, if it’s true:

- “Toxic Oil Spill Rains Warned Could Destroy North America†on eutimes.net

Here are other articles that give more information in the use of dispersants in the oil spill:

- “Despite concerns, dispersant use continues on gulf oil spill†from tampabay.com

- “Why Is BP Using Highly Toxic Corexit Oil Dispersant?†from beforeitsnews.com

- “Gulf Oil Spill: BP Trying To Hide Millions of Gallons of Toxic Oil?†- from protecttheocean.com

- “Class action lawsuit targets BP and dispersant maker†– from fox8live.com

Hopefully this was informative and not starting a flame.

[ReneTL]

Scary stuff. Thanks for sharing.

[Geek]

I've been reading similar things for a while now. I think about this a lot and it's really getting to me. :(

[jewellsmommy]

I watched Huckabee's show (on fox news) where he had lots of different companies and scientists and business reps that demonstrated a slew of techniques for cleaning up and removing the oil. It was fascinating. Everything form hay to hair to non toxic chemical options. Why can't they use any of these options. You know people would have their hair cut off and sent to the gulf for the cause.

Edited June 27, 2010 by jewellsmommy

[Leola]

I can't offer much - I find this whole thing outrageous. I can't help but wonder if there isn't something deliberate going on with this.

[Melissa in FL]

Here is the website that makes Corexit: http://www.nalco.com/news-events.htm They are located outside Chicago. They have a lot of information on that page, some statements from them and several from our government (lots to read). I would love to know who the major stockholders of NALCO are. There are many rumors on the web about it, but I can't find any specifics to back up their claims. I always try to go straight to the source which is why I went to the nalco site. There are a lot of rumors around the web about the oil spill right now, I read them but add a grain of salt when I do.

Melissa

[MtnTeaching]

Here is the website that makes Corexit: http://www.nalco.com/news-events.htm They are located outside Chicago. They have a lot of information on that page, some statements from them and several from our government (lots to read). I would love to know who the major stockholders of NALCO are. There are many rumors on the web about it, but I can't find any specifics to back up their claims. I always try to go straight to the source which is why I went to the nalco site. There are a lot of rumors around the web about the oil spill right now, I read them but add a grain of salt when I do.

Melissa

 

Definitely take what I've put on here with a grain of salt. Hopefully, NONE of it is true. I tried to find the information I wrote about backed up in several different sources.

 

I did find that there are a lot of questions about HUGE amounts of stock being sold by Goldman Sacs and the CEO of BP just weeks before the spill. Large enought amounts to have questions raised about insider trading. One of the articles I mentioned in my information also has the name of the gentleman who was on the board of both BP and Nalco.

 

I need to head to dinner with in-laws, but will try and find the info when I get back.

[Julie in Austin]

"My question is – why are people and other nations who really want to help, being denied the ability?"

 

Is this really the case? According to this site, it is not. If there is more info out there, I would like to know about it.

[Peela]

It makes me wonder what we can actually do?

I mean, I am in Australia, but if it was happening here on my coast....there would be outrage and uproar and I think many thousands of people woudl be demanding answers and trying to help and even demanding and pushing down barriers and insisting - in other words, breaking the law and making a fuss until the "powers that be" come clean. Because its too big- its everyone's planet, the government doesnt own it, for goodness sakes!

I am wondering if there are literally movements happening where people intend to take the law into their own hands and do something?

Otherwise....well, this could be so bad people will wonder, in a few years, why they just sat and watched it on TV and shook their heads.

What will it take for people to get angry enough ? When will we stop trusting the governments and multinationals to look after us?

(Asking myself here too).

[asta]

I did find that there are a lot of questions about HUGE amounts of stock being sold by Goldman Sacs and the CEO of BP just weeks before the spill. Large enought amounts to have questions raised about insider trading. One of the articles I mentioned in my information also has the name of the gentleman who was on the board of both BP and Nalco.

 

 

What are you considering weeks before the spill? It actually started in February 2011, although not at this scale.

 

People (who shall not be named to avoid the politics rule here) in the US government shifted their own investments from mutual and hedge funds that had large BP holdings to ones that focused on other oil companies at that time based on initial reports. No one outside of the gvt of BP had that opportunity that early in the game.

 

Insider trading happens all of the time, and has since time immemorial. I'm not saying it is right, just that it happens. We shouldn't even be shocked about it anymore. Outraged? Yes. But not shocked.

 

 

asta

[MtnTeaching]

What are you considering weeks before the spill? It actually started in February 2011, although not at this scale.

 

People (who shall not be named to avoid the politics rule here) in the US government shifted their own investments from mutual and hedge funds that had large BP holdings to ones that focused on other oil companies at that time based on initial reports. No one outside of the gvt of BP had that opportunity that early in the game.

 

Insider trading happens all of the time, and has since time immemorial. I'm not saying it is right, just that it happens. We shouldn't even be shocked about it anymore. Outraged? Yes. But not shocked.

 

 

asta

 

Very good points!

 

Looking backward at the timeline of the leak... The actual blow-out and explosion of the oil rig took place on April 20th.

 

An oil rig worker/survivor stated that he noticed a leak from the blow-out preventer safety device several weeks (I couldn't find where he ever gave an exact date) before the actual blow-out and that BP officials were notified. http://www.aolnews.com/gulf-oil-spill/article/report-deepwater-horizon-worker-says-bp-rig-was-leaking-weeks-before-explosion/19524065 (This story was reported to BBC).

 

The Mining and Mineral Services agency released documents to Bloomberg indicating that BP “was trying to seal cracks in the well about 40 miles (64 kilometers) off the Louisiana coast. BP started trying to fix the fissures on Feb. 13th. Investigators still aren't sure if the fissures caused the actual explosion, but speculation is that gases could have built up...

 

Meanwhile, back at the bigwig ranches:

 

Goldman Sacs had the incredible good foresight? to decide to sell 4.6 million shares of its BP stock on March 31th (according to MSN Money and SEC filings). The single largest sell-off of petroleum shares ever... 44% of it's BP holdings...and right at the beginning of summer when oil prices usually go up and the oil stock guys are all hanging on to their stock.:confused:

 

And here's another tasty bit of info to chew on:

"The Post (New York Post)says the decision (to sell the stock) came from Goldman Sachs International Chairman Peter Sutherland, who — in another instance of insanely good timing — stepped down from his post as BP chairman last December."

 

Furthermore, as reported by the London Telegraph on June 5th, Tony Hayward, the then BP CEO sold £1.4 million of his shares in the fuel giant weeks before the spill. (Haven't verified the exact date of his stock sales because I'm falling asleep.)

 

Regarding the govt. officials and their stock juggling - I am going to side with you Asta and not name names.

 

Am I shocked by insider trading? No. Do I think it's wrong and should be punished? Yes. What's good for Martha Stewart is good for these guys. Do I personally believe this is insider trading. Yeap - but it's up to the courts to make the final decision.

[MtnTeaching]

"My question is – why are people and other nations who really want to help, being denied the ability?"

 

Is this really the case? According to this site, it is not. If there is more info out there, I would like to know about it.

 

Hi Julie,

I have lots of great info on this with tons of links, but I'm beat and need to go to bed. We've had strep throat going around the house. I promise I'll get this info to you tomorrow. Remember to check back in.:001_smile:

[Mama Geek]

I am not sure about the chemicals that are being used to try and clean up the oil spill, but after being in Valdez, AK a little over a year ago I think the long term effects of oil on the environment have been way over blown. Nature has a way to clean itself up.

 

Valdez looks like there was never an oil spill today. The fishing there has returned. I know and understand the short term effects on the environment and the economy were great, but it didn't take more than 10 years and I am sure it was something less than that for that area to recover.

