Slashdot Mirror
BP Permanently Seals Gulf Oil Well
rexjoec writes "BP has finally plugged the Macondo well. This announcement came yesterday after $9.5 billion (through September 17) in expenditures and five months of continuous effort."
From the LA Times: "Of the estimated 4.9 million barrels of oil that gushed from the well, 25% was burned, skimmed or piped to tanker ships. A second 25% has evaporated or dissolved, according to government estimates. Another 25%, classified by the government as 'residual oil,' consisted of light sheens on the water, thick goo on the shore and tar balls. The tar balls, though not harmful to humans, are likely to wash up on shore for some time."
The "potential" for conflict can raise the cost of oil by 5-10 cents in less than a week. The "potential" for supply problsm can raise the cost of oil by as much as 50 cents over the course of a couple of months.
Millions of gallons leaking into the Gulf, however, seem to have had pretty much zero effect on gas prices. Am I wrong? Please put some numbers up showing that I am...I'd really be pissed off if I'm right about that.
Living With a Nerd
If my company has a tanker full of gas, and that tanker explodes outside your store due to my company's negligence, cratering the street and making your store unreachable for months. By your logic, my company shouldn't be liable for monetary damage to your store. How would you feel about this? You can say "adapt! change!" all you want, but the bottom line is, there should be no legal justification for this kind of negligence.
I'm not saying that the specifics of this case are right, but thats what you have to do if you sue for damages with long term repercussions.
Lets say I run into you with my car and break your hand. You would need to sue me to recover the following costs:
- Immediate medical care (ER, ambulance)
- Surgery to correct your hand
- Lost wages from the immediate time away from work
- Cost of physical therapy
(heres the important part)
- Cost of long term followup visits
- Cost of pain meds (even say, Advil) because of long term discomfornt
- Lost wages from not being able to use your hand 100% ever again
- Cost of followup visits if your hand flares up again
- Cost of treating the arthritis that is now likely to develop
You can only sue me once. You may not come back and sue me again in 15 years when it acts up after feeling fine for a decade.
Similar thing is going on here. The fishermen just plain don't know whats going to happen in the long term. The legal term is "make me whole". BP did something to harm them and the fisherman isn't made whole again unless all of his costs , short and long term, are recovered. The fisherman doesn't get to go back in 5 years and sue BP again after he finds out his fishing area is a wasteland because the fish are gone.
Bullshit. They are going to weasel out of this like all big companies do when something like this occurs. Google "bhopal union carbide", for a great example.
In a just world they will have to pay every inflation adjusted dime since the fishing industry was damaged to when it fully recovers. In our world they won't.
Is BP paying those fishermen for the next 40 years of lost work?
No, but BP is paying for those fisherman to go out and clean the oil. Also 40 years=number pulled out of your ass. The effects of the Ixtoc 1 oil spill were not that drastic and shrimp industries returned to normal in 2 years.
Is it paying the hotels for the next 20 years of lost business?
The hotels are already doing quite well this year as they are hosting all the contractors that have been brought into the region, as are all the restaurants and such with the per diem the contractors are getting paid. And again 20 years=number pulled out of your ass.
It sure seems like dumping a few gallons of oil can get you arrested, dumping millions though is ok so long as you pretend to do something about it.
Yes, dumping millions of gallons of oil is ok (if you consider 20 billion dollars to not be a penalty). That works out to about $95 a gallon, not to mention the additional $1.87/gallon in lost oil revenue.
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
By your logic, I should be allowed to start a "waste disposal service". What I will do is locate myself in your neighborhood and burn tires, paint thinner, waste paint, and miscellaneous plastics in large heaping piles. You should just have to adapt to it and deserve no compensation down the road when you get cancer or poisoned by the toxic fumes in the air. Its not my fault you live there and use the neighborhood for your own personal enjoyment and living space. After all, this society is capitalist so I should be able to start a business like this cut out my niche in the market.
That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
There's fundamentally two ways to make a business responsible for its unsafe actions.
One is to impose government regulations. These are generally flawed, often tuned to avoid expense to the corporation, often require unnecessary things at extra expense, may not be enforced, and are typically something of a pain.
The other is to make corporations civilly liable for what they do. This has its own set of problems, including shell corporations that loot and discard operating corporations, and the ability of large enterprises to wage delaying actions through the legal system.
The worst of both worlds is when bad government regs are used to shield a corporation from well-deserved liability.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
The BP+US statements about this debacle have from the very beginning been utterly fanciful and misleading. Why should anyone suddenly believe this one?
BP+US has treated the entire disaster as simply a public relations problem. Control the media message, attack and suppress any contrary evidence, and thus define reality. At least until the guilty have escaped any consequences and the gullible are left to pay the real costs.
And my observation here is to note the similarity to U.S. petro-military operations in Iraq (and the rest of the Middle East). Both were caused by hubris and greed, and the official "solution" to what is clearly a complete and total clusterfuck is just PR "rebranding" - to simply leave and declare victory.
Without independent observation and analysis, in either the Persian Gulf or the Gulf of Mexico, who has any idea of what's really happening?
But from the similarities I'll bet this disaster will continue exactly like Iraqistan: lots of smiling photo ops of the CEO's of state, the occasional human interest story about the hardships suffered by the little people (carefully avoiding any link to those responsible), and the suffering and environmental devastation and the death will keep going on and on.
Gulf of Mexico, Persian Gulf.
Same hydrocarbons, different day.
"My fellow Americans, major combat operations in the Gulf have ended. In the battle of Macondo, the United States and our oillies have prevailed."
"Emission Accomplished"
Deliberately dumping used motor oil is a crime. Having it spill out of your car onto the pavement because a gasket fails is not a crime, though you may still be required to pay clean-up costs.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.