New Batfish Species Found Under Gulf Oil Spill

eDarwin writes "Researchers have discovered two previously unknown species of bottom-dwelling fish in the Gulf of Mexico, living right in the area affected by the BP oil spill. Researchers identified new species of pancake batfishes, a flat fish rarely seen because of the dark depths they favor. They are named for the clumsy way they 'walk' along the sea bottom, like a bat crawling."

Comments

They don't walk any more

[Anonymous Coward]

They kind of glide across the surface now.

Re:They don't walk any more

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, these recently discovered species are now extinct. Thanks BP.

Re:They don't walk any more

[blind monkey 3]

Hey - credit where credit is due!
The only reason we were able to spot them is because they were slipping on the oil so they couldn't run away and hide.

Thank you BP.

Re:They don't walk any more

[debatem1]

They kind of glide across the surface now.

Belly up.

Correlation v. Causation

[girlintraining]

They're ugly, look crippled, and found in only one place in the world -- an oil spill.

Gentlemen, to your conspiracies!

Re:Correlation v. Causation

[overlordofmu]

The aliens caused the oil spill to increase the number of oil covered animals, which while totally inedible to them, are a source of great comfort to them.

You haven't see cute until you have seen an Alterian cuddling a rotting, oil-covered pelican corpse like a teddy bear.

Re:Correlation v. Causation

[Itninja]

They're ugly, look crippled, and found in only one place in the world -- an oil spill.

It's true. There are a lot of BP Execs involved ~rimshot

Re:Correlation v. Causation

[pookemon]

Yes - however given the size of the oil spill - everything is now found where an oil spill is.

Re:Correlation v. Causation

[AngryK9]

Except the technology to stop the spill.

And the old saw applies here

[dkleinsc]

What's the difference between a pancake batfish and Tony Hayward?

One's a scum-sucking bottom-feeder, and the other's a fish.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Haffner]

I'm inclined to agree; while he is responsible for the pressure that eventually trickled down the management chain resulting in the cost-cutting measures leading to the spill, he bears no personal responsibility. That lies with the management in charge of the well.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Sponge Bath]

I mean seriously, what did this guy do or fail to do?

Lead and instill a culture of safety and accountability in a company with a history of dangerous cost cutting.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Bakkster]

I mean seriously, what did this guy do or fail to do?

Lead and instill a culture of safety and accountability in a company with a history of dangerous cost cutting.

He also produced some of the most incredible PR gaffes in recent memory. It's easy to hate someone when they're wholly unlikeable.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[no1home]

And today, I have no points to give. Damn.

That is EXACTLY the correct call on this one. As a leader, one can, and should, instill both fiscal AND safety responsibility.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[mswhippingboy]

what did this guy do or fail to do?

How about spending a tiny bit of the $5.5B in profits each quarter on R&D for oil spill containment and cleanup? I guess that would have been too much to ask.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Bryansix]

Are you saying then spent none? Becuase I followed the timeline and they already had like 5 different things to try within days of it happening. The problem is they should not have been forced to drill so deeply in the first place. Drilling in shallower water is MUCH safer although more politically incorrect.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Monchanger]

They didn't. They called him a name which while perhaps harsh, isn't defamatory. You're being unfair comparing the two.

What he did or didn't do may be a matter of perspective considering public opinion could matter a lot in this case.

You could sit in the crowd which holds that corporate executives should not be liable for anything, that there's nothing wrong with acting solely in the interest of shareholders or golden parachutes. That sounds like you.

Or you could be one of the people who expect the chief executive to be responsible for everything happening under him, and that accusing subcontractors is the act of a weasel who draws an outrageous salary while having no actual responsibility. That'd be me and probably dkleinsc.

Hayward's been his own worst enemy here. For enjoying his position, for not taking responsibility, and for making an ass of himself on camera.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[PolygamousRanchKid]

I mean seriously, what did this guy do or fail to do?

He needs to take his head out of his ass.

How about playing golf on the weekend when he needs his life back?

Playing sailor boy on a yacht while fishers on the Gulf are stranded . . . just adds insult to injury.

Someone with his level of pay should know better. I need that on my resume "Hey, I destroyed 2 Billion $ in wealth during my leadership of the company . . ."

Or he is just an arrogant, royal fucking dickhead.

Where's my Roger Mellies' Profanisourus when I need some utterly vulgar English curse words?

Re:And the old saw applies here

[h4rr4r]

Bullshit!
Drilling in shallower water is done all the time, but costs money in loss of tourism and only works if that reservoir is not already tapped. No one cares how politically incorrect something is if it makes money.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Dahamma]

I followed the timeline and they already had like 5 different things to try within days of it happening.

That is just plain untrue.

April 22 - The Deepwater Horizon rig, valued at more than $560 million, sinks and a 5-mile-long (8 km) oil slick forms.
April 25 - Efforts to activate the well's blowout preventer fail. [It took them THREE DAYS to realize they had completely forgotten to maintain the main component intended to prevent the blowout]
May 7 - An attempt to place a containment dome over the spewing well fails when the device is rendered useless by frozen hydrocarbons that clogged it [this was not days later, it was over TWO WEEKS LATER]
May 16 - BP inserts a tube into the leaking riser pile of the well and captures some oil and gas.
May 26 - A "top kill" maneuver starts, involving pumping heavy fluids and other material into the well shaft to try to stifle the flow. [Already over a month later!]
June 2 - BP tries another capping strategy but has difficulty cutting off a leaking riser pipe. [etc]

So "within days" they had done one thing, which is to try to manually activate a device that didn't automatically activate because it "had a dead battery in its control pod, leaks in its hydraulic system, a "useless" test version of a key component and a cutting tool that wasn't strong enough to shear through steel joints in the well pipe and stop the flow of oil.".

Wow, yeah, sounds like they sure spent big bucks on R&D and maintenance there...

Re:And the old saw applies here

[RSCruiser]

Of course drilling in shallower water is safer. The problem is we've already exhausted a large number of those reserves, forcing deep water drilling.

The reason they had 5 different things to try so quickly is because they were all tried way back during the Ixtoc spill. The ideas weren't new. The problems arise when you consider they're now under a mile of water instead of a few hundred feet.

Its a fairly safe assumption that BP (and other companies) have spent nothing on containment research given the rehashing of Ixtoc containment and the on-the-fly engineering that has happened since the spill started.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[SpongeBob Hitler]

Wow, the demonization of Tony Hayward is complete. Why don't you start spreading some wrong information that he's a pedophile to add the icing on the cake? I mean seriously, what did this guy do or fail to do? The way I see it the whole disaster would not have happened if Halliburton didn't fuck up the cementing and that other company didn't fuck up the failsafe mechanism.

I thought he raped and murdered an 11 year-old girl in 1990? Or, was that Glenn Beck? Or both?

Anyway, it wouldn't surprise me. People at his level think that laws only apply to us "little people".

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Nathanbp]

Are you saying then spent none? Becuase I followed the timeline and they already had like 5 different things to try within days of it happening. The problem is they should not have been forced to drill so deeply in the first place. Drilling in shallower water is MUCH safer although more politically incorrect.

