Keep a Boot the Neck of BP
in [Motorcycles]
|
From: don (Calgary) on 23 May 2010 21:44 We are not getting a lot of detailed coverage regarding the Gusher in the Gulf in these parts. From what I am seeing and reading, there appears to be complacency setting in about this spill. Sure the powers that be are parroting the typical party line. BP, "We are doing all we can" and the government talking heads are posturing about keeping a boot to the neck of BP. What concerns me are the attitudes expressed, especially those of BP executives. I see the CEO of BP, Tony Hayward, quoted as saying the environmental impact of the spill will be very, very modest. Ouch! Talk about underselling an ecological disaster of unprecedented proportions. I see the US government making noises about applying the correct amount of oversight. Is the US government risking too much with this go along strategy, by simply reviewing and commenting on BP's plans? Should they not be more proactive and be leading the discussions on first, how to stop the flow of oil and then, what needs to be done to clean the mess up? I was thinking the government might be concerned adopting a more prescriptive approach could make BP less responsible, financially, for the cleanup down the road. BP could take the position, they did what the government told them to do, and therefore are not responsible for the results. Bottom line, this thing is a mess and it will be years, maybe a decade before we know what the environmental impacts of the spill will be. I hope BP is ready for a very long commitment to cleaning up the region and are willing to dig very deep into their pockets to support the people in the gulf whose lives will be ruined by this disaster. More than that I hope they will soon recognize this is not a modest event.
From: don (Calgary) on 23 May 2010 22:53 On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:41:20 -0400, .p.jm.(a)see_my_sig_for_address.com wrote: >On Mon, 24 May 2010 01:44:04 GMT, "don (Calgary)" <hd.flhr(a)telus.net> >wrote: > > >>I hope BP is ready for a very long commitment to cleaning up the >>region and are willing to dig very deep into their pockets to support >>the people in the gulf whose lives will be ruined by this disaster. >> >>More than that I hope they will soon recognize this is not a modest >>event. > > You'll be glad to know that the government is talking about >setting up a 'disaster fund' of 10 billion dollars, to 'be funded by >the oil companies' ( IOW, their customers ) for dealing with this kind >of thing. > > You'll be suprised and amazed, like I am, that Congress is >already drawing up plans on hwo to spend that 10 billion on other >things, like Obama's social agenda. It's already being used or >proposed as 'pay go offset' income to justify spending on things like >paying teacher's salaries, etc. > > Of course, back in the real world, that means that when the >day comes when they need that money for the next clean-up, it will >already have been spent. My sense is they need it for this clean up and compensation to the people and businesses that rely on the Gulf for their livelihood.
From: don (Calgary) on 24 May 2010 13:37 On Sun, 23 May 2010 23:34:08 -0400, .p.jm.(a)see_my_sig_for_address.com wrote: > > Congress, however, has other ideas. They never saw a dollar >they couldn't spend today, and borrow tomorrow. > Seems like both sides are ramping up the rhetoric over this mess. I listened to a BP exec, in response to a question about Tony Hayward's quote "the environmental impact of the spill will be very, very modest", tell the reporter this is not the first spill that the Gulf of Mexico has experienced. He also noted there are many "seepers" in the gulf. LOL. Seepers. Talk about spin. Of course he was not referring to the current gusher, but he may be laying the foundation for BP's position after the gusher is capped or partially capped. I suspect they know they cannot totally contain the leak and will refer to the well as a "seeper" when they give up trying to completely stop the flow of oil. From the government side, they are talking tough. I heard one elected representative say BP no longer stands for British Petroleum. It now stands for "Beyond Patience". He went on to say "This is a major mess and it is BP's major mess". With respect to compensation, another elected representative noted if you made $50k last year and cannot make $50k this year, BP will cut you a cheque for $50k. She went on to say if you made a million last year and cannot make a million this year, BP will cut a cheque for you. No word from BP confirming that deal, but I hope they are willing to compensate people for their losses. It will run into the billions. In fact compensation, combined with clean up costs, and environmental restoration could run into the hundreds of billions. Does BP have the resources to deliver the goods? I hope so, but at some point the BP bean counters are going to talk to the BP lawyers and devise a back door for BP to limit their losses. It is the corporate way. At the end of the day the US needs to tighten up their regulations regarding off shore drilling. As reported in our local newspaper, Canada requires more stringent inspection of blow out preventers and requires the drilling of relief wells at the same time the main wells are drilled. Either of those measures would have minimized the Gulf spill and mitigated the damages.
From: saddlebag on 24 May 2010 21:51 On May 23, 9:44 pm, "don (Calgary)" <hd.f...(a)telus.net> wrote: > We are not getting a lot of detailed coverage regarding the Gusher in > the Gulf in these parts. From what I am seeing and reading, there > appears to be complacency setting in about this spill. Just part of the business: http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/nigerian-oil-spills-make-exxon-valdez-look-like-drop-in-the-bucket/19483921 "Meanwhile, Nigeria reportedly leaks as much oil as the Valdez -- which spewed nearly 11 million gallons of crude into Alaskan waters in 1989 -- every year, with little attention paid."
From: don (Calgary) on 24 May 2010 23:07
On Mon, 24 May 2010 18:51:18 -0700 (PDT), saddlebag <saddlebag(a)aol.com> wrote: >On May 23, 9:44�pm, "don (Calgary)" <hd.f...(a)telus.net> wrote: >> We are not getting a lot of detailed coverage regarding the Gusher in >> the Gulf in these parts. From what I am seeing and reading, there >> appears to be complacency setting in about this spill. > >Just part of the business: > >http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/nigerian-oil-spills-make-exxon-valdez-look-like-drop-in-the-bucket/19483921 > >"Meanwhile, Nigeria reportedly leaks as much oil as the Valdez -- >which spewed nearly 11 million gallons of crude into Alaskan waters in >1989 -- every year, with little attention paid." Since I posted the initial message on this topic there seems to be considerable more news available on the spill. Maybe the news organizations were waiting for the oil to wash up in the wetlands and marshes before rasing the profile of the story. More dramatic photo ops I suppose. I would certainly not describe the reaction by the media today as complacent. As for BP and the government I am not so sure. The US government is just posturing. They're talking a good fight but they simply do not have the resources or the expertise to perform the kind of work required to cap the well. They also run the risk of being too prescriptive with their instructions to BP, which could undermine their legal claim against BP for damages. BP seems to be of the same mind as Neil, it's no big deal. Just a modest environmental impact. I find it hard to believe they have not mobilized an army to clean and protect the wetlands. They seem to think their responsibility ends with spraying dispersents and skimming a fraction of the oil from the surface of the water. Let's hope we can be a little more civilized with our stewardship of the environment than Nigeria appears to be. I am sure the link you provided will thrill Neil, but it does little to provide me with confidence BP has the will, ability or financial resources to be fully responsible for the mess they have made. This billion dollar boondoggle will fall to the US taxpayers to pony up the dough. |