Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 xlr8ingmargo
Joined: 7/28/2009
Msg: 92
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...Page 3 of 33    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33)
^^^ Very well said. I remember getting picked on for my cloth diapers, home made baby food, compost piles, organizing coastal clean ups, home made organic house hold cleaners, home made soaps, and recycling everything I could. I was considered extreme in my views then. I wish more people would get concerned so those like myself would remain encouraged to keep going. Im just burnt out knowing when I clean up a mile of beach and walk back to my car with bags of trash I pass crap all over again. Its like Im not even making a dent. I now take videos and give them to beach patrol for the littering fine. Its like a life time of caring doesnt mean a rats butt cause no one else does. Yet when theres an oil spill everyone that throws garbage out of their car, leaves cigarettes on the beach, spills chemicals in their yard, throws away toxic substances in the garbage, and never recycles says "look what they are doing". Look at your own self.
I know next week end Im going to the coast with hefty bags ans gloves.
Im going to pick up garbage while tourist pick up shells.
 FrankNStein902
Joined: 12/26/2009
Msg: 93
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/21/2010 11:50:11 AM

how much more can mother nature handle?

She has and can much more than we can ever do to her.

Mother nature is not at risk, it is man that is in trouble or at least someones pocketbook, which seems to be the main motivation of the news networks.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 96
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/21/2010 9:42:09 PM
Obviously the current and historic use of fossil fuels is less than ideal. But from what's been written on this page it seems as though people don't realize that the grass is still green, the sky is still blue, the squirrels are still here.

What data are you all using to justify your apocalyptic analysis?

Civilization is in a biologically "better" state today than at any point in human history. That includes all peoples of the world. Live expectancy and disease survival rates are up and infant mortality rates are down across the board.

The world is not coming to an end because human beings use oil. And yes, that includes plants and animals.

An unintended consequence of the use of petroleum-based products is that human beings are now more occupied listening to their iPods and reading Wikipedia than by hunting and gathering everything around them into near oblivion - as used to be the case. Educate yourself on early human civilization and you'll see that slash and burn agriculture is the history of the human race. It was extremely common for entire populations of animals to be decimated to feed a village. And yes *sigh* that includes the Native Americans. They were actual people ya know - no worse or better than anyone else - and not these little caricatures our popular media likes to portray them as.


(Not posting this to pick on the Native Americans by any means. Europeans, Asians, and the rest of the world was no different. I just want to propagate a more accurate understanding of human history):

"The cumulative impact of burning by Native Americans profoundly altered the landscape. When first encountered by Europeans, many ecosystems were the result of repeated fires every one to three years, resulting in the replacement of forests with grassland or savanna, or opening up the forest by removing undergrowth. More forest exists today in some parts of North America than when the Europeans first arrived. "


-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_use_of_fire


It's a curious thing how the rise of the use of oil in the US has occurred simultaneously with a dramatic rise in the number of trees and population of animals like beavers and bald eagles in North America. Don't misunderstand me. I don't think this has happened because we use oil. I think it's (largely) because use use energy.

Using fossil fuels does impose costs. But it is not destroying the planet. Even the number of animals kills in the tragic Exxon Valdez accident pales in comparison to the number of animals killed in any given day to supply human beings with flesh to frivolously consume.

If you want to save animals, then your efforts will have a far greater impact by supporting vegetarianism than by attacking oil. Even if you ignore brutal factory farming, oceanic fishing alone kills far more animals than do oil spills. There's no comparison whatsoever.

I mean, I'm all for advancing past fossil fuels and for accurately acknowledging and pricing the costs of oil... but good god, that doesn't mean we should sacrifice honesty, perspective, and rationality. Are these not the very things that give us our humanity?

My first post expressed a fear that this would happen.

The best thing we can do in my opinion is demand our congressman/women impose the costs of this spill on the BP shareholders and the other responsible parties. Make them pay for what they did. That means make them pay for the costs of the cleanup, make them pay for the losses suffered by businesses affected by the spill, and make them pay for a rationally-determined cost of the ecological damage. That way the price of their product will incorporate its external costs.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 98
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/21/2010 10:36:14 PM
You still haven't given up on that semantic, non-argument?
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 100
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/21/2010 10:57:02 PM
How many times do I have to tell you? You are attributing to me a claim that I never made.

I wrote "offshore drilling is over 99% safe". That is not a claim. That is a string of words. The claim is the meaning the words imply. Said meaning is that which I attribute to them, not you. I clearly defined my use of the term "safe" in the context I used the word: barrels of oil successfully delivered to land vs barrels of oil spilled into the water. But you can't accept it. You are substituting your own definition in place of mine and thereby substituting my claim with the one you, for whatever reason, are attributing to me.

It'd be a good idea to study linguistics before perverting Aristotle.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 101
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/21/2010 11:09:54 PM

Empirical data really sucks, when you're on the "loser" side.

Its on mine.

Look up any figures of volume of oil produced by offshore drills in a given decade and compare them to amount spilled by them in the same time period. Any decade you want.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 104
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/21/2010 11:33:09 PM
Quietjohn


I have no idea. Laissez faire is not a system immune to accidents. And that's what this was.

If anyone could have known this would have happened, it would be BP. They not only have far more resources and technical knowledge of drilling oil and the capability and limitations of their equipment at their disposal than any politician, but they also had the greatest interest in preventing it from happening in the first place. Why would they ignore the risk if it was known? The only rational reason would be if they were confident they wouldn't have to pay for the costs. If property rights weren't being enforced. I'm sure that was some part of the equation. After all, Exxon only had to pay 25% of the cleanup costs of their Valdez spill, if my memory serves me. So I'm sure that BP operated with some belief that they could get around some costs. But the cost of this spill is so high that it is irrational to think that they would have ignored it if they knew about it.

People are acting as if BP is gaining from this. They are among the biggest losers here, obviously behind the animals that have and inevitably will be killed. And they should be. It is their accident. They should be responsible for the full costs of it.

So, I don't know.

But what I do know is that the oil industry would never have gotten the enormous subsidies and tax breaks that they have if they existed under a under a lassez faire system. Plus there would be far more competition in the industry. BP, Exxon, Shell wouldn't have half of congress in their pocket, either. Moreover, I would expect that the Gulf Coast would likely be owned by hundreds of thousands of people under a Laissez Faire system - much like land is. And I believe they would almost certainly be far more effective in demanding from BP full compensation the costs of this accident than will our government be, supposedly on our behalf.

Laissez faire doesn't mean anarchy. At least not when I use it. It requires a strong legal system, including policing and a robust court of law.

Plus I would expect to see a form of "Cap and Trade" legislated and enforced by the courts as this is the only practical way to enforce property rights in the air - which is why I support it now. That would be superior to our EPA in my opinion, which is largely influenced by our oil corporations. But this has more to do with the use of oil rather than spills. But it's still somewhat relevant.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 105
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 12:09:48 AM
It requires a strong legal system, including policing and a robust court of law that enforces property rights.***
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 107
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 4:33:13 AM
Okay, I'm going to try to tackle this quickly.

My age is a complete non sequitur. The number of years I have been alive has no bearing whatsoever on the points that I made. I... understand the temptation to believe that youths don't know as much as you do. But, it is an invalid argument according to logic. Literally. And logic is the language of philosophy, which is the forum we're in.


Secondly, I know this thread isn't about me. I'm not sure what you meant by that lol?


Thirdly, I'm not sure how you qualify me as writing like "Gerry Springer". I've merely tried to keep things in perspective by applying principles of empiricism, valid epistemological reasoning, and logic to the discussion. Not sure how that relates to a frivolous talk show host lol. If you're referring to my earlier posts directed at Krebby, they're the result of his ad hominem attacks against me in this and other threads. It's a personal thing. Although I'll add that my latest responses against him have been docile despite his continued personal attacks lol.