Yeah, it's so much safer that the last major oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico was in 50 meters of water and took 10 months to stop.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[ultranova]

while he is responsible for the pressure that eventually trickled down the management chain resulting in the cost-cutting measures leading to the spill, he bears no personal responsibility

This, here, is the problem with capitalism.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Anonymous Coward]

It's easier to make these things about villians and heros than it is to delve into the sticky and complicated issues as they exist in the real world. Check out this article for some interesting facts about the rig,

There were 126 people working on the Deepwater Horizon rig, yet no more than eight of them were BP employees. Some 79 worked for Transocean, the firm that owned and operated the rig. A further 41 worked for contractors such as Anadarko Petroleum Corp, a BP partner on the well. BP had 65 per cent of it, Anadarko 25 per cent and Mitsui Oil Exploration 10 per cent. There was also a firm called M-I Swaco, a contractor providing mud-engineering services on the rig, two of whose workers were among the 11 killed. Halliburton, Dick Cheney's former company, had four staff on the rig, and was responsible for "cementing" on the sea bed. Another firm, ironically called Cameron International, supplied the rig's blowout preventer valves, which, as it happened, prevented no such thing.

Further, the New York Times ran a great story examining the technology at work. It makes for some head-smack-inducing reading. It includes such gems as
 

blowout preventers used by deepwater rigs had a “failure” rate of 45 percent.

BP and other oil companies helped finance a study early this year arguing that blowout preventer pressure tests conducted every 14 days should be stretched out to every 35 days. The industry estimated the change could save $193 million a year in lost productivity. The study found that blowout preventers almost always passed the required government tests — there were only 62 failures out of nearly 90,000 tests conducted over several years — but it also raised questions about the effectiveness of these tests.

As with BP, the rig’s owner, Transocean, was aware of the vulnerabilities and limitations of blowout preventers.
But they were not the only ones.
The Minerals Management Service knew the problems, too. In fact, the agency helped pay for many of the studies that warned of their shortcomings, including those in 2002 and 2004 that raised doubts about the ability of blind shear rams to cut pipe under real-world conditions.

approved BP’s permit without requiring proof that its blowout preventer could shear pipe and seal a well 5,000 feet down...Mr. Patton said he had approved hundreds of other well permits in the gulf without requiring this proof, and BP likewise contends that companies have never been asked to furnish this proof on drilling applications.

As part of its assessment of the blowout preventer, Transocean hired West Engineering, which had a checklist of more than 250 components and systems to examine. It did not perform 72 of them, mostly for a simple reason: at the time, the Deepwater Horizon was operating in the Gulf of Mexico, and the blowout preventer was on the seafloor and therefore inaccessible.

According to a West Engineering document, one of those 72 items was verifying that the blowout preventer could shear drill pipe and seal off wells in deepwater. This checkup appears to be the last time an independent expert was asked to perform a comprehensive examination of the Deepwater Horizon’s blowout preventer.

The list goes on and on, a litany of errors from everyone involved.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[mswhippingboy]

That's right. BP spent $0.00 on R&D for containment and cleanup contingencies prior to the disaster. In any other business, having no DR plan would get a CEO fired.

I got the distinct impression that Ol' Tony didn't give a damn about us "little people" and his biggest issue with the oil spill was that it was keeping him from "getting his life back".

Re:And the old saw applies here

[cappp]

It's easier to make these things about villians and heros than it is to delve into the sticky and complicated issues as they exist in the real world. Check out this article for some interesting facts about the rig,

There were 126 people working on the Deepwater Horizon rig, yet no more than eight of them were BP employees. Some 79 worked for Transocean, the firm that owned and operated the rig. A further 41 worked for contractors such as Anadarko Petroleum Corp, a BP partner on the well. BP had 65 per cent of it, Anadarko 25 per cent and Mitsui Oil Exploration 10 per cent. There was also a firm called M-I Swaco, a contractor providing mud-engineering services on the rig, two of whose workers were among the 11 killed. Halliburton, Dick Cheney's former company, had four staff on the rig, and was responsible for "cementing" on the sea bed. Another firm, ironically called Cameron International, supplied the rig's blowout preventer valves, which, as it happened, prevented no such thing.

Further, the New York Times ran a great story examining the technology at work. It makes for some head-smack-inducing reading. It includes such gems as

blowout preventers used by deepwater rigs had a “failure” rate of 45 percent.

BP and other oil companies helped finance a study early this year arguing that blowout preventer pressure tests conducted every 14 days should be stretched out to every 35 days. The industry estimated the change could save $193 million a year in lost productivity. The study found that blowout preventers almost always passed the required government tests — there were only 62 failures out of nearly 90,000 tests conducted over several years — but it also raised questions about the effectiveness of these tests.

As with BP, the rig’s owner, Transocean, was aware of the vulnerabilities and limitations of blowout preventers. But they were not the only ones. The Minerals Management Service knew the problems, too. In fact, the agency helped pay for many of the studies that warned of their shortcomings, including those in 2002 and 2004 that raised doubts about the ability of blind shear rams to cut pipe under real-world conditions.

approved BP’s permit without requiring proof that its blowout preventer could shear pipe and seal a well 5,000 feet down...Mr. Patton said he had approved hundreds of other well permits in the gulf without requiring this proof, and BP likewise contends that companies have never been asked to furnish this proof on drilling applications.

As part of its assessment of the blowout preventer, Transocean hired West Engineering, which had a checklist of more than 250 components and systems to examine. It did not perform 72 of them, mostly for a simple reason: at the time, the Deepwater Horizon was operating in the Gulf of Mexico, and the blowout preventer was on the seafloor and therefore inaccessible.

According to a West Engineering document, one of those 72 items was verifying that the blowout preventer could shear drill pipe and seal off wells in deepwater. This checkup appears to be the last time an independent expert was asked to perform a comprehensive examination of the Deepwater Horizon’s blowout preventer.

The list goes on and on, a litany of errors from everyone involved.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[MachineShedFred]

Oh, you mean all the same things they tried with Ixtoc I, 30 years ago, which also didn't work then?

Yeah, that's some real R&D there. Well done.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[countertrolling]

Yeah, I suppose Lee Iacocca, of Ford Pinto fame, is your hero too.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[CharlyFoxtrot]

I mean seriously, what did this guy do or fail to do?

Lead and instill a culture of safety and accountability in a company with a history of dangerous cost cutting.

Like that makes him an exception among his peers. You could say the same of the vast majority of CEO's out there. Luckily only a small number of these silver spoon fuckwits can cause disasters of this magnitude though.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Are you saying then spent none? Becuase I followed the timeline and they already had like 5 different things to try within days of it happening. The problem is they should not have been forced to drill so deeply in the first place. Drilling in shallower water is MUCH safer although more politically incorrect.

The same measures they took in 1979 when an oil rig exploded in the gulf. Let's face it 30 years of technological progress and they have done nothing to stem the negative effects of their actions.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[DrugCheese]

Very little, if anything. 5 different ideas within days? If they didn't work then why would anyone think they would work now?

Yes the same company had the same problem and tried all the same ideas 30 years ago, in shallow water. Forced them to drill? lol *twisting*arm*

Re:And the old saw applies here

[DrugCheese]

Among one of the many problems.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[h4rr4r]

Natural seeps are not all in one place. How much is BP paying you to post this drivel?

Re:And the old saw applies here

[h4rr4r]

In some states it looks like, and only after they had already proven they could not do this safely or responsibly. Let me shed a tear for the poor oil companies.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[h4rr4r]

Except they used the same tactics to solve this leak so that seems pretty false.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[h4rr4r]

I heard they took turns doing that, they still have not denied this either.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[JDmetro]

As an employer I am legally responsible for the employee's and sub-contractors under me while they are on my job site. That why I have insurance. Now why is this agent of douche-baggery not responsible? Should big companies have different rules than small companies? The big companies already get bail outs when they make stupid decisions. How much is this particular fiasco going to cost taxpayers in the end?

Re:And the old saw applies here

[nedlohs]

Except that is orthogonal to capitalism. You can have capitalism without the limited liability of corporations and with laws that punish executives for their actions. And you can have executives with no personal responsibility without capitalism, though you would probably call them something else.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[thegarbz]

April 25 - Efforts to activate the well's blowout preventer fail. [It took them THREE DAYS to realize they had completely forgotten to maintain the main component intended to prevent the blowout]

Following the story the BOP had been previously modified, and the drawings were incorrect on top of the lack of maintenance. The crew attempting to operate the BOP were a different crew than those who ran the rig, from a different company as those who modified the BOP, and I guarantee you didn't know the history of maintenance on the device.

Spending three days trying to figure out something may seem like incompetence to you, but quite frankly you are not the one there. I work as a maintenance engineer within the oil and gas industry and I can tell you that a large portion of my time is spent reverse engineering crap that is documented only in some old fart's head who retired several years earlier.

Criticise BP for all the actions leading up to this, but have some sympathy for the people spending three days bashing their heads against the wall trying to get the thing close to protect your environment.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[LoadWB]

No, that is not true Capitalism, that is greed and bungled regulation. Capitalism is not greed, and greed is not capitalism. I am AC above you, and I fully agree in terms of government culpability. But if you want to know where the blame against Halliburton is, you must have missed the kangaroo court, Stalinist commission hearings at the outset of the whole mess, where it was like watching the Three Stooges (Oceanic, BP, and Halliburton) in front of what amounts to a show trial. Probably because so much was done wrong from the get-go that they just could not be sure whose process failed and who would be ultimately responsible.

And to which treaty to you refer? If its the Kyoto Accord, the US has not gone with that because it allows exemptions for developing industrial countries, like China, and puts draconian restrictions on third-world countries essentially ensuring that they never develop.

Then there are the boycotts. How utterly stupid. First, BP will need the money to pay for the clean up and damage claims, as it is already beginning to liquidate assets of its North American operations. Secondly, the boycotts really only harm the local business owners. Lastly, if you are going to boycott BP on principal for the leak, then you should also check out the Niger Delta and ExxonMobile, and while you are at it why not boycott Citgo for being owned by a dictatorial regime which uses fear and intimidation, if not flat-out strong-armed tactics, to silence its critics.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[SkunkPussy]

Couldn't the limited liability of a corporation be insurance sold by banks, instead of as a cost implicitly underwritten by society?

Re:And the old saw applies here

[SkunkPussy]

also the american (and eu) people for demanding oil knowing full well that a certain percentage of the oil will leak into the environment.

boohoo there was a big well that blew up. boohoo you got to drive to work every day for the last YOUR WHOLE LIFE?

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Dahamma]

No, I was replying to the OP's comment (which I even quoted in my post!)

"I followed the timeline and they already had like 5 different things to try within days of it happening".

"Pre-made" domes or whatnot has nothing to do with disputing that statment.

Do you even READ THE ORIGINAL POST or do you just get irate and post on emotion?

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Dahamma]

I don't believe I criticized anyone in particular, but BP and the overall mismanagement and incompetence of the situation.

Large corporations have many employees, of course. Not all of them made mistakes or share any blame in a fiasco like this. Sometimes you can't even blame the corporation or its management, since the mistake was the fault of individuals acting alone.

But who's fault is it that the crew trying to repair the BOP did not exchange proper information with those knowlegable about its installation or maintenance? BP management "coordinating" the efforts. Which if you read the thread, goes back to the original criticism anyway...

Re:And the old saw applies here

[bug1]

Unfortunately the mob only descends when the target is already on its knees.

The public pushes companies to make extreme profits and turn a blind eye to their methods until something goes wrong.

Im sure all the critics will keep using those oil derived products in your everyday life whilst maintaining outrage about the methods that where used to generate said products.

Its all a game to blame someone else.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Leebert]

I work as a maintenance engineer within the oil and gas industry and I can tell you that a large portion of my time is spent reverse engineering crap that is documented only in some old fart's head who retired several years earlier.

They should take a lesson from those of us in the IT industry! Oh, wait...

Re:And the old saw applies here

[CharlyFoxtrot]

The public pushes companies to make extreme profits and turn a blind eye to their methods until something goes wrong.

The public ? Most people I talk to don't mind companies turning a healthy profit as long as it isn't an exorbitant one earned on the back of workers or by cutting corners but I've yet to hear people push companies to make ever more profits. When you do hear analysts push for ever increasing profits it's usually attributed to some vague entity like "the market" or "investors" which are code for the wealthy few as far as I'm concerned.

You're right about the consumer hypocrisy though.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[AngryK9]

Greed is the problem. It is a flaw inherent to humans. After all, you don't see dogs cutting corners and ignoring safety regulations in order to increase the size of their bank accounts. Accidents happen, but I believe that if greed wasn't the driving force in human society, this wouldn't be anywhere close to as bad as it is.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Bing Tsher E]

I wouldn't say Biden isn't likeable. He seems like one of the most 'regular guy' types at that level of goverment ATM. I'd even like seeing him as President some time in the very near future.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[khallow]

April 22 - The Deepwater Horizon rig, valued at more than $560 million, sinks and a 5-mile-long (8 km) oil slick forms.
April 25 - Efforts to activate the well's blowout preventer fail. [It took them THREE DAYS to realize they had completely forgotten to maintain the main component intended to prevent the blowout]

Attempt #1.

May 7 - An attempt to place a containment dome over the spewing well fails when the device is rendered useless by frozen hydrocarbons that clogged it [this was not days later, it was over TWO WEEKS LATER]

Attempt #2.

May 16 - BP inserts a tube into the leaking riser pile of the well and captures some oil and gas.

Attempt #3.

May 26 - A "top kill" maneuver starts, involving pumping heavy fluids and other material into the well shaft to try to stifle the flow. [Already over a month later!]

Attempt #4.

June 2 - BP tries another capping strategy but has difficulty cutting off a leaking riser pipe. [etc]

Attempt #5. Let us also remember the first of the relief wells was started on May 2 (Attempt #6). As I see it, saying this massive activity happened in "days" is a mild exaggeration, but it is impressive just the same. For example, the federal government likely would not do better.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[infinitelink]

What essentially makes this a problem with capitalism? What makes it that rather than an endemic phenomena in human society reflective of human nature, particularly the desire to avoid accountability (read "hide from justice when it metes out an unfavorable portion") and create systems of abstractions and hierarchical layers behind which to hide? This sort of behavior as well as the thinking embodied in the statement you quote is found in every nation and people of the world, don't mis-assign blame. It's also more complex than that: trying to put the blame on the guy who pressured vs. the guy/s who bowed to it, or vice versa, rather than assigning credit wherever it is actually do, in proportions that it is due, is a sure sign of simpletonism. I have to be a critical bastard and say straightforwardly that your statement is irrational nonsense; flow of capital in and of itself is fine and dandy, a necessary right for men to be free, that is, something inseparable from free men and a free state, which is capitalism: as for laissez-faire, which I'll comment upon pre-emptively before someone tries to divert attention to a non-issue, that doesn't exist and never has: the U.S. has more regulations than even the European Monstrosity (which seems in its jealous envy to be trying to catch-up) on almost every trival matter you could possibly think of (which also seriously happens to actually diminish and imminently threaten the freedom of its inhabitants), including on transfers of money; those many regulations happen to be for attempting to prevent things like the government failure in this (giving B.P. the "ok" not to follow all the safety measures and procedures required before starting the pump) don't happen, and instituting serious consequences against corporate failures like this (all kinds of things): trouble is that the government is able easily to evade any consequences and even argue in court (with judges colluding) that any amount of mismanagement, incompetence, or gross negligence, is defensible so long as they were attempting to fulfill and exercise legitimate and necessary/proper functions of government (massive explosion in Texas caused by the Feds idiocy that kills many? Nobody in government can be held accountable; approving driling known beforehand to likely destroy entire water tables, which drilling should not have been approved and this was known? Can't be held accountable. Etc etc., "you can't sue the king"--despite that we intentionally don't have one and have made all such titles, even ones just received from other nations, illegal and treasonable offenses); private corporations, on the other hand, can be held up to light and served justice...if the people are vigilant and they elect principled and law-abiding oath-keeping officers. Fail that, and you get what you deserve in proportion to your corporate failures in vigilance.

