I am finding all the comparisions with 9/11 a bit over the top. It was terrible that eleven oil workers died when the rig blew up and it is very sad that such a picturesque region is being ravished by oil slicks, but to say it is like 9/11 I think is ridiculous. 3,000 people died that day in New York and the nation was put on a war-footing and has had to live with the legacy of fear ever since. America invaded the middle-east as a result and the death-toll amongst American soliders, and the huge financial cost of these military campaings, have been vast.
Also, in terms of impact of peoples lives and on the huge financial cost to the USA, the banking collapse was worse than this oil spill. They will get this leak under control, maybe this week or maybe not for a month or two, but they will eventually get on top of it. It will take some years but a time will come when you will be able to go to the Gulf of Mexico and have no idea the leak ever occured - the region will replenish itself. The long ugly shadow left by 9/11 will last much longer.
I think this is all typical American media over-dramitising everything and going way over the top. The criticisms of the BP boss going sailing last Sunday off the Isle Of Wight, which was covered like nobody's business on American television, is an example of this. Also, the environmental impact of how American people live in general, like driving gas guzzling 4x4's, living a very non-environmentally friendly life, and not giving a damn about it, causes huge problems for the environment and the people involved couldn't care less. Those very people are the ones moaning about this!
What are peoples views?
the Gulf of Mexico oil spill..
-
Sam Slater
- Posts: 11624
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: the Gulf of Mexico oil spill..
[quote]Also, the environmental impact of how American people live in general, like driving gas guzzling 4x4's, living a very non-environmentally friendly life, and not giving a damn about it, causes huge problems for the environment and the people involved couldn't care less.[/quote]
Quiet. The oil fucks up the planet one way or another.
Quiet. The oil fucks up the planet one way or another.
[i]I used to spend a lot of time criticizing Islam on here in the noughties - but things are much better now.[/i]
Re: the Gulf of Mexico oil spill..
Some times America gets a nasty shock that brings them kicking and screaming into the real world ... this one after loosely basing a flawed "war on terrorism" on the oil rich regions of the world, added to the fact they have shown no signs of signing Kyoto Protocol treaties and have continued to be "mass poluters" is highly amusing - of course I hope this event will maybe do some good in the long run for the environment as a whole.
PEOPLE think Stephen Hawking is so clever, but when you ask him a question and he is typing in the answer on his little screen, how do we know he isn't just looking up the answer on the Internet?
Re: the Gulf of Mexico oil spill..
BP holds the licence. BP has stated that they will foot the cleanup costs.
An American company operated the rig that blew up.
An American company supplied an American made blowout preventer that failed.
Why the fuck should BP be getting it in the neck?
Hysterical hypocritical ignorant bastards is a term that springs to mind to describe the fucking Yanks and their idiot gobshyte President.
An American company operated the rig that blew up.
An American company supplied an American made blowout preventer that failed.
Why the fuck should BP be getting it in the neck?
Hysterical hypocritical ignorant bastards is a term that springs to mind to describe the fucking Yanks and their idiot gobshyte President.
RoddersUK
-
max_tranmere
- Posts: 4734
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: the Gulf of Mexico oil spill..
I agree. Only a handful of the people on the rig were BP staff apparently.
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: the Gulf of Mexico oil spill..
"Why the fuck should BP be getting it in the neck?"
Because they are in overall charge. Companies throughout the world try to avoid their responsibilities by contracting out as much as possible and drive down costs irrespective of the risks involved.
So for example, Primark outsource all their work to Asian companies at rock bottom costs. When their contractors then start employing child labour to make a few quid on their Scrooge-like contract, Primark take the "oh we never knew we are going to carry out an inquiry to see what went wrong" bollocks.
Contracting out work DOES NOT mean you can wash your hands of responsibility. BP have a very poor safety and environmental record and I am delighted to see them getting it in the neck!
Cheers
D
Because they are in overall charge. Companies throughout the world try to avoid their responsibilities by contracting out as much as possible and drive down costs irrespective of the risks involved.
So for example, Primark outsource all their work to Asian companies at rock bottom costs. When their contractors then start employing child labour to make a few quid on their Scrooge-like contract, Primark take the "oh we never knew we are going to carry out an inquiry to see what went wrong" bollocks.
Contracting out work DOES NOT mean you can wash your hands of responsibility. BP have a very poor safety and environmental record and I am delighted to see them getting it in the neck!
Cheers
D
-
Bob Singleton
- Posts: 1975
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: the Gulf of Mexico oil spill..
max_tranmere wrote:
[SNIP] ...and it is very sad that such a picturesque region is being ravished by oil slicks... [SNIP]
I think the word you may be looking for is ravaged!!
[SNIP]
> I think this is all typical American media over-dramitising
> everything and going way over the top. The criticisms of the BP
> boss going sailing last Sunday off the Isle Of Wight, which was
> covered like nobody's business on American television, is an
> example of this. Also, the environmental impact of how American
> people live in general, like driving gas guzzling 4x4's, living
> a very non-environmentally friendly life, and not giving a damn
> about it, causes huge problems for the environment and the
> people involved couldn't care less. Those very people are the
> ones moaning about this!
[SNIP]
It is our global dependence on oil (and especially the general belief in America that petrol should be cheap, that cars with 6 litre engines should be the norm, etc) that has fuelled the need for oil companies such as BP to search for the stuff in ever more dangerous/challenging environments.
Deep sea drilling is one of the most "challenging" methods of finding oil and comes at considerable risk. If it hadn't been BP in the Gulf of Mexico, it would have been someone else, somewhere else!
It's high time that more money was invested in alternative fuels, such as Hydrogen Fuel Cells. Hydrogen is the most common element in the known universe. Yes it's difficult getting the hydrogen off whatever it's attached to, but surely no more difficult than drilling for oil through several miles of ocean! Once "captured" the only waste product is water!
I really don't feel sorry for the Americans one bit... they've driven the need for such risky enterprises by their own selfishness. As ye sow, so shall ye reap!
[SNIP] ...and it is very sad that such a picturesque region is being ravished by oil slicks... [SNIP]
I think the word you may be looking for is ravaged!!
[SNIP]
> I think this is all typical American media over-dramitising
> everything and going way over the top. The criticisms of the BP
> boss going sailing last Sunday off the Isle Of Wight, which was
> covered like nobody's business on American television, is an
> example of this. Also, the environmental impact of how American
> people live in general, like driving gas guzzling 4x4's, living
> a very non-environmentally friendly life, and not giving a damn
> about it, causes huge problems for the environment and the
> people involved couldn't care less. Those very people are the
> ones moaning about this!
[SNIP]
It is our global dependence on oil (and especially the general belief in America that petrol should be cheap, that cars with 6 litre engines should be the norm, etc) that has fuelled the need for oil companies such as BP to search for the stuff in ever more dangerous/challenging environments.
Deep sea drilling is one of the most "challenging" methods of finding oil and comes at considerable risk. If it hadn't been BP in the Gulf of Mexico, it would have been someone else, somewhere else!
It's high time that more money was invested in alternative fuels, such as Hydrogen Fuel Cells. Hydrogen is the most common element in the known universe. Yes it's difficult getting the hydrogen off whatever it's attached to, but surely no more difficult than drilling for oil through several miles of ocean! Once "captured" the only waste product is water!
I really don't feel sorry for the Americans one bit... they've driven the need for such risky enterprises by their own selfishness. As ye sow, so shall ye reap!
"But how to make Liverpool economically prosperous? If only there was some way for Liverpudlians to profit from going on and on about the past in a whiny voice."
- Stewart Lee
- Stewart Lee
Re: the Gulf of Mexico oil spill..
But they have not abrogated responsibilty. They have stated that they will pay the compensation required!
As for their safety record it is no worse than any other major conglomorate. The responsible ones for this disaster are the fucking Yasnks. Period.
As for their safety record it is no worse than any other major conglomorate. The responsible ones for this disaster are the fucking Yasnks. Period.
RoddersUK
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Rodders
"Why the fuck should BP get it in the neck"
You have answered your own question. Because BP are responsible and have accepted responsibility.
Because they have accepted responsibility does not make it any less of an environmental disaster, it just means it is clearer about who rightly foots the bill.
The extent of this environmental disaster, the anger with the BP lies and Hayward gaffes, their appalling record in the US means that they "are getting in the neck". Quite right too.
As for their safety record in the US
http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmen ... spill-0430
And your unsubstantiated comment about the other oil companies record being just as bad, that's a defence is it?
I am sure if the likes of Shell have a similar size spill they will also get it in the neck.
Cheers
D
You have answered your own question. Because BP are responsible and have accepted responsibility.
Because they have accepted responsibility does not make it any less of an environmental disaster, it just means it is clearer about who rightly foots the bill.
The extent of this environmental disaster, the anger with the BP lies and Hayward gaffes, their appalling record in the US means that they "are getting in the neck". Quite right too.
As for their safety record in the US
http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmen ... spill-0430
And your unsubstantiated comment about the other oil companies record being just as bad, that's a defence is it?
I am sure if the likes of Shell have a similar size spill they will also get it in the neck.
Cheers
D
Re: Rodders
I diidn't necessarily mean Shell. I just meant any large conglomorate.
Yes, BP should take responsibility, by holding the licence they are responsible. It is just so unfuckingfair that the US company that operated the rig and had the disaster and the US supplier are being overlooked by every fucker in the States.
If BP's safety record is so bad why then were the fucking Yanks happy to continue with the drilling? No fucker seems to be asking that fucking question!!
Yes, BP should take responsibility, by holding the licence they are responsible. It is just so unfuckingfair that the US company that operated the rig and had the disaster and the US supplier are being overlooked by every fucker in the States.
If BP's safety record is so bad why then were the fucking Yanks happy to continue with the drilling? No fucker seems to be asking that fucking question!!
RoddersUK