BP spills coffee

treitz3

What caused it to begin with?

While BP and all of it's partners are busy BS'n everybody, what is going to stop this exact thing from happening again with the other hundreds of wells various companies have?

Demiurge

lol...some serious ignorance on display at Club Polk once again.

News Flash: BP has all the incentive in the world to cap this leak as soon as possible. They've been losing their ****.

If it weren't for the environuts, companies with U.S. oil drilling contracts wouldn't be forced to drill in 5,000+ feet of water, they'd be closer to shore or on land (ANWR). Those ole unintended consequences.

I don't really care if BP is forced to pay the price for the leak (whatever that is, as I'd argue they already are), because some other oil company will pick up their slack, but I do feel bad for their employees and shareholders (which are probably any of us with a 401(k) or in a mutual fund).

Have fun with your organized boycotts. :rolleyes:

treitz3

Back to the OP. The clip may be funny by itself but with the real problem looming in the Gulf, it's just a matter of time to see what the real devastation will be. I have always been a half glass full kinda guy but this is the first real glimpse I have had to the beginning of Armageddon.

With oil being spewed in vast quantities over an area so large [dispersant included] and the underwater currents taking it around the world? I personally do not see anything but the changing of Nature that she will not like. The oil and dispersant make an organism "dead zone" to where microorganisms thrive and kill everything within its reach due to depleted oxygen.

We all know how fragile the system is within a coral reef. Multiply this ten fold on other systems she has that we may not even know about that help to sustain the basic fundamentals of nature and how she works.

It's obvious at this point that it will not be limited to the Gulf of Mexico. It WILL travel around to areas that we, as humans, have no comprehension of what stabilizing features Mother Nature has to keep the ecology going. Mother Nature will respond to this and when she does?

I hope that she is kind. Given our actions?

comfortablycurt

bobman1235 wrote: »

COnsidering the way gas stations work, I do kind of feel bad for the individual owners of BP stations. They obviously have nothing to do with their corporations blatant idiocy, and yet they're going ot get he brunt of the backlash.

I can see that point, however...I feel much worse for the tens of thousands of people whose personal lives have been drastically affected by this tragedy, than I do for the BP franchise owners that are already making significantly more money than the average person.

concealer404 wrote: »

Yeah... i won't boycott a station. You think they make a profit off the gas? Not really. They make their profit off the stuff inside the store. The gas is just more of a lure than anything.

Exactly. Gas stations don't really make their money off of gas. They make their money off of all the other stuff that people but there.

hearingimpared wrote: »

Curt, why punish independant service station owner because thier corporate fools have screwed up? The owner of the station is going to suffer, it won't put a dent in BP.

The station owners won't really be too drastically affected by this. As said above, gas stations don't really make their money selling gas.

It's an unfortunate side effect that the store owners will be "suffering" slightly, but it's what has to be done. We can't let BP's irresponsibility be acceptable, at the expense of some BP franchise owners making a few thousand dollars less this year. BP franchise owners are already making SIGNIFICANTLY more money than the average person is, and that's not just from selling gas.

There are tens of thousands of people that are out of work in the Gulf coast right now because of this oil spill. I feel much worse for them, than I do for the BP owners that are already probably bringing in 6 figures+.

Kex wrote: »

There are no BP stations near where I live, so I have nothing to boycott, but to consider this is a uniquely BP failure is incredibly naive IMO. BOP's will fail. It does happen. It has happened before. It will happen again.

Why are we drilling so deep when there was no procedure in place in case of a BOP failure (political guys, please don't bother to answer)? What we need are resources to act effectively in the case of a BOP failure in deep waters, and this is an issue for every single deep water rig in the Gulf, without exception, not just BP. We should not be inventing this as we go along at this point.

Does anyone honestly think that Chevron or Exxon or whatever other oil company could have fixed a BOP failure any better? And don't try to tell me that BP has a worse safety violations record (which it does, AFIK). All industry analysts seem to agree that a BOP is never going to be 100% reliable at this depth, under any circumstances. How about some perspective here, and some more in-depth reporting about the real issues from the media, not just sensation seeking?

Curt, best of luck with your protest nonetheless!

There used to be a procedure in place to prevent something like this from happening. Unfortunately, during the Bush/Cheney administration, restrictions on off shore oil wells were laxed quite a bit.

To sum it all up into layman's terms, there used to be a valve that served as a fail safe stopper, in place on these pipes. It cut off the flow of oil in the event of a pipe breaking. This valve cost roughly $500,000 to implement, which is mere pocket change to the people that are responsible for this environmental disaster. The Bush/Cheney administration relaxed the restrictions on it, and this valve is no longer required. We've done irreparable damage to the Gulf of Mexico, in the name of saving some pocket change.

Thanks for the good luck wishes! We already have quite a few people that have committed to coming out. If we get a big enough turn out, we're going to start sending people out to the other two BP stations in town.

concealer404 wrote: »

That's the point... nobody really just goes into a gas station to get a hot dog, or a bag of chips. That's what fast food places or the grocery store are there for. That stuff is there for you to notice and then buy when you go inside to pay for your gas.

Or when you pump your gas, and notice the sign for a $2 hot dog and think "Damn, that sounds good right now."

The gas is merely a lure for you to buy the stuff that they actually make a profit on.

Without the gas, the stations go under.

Not necessarily. I go to the gas station nearly everyday to buy various things...but I only put gas in my car about once a week or so. Point is...gas stations don't make their money by selling gas.

How many people go to the gas station to buy beer or cigarettes? What about their morning cup of coffee and a donut? Candy, drinks...all sorts of stuff. That's where they make their money.

Demiurge wrote: »

lol...some serious ignorance on display at Club Polk once again.

News Flash: BP has all the incentive in the world to cap this leak as soon as possible. They've been losing their ****.

If it weren't for the environuts, companies with U.S. oil drilling contracts wouldn't be forced to drill in 5,000+ feet of water, they'd be closer to shore or on land (ANWR). Those ole unintended consequences.

I don't really care if BP is forced to pay the price for the leak (whatever that is, as I'd argue they already are), because some other oil company will pick up their slack, but I do feel bad for their employees and shareholders (which are probably any of us with a 401(k) or in a mutual fund).

Have fun with your organized boycotts. :rolleyes:

Now there's a flawed theory if I've ever seen one.

Let's suppose for a second that we start allowing drilling closer to shore.

What happens to the off shore wells then? Are they going to close them up, and move their whole operation closer to shore? Hell no they're not. They're going to build the new wells closer to shore, and keep right on using their off shore wells also.

Please, tell me how allowing drilling closer to shore would solve this problem?

Sorry if this sounds crazy, but when I'm looking at the ocean, I don't want to see a bunch of oil derricks right off shore.



Have fun with my organized boycott? I'm not doing this to have fun. I'm doing this because I'm seriously upset that BP has caused a devastating amount of irreparable damage to the Gulf of Mexico. They can clean it up...but it'll never be fixed. The effects of the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska are still apparent now...and that spill was but a fraction of what the Gulf "spill" is.

Either way though, yes, I will enjoy it.

Environut? I really don't understand why that is a bad thing to some people. What exactly is so bad about caring about the planet that sustains our very existence?


Ignorance? Where? I fail to see any ignorance in any of my posts in this thread. Please enlighten me.

bobman1235

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RKQ3LXHKB34&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RKQ3LXHKB34&hl=en_US&fs=1&&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Demiurge

comfortablycurt wrote: »

Now there's a flawed theory if I've ever seen one.

Let's suppose for a second that we start allowing drilling closer to shore.

What happens to the off shore wells then? Are they going to close them up, and move their whole operation closer to shore? Hell no they're not. They're going to build the new wells closer to shore, and keep right on using their off shore wells also.

Please, tell me how allowing drilling closer to shore would solve this problem?

First and foremost, lets make clear the fact that this disaster is a complete anomaly. Secondly, lets also understand that this disaster in depths of even 1,000 feet of water is dealt with in a matter of days, at most...and in fact, aside from the life lost wouldn't even be called a disaster except by your most ardent loons.

The off shore wells are a result of environmental activists going mental about drilling "too close to shore." Deep sea drilling has HUGE risks (as anyone with half a brain now knows if they weren't sure before). Capping off a leaking well in a few hundred feet of water is a hell of a lot easier than in 5,000 feet of water.

Granted, we'd have drilled there eventually when the need had arisen, but it isn't a conversation any of us alive today would be having in our lifetimes. Low risk > high risk.

Its very telling you ignored the part about drilling on land, namely ANWR. I suppose you're against drilling there, too.

comfortablycurt wrote: »

Sorry if this sounds crazy, but when I'm looking at the ocean, I don't want to see a bunch of oil derricks right off shore.

Advocating for drilling in lesser depths does not equal drilling off of your favorite beach. Please tell me you were going for dramatic effect with that comment....

comfortablycurt wrote: »

Have fun with my organized boycott? I'm not doing this to have fun. I'm doing this because I'm seriously upset that BP has caused a devastating amount of irreparable damage to the Gulf of Mexico. They can clean it up...but it'll never be fixed. The effects of the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska are still apparent now...and that spill was but a fraction of what the Gulf "spill" is.

Would "have fun wasting your time," sat better with you?

BP didn't cause anything. It was an accident. Drilling in deep seas at depths of 5,000 feet isn't without risk. Aside from the wildly ignorant, everyone knows as much -- BP, the government, etc.

Are they responsible for fixing it? Absolutely. And on an unrelated note, as oil companies go BP is my least favorite. What with their "green" BS they constantly spew sucking up to the morons who forced drilling operations to such depths in the first place.

I'm not sure if you're aware, but oil leaks into the oceans NATURALLY all the time in huge amounts. Oil is a natural substance. Mother nature always manages to clean it up (just like it did with the Exxon Valdez and like it will do with the Deepwater Horizon leak). Its going to take a lot more than this oil leak to kill the planet or even have an impact on the planet itself.

In fact, the impact is largely felt by humans, not the environment, which makes the hysteria and oil coated animal photos all the more obnoxious.

I have empathy for the fisherman and the tourism industries in the areas that will be affected over the next several years, but thats about it.

comfortablycurt wrote: »

Environut? I really don't understand why that is a bad thing to some people. What exactly is so bad about caring about the planet that sustains our very existence?

I care more about the environment than anyone standing outside of a gas station with a boycott sign over an oil leak does or ever will, I can guarantee you that.

I'm rational about the environment. I understand natures power and my human insignificance. I'm also a good steward of the earth and believe in conserving where conserving is necessary.

Anyone that is irrational with regard to the environment gets the environut label, yourself included.

You might want to read a book sometime, namely Michael Crichton's State of Fear. It would begin to give you some of the perspective you sorely lack regarding the environment. It's a work of fiction supported by copious amounts of factual data.

comfortablycurt wrote: »

Ignorance? Where? I fail to see any ignorance in any of my posts in this thread. Please enlighten me.

I know, that's the problem. You'll wake up on your own someday (hopefully).

Demiurge

PS, if you care one lick about the people in the Gulf Coast region, you'd do well not to try and kill off-shore drilling, which is how millions of people make a living down there, both directly and indirectly.

WilliamM2

I stopped and filled up at a BP this morning, just as I do every Friday. It's a locally owned grocery/hardware store/gas station. The owner's are some of the nicest people I've ever met, and it's the only station on the way to work. I'll do it again next Friday too.

How would depriving these people of their livelihood help the cleanup effort in any way?

Serendipity

hearingimpared wrote: »

Why punish an independent gas station owner for what is deemed to be the big boy's problem?

It's not like boycotting Shell oil because it is owned on a 50/50 platform with the Saudi Arabian government.

I said I would still buy from their convenience store but probably not their gas. I have biked to the local BP station and have bought from their convenience store in the past.

danger boy

well now they are burning the oil.. sending up toxic black clouds of smoke.. WTF???

seriously.. are you freakin' kidding me? burn it? sure it's getting the oil out of the water, only create a toxic cloud of black smoke that is now destroying the ozone layer, and who knows what else.


O M G!!!

tonyb

Destroying the ozone layer ?? I suppose we should ban Iceland for toxic smoke their volcano spewed out too. Which makes burning any oil minute in comparison.

danger boy

yes ban Iceland.. they are to small and are doing to much damage to my breathing air.

Demiurge

tonyb wrote: »

Destroying the ozone layer ?? I suppose we should ban Iceland for toxic smoke their volcano spewed out too. Which makes burning any oil minute in comparison.

We need to ban the earth...from itself!

mrbigbluelight

I used to get "Offshore" magazine ( one of the gazillion and one mags I'd get for free from an online subscription service ).

Pretty darn interesting; every month the magazine would come, and there'd be a large, detailed fold-out map in the center section of a different area of the world. Long story short: the whole dang world, including the oceans, is either actively drilling or is leased for drilling (or up for auction to be leased).

The Gulf of Mexico has enough pipeline running underneath it to run to the moon (slight over exaggeration).

BTW, 5000 feet of water isn't considered that awe-inspiring to the boys in the earl business. Could I drill that deep ? Uh .... no. But then again, that ain't my job.

That's THEIR job and they failed at it. Miserably.

Demi, I'd have to disagree with you on that point:
They DID cause the accident.
Failure to recognize that is, IMO, an invitation for a repeat performance either there or in another area of the world.

To say that "This was an accident" is to say "There is nothing that could have been done to prevent this incident". Again, an invitation for a repeat performance.
Real accidents are actually very rare.

mrbigbluelight

Regarding the boycott of BP stations:

I'd say don't buy gas there, but double up on the snacks you buy there.
BP stations are independently owned, and the owners don't make that much money on the gas; BP does.
I'll personally double up on the Uncle Ray's Bar-B-Q chips I buy and drink twice the amount of milk but .... no gas .

nooshinjohn

Demiurge wrote: »

We need to ban the earth...from itself!

We could always ban HUMANS from the earth, as that is the ultimate end-game of the Environazis anyway.;)

tonyb

By not buying their gas,you think your hurting them ? Alittle misguided as some others suggest. Many state pension funds, union pensions,teachers, and most likely smaller pension funds are heavily invested not only in BP,but in oil in general. Most likely you'd be hurting yourself by boycotting. Then when you get your pension statement in the mail and you find you've lost half of it, will it be those evil bankers,that evil wall street??

I just find it funny...and sad, that some of you promote supporting Little Debbie cupcakes than your own financial future.

nooshinjohn

xcapri79 wrote: »

Government is ALWAYS the problem NEVER the solution.

Fixed...:)

Face

tonyb wrote: »

By not buying their gas,you think your hurting them ? Alittle misguided as some others suggest. Many state pension funds, union pensions,teachers, and most likely smaller pension funds are heavily invested not only in BP,but in oil in general. Most likely you'd be hurting yourself by boycotting. Then when you get your pension statement in the mail and you find you've lost half of it, will it be those evil bankers,that evil wall street??

Curt and the others said they were boycotting BP stations, not gas in general.

tonyb

One also has to remember when pointing fingers, is that BP didn't do anything our government and manageing agencies,didn't let them do. You just don't plop a rig down in the gulf and start drilling without an OK from Uncle Sam. How you do it,the safety precautions in place,etc, also has to be approved. It may be politically correct these days to blame the big bad corporations of the world, but when you start pointing fingers, the other 3 fingers are pointing back at you. BP has allready laid claim to this mess, will anyone lay claim to the mess in government that helped this situation occur ? Think not. Bp, as Demi said, has everything to gain by a rapid solution and clean up of this mess,nothing to lose. The government has everything to gain if they don't. No conflict of interest there is it ? A small example is, we have a law,I forget the name of it, that says all boats pulling into ports must have unionized people working those boats. During Katrina,given the magnitude of that disaster,Bush temporarily dropped that law so more boats and people could help. During this oil spill, boats are the primary source to clean up,to get materials out there, but Obama has yet to drop this law to allow more help, 2 months after the spill. Why?? You tell me.

tonyb

Face wrote: »

Curt and the others said they were boycotting BP stations, not gas in general.

You think BP gas is only sold at BP stations ?

nooshinjohn

All you need to read to understand the reasons behind the dismal response to the Gulf is right here... Get ready for your energy costs to "nessesarily Skyrocket"...


http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/06/11/gulf-oil-spill-could-spur-energy-bill.html

Face

So do you believe we'll hear "drill, baby, drill" from some annoying twit again?

tonyb

Speaking of our buddy Rahm, did any of you guys see the story of his perk of a NY apartment,rent free for 5 years ? Who owned it ? A BP adviser. Like I said,BP can't do anything the government won't let them.

tonyb

Face wrote: »

So do you believe we'll hear "drill, baby, drill" from some annoying twit again?

Not because we want to,we have to out of necessity.

tonyb

But he had experience....running his campaign. Well now you see the results of that experience in the gulf. Palins point was,you could drill on land,much safer too, if the government would let them.

nooshinjohn

in their own words... The reason the BP spill has been largely ignored.


<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/HlTxGHn4sH4&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/HlTxGHn4sH4&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

tonyb

Thats called "leadership" John, don't you recognize it when you see it ?:p;)

nooshinjohn

tonyb wrote: »

Thats called "leadership" John, don't you recognize it when you see it ?:p;)

I do recognize it Tony... but I think it fair to say if he were leading me to the only ice-water fountain in Hell, I would rather drink boiling tap water.:D:rolleyes:

mrbigbluelight

tonyb wrote: »

By not buying their gas,you think your hurting them ?

The idea isn't to hurt them, per se.
It is a ground floor level attempt to force them into social responsibility.

tonyb wrote: »

Many state pension funds, union pensions,teachers, and most likely smaller pension funds are heavily invested not only in BP,but in oil in general. Most likely you'd be hurting yourself by boycotting. Then when you get your pension statement in the mail and you find you've lost half of it, will it be those evil bankers,that evil wall street??

While I agree with you, tonyb, that evil bankers bear a large level of responsibility for the already present drop in the value of pension funds * , I do believe this: if it is necessary to "hurt myself" by boycotting a large petroleum conglomerate in order to force them to take the necessary steps in the future to avoid an inept repeat performance of this environmental fiasco, than so be it.

( * RE: the present drop in pension fund values and evil bankers. Ask a financial industry expert to attempt to explain "derivatives". In the unlikely event they can conjure up some semi-reasonable sounding answer, than ask them why the derivatives industry is unregulated. )

tonyb wrote: »

I just find it funny...and sad, that some of you promote supporting Little Debbie cupcakes than your own financial future.

Actually, that grass roots movement, will/would have a more focused, deeper, and quicker impact on the prime company at fault (BP) than most other methods.
BTW: my local BP station (Hucks) doesn't carry Little Debbies, but I'll stand behind Uncle Ray's all the way.

tonyb wrote: »

One also has to remember when pointing fingers, is that BP didn't do anything our government and manageing agencies,didn't let them do.

And BP paid good money for that right ! It's known as "vigorish".