Gulf Oil Spill & Continuous Outpour

[Ya Mu]

Miraculously?? How about having real safeguards at every point in the deep water system, with real plans for action if there is failure? Obviously BP was cutting costs and actually did not much care. They got lazy. What if the FAA gets lazy about safeguards and back up plans for the aviation industry, and the inspectors were getting favors and kick backs from the airlines? Isn't the government supposed to 'miraculously' try to foresee any event that might happen, regardless if we've seen anything like certain possible scenarios before? The stakes are enormous, so yes, you must have legitimate plans in place to protect the safety of many people. Same for deep water drilling. They can't just 'blow it off'.

 

When the stakes are so supremely high, it is like what Rachel Maddow said in the video cited already in this thread:

 

 

"...Never again will any company, anyone, be allowed to drill in a location where they are incapable of dealing with the potential consequences of that drilling. When the benefits of drilling accrue to a private company, but the risks of that drilling accrue to We, the American People, whose waters and shoreline are savaged when things go wrong...I, as 'President', stand on the side of the American People and say to the industry, 'from this day forward, if you cannot handle the risk, you no longer will take chances with our fate to reap the rewards'..."

 

We must demand that the oil companies have these plans and safeguards in place, with many back ups and cross checks, so we can avoid despoiling our waters and smashing the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.

Oh you misguided Songs,

The oil companies HAVE a plan. They are going to save the walrus(s) in the gulf.

[ralis]

Great speech by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse on corporate power and why it needs to be limited!

 

ralis

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8595114

[reddragon]

one of the three ingredients in the dispersant being used is propylene glycol.

the most toxic substance in the oil is Benzene. Benzene is the active ingredient

in Valium and many of it's sister molecules found in sleep aids and anti anxiety

medication. There are over thirty of them that contain Benzene. Valium is produced

by adding propylene glycol to benzene making the benzene water soluble which means it will carry in water vapor and taken up by inhalation. Benzene is an amnesiac and if bound to a chlorine or fluorine or iodine molecule will readily bind to the pineal gland.

 

Glutathione will remove benzene from the body. Iodine supplementation will speed up

displacement of fluorine or chlorine in the body. There is an old product by the name

of Wilard Water. There are calciums in it that unbind fluorine from tissues. It is produced form a form of red coal that the country of germany has found and now uses to remove chlorine and fluorine from the waste water treatment and it is highly effective.

Edited June 21, 2010 by reddragon

[reddragon]

Edited June 21, 2010 by reddragon

[reddragon]

Very strong hurricanes have been predicted in the next month. This will distribute

the benzene (Valium) There are 3-7 class 3 or higher predicted in the next month

Edited June 21, 2010 by reddragon

[joeblast]

"Nickle and dime crap." I seriously disagree here. Ar you saying oil, coal, and nuclear have not been HEAVILY subsidized in our country? How could you think that? If just solar hot water was implemented by everyone then there would be an approximate 30% reduction in utility usage. ALL that coal you see being transported from one end of the country at every hour of every day uses OIL to do so. This usage would be cut SIGNIFICANTLY. Do you think the automotive industry has not been HEAVILY subsidized? How could you think so? Just think - 70% of the population drives under 40 miles to work. Electric powered vehicles, the technology we have NOW, would do that. Say 50% of the population adopted electric cars with solar powered charging stations. 50% reduction of need for oil.

 

Do you wonder why Germany, Japan, and other countries are so far ahead of the USA in adopting solar? (oh yes they are) It is because of folks who think like you, quite specifically 8 years of oil buddy buddy hell caused by GREED of the previous administration (closed door oil bigshots with huge GREED SETTING energy policy! Still can't believe the American people stood for this!) and the backers of said administration. And the current administration is not really doing anything to pull us out of this oil oil oil addiction either.

 

I was around when solar tax credits existed late 70's early 80's. A HUGE industry sprang up, making great strides in solar efficiency and implementation. Then BAM, oil interests were successful in getting the subsidies pulled, and the industry crashed like a brick. Just think what could be if that hadn't happened.

 

Have you ever SEEN a solar hot water heater?

 

"Are you saying X? Because if you are, I've got a whole bunch of rebuttals against that."

 

I love how it all revolves around establishing some sort of disagreeable context with my words, and then arguments are made on assumed inferences. Apparently my positions present some sort of dichotomy for a bunch of you guys? While I type moderately fast and am verbose at times, I'm not all that inclined to endlessly clarify my positions here.

 

Ya Mu, thanks for being straightforward and cordial. While its lamentable that the industries flourished for a while, the fact that they crashed sans subsidies was a little telling. I'll be clear, I support any and all forms of energy harvesting, so long as they're not destructive. I understand that subsidies can, do, and will forever exist, my main point was that oversubsidization distorts the markets, as does overregulation (although that facet seems to drive people to think that I dont support oil drilling being regulated, somehow?) Germany may be well ahead of us in terms of solar development but the level of subsidies does have a price - extrapolate a bit and look at spain! At the same time, I think a solar cell on every roof is a great idea.

 

SoDE, all I get from you is sarcasm - I use it once or twice with you on "global warming" and that's all I get in future replies? Once again you're attacking with things you view my opinion as being contrary to, but I guess you've been speed-reading my replies to the point that you cant detect any nuance and thus my position gets put in a particular box in your head. I gotta say, I cant really compete with your fantasies

 

Blasto...amusing that you think many of these things are wholly incompatible. Sorry you havent been able to glean anything of value from *any* of my posts whatsoever

[Ya Mu]

...

Ya Mu, thanks for being straightforward and cordial. While its lamentable that the industries flourished for a while, the fact that they crashed sans subsidies was a little telling. I'll be clear, I support any and all forms of energy harvesting, so long as they're not destructive. I understand that subsidies can, do, and will forever exist, my main point was that oversubsidization distorts the markets, as does overregulation (although that facet seems to drive people to think that I dont support oil drilling being regulated, somehow?) Germany may be well ahead of us in terms of solar development but the level of subsidies does have a price - extrapolate a bit and look at spain! At the same time, I think a solar cell on every roof is a great idea.

...

If all was equitable, as in an equal playing field, as in no more oil, coal, nuclear subsidies, then I would agree with you. IMO if the government ceased all subsidies and let there be an equal playing field, then we would find solar to be extremely viable, oil not at all viable, nuclear not at all viable, and we would proceed to totally change the way we do things.

I'll admit a certain bias towards solar & wind energy as these are the only forms of energy production (current technology) which make sense to me.

[Encephalon]

Mismanaging Contraction

By James Howard Kunstler

on June 21, 2010 8:53 AM

www.kuntsler.com

 

Lesson of the Macondo: Blowout preventers don't prevent blowouts. This comes as a shock to people attuned to the on-schedule arrival of techno-miracles. Now, all the acronym-studded invocations of techno-mastery by men wearing interesting hats will not avail to put the schnitz on an epic horror show in the Gulf of Mexico.

 

President Obama's speech to the nation a week ago was designed as a kind of blowout preventer for the legitimacy of the federal government. It did little to stop the hemorrhaging of confidence in political leadership. A nation foundering in a crippled vessel in the horse latitudes of collective purpose on a sea of red ink looks to its captain - who puffs a few platitudes into the tattered sails and retreats belowdecks to pace and stew. This is a society truly lost at sea, where even the friendly dolphins are turning belly-up and the dying seabirds stare accusingly under their cloaks of crude oil. The feeling grows that we can't do anything right. Will someone please turn off the TV?

 

In 2008, the voters turned to a lanky newcomer from Illinois to rescue itself from just the sort of technocrat jerkoffs who had run the nation into a ditch with their invocations of "mission accomplished" and "Good job, Brownie." Change was in the air. Alas, consistent with the apparent fact that history rhymes but doesn't repeat, Barack Obama proved to be the reincarnation of Millard Fillmore, not Abe Lincoln. Sometimes history works in free verse and this stanza was off by a few syllables. It turns out that change was exactly the one thing not really in the air. America does not want change, except from the cash register at WalMart.

 

The last time America faced a convulsion as profound as the present one was the late 1850s. The internal contradiction of slavery was driving the nation crazy. The Whig party had been running things for a couple of decades. The Whigs were the party of Daniel Webster and Henry Clay. They tried everything possible to finesse the expansion of US territory around the inflammatory issue of slavery. Fillmore came along just in time for the Compromise of 1850, which was intended to settle things and did absolutely nothing to settle things. By the time the election of 1852 happened, Both Webster and Clay were old men preparing to meet their maker and the Whig party absolutely fell apart. Scroll forward a few years and we're in the slaughterhouse of The Civil War.

 

A hundred and sixty years later now, and the USA faces a new and very different set of internal contradictions. We've ramped up a living arrangement that has no future, just as slavery had no future. We're uncomfortable with the mandates of reality, which is trying to tell us we have to live differently. The American people don't want to hear this. The president doesn't want to tell them. It's possible that he is not tuned into the reality radio station that is broadcasting its mandates. You'd think the Macondo Blowout horror show was coming across loud and clear.

 

Right after President Obama gave his vapid speech last week, he traveled to Ohio to brag about how much federal stimulus money was going into "shovel-ready" highway projects there. I sincerely believe that the last thing we need right now in this country is more and better highways. Every president since Jimmy Carter has acknowledged that there's a problem with our extreme oil dependency, but none of them have made the short leap to understand that we have a more fundamental problem with car dependency. Someone paying attention to the mandates of reality would get the choo-choo trains running from Dayton to Columbus to Cincinnati to Cleveland - and he would tell General Motors to get into the business of making railroad cars so we don't have to import them from Canada.

 

Reality is telling us to downscale and get different fast. Quit doing everything possible to prop up the drive-in false utopia and all its accessories. Get local. Tighten up. We have no intention of doing that. The idiocy that passes as informed opinion wants the US money managers to kick out the jambs handing out more money created out of thin air to promote a fantasy called "recovery." To what purpose? To keep the tailgate parties going down at the Nascar ovals? Over at The New York Times Monday morning, the fatuous Paul Krugman says that "stinting on spending now threatens the economic recovery." Earth to Krugman: we're mismanaging contraction. Further expansion is just not in the cards right now for the human race. We don't need more people on the planet and we don't have the means to accommodate them. There will be no 'recovery" to "growth" - especially by means of pumping more oil into the system. There is no techno-miracle alt-fuel panoply waiting in the wings to take over from oil. And there is no research-and-development program that will make it happen, no matter how many acronym-studded incantations we drone out.

 

I admit that contraction is a hard reality - but so is the recognition that we don't get to live forever, something every child begins to grapple with around age seven. The inability to face comprehensive contraction will only insure that its side effects are more debilitating.

____________

[joeblast]

If all was equitable, as in an equal playing field, as in no more oil, coal, nuclear subsidies, then I would agree with you. IMO if the government ceased all subsidies and let there be an equal playing field, then we would find solar to be extremely viable, oil not at all viable, nuclear not at all viable, and we would proceed to totally change the way we do things.

I'll admit a certain bias towards solar & wind energy as these are the only forms of energy production (current technology) which make sense to me.

"If the government ceased all subsidies" appears to realistically translate to "if we were somehow starting from scratch right now." Solar is "viable" on a home by home basis but large scale, you're just not going to be able to build a solar power plant that generates anywhere near the amount of kWh as a fossil fuel plant or a nuclear plant. "Viable" in real world terms means economically as well as practically. (But please dont interpret that as me being against utilizing solar on an individual basis!)

 

Will you be against antimatter energy generation in the future because of the inherent dangers of the energy source? Unfortunately the more volatile the source, the more potent the fuel.

 

Indeterminate Antimatter ≈89,876,000,000 MJ/kg

Deuterium-tritium fusion 576,000,000 MJ/kg

Reactor-grade uranium (3.5% U-235) in light water reactor 3,456,000 MJ/kg

gasoline 32 MJ/L

battery, Lithium ion nanowire 2.54 MJ/kg

 

 

 

Good article, blasto - tell that to the unions in greece who think they're entitled to no wage/benefit reductions whatsoever!

Edited June 22, 2010 by joeblast

[Ya Mu]

"If the government ceased all subsidies" appears to realistically translate to "if we were somehow starting from scratch right now." Solar is "viable" on a home by home basis but large scale, you're just not going to be able to build a solar power plant that generates anywhere near the amount of kWh as a fossil fuel plant or a nuclear plant. "Viable" in real world terms means economically as well as practically. (But please dont interpret that as me being against utilizing solar on an individual basis!)

 

Will you be against antimatter energy generation in the future because of the inherent dangers of the energy source? Unfortunately the more volatile the source, the more potent the fuel.

 

Indeterminate Antimatter ≈89,876,000,000 MJ/kg

Deuterium-tritium fusion 576,000,000 MJ/kg

Reactor-grade uranium (3.5% U-235) in light water reactor 3,456,000 MJ/kg

gasoline 32 MJ/L

battery, Lithium ion nanowire 2.54 MJ/kg

 

...

 

Ah, but you are focusing on central-generated power. This is the fallacy in most people's thinking concerning power generation. Distributed power stations via solar and wind are indeed viable and work quite well, even at today's technology. Distributed power stations remove the expense of running insane distances of energy travel with all the inherent losses of efficiency. Also they help remove the threat of a central power generating station failing due to natural disaster or ill intentioned means.

 

My point is that the level of subsidies of coal, oil, and nuclear is extremely large and if it was a level playing field, solar technology holds it's own in viability. Once it is installed, oil used to transfer the coal clear across the country is no longer needed. Have you been around a power station - constant feeding of coal, car after car after car, usually transported an extremely long way, day in and day out. I don't see how anyone thinks this makes sense.

You were complaining about subsidies, why would you support the current subsidies of oil, coal, and nuclear?

 

You cannot show me we can dispose of nuclear waste safely (oh but not in your backyard, eh?) and you cannot show me where any type of nuclear power plants are safe and are not disasters waiting to happen. Solar IS safe - it only takes doing. For the price of that car that most people drive, they can have a solar system that will generate their power needs for the next 30-40 years AND that will, in peak power when it is needed, put distributed power back into the grid for others.

 

Antimatter? I am referring to technology available today and that can be implemented today.

[idquest]

My point is that the level of subsidies of coal, oil, and nuclear is extremely large and if it was a level playing field, solar technology holds it's own in viability.

Totally agree. Unfortunately, so few people do realize the extent to which oil/gas is subsidized at least in the USA (not sure about Venezuela though).

[joeblast]

in Venezuela it doesnt really matter, Hugo is taking control of just about every business in the country at the rate he's going...

 

 

 

I dont support the subsidies, we'd all be better off with a level playing field

 

Mostly safe/very high output vs completely safe, low output...like I said all forms, centralized as well as personal, that's the way to do it. If we do truly have "an energy crisis," that is. People toss around the word crisis like the word enlightenment is tossed around.

 

 

I mentioned antimatter because of its ridiculously high energy density - it will only be a matter of time before that's a viable method, as it will be for fusion (only much less time)...but I was mainly putting together a little context. Actually, regarding subsidies, fusion is something that should be subsidized but only until the technology becomes viable.

[Encephalon]

"This is it" (the final nail in the coffin of our brief 200-year old love affair with cheap oil and everything else we've taken for granted).

 

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/BreakingNews.html

[joeblast]

...and the administration attempts to compound the energy crisis in the form on the drilling moratorium - none of these rigs are going to sit idle for 6 months while this plays out. Looks like the couple billion the admin approved to be lent to Petrobas is going to come in handy since Brazil is already trying to secure some of the rigs! Of course, Salazar sees no issue with distorting the words of the experts that were convened, choosing to alter their words and ostensibly make their recommendation something other than it really was. Of course nobody has a problem with government heavy-handedness since its not coming from bush?

 

Nothing more than political games in order to try and get cap-n-trade passed. Or the great american energy act, whatever fancy words they're trying to adorn a massive energy tax with. Just more "spreading the wealth" trying to make a poor man rich by making a rich man poor.

 

 

 

In worse news, they crashed a robot into the collector and had to remove it, so the spill is back to "full" strength presently...

[gendao]

You guys are absolutely right about Big Government subsidies distorting free market capitalism here! Without all the oil subsidies we give Big Oil, gas would actually cost triple its price! Which means that alternative energy is actually the more economical AND ecological solution...except Big Government intervention (not free market capitalism) has artifically altered that. Hence, Big Government intervention is VERY ANTI-Taoist!

"This is it" (the final nail in the coffin of our brief 200-year old love affair with cheap oil and everything else we've taken for granted).

 

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/BreakingNews.html

There may be no way to stop the leak, and it could take 9000 days (over 24 years) for the gusher to end, while we wait for the well to simply run out.

If true, then this is truly a cataclysm of Biblical proportions. And may even be the 7th Sign referred to in the Hopi Prophecy:

"This is the Seventh Sign: You will hear of the sea turning black, and many living things dying because of it."

 

"This is the Eight Sign: You will see many youth, who wear their hair long like my people, come and join the tribal nations, to learn their ways and wisdom.

 

"And this is the Ninth and Last Sign: You will hear of a dwelling-place in the heavens, above the earth, that shall fall with a great crash. It will appear as a blue star. Very soon after this, the ceremonies of my people will cease.

The 7th Sign has been attributed to previous oil spills before, but could this be the REAL one here?

 

Conspiracy theorists believe this is another 9/11-style false flag disaster that the NWObama may exploit later to justify coastal evacuations to FEMA camps... Or at the least, nationalize the oil industry!

[Encephalon]

...and the administration attempts to compound the energy crisis in the form on the drilling moratorium - none of these rigs are going to sit idle for 6 months while this plays out. Looks like the couple billion the admin approved to be lent to Petrobas is going to come in handy since Brazil is already trying to secure some of the rigs! Of course, Salazar sees no issue with distorting the words of the experts that were convened, choosing to alter their words and ostensibly make their recommendation something other than it really was. Of course nobody has a problem with government heavy-handedness since its not coming from bush?

 

Nothing more than political games in order to try and get cap-n-trade passed. Or the great american energy act, whatever fancy words they're trying to adorn a massive energy tax with. Just more "spreading the wealth" trying to make a poor man rich by making a rich man poor.

 

 

 

In worse news, they crashed a robot into the collector and had to remove it, so the spill is back to "full" strength presently...

 

 

Interpreting reality through the lens of American partisan politics is a meaningless and futile practice, Joe. I can't recall a single event in the last year and a half where you didn't chime in without first channeling the spirit of Karl Rove or consulting the oracle of Fox News. The American political spectrum is so pathetically narrow now anyway, as Orwell long ago warned, that we've lost the ability to even discuss issues meaningfully.

 

Yin yang is not "Left/Right." It's about balance. Every thinking person I know, professionally or from grad school, students and professors, vote the liberal ticket almost exclusively. This is not because we are enamoured with the Democratic party, or even subscribe to all their views. Virtually all of us possess value systems that are culled from the throughout the political and philosophical spectrum. We have libertarian and conservative views on a range of issues. We vote liberal because the political center of gravity has shifted so far the to Right that we've become unbalanced in the way the culture conceives challenges and solutions.

 

It's up to you, but you might want to go on a corporate news fast, and maybe get an education(?). I was a high school dropout, a runaway, and a raging alcoholic, so there's hope for anyone.

 

Sincerely,

Your pedantic Ass

"reeking of haughtiness"

[joeblast]

The point is the issues and topics at hand, although...where the information comes from seems to trump what the information actually is to some people.

 

As to "so far to the right" - well, this country is traditionally a center-right leaning country - so when one views things from significantly left, center-right seems way right. Dont harp on me for your views! As to your veiled allusion that I'm an unthinking person because my views support a practical and limited government over one that is going to enforce good upon you and take whatever it needs to get it done, well...go ahead and project your biases - I'm not sure if you're trying to bother me or simply discredit my point of view, but you're not really doing a good job of either - it immediately gets out of the realm of fact and into personal issues. Instead of discussing the validity of an issue, you attack character, the source of the information...just not the information itself.

 

So...back to the real world - you think it was okay for Salazar to change the wordings of the experts to say something they explicitly disagreed with, for the reason of furthering a political line?

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

 

 

Nothing more than political games in order to try and get cap-n-trade passed. Or the great american energy act, whatever fancy words they're trying to adorn a massive energy tax with. Just more "spreading the wealth" trying to make a poor man rich by making a rich man poor.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry Joe, your cynical posts simply cry out for sarcastic reposte.

Edited June 23, 2010 by TheSongsofDistantEarth

[Samurai Jane]

Aside from the catastrophe itself it's the same old political theatrics, which I avoid. I unplugged the cable 3 years ago and shoved the brainwashing machine into a back room.

 

I'd be happy with 40 acres and a mule just to enjoy the peace and quiet and to stop supporting the anti-life war machine regime.

[joeblast]

Sorry Joey, your cynical posts simply cry out for sarcastic reposte.

hah...I do distrust the motives behind spreading the wealth - but instead of an appropriate weight given to such a comment, it becomes the focus - perhaps if I prefaced it with "pick out the main concept of this paragraph?" I think that was a third grade exercise from back in the day - do they still teach it in school?

[ralis]

Seems as if BP is only interested in recovering the oil. I see no plans other than relief wells for plugging this well.

 

ralis

[joeblast]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/24/us/24rig.html?ref=us

 

I dont see any reason why BP should be trusted with pioneering new drilling techniques in light of this huge lack of protocol. Especially something potentially more dangerous. Funny though, this was excluded from the moratorium by the Obama admin - and they even let BP submit their own ecological risk assessment (or whatever the relative equivalent is.) So do generous donations make a difference?

[idquest]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/24/us/24rig.html?ref=us

 

I dont see any reason why BP should be trusted with pioneering new drilling techniques in light of this huge lack of protocol. Especially something potentially more dangerous. Funny though, this was excluded from the moratorium by the Obama admin - and they even let BP submit their own ecological risk assessment (or whatever the relative equivalent is.) So do generous donations make a difference?

Yes, and this self-assessment was done in 2007 according to NYT.

[gendao]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/24/us/24rig.html?ref=us

 

I dont see any reason why BP should be trusted with pioneering new drilling techniques in light of this huge lack of protocol. Especially something potentially more dangerous. Funny though, this was excluded from the moratorium by the Obama admin - and they even let BP submit their own ecological risk assessment (or whatever the relative equivalent is.) So do generous donations make a difference?

Well, not when it comes to liberals - who are the impeachably noble crusaders out to save our planet!

 

I'm sure Obama exempted BP mainly appease the GOP, not because he 'owed' big oil per se. Just like he did when he permitted offshore drilling back in March!

There are two prohibitions on offshore drilling, one imposed by Congress and another by executive order signed by the first President Bush in 1990.

 

A succession of presidents, from Bush's father -- George H.W. Bush -- to Bill Clinton, have sided against drilling in these waters, as has Congress each year for 27 years. Their goal has to been to protect beaches and coastal states' tourism economies.

Yup, our Nobel Prize winner can do no wrong. It's all the GOP's fault!!! (Even though a Repub first issued the EO offshore drilling ban back in 1990.)

about three miles off the coast of Alaska, BP is moving ahead with a controversial and potentially record-setting project to drill two miles under the sea and then six to eight miles horizontally to reach what is believed to be a 100-million-barrel reservoir of oil under federal waters.

 

All other new projects in the Arctic have been halted by the Obama administrations moratorium on offshore drilling, including more traditional projects like Shell Oils plans to drill three wells in the Chukchi Sea and two in the Beaufort.

 

But BPs project, called Liberty, has been exempted

 

The environmental assessment was taken away from the agencys unit that typically handles such reviews, and put in the hands of a different division that was more pro-drilling

 

The whole process for approving Liberty was bizarre, one of the federal scientists said.

 

The scientists and other critics say they are worried about a replay of the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico because the Liberty project involves a method of drilling called extended reach that experts say is more prone to the types of gas kicks that triggered the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon.

 

It makes no sense, said Rebecca Noblin, the Alaska director for the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental watchdog group. BP pushes the envelope in the gulf and ends up causing the moratorium. And now in the Arctic they are forging ahead again with untested technology, and as a result theyre the only ones left being allowed to drill there.

 

BP has defended the project in its proposal, saying it is safe and environmentally friendly.

 

federal scientists say that BP should never have been allowed to do environmental reviews that are the responsibility of the regulators. And yet, the language of the environmental consequences sections of the final 2007 federal assessment and BPs own assessment submitted earlier the same year are virtually identical.

 

No such overlap existed in the documents for other major projects approved by the same office around the same time, a review of the documents shows.

 

Two weeks after the Obama administration declared a moratorium on offshore drilling on May 27, BP announced that the Liberty project would continue, with drilling scheduled to start in the fall, generating its first oil production by 2011.

 

The Liberty project will tie into the Endicott pipeline when complete. On April 20, the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration warned BP that it was in probable violation of federal standards because of corrosion found on its Endicott oil pipeline and a lack of records indicating corrosion protection and monitoring efforts.

 

BP has faced a number of challenges at its Alaska facilities. The company sustained two corrosion-caused leaks in its rigs in Prudhoe Bay in 2006, including a leak of over 200,000 gallons that cost the company around $20 million in fines and restitution. This was the largest spill to have occurred on Alaskas North Slope.

Yup, no special Presidential treatment for BP there! :lol: Edited June 24, 2010 by vortex

[ralis]

Just found this article on Huff Post. Gulf coast AG's are filing RICO charges against BP. These are serious criminal charges!

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4440908

 

ralis