 

I believe BP, Transocean, Haliburton and our government are all to blame for the situation we are in.

 

If drilling hadn't been pushed so far offshore and this type of thing had happened in shallow water the oil would have been much easier to stop.

[momofkhm]

You know people would have their cut off and sent to the gulf for the cause.

 

I'm assuming you mean hair? People have! I remember an article in our newspaper (Raleigh, NC) weeks ago about this very thing. Hair cutting places are sending down hair in boxes (they sweep it up after hair cuts). But it is just sitting there! If they wanted to do this option, they could. The one place local that said they had participated paid to send 10 pounds of hair down. And that's just one place and one mailing.

[Geek]

Do I personally believe this is insider trading. Yeap - but it's up to the courts to make the final decision.

In your opinion, what are the circumstances surrounding this "insider trading"? Was this purposeful and certain people got wind of it? Or did certain people become aware of dangerous policies within BP and say "I want out!"?

 

Take the water depth issue, for instance. This was something that had never been done before, and I find it challenging to believe that no one within BP, Halliburton, etc had an issue with this. Before children I worked for Halliburton's directional drilling division--Sperry Sun--testing and documenting software used out on that rig. I can easily imagine the conversations that went on between the grounded engineers working on the software, being told that they were taking those drills that far out. Sperry Sun has loads of offshore experience, some of it in deeper water in the North Sea, but the depths we're talking about here are quite a novelty.

 

So I don't think it's a stretch for drilling at this depth to have been controversial within the companies in question. As a result, I think commensurate behavior would be to sell stock. Whether or not that's considered insider trading is beyond my knowledge.

 

Just my .02.

[SailorMom]

Peela -

Don't worry - there is plenty of outrage, and no one here is just watching it on TV.

I'm in Gulf Breeze - at the end of a tiny little peninsula, surrounded by water on 3 sides, five minutes from Pensacola beach. All the communities on the coast are very angry at the Feds right now. Red tape is holding up cleaning and skimming efforts (for example - there are hundreds of skimmers sitting idle because they haven't been given clearance to work). Many communities are "going vigilante" and doing whatever they feel is right without the approval of the feds because the red tape is taking weeks to be cleared as we watch oil wash on shore.

Jindahl, in Lousianna, had boats out in front of the marshes sucking oil up with huge vacuums, it was working great. The news caught on and did a story... two days later the Coast Gaurd boats came out and shut them down - claiming that they dind't have the proper safety gear or some such nonesense. I don't think - even weeks later, that they have been able to start again.

As for the dispersants - everything said in the OP I have heard on the local news stations here. We are all afraid for our health. The oil is ugl and takes mother nature years to clear - but the dispersants are far worse and only a cover up on the part of the oil company so that the world doesn't see the amount of oil sitting on the surface that there actually is.

[JVA]

I can't offer much - I find this whole thing outrageous. I can't help but wonder if there isn't something deliberate going on with this.

 

 

 

I've thought THAT even since the explosion.....just seems fishy. I pray for the people down there- their safety, livehood and spirits. It's got to be downright depressing. Heaven looks better every day.

[Jody]

Yes, I agree that Heaven looks better everyday! The whole thing seems corrupt and it is sad.

[angela in ohio]

Furthermore, as reported by the London Telegraph on June 5th, Tony Hayward, the then BP CEO sold £1.4 million of his shares in the fuel giant weeks before the spill. (Haven't verified the exact date of his stock sales because I'm falling asleep.)

 

I would want more info on this; this isn't enough information to go on. CEOs sometimes receive stock as part of their compensation, and I would assume sell it and either spend it or diversify. Did he routinely sell his stock? Had he ever sold a similar amount before? Where did the money go (did he use it to purchase a home or did he move it to other stocks?)

[MtnTeaching]

In your opinion, what are the circumstances surrounding this "insider trading"? Was this purposeful and certain people got wind of it? Or did certain people become aware of dangerous policies within BP and say "I want out!"?

