BP spills coffee

Demiurge

mrbigbluelight wrote: »

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

:rolleyes:

They haven't been socially irresponsible in the first place.

It was an ACCIDENT. Many safety regulations failed, safety regulations put in place by the government.

There is no evil little man at the top of BP laughing and puffing away on his cigar that this happened. BP has every incentive to make sure something like this doesn't happen, and up until now they've had a very good track record of success given the dangers of deep sea oil drilling.

mrbigbluelight wrote: »

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

...and to politicians and activist groups you likely support.

http://businessandmedia.org/articles/2010/20100602161253.aspx

BP still deserves to be defended against unwarranted attacks and to have their feet held to the fire where warranted.

Face

Demiurge wrote: »

BP still deserves to be defended against unwarranted attacks and to have their feet held to the fire where warranted.

Sure they do: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/12/bp-whistleblower-claimed_n_573839.html

nooshinjohn

Face wrote: »

Sure they do: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/12/bp-whistleblower-claimed_n_573839.html

Huffington Post???

Yep, that's a credible source.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

tonyb

Maybe you missed the part in your own article Face, that the Government engineer failed to even ask if the blowout preventer worked before issueing them a permit. Was there coinage under the table ? Maybe, but what was obvious is it took both parties,BP and the government,for this to happen.

Demiurge

Demiurge wrote: »

BP still deserves to be defended against unwarranted attacks and to have their feet held to the fire where warranted.

Face wrote: »

Sure they do: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/12/bp-whistleblower-claimed_n_573839.html

Sure they do, what?

Demiurge

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Huffington Post???

Yep, that's a credible source.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Meh, I could care less about the source although HuffPo is easy to laugh at. The article was completely misleading and full of hearsay.

Here's an interesting comment from that page:

I'll try this again. While I'm a great supporter of the Huffington Post this particular story amounts to misinformation that is actually just confusing the issue.

The tests the whistle blower is talking about had nothing to do with the blow out in the Gulf of Mexico.

The critical tests that failed in this instance were performed on the well bore not the BOP's.

Now, before this post gets deleted, in the interest of HP's credibility this should be checked and corrected.

WilliamM2

mrbigbluelight wrote: »

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 .

That way you can waste more gas driving to another station to get gas. Sounds environmentally friendly to me.

mrbigbluelight

Demiurge wrote: »

:rolleyes:
It was an ACCIDENT.

I've said it before, but IMO, accidents are extrememly rare.

Demiurge wrote:

Many safety regulations failed, safety regulations put in place by the government.

Or removed by the government.
Worldwide, the oil industry is required by other countries to install a fail-safe acoustic switch at the well head. Sort of a dead man switch.
In 2001, the Federal Material Management Service reversed an earlier 2000 decision that mandated the same thing here in the US. This allowed BP and others not to install a $500,000 acoustic switch to automatically shut down oil gushers.

mrbigbluelight

Here's a link that's pretty cool, if you ask me (and go ahead .... ask me !):

Shows what the Gulf oil spill would look like in your neck of the woods:


http://www.ifitwasmyhome.com/

tonyb

mrbigbluelight wrote: »

I've said it before, but IMO, accidents are extrememly rare.



Or removed by the government.
Worldwide, the oil industry is required by other countries to install a fail-safe acoustic switch at the well head. Sort of a dead man switch.
In 2001, the Federal Material Management Service reversed an earlier 2000 decision that mandated the same thing here in the US. This allowed BP and others not to install a $500,000 acoustic switch to automatically shut down oil gushers.

....and if we had that switch and it failed, then what? Would it be considered an accident then ? Or would we go after the manufacturer of that switch. I suppose holding those accountable for making sure things actually work before issueing permits, is out of the question. Regulations in the industry are there,same as with banking, it's the enforcement part of the equation thats lacking.

tonyb

Man,don't even get me started on the bean counters X, I've been in many situations where doing the right thing at minimal cost was shot down by bean counters....as the CEO fly's off in his private jet for a 2 hour meeting halfway around the globe.

danger boy

i have no shortage of gas :eek:

tonyb

danger boy wrote: »

i have no shortage of gas :eek:

So that was you in Blazeing Saddles.:p:)

mrbigbluelight

tonyb wrote: »

....and if we had that switch and it failed, then what? Would it be considered an accident then ?

More than likely, no. All circumstances are different, but somewhere in the process (specifications, build, install, testing, or monitoring ) the situation went from "Looks good" to "Bound to fail".

A post-investigation would/should reveal the source of the failure.
Perhaps the engineers given the job to design the device weren't given correct specs.
Perhaps they were, and then designed it incorrectly.
Perhaps they designed it correctly, and the build of the device was done improperly (cheaper metals/materials used in place of spec'd materials).
Perhaps it was spec'd, designed, and built correctly and then packed for shipping incorrectly (UPS ? ).
Perhaps it was spec'd, designed, built, and shipped correctly, but installed incorrectly.
.... and it goes on.
But, IMO, there was an event (or events) that would have caused the device to not perform as needed. Somewhere in the chain a kink was introduced that would have caused the eventual failure.

And that's what I mean by there are very, very few real accidents.

mrbigbluelight

tonyb wrote: »

Man,don't even get me started on the bean counters X, I've been in many situations where doing the right thing at minimal cost was shot down by bean counters....as the CEO fly's off in his private jet for a 2 hour meeting halfway around the globe.

xcapri79 wrote: »

Yes, I see it all the time. Technical expertise is not valued either, "yes-people" are. A nice smile gets you further than knowledge, except when there is a serious problem, then they "find "you, but the "nice smile" types take the credit.

On that, we can absolutely agree.
Cheese and crackers we can agree on that !

danger boy wrote: »

i have no shortage of gas :eek:

And you know why that is ?
It's God's revenge for that dancing video you posted.
DISCLAIMER: Per Polk policy, the mention of God is not an attempt to promote or discourage the belief in the existence of a Supreme Being or the practice thereof.


........ although the fact you've got gas is just about proof positve.

comfortablycurt

Everyone keeps saying that this was an accident...but that's not really the case. BP caused this accident due to their blatant disregard for safety procedures, and the Bush/Cheney administration can also be held responsible, in large part due to the relaxation of off shore drilling safety regulations.

Had the safety precautions that were in place before the Bush/Cheney administration not been changed, this DISASTER would not have happened.

That doesn't sound like an accident to me.


Let's talk for a moment about the various criminal charges that BP has been brought up on, some various other cases of complete social irresponsibility, and disregard for safety regulations that have resulted in the deaths of 29 employees in the last 5 years.

I'll cut and paste this from Wikipedia...It's a lot of reading, but please take the time to read it.

1993–1995: Hazardous substance dumping

In September 1999, one of BP’s US subsidiaries, BP Exploration Alaska (BPXA), agreed to resolve charges related to the illegal dumping of hazardous wastes on the Alaska North Slope, for $22 million. The settlement included the maximum $500,000 criminal fine, $6.5 million in civil penalties, and BP’s establishment of a $15 million environmental management system at all of BP facilities in the US and Gulf of Mexico that are engaged in oil exploration, drilling or production. The charges stemmed from the 1993 to 1995 dumping of hazardous wastes on Endicott Island, Alaska by BP’s contractor Doyon Drilling. The firm illegally discharged waste oil, paint thinner and other toxic and hazardous substances by injecting them down the outer rim, or annuli, of the oil wells. BPXA failed to report the illegal injections when it learned of the conduct, in violation of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act.

2005-Texas City Refinery explosion.

In March 2005, BP's Texas City, Texas refinery, one of its largest refineries, exploded causing 15 deaths, injuring 180 people and forcing thousands of nearby residents to remain sheltered in their homes.[47] A large column filled with hydrocarbon overflowed to form a vapour cloud, which ignited. The explosion caused all the casualties and substantial damage to the rest of the plant. The incident came as the culmination of a series of less serious accidents at the refinery, and the engineering problems were not addressed by the management. Maintenance and safety at the plant had been cut as a cost-saving measure, the responsibility ultimately resting with executives in London.[48]

The fall-out from the accident continues to cloud BP's corporate image because of the mismanagement at the plant. There have been several investigations of the disaster, the most recent being that from the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board[49] which "offered a scathing assessment of the company." OSHA found "organizational and safety deficiencies at all levels of the BP Corporation" and said management failures could be traced from Texas to London.[47]

The company pleaded guilty to a felony violation of the Clean Air Act, was fined $50 million, and sentenced to three years probation.

On October 30, 2009, the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) fined BP an additional $87 million — the largest fine in OSHA history — for failing to correct safety hazards revealed in the 2005 explosion. Inspectors found 270 safety violations that had been previously cited but not fixed and 439 new violations. BP is appealing that fine

2006–2007: Prudhoe Bay

In August 2006, BP shut down oil operations in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, due to corrosion in pipelines leading up to the Alaska Pipeline. The wells were leaking insulating agent called Arctic pack, consisting of crude oil and diesel fuel, between the wells and ice.[51] BP had spilled over one million litres of oil in Alaska's North Slope.[52] This corrosion is caused by sediment collecting in the bottom of the pipe, protecting corrosive bacteria from chemicals sent through the pipeline to fight this bacteria. There are estimates that about 5,000 barrels (790 m3) of oil were released from the pipeline. To date 1,513 barrels (240.5 m3) of liquids, about 5,200 cubic yards (4,000 m3) of soiled snow and 328 cubic yards (251 m3) of soiled gravel have been recovered. After approval from the DOT, only the eastern portion of the field was shut down, resulting in a reduction of 200,000 barrels per day (32,000 m3/d) until work began to bring the eastern field to full production on 2 October 2006.[53]

In May 2007, the company announced another partial field shutdown owing to leaks of water at a separation plant. Their action was interpreted as another example of fallout from a decision to cut maintenance of the pipeline and associated facilities.[54]

On 16 October 2007 Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation officials reported a toxic spill of methanol (methyl alcohol) at the Prudhoe Bay oil field managed by BP PLC. Nearly 2,000 gallons of mostly methanol, mixed with some crude oil and water, spilled onto a frozen tundra pond as well as a gravel pad from a pipeline. Methanol, which is poisonous to plants and animals, is used to clear ice from the insides of the Arctic-based pipelines.

2006-2008: Texas City refinery fatalities


From January 2006 to January 2008, three workers were killed at the company's Texas City, Texas refinery in three separate accidents. In July 2006 a worker was crushed between a pipe stack and mechanical lift, in June 2007, a worker was electrocuted, and in January 2008, a worker was killed by a 500-pound piece of metal that came loose under high pressure and hit him.

2007: Propane price manipulation

Four BP energy traders in Houston were charged with manipulating prices of propane in October 2007. As part of the settlement of the case, BP paid the US government a $303 million fine, the largest commodity market settlement ever in the US. The settlement included a $125 million civil fine to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, $100 million to the Justice Department, $53.3 million to a restitution fund for purchasers of the propane BP sold, and $25 million to a US Postal Service consumer fraud education fund.

2008: Oil price manipulation

In May 2010, the Supreme Court of Arbitration of the Russian Federation agreed in support of the country’s antimonopoly service’s decision to a 1.1 billion Ruble fine ($35.2 million) against TNK/BP, a 50/50 joint venture, for abusing antitrust legislation and setting artificially high oil products prices in 2008, TNK and BP declined comment.

and finally......

2010: Deepwater Horizon oil spill

On April 20, 2010, a semi-submersible exploratory offshore drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico exploded after a blowout and sank two days later, killing eleven people and causing a massive oil spill threatening the coast of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, and Florida. The rig is owned and operated by Transocean Ltd[62] on behalf of BP, which is the majority owner of the oil field. The company originally estimated the size of the leak at about 1,000 barrels a day but later accepted government estimates of a leak of at least 5,000 barrels per day (790 m3/d). On April 30, BP stated that it would harness all of its resources to battle the oil spill, spending $7 million a day with its partners to try to contain the disaster.[63] In comparison BP's 1st quarter profits for 2010 were roughly $61M daily.[64] BP was running the well without a remote control shut-off switch used in two other major oil-producing nations, Brazil and Norway, as a last resort protection against underwater spills. The use of such devices is not mandated by U.S. regulators.[65] The U.S. Government gave the responsibility of the incident to BP and will hold it accountable for costs incurred in containing the situation.[66] On May 11, 2010, Congress called the executives of BP, Transocean, and Halliburton to a hearing regarding the oil spill. When probed for answers regarding the events leading up to the explosion, each company blamed the other. BP blamed Transocean who owned the rig, who then blamed the operators of the rig, BP. They also blamed Halliburton, who built the well casing.[67] Scientists have been requesting the right to monitor the amount of oil that is actually being released per day, but "'The answer is no to that,' a BP spokesman, Tom Mueller, said on Saturday, May 15. 'We're not going to take any extra efforts now to calculate flow there at this point. It's not relevant to the response effort, and it might even detract from the response effort.'"[68] Steven Wereley, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Purdue University, analyzed videotape of the leak using particle image velocimetry and estimated oil flow rates at between 56,000 to 84,000 barrels per day (8,900 to 13,400 m3/d), or equivalent to one Exxon Valdez spill every 3.5 to 2.4 days.[69] A second, smaller leak has been estimated to be releasing 25,000 barrels per day (4,000 m3/d) by itself,[70] suggesting that the total size of the leak may well be in excess of 100,000 barrels per day and became the largest offshore oil spill in US history.

Sounds like a company that really cares, doesn't it?:rolleyes:








Demi-You're saying that this isn't a disaster, and only the craziest enviroloons would call it a disaster? If this isn't a disaster, then what exactly does qualify as a disaster in your book?

News flash-The US government, yes, that's OUR US government has officially declared this as THE WORST environmental disaster of it's kind, in our countries entire history.

comfortablycurt

Well, our rally today was a rousing success!!!!!:D:D:D

Through out the course of the day, we had about 75 people come out, which isn't bad at all, considering that I live in a relatively small town of only 16,000 people. Over the course of the day, we had probably around 100 people stop and talk to us, and tell us that they had no idea of the magnitude of BP's current problem, and for the most part, they didn't even know about all of the other problems they've had in the last 10 years. Most of the people that stopped pledged to not purchase gas from BP anymore. There were still plenty of people stopping in to buy gas(most of them probably just to spite us "crazy environuts"), but many of the people that did stop in came over to talk to us while their gas was pumping. Most of them said that they had no idea that BP was so irresponsible...and many of them also pledged to not buy gas from BP anymore.

The station we were at is on the busiest intersection in town, and we had hundreds, if not thousands of honks, screams of approval, and thumbs up. There are MANY people that are in complete agreement with me here.

We had reporters from our local newspaper out there interviewing people, as well as reporters from a local radio station, AM 1460 WIXN, and a reporter from NPR(National Public Radio).

You can tell me that my protest was a complete waste of time(demi), but it was anything but. We got our point across to a lot of people that had no idea there was even anything wrong. We're already planning another protest at a different BP station for either next weekend, or the weekend after. We should have a SIGNIFICANTLY higher turnout at the next one too.

I wasted my time, ehh? This was one of the most constructive days I've had in quite a while, and I couldn't be happier right now. I'm high on life at the moment.



I love you all, even those of you who at this very moment are thinking "wow, this guy is a complete moron",

LoCurtico the Environut.





PS-Hey Tony Hayward-The Gulf Wants It's Life Back Too!!!


Bad for the
Planet

tonyb

Inspectors found 270 safety violations that had been previously cited but not fixed and 439 new violations.

You don't see something wrong with this ? Who let them keep operating with 270 violations ? It's not the amount of regulations but the lack of enforcement. Of coarse the blame Bush route has really gotten old. If you would like to compare, just as many if not more democrats have their hands in oil too. Wish I had the ability like you to look at the world with one eye shut.

comfortablycurt

tonyb wrote: »

Inspectors found 270 safety violations that had been previously cited but not fixed and 439 new violations.

You don't see something wrong with this ? Who let them keep operating with 270 violations ? It's not the amount of regulations but the lack of enforcement. Of coarse the blame Bush route has really gotten old. If you would like to compare, just as many if not more democrats have their hands in oil too. Wish I had the ability like you to look at the world with one eye shut.

What does being republican or democrat have to do with anything? The democrats are just as bad as republicans. They're all essentially the same people, that come from the same upbringing and have the same ambitions. When deciding between republicans or democrats, you're essentially picking the lesser of two evils.

Yes, the Bush/Cheney administration is in a big way at fault here...but I also haven't been too impressed with the way Obama has handled this. If you ask me, the federal government should have stepped in, and booted BP out. There trying to figure out a way to save their oil and their profit margins...at the expense of saving the environment. Screw saving the oil...we need clean this mess up.

If it comes down to a decision between the two...then I'm generally going to go Democrat, but I'm for the Green Party. Yet another assumption about me that's way off base. Many of you see me as some crazy left wing liberal don't you? Well, I'm not.

Like they say..."to assume makes an........"


That's neither here nor there though. That isn't what this thread is about, so let's not turn it into a political debate. This is a societal issue, not political.







By the way Demi, despite your assumptions, I've actually read and own Crichtons "State of Fear". It's a decent book with a lot of good perspective...but there are multiple perspectives to any situation.



Also, how exactly are you making this assumption?

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 care FAR more about the environment than the average person does. I was one of the people that helped in a big way to implement stiffer fines for littering in my town a few years back. My family has also adopted a big stretch of highway, and we spend a couple days a month cleaning our stretch up. It's basically the cleanest stretch of highway in my immediate area. Both my brother and myself are on the Dixon City Tree Commission. I'm a certified arborist, as is my brother, which is essentially a tree doctor. My line of work is saving trees, and preventing them from needing to be saved in the first place. I'm certified to diagnose trees with diseases, and I can give them treatments/injections to remedy such diseases. I also perform proper trimming/pruning techniques, which the vast majority of tree companies don't do. I've helped numerous people on this very forum with questions that they've had regarding their trees. If I'm going somewhere in town, I'm gonna ride my bike or walk probably 50% of the time, because I don't want to unnecessarily burn gas.

I could keep going on, but I don't think I need to. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that you don't care about the environment or anything like that...but "you can guarantee me that you care more than anyone that's picketing outside of a gas station"? I don't think so. I'm extremely passionate about the environment, as is my entire family and nearly all of my friends. Your assumptions are VERY FAR off base.

Amherst

xcapri79 wrote: »

Since its beginning, oil has been a dirty business. To single out any one administration as being a problem is plainly ridiculous. They are all well funded and all have turned a blind eye to problems.

Hardly ridiculous, no administration has turned the environmental clock backwards more than the one in ridicule. The only blind eye in this post is yours.

Congratulations on your work Curt! Past and present.

hearingimpared

Well if nothing else, I have to commend you Curt on your commitment to your belief system.

Demiurge

I'm not a big fan of the public schools, but its glaringly obvious Curt missed out on a lot by dropping out of High School.

hearingimpared

Demiurge wrote: »

I'm not a big fan of the public schools, but its glaringly obvious Curt missed out on a lot by dropping out of High School.

:eek::eek::eek::eek: OUCH!:eek::eek::eek:

tonyb

Nothing wrong with being passionate about the environment Curt. Most people are to some degree. But running the risk of hypocracy, makeing the environment your main concern, yet you don't chastise those who have/had the power to keep the oil from hitting the shorelines. Accidents happen, this will not be the last spill in the gulf and nobody can gaurantee that it will. The gulf will eventually recover, oil will continue to be drilled, but I hope that preperations and response times, backup systems,are vastly improved. Lawsuits will go on for decades over this, and I'm sure the other oil companies down there are watching and making changes as we speak. Nice thing about mother earth is it's a perpetual cleaning machine,but it occasionally needs alittle help from us. Over regulateing the buisness will not gaurantee another spill won't happen. Demanding people enforce the rules and do their job has a better shot at preventing something like this from happening again. Over regulateing just means the price for gas will go up,which is what this administration wants, but it also cannot control the human element of error in all this. Untill a new source of cheap energy is found, drilling will go on,the environment will occasionally get a black eye, and life goes on. Does that make it OK ? No, but I don't see anyone comming up with any other solutions either. Wind,solar, while practical for small applications,cannot sustain a country our size. We need time for our technology to catch up with our ideology, all the boycotts in the world won't change that.

nooshinjohn

I do not wish to chastise you Curt, but I would do some serious homework about the environmental movement and the tactics you employed. You will find that the modern environmental movement is filled to capacity by communists, socialists and worse. Their only goal is to take over every aspect of your life. This country has been targeted for destruction by these people and your actions play into their hands perfectly. Van Jones would be proud.

I am wondering Curt, I know Ronald Reagan is fondly remembered in Dixon by the people that live there, but how is he portrayed by the education system there?

tonyb

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/3422-secrets-exposed-goldman-sachs-may-be-obamas-enron

Here's a short read on the CCX,chicago climate exchange. It will put some pieces of the puzzle together for those who failed connect the dots in grade school. It's not complete and doesn't mention everyone involved but you'll get the picture. BTW-for those that want to discredit the source, the info is easily verified from other sources as well.

After reading, tell me who benefits from prolonging this disaster in the Gulf.

tonyb

It's all about money and control X, you know that. To get it though,you have to sell it to the american people and the world. What better way than to use man made climate change as the vehicle. They have the framework setup allready in the CCX. They appoint the people they want in positions of power. What better way to exploit the Gulf disaster to help meet their end game. The only way to stop this is the midterms, and thats not even a gaurantee. I fear for this country if cap and trade legislation is passed. The rich will get richer,the poor will definately get poorer, and the middleclass will become the new lower class.

comfortablycurt

Amherst wrote: »

Hardly ridiculous, no administration has turned the environmental clock backwards more than the one in ridicule. The only blind eye in this post is yours.

Congratulations on your work Curt! Past and present.

Thank you. I'll be continuing to do my part.:)

hearingimpared wrote: »

Well if nothing else, I have to commend you Curt on your commitment to your belief system.

Thanks.:)

Demiurge wrote: »

I'm not a big fan of the public schools, but its glaringly obvious Curt missed out on a lot by dropping out of High School.

Hey, screw you dude. Get off your damn high horse and quit trying to insult me. That was a VERY backhanded comment, and one that you NEVER would have made to ANYONE in person. I dropped out of high school for a number of reasons, and it was a decision that I've NEVER regretted a single bit in my entire life.

What have YOU ever done for the world? Please explain.

How about you get out and do something, rather than chastising my decision to drop out of high school and get a GED instead. I'll also mention that a high school diploma and a GED are viewed as being essentially the exact same thing in nearly all respects, unless you're trying to get into a university. You can go to any public college on a GED just as easily as you can with a high school diploma.

A high school diploma is essentially meaningless in todays day and age, and not having mine hasn't affected my life a single iota. Dropping out of high school was one of the best decisions I've ever made. Believe it or not, not everyone views life in exactly the same way as you do. Some people have different ambitions. Enjoying life is number one for me...and I do that in spades.

Now kindly quit insulting my intelligence.

tonyb wrote: »

Nothing wrong with being passionate about the environment Curt. Most people are to some degree. But running the risk of hypocracy, makeing the environment your main concern, yet you don't chastise those who have/had the power to keep the oil from hitting the shorelines. Accidents happen, this will not be the last spill in the gulf and nobody can gaurantee that it will. The gulf will eventually recover, oil will continue to be drilled, but I hope that preperations and response times, backup systems,are vastly improved. Lawsuits will go on for decades over this, and I'm sure the other oil companies down there are watching and making changes as we speak. Nice thing about mother earth is it's a perpetual cleaning machine,but it occasionally needs alittle help from us. Over regulateing the buisness will not gaurantee another spill won't happen. Demanding people enforce the rules and do their job has a better shot at preventing something like this from happening again. Over regulateing just means the price for gas will go up,which is what this administration wants, but it also cannot control the human element of error in all this. Untill a new source of cheap energy is found, drilling will go on,the environment will occasionally get a black eye, and life goes on. Does that make it OK ? No, but I don't see anyone comming up with any other solutions either. Wind,solar, while practical for small applications,cannot sustain a country our size. We need time for our technology to catch up with our ideology, all the boycotts in the world won't change that.

Alternative sources of energy are already here...we just need to implement them in a bigger way. We're not going to completely move away from oil anytime soon, but that's not even really the point. I fully realize that we are going to be using petroleum for many years to come, and I have absolutely no problems with that. That's not what I'm protesting. What I'm protesting, is buying gas from BP due to their poor ethics and terrible safety record.

nooshinjohn wrote: »

I do not wish to chastise you Curt, but I would do some serious homework about the environmental movement and the tactics you employed. You will find that the modern environmental movement is filled to capacity by communists, socialists and worse. Their only goal is to take over every aspect of your life. This country has been targeted for destruction by these people and your actions play into their hands perfectly. Van Jones would be proud.

I am wondering Curt, I know Ronald Reagan is fondly remembered in Dixon by the people that live there, but how is he portrayed by the education system there?

I've done far more homework than the average person does on this topic. This is not some enviro-bandwagon I just jumped on last month.

Communists? I've met and know MANY environmentalists, and not a one of them has come off as being a communist or socialist.




Ronald Reagan fondly remembered in Dixon? Yes, by everyone over the age of 80 possibly...and a few others that like to feel important. As far as the general public? They could care less that Reagan used to live here. The township uses that as a reason to pull in tourists and tax dollars...that's about it. A couple years ago the town spent over a quarter million dollars for a bronze statue of "Dutch" for our riverfront. What a ridiculously huge waste of money. It is not as if there's some huge town wide "outpouring of pride" over being Ronald Reagans home town. Aside from us having the "Reagan Memorial Highway" and "Ronald Reagan Middle School", and the "Ronald Regan Memorial Riverfront" etc...it really isn't even something that most people think about much, if ever. Most people could really care less.

Reagan used to live in THE VERY house that I'm sitting in right now. Does that matter to me? Not at all.

How is he portrayed by the education system here? Not at all, I hope. What would Reagan have to do with the education system? Public schools don't teach political view points. He's probably portrayed to exactly the same capacity as any other president is.

Serendipity

I passed by a BP station today and there were barely any customers. The Mobil station down the road was full, though...

tonyb

Serendipity wrote: »

I passed by a BP station today and there were barely any customers. The Mobil station down the road was full, though...

You know whats funny about that ?

BP is one of the few companies that DOESN'T buy oil from the mid east. Some that DO are Mobil, marathon,texaco and pretty sure shell too. So with all the hupla over nation security, funding terrorist, blah,blah,blah,from buying mid eastern oil, some are doing just that. Hypocracy ?? Hmmm.....