Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
behaviour???

Oilspill off Louisiana could threaten coast

26 posts in this topic

There are fears of an environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, as efforts to clear up an oil spill have been suspended because of bad weather.

A drilling rig leased by the oil company BP exploded and sank off the Louisiana coast last week.

arrow3.gifRead more...

Thanks

B???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be a tragedy that makes Katrina look like a tiny blip on the radar. I wish the media was following it with the same intensity that they used to follow Katrina. They're now saying this could be worse than the Exxon Valdes incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better believe it... This is NOT good.

The oil company that "dropped the ball" should pay FOR EVERYTHING.... and then some. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better believe it... This is NOT good.

The oil company that "dropped the ball" should pay FOR EVERYTHING.... and then some. :angry:

Its horrible.. I agree with you Hazzard...being that Im living in new orleans :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better believe it... This is NOT good.

The oil company that "dropped the ball" should pay FOR EVERYTHING.... and then some. :angry:

Obama's newsconference today said that British Petroleum (BP) is paying for the clean up. All of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This morning a large sea turtle and a moderately sized fish washed up at Daytona Beach covered in oil / sludge. I live in Florida as well. :(

Idiots, I cannot believe that we as a species still rely on oil. Absoultely inexcusable! The oil barons that are controlling the economy should either step down, or switch to something more eco-friendly, ethanol, sunlight, whatever, it has to be done.

Edited by SpiderCyde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This morning a large sea turtle and a moderately sized fish washed up at Daytona Beach covered in oil / sludge. I live in Florida as well. :(

Idiots, I cannot believe that we as a species still rely on oil. Absoultely inexcusable! The oil barons that are controlling the economy should either step down, or switch to something more eco-friendly, ethanol, sunlight, whatever, it has to be done.

All that is stopping them going for hydrogen fuel is the initial cost of investment required and the profits they will lose from giving up oil, whose demand and price they can control so easily. BP better pick up the tab but ultimately consumers will be the ones who pay, not to mention all animals and fishermen who are already paying the hefty price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've already said they will pick up the tab. I doubt this will kill our prices, but it's going to damage and/or destroy the BP market here, as other companies keep their prices low and BP either raises their prices to cover the cost or they eat the cost of repairs/clean-up and don't mess with their prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yah, it looks like this is going to be really really bad especially if they can’t close the well. I personally can’t believe this is how the problem is playing out. I would have never thought that we poke holes in the ground in such ways that we could possible not stop the flow – unreal. Of course, if this oil was on land we would not be having this problem, but a lot of that easy oil has been removed so we look for more in places that are obviously more and more dangerous for the environment.

It seems under the Oil Pollution Act BP will have to cover all containment and cleanup costs. This act was created in Aug 1990 in large response to the Exxon Valdez spill. But it may also put a limit on Punitive damages, the ones that pay back individuals for their livelihood/jobs being destroyed, to 75 million.

[…]” holders of leases or permits for offshore facilities, except deepwater ports, are liable for up to $75 million per spill, plus removal costs.” source

Also, here is a video from “Democracy Now” of a discussion on the gulf spill and Punitive damages, if you are only looking for a 15 sec news clip this is not for you:

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/5/3/bp_oil_spill_worsens_with_no

Anyone effected by this directly or indirectly please do not sign a sew waver for a quick 5000. It’s what people did during the Exxon Valdez spill and it greatly reduced the effectiveness of the people’s case. I know you need 5000 cuz you’re screwed but 5000 grand is not going to save you from the problems you now face.

It also seems that oil vapors are really bad for people to inhale and unlike the EV spill this spill/leak is close to a lot of people.

I have to say as mad as this makes me I’m glad that the flow oil is going to affect our U.S. shores far more greatly then Mexico or other gulf countries. It must stand that we reap what we sow. We must change our ways or face the consequences!

Here is a nice interactive link on the movement of oil

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/oil-spill-map.htm

And just to spread the hate – did you hear what Rush Limbaugh said about the oilrig burning down, something to the effect that is was a liberal plot so we can all b**** about and push our alternative energy view. Man I wish that leper would drop dead of all natural causes! The reason I bring this horrible person into view is because he reaches millions of listeners a week in the US. So these ideas and the media that backs it will be added to the mix and how we solve this problem and other future problems like it.

Edited by 4dplane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the media didn't feed the trouble groups - I mean the ones who don't do their own research and rely solely on pundits, without trying to offer their own solutions to anything - then there would be a decrease in social problems. . . like, if the media didn't politicize this, there would be more people shouting "That's plain ****ing wrong!" Instead of "Liberals did it!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

So looking at the oilmap link I posted above I noticed there are a lot of oil rigs in the Gulf, so the question had to be asked - how many oil rigs does the U.S. have in the Gulf.

It looks like:

"Currently, the number of US structures in the Gulf is roughly 4,000, with 819 manned platforms." - source

And only more to show up right!

Edited by 4dplane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just Heard Mr. Obama might remove the 75 million dollar cap - that's right, **** you BP! **** you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a link of an interesting conversation about the idea of using explosives to close the well - like a nuke! Paul Noel, does not advocate for this idea. He then goes on the describe the potential size of the deposit.

"It is this deposit that has me reminding people of what the Shell geologist told me about the deposit. This was the quote, "Energy shortage..., Hell! We are afraid of running out of air to burn." The deposit is very large. It covers an area off shore something like 25,000 square miles. Natural Gas and Oil is leaking out of the deposit as far inland as Central Alabama and way over into Florida and even over to Louisiana almost as far as Texas. This is a really massive deposit. Punching holes in the deposit is a really scary event as we are now seeing. "

http://pesn.com/2010/05/02/9501643_Mother_of_all_gushers_could_kill_Earths_oceans/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4dplane, you didn't read the Limits of Liability very well. The limit is the TOTAL cost, plus $75 million dollars... and unless they were criminally negligent, they can't be held to a penny more unless the law is changed.

The TOTAL cost is going to be in the Billions of dollars... and then we can tack on the piddling $75 million. BP has no legal choice in this matter - they have to pay ALL cleanup costs.

Isn't that enough for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Am I wrong? I said, "It seems under the Oil Pollution Act BP will have to cover all containment and cleanup costs" - plus the 75 million.

Is this enough for me? - No, not 75 million for punitive damages - fisherman loose there jobs because the fish smell like crap, they need to be compensated. The grocery stores will loose money because the fisherman won't go shopping, they need to be compensated. The grocery owner fires an employer because the fisherman does not shop there anymore. The ex-employee will not go out for Friday night steak and strippers, etc ... - that's what I'm talking about.

The part that I am confused about is in this quote from the Oil Pollution Act,

"Holders of leases or permits for offshore facilities, except deepwater ports, are liable for up to $75 million per spill, plus removal costs."

I assume the oilrig was deepwater, but I heard today on the news that Obama may remove the limit.

Edited by 4dplane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only Deepwater Port in the area is The Loop - of which, the Deepwater Horizon is not a part... even though it has a confusing name. The water may be deep, but it isn't considered a "deepwater port."

The limits of liability are for Federal CIVIL penalties only... they have nothing to do with third-party claims, like those that all those fishermen will be filing.

$75 million has NOTHING to do with punitive damages. Depending on how the investigation goes, they may be hit with upwards of BILLIONS of dollars worth of punitive damages... or nothing... depending on the findings.

There is nothing that Obama can do about raising the limits of liability - as they are set by law. He would have to recommend a new bill, the House and Senate would have to submit, debate and approve it, and Obama would have to sign it - and it would be way too late anyway because the incident has already happened, and BP is going to be dealt with under the laws in existance at this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expected an oil spill to occur from the oil rig fire about 2 weeks ago, because the fire damage will release crude oil into the sea water and eventually wash ashore by the currents or tides heading north. The ecological and economic impact will be highly catastrophic, and either BP (the company's legal responsbility) or the feds. should clean it up before the oil spill's devastation worsens and deepens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Malruhn,

what does this mean?

"A federal statute caps damage recoveries from oil spills at $75 million, if no negligence is established. On Capital Hill, lawmakers are working on a measure to lift it to $10 billion." - source

Looks like it might happen - so, what are "damage recoveries"?

Edited by 4dplane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Malruhn,

what does this mean?

"A federal statute caps damage recoveries from oil spills at $75 million, if no negligence is established. On Capital Hill, lawmakers are working on a measure to lift it to $10 billion." - source

Looks like it might happen - so, what are "damage recoveries"?

That quote isn't in the source you cited. Reuters may have amended the info, because the info is flat out wrong.

It is probably due to the reporter's error and unfamiliarity with the law... it happens all the time. According to the Code of Federal Regulations, the limit of liability for offshore platforms is the TOTAL cost of cleanup, PLUS $75 million dollars. This penalty is assessed through civil processes - basically the company get sued by the federal government to recoup the money spent for the response. If the issue is taken to the criminal courts, this penalty (total plus $75) is thrown out and the criminal court can assess nearly anything - from ZERO penalty (considering the cleanup will cost BP upwards of $2-3 BILLION), to significantly more than that amount.

Besides, the way US law works, the increase to $10 billion will happen AFTER the incident, so the penalties won't, and CAN'T be assessed for this incident.

Oh, and "damage recoveries" is a crap term created by the reporter for the slap-on-the-wrist EXTRA fines the company gets that are over and above the cost of cleanup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

...

Edited by 4dplane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Wow, I have never seen a piece of info removed like that, crazy!

I do however find other sourcees that say the same thing.

This one has it in the title so maybe it will stay up.

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/96375-dems-propose-massive-increase-in-oil-company-liability-from-75-m-to-10b

News sources do that with updated info... it happens all the time.

I just want to say that I hate stupid lawmakers...

(from your cite)

“In a fair and just world, companies like BP should pay for every last cent of the mess they’ve made, not taxpayers, not the tourism industry, not the fishing industry, not small businesses,” a lead co-sponsor, Rep. Rush Holt (D-N.J.), said. “Our bill is clear: The buck stops with oil companies; it shouldn’t spill over to taxpayers.”

This idiot doesn't understand what "actual costs" means - it means that BP will spend their own money to clean up the oil - to include any bills that the Federal, State or Local governments hand them... and this is on top of the third-party claims from individuals that get "damaged" by the oil. The lawmakers are idiots.

If it costs BP $10 billion to clean up the oil, the extra money ($75 mil right now, $10 bil in the proposal) is merely a fine on top of the costs. It has NOTHING to do with the tax payers having to pay for the cleanup.

Idiots...

For an analogy - let's say the law has to do with damage to cars. Say that I do something that damages your car. I am on the hook to pay for the entire fixing of your vehicle... everything from the body work and paint, to the cost of you having to take a bus for two weeks, and taxi's every so often. THEN, on top of this, I can possibly be fined up to $75 on top of the costs to fix your car as kind of punishment.

If it takes your insurance company $2000 to fix your car, and I have to repay them.

The problem is that these idiot lawmakers think that the extra $75 is going to help pay for the fixing... and it isn't.

I don't care that the amount is being raised. What I DO care about is that they actually understand what they are proposing - and that they understand that this won't impact BP's actions in this case at all.

SORRY... I feel better now.

Edited by Malruhn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
THEN, on top of this, I can possibly be fined up to $75 on top of the costs to fix your car as kind of punishment."

So who get the 75 million / possible 10 billion?

The limits of liability are for Federal CIVIL penalties only... they have nothing to do with third-party claims, like those that all those fishermen will be filing.

Is there a max for third-party claims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So who get the 75 million / possible 10 billion?

Is there a max for third-party claims?

Who gets the money? Uncle Sam. The Coast Guard processes the penalty, and the fine goes into the general fund when BP pays.

The max for third-party claims is whatever BP can afford before they shut their doors. It could be billions...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've started my first online petition (which I'm sure will amount to nothing and make me feel like an idiot, but what the heck).

The petition reads:

To Whom It May Concern,

I am signing this petition to express my dismay at the way BP's oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico has been handled thus far. It is obviously in our country's best interest to send our own video equipment down to the leak site to impartially access the extent of the damage. There are scientists all over this country (both liberal and conservative) who would be more than willing to analyze this data and offer their opinions. Is there any rational reason that the public has not been given access to impartial data when it is easily obtainable?

If you agree that our government should send it's own equipment down to evaluate the leak rather than simply depending on BP's video, please consider signing the petition. It seems pretty naive that we're depending on BP-- the company financially responsible for the damage-- for all our visual information on the leak.

The petition's at: http://www.thepetiti...k/621029891/taf

If you agree with the petition & have time, please pass it's URL around to your friends

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.