 

Take the water depth issue, for instance. This was something that had never been done before, and I find it challenging to believe that no one within BP, Halliburton, etc had an issue with this. Before children I worked for Halliburton's directional drilling division--Sperry Sun--testing and documenting software used out on that rig. I can easily imagine the conversations that went on between the grounded engineers working on the software, being told that they were taking those drills that far out. Sperry Sun has loads of offshore experience, some of it in deeper water in the North Sea, but the depths we're talking about here are quite a novelty.

 

So I don't think it's a stretch for drilling at this depth to have been controversial within the companies in question. As a result, I think commensurate behavior would be to sell stock. Whether or not that's considered insider trading is beyond my knowledge.

 

Just my .02.

 

As for your questions regarding the insider trading and my opinion. I can only say that from experience, this looks a lot like insider trading. Just to give you an idea of where I'm coming from re: insider trading, I worked for 5 years for a well-recognized Venture Capital firm in Silicon Valley and prior to that, for the top executives (President and Vice-Presidents) of the most well-known soda company based out of Atlanta.

- The fact that the CEO KNEW there were problems with the rig prior to the sale of his stock is why I believe Hayward's sale can be questioned. (The oil rig worker who reported the leak, Tyrone Benton, gave an interview to BBC that you can view on their website.)

- The fact that the CEO of Goldman Sacs had just stepped down from his job as CEO of BP in December - oh wait, did I mention that up until that point he was the CEO of BOTH Goldman Sacs and BP at the same time? The resume of this guy and his affiliations are enough to make the hair rise on the back of your neck. Am I saying that there's a possibility that these two (Hayward and Sutherland) had a chat? I certainly wasn't there, but I do believe it warrants an investigation.

You make the point about the rig being located at such a great depth. Then why did they make the decisions they did regarding the building and safety of the rig? Wouldn’t you think they would be extra careful?? Here's just a few points that can be gleaned from the info at the Congressional Hearings:

- The centraliser devices. These devices make sure that the pipe or casing is centralised during cementing, to ensure a good job is done. Congressmen say Halliburton recommended that 21 should be used, but BP decided only six should be used.

- “Because of the importance of getting a good cement job in the well, one that is bonded both to the casing and to the geological formation in which the well is dug, a series of measurements called a "cement bond log" is usually run.

A sonic scanning device is lowered through the well on a wireline. It checks whether there are imperfections in bonding or other problems in the cement. If there are, more cement can be squeezed into affected sections.

Documents presented to Congress show a team from Schlumberger were called to the rig to be ready to do such work, but that they departed on the morning of the disaster having been told their services were not required.†(REALLY??? They were told to leave the morning of the explosion???)

Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, noted "the failure to circulate potentially gas-bearing drilling muds out of the well". This should have been done before cementing.

-Another issue was the type of casing that would be used on the final, bottom section of the well. BP opted for a single line of casing from the seabed down to the bottom of the well, Congressman say. The more expensive option would have been to use a "liner", a bit of casing hung from the bottom of the casing section above. Inside this would have been a further piece of tubing called a "tieback".

This arrangement would have created more barriers to the upward flow of oil and gas, but it would also have been more expensive.

Other cementing issues being investigated by Transocean include the type of nitrogen-foamed cement used, the volume and the time it was allowed to "cure".

-The Blowout Preventer- Whatever the exact cause of what happened, it is clear there was some sort of gas-kick and blowout resulting in an uncontrolled upward surge of oil and gas flow to the surface.

The blowout preventer (BOP) is supposed to stop this happening. The BOP, the size of a five-storey building, consists of a series of high-pressure valves, designed to prevent such a surge or kick from damaging the drilling operation.

In this particular BOP, built by US firm Cameron to specifications by Transocean, there are five ram-type preventers and two annular preventers, according to Transocean's chief executive.

