The environment thread

[bmags]

We did hire a President with significant underwater experience in 1976 you know.

 

and in the gulf spill in 79 it took him 10 months.

[mr_genius]

Well, now we at least know we need to hire an engineer to be president

 

probably should. too many lawyer presidents.

[Rex Kickass]

What does he do better? How about fixing the problem instead of using this catastrophe to institute his agenda? Didn't you find it hilarious that during his speech last night he railed against the MMS for failing to do their job, and then his response is that there needs to be MORE regulation? How totally inconsistent is that? We’ll just add more law to this heavily regulated industry, but THIS TIME we’ll have people ENFORCE it. Oh wait. That’s exactly what didn’t happen before.

 

(on a side note, love that no one is griping about his selection of an ex-federal prosecutor to run a division set with the task of regulating the oil industry. Let’s see, someone with great managerial experience in a different industry, but not in the industry that they’ve been selected to lead….kinda reminds me of another appointment people had problems with. Michael Brown perhaps?)

 

But I know. The government will get it right this time around!

 

There does need to be more regulation. For example, why doesn't the US require relief wells to be drilled at the same time as main exploratory wells? Other countries require it. Maybe you could point out exactly what makes deepwater drilling in US waters more unfriendly than say drilling in the North Sea off the UK or Scandinavian coastlines? "Heavily regulated" is not the word that I would use given that the MMS didn't require backup blowout preventers, delayed testing to accomodate business schedules, etc.

 

The MMS does need to be reformed too. It's obviously corrupted, and from what I understand, understaffed given the complexity of what they do. So the MMS failed to do its job, the head of the organization was fired, Obama accepted responsibility. He is looking to fix that small agency that's been riddled with corruption for decades. Is it unacceptable that the corruption was left to fester for the first 18 months of his administration? Absolutely.

 

But maybe you can tell me what more Obama can do? How can he fix the catastrophe? What exactly could possibly be done? Maybe you can share that with us.

 

 

[Chisoxfn]

You and Jas are just off your rockers on this. Seriously. You've seen me post here that ObamaCo is pretty much as bad as BushCo was on Katrina... but criminally negligent? The President? Just as responsible? Not enough LOL'ers in the world for that.

 

BP was indeed criminally negligent, as we have clearly seen. What ObamaCo has been, much like BushCo after Katrina, is managerially and administratively inept in the extreme. That, I don't see how anyone could argue.

When did I say they were criminally negligent? They f***ed up majorly.

[Jenksismyhero]

There does need to be more regulation. For example, why doesn't the US require relief wells to be drilled at the same time as main exploratory wells? Other countries require it. Maybe you could point out exactly what makes deepwater drilling in US waters more unfriendly than say drilling in the North Sea off the UK or Scandinavian coastlines? "Heavily regulated" is not the word that I would use given that the MMS didn't require backup blowout preventers, delayed testing to accomodate business schedules, etc.

 

The MMS does need to be reformed too. It's obviously corrupted, and from what I understand, understaffed given the complexity of what they do. So the MMS failed to do its job, the head of the organization was fired, Obama accepted responsibility. He is looking to fix that small agency that's been riddled with corruption for decades. Is it unacceptable that the corruption was left to fester for the first 18 months of his administration? Absolutely.

 

But maybe you can tell me what more Obama can do? How can he fix the catastrophe? What exactly could possibly be done? Maybe you can share that with us.

 

more regulation = WORTHLESS. Everything I read leads me to believe that inspectors could have shut this thing down based on current regulation, so clearly adding more requirements isn't gonna do jack if BP can't even follow minimum requirements. It's a freakin' joke to sit there and tell the american people that what we need is more useless words on pages when the problem was that people tasked with enforcing the law weren't doing their jobs (see also, the SEC).

 

And i'm not disagreeing that the MMS needs to be reformed. My comment was basically that Obama is pulling a Bush, just after the fact. He's a guy with good managerial and reforming skills IN OTHER AREAS, which was exactly like Michael Brown, who ended up being a scapegoat for corrupt state/local officials and just plain retarded people who couldn't figure out that living below sea level + massive hurricans and increased risk of flooding = danger.

 

And I've already told you its BP's problem to FIX the leak. I'm complaining that Obama didn't act fast enough (which you admitted as well). And I’m sure spending 20 minutes with BP this morning was really beneficial. Seriously? When I conduct meetings the introductions barely end before 20 minutes. What a joke.

 

[Rex Kickass]

What does he do better? How about fixing the problem instead of using this catastrophe to institute his agenda?

 

Sorry maybe I misread that part where you suggested he fix the problem. Again, what should he do to fix it? So far, all I've got from you is "have longer meetings."

 

Again, requiring a redundant blowout preventer would have potentially averted this catastrophe. Also requiring relief wells to be drilled at the same time would have potentially minimized the damages to this disaster. So yeah, more regulation could have really helped here. It's not just about being able to shut something down as much as it is also about minimizing damage when disaster happens.

[StrangeSox]

less regulation or the same regulation = STUPID.

[bmags]

well then why give a f***? More regulation may get worthless but only after the regulated companies get good enough at buying an entire agency or enough people are put there specifically to get bought, but at least it has potential to fix the problem, as opposed to relying on BP to give a s***, which has proven to not work.

 

If you want to feel less helpless, stop using so many plastic bags and find other ways to get around beside car. "Catastrophes" like this are only going to get more likely as oil gets harder to find. This is the consequence for our lifestyle.

[NorthSideSox72]

When did I say they were criminally negligent? They f***ed up majorly.

Kap did, multiple times, and you chimed in agreement.

 

And I've said before, yes, they f***ed up majorly.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

Sorry maybe I misread that part where you suggested he fix the problem. Again, what should he do to fix it? So far, all I've got from you is "have longer meetings."

 

Again, requiring a redundant blowout preventer would have potentially averted this catastrophe. Also requiring relief wells to be drilled at the same time would have potentially minimized the damages to this disaster. So yeah, more regulation could have really helped here. It's not just about being able to shut something down as much as it is also about minimizing damage when disaster happens.

 

I'm not a scientist or an engineer, so I'm not sure what specific things he can/should do. But unless you're suggesting that he's no longer needed, there's SOMETHING he could be doing, like speaking to BP about his (our) concerns for longer than 20 minutes.

 

And enforcing existing regulation would have prevented this thing from happening as well. Again, why would words on a piece of paper mean jack to a company that clearly skirted the rules and were allowed to because that oh-so-efficient government can't/won't/didn't do its job? Sweet. From now on these wells have to have a redundant blowout preventer. Hell, mandate they have 10 of them. That still requires the company to install it and the government to make sure that it gets installed. IMO there's an equal chance that this type of thing happens again because a blowout preventer fails and because a company gets greedy, works on the cheap, and the gov't fails to catch them.

[bmags]

I'm not a scientist or an engineer, so I'm not sure what specific things he can/should do. But unless you're suggesting that he's no longer needed, there's SOMETHING he could be doing, like speaking to BP about his (our) concerns for longer than 20 minutes.

 

And enforcing existing regulation would have prevented this thing from happening as well. Again, why would words on a piece of paper mean jack to a company that clearly skirted the rules and were allowed to because that oh-so-efficient government can't/won't/didn't do its job? Sweet. From now on these wells have to have a redundant blowout preventer. Hell, mandate they have 10 of them. That still requires the company to install it and the government to make sure that it gets installed. IMO there's an equal chance that this type of thing happens again because a blowout preventer fails and because a company gets greedy, works on the cheap, and the gov't fails to catch them.

 

so we should nationalize all energy companies. Excellent.

[KipWellsFan]

I'm not a scientist or an engineer, so I'm not sure what specific things he can/should do. But unless you're suggesting that he's no longer needed, there's SOMETHING he could be doing, like speaking to BP about his (our) concerns for longer than 20 minutes.

 

And enforcing existing regulation would have prevented this thing from happening as well. Again, why would words on a piece of paper mean jack to a company that clearly skirted the rules and were allowed to because that oh-so-efficient government can't/won't/didn't do its job? Sweet. From now on these wells have to have a redundant blowout preventer. Hell, mandate they have 10 of them. That still requires the company to install it and the government to make sure that it gets installed. IMO there's an equal chance that this type of thing happens again because a blowout preventer fails and because a company gets greedy, works on the cheap, and the gov't fails to catch them.

 

Sounds like a perfectly good argument for stopping this bloody deep oil drilling completely. And we seriously need to look past the President and BP's fault in this. We really need to look at ourselves. Who started using more public transit? Who started making and keeping more efficient residences? Who stopped buying fruits and vegetables from thousands of miles away? Nobody. I think we play this blame game to help us dismiss the fact that BP is really only providing a service that so many selfish individuals demand. We blame to cover up our own guilt.

 

"It's those evil executives and politicians to blame! How could they do this!?!?! I'm so much better than them!"

[Rex Kickass]

I'm not a scientist or an engineer, so I'm not sure what specific things he can/should do. But unless you're suggesting that he's no longer needed, there's SOMETHING he could be doing, like speaking to BP about his (our) concerns for longer than 20 minutes.

 

And enforcing existing regulation would have prevented this thing from happening as well. Again, why would words on a piece of paper mean jack to a company that clearly skirted the rules and were allowed to because that oh-so-efficient government can't/won't/didn't do its job? Sweet. From now on these wells have to have a redundant blowout preventer. Hell, mandate they have 10 of them. That still requires the company to install it and the government to make sure that it gets installed. IMO there's an equal chance that this type of thing happens again because a blowout preventer fails and because a company gets greedy, works on the cheap, and the gov't fails to catch them.

 

So the solution would be what then? It seems to me that what you're asking for is the same thing I would ask for. Standardization of safety procedures for exploring deepwater wells in the US similar to what other developed countries require, and giving regulatory agencies the teeth necessary to be able to perform their jobs.

 

But doing these things would require our government to do things that the loyal opposition isn't so keen on. Like increase funding on inspections of facilities, enact tougher and more stringent penalties on corporate crime, make it easier for big oil companies to lose their exploration permits and leases, and stop letting the foxes run the hen house by not putting ex-oilmen in charge of enforcing regulations they oppose.

 

Essentially, this would require a sea change in the way these kind of agencies have worked over the last few decades. Since 1980 (and possibly earlier), the US government has been more concerned with protecting business and money over protecting people when it comes to government regulation. We've started to see signs of that change in the federal government since ownership of the big house changed last January. But that change comes painfully slow, sadly. Too slow for many of us, and too quickly for those people who'd rather just blame government no matter who started the mess in the first place.

[NorthSideSox72]

Sounds like a perfectly good argument for stopping this bloody deep oil drilling completely. And we seriously need to look past the President and BP's fault in this. We really need to look at ourselves. Who started using more public transit? Who started making and keeping more efficient residences? Who stopped buying fruits and vegetables from thousands of miles away? Nobody. I think we play this blame game to help us dismiss the fact that BP is really only providing a service that so many selfish individuals demand. We blame to cover up our own guilt.

 

"It's those evil executives and politicians to blame! How could they do this!?!?! I'm so much better than them!"

This is an excellent point. The best way to fix this, long term, is to do everything possible to reduce our dependence on oil going forward. Its akin to when Bush pushed the idea that the best way to fix poverty and losing high paying jobs overseas, was education. His method for doing that was an abject failure, but his overall point was spot on.

 

[bmags]

Sounds like a perfectly good argument for stopping this bloody deep oil drilling completely. And we seriously need to look past the President and BP's fault in this. We really need to look at ourselves. Who started using more public transit? Who started making and keeping more efficient residences? Who stopped buying fruits and vegetables from thousands of miles away? Nobody. I think we play this blame game to help us dismiss the fact that BP is really only providing a service that so many selfish individuals demand. We blame to cover up our own guilt.

 

"It's those evil executives and politicians to blame! How could they do this!?!?! I'm so much better than them!"

 

AMEN X ∞

[StrangeSox]

Via BP's annual review of world energy:

 

 

My fiance's 101 year old great grandmother is doing her part by leasing space for a couple of windmills in Odell.

 

But it's still a blip on the map:

Edited June 16, 2010 by StrangeSox

[lostfan]

I'm not a scientist or an engineer, so I'm not sure what specific things he can/should do. But unless you're suggesting that he's no longer needed, there's SOMETHING he could be doing, like speaking to BP about his (our) concerns for longer than 20 minutes.

In that 20 minute meeting, apparently he got BP to agree to provide a $20 billion escrow account... is that insignificant?

[southsider2k5]

well then why give a f***? More regulation may get worthless but only after the regulated companies get good enough at buying an entire agency or enough people are put there specifically to get bought, but at least it has potential to fix the problem, as opposed to relying on BP to give a s***, which has proven to not work.

 

If you want to feel less helpless, stop using so many plastic bags and find other ways to get around beside car. "Catastrophes" like this are only going to get more likely as oil gets harder to find. This is the consequence for our lifestyle.

 

I'd be convinced that more regulations would help if a few things had happened.... First of all was that all of the old regulations that had been broken actually were enforced and had some consequences before a disaster if they were broke. Second would be that our federal government actually did something in the first place that made new regulation relevant to stopping the next situation from happening. All more regulations do is make it more expensive for the companies that are already following the rules. The companies that don't still won't follow the rules, because there is pretty much no disincentive not to.

[kapkomet]

So I'd expect that if I look back to 2005, I'd see you spouting off in here about Bush being criminally negligent as well, right?

No, because he actually responded. It took your hero 50+ days to get even semi serious... and that took "negotiations" to take over BP.

[kapkomet]

AND, how about a meeting with BP that lasts longer than 20 minutes...

 

 

Because it took him only 20 minutes to take over their corporation.

[kapkomet]

So, "negotiations" would imply that there had to be two sides to this. What got threatened against BP to make them essentially let Barackus the Great take over their boardroom?

 

[Rex Kickass]

Kap, there's something delicious that you decide to announce that Obama has done too little and too much simultaneously.

[HuskyCaucasian]

I have been out of town and cut off from civilization for 2 days. can someone give me a synopsis of what Obama said last night?

[HuskyCaucasian]

The reailty is there are some things that are bigger. When big s*** happens that needs massive resources the government typcially needs to be invovled because private business don't necessarily have the pull to make it all happen. Sometimes they do, but often times they don't. In this case, it is our governments job to protect our country and this spill harmed our country, so they needed to get involved.

Here's the problem and where the logic of many conservatives breaks down:

Bailing out banks a banks mess to protect the economy from diving into a deep depression is bad because government should get involved.

Bailing out an oil companies mess because it is polluting water and ruining an ecosystem is a a great idea and a role of the government.

[kapkomet]

Kap, there's something delicious that you decide to announce that Obama has done too little and too much simultaneously.

 

 

Sure... he does nothing so he can resdistribute more wealth. It makes perfect sense, actually.