BP oil spill - Page 3

Pika Chu

Romania2510 Posts

May 30 2010 18:13 GMT

#41

BP are getting major PR companies to work for them and sort this out. I'm curious what strategies will they find to try and wash BP's image which right now is getting worse every day that more BP fails come to public knowledge.

Btw, there's a funny fake PR account on twitter http://twitter.com/bpglobalpr and funny BP anti-PR here: http://www.iridetheharlemline.com/twitter-photos/bpglobalpr-billboards/

This one made my day:

[image loading]

A general boycott of BP products would be necessary. What happened to Exxon (that went from #1 to #3) back then should happen twice as powerful to BP now.

Assault_1

Canada1950 Posts

May 30 2010 18:13 GMT

#42

how is BP making money? I thought they're losing billions from this..

Deleted User 3420

24492 Posts

May 30 2010 18:20 GMT

#43

On May 31 2010 03:06 il0seonpurpose wrote:
Can you give some sources or back up how you know that BP is still making so much money and not helping (enough) to pay for the damages? I believe you, but I just want to see the facts

it was on the news here on tv
other than that I have nothing other than data with no sources. lots of that.

the problem is the data is classified many different ways.

there are payouts to claims from fisherman / other workers.
there is paying for cleanup. there is paying for health suits.

i gave it a quick effort to try to find some figures but it was way too much work. maybe someone else can find them.

IrT4nkz

229 Posts

May 30 2010 18:21 GMT

#44

On May 31 2010 03:13 Assault_1 wrote:
how is BP making money? I thought they're losing billions from this..

I was about to post this as well.

So someone enlighten the community, how are they making money if they have to incur additional costs to clean up the oil spill? Don't come typing about some Oh they're drilling another well - BP will obtain the oil even if there wasn't any spill. Besides, processing all of the leaked oil which has contaminated costs MONEY.

mmp

United States2130 Posts

May 30 2010 18:21 GMT

#45

On May 31 2010 03:08 Lexpar wrote:
They have too much money. How can a government that has negative money boss around a corporation with infinite money?

Don't be silly. Government is lobbied, not ordered. As long as enforcers are doing their job, BP can be brought to accountability for this spill.

There are two factors involved in leniency of repercussions: (1) It's unreasonable and improper to bankrupt a significant company for spite or environmental fetishism. (2) BP has contributed to Obama's campaign, and energy companies generally try to buy both major parties in an election.

So it is difficult to say whether the government is doing too much or too little without a transparent investigation.

Polygamy

Austria1114 Posts

May 30 2010 18:23 GMT

#46

make them fucking pay for it all, none of this crap where the gov picks up the slack

Deleted User 3420

24492 Posts

May 30 2010 18:25 GMT

#47

On May 31 2010 03:13 Assault_1 wrote:
how is BP making money? I thought they're losing billions from this..

ok here i found some article

BP has made huge profits over the last 10 years. In fact, during the early days of the Gulf of Mexico disaster, BP was making “enough profit in four days to cover the costs of the spill cleanup” so far.

BP made $163 billion in profits from 2001 to 2009 and $5.6 billion in the first quarter of 2010. And The Washington Post found that, “BP said it spent $350 million in the first 20 days of the spill response, about $17.5 million a day. It has paid 295 of the 4,700 claims received, for a total of $3.5 million. By contrast, in the first quarter of the year, the London-based oil giant’s profits averaged $93 million a day.”

in the actual article it has links to sources
article is here:

http://climateprogress.org/2010/05/27/exxon-valdez-bp-oil-disaste/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed: climateprogress/lCrX (Climate Progress)

looks like this is a couple weeks old, but still.

Motiva

United States1774 Posts

May 30 2010 18:27 GMT

#48

Personally, FUCK Bp.

However, Theres a lot more to it than saying if BP went bankrupt the oil would still be there. This is the root of a more fundamental problem in our society. The oil in the earth doesn't belong to the earth. As with everything else in the world, it's been claimed and is legally bound to some companies. As such, as long as BP own undrilled oil, they can't go bankrupt, and as long as They're selling Oil, they'll turn a profit. Yes, they've been spraying oil all over the gulf for 42 days or whatever. But they sell China a large % of it's oil, and the rest of the world.

BP is approaching astronomical numbers when it comes to how much they're spending. From what I've heard as well, Only the Oil belonged to BP. Not the Rig. So BP is paying ~1billion, but do those other companies still exist? If your out for blood, They caused it and they're not doing anything. Attack.

That isn't to say that any mercy or compassion should be spared for these evil titanic corporations. But BP will always turn a profit as long as they're selling oil. If you want people to stop buying oil, well then, we need to transform our society. Are you boycotting gasoline?

It was just a matter of time until some major energy or power company had some great atrocity, this is the nature of these businesses.

If BP stopped turning a profit, that would mean it stopped welling, producing, refinining, and selling oil/gas. That would mean that some country's economy would be royaly fucked. It's a complicated issue, and if we're not interested in redefining our economy, and social work structure, we have to keep buying gas and so BP has to keep turning a profit.

I'm all for boycotting BP, however, i think easier said than done. I don't think if i wanted to, it would be possible. BP has very few of it's own retail stations. I've only seen one. 99% of the things BP sells are rebranded before they hit the streets, and following that maze is daunting, but go for it.

edit: I think theres also an argument here for is the difference in what 5billion and 10billion dollars would do to help this really that large? It's a leaking oil well, I'm assuming, that there are procedures in place to deal with that. If those prodecedures don't work, will more money really help stop the leak? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe, you just need more procedures. This isn't to say that more money couldn't be spent on cleaning up spilt oil, as opposed to stopping the leak.

Pika Chu

Romania2510 Posts

May 30 2010 18:31 GMT

#49

On May 31 2010 03:21 IrT4nkz wrote:

Show nested quote +

I think the idea was not that they are making money from this "accident" but actually that they aren't putting enough effort in it. BP continues on making money because obviously they have many other exploitations.

They have already spent about 1 billion dollars trying to fix the situation, but that's not so much for them. What they did is so bad that it's going to take hundreds of billions to clean up (and it's just impossible to totally clean it up, marine fauna is screwed there).

http://sites.google.com/site/artmarcovici/

mmp

United States2130 Posts

May 30 2010 18:32 GMT

#50

The sad thing is, no matter how much BP spends it is practically impossible to clean up every last drop of oil in short time. No matter how much BP spends in good faith there will still be critics that say they didn't do enough and were lazy or cheap.

In the short term cleanup crews are needed all along the Gulf coast, but in the long term the pollution will become an intractable corruption of the environment. This is ecological damage that cannot be undone, only remedied.

Pika Chu

Romania2510 Posts

May 30 2010 18:38 GMT

#51

Unfortunately it's true, this damage cannot be undone, our methods of cleaning up using chemical disolvants are usually even worse than the petrol itself. It will take over 40years until "nature will fix this".

NuKedUFirst

Canada3139 Posts

May 30 2010 18:45 GMT

#52

On May 31 2010 01:53 RaGe wrote:
Yeah I fully agree they should be held 100% accountable.

^^ They should be giving all of their money to help animals and rebuild habitats.

wanderer

United States641 Posts

May 30 2010 18:45 GMT

#53

On May 31 2010 01:43 travis wrote:
You know, the worst part is, that BP repeatedly lied and covered up the actual facts on what was happening, and yet THEY ARE STILL IN CHARGE OF IT.

this shit is why i am a "conspiracy theorist". Who doesn't think corporations don't rule the world?

That's a very Left-wing thing to say, calling for Big Brother to come help us take care of ourselves. Big government looks like a nice option all of a sudden.

(btw I've lived in Louisiana for the past 12 years)

Nytefish

United Kingdom4282 Posts

May 30 2010 18:46 GMT

#54

I was wondering why there wasn't a thread for this in general, it's a huge ecological disaster, being caused by people makes it far worse than something like a volcano erupting.

Is that nuke thing a serious suggestion by the way, or some crazy last resort?

mmp

United States2130 Posts

May 30 2010 18:47 GMT

#55

A lawsuit from affected businesses would be appropriate but chaotic, disorganized, and out of proportion.

The government should investigate the economic damage and bill BP to reimburse the victims. We need annual surveys to keep track of pollution levels and to monitor affected species' growth.

And then there's the human health cost...

wanderer

United States641 Posts

May 30 2010 18:48 GMT

#56

I doubt that BP would win a lawsuit if I went down to the beach and started cleaning up.

The reason why I say this is because there are organizations (I would've joined one back in Baton Rouge, but I had go North after graduating last week) who take volunteers to clean the beaches and wildlife.