These devices did not stop the blowout. Nor has it been possible to activate them using remote-operated vehicles.

(The rig worker stated that he let management know there was a leak on one of the BOP control pod and that management decided to just shut that one off instead of trying to fix it). Here’s his interview: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and_canada/10362139.stm

__________________________________________________________

Does any of this raise any questions for you? Do you think the guys may have known that these short-cuts were being taken? I would hope the CEO would know what was going on with a well being dug in pretty much unprecedented depths and if that well was having problems.

Just my opinion and like I said, I wasn't there and the courts need to decide on this one. But it sure looks like these guys could have had enough prior knowledge to have helped in making the decision to sell the stock when they did. The same stock that has dropped to 50% of what it was worth before the spill.

[MtnTeaching]

In your opinion, what are the circumstances surrounding this "insider trading"? Was this purposeful and certain people got wind of it? Or did certain people become aware of dangerous policies within BP and say "I want out!"?

 

Take the water depth issue, for instance. This was something that had never been done before, and I find it challenging to believe that no one within BP, Halliburton, etc had an issue with this. Before children I worked for Halliburton's directional drilling division--Sperry Sun--testing and documenting software used out on that rig. I can easily imagine the conversations that went on between the grounded engineers working on the software, being told that they were taking those drills that far out. Sperry Sun has loads of offshore experience, some of it in deeper water in the North Sea, but the depths we're talking about here are quite a novelty.

 

So I don't think it's a stretch for drilling at this depth to have been controversial within the companies in question. As a result, I think commensurate behavior would be to sell stock. Whether or not that's considered insider trading is beyond my knowledge.

 

Just my .02.

 

By the way, I think the first sentence of my LONG response above was left off when I cut and pasted. I think this is very cool that you have firsthand knowledge of the software used on the rig!

[MtnTeaching]

I was going to try and personally answer all of the questions here, but I have to say that after all of the research I've done, I am overwhelmed and exhausted both physically and mentally.

I urge all of you to take the time to really look into this. As always, there are some kooky ideas and theories out there that don't warrant even glancing at, but when you really start digging and looking for facts, there are enough questions raised that you go "Huh???"

Just a few to dig into for yourselves if you are interested:

- The clean-up effort has definitely been thwarted, and in several cases, with force. Offers of help from other countries all the way down to the concerned US citizen that shows up with their bottle of Dawn on a Sat. afternoon have been denied. Why???? Liability fears? Toxicity fears (Corexit)? Something else? I just don’t get it. Some help has since been accepted, notably from the Dutch, but well past the time when it really could have made a difference. News/film crews have been threatened with arrest for taking pictures of a public beaches.

- A President who doesn't bat an eyelash at taking over our banking industry, healthcare industry and automotive industry, but he decides to let BP be solely in charge of handling the capping of the well and the clean-up?? What day of the spill is this?? Don’t you think it might be time to call in a few more experts from around the world that may have some novel ideas?

- One the scariest things I read about was how much BP wants this “Climate Change†bill.

The National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR) on June 11 called on environmental activist groups to return the contributions they have received from BP, which has been a high-profile supporter and funder of activist causes. A June NCPPR press statement specifically named the Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, World Resources Institute, various branches of the Audubon Society, the Wildlife Habitat Council, and others as recipients of major gifts from BP.

While NCPPR called on the groups to return the BP money, BP doubled down on its environment activist connections, employing the Podesta Group, a Washington DC lobbying company formed by the CEO of the activist group Center for American Progress, to lobby Congress and the Obama administration on its behalf.

Siding with a position held by BP and the Podesta Group, Obama launched a major public relations offensive claiming the best response to the oil spill would be to enact cap-and-tax legislation to restrict carbon dioxide restrictions. BP has long lobbied for such legislation, believing the restrictions would give it a competitive advantage over other companies because of its natural gas and alternative energy projects. The Center for American Progress is likewise a longtime supporter of carbon dioxide restrictions.

(For those of you who know who George Soros is – he’s the Podesta Group and The Center for American Progress. That opens a whole other can of worms.)

-There are unprecedented amounts of toxins being poured into our beautiful Gulf and no one is talking about it nationally. There is a ton of information out there on this. I am close to tears reading about the damage the mix of oil and toxins are going to do.

-This article in the EU Times can make interesting reading. http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/toxic-oil-spill-rains-warned-could-destroy-north-america/ Take it with a grain of salt, but I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when this came up in the discussions President Obama and President Medvedev had last week.

_______________________________________________________________

The bottom line for me after hours and hours of research about the oil spill: something doesn’t feel right. I hope everyone, no matter what your political affiliation, will take it upon yourselves to research and make your own opinions.

I've probably bored everyone to tears.

[Peela]

Peela -

Don't worry - there is plenty of outrage, and no one here is just watching it on TV.

I'm in Gulf Breeze - at the end of a tiny little peninsula, surrounded by water on 3 sides, five minutes from Pensacola beach. All the communities on the coast are very angry at the Feds right now. Red tape is holding up cleaning and skimming efforts (for example - there are hundreds of skimmers sitting idle because they haven't been given clearance to work). Many communities are "going vigilante" and doing whatever they feel is right without the approval of the feds because the red tape is taking weeks to be cleared as we watch oil wash on shore.

Jindahl, in Lousianna, had boats out in front of the marshes sucking oil up with huge vacuums, it was working great. The news caught on and did a story... two days later the Coast Gaurd boats came out and shut them down - claiming that they dind't have the proper safety gear or some such nonesense. I don't think - even weeks later, that they have been able to start again.

As for the dispersants - everything said in the OP I have heard on the local news stations here. We are all afraid for our health. The oil is ugl and takes mother nature years to clear - but the dispersants are far worse and only a cover up on the part of the oil company so that the world doesn't see the amount of oil sitting on the surface that there actually is.

 

Thanks for sharing that.

It seems that getting really agnry sometimes is the way people find the energy to do what is right and necessary.

I am so sorry for those of you whose beautiful beaches are wrecked. The people and the animals.

[MtnTeaching]

Hi All,

Sorry I got a little carried away with this thread. I just kept reading things that were frustrating me and making me sad.

 

Now you know what my poor kids and husband go through! :001_smile:

[JenC3]

Leslie I read this a few weeks ago and I'm reeling from it.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6593#comment-648967

[jewellsmommy]

I'm assuming you mean hair? People have! I remember an article in our newspaper (Raleigh, NC) weeks ago about this very thing. Hair cutting places are sending down hair in boxes (they sweep it up after hair cuts). But it is just sitting there! If they wanted to do this option, they could. The one place local that said they had participated paid to send 10 pounds of hair down. And that's just one place and one mailing.

 

 

Yes, I fixed it. I did mean hair. I have heard that there were collection by individuals. But, it doesn't matter how much is collected if BP won't use it. It was also brought up on Huckabee's show that the EPA has not authorized/approved it yet.:confused: Hello, it's hair! All those gallons of oil and they are worried about hair?

[jewellsmommy]

I am not sure about the chemicals that are being used to try and clean up the oil spill, but after being in Valdez, AK a little over a year ago I think the long term effects of oil on the environment have been way over blown. Nature has a way to clean itself up.

 

Valdez looks like there was never an oil spill today. The fishing there has returned. I know and understand the short term effects on the environment and the economy were great, but it didn't take more than 10 years and I am sure it was something less than that for that area to recover.

 

I believe BP, Transocean, Haliburton and our government are all to blame for the situation we are in.

 

If drilling hadn't been pushed so far offshore and this type of thing had happened in shallow water the oil would have been much easier to stop.

 

The wikipedia article on the Valdez incident:

 

Despite the extensive cleanup attempts, less than ten percent of the oil was recovered[17] and a study conducted by NOAA determined that as of early 2007 more than 26 thousand U.S. gallons (22,000 imp gal; 98,000 L) of oil remain in the sandy soil of the contaminated shoreline, declining at a rate of less than 4% per

year.

 

AND

 

Almost 20 years after the spill, a team of scientists at the University of North Carolina found that the effects are lasting far longer than expected.[22] The team estimates some shoreline Arctic habitats may take up to 30 years to recover.

 

My take on this:

 

We have a responsibility to clean up the Gulf to the best of our ability, IMO. I do not think that we should let nature take care of it because this leak was certainly not a natural event. As humans, we made this mess and we should clean it up.

[MtnTeaching]

Leslie I read this a few weeks ago and I'm reeling from it.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6593#comment-648967

 

 

OK, I just thought I had read some scary stuff. I pray, pray, pray this isn't true.

[Quad Shot Academy]

OK, I just thought I had read some scary stuff. I pray, pray, pray this isn't true.

 

In case you did not read The Oil Drum's response to DougR's comment:

 

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6659

[duckens]

The clean-up effort has definitely been thwarted, and in several cases, with force. Offers of help from other countries all the way down to the concerned US citizen that shows up with their bottle of Dawn on a Sat. afternoon have been denied. Why???? Liability fears? Toxicity fears (Corexit)?

Liability? Yes, because of what happened to clean up crew in Alaska after Exxon Valdez.

 

Toxicity? Yes, because of what happened to clean up crew in Alaska after Exxon Valdez.

 

Watch this. It's horrifying if it is true.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrueRZ1qKnY

 

BTW, Exxon lawyers are still fighting the settlement from that accident for fishermen and communities. Over a third of all plaintiffs are dead of old age.

[Geek]

Does any of this raise any questions for you? Do you think the guys may have known that these short-cuts were being taken? I would hope the CEO would know what was going on with a well being dug in pretty much unprecedented depths and if that well was having problems.

 

Just my opinion and like I said, I wasn't there and the courts need to decide on this one. But it sure looks like these guys could have had enough prior knowledge to have helped in making the decision to sell the stock when they did. The same stock that has dropped to 50% of what it was worth before the spill.

Oh that definitely raises questions. I don't believe I've denied the possibility of insider trading. But I think this is a very complicated issue, and at its heart it was driven by consumer demand for oil and the public's general lack of commitment to developing alternative energy sources and our insatiable demands for petroleum-based products like plastic.

 

They went that far offshore because they were allowed to do it. They handled it in a lousy fashion, to be sure. But I get frustrated when people start pointing fingers at Big Bad Business when it was our demand for the oil that made them go that far offshore in the first place. It's akin to Americans sitting on their lofty towers and pointing to the poor in the Amazon river basin and demanding that they stop burning the rain forest. They need to eat, and for that they need cleared land. And the loggers have a heck of a market for the lumber. ;)

 

It's also akin to Americans going on and on about all the drugs those "darn" Columbians "let go" out of the country. Well maybe if there weren't such a demand for illegal drugs in this country they wouldn't be supplying them to us as a nation.

 

In sum, I think Americans should be looking at themselves and asking what role they played in this oil mess. As much as I'm a non-capitalist, I still don't think this is all about "greedy capitalists" out to make a quick buck and ignore safety. We provided them this opportunity by insisting they find more and more (and more!) sources of oil.

 

I've had a very hard time getting a female-politician-who-shall-not-be-named's words out of my head throughout out of this: "Drill, baby, drill." Of course now she's backpeddling and insisting she didn't mean offshore drilling. :glare:

[MtnTeaching]

In case you did not read The Oil Drum's response to DougR's comment:

 

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6659

 

Thank you, at least now I can take the paper bag away and stop hyperventilating. Unfortunately, they can't seem to come to a consensus about whether or not a relief well/bottom kill will actually work.