Slashdot Mirror
Huge Amounts of Oil Found On Gulf of Mexico Floor
intellitech tips news of a study examining the Gulf of Mexico sea floor in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Marine scientists have found a thick layer of oil, and say it has devastated life there.
"Studies using a submersible found a layer, as much as 10cm thick in places, of dead animals and oil, said Samantha Joye of the University of Georgia. Knocking these animals out of the food chain will, in time, affect species relevant to fisheries. She disputed an assessment by BP's compensation fund that the Gulf of Mexico will recover by the end of 2012. ... 'The impact on the benthos was devastating,' she told BBC News. 'Filter-feeding organisms, invertebrate worms, corals, sea fans — all of those were substantially impacted — and by impacted, I mean essentially killed. Another critical point is that detrital feeders like sea cucumbers, brittle stars that wander around the bottom, I didn't see a living (sea cucumber) around on any of the wellhead dives. They're typically everywhere, and we saw none.'"
"Huge Amounts of Oil Found On Gulf of Mexico Floor"
Yeah... drill baby drill. Oh, hang on...
And people are surprised?
That's junk! This sucks! Suck it! I am trying to find a slick reply, but obviously I am failing. Just give me a few months and I will sort it out!
Exactly. That's how this whole mess started.
And this is the problem with allowing big business to violate the environment. No matter how much they can assure us nothing will go wrong, something generally does go wrong and then we're screwed. Sure we "fined them" and "made them pay for the cleanup" but still the ecosystem in the Gulf of Mexico got badly damaged and will take a long time to recover (2012 my ass - shit, there is still oil on beaches in Alaska from the Valdez spill, that happened decades ago).
When will we learn that there are some risks we just shouldn't take.
Now all the wildlife is perfectly preserved for future generations to study after we've finished killing them all off. Oil companies are always thinking of our children.
All those dead animals will be oil in a few million years. We should be *thanking* BP for making more oil, not reprimanding them for the spill.
Wow! Who would've thought Corexit would work as intended!
As in... drag all the oil to the bottom of the sea far from most camera lenses.
Just waiting to see what kind of fines BP will have to pay to help clean up that mess.
And if you're going to say that they'll just pass the fines on to their customers ... who cares? If their prices are higher than their competition then I'll shop at their competition.
"I didn't see a living (sea cucumber) around on any of the wellhead dives"
I'd like to see a larger survey, please. Of course right next to where the well broke there will be a significant problem with marine life. Please examine what exactly is the area impacted.
Why is it that when a Democrat is in office, Republicans always say things like this, and when a Republican is in office, Democrats always say things like this? Is it because you're both idiots?
By that use of 'logic', if we aren't supposed to eat them, they should be able to swim faster.
Which party had "Drill baby drill" as part of their campaign platform? Which party is defending BP?
Are you seriously implying that the mainstream media isn't a puppet of both parties just the same?? Under how thick a layer of oil have you been living?
Thank you for saying what I have been thinking my entire life. I recall this being Obama's Katrina in many media outlets. More evidence that politics == religion returns true.
BP will keep any compensation claims in court until a more favorable (READ: Republican) administration is in office to sweep the whole thing away (note I said away, it's already been swept under the rug, or the ocean as it were). If you don't like it, stop voting Republican. Jeez, they've come out & publicly said they want to dismantle the EPA...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Pics, or it didn't happen. I'd also like tests done to certify that this oil did, in fact, come from the Deepwater Horizon spill.
Here are the scary looking picture:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358861/BP-Gulf-oil-spill-Shocking-images-prove-seabed-STILL-coated.html
vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
How is anyone supposed to make an assessment of this story? There is no data presented, no links to scientific articles, and the quotation referenced 'around the wellhead' where of course you would expect severe effects.
I realize this is Slashdot, but surely there has to be a minimal standard for reporting on a technical site.
In 10 Million years or so, we have our future oil there. Awesome!
"Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
In other news... peak oil hasn't been reached since we now have an ample supply on the Gulf of Mexico floor.
Under 1000ft, seawater is usually under 4C. All the processes and critters that break down the oil work much slower in the cold. A lot of that area will probably remain dead until more silt falls over it and its recolonized from scratch. This is sad, but I doubt it was unexpected by anyone who knew anything.
It's too difficult for Demicans and Republocrats to see beyond party stereotypes? Or, really, anyone for that matter.
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
to pass the cost of fixing their mess on to consumers. Oil is a commodity, if they raise their prices, everyone else will take their business elsewhere.
I've always suspected that if Gore had orchestrated the Iraq War Part Deux, the dems would have been hawks, and the repubs would have been doves.
Politics isn't about core values, it's about what team you're on.
You know I think it's about time to start killing off the oil companies. Stop funding their stupid little games with our environment. Take their patent portfolios. Then using some of them to form some real renewable energy systems that the average person can afford and use and the average handy man or woman can put together if they want. And I'm not talking about those "make your gas go further" type schemes.
Perhaps I'm missing something but there must be a resource out there on the net with real tested results of something within reach of the average DIY that can relieve us of this dependence on money hungry dumb asses (or smart asses if you look at the con) like those execs.
The American government needs to step up to the plate and hit a home run on these jerks. When they fine them they should also force them to allocate all of their research funds and the fines on alternative, renewable and environmentally friendly solutions to our energy requirements. Things like better cleaner manufactured long run batteries for electric vehicles. Forced subsidies paid from their coffers to make these available to everyone. Force them to cut their ties with the vehicle manufacturers that are stalling the progress forward in this technology. Etc. Blah blah. I can go on like many people can. But it comes down to the powers that be, the ones voted in, to turn up and take the heat because that's why they are up there in the first place!!!
We don't really have to dig for it anymore if we can just scrape it off the sea-floor instead... *groan*
this was the catalyst that causes the world to end in 2012?
Just sayin.
-@|
I find that doubly funny. The president who is supposed to part of the party fighting against things like this is actually supporting it. Just about everyone is wrong. The lesson no one took from the spill is that the people who are supposed to check on oil rigs and make sure nothing bad happens are absolutely incompetent. Hilarious.
It's not adequate to know that the layer is 4 inches thick if we don't know the area the layer covers. If it's a square mile, who cares? If it's 100 square miles, it may have some practical significance. Alarmist articles like this are irresponsible.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
No political fallout at all. None.
:(){
10 centimeters, that's like a decimeter right. Why not say that.
"Knocking these animals out of the food chain will, in time, affect species relevant to fisheries."
Gotta love that.
"Hey, turns out we've devastated the local environment!"
"Why should I care?"
"But whole species could die, or be pushed to the brink of extinction!"
"Meh."
"Well... fishermen could lose their jobs!"
"Oh, that is a big deal! They'd better get right on that."
"Hm, how can I put this... You'll have to pay more for fish, and Your Tax Dollars* will have to be used to solve the problem!"
"TO ACTION!"
(* Your Tax Dollars are not actually yours.)
Bow-ties are cool.
"That's not OUR oil, you can't prove anything. THAT oil must have come from somewhere else, our well is sealed."
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Ok I just cant take it any longer. It is "toe" the line not "tow"
Fuck me, it not that difficult, simple common sense and comprehension. Where would you tow the line to?
the people who are supposed to check on oil rigs and make sure nothing bad happens are absolutely incompetent
Well, that's not entirely true. They're actually quite competent...they just work for the oil companies and thus their opinions are drowned out by the "cha-ching" sound the executives eyes make. GW made absolutely sure there was no one who would slow down an oil operation anywhere in the gubment. And, yes, the spineless coward Dems aren't any better. Time to stop throwing our votes away on the two major parties!
Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
http://www.workorspoon.com
We need to stop relying on fossil fuel
yeah , yo , fuck whitey
I wish they worked with us. Trust me. They're definitely incompetent. The prior combination of incompetent and lazy meant that the desk jockeys approved everything rather than actually learn something and the guys in the field just looked for non-grounded equipment and checked the dates on certification rather than anything that would materially affect well control. This may have looked the same as bought, but it's not. The current combination of incompetent and scared means that the desk jockeys still don't know what they're looking at so they blanket deny everything. Either way, they're still incompetent because they pay way less than the oil companies and they don't want to hire anyone who does know what they're doing because they got the knowledge working for the oil companies.
It's the stinkin corexit. They were told not to use it, they did anyway. They claimed the oil was just "gone" and claimed success, but no, it was on the floor.
http://www.google.com/search?q=dispersant+corexit
Conspiracy or not, doesn't matter - the rig blew up, they dumped crap in the water, made the problem disappear from view, and now the GOM is messed up and oil is more expensive now.
Thanks, BP. Appreciate it. Hope it was worth it.
Flappinbooger isn't my real name
Offtopic, but that is a very interesting link you have posted, and to my eye, looks correct.
I'm a dual Australian and American citizen, so am familiar with the politics of both countries and the recent debates re health care in the US. In Australia we have universal, single-payer health care and like 99% of people here I believe that is a good thing. However, your link led me to take a look at the constitutional situation with regards to healthcare matters here. The Australian Constitution is not dissimilar to the US one - both set up a system of Federal Govt. with certain powers, with other powers remaining with the States.
Lo and behold, implementing Australia's universal healthcare system DID require a change to the Constitution:
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/general/constitution/par5cha1.htm
That is the Australian equivalent of section 8 of the US Constitution, setting out the powers of the Federal Government. Cast your eye down it and you will see one that breaks the normal numbering scheme - between paragraph 23 and 24 you have a random paragraph 'xxiiiA' that allows them to legislate regarding healthcare. It was indeed inserted to allow UHC to be implemented in Australia in the mid-70s.
Given this, and given the large scale similarities with the US Consititution, it does indeed seem as if any such system implemented in America would require section 8 of the US Constitution to be amended. Interesting how this is an issue that has seemingly been overlooked in the debate.
We don't see anything but newly clean beaches...
Oh yeah, other than:
Multiple 'washups' of bottom life on the beach (mostly snails and algae, depending on the prevailing currents).
Recently a 'crop' of small fish (minnows) washed up like a cloud of algae in the shore currents. It was cleaned up by the next day.
I play on the beaches from PC to PCOLA all season (~ 3-5 days a week, if just for a liitle while; even when its 27%, COLD for me) and have never had an 'issue' that lasted more than that day or so...
Ever seen separated salad dressing from the side view? Where is the emulsified stuff verses other stuff? Where do the solids end up?
While you are absolutely correct in your premise that Earth has a major problem with overfishing (some would even say, a crisis), and that we need to significantly reduce our catch, to say that we simply 'aren't supposed to eat them' is a bit rich. Humans developed tools, such as spears for fishing in rivers and shallow coastal areas, for catching fish very early on in our evolution. We've been eating them for hundreds of thousands of years, so even if we weren't meant to eat them originally, I think we can say they are a natural and acceptable food source for us now.
To take that a step further, we can't run down and kill many land-based animals with our bare hands either. We developed tools (bows and arrows, spears, boomerangs, you name it) to hunt them. Are we 'not supposed' to eat them either?
Given this, and given the large scale similarities with the US Consititution, it does indeed seem as if any such system implemented in America would require section 8 of the US Constitution to be amended. Interesting how this is an issue that has seemingly been overlooked in the debate.
Lots of Republicans, conservatives, libertarians and tea partiers have been saying it is Unconstitutional (and have been going as far back as HillaryCare in the mid-90s, if not sooner if you want to get into the Medicare/Medicaid debate too). Two judges have ruled it to be Unconstitutional so far and it is making its way up to the Supreme Court for review. When confronted, then Speaker Pelosi and numerous other Democrats refused to acknowledge even the notion that it might be Unconstitutional and often resorted to condescension of constituents and reporters that dared to ask.
In an effort to try to get around the Constitutional argument, the Obama administration has tried to claim that it is a tax and not a penalty, while during "debate" Congressional Democrats argued that it was a penalty and not a tax. They've argued that it is interstate commerce because the effect of choosing NOT to participate in commerce is an act of commerce in itself. And if I hear one more person try to justify it under the "general welfare" clause when they clearly have no clue what the "general welfare" means (read both the Federalist and Anti-federalist papers, it meant the overall ability for government to maintain itself and function, not welfare in the modern notion), I think my head is going to explode.
People have their biases and they like to seek out information and sources that confirm rather than challenge their assertions and assumptions... those on the left whom limit themselves to only "friendly" sources, plus those that do seek out "enemy" sources but dismiss everything the opposition has to say anyway, might have had a hard time finding coherent arguments to why ObamaCare wasn't a good thing, well, other than the far left that cried that ObamaCare just didn't go far enough. Do a search on google for "obamacare unconstitutional" between Feb 1, 2009 and Sep 30, 2009 and you'll get 167k hits and that was still months before final passage. Remember the Democrats canceling their town halls so they wouldn't have to face angry constituents?
Stop Koolaid Politics
Hmm... this tells me that his administration isn't as bad as paid political operatives, maybe such as yourself, make him out to be. Boy you guys come out early to fling mud... wait a second... what was your point? and how is it relevant? and... how the heck is it insightful? This shit, the shenanigans at the MMS, the environmental rape, the greed... this is the mess of Republicans. But go ahead... try to blame the president, you guys have less than 2 years to get your shit together and FIND SOMEONE ELECTABLE ROFLMAOKTHXBAI
The Deepwater Horizon oil spill released over 6 times as much oil as the Valdez did. Very little of it was actually cleaned up. Of the oil which even made it to the surface, mostly BP just dumped enough dispersants down to cause the oil to sink back down to the ocean floor. Where exactly did people think it was going to go anyways?
---- I'll take you in a Hunt deathmatch any day.
it will take forever to find clever words ... by which time these bands
of oil well be fossilized and generations 10000000 years from now
will be trying to figure it all out.
However barges of muck dredged from channels in bays as well as up and down the Mississippi
can be used to cover these layers over and would help in a near sighted way.
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
Under 1000ft, seawater is usually under 4C. All the processes and critters that break down the oil work much slower in the cold.
My blog post on Cleaning up the Gulf of Mexico calls for pumping oxygenated surface water to the oil plumes (... it was actually a slashdot reader's idea - I originally said to pump air). Specific locations on the ocean floor would probably be easier to target than moving plumes.
It'd be quite an engineering effort (and who knows if the Navy would be willing to share any of their portable nuclear reactors), but ... I don't see any other cleanup ideas being discussed.
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
...wondered where it went.!
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
I scored some killer home heating oil off that BP dude. But it turns out he wasted the sea.
Gently reply
Yes, this is entirely Obama's fault. The entire federal bureaucracy turns on a dime every time the president changes.
And do you also believe that under a Republican president such as John McCain, who campaign under the banner of 'smaller government' and are working on actively making it harder for the EPA to enforce existing regulations, would have resulted in anything different happening in the gulf? Other than perhaps having two or three more drilling rigs working within sight of the one that blew up.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
And don't forget that GW(and his cronies) also had/have significant interests in Haliburton, the company that did the work that failed in the gulf...
As if destabilizing world politics and the WFC wasn't bad enough, now they are destroying the environment; one last FU to the world!
America, the land of the corrupt, immoral and gullible, and the occasional balanced individual; Don't give up BO!
I mean sure some people will care, but wont care enough to spend their money or their time in a way that will actually be effective. And thats why our society is a failure, because we dont care about the past or the future. All we care about is right now, we only care after something has become a problem and its too late. We love to give speeches on tv, raise awareness, use tax dollars to solve problems, see our politicians go to war on something but the bottom line is its always in response to something and never to prevent anything. So big companies are still allowed to screw everything up because they are making money right now. Instead of focusing time and money on finding out ways to meet our energy needs and keep our planet safe we just keep drilling and will do until its too late and then we will get serious about it once we have royally messed up everything.
I really wish the human race would just die already. This planet is better off without us and so is the rest of the universe. If we dont die soon we will just go to mars and colonize it with our teeth whitening strips, compressed cheese in a can and a swifer floor dusters till we ruin that planet also. Human beings are nothing more than parasites.
You seem to have missed the truth that 2 judges have ruled that the federal health care reform law in unconstitutional while 2 have ruled that it is constitutional. As a U.S. citizen who is looking forward to the Supreme Court striking down a law that forces citizens to buy over priced insurance policies from corrupt scum bag corporations I can also see that a single payer system would be good for the welfare of the entire nation, from individual citizens to all corporations excluding the scum bags currently ripping off citizens.
So I have to ask, that super Koolaid you are drinking that blinds you from reality, is it a bum trip or a super high cause I wouldn't want a bum trip but if the fantasy world your living in is any fun perhaps it would be worthwhile to take a sip.
What lazy SOBs, giving a date of 2012 and all, since the world will end.
Suck it up, refine it, and sell it!
I know capitalism is a dirty word 'round these parts but what else is there to do? Wring our hands and burn BP execs at the stake (while filling our gas tanks, heating our homes, and cooking dinner...) ??
The constitution is only brought up when it fits someone's agenda
Where exactly did people think it was going to go anyways?
They sprinkled their magic Oil-B-Gone all over it and *POOF* it disappeared! Thats where!! No harmful effects guaranteed!!
Tm
Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
I realize that these scientists think they have found oil at the bottom of the Gulf, but let me assure you that it is nothing but wine from fermented dinosaurs. Nothing to see , move along.
Why bother with all of that laborious drilling when there are huge amounts of oil just sitting there, waiting to be vacuumed off the ocean floor?...
Vacuum Baby, Vacuum!
In economics, they call this externalised costs, because they dont cost the company. The real cost of the oil spill should be calculated this way: How much would it cost to replace each dead animal, and each destroyed wildlife habitat. ie. how much would u have to pay someone to breed replacement animals in captivity, and how much would u have to pay construction workers (or whatever the underwater equivalent is), to reconstruct the seabed.
if I spilled paint all over on my neighbour's lawn, I'm sure I had to pay full replacement cost of his lawn, so why shouldnt it be the same when a corporation messes up the environment like that?
(posted ac coz although i signed up for an acct years ago, i rarely post that I dont bother to log in)
...I know capitalism is a dirty word 'round these parts...
OK, I'm good with a capitalist approach. Seems like a fine way to do things, so long as it doesn't involve being publicly funded (also a capitalist ethic, I would say). What is your capitalist solution if its not profitable to get the oil out? What is the capitalist solution to restoring the sea bed life?
Maybe BP could show everyone what a big boy it truly is by picking up what it dropped? Or are we still to young to do so? And need a parent to do it for us? And maybe take the cost of wiping our dripping bung, out of our allowance for the week? LOL
Yet another who believes in green revolution: just a big scam making the Monsantos, Syngentas and other Big Crooks filthy rich at the cost of starvation.
Overfishing is an example of the tragedy of the commons, not that they aren't supposed to be eaten. The problem is that no one uses the fish as a resource owns the fish as a resource.
The Oil in the gulf is just being discovered at the ocean floor, Think of all the affected areas down their. President Obama did very little to stop BP from running the show back then and now.
You seem to have missed the truth that 2 judges have ruled that the federal health care reform law in unconstitutional while 2 have ruled that it is constitutional
I know the gp said that shit, not you. I don't bother trying to teach facts to teabaggers. You seem capable of learning and appreciating relevant information though, so here you go. http://www.truth-out.org/bush-appointed-federal-judge-tosses-out-challenge-to-health-reform67476
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
and the perfect disguise above.
Under the cities lies a heart made of ground
But the humans will give no love
You see I've been through the desert on a horse with no name
It felt good to be out of the rain
In the desert you can remember your name
Cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain
La la la la la
La la la la la
The oil companies screwed you again .....
Its not the years, its the mileage
I'll grant you that MightyMartian referenced some common stereotypes of conservatives that aren't optimally conducive to bridging cultural and political barriers. But on the relevant facts, the corruption is all corporate. Al Gore has pediatric oral Bidenitis, sure, but what matters is influence on government policy and no environmentalist has the power and financial resources to bribe the tens of billions of dollars out of Congress, which the oil industry receives every year.
http://www.grist.org/article/2009-09-22-fossil-fuel-subsidies-dwarf-clean-energy-subsidies-obama-wants
The only way environmentalists ever get any policy outcomes to go our way is by being absolutely right, having all the science on our side. And we have.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.abstract
About that 2% or 3%, they're really tenured professors who can't be fired, former scientists turned corporate shills.
http://www.desmogblog.com/lindzen-wipes-hands-clean-of-oil-and-gas
Lindzen has not done respectable work for some years; since he started taking oil and gas money, not coincidentally.
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
There is a little bit of truth in the view from both sides no doubt but either way, for BP to say, "no mas" or for her/they to suggest the Gulf will become a giant dead zone is just over the top.
Don't be an idiot! Who has $BILLIONS to lose? BP. Whose life will be harder because of what she's saying? Samantha Joye. Her only corrupt motivation would be to shut up and pretend BP is not lying. That would be more convenient for her.
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
That's how this whole mess started.
And anybody who's been on the internet for more than a few days knows what happens when the oil hits the bottom...
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
They're just putting some back for later use, innit?
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
Stop bitching about US healthcare reform already. I'm sure you have enough entrenched interests to keep it broken for the foreseeable future. You'll keep on paying more and receiving worse care than the rest of the Western countries, due to corporate propaganda managing to convince you that government is bad and anything that benefits people is also bad since it's socialism. You'll continue paying a robber baron and have him have more controll over your life than a democratically elected government you might actually influence some way. So relax.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Time to stop throwing our votes away on the two major parties!
We tried that in the UK and it didn't turn out very well. At the last election the Lib Dems had not been in power for over 90 years and were seen as largely irrelevant. They made bold pledges, even signing a contract saying they would not raise student fees.
At the election the result left neither of the main two parties with a majority so they had to form a coalition with the Lib Dems. Within the first year they had raised student fees, not just by a bit but to triple the previous amount.
Moral: they are all lying bastards.
A more effective option is to sue the oil companies again and again until crime doesn't pay for them. Hard work and needs a lot of funding, but realistically you can't rely on politicians or compete with the funding the oil companies offer them. At least in court there is an attempt to level the playing field, assuming both sides have competent legal teams.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Unfortunately you appear to not understand British politics well, as the Lib Dems did not exist prior to the 80s, and were a merged party of other liberal groups. Also, the fees issue isn't simple and certainly will not lead to anyone paying 3 times as much as people do at the moment, except for the very rich. Please do some more in-depth research rather than just reading columns in newspapers.
BP will keep any compensation claims in court until a more favorable (READ: Republican) administration is in office to sweep the whole thing away.
Yeah we could go with this hyperbole or we could go with the fact that BP has already paid $3.9bn to businesses and personal claims, and $1.2bn in government claims, and that the claims for it's escrow fund are being run by an independant company.
But yeah oil company actually paying for claims isn't anywhere near as good a headline to whore karma.
I didn't say it was his fault, I just said it was his legacy. I'm quite certain that the civil rights movement and the Apollo program would have happened with or without JFK, but many people refer to those things as his "legacy."
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
The Lib Dems probably had no option but to go along with the raise in tuition fees, or the Tories would break up the coalition. Breaking up the coalition meant no AV referendum, and no chance of electoral reform - a once in a generation opportunity. They had the Lib Dems over a barrel. Once electoral reform is in place, more left wing parties can get into parliament and reverse tuition fee increases. Maybe.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
You'll keep on paying more and receiving worse care than the rest of the Western countries
Yet this has nothing to do with our highly regulated insurance system that posts single-digit profit margins.
Until you know what the problem isn't, perhaps you shouldnt stick your two ignorant cents into it?
Yes, I'm quite certain that republicans are very well known for citing references with names like "treehugger." And I don't see how discussing the oil spill could possibly be deemed not relevant to a discussion of the oil spill.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
This is a shining example of how immature political discourse in the UK has become.
'Promises' made during an election campaign are made on the assumption that the party making them gains an absolute majority in parliament, and is actually in a position to fulfil them. Because absolute majorities are the rule in Westminster rather than the exception, the British public and media are used to being able to hold parties in government to the promises they made during their campaign.
The whole thing falls apart when no party has an absolute majority, as is the case right now, because no party is in a position to fulfil its promises. They simply don't have the votes on their own.
We have a coalition between the Tories and Lib Dems right now, and the expectation of the public and the media at this point seems to be that both the Tory manifesto and the Lib Dem manifesto are implemented in full. This is a ludicrous expectation.
In a coalition, each party has to compromise on some (or most, in the case of the smaller party) of its policies, in order to have most (or some) of its policies implemented. The alternative is to not participate and have none of your policies implemented.
The sad fact is that this doesn't make good headlines and is hard to explain to the knuckle-draggers who read the Sun and Daily Record, who would rather have politics exposed to them as the kind of Punch and Judy performance that you see in PMQs, as opposed to the practicalities and ins and outs of actually running the country.
I've got all but one of the presentations (ppt or pdf) from the Alaska Marine Science Symposium in Jan 2010. Two of the talks had to be approved by the White House. There need to be many many more of these types of events, but at least it is a start. http://tinyurl.com/BpLessons
... even though there will soon be NO fish left for humans to eat.
Not even from aquaculture? aka "farm raised fish"?
The problem with fearmongering is going too far (too far too fast?) and being laughed at.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Yeah... suck baby suck.
(Sorry)
Keep in mind political parties in the UK, Canada and Australia, actually mean something, they are there all the time and do function as the point for members to seek election.
In the US the political parties a hollow marketing memes and have no real existence apart from getting involved in all sorts of shenanigans to block new parties forming and of course to defeat the opposition marketing team.
In the US with candidates being 'elected' in the primaries and with those primaries being pretty much open to all comers. The smart person will ignore the election and focus on those primaries and quite simple get their candidate or more accurately both candidates up for the election.
Really smart as only a very small percentage vote in the primaries making it easier to get your say, Labour Democrat and Green Republican up. It would also make for a very amicable policy based election, with both politically content for the other to win, ego would still play a role.
In the US they have well and truly stacked the deck against any new party attempting to form or to gain any significance. So the only real chance is to flip the primaries on their head and drive out the corporate selections before the election even starts.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
"Only after the last tree has been cut down, Only after the last river has been poisoned, Only after the last fish has been caught, Only then will you find that money cannot be eaten." - Cree Indian Prophecy
Yeah... drill baby drill. Oh, hang on...
Drill baby drill! We need a sane energy policy or our already struggling economy will take another dive soon. Things aren't looking at all good given the unrest in the Middle East right now.
More drilling sounds like a plan to me as long as basic safety procedures are followed. It took multiple violations for this well to fail. Thousands of rigs have operated there for many years with no problems. After Deepwater Horizon I'm sure all of the companies involved realize there's no net cost savings in skimping on safety.
On a more scientific note, I notice there's absolutely no quantitative information in the linked article. Exactly how much of the 615,000 square miles of the Gulf of Mexico seafloor was affected? I'm guessing it was far less than 1%, but of course that wouldn't sound nearly so alarming...
According to Wikipedia, about 5 million barrels of oil were released into the Gulf, at 42 gallons per barrel for 210,000,000 gallons. Also according to Wikipedia, the total amount of water in the Gulf is 660 quadrillion gallons (6.6e15 gallons). So the oil released represented about 0.0000003% of the total volume of the seawater. If you released the same percentage of oil into a full standard bathtub (36 gallons) you'd be releasing about 0.0004 grams of oil...not even close to a single drop. Also reflect on the fact that around half the oil evaporated quite soon after the spill.
This is not to say such spills are negligible, but I hope the numbers put things into a bit more of a perspective. Newspapers sell (and websites get hit) based on how alarming the story sounds...
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
It should also be noted, from TFA, that we're talking about the immediate vicinity of the wellhead, rather than a substantial part of the Gulf.
It was expected, by pretty much all the sane people, that the area right around the gusher would getted messed up. What wasn't expected (and what TFA discusses not at all) was that a substantial portion of the Gulf would be messed up.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
That's old news. I'm talking about the PRESENT. Bush was constantly pounded by the media, about Katrina, even 5 years later.
I don't see the same happening to Obama, and it's only been half a year.
Information wants to be expensive AND wants to be free. So you have Value vs. Cheap distribution fighting each other.
I guess they didn't realize that if they started to pump money into the media to avoid any focus what so ever on the stories linking to the oil spill, that it would have to continue for a long time. Looks like someone dropped the ball, because man can finally write about what is happening over there....it is sad to see, that this being the worst natural disaster in mankind's history with effects to be felt for another 20 years at least, got so easily swept under the rug.
You know there was so much stuff going on, even Kevin Costner tried to get involved by inventing some machines to scoop up the oil (maybe it will be useful for this task). We never heard much about it though...because we were never allowed to. Obama made sure that all news outlets did not spend too much time reviewing what was going in, and set up the coast guard to patrol the area so as to avoid any photos to be taken.
The Lib Dems had two choices. They could have made their cast iron guarantee singed contract flagship pledge hawked around every university in the country a condition of forming a coalition. They could have formed a coalition with Labour, a party more closely aligned to their political ideals than the often diametrically opposed Conservatives.
Far from being the ones under pressure to accept a deal they were in a position to put either Labour or the Torys in power. I think they dismissed Labour's offers early on because they didn't want to be associated with Brown et. al, but since he was doomed from the moment the results came in anyway they could have made a leadership contest a condition of joining.
They were in a strong position but let the Torys walk all over them. Just look at what jobs they end up with. Deputy Prime Minister is a non-job, no portfolio, originally created by Thatcher to shut Hesseltine up. The Business Secretary has only limited powers because the Treasury sets economic policies and budgets, with Cable now marginalised even more for speaking his mind and unable to deliver the banking sector reforms he promised.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Yeah. They could've formed a coalition with Labour, and the only problem would've been that they wouldn't have had a majority. Oh, and that Labour were pretty sketchy about whether they'd even be able to get all their MPs to vote for an AV referendum. And Labour are infamous for treating their manifesto pledges like toilet paper. Apart from that, no problems.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
Of course there has to be compromise, but so far the Lib Dems have not had their way on a single major policy. Lots of smaller, mainly civil liberties based ones, but the tempering of harsh Tory ideology has failed to materialise.
If there was one policy they should have picked as a condition of joining the coalition it was student fees. AV is all very well but they will probably lose the referendum anyway, and even if they do get it they have already agreed to take democratic power away by fixing parliamentary terms at 5 years.
A coalition does not mean that the bigger party gets everything they want and fobs the smaller one off with a few concessions here and there.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It is true that they would have needed support from some other small parties but no serious effort to organise it was made. Also Labour are no worse than the Torys when it comes to manifesto and election promises. How many times have they said "we won't raise taxes" and then within 3 months of getting in raise taxes?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
http://www.grist.org/article/2009-09-22-fossil-fuel-subsidies-dwarf-clean-energy-subsidies-obama-wants
Not only are there perfectly good substitutes, there are superior competitors which just haven't acquired the favor of Republican politicians and the accompanying tens of billions of dollars of annual subsidies that come.
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
You seem to have missed the truth that 2 judges have ruled that the federal health care reform law in unconstitutional while 2 have ruled that it is constitutional.
Maybe you should read up on these cases. There also have been a number of Obamacare cases that have been dropped because they are frivolous. By your remarkably weak logic, this would indicate that all of the cases are frivolous. The thing to remember here is that these are all different cases and the grounds for the cases are different as well. All it takes is for one of the unconstitutional verdicts to be upheld by the Supreme Court and that's pretty much it.
My take is that it will happen, even with two justices appointed by Obama. There are several blatant abuses of the Constitution in there. And the law has been set up (no severability clause) so that it stands or falls as a whole. I think that's an indication of the utter stupidity and cluelessness of the people who made the law in the first place.
I slipped a decimal or two...the 6.6e15 gallons should have been 6.6e17 gallons. I was off by only a single decimal when I did the calculation though, it should have been 0.00000003%, or one part in about 3 billion.
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
It was expected, by pretty much all the sane people, that the area right around the gusher would getted messed up. What wasn't expected (and what TFA discusses not at all) was that a substantial portion of the Gulf would be messed up.
Really? For what value of "messed up" would that be? Another appeal to emotion with no quantitative meat to back it up.
The thing that's really "messed up" is the state of the Gulf economy due to the 0 administration's moratorium on drilling. We're all paying the price at the pump as well.
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
Hank Paulson made his "sky is falling" extortion demands on 15 September 2008. President Obama wasn't even elected until November 4 2008, and inaugurated 20 January 2009. And in case you want to blame that crash on the "Democratic" Congress, it was caused by CDOs & CDSs, bogus commodities made possible by deregulations penned by Republicans, specifically the Gramm-Leech-Bliley Act and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. Phil Gramm, whose wife Wendy made millions off the corrupt, dishonest speculative schemes he legalized, was primary author of both.
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
You chose to buy that Chevy Tahoe, asshole, in spite of the freely available and well-documented facts of global warming and peak oil. Your willful ignorance is not my responsibility. Fuck off.
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
The US School system is not single-payer. Are you retarded?
Amtrak? Let's fund Amtrak the same amount, per user, that we fund drivers via highway construction and maintenance, law enforcement, etc. It's hard to bitch about Amtrak when your driving ass is subsidized by thousands of dollars of public funds.
The USPS? Their problem is not that it's a single entity. Their problem is that technology has made them obsolete. This is totally tangential to your argument.
The SSI Retirement system? Not in debt. It will have trouble meeting future obligations, but that's largely because we've robbed SSI to cut taxes for the wealthy.
Haha. Only the bottom 5% lack the money to purchase health insurance? You're loony if you think that's the case.
Sidenote: Why'd you change your username again, Commodore_64Love? Karma too low from your trolling?
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
[Comment From Steve ] Methane has been the "hidden" impact of the spill. Rarely, if ever has it been mentioned in media reports. Is there any way to measure the long term impact of the methane released into the Gulf?
11:21
Mandy Joye: Steve-I agree that methane has received nearly enough attention. We can measure it's long term impact because it has a unique signature--the Macondo methane isotopically unique compared to methane from other nearby reservoirs and for the Gulf in general: it has a 12C to 13C ratio of about -60. The oil is -27. So we can track methane into the microorganisms that consume -- and then into the organisms that consume those microbes -- by monitoring the carbon isotope composition. These measurements take some time but we are doing this to track the path of methane through the system.
SCIENCE: It works, bitches!
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
Yeah, and in 1000 years scientists will use those ratios to draw conclusions about age/climate/whatever, and will get completely bogus results because they will not know about the effect of this spill. BP has damaged future research! :-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Invalid assumptions. Oil doesn't equally disperse and life isn't equally dispersed either. If the *heavy* oil drifts to the bottom, as the article suggests you're looking at layering the *life rich* ocean floor with 341 gallons per square mile. Too much for my taste.
And realistically its more like a 10,000 square mile affected, 21,000 gallons per square mile. = more than enough to kill off all life.
Y'know, in case anybody here is interested in the Science and not just bitching that the science isn't already delivered to you. No, no, don't Google it, I can just fetch it for you, lazy bastards.
Knowable, documented facts include:
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
Because Republican's don't care at all about job losses. What they care about is making sure profits continue to flow to rich people. If a bunch of fisherman lose their jobs, who cares? They're little people.
Suck baby suck?
And thus modern civilization is utterly doomed, for we have likly already passed the world's peak of oil production. It's all going down from here and we are stuck, dependent on an economic system that requires growth to function. And we haven't even begun to TALK about transition. Just look at the related problem of global warming: we haven't even begun to DO anything substantial even though we have talked about it for a long time. We don't have a long time to make the change now. In fact even if we did something really drastic NOW it would still be too little, too late to avoid a crash, but I hope that we do something drastic because it would of course soften the fall. The world economy will fall apart like the house of cards it is and is it not doubtful if the governments can survive when the looting and rioting starts?
We live in "interesting" times good fellows. Better brace yourselves for the crash.
This was expected...The Obama administration declared there was no more oil left to clean up...but most scientists said that it probably sunk to the bottom and some expeditions confirmed this. We won't know the full extent of this disaster for 10 or 20 years perhaps. That doesn't mean we need to go and outlaw oil production, though. We just need to do it safer, and enforce the laws and regulations we already have. We can't live without oil...yet. Maybe someday, in 40-50 years or so, when we've developed processes to create synthetic oil in the quantities required, and alternative energy sources that are as efficient as gasoline, diesel, etc. I'm all for it. But I'm not for wrecking the world economy and shoving everybody back to the 1700's.
Nothing to see here but us trolls...move along...
Invalid assumptions. Oil doesn't equally disperse and life isn't equally dispersed either. If the *heavy* oil drifts to the bottom, as the article suggests you're looking at layering the *life rich* ocean floor with 341 gallons per square mile. Too much for my taste.
And realistically its more like a 10,000 square mile affected, 21,000 gallons per square mile. = more than enough to kill off all life.
Invalid assumptions indeed. First off, most oil is lighter than water and floats. Secondly, the majority of the oil left the Gulf waters through various mechanisms. From "Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: The Fate of the Oil" report produced by the Congressional Research Service:
That leaves a grand total of 22% of the oil unaccounted for, with an unknown amount being biodegraded by oil-eating bacteria.
Given that between 24 million gallons and 70+ million gallons of oil are released into North American waters each year from natural seepage, the ocean ecosystem clearly has the ability to thrive despite some oil release. It's quite likely the damage from the Deepwater Horizon spill is being exaggerated by the environuts for the usual reasons.
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
I have no doubt the heavy tars will be the last to degrade and will sit around for years. But there have been widely varying assessments of the lingering damage. And the scientists themselves widely disagree as to the extent. This study is the largest assessed damaged and will have to be verified by others if really science and not politics. If there was lingering damage visible at the surface, I am sure the network news and CNN would be showing it endlessly. They have not.
That all may very well be true. a federal level, single payer healthcare system could be GREAT for the USA. It just happens to be unconstitutional at the moment. The Constitution was designed to be amended and has been many times. Let's just amend it to say "Health care is a really important thing and we all now think the Federal government should offer it." Boom. Done. Problem solved.
If healthcare is really that important, where's the movement to amend the Constitution to allow the Feds to supply it? Why weren't the Democrats saying something like, "we want to pass some legislation now to improve things, but also want to amend the Constitution because that's what needs to be done to really take care of this issue."
My cynical opinion is that both the Democrats and Republicans want to ignore the Constitution's limits on what the Federal government is allowed to do*. They want to lob anything they want to do into the commerce and general welfare clauses so the Federal government has limitless power.
* Unless the other guys are trying to do something they don't like. Then they'll trot out the Constitution to keep the other guys from doing anything.
And your source for "around half the oil evaporated quite soon after the spill"? I've never seen oil evaporate in any timeframe I'd call soon. Of course we're talking crude oil here. So without having the assay, it's impossible to say how much of the oil evaporated. It'd be nice, if your number was right, but I suspect it's a bunch of prospective future oil in the form of the male bovine variety. I have a suspicion where you got that figure. Granted the methane evaporated, but that figure is separate from the crude figure.
But as for the article and "there's now a life killing layer of oil near the well area", all I can say is "Thank you Capt'n Obvious".
Plus I expect your analysis is very flawed. While overall the Gulf is probably going to be ok, That is not to say that area that had oil on the surface/below the surface is not going to be devastated for the next decade. History supports my theory. The Exxon Spill and the previous spill close in to Mexico. The area that was affected by the spill was some of the richest shrimping grounds in the Gulf. I predict a lot of really good bargains in the Gulf states. They might even be able to compete with Michigan soon for land value.
One thing pretty much everyone is missing is that 20-30 years from now, if no more tragedies occur the marine life in that area is going to skyrocket and be even richer than before from all the decomposed nutrient rich oil. This is also a historical fact. But what affect it has on global diversity and the long-term evolutionary scheme of things I can't say. That's the scary part. Trying to project the really long term impacts of our stupidity/greed as a species on this planet. For such intelligent creatures we do a lot of really idiotic things. You know, overall, as a species.
Well, I guess we don't have to drill for oil anymore. We can just scoop it off from the bottom of the ocean.
Remember, that costs money, and BP would skin you and your family alive, and sell the results as wetsuits, if it meant making an extra cent per share next quarter.
You might not think that oil amount can affect much... but you'd be wrong. We had a biology project in my freshman year of college. We had a large fish tank, about 40-60 gallons or so, that housed a freshwater lake ecosystem (in balance). We did our studies and observations for lab off of it. For the last couple experiments they had us simulate pollution on the environment. They put in 1 tiny piece of cat food (nitrates), within a week the whole damn thing was decimated. About 1 mL volume of pollutant in a volume of about 150-225 L, so about 0.000004% to 0.000006% of the volume. Everything was dead. This is only off from your estimates by a decimal point. Keep that in mind. The numbers may make it seem mundane or negligible but it has a rather severe effect that you don't seem to be aware of. (and yes I'm aware that cat food = crude oil, but the toxicity for the oil is likely much higher than cat food nitrates)
Quote from random website
"Although coral reefs comprise less than 0.5 per cent of the ocean floor, it is estimated that more than 90 per cent of marine species are directly or indirectly dependent on them."
http://www.savethesea.org/STS%20ocean_facts.htm
So your example doesn't take into account the impact that the destruction of this specific area may have on the ecosystem.
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2010/11/23/global-fossil-fuel-and-renewable-subsidies/
"On a per unit of production basis, however, renewables had the largest subsidies with biofuels the highest at 5.1 cents per kilowatt hour, renewable energy for electricity generation at 5.0 cents per kilowatt-hour, nuclear energy at 1.7 cents per kilowatt hour, and fossil fuels at 0.8 cents per kilowatt hour.[xi] (See graph below.)The biofuels number is lower than actual because the calculation is based on taking the subsidies for the 8 countries and dividing by the total global biofuels production, rather than the biofuels production for just the 8 countries."
I had to buy the Tahoe. I enjoy skiing and need room for my dog, although I admit it is a bit marge for my morning commute alone. Global warming is a fraud. Peak oil a myth. Long live the American way of life!
an ill wind that blows no good
you guys have less than 2 years to get your shit together and FIND SOMEONE ELECTABLE
What are you talking about? Sarah Palin is totally going to get elected.
... and then she'll finally read my letters and realize I'm right for her and she's right for me and then invite me over for homemade pie and tell me she'll always be my mom but had thoughts about other relationships and she'd say how she secretly read my blog posts and totally agreed with my politics but couldn't say my name on air for legal reasons.
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
"After Deepwater Horizon I'm sure all of the companies involved realize there's no net cost savings in skimping on safety."
Yeah. I'm SURE of it.
I think what you mean to say is: after Deepwater Horizon, we're going to regulate these companies so strictly and give them such big fines for safety violations that they'll realize there's no net cost savings in skimping on safety. After we force them to pay for this massive ecological disaster that they caused.
ROFLMAO. Have you ever had anything to do with the drilling industry? Obviously not. I've had nearly 200 colleagues killed in the duration of my career in the North Sea, and having started to widen my career into North American basins, I've had to include memorials for another hundred dead Canadians (mostly) in the last couple of weeks. Nobody ever, in any industry, anywhere, gave a single under-powered fart (let alone a good shit) about "net cost savings", because nobody ever believes that they're going to get caught by this particular transgression of best-practice.
The proportion would be far higher than if you took into account that eventually (over a period of some tens of thousands of years, not that that matters if you're looking to downplay the impact of the spill ; how are your BP shares recovering?), the water will be dispersed through the whole of the ocean basins of the planet. So you can dilute the effects across that much greater a volume on that basis. ... until the proportion fell below the detection limits of your measurement technology(-ies). But might that provide unpleasant answers for you?
Of course, if you wanted to provide a more appropriate description of the distribution, you might wish to mention the proportion of the seabed covered within one mile of the well centre, the proportion within two miles, the proportion within three miles
You have some data to back up this assertion? Something like the composition of the hydrocarbon charge in the Macondo prospect, the temperature profile over the area in the appropriate time (has the oil left the surface yet? I wasn't bothered to listen to the American news while I was over there earlier this week.), ventilation effects ... and even then you'd be pushing the data really hard to get a +/- 50% estimate of the changes. That's taking no account of the unknown amount of oil that actually came out of the hole.
Does converting liquid toxic hydrocarbon pools on the surface of the sea into a less-visible but no less toxic clouds in the air which then drift through populated areas actually do anyone any benefit?
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Bullshit. All the nuke fluffers continue to say that THE NEXT VERSION WILL WORK. Never does.
So it's 10 cm thick. Over how large an area? Is it fallout from a plume, and is a mile wide, and 10 miles long? Is it 500 square miles?
How fast does oil degrade on the sea floor?
Compare to other natural disasters:
1. The Mississippi jumps it's banks and drops a foot of clay on hundreds of square miles of farm land.
2. A forest fire burns 1000 square miles.
3. Mount St. Helens blows it's top, and puts a foot of powdered volcanic glass downwind.
When the Exxon Valdez incident occurred, the environmentalists shrieked that it would never recover. Two years later, numbers were still down especially amoung the top preditors, (who both can move to the next by down the coast, and who have longer reproduction cycles) but all species known there before were present.
Third Career: Tree Farmer Second Career: Computer Geek First Career: Teacher, Outdoor Instructor, Photographer.
There is still oil on Alaskan beaches today. Today! The Valdez spill happened in 1989. 22 years later there is still oil on the beaches. You think this is ok? If that was a beach your kids played on you wouldn't be ok with that, even if "all species known there before were present". That's just bullshit talk to make people think everything is fine and not address the truth.
You are not thinking your position through if you are using the Valdez disaster (yes, disaster, stop trying to minimize it by calling it an "incident") as a model of success here.
Drill baby drill! We need a sane energy policy or our already struggling economy will take another dive soon.
Hurm... I'm not sure I buy this. Do you have some data?
Things aren't looking at all good given the unrest in the Middle East right now.
You're joking, right? When in the past 100 years has there not been unrest in the Middle East? I've lived through decades with many simultaneous wars going on there, depending on what you call "The Middle East" which can include or not include states such as Iran, Egypt, etc. depending on which definition you use. One fundamental constant: oil has a dollar value and someone's going to want to do that conversion.
More drilling sounds like a plan to me as long as basic safety procedures are followed.
Of course, and guaranteeing that takes time. Rushing the imposition of strong regulatory oversight because of an imagined crisis is reckless and irresponsible.
It took multiple violations for this well to fail.
I'd argue that it took one: prioritizing immediate returns over safety.
After Deepwater Horizon I'm sure all of the companies involved realize there's no net cost savings in skimping on safety
How many NEW buildings since 2001 have extra-wide stairwells, after seeing how many died in the twin towers because narrow stairs cause backups that prevent evacuation?
Sure, you sometimes hear of a success story in terms of companies smartening up, but it's usually in public-facing situations. For example, though the McDonalds coffee-in-lap suit is often made fun of because it sounds like a customer suing a company after doing something stupid, it's actually a great example of where a corporation tried to game profit/loss/safety and lost. What McDonalds did is they ignored dozens of cases where people were sent to emergency rooms because their coffee was too hot, a warning from the FDA that their coffee was too hot and produced and internal memo that was turned up during discovery that argued that the cost of law suits from burn victims was less than the cost of upgrading their coffee beans, which they would have to do in order to produce coffee that tasted good at lower temperatures.
When you think about companies "realizing" that there's no net savings in skimping on safety, think about the guy that wrote that memo. Think about the mentality that says, "I'll never get caught, and this will result in a small uptick in profit, for which I'll be rewarded."
Just looking at dilutions will not tell you the whole story. Calculate the volume of living biomass vs volume of oil thrown on it. Of course sea volume is massive, what gets critically impacted is the LIFE in the water, not the water.
It's too bad the US government didn't accept any help from the other countries who offered to come help clean up the oil from the beginning. Instead of doing the right thing, the Obama administration seems to have done what was requisite to push climate change politics on the people and also help the price of oil go up by not allowing companies to drill in the gulf.