Moderators: peeker643, swerb, Ziner
by Bayou Tribe » Fri May 28, 2010 1:00 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Fri May 28, 2010 1:09 pm
by jb » Fri May 28, 2010 1:24 pm
Bayou Tribe wrote:It's just a little frustrating that it seems to always be BP. North Slope, Texas City, Prudhoe Bay, now Horizon. All within roughly a 10 year stretch. It's pretty amazing.
by fundamentals » Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:28 pm

by jb » Wed Jun 02, 2010 2:55 pm
fundamentals wrote:
by municipalmutt » Wed Jun 02, 2010 3:12 pm
by jb » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:03 pm
municipalmutt wrote:Yeah it's pretty funny how the official report from the news is that the spill will have little affect on gas prices due to our domestic reserves. I guess we didn't have any reserves a few years ago when a storm cloud threated an offshore oil rig and prices went up to four bucks a gallon.
by FUDU » Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:25 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:33 pm
FUDU wrote:Gas prices are a scam, no way around it. Right now it's dropping 10 cents a week in the middle of all this crap. I have heard it does take roughly 75-90 days for prices to hit us consumers from the time the process of refining etc begins...who knows. I fully expect $3.50 by Oct. 1.
Serious question, should BP suffer catastrophic consequences for this fiasco? Whether through civil or criminal charges, damage laws in place or from the free market forces of us consumers? Should be wiped out due to this?
by municipalmutt » Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:43 pm
FUDU wrote:Gas prices are a scam, no way around it. Right now it's dropping 10 cents a week in the middle of all this crap. I have heard it does take roughly 75-90 days for prices to hit us consumers from the time the process of refining etc begins...who knows. I fully expect $3.50 by Oct. 1.
Serious question, should BP suffer catastrophic consequences for this fiasco? Whether through civil or criminal charges, damage laws in place or from the free market forces of us consumers? Should be wiped out due to this?
by FUDU » Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:02 pm
by pup » Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:29 pm
by smalls1129 » Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:39 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:15 am
smalls1129 wrote:It would set an extraordinarily bad precedent if criminal charges are brought. What they were doing at the time was legally regulated, if the government brings charges on something that they were the final approver of...it will not end well.
by smalls1129 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:24 am
by Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:49 am
smalls1129 wrote:If criminal negligence can be proved then so be it. It is not the easiest thing to do and barring a smoking gun I see civil action far more likely. I honestly don't know or remember; but did the Mining CO. get any criminal charges for the collapse earlier this year?
by smalls1129 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:34 am
by jb » Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:18 am
peeker643 wrote:Bayou Tribe wrote:WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama defensively and sometimes testily insisted on Thursday that his administration, not oil giant BP, was calling the shots in responding to the worst oil spill in the nation's history.
"I take responsibility. It is my job to make sure this thing is shut down," Obama declared at a news conference in the East Room of the White House. The Gulf of Mexico oil spill dominated the hour-long session.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama
If he's taking responsibility that's the best evidence yet that the situation is nearly under control. Obie ain't claiming responsibility for shit if that things still gushing crude.
No politician would.

by jb » Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:30 am
FUDU wrote:Gas prices are a scam, no way around it. Right now it's dropping 10 cents a week in the middle of all this crap. I have heard it does take roughly 75-90 days for prices to hit us consumers from the time the process of refining etc begins...who knows. I fully expect $3.50 by Oct. 1.
Serious question, should BP suffer catastrophic consequences for this fiasco? Whether through civil or criminal charges, damage laws in place or from the free market forces of us consumers? Should be wiped out due to this?
by jb » Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:32 am
pup wrote:75-90 days for prices to come back down after an increase in production.
75-90 seconds for it to go up based on a 30% accurate weather forecast.
by jb » Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:34 am
municipalmutt wrote:FUDU wrote:Gas prices are a scam, no way around it. Right now it's dropping 10 cents a week in the middle of all this crap. I have heard it does take roughly 75-90 days for prices to hit us consumers from the time the process of refining etc begins...who knows. I fully expect $3.50 by Oct. 1.
Serious question, should BP suffer catastrophic consequences for this fiasco? Whether through civil or criminal charges, damage laws in place or from the free market forces of us consumers? Should be wiped out due to this?
I've seen the gas jockeys changing the price signs up on the same day in the past when weather reports showed possible hurricane activity in the gulf. They have changed the price up immediately when there is a fart in the wind but take months to adjust back down to the actual market price. Why is it different now?
I don't know about your second part. Yeah they should be punished heavily, but to the point of bankruptcy? Wouldn't that stop any foreign investment here?
by Bayou Tribe » Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:51 am
jb wrote:peeker643 wrote:Bayou Tribe wrote:WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama defensively and sometimes testily insisted on Thursday that his administration, not oil giant BP, was calling the shots in responding to the worst oil spill in the nation's history.
"I take responsibility. It is my job to make sure this thing is shut down," Obama declared at a news conference in the East Room of the White House. The Gulf of Mexico oil spill dominated the hour-long session.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama
If he's taking responsibility that's the best evidence yet that the situation is nearly under control. Obie ain't claiming responsibility for shit if that things still gushing crude.
No politician would.
Bump.
WTG Nostrodumbass. ;-)
What's the Lead Pipe Lock take this week?
by Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:25 am
jb wrote:One, open the books via court order on the Cheney energy hearings. We need to know if wink, wink, nudge, nudge deregulation was part of this.
barry's agenda should have been comprised of five macro policy points, period: Fix health care, get serious about clean, non-Muslim based energy, get us the freak out of trumped up international issues that put us in cross hairs, re-install federal regulation subject by the executive branch that was systematically ripped apart for 8 years of pigs at the trough, and deal with budget control. If this helps him not play footsey on what he'll still control after November, and get us serious about getting off of oil, then boo yah, make that part political.
by mistero » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:06 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:19 pm
mistero wrote:It was an accident. Accidents happen , especially in something this risky. They'll clean it up. No big deal.
by mistero » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:44 pm
by Ziner » Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:07 pm
mistero wrote:Well why does it have to be someone's fault? When the Challenger (right?) blew up was it someone's fault?
mistero wrote:Maybe if we had more nuclear plants, more land drilling, more shallow water drilling we wouldn't even be out there... but that's not the point either.
by Erie Warrior » Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:41 pm
mistero wrote:Well why does it have to be someone's fault?
I'm going to have to EW's neck of the woods to fish reds now.


by Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:45 pm
Well why does it have to be someone's fault? When the Challenger (right?) blew up was it someone's fault? This is deep water drilling. Hard stuff. Something was bound to happen at some point. Why does it have to be political or greed related?
An accident occured, now they are trying to fix it. It will be cleaned up at some point.
Maybe if we had more nuclear plants, more land drilling, more shallow water drilling we wouldn't even be out there... but that's not the point either.
Why do we have to create a villian?
Not really a singular person's fault, but it certainly could have and should have been prevented.
For sure, Willing to bet a spill at ANWR wouldnt take nearly as long to stop
by aoxo1 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:59 pm
mistero wrote:When the Challenger (right?) blew up was it someone's fault?
by mistero » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:02 pm
by aoxo1 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:04 pm
by Ziner » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:09 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Not really a singular person's fault, but it certainly could have and should have been prevented.
So, Ziner you are of the mind that this was something that wasn't just an accident? That someone screwed the proverbial pooch?
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:For sure, Willing to bet a spill at ANWR wouldnt take nearly as long to stopAnd i'm willing to bet the people who endorse this would still be screaming "Drill, baby, drill!" as oil spewed out all over the tundra.
by Ziner » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:11 pm
aoxo1 wrote:FWIW even if BP did nothing criminally, they have destroyed property and life. They ought to be held liable for that. Everyone else sure as heck is.
Or is that an acceptable excuse when you go before the judge? "Sorry, your honor, it was just an accident."
by aoxo1 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:17 pm
In February 2009, BP filed a 52 page exploration and environmental impact plan for the Macondo well with the Minerals Management Service (MMS), an arm of the United States Department of the Interior that oversees offshore drilling. The plan stated that it was "unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities".[54] In the event an accident did take place the plan stated that due to the well being 48 miles (77 km) from shore and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts would be expected.
Attention has focused on the cementing procedure and the blowout preventer, which failed to fully engage.[36] A number of significant problems have been identified with the blowout preventer: There was a leak in the hydraulic system that provides power to the shear rams. The underwater control panel had been disconnected from the bore ram, and instead connected to a test hydraulic ram. The blowout preventer schematic drawings, provided by Transocean to BP, do not correspond to the structure that is on the ocean bottom.
Of the two control pods for the deadman switch, the one that has been inspected so far had a dead battery.
According to a report by 60 Minutes, the blowout preventer was damaged in a previously unreported accident four weeks before the April 20 explosion, and BP overruled the drilling operator on key operations. BP declined to comment on the report.[127] The American Bureau of Shipping last inspected the rig's failed blowout preventer in 2005.[240] Just hours before the explosion, a BP representative overruled Transocean employees and insisted on displacing protective drilling mud with seawater.[241] One of the BP representatives on the board responsible for making the final decision, Robert Kaluza, refused to testify on the Fifth Amendment grounds that he might incriminate himself; Donald Vidrine, another BP representative, cited medical reasons for his inability to testify, as did James Mansfield, Transocean's assistant marine engineer on board.
by jb » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:29 pm
mistero wrote:Well why does it have to be someone's fault? When the Challenger (right?) blew up was it someone's fault? This is deep water drilling. Hard stuff. Something was bound to happen at some point. Why does it have to be political or greed related?
An accident occured, now they are trying to fix it. It will be cleaned up at some point.
Maybe if we had more nuclear plants, more land drilling, more shallow water drilling we wouldn't even be out there... but that's not the point either.
Why do we have to create a villian?
by jb » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:32 pm
Ziner wrote:Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Not really a singular person's fault, but it certainly could have and should have been prevented.
So, Ziner you are of the mind that this was something that wasn't just an accident? That someone screwed the proverbial pooch?
I willing to see it play out and make up my mind, but if they were using seawater when they should have been using drilling fluid then take them to the cleaners. It will come out. I am of the mindset that businesses should be generally left to regulate themselves, because when you over-regulate you hurt the good as well. However when companies such as this make bad decisions you should be punished, and punished severely not by the government by way of fines. But they owe a lot of people a lot of money for the things they have done. A fine from the government that goes to the government kitty is not what should take place. You can bet Exxon and Shell won't be making similar mistakes if they see the hammer dropped on BP.
BP could have been regulated at every turn, but I have a hard time believing regulation would have prevented this. JMHO, the truth will come out. Can't have government regulators making or approving every decision. At some point it is just the businesses responsibility to do the right thing or be prepared to pay severely.
That is part of my problem with the bailouts of the financial services and auto companies. I understand the need, I see the macro issue, I just think that if there was more of a repercussion for their actions things would change. Businesses have make correct decisions. But if you have a safety net every time you make a mistake what stops the mistake from happening again?Cerebral_DownTime wrote:For sure, Willing to bet a spill at ANWR wouldnt take nearly as long to stopAnd i'm willing to bet the people who endorse this would still be screaming "Drill, baby, drill!" as oil spewed out all over the tundra.
Maybe, but it wouldnt still be spewing oil all over the tundra and BP would be already starting to clean up.
by Ziner » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:45 pm
jb wrote:Z, when buisinesses are corporate rather than individual entities, how does that happen?
In a little-noticed provision in a 1990 law passed after the Exxon Valdez spill, Congress capped a spiller’s liability over and above cleanup costs at $75 million for a rig spill. Even if the economic damages — to tourism, fishing and the like — stretch into the billions, the responsible party is on the hook for only $75 million. (In this instance, BP has agreed to waive the cap for claims it deems legitimate.) Michael Greenstone, an M.I.T. economist who runs the Hamilton Project in Washington, says the law fundamentally distorts a company’s decision making. Without the cap, executives would have to weigh the possible revenue from a well against the cost of drilling there and the risk of damage. With the cap, they can largely ignore the potential damage beyond cleanup costs. So they end up drilling wells even in places where the damage can be horrific, like close to a shoreline. To put it another way, human frailty helped BP’s executives underestimate the chance of a low-probability, high-cost event. Federal law helped them underestimate the costs.
by Bayou Tribe » Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:01 pm
by jb » Thu Jun 03, 2010 5:16 pm
by FUDU » Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:51 pm
by Ziner » Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:02 pm
FUDU wrote:2. BP supposedly is already on record as saying the cost of all this WILL be passed on to the consumer.
If 1 is true than really WTF, we are screwed b/c it is obvious the monkeys we put in charge have no business being in such a position.
As far as 2 goes, what ever happened to if you break it you buy it. IOW if the store owner knocks over a case of vodka that's on him, he takes the loss and so on and so forth, no going around the store marking up the other bottles of vodka to make up the difference.
Fuck it, I'm going electric.
by FUDU » Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:08 pm
by FUDU » Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm

by mattvan1 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 8:35 pm
mistero wrote: Or maybe everything was done 100% correctly, yet an accident still ocurred. Does finding a culprit make everything better?
by pup » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:28 pm
by aoxo1 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:51 pm
pup wrote:Someone I work with mentioned this and I have no desire to fact check so I will throw it out to the masses and find out that way.
The total amount spilled in The Gulf so far is consumed by the United States every 7 minutes, which is why the price hasn't bounced.
by jb » Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:18 am
by Ziner » Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:27 am
by Fire Marshall Bill » Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:14 am
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest