How has the Oil Spill affected your life?

[Adam]

But, that's essentially my point. The Governement, federal and local, IS ivolved and has been involved. So has the private sector. There have been massive efforts to contain this spill. Let me ask.. how much has been pointed out about the dispersants that are being used? Next to nothing. But, that's all private contractors and local aerial ag applicators making millions right now applying those dispersants. (It's probably doing more harm than good, but that's beside the point.)

 

We could go on, but the fact remains; there's been considerable involvment by lots of people. No one is just standing by watching this thing and waiting or BP to do somethng. Of course, that's the perception. But, it's just not reality.

 

The problem with fixing this, is it's a busted pipe 5,000 feet under water. That's not an easy thing to fix. The most telling point from Murra's post about the top 10 spills should be how long it took to get similar "spills" to stop flowing. So for any of us to think they could or should have stopped the flow of oil within a few days is being naive.

 

Believe me, I hate this. I fall squarley into the "this is a huge environmental disaster and just another reason why we should do all we can to find alternative energy" camp. However, as a realist, there's certain realities that are unavoidable. We are an oil dependent nation; therefore we must drill; therefore there will be spills and environmental damage. Furthermore when there is a spill; certain realities inevitably follow - just as we're seeing.

 

But, to pretend that anyone could be doing more than they are doing is largely reactionary and counter productive at this point. For example, Jindall wants to build a huge sand bar to shield the coast. Do you know the time and effort to do such a thing? To think that creating a sand bar of that scale within a coule of weeks is a viable solution is borderline insane. But, I guess its doing something.

 

Realistically, thing of it from a pure business perspective. How much money is BP losing because oil is being wasted, because they have to pay for this clean up, and because they'll have to pay restitution? There's not a company employee that's not doing everything they can to stop this leak. Hell there's probably a million dollar bonus to the engineer that figures out how to stop this. BP is motivated more than anyone to fix this. Now, that doens't mean that I think BP is great or anything. It just means that for the time-being; they are the best hope to getting this thing stopped. Now, come cleanup time... that may very well differ, depending on how much bad PR they're willing to endure.

The heck with PR.

 

My problem with BP is about what I have heard about them using saltwater instead of the mud they were supposed to- then they saw there was a problem, they kept using it. I will admit I am not very knowledgeable- I know someone who is, and despite not understanding what he tells me about it, I understand that he told me that BP screwed this up through something horribly beyond negligence. There shouldn't be a cap on the restitution.

[Dan]

The heck with PR.

 

My problem with BP is about what I have heard about them using saltwater instead of the mud they were supposed to- then they saw there was a problem, they kept using it. I will admit I am not very knowledgeable- I know someone who is, and despite not understanding what he tells me about it, I understand that he told me that BP screwed this up through something horribly beyond negligence. There shouldn't be a cap on the restitution.

To that... I completely agree. BP needs to be far more accountable for the cleanup and restitution. And, that is something I hope the federal goverrnment gets involved with - holding them accountable. Given the influence of big oil on our government, however, I'm not holding my breath.

 

Ultimately, they need to make sure the cost of fixing and cleaning up an oil spill immensely outweighs the cost of the saftery valves and such. Because as all businesses do; they'll weigh the costs and why install saftey measures/devices if the fines and costs of a spill are roughly equivalent or even less.

[Bronc24]

The gov't won't hold big oil accountable..isn't that why you guys are in Iraq?

[Booster4324]

Murra, everyone made the points I might have made. In all seriousness, we aren't acting like a bunch of "environmentalist whackos" (a term it seems you may be familiar with) as most of us are more concerned with the economy. Sure, I am upset with the damage to the environment, but my main concern is what will this do to the economies of Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida, and ultimately the US.

 

My question to you is, are you trolling or simply clueless?

[murra]

Murra, everyone made the points I might have made. In all seriousness, we aren't acting like a bunch of "environmentalist whackos" (a term it seems you may be familiar with) as most of us are more concerned with the economy. Sure, I am upset with the damage to the environment, but my main concern is what will this do to the economies of Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida, and ultimately the US.

 

My question to you is, are you trolling or simply clueless?

 

 

I don't think I've been that outrageous in this thread to warrant the "tool of the month" (although wouldn't the guy who monthly awards such an achievement be the real tool of the month/year/decade?), or troll, or clueless titles at all. I have seen much wilder claims throughout these boards than questioning the legitimacy of the predicted job loss, and certainly the projected ecological damage.

 

 

When 60,000 jobs are lost in louisiana directly because of this I will rescind my previous statements.

 

Until then, I have equal weight in this conversation since everyone's accusations are exaggerated and hypothetical. I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if this truly effects our economy, until then I have no clue why you guys are acting like you've won some sort of argument when there are still no facts on the table to support such a claim.

 

I don't think I've been that outrageous in this thread to warrant the "tool of the month" (although wouldn't the guy who monthly awards such an achievement be the real tool of the month?), or troll, or clueless at all. I have seen much wilder claims throughout these boards than simply questioning the legitimacy of the predicted job loss, and certainly the projected ecological damage.

[John Adams]

I don't think I've been that outrageous in this thread to warrant the "tool of the month" (although wouldn't the guy who monthly awards such an achievement be the real tool of the month/year/decade?), or troll, or clueless titles at all. I have seen much wilder claims throughout these boards than questioning the legitimacy of the predicted job loss, and certainly the projected ecological damage.

 

 

When 60,000 jobs are lost in louisiana directly because of this I will rescind my previous statements.

 

Until then, I have equal weight in this conversation since everyone's accusations are exaggerated and hypothetical. I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if this truly effects our economy, until then I have no clue why you guys are acting like you've won some sort of argument when there are still no facts on the table to support such a claim.

 

I don't think I've been that outrageous in this thread to warrant the "tool of the month" (although wouldn't the guy who monthly awards such an achievement be the real tool of the month?), or troll, or clueless at all. I have seen much wilder claims throughout these boards than simply questioning the legitimacy of the predicted job loss, and certainly the projected ecological damage.

 

Get this right. You're tool of the month for accusing me of bashing Bush for Katrina when as I quoted, I defended Bush for Katrina.

 

You're clueless for thinking dumping a few million gallons of oil into the gulf is no big deal.

 

And calling you a troll was giving you the benefit of the doubt about the tool and clueless labels.

 

So take your pick. If you're smart, you should go with troll.

[PromoTheRobot]

Here's the irony I see. The same people screaming for the Federal government for help are the same people who want government out of their lives. The same people who support deregulation to keep government out of the way of free enterprise.

 

So when free enterprise sets of an environmental Armageddon, people can't understand why government is powerless to do much. The same Gov. Jindahl who mocked government study of volcanoes as a waste of money would have felt the same way if they wanted to spend money on oil rig inspectors.

 

Ye reapeth what ye soweth.

 

PTR

[RuntheDamnBall]

Here's the irony I see. The same people screaming for the Federal government for help are the same people who want government out of their lives. The same people who support deregulation to keep government out of the way of free enterprise.

This.

[Booster4324]

I don't think I've been that outrageous in this thread to warrant the "tool of the month" (although wouldn't the guy who monthly awards such an achievement be the real tool of the month/year/decade?), or troll, or clueless titles at all. I have seen much wilder claims throughout these boards than questioning the legitimacy of the predicted job loss, and certainly the projected ecological damage.

 

 

When 60,000 jobs are lost in louisiana directly because of this I will rescind my previous statements.

 

Until then, I have equal weight in this conversation since everyone's accusations are exaggerated and hypothetical. I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if this truly effects our economy, until then I have no clue why you guys are acting like you've won some sort of argument when there are still no facts on the table to support such a claim.

 

I don't think I've been that outrageous in this thread to warrant the "tool of the month" (although wouldn't the guy who monthly awards such an achievement be the real tool of the month?), or troll, or clueless at all. I have seen much wilder claims throughout these boards than simply questioning the legitimacy of the predicted job loss, and certainly the projected ecological damage.

 

Bookmarking this post. It will take a bit, but the blow should be minimal since the economy is going along so smoothly.

[IDBillzFan]

Here's the irony I see. The same people screaming for the Federal government for help are the same people who want government out of their lives. The same people who support deregulation to keep government out of the way of free enterprise.

 

So when free enterprise sets of an environmental Armageddon, people can't understand why government is powerless to do much. The same Gov. Jindahl who mocked government study of volcanoes as a waste of money would have felt the same way if they wanted to spend money on oil rig inspectors.

 

Ye reapeth what ye soweth.

 

PTR

A special thanks to our guest today, Bob Beckel.

 

If you would listen to these people and not their critics fighting for re-election in November, you'd know they don't want the government out of their lives completely; they want LESS government in their lives. And most of these people are smart enough to recognize that regulations are needed in many areas to do what the government is supposed to do; keep us safe. It's not regulation that bothers them, it's OVERregulation.

 

But why bother with reality when a big, fat sweeping generalization sounds so juicy.

[Booster4324]

A special thanks to our guest today, Bob Beckel.

 

If you would listen to these people and not their critics fighting for re-election in November, you'd know they don't want the government out of their lives completely; they want LESS government in their lives. And most of these people are smart enough to recognize that regulations are needed in many areas to do what the government is supposed to do; keep us safe. It's not regulation that bothers them, it's OVERregulation.

 

But why bother with reality when a big, fat sweeping generalization sounds so juicy.

 

Would you agree that more regulations are needed for deep sea oil rigs?

[murra]

Get this right. You're tool of the month for accusing me of bashing Bush for Katrina when as I quoted, I defended Bush for Katrina.

 

You're clueless for thinking dumping a few million gallons of oil into the gulf is no big deal.

 

And calling you a troll was giving you the benefit of the doubt about the tool and clueless labels.

 

So take your pick. If you're smart, you should go with troll.

 

I wasn't trolling at all, I believe the stuff I've said...except for me saying that you blamed bush for katrina, that was an educated guess, and I got that one wrong.

[Booster4324]

Here is a a pro British Petroleum show of the effort they are making. I am sure they are trying their hardest atm, my main criticism is the lack of a back up plan. I do not doubt they are trying their hardest to stop this. The backlash from this will hurt British Petroleum for years. Link

[Booster4324]

I wasn't trolling at all, I believe the stuff I've said...except for me saying that you blamed bush for katrina, that was an educated guess, and I got that one wrong.

 

Yeah he is such a lib. <jedi mind trick> Rethink your position.</jedi mind trick>

[IDBillzFan]

Would you agree that more regulations are needed for deep sea oil rigs?

I honestly don't know if more regulations are needed, or if the existing regulations are simply not being enforced. I know that BP has apparently cut some corners that have led to this, but I also know that the this administration recently gave this particular rig one of it's highest safety awards. But before we decide to throw more regulations at this, it would probably help to know specifically what caused the problem. Trying to fix a problem without knowing what caused it is pissing in the wind, however if it turns out that BP adhered to all regulations and that new regulations are needed to avoid an accident like this, then yes.

[Booster4324]

I honestly don't know if more regulations are needed, or if the existing regulations are simply not being enforced. I know that BP has apparently cut some corners that have led to this, but I also know that the this administration recently gave this particular rig one of it's highest safety awards. But before we decide to throw more regulations at this, it would probably help to know specifically what caused the problem. Trying to fix a problem without knowing what caused it is pissing in the wind, however if it turns out that BP adhered to all regulations and that new regulations are needed to avoid an accident like this, then yes.

 

Fair enough, I wasn't particularly clear in hindsight. Completely agreed.

[/dev/null]

Guess who Nancy blames for the spill?

[DC Tom]

I honestly don't know if more regulations are needed, or if the existing regulations are simply not being enforced. I know that BP has apparently cut some corners that have led to this, but I also know that the this administration recently gave this particular rig one of it's highest safety awards. But before we decide to throw more regulations at this, it would probably help to know specifically what caused the problem. Trying to fix a problem without knowing what caused it is pissing in the wind, however if it turns out that BP adhered to all regulations and that new regulations are needed to avoid an accident like this, then yes.

 

In the interest of playing devil's advocate, it may simply be that no amount of regulation could have prevented this. Sometimes accidents do just happen.

 

It's not so important for this incident, as for the resulting regulation from it. It is impossible to eliminate all risk via regulation.

[Booster4324]

In the interest of playing devil's advocate, it may simply be that no amount of regulation could have prevented this. Sometimes accidents do just happen.

 

It's not so important for this incident, as for the resulting regulation from it. It is impossible to eliminate all risk via regulation.

 

Over regulation would be idiocy. We shall see what comes from this. In the future, I think the cap on damages should be raised to say 10 billion as a starting number. I could be argued up or down. I am cognizant of the fact that this can impact the cost of the rig. However, when you consider the cost cutting measures British Petroleum used here, did they really save any money? Honest question, as how much will this cost them long term? 500k for an additional fail-safe that many say would have prevented this. Use of sea water to seal it, lack of a battery for God's sake. Multiply that by however many deep sea oil rigs they have and did they really save money? I would be bean counter hunting if I ran the company. They best have a good explanation.

[DC Tom]

Over regulation would be idiocy. We shall see what comes from this. In the future, I think the cap on damages should be raised to say 10 billion as a starting number. I could be argued up or down. I am cognizant of the fact that this can impact the cost of the rig. However, when you consider the cost cutting measures British Petroleum used here, did they really save any money? Honest question, as how much will this cost them long term? 500k for an additional fail-safe that many say would have prevented this. Use of sea water to seal it, lack of a battery for God's sake. Multiply that by however many deep sea oil rigs they have and did they really save money? I would be bean counter hunting if I ran the company. They best have a good explanation.

 

Yeah...tell ya what, let's not talk about that magic $500k device, since it's a red herring, and a stupid one at that.

 

Agree that the penalty should be increased, though...$75M may have been a lot when the regulation was written, now it's a rounding error. But keep in mind...every dollar that goes into that penalty is a dollar corporations don't have available for remediation. I feel the same way about that that I do about malpractice damages...punitive damages should be capped at a reasonable level, but the amount spent on actual damages should be open-ended (which I believe it already is - BP isn't liable for $75M of remediation costs, as far as I know. They're liable for the whole thing.)