Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   The former Gulf of Mexico (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36546)

Rupert Pupkin 06-09-2010 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 656055)
Gee. Hum. ;)

These same people didn't have a problem with Bin Laden when he was killing Americans. Quite to the contrary. Bin Laden's popularity in the Muslim world was at its height shortly after 9/11.

If Bin Laden didn't kill so many Muslims and he just concentrated on killing Americans, Christians, Jews, and Hindus, he would probably be more popular than ever in the Muslim world.

hoovesupsideyourhead 06-10-2010 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 655949)
No, it's not fn stupid, you moronic d**head. They make money on oil. They lose money on safety implementations (they are currently fighting safety standards - the same ones which lack of caused the gulf disaster - for their Canadian drilling ops). They lose money spending it on cleanup.

well i can see the gulf from my back yard. bp has hired every fishing boat in the area to work the boom lines.they have set up community claims centers all over the gulf from new orleans to key west. there were 30 clean up crews on the beach 1 day before the first blob of oil hit. they have stated they will pay claims for any loss of income..ie canceled bookings for rental homes ect.
it was an unfortunate mistake made on the platform. the high menthane pressure was not dealt with correctly. as i am sure you will come back on here and tell me diffrent. ill let it go.

also many oil rigs were damaged durring hurricane ivan and katrina..not
1 has had a problem like this .they have been fixed as much as possible.
think about this riot..how much do you think it costs too build one of these rigs.? and you really think they dont care?..the us coast gaurd , the epa,
osha, has had standerds for years that have made this kind of accident
a non issue. you dont know **** about what your saying. and i heard somthing
last night you will like ...this could have been stopped in 6 days by Halliburton
and obamas people wouldent even concider it. point your mouth twards your
boy obama..hes the one who does not care....this info came from the military......

Coach Pants 06-10-2010 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead (Post 656194)
well i can see the gulf from my back yard. bp has hired every fishing boat in the area to work the boom lines.they have set up community claims centers all over the gulf from new orleans to key west. there were 30 clean up crews on the beach 1 day before the first blob of oil hit. they have stated they will pay claims for any loss of income..ie canceled bookings for rental homes ect.
it was an unfortunate mistake made on the platform. the high mentane pressure was not dealt with correctly. as i am sure you will come back on here and tell me diffrent. ill let it go.

also many oil rigs were damaged durring hurricane ivan and katrina..not
1 has had a problem like this .they have been fixed as much as possible.
think about this riot..how much do you think it costs too build one of these rigs.? and you really think they dont care?..the us coast gaurd , the epa,
osha, has had standerds for years that have made this kind of accident
a non issue. you dont know **** about what your saying. and i heard somthing
last night you will like ...this could have been stopped in 6 days by Halliburton
and obamas people wouldent even concider it. point your mouth twards your
boy obama..hes the one who does not care....this info came from the military......

Have you heard anything about the 33 deep-water rigs that are shut down?

I have.

Seems like Soros the Hedge Fund Hog is looking to move a few of them down south.

It must be nice to have employees in high places. :D

Riot 06-10-2010 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead (Post 656194)
.how much do you think it costs too build one of these rigs.? and you really think they dont care?.

If BP cared (about the gulf), they wouldn't have spent, and currently are spending, so much time and effort and money fighting to have safety requirements waived or removed. BP wouldn't have disregarded the safe methods, supervisors having a fight over disregarding it, the night the rig blew and killed those men.

BP is a corporation. I expect them to think of their owners first. That is their responsibility. Our government through MM was responsible for not allowing our interests - as the owners of the property - to be disregarded. For not allowing BP to literally write their own safety inspections.

Let's see what comes out regarding the now famous meeting 100 days into oil man Bush's White House. Where Cheney met in secret with the oil companies. No minutes, no records. The whistleblowers are gonna fall from the skies.

GBBob 06-10-2010 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 656407)
If BP cared (about the gulf), they wouldn't have spent, and currently are spending, so much time and effort and money fighting to have safety requirements waived or removed. BP wouldn't have disregarded the safe methods, supervisors having a fight over disregarding it, the night the rig blew and killed those men.

BP is a corporation. I expect them to think of their owners first. That is their responsibility. Our government through MM was responsible for not allowing our interests - as the owners of the property - to be disregarded. For not allowing BP to literally write their own safety inspections.

Let's see what comes out regarding the now famous meeting 100 days into oil man Bush's White House. Where Cheney met in secret with the oil companies. No minutes, no records. The whistleblowers are gonna fall from the skies.

But..but..you aren't allowed to bring up Bush in this forum.

Coach Pants 06-10-2010 09:19 PM

The response to the spill is clearly Dubya's fault. If he wouldn't have f.ucked up for 8 years then we wouldn't have the community organizer in charge looking to kick some ass and file criminal charges before the spill is stopped.

Riot 06-10-2010 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GBBob (Post 656409)
But..but..you aren't allowed to bring up Bush in this forum.

Really it was more of a Cheney reference ... :rolleyes:

dellinger63 06-11-2010 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 656407)

Let's see what comes out regarding the now famous meeting 100 days into oil man Bush's White House. Where Cheney met in secret with the oil companies. No minutes, no records. The whistleblowers are gonna fall from the skies.

I believe you maybe on to something here just the wrong suspect. Locally we are hearing the condo Rahm stayed in rent-free in DC for five years is owned by a guy (Greenburg) who along with James Carvell and another guy run a consulting/promo business (GCS I think) with BP as a customer. In fact these guy's came up with the whole "Greener, friendlier BP" with all the green logos etc. I don't see any crime in any of this yet but it does have that Chicago stink I'm so familiar with.

hoovesupsideyourhead 06-11-2010 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GBBob (Post 656409)
But..but..you aren't allowed to bring up Bush in this forum.

sure you can..why exactly does this include him..

its a knee jerk reaction any time obama looks like a fool.blame bush/ch..
we wanted 'change' but not at the expense of the gulf of mexico..if true that
obama wouldent concider using kbr when in fact they were able to stop
the leak alot sooner thats just wrong.ive checked around and they do this [cap wells] also typical is the rush to blame the oil company for lax safety.
it was an industrial accident.obama dropped the ball on his toe..

hoovesupsideyourhead 06-11-2010 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 656407)
If BP cared (about the gulf), they wouldn't have spent, and currently are spending, so much time and effort and money fighting to have safety requirements waived or removed. BP wouldn't have disregarded the safe methods, supervisors having a fight over disregarding it, the night the rig blew and killed those men.

BP is a corporation. I expect them to think of their owners first. That is their responsibility. Our government through MM was responsible for not allowing our interests - as the owners of the property - to be disregarded. For not allowing BP to literally write their own safety inspections.

Let's see what comes out regarding the now famous meeting 100 days into oil man Bush's White House. Where Cheney met in secret with the oil companies. No minutes, no records. The whistleblowers are gonna fall from the skies.

your second award is on the way ..fine work..

Riot 06-11-2010 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead (Post 656538)
your second award is on the way ..fine work..

I'll stick with BP being careless, incompetent in the face of disaster, and deliberately sacrificing safety for profit.

You stick with calling this an "industrial accident", and that it's wrong to, "blame the oil company for lax safety".

We'll see.

Honu 06-11-2010 10:30 PM

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html


Maybe this is who we should blame, our corrupt politicians and the lobbyists they employ really they should be very ashamed of themselves but of course they arent.

dellinger63 06-11-2010 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 656806)
I'll stick with BP being careless, incompetent in the face of disaster, and deliberately sacrificing safety for profit.

You stick with calling this an "industrial accident", and that it's wrong to, "blame the oil company for lax safety".

We'll see.

Give BP credit. Like Carter and Obama with the mideast, they understand the complexity of the problem and in your mind isn't that what counts? :zz:

Riot 06-11-2010 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu (Post 656822)
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html


Maybe this is who we should blame, our corrupt politicians and the lobbyists they employ really they should be very ashamed of themselves but of course they arent.

The quoted article, above, is dated May 5th.

Another point of view:
Media Matters EXCLUSIVE: Debunking the myth of Obama's "BP cash"
May 24, 2010 2:47 pm ET by Julie Millican & Eric Schroeck
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005240042

Honu 06-11-2010 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 656832)
The quoted article, above, is dated May 5th.

Another point of view:
Media Matters EXCLUSIVE: Debunking the myth of Obama's "BP cash"
May 24, 2010 2:47 pm ET by Julie Millican & Eric Schroeck
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005240042

Who do you think gives the employees the money to donate ?????? You cannot be that blind read the rest of the article they pay commitees and spend millions on lobbying . Do you really believe that BP has no influence on how the regulatory commissions do buisness when they or their employess give them so much money. Get a clue .

Riot 06-11-2010 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu (Post 656840)
Who do you think gives the employees the money to donate ?????? You cannot be that blind read the rest of the article they pay commitees and spend millions on lobbying . Do you really believe that BP has no influence on how the regulatory commissions do buisness when they or their employess give them so much money. Get a clue .

:zz: No. You haven't noticed I've already posted about BP being in bed with MM, I guess.

Honu 06-11-2010 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 656842)
:zz: No. You haven't noticed I've already posted about BP being in bed with MM, I guess.

You know its not even about Dems or Rep its all of them , its sickening to see the amount of "legal" corruption our government allows. If I were President the first thing I would do is outlaw campaign contributions by anyone. If you cant do it on your own then tough crap .

Riot 06-13-2010 10:09 PM

Shocking expose in Rolling Stone, how MMS became completely corrupt under Bush, Salazar failed to change a thing under Obama, and BP disregards safety, period. Eight pages - takes a while, but all are a good read. Unfortunately, very, very ugly.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...RS_show_page=0

hoovesupsideyourhead 06-15-2010 08:52 AM

burp.. obama s in town to roll up his shirt and 'get around this thing'...lol
photo op..4 trips too the gulf coast..advance party ,airforce one, cost the taxpayers about 75 mill..nice

Riot 06-15-2010 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead (Post 658057)
burp.. obama s in town to roll up his shirt and 'get around this thing'...lol
photo op..4 trips too the gulf coast..advance party ,airforce one, cost the taxpayers about 75 mill..nice

Good point - let's talk about Presidential travel expenses: Bush II spent 1/3 of his presidency on vacation: chilling back at his ranch in Texas or hanging out at Camp David. Traveled there via Airforce One, presidential helicopters, advance party, Secret Service. Talk about $$$$$$$$$$ to taxpayers.

The gulf is now a longstanding, forever environment disaster caused by gross private corporate negligence that will have decades of negative impact on the lives of millions of Americans (and Brits who have seen their pensions tank), and isn't under one bit of real control yet.

Today BP warned of extreme employee safety hazard (threat of explosion, loss of life) and massive topspill hazards regarding the methodology of ships gathering oil directly off the well cap pipeline. So extreme they want to have the employees abandon the ships.

I have no problem with the president going to Louisiana.

Coach Pants 06-15-2010 09:35 AM

b-b-b-but Bush

Antitrust32 06-15-2010 10:04 AM

I've read some articles on dangerous gasses coming from the blown well.. VOC's or something like that. the articles said the VOC's could be toxic to people living in Gulf states (like me!!). Any truth to this? And if there is truth why arent the major networks talking about it?

Riot 06-15-2010 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 658069)
I've read some articles on dangerous gasses coming from the blown well.. VOC's or something like that. the articles said the VOC's could be toxic to people living in Gulf states (like me!!). Any truth to this? And if there is truth why arent the major networks talking about it?

Yes, there is truth to it, if one is exposed to the fumes. I hope you can't smell anything where you live?

BP appears to be covering up all it can regarding media, and most of the media is light and fluffy - hardly investigative or smart - nowadays anyway.

Riki Ott is a marine biologist who was involved in Exxon Valdez and the years of after-affects. She's been more and more vocally active in the press talking about citizens near the beach, and cleanup workers, developing respiratory symptoms and other problems from the fumes. Apparently Tulane U. sent a medical team down there this week, to start investigating it.

Edit: here, found this, dated May 1: http://blogs.reuters.com/environment...-valdez-spill/

Quote:

A friend in New Orleans is concerned about the oil fumes now engulfing the southern part of town. He says it “smells pretty strong–stronger than standing in a busy mechanics shop, but not as bad as the bus station in Tijuana.”

State health officials are warning people who are sensitive to reduced air quality to stay indoors, but anyone who experiences the classic symptoms of crude oil overexposure–nausea, vomiting, headaches, or cold or flu-like symptoms–should seek medical help.

This is serious: Oil spill cleanups are regulated as hazardous waste cleanups because oil is, in fact, hazardous to health. Breathing oil fumes is extremely harmful.

After the 2002 Prestige oil spill off Galicia, Spain, and the 2007 Hebei Spirit oil spill in South Korea, medical doctors found fishermen and cleanup workers suffered from respiratory problems, central nervous system problems (headaches, nausea, dizziness, etc.), and even genetic damage (South Korea). I have attended two international conferences the past two years to share information with these doctors.

During the Exxon Valdez spill, health problems among cleanup workers became so widespread, so fast, that medical doctors, among others, sounded warnings. Dr. Robert Rigg, former Alaska medical director for Standard Alaska (BP), warned, “It is a known fact that neurologic changes (brain damage), skin disorders (including cancer), liver and kidney damage, cancer of other organ systems, and medical complications–secondary to exposure to working unprotected in (or inadequately protected)–can and will occur to workers exposed to crude oil and other petrochemical by-products. While short-term complaints, i.e., skin irritation, nausea, dizziness, pulmonary symptoms, etc., may be the initial signs of exposure and toxicity, the more serious long-term effects must be prevented.”[1]

Unfortunately, Exxon called the short-term symptoms, “the Valdez Crud,” and dismissed 6,722 cases of respiratory claims from cleanup workers as “colds or flu” using an exemption under OSHA’s hazardous waste cleanup reporting requirements.[2]

Sadly, sick Exxon cleanup workers were left to suffer and pay their own medical expenses. I know of many who have been disabled by their illnesses – or have died.

I have repeatedly warned Congress in letters and in person to strike that loophole because it exempts the very work-related injuries–chemical induced illnesses–that OSHA is supposedly designed to protect workers from.

Remember the “Katrina Crud” and the “911 Crud?” Standby for the “Gulf Crud” because our federal laws do not adequately protect worker safety or public health from the very real threat of breathing oil vapors, including low levels typically found in our industrial ports, our highways during rush hour traffic, and our urban cities.

Oil is not only harmful to people, it is deadly to wildlife. I am sickened to think of the short-term destruction and long-term devastation that will happen along America’s biologically rich coastal wetlands – a national treasure and a regional source of income.

In Alaska, the killing did not stop in 1989. Twenty-one years later, buried oil is still contaminating wildlife and Prince William Sound has not returned to pre-spill conditions – nor, honestly, will it. The remnant population of once-plentiful herring no longer supports commercial fisheries and barely sustains the ecosystem.

Riot 06-15-2010 10:40 AM

Here's some more, plus a news video about VOC's:

http://spotlight.vitals.com/2010/06/...-bp-oil-spill/

Antitrust32 06-15-2010 10:47 AM

I'm 40 miles inland from the Gulf.. and dont smell anything but Nasty Florida Humidity & Heat..

But I'm sure the problems are more in LA and MS right now... I do worry about fumes in the near future. I wish the EPA would shed some light on it...

dellinger63 06-15-2010 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658078)
Yes, there is truth to it, if one is exposed to the fumes. I hope you can't smell anything where you live?

BP appears to be covering up all it can regarding media, and most of the media is light and fluffy - hardly investigative or smart - nowadays anyway.

Riki Ott is a marine biologist who was involved in Exxon Valdez and the years of after-affects. She's been more and more vocally active in the press talking about citizens near the beach, and cleanup workers, developing respiratory symptoms and other problems from the fumes. Apparently Tulane U. sent a medical team down there this week, to start investigating it.

Edit: here, found this, dated May 1: http://blogs.reuters.com/environment...-valdez-spill/

Luckily this woman wrote at the end of her blog "In Alaska, the killing did not stop in 1989. Twenty-one years later, buried oil is still contaminating wildlife and Prince William Sound has not returned to pre-spill conditions – nor, honestly, will it. The remnant population of once-plentiful herring no longer supports commercial fisheries and barely sustains the ecosystem."


I was surprised to see this as a neighbor had one of his best fishing trips ever to Prince William Sound 2 years ago. This man lives fishing and bragged of the many species caught in a single trip both inland and in the sound. I looked up a Prince William Sound fishing report and was quite happy to find what I did…..

Report dated 6/8/10 put out by Alaskan Fish and Game


Salmon
• Sockeye fishing in the Eyak River ramped up this last week with many anglers catching their limits in an afternoon of fishing. Fish are dispersed throughout the river with boat anglers doing well downstream and shoreline anglers catching fish at the weir.
Salt waters
Halibut, Pacific Cod and Rockfish
• Small to medium-sized halibut are being caught consistently throughout the Sound. Locations such as Knowles Head, Knight Island, and areas around Port Wells have all been productive.
• Halibut anglers fishing Hinchinbrook Entrance and Middle Ground Shoal continue to have good luck halibut fishing with some larger fish (100 + lbs.) reported last week.
• Fishing for ground fish is always better the closer you fish to ocean entrances in Prince William Sound.
• Rockfish angling has been productive. Rocky benches adjacent to reefs are good places to find rockfish.
• Anglers continue to catch Pacific cod throughout the Sound while targeting halibut. They make a great meal when halibut are hard to come by!
Shellfish
• It’s been a great year thus far for shrimpers in the Sound. Great shrimping can be found throughout the Sound with Wells Bay, Blue Fjord, and areas around Chenega Island producing exceptional catches.
• Don’t forget your shrimp permit – everyone needs one.

http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/Fishi...il/area_key/11

so she obviously has an agenda and is short on facts at least in PW Sound so take her with a grain of salt.

hoovesupsideyourhead 06-15-2010 01:31 PM

i dont smell anything..save the grill...and the pool..obama tied up the whole area so he could go to the beach and enter 1 building for 10 min.. fn joke..

a small development

http://www.thedestinlog.com/news/pas...and-plans.html

Antitrust32 06-15-2010 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658103)
Luckily this woman wrote at the end of her blog "In Alaska, the killing did not stop in 1989. Twenty-one years later, buried oil is still contaminating wildlife and Prince William Sound has not returned to pre-spill conditions – nor, honestly, will it. The remnant population of once-plentiful herring no longer supports commercial fisheries and barely sustains the ecosystem."


I was surprised to see this as a neighbor had one of his best fishing trips ever to Prince William Sound 2 years ago. This man lives fishing and bragged of the many species caught in a single trip both inland and in the sound. I looked up a Prince William Sound fishing report and was quite happy to find what I did…..

Report dated 6/8/10 put out by Alaskan Fish and Game


Salmon
• Sockeye fishing in the Eyak River ramped up this last week with many anglers catching their limits in an afternoon of fishing. Fish are dispersed throughout the river with boat anglers doing well downstream and shoreline anglers catching fish at the weir.
Salt waters
Halibut, Pacific Cod and Rockfish
• Small to medium-sized halibut are being caught consistently throughout the Sound. Locations such as Knowles Head, Knight Island, and areas around Port Wells have all been productive.
• Halibut anglers fishing Hinchinbrook Entrance and Middle Ground Shoal continue to have good luck halibut fishing with some larger fish (100 + lbs.) reported last week.
• Fishing for ground fish is always better the closer you fish to ocean entrances in Prince William Sound.
• Rockfish angling has been productive. Rocky benches adjacent to reefs are good places to find rockfish.
• Anglers continue to catch Pacific cod throughout the Sound while targeting halibut. They make a great meal when halibut are hard to come by!
Shellfish
• It’s been a great year thus far for shrimpers in the Sound. Great shrimping can be found throughout the Sound with Wells Bay, Blue Fjord, and areas around Chenega Island producing exceptional catches.
• Don’t forget your shrimp permit – everyone needs one.

http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/Fishi...il/area_key/11

so she obviously has an agenda and is short on facts at least in PW Sound so take her with a grain of salt.


Did you read where the woman in the article said "HERRING" when she referred to the type of fish? Herring is not mentioned in your post. I've also read articles in the past about how Herring disappeared after the spill. So it is not false if you read it correctly.

They arent positive that the herring moved because of the spill, though it is the main theory. It is true they are gone though.

dellinger63 06-15-2010 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 658184)
Did you read where the woman in the article said "HERRING" when she referred to the type of fish? Herring is not mentioned in your post. I've also read articles in the past about how Herring disappeared after the spill. So it is not false if you read it correctly.

They arent positive that the herring moved because of the spill, though it is the main theory. It is true they are gone though.

She made it sound like the entire eco-system relied on herring as mainly a bait food when in fact many species have obviously substituted and supplemented their diets and are now thriving including the whales.

Here's the local's take on the herring problem. The end to the moratorium on whale hunting makes more sense now.


http://www.adn.com/2010/02/08/112967...e-william.html

dellinger63 06-15-2010 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 656407)
Let's see what comes out regarding the now famous meeting 100 days into oil man Bush's White House. Where Cheney met in secret with the oil companies. No minutes, no records. The whistleblowers are gonna fall from the skies.

Wouldn't it be more interesting to find the motives behind the signing of the Deep Water Royality Relief Act? You know the one that implemented a royalty-relief program that relieved eligible leases from paying royalties on defined amounts of deep-water petroleum production over Federal Outer Continental Shelf lands. When leases for wells deeper than 800 meters went from 39 wells to 171 wells. Then in the next three years saw 712, 1110 and 771 additional leases issued? C'mon that's going from 39 deep water leases to 2764 in four years. The fact that the Clinton/Gore administration, you know the 'green guys', were the ones that signed the Act would seemingly make it a must see comedy.

Riot 06-15-2010 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658103)
so she obviously has an agenda and is short on facts at least in PW Sound so take her with a grain of salt.

She is completely anti-drilling (any drilling). But her facts are true - there is still oil on the beaches, and negative effects due to the EV spill.

Riot 06-15-2010 05:00 PM

Clinton certainly was the first to open up offshore drilling.

dellinger63 06-15-2010 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658256)
She is completely anti-drilling (any drilling). But her facts are true - there is still oil on the beaches, and negative effects due to the EV spill.

her portrail of the eco-system being barely sustainable is far from the truth but why let that get in her way.

dellinger63 06-15-2010 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658260)
Clinton certainly was the first to open up offshore drilling.

but guess why in deep water?

Riot 06-15-2010 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658270)
her portrail of the eco-system being barely sustainable is far from the truth but why let that get in her way.

Your own post regarding fishing supports it - small/med fish; big fish, best found at the mouth of the bay, not within the spill area, etc.

One person isn't the only scientist following the effects post EV. Plenty of duplicate information out there if you want to discount this person entirely.

Quote:

Despite the extensive cleanup attempts, less than ten percent of the oil was recovered[15] and a study conducted by NOAA determined that as of early 2007 more than 26 thousand U.S. gallons (22,000 imp gal; 98,000 L) of oil remain in the sandy soil of the contaminated shoreline, declining at a rate of less than 4% per year.[16]

Both the long- and short-term effects of the oil spill have been studied comprehensively.[18] Thousands of animals died immediately; the best estimates include 100,000 to as many as 250,000 seabirds, at least 2,800 sea otters, approximately 12 river otters, 300 harbor seals, 247 bald eagles, and 22 orcas, as well as the destruction of billions of salmon and herring eggs.[5][19] The effects of the spill continued to be felt for many years afterwards. Overall reductions in population have been seen in various ocean animals, including stunted growth in pink salmon populations.[20] Sea otters and ducks also showed higher death rates in following years, partially because they ingested prey from contaminated soil and from ingestion of oil residues on hair due to grooming.[21]

Almost 20 years after the spill, a team of scientists at the University of North Carolina found that the effects are lasting far longer than expected.[20] The team estimates some shoreline Arctic habitats may take up to 30 years to recover.[5]

Exxon Mobil denies any concerns over this, [editorial comment: azzholes] stating that they anticipated a remaining fraction that they assert will not cause any long-term ecological impacts, according to the conclusions of 350 peer-reviewed studies.[21] However, a study from scientists from the NOAA concluded that this contamination can produce chronic low-level exposure, discourage subsistence where the contamination is heavy, and decrease the "wilderness character" of the area.[16]
I am amazed that some think there is no tipping point. That there exists no point where man can indeed permanently ruin this earth, and hasten our own destruction.

Riot 06-15-2010 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658271)
but guess why in deep water?

What does Hannity tell you think regarding "why in deep water"? :D

The Republican-lead Congress/Senate created and passed the deepwater royalty relief act to give a $ break to big oil regarding their payments to the government, lead by the GOP reps of the gulf states. Clinton signed it.

dellinger63 06-15-2010 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658282)
What does Hannity tell you think regarding "why in deep water"? :D

The Republican-lead Congress/Senate created and passed the deepwater royalty relief act to give a $ break to big oil regarding their payments to the government, lead by the GOP reps of the gulf states. Clinton signed it.

Hmmm then this article published a year before Bubba signed it must have been all wrong.


U.S. offshore operators got a boost last week when the Clinton administration offered its support for a deepwater royalty relief bill pending in Congress. (Brief Article)
The Oil and Gas Journal| April 18, 1994

Riot 06-15-2010 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658330)
Hmmm then this article published a year before Bubba signed it must have been all wrong.

:zz: What is "all wrong"?

dellinger63 06-15-2010 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 658335)
:zz: What is "all wrong"?

Sorry you made it sound like Bubba just signed it. As though he wasn't for it but signed it to appease the Republicans?

The article points out that a full year before he signed it his administration publicly came out in support of it.

Riot 06-15-2010 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 658340)
Sorry you made it sound like Bubba just signed it. As though he wasn't for it but signed it to appease the Republicans?

The article points out that a full year before he signed it his administration publicly came out in support of it.

Yes, the bill was introduced and sponsored by the GOP (look it up) primarily of the oil states, and Clinton supported it and signed it to provide financial support for the industry. Clinton didn't create the bill, or tell Congress/Senate to make that law. The GOP oil men did that.

Bush then went on to completely remove government oversight via MMS. Obama then sent Salazar to fix that disaster, and Salazar did nothing.

The far right is trying to blame this disaster on Clinton and Obama, and completely ignore what happened during the eight Bush years in the middle. That's beyond absurd.

What do you think of that Rolling Stone article?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.