Quote:
Originally Posted by cres
Oil spill is not the same as a ruptured newly drilled well. 30 years ago a similar incident occurred, the manual should have included a chapter. If it were only a theoretical accident then the omission could be understandable.
You're engaged in an alternative reality.
Oil Spill
An oil spill is a release of a liquid petroleum hydrocarbon into the environment due to human activity, and is a form of pollution. The term often refers to marine oil spills, where oil is released into the ocean or coastal waters. Oil spills include releases of crude oil from tankers, offshore platforms, drilling rigs and wells, as well as spills of refined petroleum products (such as gasoline, diesel) and their by-products, and heavier fuels used by large ships such as bunker fuel, or the spill of any oily refuse or waste oil. Spills may take months or even years to clean up.[1]
Quote:
The industry wants to proceed on a backwards thinking strategy on environmental issues, while they use a forward thinking plan for extraction issues. Former is a cost while the latter is a profit, I get it makes financial sense.
Source and apparently if so US govt does to.
Quote:
To clean up the mess is actually easy, skimmer barges, fleets upon fleets working in the Gulf could control the slick. Just add $$$$$$$$$. But the underlying issue(full pun intended) is the new oil ejected by full pressure. Where was the plan to address the possibility?
I don't know, point is though that apparently BP followed US law in developing the plan.
Quote:
If you lobby hard enough, grease the appropriate wheels, you can change anything. They chose the probable(less expensive) over the possible.
Gov't is as guilty as the exploration companies, they both believe its acceptable to **** up and just pass the costs along.
To me this is stating the models in question were developed in bad faith. I doubt that very much, we'll just have to agree to disagree.