BP oil spill

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?

On May 31 2010 01:44 micronesia wrote:
I agree with you that we have several reasons to be pissed at BP and possibly at how they have been regulated... but I don't think the fact that they are or are not making money during this fiasco is anywhere near as big a deal as the others.

On May 31 2010 01:45 neVern wrote:


Sounds kind of like the federal government in everything they do.

On May 31 2010 01:48 travis wrote:


really
so you think it's fine that they are profiting during their fuckup, while tons of livelihoods are destroyed?

would it be fair if there was gold under your house that they were entitled to, so they burn down your house. then they take the gold and rebuild your house HALFWAY, leaving with massive profits?

this is the best analogy I can come up with but come on don't you see what i am saying? this is bp's fuckup(in conjunction with the other invested interests), they should be paying for EVERYTHING.

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

Who doesn't think corporations don't rule the world?

On May 31 2010 02:02 johanes wrote:
What about Obama? Originally i laughed about comments like this will be Obama's Katrina, but now it's actually happening. Why isn't the supposedly most advanced and powerful nation able to stop simple oil spill? Incompetence and corrupcy anywhere you look.

On May 31 2010 01:58 ggrrg wrote:
Because if they go bankrupt the Western world will collapse...

On May 31 2010 02:01 Catch]22 wrote:
What I want to know is how you can be so undoubtedly sure that BP is fully responsible. The Oilplatform was the responsibility of 4 parties, Halliburton, BP, Transoceanic and the goverment inspectors.

On May 31 2010 02:08 Xeris wrote:
Wtf ? Just because a country is powerful has nothing to do with its ability to prevent an oil spill...

On May 31 2010 02:18 Pika Chu wrote:
I'm doing a case study on it, right as we speak, i need to finish it in 3 days.

Travis if you don't mind but have interesting sources and interesting reads about it, i would appreciate if you could share some with me.

And i hate the "i'm not american why should i care" attitude that i've seen around here. I care and i am pissed as well.

Hell, let's think at how BP appeared and the fact that it indirectly made a coup d'etat in iran for its profit. And let's not forget about other screw ups done by BP. And let's be honest, BP is simply doing a better job in PR than Exxon but otherwise they are just as iresponsible as exxon was when valdez sank.

On May 31 2010 01:43 travis wrote:this shit is why i am a "conspiracy theorist". Who doesn't think corporations don't rule the world?

On May 31 2010 02:23 JohannesH wrote:

How is saying corporations rule the world, a conspiracy? Of course big companies with a tons of money have a lot of power - it is just how things work atm, and pretty clear to anyone.

The U.S. Government has named BP as the responsible party in the incident, and officials have said the company will be held accountable for all cleanup costs resulting from the oil spill.[17][18] BP has accepted responsibility for the oil spill and the cleanup costs, but indicated they were not at fault because the platform was run by Transocean personnel.[19]

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

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

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?

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

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.”

On May 31 2010 03:21 IrT4nkz wrote:

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.

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

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?

On May 31 2010 03:54 geometryb wrote:
i thought they already said they would pay for all of it.

On May 31 2010 03:31 Pika Chu wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +



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/

On May 31 2010 04:04 duckett wrote:
wow i just lost all respect i had for travis that i gained when he made all of those blogs on self realization and enlightenment and shit

On May 31 2010 04:09 L wrote:
This is what happens when you deify the profit motive in the name of secular humanism and toss moral relativity into the fray as a method of dismissing objectively unsound action.

Reap what you sow. You're part of the problem.

On May 31 2010 02:10 travis wrote:


no it wouldn't, what are u talking about?

the oil is there whether or not BP is there. BP going bankrupt will not make the oil disappear.

but regardless, they could clean all of this up with fishing boats and they wouldn't go bankrupt.
(im exaggerating for emphasis. but i wouldn't be surprised if they really could)

It just seemed like too much work to include them all.

On May 31 2010 10:51 fight_or_flight wrote:
Just curious, is this the only thread about the oil spill on TL? Cause its like a really huge deal. I'd expect a thread with 300+ responses at least.

On May 31 2010 10:51 fight_or_flight wrote:
Just curious, is this the only thread about the oil spill on TL? Cause its like a really huge deal. I'd expect a thread with 300+ responses at least.

On May 31 2010 03:25 travis wrote:


ok here i found some article



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.

I don't think the real issue here is off-shore drilling, good or bad, but rather the cavalier, devil-may-care attitude that has always existed in the oil industry in sharp contrast to pretty much everything else.

I have no reason to believe that off-shore drilling cannot be accomplished with proper safeguards and contingency plans in place. But such a thing would require a level of forsight that has never existed in an industry guided by a "go get the oil, worry about the rest later" attitude since day one. It's worth noting that the Alberta government once postulated detonating a nuclear weapon underground to free trapped oil in the Alberta oil sands for conventional drilling. And for anyone involved with or familiar with the industry, this doesn't come as much of a surprise.

.....

People have accomplished much more challenging and much more dangerous tasks than offshore drilling without disaster. Realistically, there's no reason they can't do this without catastrophic disaster. They have for 30 years. But the oil industry is a "now" driven business as opposed to a "when we know how" driven business. That's the part that needs to change. It's an industry where technology and regulation is always playing catch-up with production.

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?

On June 01 2010 23:01 Hawk wrote:


it looks like it's already been addressed, but you are totally confusing profiting from the spill with pulling in money from other assets while the spill is going on. bp obviously isn't going to stop drlling and shit elsewhere...

and of course they're not gonna sink all the money into costs now. the govt picks up the tab, and then goes after the company, who will inevitably try to deflect some of the liability elsewhere. this is how it works.

most rational people already know that BP at least has a majority of hte fault here (their lawyers will try to pin it on the subcontractors at the place—which may be true.) No one is really denying that. It's been reported that a bunch of safety regulations were flat out ignored.

But as much as people are rightfully pissed that this happened, you spewing completely and totally misinformed shit like it's a fact is every bit as retarded as some right wing redneck talking about how this is Obama's fault.

On June 02 2010 01:36 travis wrote:



how did I misinform people? It could be argued that I misled people into thinking that they were making money from this current well, but it wouldn't be a very good argument, since it was immediately addressed in this thread that that isn't the case and really it wouldn't even make sense in the first place.

I didn't misinform people, they misunderstood me - and stupidly I might add. How could they be making money from a leaking well.



Djzapz: you are fighting with a strawman here

On June 02 2010 02:38 Misrah wrote:
travis- it sad that your intelligence and fervor is so misguided. You must understand that we allow BP and all of the other oil industries to exist right? it is our demand for the oil that allows these corporations to go out and drill for it in the first place. Secondly it is becuase of this endless demand that oil companies are forced to drill in more and more inhospitable places. Of course a single little mistake can have devastating consequences when you are forced to drill at the bottom of the ocean. Stop blaming the companies that are forced to drill there because of the demand we placed on them.

So before you go blaming the big bad corps- ask yourself this: How and Why do they exist in the first place? If you didn't have the demand for oil- those corps would never be there, ever.

And lastly, it doesn't matter if you try and bankrupt BP and have them clean up the mess. That is a pointless endeavor. America and the rest of the world will still guzzle gallons and gallons of crude despite this incident. BP will rebound within the next few years anyway. So instead of blaming a corporate entity- you should turn instead to all of the oil dependent nations.

On June 02 2010 02:54 Misrah wrote:
Travis stop lying to yourself. You live in the US. You are dependent on oil in millions of ways.

MILLIONS! Secondly, 'green' energy is a joke- and there is nothing that we have currently that can compare to the efficiency of oil and other fossil fuels (except maybe nuclear).

You clearly don't understand what i am talking about. You are the root cause of why the oil companies are drilling out there in the first place. You facilitate the demand, and buy their products. Don't place all of the blame on BP when you are still buying and using their products every single day.

On June 02 2010 03:11 travis wrote:
Also I would like to say that it should be up to the fuel companies to change, and not just the public. The responsibility lies with them as much as us. If anything, more. How is the public supposed to just "up and stop using oil" ?

On June 02 2010 03:11 travis wrote:
Also I would like to say that it should be up to the fuel companies to change, and not just the public. The responsibility lies with them as much as us. If anything, more. How is the public supposed to just "up and stop using oil" ?

On May 31 2010 01:48 travis wrote:


really
so you think it's fine that they are profiting during their fuckup, while tons of livelihoods are destroyed?

would it be fair if there was gold under your house that they were entitled to, so they burn down your house. then they take the gold and rebuild your house HALFWAY, leaving with massive profits?

this is the best analogy I can come up with but come on don't you see what i am saying? this is bp's fuckup(in conjunction with the other invested interests), they should be paying for EVERYTHING.

On June 02 2010 11:51 Misrah wrote:
"A blogger at the liberal web site Daily Kos notes that BP was reportedly among one of the companies that Cheney met with."

Travis- you must be joking me? that source- takes it source from an un named blogger, from a liberal website lol.

Secondly, I say again- so what? so the same spokeswomen for big C is now speaking for BP. I don't get it? Please enlighten me on the causation that i am supposedly missing.

Lastly, Cheneys PR rep is not Cheney. The fact that you are trying to tell me that Cheney is an evil man with horns on his head leads me to believe that i was in fact giving you far to much credit for your intelligence. How is this PR rep shift a big FU to america?

Travis, it sounds like you really have a big misunderstanding of politics..... you read a single thing and are instantly swayed. Don't tell me you actually believe the stuff they feed you on the news?

On Wednesday, film director and deep-sea explorer James Cameron said that BP had turned down his offer to help combat the massive spill.

"Over the last few weeks I've watched, as we all have, with growing horror and heartache, watching what's happening in the Gulf and thinking those morons don't know what they're doing," Cameron said at the All Things Digital technology conference.

Cameron, the director of "The Abyss," "Titanic" and "Avatar," has worked extensively with robot submarines and is considered an expert in undersea filming. He did not say explicitly who he meant when he referred to "those morons."

His comments came a day after he participated in a meeting at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency headquarters in Washington to "brainstorm" solutions to the oil spill.

On June 04 2010 04:59 Misrah wrote:
Nothing is ever fact, and nothing is ever capital T true. Its always a matter of how you look at it. That source was a joke and you know it travis. I call it into question, because you cannot believe everything you see or hear, especially on the internet.

I say 'So what' because i mean exactly that- so what! how does this stop the oil, how does this change what BP is doing? How does this make the environmental disaster any less terrible. How does this change anything??

If you post your opinions, especially political ones- coupled with that your heated resolve, of course this is going to delve into discussions about your opinion. Because in my opinion, your opinion is incorrect. I am having an intelligent conversation with you becuase i want to show you that your opinion is wrong, and mine is right. That is why anyone argues...

On June 05 2010 15:16 Misrah wrote:
all the pretty reefs i used to swim on- are now destroyed

I really just want to cry

Dr. Soto is finding disconcertingly consistent and high levels of toxic chemicals in every one of the patients he is testing.

"I'm regularly finding between five and seven VOCs in my patients," Dr. Soto told Al Jazeera. "These patients include people not directly involved in the oil clean-up, as well as residents that do not live right on the coast. These are clearly related to the oil disaster."

Many of the chemicals present in the oil and dispersants are known to cause headaches, nausea, vomiting, kidney damage, altered renal functions, irritation of the digestive tract, lung damage, burning pain in the nose and throat, coughing, pulmonary edema, cancer, lack of muscle coordination, dizziness, confusion, irritation of the skin, eyes, nose, and throat, difficulty breathing, delayed reaction time, memory difficulties, stomach discomfort, liver and kidney damage, unconsciousness, tiredness/lethargy, irritation of the upper respiratory tract, and hematological disorders.

While there are many examples of acute exposures like Pearcey and Dr. Soto's patient who developed cancer, his concern is that most residents who are being exposed will only show symptoms later.

State health departments in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama had issued swimming advisories while BP's well continued to gush oil into the Gulf of Mexico last summer. Since then, however, all three states have declared their beaches, waters, and seafood safe from oil disaster related toxins.

Florida never issued any advisories, despite many residents reporting illnesses they attribute to the oil disaster.

US federal government agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, along with President Barack Obama himself, have declared the Gulf of Mexico, its waters, beaches, and seafood, safe and open to the public.

WASHINGTON – Oil from the BP spill remains stuck on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, according to a top scientist's video and slides that she says demonstrate the oil isn't degrading as hoped and has decimated life on parts of the sea floor.

That report is at odds with a recent report by the BP spill compensation czar that said nearly all will be well by 2012.

At a science conference in Washington Saturday, marine scientist Samantha Joye of the University of Georgia aired early results of her December submarine dives around the BP spill site. She went to places she had visited in the summer and expected the oil and residue from oil-munching microbes would be gone by then. It wasn't.

The US Coast Guard is currently investigating reports of a potentially massive oil sheen 20 miles north of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion from last April.
According to Paul Barnard, operations controller for the USCG in Louisiana, a helicopter crew has been dispatched to the site of the Matterhorn SeaStar oil rig, owned by W&T Offshore, Inc.

Multiple reports have come in of a sheen nearly 100 miles long and 12 miles wide originating near the site.

Independent pilots, including John Wathen of the Waterkeeper Alliance, and Bonnie Schumaker with Wings of Care, are currently flying out to investigate the spill. Schumaker reports having seen the sheen on Friday, March 18, and confirms that it is rapidly expanding.

On March 21 2011 06:02 Aruni wrote:
Wow, that's terrible.
BP really doesn't seem to care about the enviroment

On February 20 2011 14:36 semantics wrote:
well i suppose it's not lying it's more like being incompetent i mean i don't know the science but from what i heard from scientist is that it would likely break up in that climate but ionno if that was just all bp's payroll or not. But right not as i do not live in the area i sorta of have just a malaise about the whole subject.

BP Plc has pleaded guilty to criminal charges relating to its 2010 oil spill and agreed to pay an extra $4.5bn on top of the tens of billions it is already paying out.

The British oil company said on Thursday that it would plead guilty to 11 felony counts of misconduct or neglect relating to the death of 11 workers, one misdemeanour count under the Clean Water Act, one misdemeanour count under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and one felony count of obstruction of congress.

BP will also pay $525m to settle securities claims with US regulators. In aggregate BP said it will pay the
$4.5bn over six years for the various resolutions.

"There can be no question that this historic announcement represents a critical step forward, and really uderscores the justice department's determination to stand with the Gulf Coast communities," Eric Holder, US attorney general, said in New Orleans.

BP will have to retain a monitor for four years, charged with overseeing safety and ris management, as well an an independent auditor to ensure compliance with the terms of the agreement, he said.

The company said that it is "prepared to vigorously defend itself against remaining civil claims".

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2012/11/201211151556362973.html