BP Oil Spill

I was never for off-shore drilling and this disaster certainly isn't making me change my position on the matter.

 

"BP has accepted responsibility for the oil spill and the cleanup costs but indicated that, because the rig was run by Transocean personnel, the accident was not BP's fault."

They aren't denying it. Hell, you can't deny an oil spill with this much public awareness.

I'm expecting them to light it on fire soon. It's their last resort, but it's getting extremely close to the wetlands they're trying to protect.

 

My sister is a chem engineer and iirc she told me that BP is a terrible company to work at. They are very prone to accidents (and most go unnoticed).

 

To answer this part, BP always seemed a bit better than most. Shell too. But the #1 worst in my book is ExxonMobil (Esso here in Europe). It's always been bad with enviro stuff like the Exxon Valdez and spending all this money to refute global warming...there's constant boycotts against them. But they also are shitty with LGBT rights issues and get an overall ZERO rating from the HRC. So just for you, I tied this to LGBT rights after all
http://www.hrc.org/issues/workplace/8837.htm

 

further proof that we need to stop listening to the likes of sarah palin, john mccain, john boehner, and all those idiots who demand we open up the entire coastal regions to oil drilling.

We need energy that doesnt require us to put the world and it's already fragile ecosystems at risks.

We need to ween ourselves from oil, a finite source that will dry up, and stop funding terrorisem with it, because everytime we see a increase in the cost of oil, we are sending more money to countries like iran, who actively kill americans in afganastan and iraq.

We live in a volitle world, and yes, america has helped make it even more dangerous. Our only true path to safety is to learn to be as self-suficcient as possible. That is why we need to find ways to produce our own power, so we dont have to rely on and fund all those nations that mean us harm.

It is not going to be easy, and will cost money, but so does every frickkin thing in this world.

That, and I think haliburton *who worked on the oil rig days before it exploded* has made enough money selling out, poisoning, and killing americans...

 

^Ah it wasn't hard to tie it. When I had a car, I'd avoid going to Exxon/Esso entirely, and when in others cars, I annoy them with my ravings so they'd go to a different station Petroleum companies are so big and profitable, and they make such a huge environmental/social/politcal impact everywhere they exist (esp with exploration and extraction), that I think it's really important to pay attention to how they behave as corporations. If this was Exxon responsible for the oil spill, they'd probably still be arguing that it's not their fault while waves of oil hit the coast.

 

:eusa_clap

 

Sorry but from an oil rig point of view Diesel and Petrol are the same thing. There are alternatives like biofuels (takes land away from growing food) and electric vehicles (means moving the power generation to a power station) and LPG (even worse than petrol for blowing up).

Regards

Prester

 

They aren't denying it. They are also saying that they will be paying for the entire cleanup. They are also working tirelessly to fix the leak in every way possible.

I don't see why one would boycott the company when they are trying to fix the problem (albeit for profit purposes, but still).

 

I used to be in the "hydrogen for vehicles" business... The problem is simple. Hydrogen is not a fuel, it's an energy carrier. It doesn't exist on its own in nature in a way that we can "mine" or "gather" it. It has to be produced from something else, for example by stripping it out of natural gas (which produces exactly as much CO2 as burning natural gas) or by electrolysis which uses electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen - but then where does the electricity come from? You still end up working your way back to some other energy source, and that's the problem.

Now if you use wind or solar or nuclear to produce the electricity which produces the hydrogen, then you have a clean supply chain... but then why not skip a step and use the electricity directly in the vehicle? Hydrogen becomes an unneccessary intermediary. Plus it's quite difficult to use as an energy carrier because it has low energy density (the explosive part is overrated).

Hope this helps!

 

Simple - it's economics. It's much cheaper to produce electricity by burning coal. What's the incentive for using a more expensive means to produce the same thing? The environment? Tell that to the energy companies...

 

I just wanted to point out that Obama presented a plan to open vast areas of the shoreline for deep sea driling. So it is not just the "Republican idiots".
And In my opinion I think this is necessary. While I agree we need to reduce our dependance on oil, it simply is not viable at this point. It is certainly something to put money and time into, but in the meantime we need to reduce our dependance on foriegn oil.
Most likey, now that this oil spill has occured, this is not going to happen.

Hopefully this spill can be cleaned up and nothing like this will occur again. It's horrifying to watch the news about this.