Thread: Gulf Oil Spill - Solution restores the environment in just six weeks.

Please repost this on your facebook and myspace, etc. pages. And get the word out, contact the guy who made the video. Please...

I am pretty sure they know all about this, as well as the many other ways to clean up a spill. You have to remeber though, for the government its more about politics, than getting things done. There is always a political element to it.

Originally Posted by Alric

I am pretty sure they know all about this, as well as the many other ways to clean up a spill. You have to remeber though, for the government its more about politics, than getting things done. There is always a political element to it.

Which is the point. If more and more people know about this, there will suddenly be more pressure on the state and the companies, so the politicians actually might act quicker.

Yeah, the politics is that BP is in charge of cleaning it up, not the government. And BP is using chemical dispersants to hide the oil, and they are getting a tax break from buying and using dispersants from another company that BP owns. Also, they hire local fishermen to clean it up. These fishermen are being hospitalized from exposure to the dispersants. BP refuses to supply respirators for the workers. When the workers bring their own respirators they are told that if they use them they will be fired. Why? Because if BP allows respirators to be used they are admitting that there is a danger from exposure to these chemicals and they open themselves up to lawsuits etc.

You know, on a technical basis, the federal government could use this as a reason to nationalize oil. The only excuse they have to provide is that Congress tied the federal government's hands with regulation, which if the federal government controlled the oil, then they would have been able to do something immediate and effectively. Though bs, that is typically how politics proceeds.

I guess the determining factor in pouncing on the idea is whether or not American citizens will be more pissed off at the corporation BP or the federal government. It have been forty five or so days since either one have bothered acting on the national crisis. I mean, really? The DoD never had war plans drawn up for in-case the oil wells ever being hit during wartime? It is laughable.

What is laughable is that statement someone made(I forget who, but one of the government people in charge of this spill), who said that BP has vastly superior technology compared to what the government had, and that is the reason they got put in charged.

We all know the government sucks horribly at disaster response though. All our money is tied up in the military and stuff. If you can't bomb it, we can't solve it.

I am surprised no one in the government suggested that we just print money and throw dollar bills into the ocean, so that the paper would soak up the oil. Sounds like something they would do.

Originally Posted by Alric

What is laughable is that statement someone made(I forget who, but one of the government people in charge of this spill), who said that BP has vastly superior technology compared to what the government had, and that is the reason they got put in charged.

We all know the government sucks horribly at disaster response though. All our money is tied up in the military and stuff. If you can't bomb it, we can't solve it.

I am surprised no one in the government suggested that we just print money and throw dollar bills into the ocean, so that the paper would soak up the oil. Sounds like something they would do.

lol call ben bernanke and tell him to print another 1 trillion and throw it into the gulf, OH WAIT its spreading all over florida georgia and soon new york probably...

aw god, this is all gone crazy.

Originally Posted by guerilla

lol call ben bernanke and tell him to print another 1 trillion and throw it into the gulf, OH WAIT its spreading all over florida georgia and soon new york probably...

aw god, this is all gone crazy.

Something to note is that BP hasn't come out and given their estimate of how much oil is literally down there below the surface of the ocean floor. I don't see the media asking either, which it actually would be important to know. The reason is because for all we know, it could leak for years if nothing is done about it.

Anyone know how big of an oil reserve is at a typical location rich in oil? One hundred million barrels? One billion barrels?

Also, they finished cutting a section of the piping. The cut ended up being jagged. They said that there is a possibility that the oil flow could increase twenty percent after the cut until a cap is fitted on it. Well, with how BP is, it pretty much guarantees the oil flow will increase at least twenty percent until a cap is fitted on the pipe. On top of that, I doubt they will get the cap on it, especially since they cut the piping jagged.

What makes me wonder is, with all this freaking oil here in North America, why the hell are we buying it from the middle east?

This is a huge leak, that must mean there is tons of the stuff.

And maybe they want to 'salvage' the oil, or skyrocket oil prices, maybe that's why this microbe is not being used.

If there isn't many years worth of oil in a location, they probably wouldn't waste the money to build a rig to extract the oil in the first place. So the idea that oil could spill out for years, is pretty reasonable. It could even be 5 years, maybe even 10 years. Assuming that they didn't do anything.

To answer your question, the US has a ton of oil in the country. However government regulation serverly limits the creation of new oil drilling operations as well as the creation of new oil refineries. Its nearly all political.

They even passed new laws because of this, limiting drilling even more than we already do. So we are going to depend even more on oil from other countries.

let's nuke it

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/03/us/03nuke.html?hp

Originally Posted by no-Name

let's nuke it

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/03/us/03nuke.html?hp

"Not everyone on the Internet is calling for nuking the well. Some are making jokes. “What’s worse than an oil spill?” asked a blogger on Full Comment, a blog of The National Post in Toronto. “A radioactive oil spill.”"

I say nuke it too, but BP needs to release the geographical information. Depending on the geographical information and yield of the nuke, the potential risk factors are either an earthquake, tsunami, or both. The area that will be radioactive is a mile below the ocean, which the zone is dead with the oil spewing out from the ocean floor, which it was dead prior to the oil leak anyways. Radioactivity isn't a concern.

Personally, I think the decisions being made are leaning towards intent to create a global crisis. Anyhow, we are still going to face severe repercussions for the oil spill even if we did manage to seal it with a nuke or otherwise. We should have sealed the oil leak within the first week of it spewing.

Yea, lets not solve the problem, lets obliterate it with a nuke, WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG with this picture?

lol wow this is the twilight zone.

It actually is possible to explode nuclear bombs with very limited amount of radiation escaping into the environment. It probably could be done safely. However, its likely delicate work and we all know how worthless government is. I don't think any of us really wants to trust them to do the job right.

Originally Posted by Alric

It actually is possible to explode nuclear bombs with very limited amount of radiation escaping into the environment. It probably could be done safely. However, its likely delicate work and we all know how worthless government is. I don't think any of us really wants to trust them to do the job right.

Yeah, they probably would make it worse if they handle it how they are handling it now.

Guerilla, conventional explosives most likely wouldn't work because the ocean floor at the site is most likely sand. Won't know unless BP releases the geography of the ocean floor where the leak site is at. The only explosive that would work would be a nuke. The intense heat would turn the sand into glass. It is so deep down, you wouldn't have to worry about radiation. Also you wouldn't have to worry about it affecting life down there because there is none before and after the oil leak. It isn't a bad idea, though for the possibility of an earthquake and/or tsunami, which could only be determined by the yield and geography of the ocean floor.

Even with BP drilling two relief wells, that doesn't guarantee the leak will stop. How flabbergasted are people going to be if the oil leak stills continues a couple months from now, even after they finish the relief wells?

This will continue to leak until christmas, I bet so much.

It will magically stop on christmas eve, is that what you're saying?

Sorry to be so graphic but after cleaning up my dog's business two or three times a day for his life, though on first look it seems better than having the oil just sloshing about the ocean, I'd like to see results of long-term studies on the food chain of the "biproduct" of these oil eating microbes. Now there's a fart to light a match to.

More seriously, I wonder how lucid dreaming--which I would think expands consciousness at least by fostering wonderment about our nature and how we connect to it--might effect how we perceive, act upon and incorporate into our own lives such man-made environmental disasters. For instance, there are those who probably are quite environmentally concerned and who feel terrible about this incident yet consider investing in BP which has lost so much of its value since releasing this uncontrolled gusher and so might now present an investment opportunity.

How can this be rationalized: somebody is going to profit anyway, the need to generate income, investing in oil companies now also invests in alternate energy later as they shift their direction, willing the remains of those presumed profits back to environmental causes, etc.

In a capitalistic society driven not just by greed but even just by requiring that individuals stand on their own two feet, does lucid dreaming effect consciousness in a way that might bring more compassion to the system? More safety nets for those who have trouble standing; less greed, perhaps? Does lucid dreaming effect consciousness in a way that puts the lucid dreamer at a disadvantage in any way (unwillingness to compete, inclination to be less greedy, etc)? Or is there basically no difference between how a lucid dreamer and a non lucid dreamer might perceive events?

Is there any benefit that lucid dreaming adds in regard to our stewardship of this planet and the life it sustains? Is humanity the solution?

It's all a bit of a storm in a teacup really. I heard this doesn't even rate in the top 100 oil spills.

I'm not really sure about the politics but BP should probably be mostly responsible for it. However, the criticism from America is pretty ridiculous. Extracting oil is always going have risks associated with it. If you have so much of a problem with it, stop letting companies extract oil from your oceans, and foremost, stop buying oil from BP.

Of course this will never happen because the elephant in the room is that the whole of American civilisation is based on this oil, and this spill barely registers as a blip in comparison. It really smacks of hubris and ignorance to complain about it whilst still using petroleum products.

Originally Posted by Xei

It's all a bit of a storm in a teacup really....It really smacks of hubris and ignorance to complain about it whilst still using petroleum products.

Hubris and ignorance, huh? Following your train of thought, would you have everyone stop complaining about drunk driving whilst they still drive or still drink? Hey, you decided to drive so you have to take your chances on the road with everyone else. Or don't bother policing dirty restaurants whilst we still dine? Hey, you were too lazy to make your own damned meal, so tough luck if a waiter blows his nose in your salad.

Can someone explain the video? My internet is almost capped so I can't watch it.

Originally Posted by dream yogi

Hubris and ignorance, huh? Following your train of thought, would you have everyone stop complaining about drunk driving whilst they still drive or still drink? Hey, you decided to drive so you have to take your chances on the road with everyone else. Or don't bother policing dirty restaurants whilst we still dine? Hey, you were too lazy to make your own damned meal, so tough luck if a waiter blows his nose in your salad.

Drink driving is hardly a collateral risk, is it? 'Oh shit lol, I accidentally drank 12 pints and drove into a tree, me and my bad luck eh'...

But yes, driving seems to be a legitimate example, and I don't really see what your point is. If you go for a drive, you've accepted the risk that you could have a freak accident and be seriously injured, and there's not really anybody to curse for this.

I'm pretty sure it was not the intention of BP to spend millions drilling for this oil only for millions of barrels to escape, and to end up with a damaged reputation and costly repair job on their hands, which, by the way, no engineers seemed to have any iron cast solutions prepared for. Sometimes you follow the procedures and shit happens. Live with it, or stop buying the products of the companies who do the jobs with a non-zero risk of shit happening.

There is no such thing as zero risk. Oil spills do happen all the time, and usually they are just ignored. The only reason there is so much focus on this is because its a modern spill(spills have been happening for a hundred years), and because its in the US.

Of course any time people watch the news and the government is involved they are bound to get upset, because the government is always incompetent.

Originally Posted by Alric

Of course any time people watch the news and the government is involved they are bound to get upset, because the government is always incompetent.

How is the US government related?