And I have no sense of what others are trying to say? What makes you say that? Have I inaccurately described someone's points or something? I've read every single post in this thread. I think I have a pretty good understanding of what's been said. Do you think that because I don't believe the evidence warrants an apocalyptic discussion of the state and/or direction of the planet that I do not have a sense of what others have said?


Also, I never attempted to argue that history repeats itself. Not once. Not sure what gave you that idea.


And I'm not trying to make anyone feel stupid. Why would anyone feel "stupid" after reading my posts if I make virtually no good points as you've said? I speak with confidence because I make rational arguments based on evidence. I don't see how that could make anyone feel stupid.



I'd also like to question what resources do you consider finite? Fresh water, trees, agricultural goods, etc all are a part of a renewable cycle and exist in greater quantities today than they did 100 years ago despite our vastly increased consumption of them. That's the case in the United States, at least. Most resources on this planet are not utterly finite. We have control over their reproduction.


Also, scarcity (what I believe you've described as rarity) is not the result of greed. Scarcity is a feature of reality. All resources are scarce. Human perception has nothing to do with it.


I completely agree with you that we need one another and that we will be better off if we promote a healthy planet. Do you think I want to trash the planet or something? I think if you gave my posts an honest read and my arguments an honest thought, you'd clearly see that's not the case. I just believe a rational, descriptive conversation is not only more relevant to this forum (Science/Philosophy) but also more practical to the conversation of how to "fix the problem" than the emotional-based, normative/prescriptive discussion that has been starting to consume this thread. We don't make rational decisions based on normative, emotional claims. We make them based on descriptive empiricism. At least that's what I believe.


I agree wholeheartedly that BP doesn't have the ability (now) to solve this problem on their own. They obviously didn't invest in adequate equipment to clean after a spill of this magnitude. I'm not sure why you're bringing this up against me. I've claimed, repeatedly that I want the government to organize to clean up the mess (with BP's help) and for the courts to stick the bill with the BP stockholders.
I mean... you claimed that you don't read my posts. That's perfectly fine. But why argue against my points when you don't even read them? I never claimed that this we should just wait and expect BP to clean the mess themselves. Not once.

Don't you see the obvious waste of time and effort in challenging claims that were never made? This is just a strawman : /



Anyways, I can tell you're a good person who means well. I know you're not trying to belittle me by referencing my age. So no offence taken. I hope you haven't taken any offence from my posts. And if you decide to continue this conversation with me, I just hope we can stick to the points that we make and try to limit ourselves to principles of logic and empiricism.

...I hope you're enjoying your Saturday morning : )
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 109
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 5:21:09 AM

By the by, just by using the words... Educate yourself, makes your style of writing look very condescending...

I can see how one can interpret it that way... but it wasn't meant that way at all. I was just conveying the point that if you learn about the history of human civilization, you'll see that the techniques humans used to supply themselves with food, lumber, land, etc were brutal.

And I wasn't stating that history repeats itself at all. I was stating just the opposite. Didn't you read my bit on the curious fact that as we've used more and more oil, we've also seen a dramatic increase in the number of trees and populations of animals such as beavers and bald eagles? I was arguing that poor, earlier human civilization had to engage in slash and burn agriculture in order to sustain themselves. Today we don't. Not in nations rich with capital.

This is why it's useful to read a post thoroughly before responding. So you don't inadvertently attack strawmen : /

I'm not arguing for correlation. I'm arguing against the idea that the use of oil decimates the planet lol. The US consumes by far most oil on the planet. Yet we have pretty darn green grass, thriving animal populations, growing forests, etc. I just don't see any evidence to warrant the apocalyptic claims that have been made. There's plenty of evidence that the use of oil imposes costs, but not widespread global destruction. This current spill may have that potential considering the ongoing nature of the accident. I just hope the leak can be sealed and that the responsible parties are forced to pay for the costs they've imposed.

And, about finite resources.. you are simply mistaken. This is a matter of fact, not opinion. Human beings are fully capable of replenishing resources like trees faster rate than we use them. We've been doing it for decades in North America. It is a fact that there are more trees in the United States today than there were 100 years ago. That's one of the many beauties of the price system. Greed encourages people to ensure the renewal of valuable assets that can be renewed.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 110
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 5:28:27 AM
double post : (
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 112
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 5:57:38 AM
I've watched the Story of Stuff. It is leftist propaganda filled with literal lies and zero understanding of economics. Its so unfortunate that it is being shown to elementary school kids.

You should watch Lee Doran's critique of it. That is if you are intellectually honest and will give the "other side" a fair chance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5uJgG05xUY - Part 1





You can make the claim that we are "enslaving" people in third world nations. Go on ahead. But guess what. Since India opened the borders to trade and allowed the US to "enslave" their citizens and "exploit" their resources, their poverty rates have cut in half in less than two generations. The same goes for China and just about every other nation the global economy trades with.

The nations NOT heavily involved in international trade are the ones that are poorest.

Again, you are simply mistaken about this. The Story of Stuff and the paradigms of thought on which it operates are not consistent with reality. Life is not a zero sum game. Both parties can benefit from trade. This is where an understanding of economics comes in.



*edit*

And what the f*ck, man. You keep harping on me about being condescending, but you CONTINUE to attack strawmen and throw non sequitur against me. Why are you stating that oil adds chemicals to marine life as if its an argument against me? I've acknowledged this fact over and over in this thread. Just because I rightly say that the empirical evidence doesn't warrant apocalyptic claims doesn't mean I don't believe oil imposes ecological costs. You're acting as you one has to take an extreme position.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 114
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 6:06:47 AM
Did you not know that global poverty rates have been plummeting for decades? International trade and the global movement towards capitalism has been lifting humanity out of starvation and disease for many, many years now.

And outsourcing is a beneficial thing for both parties involved, provided it is the result of relative free competition. It's all about optimizing opportunity cost. Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case here in the US. Much of our outsourcing is the result of our inept and largely corrupt government imposing such high taxes and costly controls on our businesses that they flee the country to nations that don't impose such high taxes and costly controls on them. That kind of government-forced outsourcing tends to help foreign workers at the expense of domestic workers.

Companies don't want to outsource. They know their customers prefer to see "Made in America" for most goods. They know their customers scoff at companies that outsource. And ultimately, that's what a company wants to do. Please its customers to generate profits.

They outsource because it costs less. Less expensive labor is only one appeal of moving production overseas. It alone rarely is enough to justify the costs of outsourcing for most industries that outsource. The lower corporate taxes and the costs of meeting regulations are often the motivating factor.

Our politicians bring much of our outsourcing on us. And we expect them to solve the problem?
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 115
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 6:23:13 AM
lol @ assuming I've never thought outside the box

I'm done with you. You are extremely offensive, hypocritical, intellectually dishonest, and maintain an extremely pompous view of yourself. You see the "big picture" huh? Not me?

I've never "thought outside the box".

What a crock of sh*t. I was obviously wrong about you having intentions of maintaining a logical, rational discussion.

Peace.




Reposting from the the poverty thread:





I just want to say openly that if I were one of the "adults" here and the only way I could respond to an argument presented by someone such as myself is with "you're too young/naive" then I would feel f*cking pathetic about myself.

It's so freaking sad how many of the 30somethings and older here, who voluntarily post in the SCIENCE and PHILOSOPHY forum, think appealing to age is some sort of valid argument against facts, logic, and historical president.

If you truly believe what you say, then argue it. If your argument is persuasive, then fantastic! To the extent that it is based on logic and fact, I will switch to your side. But don't lumber back in your chair, posturing with condescension, and rationalize away your lack of intellect and argumentative basis with a bullshit belief that your miserable life of ignorance of the topic and overall intellectual dishonesty is somehow superior to that of every generation younger than your own.

To all of whom this post applies - if any of you have children, then I feel a genuine and painful sense of regret in my heart for them. Children suffer immensely when the adults in their lives are too insecure to utter the simple words, "you have a point". You are condemning their precious minds to suffer from your same pathetic insecurities.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 117
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 6:51:43 AM
Are you fu*king kidding me? The propaganda of my country is tax and regulate! The free market is evil! If you give people the freedom to buy and sell as they wish, children will starve, the animals will die, and the world will come to an end.

You are making assumption after assumption about me. The only "assumption" I made about you is that you understand little about economics. Why did I make this assumption? Because you are making arguments based on basic economic fallacy. And I mean basic. Plus your assertions are inconsistent with FACT. It's reasonable to infer that you haven't studied economics in light of these.

Seriously, discussing this sh*t with someone who hasn't taken the time to educate themselves on the topic is LITERALLY like discussing evolution with a fundamental creationist. Aka, its the most frustrating and useless discourse one can engage in.

And don't fu*king paint yourself as innocent in this conversation. You called me "grasshopper", attacked my age, and my s0-called lack of experience over and over and over despte my repeated attempts to keep the discussion grounded and logic-based. You are bullshitting yourself if you think you didn't. Go back and read your own goddamn posts and see for yourself.
 Divorced, Broke, Bald
Joined: 7/9/2009
Msg: 119
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 8:27:00 AM
Think anybody will go to jail for this? If authority can be delegated, but not responsibility, then why is the executive board not being held criminally responsible?

Put pot smokers in jail for twenty years for a spliff, but let killers like these walk.

Nope, no problem here.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 120
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 8:30:50 AM
Michael Moore eats babies and bathes in virgin blood.

Holy hell, this kind of argument is pretty frickin' sweet!
 That Handy Man
Joined: 11/23/2008
Msg: 121
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 8:55:42 AM
This (Thread posts) is nothing but the Ego fighting! And it is the human EGO that is responsible for probably (notice how I put in limitations that can't be argued! I didn't say 99 %) of human suffering and grief, not to mention damage to the planet and it's other inhabitants!

You need to learn to step back and observe yourself! See what your Ego is doing and what it's motivations are! Usually it has something to do with POWER! Then step back and see what your society is doing in the bigger picture. STOP pretending that it's the words or political orientation that matter.

As a single person, it horrifies me as to the amount of recycled containers I go through, or the packaging that I carry to the wood stove after just a few days. Some of it could be reduced, but much, not! I sometimes wonder if doing little things, under the pretence of "making a difference" is worse then doing nothing at all! The amount of manufactured goods I see in the room round me is just staggering. What's the alternative? Living in sod house with no creature comforts?

I think it's probably true. Off shore drilling is VERY VERY safe, with an excellent record. But like with air travel, when something does goes wrong, it can do so in a spectacular way! I personally knew and dreaded, that something like this would happen (the oil platform thing that is).

What people may not realize is how things relate to one another. I believe that human activity has effected the climate. This is a scenario outlined (quite accurately, it NOW seems) in the book "Global Super storm). So now, because of our extensive use of fossil fuels, we have a climate with increasingly violent storms and also, weather in places, unexperienced before! Now these same storms threaten the oil infrastructure. After all, things are generally engineered for predicted, worst case scenarios, but we are now in uncharted territory!

In general, we will see the "PERFECT STORM" . Not only, climate, but economic, religious, political, big business and so forth! Everything we counted on, seems to become unraveled or reveal itself for the lie that it was! Even charished and trusted organizations like the Cub Scouts (OMG, FAGS! Who Would Have Guessed!) and SPCA (Again the EGO shows it's ugly head) are exposed for what they are. So, by the perfect storm, I mean a case where lets say the climate overwhelms us, but our governments being dysfunctional and broke, are unable to assist, and the various infrastructre may not be intact either, like hydro, water and communications. It's like, not having a job, trying to get to a job interview but your car won't start, because you don't have the money (on account of you don't have a job) to have it repaired. You can't call a friend, because you have no more cell phone minutes, and can't call a cab because (again) you have no money and your credit cards are maxed out! So suddenly, everything is working against you.
 xlr8ingmargo
Joined: 7/28/2009
Msg: 122
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 9:59:05 AM
Thats the entire problem with corporate laws in this country.
No one will go to jail, while the American tax payer pays the price for generations to come. Great country we live in ehh?
 Caexars
Joined: 10/25/2008
Msg: 123
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 11:16:27 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 124
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 11:20:33 AM
Caexars


Haha, I'm in love! I showed that to Krebby like a week ago. Doubt he's watched it, though.
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 130
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 5:35:52 PM
Krebby, you keep thinking I've changed my position. I haven't.

My first post is 100% consistent with every single one of my others.

And that last video is not a Youtube lecture. It's a music video of a rap battle between two gentlemen posing as Kaynes and F. A. Hayek, explaining their theories of what causes the 'boom and bust' cycle. The lyrics are extremely well-written and the production value is very high.


 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 131
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 5:43:28 PM
QJ, are you going to respond to my answer to your question? Or were you not really interested in what I had to say to begin with?
 HeyJenny
Joined: 11/13/2008
Msg: 132
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 7:47:09 PM
Here is a good link with Anderson Cooper

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/18/must-see-ac360-video-cutting-through-the-noise-on-the-oil-spill/

Must see AC360 video: Last night, Anderson devoted the first segment of his show to a close examination of the Gulf oil leak. In the first video, you'll see Anderson breaking down BP's assertion that they're making good progress on containing the oil leak. In the second video, hear from presidential historian Douglas Brinkley about how he thinks this newest claim that BP is containing 20% of the leak is "a PR stunt

* Wow, BP is capturing at the very most 20% of the oil !! Why isn't this the President's number one priorty? Don't we have engineers to do the job? Why are we allowing this to continue? I feel helpless and hopeless watching possibly the worst disaster our country has had unfold. Every minute of every day it gets worse, how many days has it been? Sickening !!
 Ubiquitous.
Joined: 11/7/2009
Msg: 133
view profile
History
The BP oil spill in the Mexican Gulf ...
Posted: 5/22/2010 8:17:39 PM
If fixing the problem were as simple as "have engineers do the job" then it would be done by now.

The leak is miles under the water where very few vehicles can travel and the oil is gushing out at very high pressure. There is no equipment so far built that is capable of dealing with this kind of problem. It's an enormous technical challenge.

BP has every incentive to get the leak fixed. They know they're going to end up having to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up the mess. And they know they will have to pay more each day the mess carries on. If there were a solution that cost, for example, $200million and could be implemented right away, they would have carried out with it, no question. Even though it would be an expensive solution, it is less expensive than letting the oil continue to spill for months. It would be the best business decision.

The reason they haven't is because the solution doesn't exist. Not yet. That's why this is such a disaster. They are scrambling and spending tons of money to discover a way to fix the leak.

This mess is costing them billions of dollars if you include how this mess has affected their stock price, let alone the lost mindshare of the public. Its not as though they are choosing not to fix the leak. They're trying. But... its such a debacle.

We need to carry out our role as responsible citizens and verify the information about how much oil is really being leaked out - because BP obviously has an incentive to underplay that amount - and we need to hold our representatives accountable to ensure they make BP responsible for the costs of cleaning this mess up. That will guarantee that their incentive to fix the leak remains strong. If BP is able to avoid having to pay the direct costs of the cleanup, business losses, and environmental damages, then the chance of this happening again by BP or another company will be greater than it otherwise would.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >