Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by dryflylarry, May 14, 2010.
Environmental catastrophe, not political platform.
Thanks, Mumbles. I hate the Democrap and the Repthuglican parties equally. Its always a conundrum for me come election time when it comes down to choosing the lesser of two evils.
Over the last decade, things haven't been going too well for whistleblowers:
Apparently, the former Secretary of the Interior, Dirk Kempthorne, claimed to be outraged by Bobby Maxwell's allegations and findings. but he didn't do anything about it.
His successor, the current Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar, also did nothing to fix the problem with the Mineral Management Service, until now that its too late. He should have known about this problem, and by last year at the latest, he should have cleaned up the corruption in the MMS. But he didn't do anything. So you see, it doesn't matter who's in charge of the public interest. They will be bought.
I'm going fishing before the oil works its way around to here.
I missed this. Can anyone tell me about what happened here? or, the rest of the story?
Murray Slams Republicans for Blocking Bill to Make Big Oil Pay to Clean up Spills
May 13, 2010
(Washington D.C.) – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) released the following statement after Republicans blocked the Big Oil Bailout Prevention from passing today. This bill, co-sponsored by Senator Murray, would make sure oil companies are held accountable for the economic costs resulting from spills.
“I am extremely disappointed that Senate Republicans once again put Big Oil profits over Washington state taxpayers,” said Senator Patty Murray. “Today, we had a chance to make sure Washington state taxpayers would never be left holding the bag for oil companies’ environmental and economic disasters, but Senate Republicans said no. This is a simple issue of fairness—if an oil company causes a spill, they should have to pay to clean it up.”
Currently, the responsible party in an oil spill must cover all costs related to clean up; however, there is a $75 million cap on its liability for economic damages, such as lost business revenues from fishing and tourism, natural resources damages or lost local tax revenues. The Big Oil Bailout Prevention legislative package would raise the liability cap from $75 million to $10 billion.
The legislative package is composed of two bills. One to increase the oil spill liability cap and the other is to reform the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund.
S. 3305, The Big Oil Bailout Prevention Liability Act would:
Raise the liability cap for offshore oil well spills from $75 million to $10 billion.
S. 3306, The Big Oil Bailout Prevention Trust Fund Act would:
Eliminate the $1 billion per incident cap on claims against the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and allow community responders to access the fund for preparation and mitigation up front, rather than waiting for reimbursement later.
If damage claims exceed the amount in the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (currently $1.6 billion), then Treasury can temporarily refill the Fund and be repaid by the oil industry with interest once it is replenished.
Eliminate the $500 million cap on natural resources damages.
The Big Oil Bailout Prevention legislative package was introduced on the heels of the British Petroleum Gulf Coast oil spill disaster, and days after BP announced that their single-quarter profits doubled to $6 billion.
So true. Yet isn't it sad that they are already spinning it that way. Maybe if they spent as much time and money to stop the leak, as they did to pass/stop the health care bill, this thing might be closer to being done.
If I screw up I pay for it.
So should BP.
It's nice that they have the friends to get their liability limited.
BP must have insurance....Oh yeah, it's half of
the US Government.
Boyccot BP (do a search)
Sometimes i like to "think the unthinkable" just for a mental exercise. Suppose this wasn't an accident.
A BP official told the Horizon workers that "This is how its going to be done," despite their arguments to the contrary. A supervisor left the rig with other workers in charge shortly before it exploded. Supposed these two guys were paid off.
Who stands to gain?
Shit Jim, I wouldn't post an idea like that for the world to read.
It would be unAmerican to do something like that. What, just to rise the price at the pump.
Now who's hit list are you on?
Maybe we'll have the answer if gas prices suddenly hit the $10 per gallon mark... I love conspiracy theories...
NASA Satellite Air Photos of oil spill.....
And a little more scary....
Those satellite pictures are freakin scary. I wish they'd get the damn thing to stop leaking already.
Gee, really? cause I was kinda thinking...... :beathead:
Here's one whore in the pocket of big oil; as her daddy was:
Any bets BP tries to slip out of financial responsibilty for this mess? Similar to what Exxon did?
Yeah, and the latest lie is that the leak is pumping 798,000 gallons per day into the Gulf. That is only 554 gallons per minute. I call bullshit! It's putting out more than that! I still say it is putting out 4-5 times that amount!
Anybody here heard of the Athabasca Oil Sands? Know whats going on in Alberta? try googling "Alberta Tar Sands" and read til you can't take it any more.
Now, suppose that BP successfully tapped into that HUGE deposit under the Gulf. Would that maybe keep the price of oil down enuff to make extracting oil from tar sands uneconomical? Perhaps derail some projects and scuttle billions in investment.
Or maybe the BP bonus structure was set up such that the guy who said "This is how it's going to be," was hoping that his bonus would be fatter if he used less costly methods and allowed no further delays? Hoping nothing would go wrong...
Yeah, I know i'd never make it as a sci-fi writer.
BP was 6 or so weeks behind schedule on this project, and in a rush to get the rig to another location:
Last week Robert Kaluza, BP's head site rep, pleaded the 5th during testimony: