oil spill rant

[rufus]

Quote:
That is just unbelievable! I just hope that all this craziness is an eye opener for everyone and a better system will ensue

.. one with real checks and balances

There will be drilling in the gulf no matter if the US allows it in it's territorial waters or not. Chinese oil companies will soon begin drilling in Cuban national waters, and they don't give a dooley about the environment.

We had better develop procedures to clean up the messes they will make or we will just learn to live with those messes.

When PEMEX had a similar blow out in the gulf, they lowered a huge bell over the well to contain the mess, and then they drilled relief wells. That worked.

Rufus

 

[cmjust0]

Quote:
You certainly may. Transocean, the owner of the rig, was founded in Louisiana and the stock is traded on the US stock exchange. The principle office is located in Houston, Texas but the company itself is now incorporated in Zug, Switzerland. Their board of directors certainly has an international flavor (Brits, French, Egyptians, etc), but I think you will find that most received their college degrees in the US and were born Americans. I’d tend to call them international with a strong American flavor instead of foreign, but you can certainly call them foreign if you wish. I think you will find that a vast majority of those working on the rig were Americans.

Lots of foreign companies' stocks are traded on US stock exchanges, just as lots of US companies' stocks are traded abroad. Big deal.

Bottom line, neither BP, plc (the lessee of the rig and owner of the well) nor Transocean (the owner of the rig) are US companies...they're both foreign companies, registered in foreign countries.

The well is technically owned by you and me through our federal government, but it is indeed leased to an American subsidiary of British Petroleum.

Wrong. The oil is owned by you and me. Or, it was, anyway.. The rig belongs to Transocean, who leased it to BP, who used it to drill the well...the well which is now owned by BP, plc.

BP plc being, of course, a foreign company.

May I point out that Chevron and Exxon, the two big American oil companies that are left, are drilling and producing in Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America, including British waters for sure and I believe they are also working in Dutch waters but I am not sure of that. (The Dutch sector is pretty small and mainly natural gas.) I'm pretty sure the French do not have any significant offshore oil fields to develop. The foreign oil companies that are drilling and producing in US waters are required to follow US laws and regulations, put a lot of Americans to work, use a lot of American resources and goods, and pay taxes and fees. American oil companies working overseas are also required to follow the laws of the nation they are working in, hire a lot of locals, use as many local resources as they can since it is usually cheaper and is also usually required by local law, and certainly pay a lot in taxes and fees to those foreign governments.

Funny how you just pointed out how "two big American oil companies" were doing la ti da overseas, only to turn around and say:

I think I’d look at them as international instead of foreign, since that is the nature of big oil,

...about foreign companies who come here.

Which is to say that American companies stay American when they're overseas...because that sounds better...but when foreign companies come here to suck our oil out of the ground and sell it to the Chinese, they're "international" companies...because it sounds better.

but you can certainly call them foreign if you wish.

Oh, I'll call them foreign alright...but not just because I wish to do so.

I'll call them foreign because they are.​

 

[I have WHAT in my yard?]

Quote:
Can I just say I am your fan? The whole Spencer thing just torque's me no end. Darwin didn't use the phrase survival of the fit until the 5th edition many years AFTER Spencer used the phrase. And it was FIT not FITTEST. It implies a temporary state. Those who are most fit to survive a drought will survive a drought, but two seasons later when it is very wet those same creatures may die off and those that are FIT for wet environments will survive. The misuse of the term fittest implies an ongoing improvement in the species and this is NOT necessarily true!

And truly if humanity is the best this planet can do we're scr***ed

Personally I vote for the cockroach, although termites with their very complex societies and city building are a close second. Only humans consistently destroy their own habitat and put self before the communal whole to a degree which could kill us all.

 

[redhen]

I read somewhere that the 2 things that would survive any major diasters would be the roach and the octopus...

 

[Royd]

Quote:
That is what I am stating. If the folks on the rig had been doing their job properly, there would have been some kind of plan for this. This is a foreseeable occurrence. They all should have been trained for this. The problem was they were drilling at a depth they KNEW their equipment wasn't meant to handle and they did it anyway, crossing their fingers and hoping against all sense that if anything did go wrong, one of their untested or woefully lacking plans to fix the problem would miraculously work.

I mean, this is like taking a Ford Pinto off-roading and hoping the spare tire in the back will cover all the potential problems that may develop. Sure, it's possible everything will work out just peachy but really now.

Mother Nature will recover. Whether it is years or decades I don't know, but she will recover.

No, she won't. And she hasn't from the last disaster like this either. There are at least 400 species threatened by this disaster, some of which will undoubtedly go extinct as a result of it. Hopes for the brown pelican are low, they were at risk enough as it was and this has destroyed their breeding cycle for this year. They will probably not recover. Due to this disaster, we may also lose the North Atlantic Bluefin Tuna, Loggerhead turtles and four other of the seven types of sea turtle in the area, several types of shark, possibly even the whale shark, who use this area for breeding, most of the oysters off the coast of LA for years to come, LA shrimp and blue crabs, both of which are in their delicate stages of development in the area, and hundreds of other species of fish and bird who have, at the very least, lost an entire generation out of this disaster. With the threats they already face and the near certainty that another such disaster will follow due once again to human greed and carelessness, well, I suppose Louisiana can always pick a new state bird when the brown pelican is gone.

Yes, the oil kills the vegetation. It also remains in the sediment for years continuing to poison creatures like oysters and shrimp and plankton, which are then fed upon by other creatures who are poisoned by eating them. The nursery for these animals is already gone for, at the minimum, a decade. Things are already changed forever.

And that's not even taking into account the damage the actual clean-up efforts are doing to fragile reefs and the migratory pattern of the birds over that area.

And nobody will learn from this disaster either.​

Did you sell every oil burning vehicle and tool, which you currently own, yet? The OMG hand wringing, is too much...First, there was nuclear anilation, then, in the 70's, it was the coming ice age, global warming, climate change, and now, the world is going to die off, with the huge domino effect, of one blown oil well.

Let's hope that Yellowstone doesn't get serious.

 

[Q9]

Quote:
That is entirely YOUR opinion. Quite frankly, if I had to choose who to save from certain death, my chickens or my uncle Carl and his household, I'd save the chickens, hands down.

The Bible is quite clear that humanity is to rule the Earth. Not abuse, mind you, but tend it and USE it.

That really only matters to Christians, and I am not one such.

Here's a shocker for you: Humans are the fittest.

Actually, coyotes and cockroaches are both far better at survival than humans are. But if you think you are the fittest, let's toss you into the jungle for a few months and see how you do.



Now, let me be blunt. The reason I am upset about the animals and the damage to nature is because I am human. This planet is Earth. It is the only one in this solar system capable of supporting human life. Each disaster like this one makes it much less so, and disasters like these occur because of human greed and selfishness. I want my son to be able to see a sea turtle in the wild. There are animals I saw as a child that have become extinct in my lifetime, and still more that will become extinct before my son is old enough to truly experience the world. Thus, yes, the damage done to nature matters to me far more than the lives of a few men who knew and consented to the risks involved in their work. Especially because, I hate to say, it, if they were doing their jobs properly the disaster may well not have happened or at least not been anywhere near as bad.

And for the record, most of the oxygen we breath comes from the plankton and the like in the ocean. ALL of which that was in the area of the oil spill is now dead. I am rather fond of breathing, thus, yes, the lives of the wildlife therein is vastly more important to me.


The humans will recover before the fish and birds do. The last disaster and the one before that and the one before that have demonstrated the truth of the recovery rate far to many times over.​

Good gosh. Darwin actually DID say "survival of the fittest," he just didn't say it FIRST. I didn't remember who the guy was that said it first, but the quote is usually attributed to Darwin. At any rate, that's the basic concept of Darwinism itself.

People need to remember that oil is biodegradable. The plankton will recover fine, and if I'm not mistaken, the area affected by the spill covers only a teeny tiny percentage of the plankton of the world. By the way, I was quite aware that the Bible is only followed by Christians and Jews. That is the stated reason that I also cited Darwin, or that other guy who said it first. Same concept. Also, I completely understand your point about the wildlife. Call me crazy, but I think I stated that I agreed the wildlife should be preserved. Our first priority, however, should be on containing the spill and preventing further damage to humans' livelyhoods (sp?). As others have pointed out, the spill is affecting "people's backyards" in a sense. This is what stewardship entails, preserving the value and beauty of that land, the two often being one and the same.

As for humans being fittest, of COURSE a lone human couldn't survive in the jungle. Odds are, neither could a coyote. Our superiority stems from our intelligence and our ability to tame our habitat, to bend it to our will. No other creature can create an African savanna in North Carolina. No other creature can construct a mountain on the ocean (think cruise ship climbing walls). We have no natural weapons, yet our intelligence gives us the power to kill anything. Give me a 12-gauge with 00. buckshot and I can kill or maim nearly any land animal short of a rhino, without having to make actual contact at all. Give me a tank and I'm invincible to all other creatures. Humans are the only creatures to have actually defeated numerous diseases. Polio has been destroyed. What other creature can do that? We have cures for nearly every bacterial disease in existence. With modern rifle technology, one can shoot and kill a lion while situated comfortably hundreds of yards away, not exposed to any danger at all. Who's fittest now?

As for what you said about choosing between chickens and your uncle, unless your uncle is a serial killer or a rapist, it can be safely said that your beliefs are quite disturbing.

By the way, don't mistake me for one of those people who advocates "paving the rainforest." I love nature. I love looking off the top of a mountain at the vast forests below. I love walking through woodlands and exploring swamps in their strange beauty. What I don't love is the socialistic, "it belongs to everyone" view of nature that people like you tend to have. My grandpa owns a nice bit of land out in the country. It is his, and it is nature. It belongs to no one but him. Ever heard of Natural Bridge? One of the Seven Natural Wonders of the world, in Virginia. It has been privately owned since Thomas Jefferson bought it. The Bridge and surrounding forests belong to the owners, and it is nature. It belongs to no one else. Out and away the best method of preserving rainforest is to buy it and bring in scientists. The tracts of rainforests that are bought belong solely to the owners. If this would be applied to waterways and areas of ocean, many environmental problems would be much, much rarer. Accidents like the one in the Gulf sometimes happen. There's nothing we can do about it now but contain it. Should BP get into trouble for an accident? No, there is no way they could have seen this coming.

Q9, over and OUT.​

 

[OccamsTazer]

One would think that avoiding damage to the planet where we live would be something everyone could agree on.

Even my dogs don't cheerfully pee where they live.

 

[I have WHAT in my yard?]

Quote:

 

[fancbrd4me02]

I have WHAT in my yard? :

Quote:

Actually, your dogs WOULD cheerfully pee where they live IF they were superior enough and understood that thier superiority gave them the right to do watever they want whenever they want however they want, as long as it only indirectly harms others.​

 

[Rhett&SarahsMom]

I will take a few "ugly" wind turbines over a disgusting, filthy and environmentally dangerous oil rig any day. I hope the residents of the Eastern seaboard remember this disaster when they bring up the wind farms again. I have been close to a oil rig and this type of disaster was just bound to happen. They are darn lucky more men werent killed.

The impact of this on the environment will be felt for years. and will not be just felt by the Gulf area. It's all tied together. Anyone that thinks otherwise is a fool.