Anyway, technically B.P. had permission to skip certain steps otherwise required by the government, and the government gave it. So who shares the larger part of the blame, then, but is the public ever going to hear about it? Politics 101, those in power, whatever form their power might take, are never to blame, and will never allow that they should be said to be those who are to blame, period: ever, got it? Good, now you're a LOT wiser for the wear and journey ahead. Maybe if you're Cicero you'll take one powerful criminal down, but remember that the next attempt to foil a plot will probably cost you your life.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[vbraga]

Yes, it should be. Great idea.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Bing Tsher E]

And the 11 year old girl was none other than Barack Obama!

Re:And the old saw applies here

[khallow]

Oh, you mean all the same things they tried with Ixtoc I, 30 years ago, which also didn't work then?

How much oil did the caps of Ixtoc I intercept? Just because they "didn't work", doesn't that they worked as well as they worked 30 years ago.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Dahamma]

5 attempts, no matter how "massive", that fail miserably is in no way impressive to me. No points for effort here, this isn't Kindergarten.

And becomes even less impressive when the ridiculous estimates of 2000-5000 barrels per day leaking were later updated to 60,000-100,000 bpd (and those were really only changed when the majority of non-partisan scientists examining the data pointed out how ridiculous they were... so believe the new "official" estimate with a grain of salt...)

Re:And the old saw applies here

[infinitelink]

Maybe the "most people" you're talking about are those wholly dependent upon others' entrepeneurialship, investments, ideas, and generative labors; as for the kind which isn't into following others around like helpless parasites, including those who're such dependents but not by choice and are just a little more educated or thoughtful, they tend not to see difficulties with profit-making where people can sell. Now I know there really are cases where this isn't just, such as the many instances where monopolies of whatever kind (patent, whatever) are used to distort markets, crush valid competition and better service providers and producers--these things are in fact very common; as far as those cases (each should be viewed case-by-case) in which products or services are sold by prices paid willingly by grateful purchasers (which aren't negated simply because people are willing to steal), there is nothing wrong with gigantic margins: in those cases where function is just right, or perhaps there is excellence, what is wrong with selling for as much as people are wililng to pay?

Do you see a man skilled in his work? He will stand before kings; He will not stand before obscure men.--Proverbs 22:29

Wise advice.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[no1home]

Hehehe No, we're not talking about Obama. However, I'd say it applies.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[khallow]

And becomes even less impressive when the ridiculous estimates of 2000-5000 barrels per day leaking were later updated to 60,000-100,000 bpd (and those were really only changed when the majority of non-partisan scientists examining the data pointed out how ridiculous they were... so believe the new "official" estimate with a grain of salt...)

That's ok. I don't expect clueless people to be impressed either. Instead, let's look at the US government. It has vastly more resources than BP does. If there really was something very wrong with how BP was handling the crisis, then they'd step in. Obama would be forced to, even if he wanted the crisis to develop a little more.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Biogenesis]

Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce

Re:And the old saw applies here

[DeadChobi]

Typically in the latter system you speak of, you would call them something like "Great Leader," or "President for Life."

Re:And the old saw applies here

[EastCoastSurfer]

Well said. On a slight tangent it reminds me of the Area 51 story where government employees (military iirc) were burning some toxic waste to remove it. Many of the workers down wind ended up pretty sick and sued the government. The governments defense was first they were not liable because they were the government and second they couldn't be liable because Area 51 didn't exist. That would mean that the place people were working didn't actually exist according to government.

You are absolutely correct that responsibility is first always denied and then shifted from those with the most power to those with less when the fact is that it should be shared among all those involved including the government. Evil corporations are the in thing to attack though.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[serbanp]

Capitalism is not greed, and greed is not capitalism.

You're nuts! Capitalism is greed (nothing could get done if we all would hold hands), altruism was never an enduring society-wide motivator. The problem though is that too much greed (or just the absence of any other drive) is toxic and, like panic (as opposed of fear), produces bad outcomes.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Anonymous Coward]

Couldn't the limited liability of a corporation be insurance sold by banks, instead of as a cost implicitly underwritten by society?

What, and give banks even more money, power and influence than they already have?

You're kidding, right?

How about this: We revoke corporate citizenship, completely, first, in the US, as an implicit part of incorporation, and reclaim, proclaim, citizenship as the sole province of individual human beings, once and for all, and return "limited liability" to the internal financial operations of the corporations?

Once done, and the ability of corporations to influence government via huge amounts of money is eliminated as a side-effect, we then insist that corporate officers be held personally responsible for the decisions that they make on behalf of their companies that have detrimental effects on everyone outside their companies. They can keep the limited financial responsibility with regards to internal finances, certainly, can keep their stock options, golden parachutes, etc., but once they start fucking around with the rest of us, all bets are off.

The problem with incorporation isn't itself, per se - it's that it's been expanded from limited, internal financial responsibility to "it's OK for me, as CxO, to do whatever the fuck I want, have my company do whatever the fuck makes us money, regardless of anything other than profit, and I'll never have to answer for it personally, regardless of who gets hurt, who dies, the effect on anyone or anything else in the world, so long as my company continues to make money, and so will pay for the battery of lawyers needed to tie up any such actions in court for the rest of my life."

In short, it's about personal responsibility, and that's what is missing, has been missing, for so very long in the US.

And, certainly, it's not universal (or at least, I'd like to think that it isn't), but it IS growing, and rapidly becoming the norm, almost expected. THAT is bad.

But, the good news is this: All of you reading this have, by definition, access to information, knowledge, that you can use to make things better, albeit slowly. It's taken almost 100 years for the US to get this messed up, and it's going to take time to fix it, but YOU can.

WE can.

You can't trust the politicians, the corporations, to do it for you: You already know that they don't serve your best interests - you've seen it, continue to see it.

But, the Internet changes everything: I truly believe that. It spans the world, and you are part of it, and by extension, you are part of the world in a way that has never been possible before. Political power, corporate power, is by necessity concentrated, insulated, isolated, though exercised externally. The Internet now surrounds it all, it's part of our society, our culture, and CAN be used to break the hold that so few have over us... which leads me to this caveat:

"You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant."
- Harlan Ellison

You have at your disposal, without effort, access to more knowledge and information now than any of those of us that have preceded you, and such is growing every day. More, you have, by the same means, the ability to talk about what you learn, share what you know, and listen and learn from others all over the world.

In short, there's no longer any reason for any of you to be ignorant, save by choice, especially about the things that effect us all. And so, there's no reason for you, once informed, to not act upon your informed opinions, in the real world, and work to make it better, regardless of the failures of the past, save for apathy, laziness or selfishness.

So many of you enjoy access to something that I deem so wondrous, take it for granted, treat it as a mere replacement for TV or radio.

It's more than that, far more - but it's true potential can only be realized by you.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[nedlohs]

It's not even that high up the chain.

High level bureaucrats in the old USSR would count I think. They might get punished if they really screw something up, but only if they managed to get on the bad side of their peers.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[nedlohs]

And what happens when the bank goes under due to the costs of paying out a claim? Are the owners of the company being insured then personally liable? Or are the owners of the bank personally liable (unless they in turn have insurance and the bankruptcy doesn't just move up the chain)?

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Dahamma]

I don't see what the government could do after the fact, they have no expertise in the field, nor should they.

The thing they could have done was actually properly monitor the industry and prevent an unprepared company from tapping a 30B+ barrel oil field in one of the most environmentally diverse and economically important ocean regions in the world until they have tested and verified containment procedures in place, rather than exchange money, gifts and sex for favorable treatment...

Re:And the old saw applies here

[bm_luethke]

No, it has *nothing* to do with capitalism. There are socialist, communist, and any other economic system around that doesn't hold business owners responsible for what their employees do and there are capitalistic ones that do. Even in full command type economies there *has* to be some type of concentration of wealth or power - you at the least have the govt chairmanships that direct policy for the state run factories (and try and hold them responsible - I expect you will get BP execs held responsible, win the lottery, and discover an immortality potion before you get a govt agency to decide to hold itself responsible for its own actions). If you want economies of scale to kick in - and I assure you that you do - then the question isn't if something like BP will exist it is who has control of it. A little mom & pop isn't going to run an offshore deep water oil rig no matter what and industry of that scale exists in nearly every sector (a small local team isn't going to produce whatever the current generation of Intel chips is when someone reads this - or whatever company is currently on top of the world market).

What this is a failure of is a failure of our government. We have regulations in place that would have (maybe - can't truly see alternate time lines but this type of thing is *not* unknown and we can trace the chain of failures) prevented it from being a true disaster. They were ignored from every level you can point at and in many cases still are 70+ days later (not sure the current count) - nor can you pin it on any political group (more than just our two main ones involved too) or any specific president (Obama failed miserably on initial reaction and on his now long term response - Obama has made Bush with Katrina look highly competent).

The problem is that as we get to where in order to advance you have to have not just multi-billion but *multi-trillion* dollar budgets for some advances then there is just so much money/power floating around that it draws corruption to a point that I can't really come up with a good analogy. Given the corruption we have seen with our own regulators (with drugs and prostitutes) and the ineptitude of all levels of govt to respond to this what would a command market have done better? Indeed, the fact that this is hurting their stock and end user sales has done more to spur them than *anything* the govt has done or will ever do. They aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them and look to how whom they donate too, whom is in power, and whom gets elected correlates to see how buyable most politicians are.

While we can certainly point to fairly socialistic countries that do things Right - say the Dutch - it isn't because they are tending socialistic. Indeed, a stronger govt presence and control would have been *worse* in our case - as bad as BP has done our govt has done worse (and I say that is true for the last few decades too, and that is *all* branches of the govt). I can also point to China and the old Soviets for examples of more socialistic countries that are as bad or worse than us. It is more rot at our core and that rot stems more from our concentration of wealth. That concentration of wealth is not so much from being capitalistic as much as it from necessity. While the Dutch have chosen their niche to be world expert on even there they have a concentration of wealth that will most likely one day rot. For world super powers (while we do not list China as one today it is almost there) you are going to have several. The Dutch aren't going to have globally competitive space exploration, deep sea exploration, energy research, computing research, and pretty much globally competitive (say top five) in hundreds of fields. There are only a few countries with the wealth (and by that I mean raw resources) and they *all* suffer (or in the case of the old soviets used too) from the same thing.

In the end I personally think it is more that human nature is such that we will have trouble progressing past a certain point - or at least it is going to be a l

Re:And the old saw applies here

[khallow]

I don't see what the government could do after the fact, they have no expertise in the field, nor should they.

Bingo. To correct you here, the government does have expertise in this field. What those experts probably told their bosses was that the feds couldn't do better (or at least it wouldn't be worth the risk to try) than the people on the scene. Given that the feds still haven't taken over, that means that those experts still probably are saying much the same thing. So before complaining about how little or how slow BP's response to the accident was, perhaps you should consider that the biggest group that could take over from them continues to choose not to.

The thing they could have done was actually properly monitor the industry and prevent an unprepared company from tapping a 30B+ barrel oil field in one of the most environmentally diverse and economically important ocean regions in the world until they have tested and verified containment procedures in place, rather than exchange money, gifts and sex for favorable treatment...

Oh well, we can't fault the feds for not doing their job (well, not legally). After all, it's no skin off their teeth, if they screw up massively every now and then.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[ross.w]

If you reckon dogs aren't inherently greedy, you've never seen one eat.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Chih]

In parts, I agree, but wow, you, use a lot, of commas,

Re:And the old saw applies here

[JDmetro]

BP got their agents/supporters here too. How is parent a troll??

Re:And the old saw applies here

[TheBean]

I mean seriously, what did this guy do or fail to do?

Lead and instill a culture of safety and accountability in a company with a history of dangerous cost cutting.

And the aqueducts.

But apart from the aqueduct, the sanitation and the roads...

And its safe to walk the streets at night.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[thegarbz]

I think it is still misdirected. The people here at fault are engineers who think that their job is finished when the change is made, commissioned, and the system handed over. No one likes documenting things. But if the original drawings were marked up when any modification was made I doubt they would have wasted 3 days.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[jlehtira]

while he is responsible for the pressure that eventually trickled down the management chain resulting in the cost-cutting measures leading to the spill, he bears no personal responsibility

This, here, is the problem with capitalism.

Being a leader of something means that you're supposed to know and to control what is happening below you. I agree that a leader shouldn't be held responsible if someone disobeys him/company values/given instructions, but a leader pretty well is responsible for values and instructions. That's why they're paid so much.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[riperrin]

Can you clarify BP, the subcontractor or both?

Re:And the old saw applies here

[bug1]

Well, capitalism encourages all people/companies to maximize profit, AFAIK its a legal obligation of listed companies.

Consumers want stuff cheap, owners want more profit, workers want higher wages, it all drives companies to take risks.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[CharlyFoxtrot]

there is nothing wrong with gigantic margins: in those cases where function is just right, or perhaps there is excellence, what is wrong with selling for as much as people are wililng to pay?

Gigantic margins are an indication that the free market isn't working because there should be other players appearing on the market to offer the same service at a still profitable but more affordable rate until an equilibrium is reached where the goods/service is both profitable and competitively priced. And leave off the objectivist ranting calling labourers "parasites", it's insulting.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[sycodon]

Or, The One

Re:And the old saw applies here

[sycodon]

I don't see what the government could do after the fact, they have no expertise in the field, nor should they.

Yet they pretend they know enough to regulate it.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Well, capitalism encourages all people/companies to maximize profit, AFAIK its a legal obligation of listed companies.

Consumers want stuff cheap, owners want more profit, workers want higher wages, it all drives companies to take risks.

"Capitalism" as we have it now at least. It wasn't always seen like this. Adam Smith himself wrote: "But the rate of profit does not, like rent and wages, rise with the prosperity, and fall with the declension of the society. On the contrary, it is naturally low in rich, and high in poor countries, and it is always highest in the countries which are going fastest to ruin." and "Our merchants and master-manufacturers complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price of their goods both at home and abroad. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits."

Truth is workers also want a sense of purpose and pride in their work, consumers also want safe, responsibly made products and business owners hate to fire people. Problem is our businesses are run by committees of profit seekers whose goals are completely divorced from the long term goals of any healthy business. This is not capitalism; it's an unhealthy dead end deviation like Stalinism was to socialism.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[sycodon]

Yeah, it's not like all those communist leaders were hording food and other supplies for themselves, or had huge offshore bank accounts for when they "retired".

Greed is a Human attribute that exists regardless of the economic framework.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[SleazyRidr]

Haliburton may have not done the cementing correctly, but they owned up to their mistake immediately and told BP that they'd do it again. BP said, 'Nah, that'll take too long, we'll just go with it.'

There's an easy way to instill a culture of safety in a company: instant dismissal for a violation of the safety code. I've only ever worked on sites where that's the case. Talking to people who've worked where that's not the case I've decided that I don't want to work there.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[mikael]

It really goes into conspiracy-theory territory here:

BP Subcontractor warned of incomplete design documents

BP cut corners while constructing well

Liberals claim Haliburton at fault

BP, Transocean, Halliburton will blame one another for the spill

It's going to be a real wham-dinger seeing them fight this one out ...

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Bryansix]

Nobody said Natural Seeps are in one place. Actually if you took the time to ask my my position I would tell you that there should be On-Shore cross drilling into the offshore wells off the coast of Santa Barbara because this would result in a higher GDP, more jobs, better national security, and LESS oil in the ocean off THAT coast.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Bryansix]

Wow, shed a tear for yourself. All you are doing is exporting the problem somewhere else in the globe. Do you think Mideast drilling operations care about safety? Do you think they care about the environment? Do you think they give a shit that most of the income from their operations funds militant theocracies or terrorists? Look at the alternative before you open your mouth. You are taking a very narrow view on the subject.

Look, we need to move away from oil as fast as possible but at the same time we need to source a much of it as possible right here at home because the alternative is infinently WORSE!

Re:And the old saw applies here

[Shotgun]

I don't see what the government could do after the fact, they have no expertise in the field, nor should they.

They could have gotten out of the way. Various countries offered incomparable resources to help contain the oil and speed the cleanup. The Feds kept pushing and continue to push red-tape in the way. Hurricanes are now threatening the efficacy of the help that was offered when it could do the most good.

Re:And the old saw applies here

[BranMan]

We have 2 big dogs. Neither one often even finishes what I put out for them. Both are lean and in good shape. In other words, I see your generalization and raise you an anecdote!

Re:And the old saw applies here

[infinitelink]

Evil corporations are the in thing to attack though

Sadly hoi polloi has been conditioned such that you don't even have to say "evil" explicitly, just "corporation/s" and the brainwashing will attach that meme for you. ; (

Re:And the old saw applies here

[mswhippingboy]

Hmmm, let me see.
Higher prices at the gas pump, or risk a possible extinction event...decisions, decisions.

Wow. Humans like to boast about their dominion and intellectual superiority over other creatures in world, while even dogs know better than to shit where they eat.

Batfish?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmmm.....how do they taste, breaded and fried?

Re:Batfish?

[unix1]

Hmmmm.....how do they taste, breaded and fried?

Oily.

Re:Batfish?

[drewhk]

At least you do not need additional oil to fry them.

Re:Batfish?

[AnonymousClown]

If cook them too long under the right temperature the volatile distillates will combust rather quickly and give you blacked batfish. Ahahahahaha..

That's a joke that only the Slashdot crowd would and if you tell it at a party, a party that has cute girls, you will just get vacant stares - unless there's a petroleum engineer in the crowd. Nah, that won't happen.

Re:Batfish?

[drewhk]

"That's a joke that only the Slashdot crowd would and if you tell it at a party, a party that has cute girls. Nah, that won't happen."

Fixed that for you.

Re:Batfish?

[ArcadeNut]

I prefer them Battered

noscript users...

[Anonymous Coward]

wondering where the pictures is...

http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2010/07/08/13866-batfish.jpg

Re:noscript users...

[nizo]

Wow, they really were cool looking.

Re:noscript users...

[catmistake]

Fuck these fish. Blue Whales, man. Blue fukin Whales. Maybe there were as many as a hundred left. Ok, sucks we hardly knew these fish, but a billion of them isn't worth the life of one Blue Whale. Maybe Blues were done for anyway, but if they no longer have a spawning ground, it still sucks their extinction was hastened just at the heartbreaking end.

Re:noscript users...

[zblack_eagle]

Obviously you haven't been listening to the blue whales themselves

Re:noscript users...

[Yo Grark]

Here's a link to the new species taken from a camera attached to one of the subs

http://www.dynamicaqua.com/raingear_files/sw_black_lg.jpg

Laugh, it's a joke.

- Yo Grark

Batgirl

[Anonymous Coward]

Batgirl, is that you? No Robin, it's Batfish.

Re:Batgirl

[Shimbo]

Pass the oil repellent bat-spray.

Well they did live there

[h4rr4r]

What are the odds we found out more about them just as they get wipped out?

How is BP going to fix this?

Re:Well they did live there

[locallyunscene]

aaaaaand it's gone.

Re:Well they did live there

[PatrickThomson]

Gosh, perhaps the dozens of robots with bright lights and cameras scouring the seabed looking for a broken oil pipe can also spot fish? This is no coincidence. There's hundreds of unique species per square mile of ocean.

Re:Well they did live there

[moreati]

Simple, they'll erase any record of them.

Re:Well they did live there

[Haffner]

New oceanographer technique:

1. Cause devastating disaster on ocean floor. 2. Get Big Corporations to send in robots with cameras. 3. Review camera footage to discover new(ly extinct) creatures. 4. ???? 5. Profit (Obligatory)

Re:Well they did live there

[h4rr4r]

So maybe we should be a little more careful?

If we started demanding relief wells were in place before any production could begin then we could make sure these leaks do not last for months.

Re:Well they did live there

[Miseph]

Suck it Blue!

Re:Well they did live there

[locallyunscene]

You mean the PanCakeBatCave?

Re:Well they did live there

[h4rr4r]

I said more careful not accepting of no risk at all. Typical AC response, so senseless that you refuse to even attach an account to it.

Further more the relief well would not be finished enough to have a blow out, you might wish to educate yourself a little about how they work.

Re:Well they did live there

[DeadChobi]

Oh please. The odds of such a catastrophic failure as a wellhead blowing out during drilling are practically nil.

New (Soon to be Extinct) Species Found...

[tekrat]

There, fixed that for you...

and

[Thelasko]

...and they're both now extinct.

Re:and

[BluBrick]

What's that?

on the subject of new species in the gulf

[rev_sanchez]

BP might pay handsomely if you could find a highly unethical biologist to identify tarballs as a new sort of petroleum-based jellyfish.

FTA:

[butterflysrage]

The well has pumped millions of gallons (liters) of oil into the Gulf

uh... one of those things is not like the other... I question the validity of any site that thinks gallons and liters are interchangable

Re:FTA:

[SheeEttin]

Well, a gallon is ~3.79 liters (according to Google), so if there's "millions of gallons", I'd say it's pretty safe to assume there are "millions of liters" as well...

Re:FTA:

[Anonymous Coward]

I question the validity of any site that thinks gallons and liters are interchangable

I question the validity of YOUR FACE!

Re:FTA:

[DIplomatic]

The well has pumped millions of gallons (liters) of oil into the Gulf

uh... one of those things is not like the other... I question the validity of any site that thinks gallons and liters are interchangable

Not really. Both statements are true.
From estimates I've gathered around the web, the total amount of oil in the gulf is around 140 million gallons, or 530 million liters.
So the well has indeed pumped millions of gallons of oil and millions of liters of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. Is it a huge understatement? Yes. Is it an incompetent factual error? No.

Re:FTA:

[RobertB-DC]

"The well has pumped millions of gallons (liters) of oil into the Gulf"

uh... one of those things is not like the other... I question the validity of any site that thinks gallons and liters are interchangable

You would prefer, then, that the article said "The well has pumped millions of gallons (3,785,411.78's of liters) of oil into the Gulf"? Perhaps a review of the concept of False Precision is in order. "A guard at a museum says a dinosaur skeleton is 70 million and six years old. He reasons that it was 70 million years old when he started working there six years ago."

Re:FTA:

[MagikSlinger]

. I question the validity of any site that thinks gallons and liters are interchangable

Well, liters and gallons are interchangable. I think you mean they aren't directly comparable because one is almost 4x the other. But it's not an order of magnitude (x10) difference, so I think they can be partially forgiven.

For their partial punishment, they will have to pay the $/gallon price for their liters of gasoline. :-)

Re:FTA:

[Haffner]

Well, if you are being precise in terms of millions/billions, then there is only a 26% chance that millions of gallons implies ONLY millions of liters, as 263.85 millions of gallons = billion of liters. And, given the odds that 1 million gallons is far less likely than, say, 50 million gallons, the odds are even higher that there are, in fact, billion(s) of liters. To get that extra s, you need 527.70 millions of gallons.

Re:FTA:

[vxice]

Well technically a billion is a thousand million. So you would still have millions of liters even if you had billions of gallons. A great way to fudge stats, well there were only tens of safety violations. Well actually it was 300 but that is 30 ten incidents. If you really want to nitpick.

Re:FTA:

[wowbagger]

To help clarify some of the issues with that statement others have pointed out:

You need to keep in mind the idea of digits of precision. Were I to say "My swimming pool contains one thousand gallons of water" I have given you one digit of precision - you can legitimately say my pool contains four thousand liters of water, because you are still in one digit of precision. You CANNOT legitimately say my pool contains 3785 liters - you just pulled 3 more digits of precision out of the air.

If I say "there are millions of gallons of water in that tank" - that is less than a digit of precision, more likely an order of magnitude. So saying "there are four million liters" is wrong - you went from less than a digit of precision to one digit of precision.

Now, if I said "my pool contains 1000 gallons of water plus or minus .1 gallon" - OK, now you can get retentive and say 3785.4 liters plus or minus 0.4 liters" (since the error was only given to one digit of precision).

Re:FTA:

[mangu]

I question the validity of any site that thinks gallons and liters are interchangable

They are, either for very small gallons or for very large liters.

Re:FTA:

[h4rr4r]

You have a very small swimming pool.

Re:FTA:

[publiclurker]

Not all countries use the word billion to indicate one thousand million.

Re:FTA:

[TrevorB]

I question the validity of any site that thinks gallons and liters are interchangable

I'm about to nitpick, but....

Both of these statements are true: "The well has pumped millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf". "The well has pumped millions of liters of oil into the Gulf".

They are comparable if we're talking order of magnitude. I know 3.79 != 1, but when we're talking about "millions of" in a vague sense where nobody really knows what's going on, the real difference is between 10^6, 10^7, or 10^8. M*10^6 and N*10^6 are relatively interchangeable. If we knew that the spill was exactly x*10^y litres, I'd be agreeing with you. /Did both mathematics and physics in university, and appreciates both sides of the argument...

Re:FTA:

[ColdWetDog]

They are, either for very small gallons or for very large liters.

Imperial liters, perhaps.

Re:FTA:

[rossdee]

I would have thought a British Petroleum gallon was about 4.53 Litres

Re:FTA:

[Anonymous Coward]

You are TECHNICALLY correct. The best kind of correct!

Re:FTA:

[h4rr4r]

Too bad, some countries also use squat toilets should that mean that when I say toilet I need to specify a civilized flush one?

Re:FTA:

[thegarbz]

I think we'd just prefer if stupid journalists didn't think that just because there are people outside America they don't realise that a gallon is a unit of measure for a liquid. I mean Americans make it their life long mission to shout at the top of their voices about how great their imperial system is so why even bother telling people there's such a thing as a litre at all.

That and if there are more than 2.6million gallons then the correct explaination would have been "The well has pumped millions of gallons (tens of millions of liters) of oil into the Gulf" Unless the journalist was being intentionally tricky and trying to show the number was between 1million gallons and 2.6million and my head really hurts.

Re:FTA:

[Laser Dan]

For their partial punishment, they will have to pay the $/gallon price for their liters of gasoline. :-)

Many countries already pay the $/gallon price you have in the US for litres of gasoline.

Re:Hmmm

[WitnessForTheOffense]

This was news like 2-3 weeks ago

Your observation, however, hasn't been relevant at any point in history.

Spokesman for BP

[mswhippingboy]

Spokesman for BP assures everyone that the fact that the fish has three heads, 5 legs and squirts a strangely mutagenic substance at it's prey has nothing to do with the oil or the disbursants being injected into the water near the site.

Re:Spokesman for BP

[Daniel Dvorkin]

the disbursants being injected into the water

If BP were being that free with its disbursing, people might be rather less upset.

Re:Spokesman for BP

[mswhippingboy]

lol... you're right.
I guess the oil fumes are getting to me!

Re:Spokesman for BP

[nu1x]

> the fish has three heads,

OK, I have 2, technically, according to some people... still, Check!

> 5 legs

Check!

> and squirts a strangely mutagenic substance at it's prey

Check!

Is a mutation even necessary ?

And now BP will take the credit for the discovery

[Taelron]

Now just watch, on the BP spin, er, news site, there will be an article saying how great this oil spill is because they discovered two new species of fish. Had then not put all those cameras and submersibles there, we'd have missed out on this new species that will likewise also be wiped out...

Clean them

[gmuslera]

After removing all the oil will be easy to see that are part of the already known brucewaynefish species.

Re:Clean them

[N0Man74]

Quick Robin! The Batfish Repellent!

Re:Clean them

[rcamans]

Shh. You going to give away batman's secret identity!

Re:Clean them

[L4t3r4lu5]

Holy viscous hydrocarbon!

Isn't the oil spilling up?

[jr2k]

If these fish are bottom feeders, then just stay on the bottom of the ocean. Oil floats, right?

I think these fish will be just fine.

Re:Isn't the oil spilling up?

[h4rr4r]

Until the oil eating bacteria remove all the oxygen those fish need. Also oil with dispersant in it does not float to the top.

Re:Isn't the oil spilling up?

[Bryansix]

Also oil with dispersant in it does not float to the top.

In Russia it does.

Re:Isn't the oil spilling up?

[jr2k]

Serious question: How does O2 get at the seafloor at that depth in the first place?

Are we 100% sure that the O2 that the fish needs doesn't come from the seabed itself? I remember watching on of the DiscoveryHD shows where some fish at extreme depths get their O2 from "steam vents" or something along those lines.

Re:Isn't the oil spilling up?

[bingoUV]

bottom feeders

"feeders" being the key word. What do they feed on? Stuff falling from a vibrant ecosystem from the upper layers of the sea. Which is no more that vibrant because of the spill. So nothing nutritious falling for the bottom feeders to eat.

Re:Isn't the oil spilling up?

[SleazyRidr]

You can't get oxygen from steam vents, but you can get sulphur from some of them, on which sulphur reducing organisms can survive.

Re:Isn't the oil spilling up?

[SleazyRidr]

Well, it would have floated, had BP not pumped all those dispersants down into it.

Re:previously and now future unknown species

[Haffner]

Then again, oil is lighter than water, so fish living on the bottom of the ocean are probably more likely to survive, than say, those who live nearest the top.

Odds are

[Shivetya]

they live below the threatened areas. Seeing that they are bottom feeders and the oil is not settling, I would say that science scored one in the middle of a disaster.

Re:Odds are

[hedwards]

Umm, you do know what it is that bottom feeders feed upon, right?

Re:Odds are

[BluBrick]

Sure, they live on the ocean floor and oil floats, but what do you reckon the chances are that there is a significant amount of water-soluble toxins leaching from that leak? Pretty good chance would be my guess. Oh, and what do these batfish feed on? That's right - the remains of critters poisoned by the oilslick above them.

Re:Odds are

[locallyunscene]

They have found deep water oil plumes that are not floating... It was on the news a little while ago.

Re:Odds are

[L4t3r4lu5]

I'm not entirely sure, but it might have something to do with making the rockin' world go 'round.

Tony Hayward is a pedophile?

[mangu]

Why don't you start spreading some wrong information that he's a pedophile to add the icing on the cake?

Oh, so he's a pedophile? I knew it! Has he denied it? No? Then it must be true.

And they will really appreciate the poison rain

[Marrow]

As an entire ecosystem dies above them, the residues, acids, and by-products of decomposition will settle to the bottom. Plus they probably wont miss all that pesky oxygen that can no longer dissolve into the water.

Animals can become susceptible to disease from changes in any number of factors. Temperature, pH, etc.

Plus, do you think the material coming out of the ground is in any way uniform in composition or will remain together? Or is different stuff, metals, chemicals, acids, poisons and whatever going to separate out and go wherever it wants.

Its like pouring the most dirty toxic destructive can of solvents you ever had in your lab and throwing it into the water. By the ton.

Re:And they will really appreciate the poison rain

[fermion]

On the other hand, the overfishing has stopped. Many species, such as sea turtles were doomed anyway, not because we eat them as food, but because they are killed in the fishing proces. This is not to mention the number of species that die because their land now has a hotel on it.

If BP would not have caved and paid off the fishing and tourist industry, then many problems would go away. Again, if there were fewer hotels, and few more careful fishing crews, turtles might survive. As it is, the oil is just more nail in the coffin. Really irrelevant in the grand context.

Wait for it ...

[damn_registrars]

If we're talking about batfish and an oil spill, there must be a manbearpig joke coming...

Obligatory

[noidentity]

The good news: We discovered a new species of fish. The bad news: They are now extinct.

Distinguishing feature

[PeanutButterBreath]

They are distinguished from other species of batfish by their oiliness.

Won't be the only "new" species discovery

[RConrad]

Stay tuned as we learn what other new life forms have been caused by BP's crime against nature.

Re:Won't be the only "new" species discovery

[Bryansix]

Yes, because they wanted the rig to explode and sink into the sea.

Re:Won't be the only "new" species discovery

[wastedlife]

Negligence can also be cr

Re:Won't be the only "new" species discovery

[wastedlife]

Okay, the preview had my full post before I clicked Submit. Anyway, it was supposed to be:

Negligence can also be a crime.

Re:Just Fine...

[blackbeak]

I think these fish will be just fine.

Yeah, just fine until security teams spot them trespassing in BP's Gulf!

Re:previously and now future unknown species

[mswhippingboy]

Except that the disbursants being pumped into the water cause the oil to break up into tiny particles and sink to the bottom.

This is why I dislike archaic units of measure

[Anonymous Coward]

millions of gallons (3,785,411.78's of liters)

BP is british. Shouldn't that be "millions of gallons (4,546,091.88's of litres)"?

You Americans and your wacky mini-gallon.

mod

[Atmchicago]

Mod parent +1, Tragic.

Batfish

[countertrolling]

Crazy

Lovely

[db10]

..they should take care of the recently discovered mutant undersea mosquitos

Batfish

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Batfish can do no work for us, nor can we eat them.

They're useless, so let's kill them. As long as my gas tank is full and God is blessing America, I don't fucking give a shit about a species confused batshit fish.

That sounds silly

[Marrow]

Sorry, but I dont buy the assertion that it was already a done-deal. The environment was not wrecked already. It is almost impossible for boats or hotels to kill every last member of a species. You would need to pour millions and millions of gallons of poison into an area to get enough coverage. Like, now for instance.

Move over Adam West...

[HopefulIntern]

Nana-nana nana-nana, nana-nana nana-nana BATFIIIIIIIIIISH!

Re:Hmmm

[PsychoSlashDot]

This was news like 2-3 weeks ago

You know what? That fact has absolutely no importance and never has. Let's see why.

First, there are two types of news: things that are interesting and things that are important. Things that are important threaten my life or my lifestyle, or those around me. I need to react, and react quickly. This story isn't in that category, and most of what's posted on Slashdot aren't. I don't come here for urgent breaking-news issues, and I shouldn't. On the other hand, things that are interesting generally remain interesting for more than a few moments. The discovery of a new (and interesting) species of fish is an interesting bit of trivia that won't be any less interesting if I read about it today, tomorrow, or a month from now. It's timeless news.

Secondly, it's very hard for the administrators to know how many readers have heard about a particular story yet. They filter through submissions and make decisions based on how interesting a story is. Thing is... I hadn't heard about this anywhere else in the last two to three weeks. If Slashdot hadn't accepted this submission and posted it, I wouldn't have heard about it. Which says that at least in this case - in my case - this acceptance worked exactly as desired. If you already heard about this, feel free to ignore the story.

Third and finally, you imply that because this news isn't 0-day it's not news. What's the threshold? 0-day? 0-minute? Who are you to decide when information is no longer "fresh" enough to merit further dissemination. I'll agree that posting a story announcing the exciting new 80486 processor would be inappropriate but you're quibbling about a few weeks in a story about a new-to-us species of fish.

You should have tried to make a fished p0st instead of complaining about this.

How long before....

[hesaigo999ca]

How long before these new species die out because of BPs lack of action.
I heard on the news last night that the state council was very appalled at how much red tape was thrown up with this situation by BP and the federal US gov. instead of just doing what it takes, everyone needed to vote on things and the lack of urgency is disgusting.

This is exactly what I mean, if the Obama administration was as uncorruptable as they seemed in the beginning, they easily would have realized a long time ago, that BP has no real interest in cleaning this up.....they are stalling, and sadly, now humans are paying the price, and marine life....I would take Obama's daughter's hostage and place them in a thick capsule deep in the ocean, and
tell him that the amount of time he has to save his daughters depends on how bad the oil is, the less oil is dumped into the ocean
the more resilient the bubble is, the more oil, well you get the picture....I am sure that oil would have been stopped immediately.

It is all a matter of relativity, what relates to what....in this case, Obama for the longest time thought he was doing enough and could not understand why the media was saying that he was not proactive, well I think he really dropped the ball with this one...