# General > General Chat >  BP Oil

## huntermj

Well i hate to say this but it looks like the gulf will soon be dead.
I checked on the BP rov camera and while i was watching the the darn thing completly blew out.  http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8238/oilboom.gif
Thats a shortened clip of what happened and it continues on. If this is the new flow rate and i lived anywhere this, i would move. This is so bad i dont have words. So many anamals will die for no reason, it's makes me sick and sad.

----------


## Rick

I don't know what the true tally is. I heard 6 million gallons for far. The Exon Valdez was nearly double that. And now BP has another problem on their hands. They had a huge spill on the Alaskan Pipeline today and they've had to drastically reduce output on the pipeline. When it rains it flows. 

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-...atestheadlines

----------


## COWBOYSURVIVAL

The guy directing the hole being plugged has quite a reputation. Lets hope he is right!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37321309...ew_york_times/

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

A local radio talk show had a lot of our local spill responce team professionals calling in which was very enlightening. News being reported has not been following protocal. They discussed how accessments of damage and containment are determined and that initial decisions are made within 24 hours to bring in all affected parties to establish a joint responce. The Feds continue to drop the ball and preventing locals from helping too. Everybody with a boat responded to Exxon spill. Why are the fishermen sitting on thier hands? It is time somebody starts looking at worst case senario and release the volume numbers of oil in that field. It is a known number or they never will have drilled and maybe then they will take this serious and pour needed resources on this.

----------


## Justin Case

Breaking on CNN,  the Top Kill Failed ,  Plan B, is to build a special "Cap" for the well,  I dont think they can stop this. Man I feel so Bad for the people that live in that region,  This is soo Terrible,

----------


## crashdive123

Eventually it will affect a lot more than just that region.  They are getting hit first and the hardest.

----------


## HeritageFarm

TODAY: EPA Administrator Returns to Gulf Region to Oversee Ongoing Response to the BP Spill



CEQ Chair Nancy Sutley joins Administrator



WASHINGTON - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, joined by Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, is back in the Gulf Coast today to monitor EPA’s on-the-ground response to the BP oil spill and speak with residents about efforts to mitigate the spill's impact on the region. 



This marks Administrator Jackson’s third visit to the gulf region since the oil spill began.  During the trip, the Administrator and Chair Sutley will visit the command center in Robert, La and will also travel to Venice and New Orleans. The visit will include a tour on a Trace Atmospheric Gas Analyzer (TAGA), a self-contained mobile laboratory being used by EPA to sample and analyze outdoor air quality in the gulf. Administrator Jackson and Chair Sutley will also tour oil impacted wetlands by boat in Venice.



At 4:15 p.m. CST, the Administrator will hold a press conference in Venice, La.



Administrator Jackson arrived in the Gulf Coast last night, where she attended a briefing at the Unified Command Center and met with BP officials along with U.S. Coast Guard Rear Admiral Landry.

----------


## HeritageFarm

5/29/10
Top Officials to Return to the Gulf Coast

Trips by Top Leaders to Inspect All-Hands-on-Deck Response Total 28

WASHINGTON - At the direction of the President, Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson and NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco will return to the Gulf region next week as they continue their work, aggressively responding to the BP oil spill.

These officials' actions on scene will be coordinated by National Incident Commander Admiral Thad Allen, who is leading the administration-wide response and directing all interagency activities.

Administrator Jackson will make her fourth trip to the Gulf Coast to inspect coastline protection and cleanup activities and meet with community members to discuss ongoing efforts to mitigate the oil's impacts on public health and the environment. A native of the Gulf region, Administrator Jackson will spend a total of six days on the ground, visiting Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama to review plans for cleanup of oil-impacted wetlands and marshes, analyze scientific monitoring of dispersant use, and ensure that recovery and cleanup plans are proceeding quickly.

Secretary Salazar will make his eighth trip to the area to meet with top BP officials, federal personnel and government scientists in Houston to get a firsthand account of the on-scene direction and oversight of BP's efforts to cap the leaking well.  He will also participate in discussions with state, local and business leaders to discuss the ways the administration is supporting their communities during this catastrophe.

Administrator Lubchenco will make her third visit to the affected area to meet with top government and independent scientists and engineers who are working with BP and coordinating efforts across the federal government to ensure the best science is used to assess and mitigate the BP oil spill’s impacts to the environment.

President Obama visited the affected area for the second time yesterday to view the administration's all-hands-on-deck response to this unprecedented disaster. He spoke to the frustration felt by those in the local community and across America and discussed extensively what he saw touring the tragedy this morning. The President also commended those in the area who have “rolled up their sleeves” to help with the clean up, saying that “we’re in this together.”

In total, senior administration officials have visited the region 28 times since BP's oil rig exploded on April 20—including trips by the President, National Incident Commander Admiral Thad Allen, Interior Secretary Salazar, EPA Administrator Jackson, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, NOAA Administrator Lubchenco and SBA Administrator Karen Mills.

----------


## huntermj

Ya all the washinton folks are going to do what they do best, TALK and not much more. There in cya mode and trying to make it look like there doing something. New estimates are 18 to 40 million gallons have leaked so far.

----------


## HeritageFarm

Now I've heard 1 million to 40 million. . . . . . . . This spill is very worrisome. (starts looking at Prius prices)

----------


## crashdive123

> Now I've heard 1 million to 40 million. . . . . . . . This spill is very worrisome. (starts looking at Prius prices)


It takes more oil in the mahufacture and use of a Prius over the expected life of the car than it does for a Hummer.

----------


## HeritageFarm

Interesting... Source?

----------


## BENESSE

How about walking--you know...one foot in front of the other? The way we might _have_ to do if TSHTF or TEOTWAWKI?
Here's a chance to practice.
Worst case, get yourself on a bike. The Chinese and Indians managed to do it all these years.

----------


## crashdive123

> Interesting... Source?


While the report that came out is not without controversy, it should make us think about more than just mpg.  http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/

----------


## your_comforting_company

Why wasn't the blasted thing imploded when it first ruptured. I understand that the cost of rigging a new well was too great so they decided to let it leak.. I don't know, it was just discussion among friends. This should have been taken care of in the first 72 hours. If you can't cap it for later, blow it up and forget it. The pollution and the biological impact this will have is far greater than we imagined it could be and it's gone on long enough. 
How do we convince them?...

----------


## crashdive123

Some people have thought about it.  http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0504/rus...lf-oil-geyser/

----------


## Justin Case

> Some people have thought about it.  http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0504/rus...lf-oil-geyser/


I just translated this from the Provada ,  It appears that Russia has blown a few closed, but not underwater,  Am I reading this right ?




> Powerful nuclear "plugs" - sometimes 3 Hiroshima - we have enjoyed until 1979. And only once failed. In 1972 in Kharkov region failed to block the emergency gas blowout. The explosion was mysteriously left on the surface, forming a mushroom cloud. Although the charge was minimal - just a 4 kiloton. And laid deep - for more than two kilometers.
> 
> Total probability of failure in the Gulf of Mexico - 20 percent. Americans could take a chance. The chance of dying during the flight to the moon they were even higher. 
> Of course, we used a civilian nuclear program on the ground, the Americans as to the sea - under water where the ocean depth reaches 1500 meters.
> 
> But in principle there is no difference - you still need to drill a well at a distance from leaking. And it lowered the bomb. As in the movie "Armageddon" with Bruce Willis in the role of a driller. It is desirable that the calculations were done correctly. Such hope is: the U.S. is full of smart scientists and powerful computers. And Russia could have contributed. We still live peaceful nuclear demolition.
> http://www.kp.ru/daily/24482/640124/

----------


## Rick

I think the article is a crock.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> While the report that came out is not without controversy, it should make us think about more than just mpg.  http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/


Hmmmm... Interesting. But after the Prius is made, it's impact is much less. While the Hummer might take less to make, it's impact is much more. This may just be a slam against Toyota Prius. But I'll look into it more. :Sailor:

----------


## rwc1969

It's the price we pay for living the good life.

So many meetings, talk shows, articles and such. At least we know how to talk about doing something.

I'm sure in 10 or 20 years when all the fish and chain of life in the ocean "again" begins dying off we'll be blaming it on el nina or changing trade winds, etc. 
LOL!

Hell, for all we know it'll still be leaking in 10 years.

Pretty Sad!

----------


## HeritageFarm

Dear ******,

It's now been over a month since the Deepwater Oil Disaster began -- and not only has BP failed to stop the flow of oil so far, but we still don't even know how big the spill is -- because BP won't allow anyone else to investigate the extent of the problem.

The secrecy must stop.

BP is refusing to share information -- data it's already tracking -- that would assist in the response and public understanding of the scope and severity of the Deepwater Oil Disaster. And they have every incentive in the world to keep doing so -- news reports say that the smaller the official estimates of the spill, the lower BP's liability could be in court.1

We don't let criminals investigate their own crimes, and this shouldn't be any different. It's time for BP to get out of the way and allow access for independent scientists and engineers to determine the real size of this catastrophe.

Sign the petition today calling on BP to provide full access to all their data to the government and independent scientists.

Independent reviews by scientists across the country are suggesting that the oil leak may be as much as 19 times worse than the original estimates -- but BP refuses to provide them with the data required to make their estimates more precise. All we know for sure is that the oil just keeps on gushing.

BP is extremely sensitive right now to public pressure -- so let's tell them that we won't stand for them hiding the truth. We'll deliver copies of the petitions and any comments you submit to the CEO of BP, as well as the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Demand full access to BP's data and real answers about the Deepwater disaster.

Thanks for joining this fight,

Maggie L. Fox
Chief Executive Officer
Climate Protection Action Fund

P.S. This disaster is a painful reminder of how dangerous our addiction to oil really is - and how critical it is that our elected officials in Washington pass strong climate and clean energy legislation that weans us off of dirty fossil fuels as soon as possible. We must make sure that Americans and our leaders understand the true cost of oil. We simply can't afford a BP coverup. Sign the petition now demanding full transparency.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Hmmmm... Interesting. But after the Prius is made, it's impact is much less. While the Hummer might take less to make, it's impact is much more. This may just be a slam against Toyota Prius. But I'll look into it more.


 You have to use common sense. A vehicle has an impact when it's made, when it's used, and when it's disposed of. You have to add them all together. The Prius crowd, only seems to see the good points....they don't see the pollution caused by production, or disposal. (Or battery replacement, production and disposal.) I find this to be the case, with a lot of do-gooder causes.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> P.S. This disaster is a painful reminder of how dangerous our addiction to oil really is - and how critical it is that *our elected officials in Washington pass strong climate and clean energy legislation that weans us off of dirty fossil fuels as soon as possible.* We must make sure that Americans and our leaders understand the true cost of oil. We simply can't afford a BP coverup. Sign the petition now demanding full transparency.


 Do you have any idea what cost would be involved in this?
(I'm speaking of cost in lives, and quality of life.)

----------


## BENESSE

So easy to dump on "do-gooders" or people with ideas--_any_ ideas. Of course, a _viable_ alternative is hardly ever offered. I've sat around too many meetings like that--after it's all said and done, more has been said than done.

----------


## crashdive123

> Dear ******,
> 
> It's now been over a month since the Deepwater Oil Disaster began -- and not only has BP failed to stop the flow of oil so far, but we still don't even know how big the spill is -- because BP won't allow anyone else to investigate the extent of the problem.
> 
> The secrecy must stop.
> 
> BP is refusing to share information -- data it's already tracking -- that would assist in the response and public understanding of the scope and severity of the Deepwater Oil Disaster. And they have every incentive in the world to keep doing so -- news reports say that the smaller the official estimates of the spill, the lower BP's liability could be in court.1
> 
> We don't let criminals investigate their own crimes, and this shouldn't be any different. It's time for BP to get out of the way and allow access for independent scientists and engineers to determine the real size of this catastrophe.
> ...


Kind of spammy don't you think?

----------


## Rick

Uh, you do know that the chairman for the Climate Protection Action Fund is Al Gore, right? Repower America is one of their initiatives and it was started by Al in 2008. I'll pass on the petition, thanks.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> So easy to dump on "do-gooders" or people with ideas--_any_ ideas. Of course, a _viable_ alternative is hardly ever offered. I've sat around too many meetings like that--after it's all said and done, more has been said than done.


 Not people with good ideas....just people with ideas that they haven't thought through, or that just ignore facts.

 I know some of them mean well, but you have to actually think, sometimes.

----------


## crashdive123

> Uh, you do know that the chairman for the Climate Protection Action Fund is Al Gore, right? Repower America is one of their initiatives and it was started by Al in 2008. I'll pass on the petition, thanks.


Zactly.

Right out of the "never let a good crisis go to waste" playbook.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

And y'all thought I was crazy, when I was suspicious of the timing, and who's agenda would benefit, from this tragedy. :Innocent:

----------


## Rick

Somebody benefits from everything. No matter how bad it is, someone is makin' a buck on it. 

The latest news from BP. The well may spew until August. Nice. Real @#$% nice.

----------


## crashdive123

This isn't aimed at you 2D because I know that you already know this, but nobody should kid themselves ALL sides take advantage of any situation they can.

----------


## Justin Case

> Uh, you do know that the chairman for the Climate Protection Action Fund is Al Gore, right? Repower America is one of their initiatives and it was started by Al in 2008. I'll pass on the petition, thanks.


Speaking of Al,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suh1dj2P1rM

he he he,

----------


## crashdive123

I haven't heard anything lately, but has anybody heard anything about Kevin Costners efforts - or if he got approval to deploy the 30 centrifuges?

----------


## Rick

They will be tested within the week. 

http://www.pddnet.com/news-kevin-cos...rifuge-052110/

----------


## BENESSE

> This isn't aimed at you 2D because I know that you already know this, but nobody should kid themselves ALL sides take advantage of any situation they can.


Exactly right.
No one can claim hi moral ground any more or there'll be 5 YouTube videos to prove them wrong.

----------


## Rick

I haven't seen a picture of it or any diagrams but cyclones (a centrifugal device) has been used for decades in the coal industry to separate coal and water. This is a Krebs Cyclone. 

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

As long as two materials are of different specific gravity they should be able to be separated using the process.

----------


## Winnie

You're correct Rick. I was invlolved with the design of a centrifuge to separate bilge water.

----------


## BENESSE

http://www.pickensplan.com

Check out the site and do what you can.
T Boone has been on the case for a long time, and he needs all the support he can get.

----------


## Rick

Good post, Benesse. I've been a supporter of his for a long time. Here's the plan without the sign up. 

http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/

----------


## HeritageFarm

I don't see why we should stop getting imported oil. We don't actually get a very large percentage of oil from terrorist countries, around a couple percent I believe.

----------


## crashdive123

> I don't see why we should stop getting imported oil. We don't actually get a very large percentage of oil from terrorist countries, around a couple percent I believe.


IMO it's a matter of national security and sovereignty.  Here are the top 10 of countries that we import oil from.  Looks to me that more than one of those are run by regimes that would not hesitate cutting their exports to us if they thought it was prudent.

1. Canada
2. Mexico
3. Saudi Arabia
4. Venezuela
5. Nigeria
6. Angola
7. Iraq
8. Algeria
9. United Kingdom
10. Brazil

----------


## BENESSE

> I don't see why we should stop getting imported oil. We don't actually get a very large percentage of oil from terrorist countries, around a couple percent I believe.


The operative phrase is *Addiction to Foreign Oil.*
_Where_ it comes from is secondary.

This from the Pickens Plan:

*It's an addiction that threatens our economy, our environment and our national security. It touches every part of our daily lives and ties our hands as a nation and as a people.
*
*The addiction has worsened for decades and now it's reached a point of crisis.
In 1970, we imported 24% of our oil.
Today, it's more than 65% and growing.*

Please do read the rest of the story if you really care:
http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/

----------


## crashdive123

I've been paying attention to T. Boone and his plan for quite some time.  There are a lot of things I like about it.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> I don't see why we should stop getting imported oil. We don't actually get a very large percentage of oil from terrorist countries, around a couple percent I believe.


 First, I have to say that I think your info is incorrect, but aside from that, it's still about $500 billion a year leaving the country. That amount of money would sure help out our economy, if it stayed in this country. 

 Producing our own oil/natural gas, would create a ton of new domestic jobs, boosting the economy, which will allow us to spend more money on research and development of other energy sources. Currently, the cost of wind and solar are too expensive. Another problem is that battery technology isn't up to the task, yet. People don't seem to think about the fact that wind/solar have to have back-ups. (Sometimes, the sun doesn't shine, and other times, the wind doesn't blow.)

 At this time, I have to think nuclear energy is the direction, for the replacement of fossil fuels.

----------


## Ken

> (Sometimes, the sun doesn't shine, and other times, the wind doesn't blow.)


If you want to see the sunshine, check here  :Smile: :  http://www.wilderness-survival.net/f...mber.php?u=200

If you want to feel and hear the wind blow, check here  :Sneaky2: :  http://www.wilderness-survival.net/f...ber.php?u=3276

----------


## Justin Case

Clean Energy would create lots of jobs too,  

2d, You are just Mad cause you dont want to drive a solar powered Race car !  :Innocent:

----------


## BENESSE

We need everything--nuclear, solar, wind, gas (Rick?)--they shouldn't be mutually exclusive.
Whatever happened to backups? I thought we were all down with that here.

----------


## crashdive123

> We need everything--nuclear, solar, wind, gas (Rick?)--they shouldn't be mutually exclusive.
> Whatever happened to backups? I thought we were all down with that here.


I absolutely agree.  No options should be off the table - period.

----------


## Rick

I'm not down with nuclear generation. Spent fuel and the possibility of an accident are serious considerations that don't have well defined solutions. 

And 2D I disagree that solar and wind generated power are too expensive. Indiana added 905 megawatts of wind generated power in 2009. Second only to Texas in construction and 13th in the nation in terms of megawatts generated. We currently have 616 utility sized wind turbines. All in production and feeding the grid.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Clean Energy would create lots of jobs too,


 So would washing everyones car, twice a week, but who's going to pay for it?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> I'm not down with nuclear generation. Spent fuel and the possibility of an accident are serious considerations that don't have well defined solutions. 
> 
> *And 2D I disagree that solar and wind generated power are too expensive. Indiana added 905 megawatts of wind generated power in 2009. Second only to Texas in construction and 13th in the nation in terms of megawatts generated. We currently have 616 utility sized wind turbines. All in production and feeding the grid*.


 I understand that, but you didn't address the cost. The info that I have read, shows that with current technology, on-shore wind farm produced energy cost about twice what coal powered energy cost.....and that doesn't even take into account that you have to have a back-up system for the wind farm. That's even more additional cost.

----------


## Ken

> So would washing everyones car, twice a week, but who's going to pay for it?


I nominate Rick!   :Smile:

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Clean Energy would create lots of jobs too,


 How many jobs would it kill, when the economy goes all to pieces, when energy prices triple?

----------


## BENESSE

> How many jobs would it kill, when the economy goes all to pieces, when energy prices triple?


You are either part of the problem, or part of the solution, 2D.  :Sneaky2: 
((I just had to say it once in my life...feels good.)

----------


## HeritageFarm

> First, I have to say that I think your info is incorrect, but aside from that, it's still about $500 billion a year leaving the country. That amount of money would sure help out our economy, if it stayed in this country.


Ouch. I would like that money to stay here. (Oh, and Walmart imports most everything from China - That there is an enormous amount leaving).
One reason we import our oil could be because we have all these environmental people who don't want oil rigs in national forests.
I present a solution: Stop driving all over the place! Let's buy local produce and meats, that weren't shipped thousands of miles before making it to you.

----------


## BENESSE

> Ouch. I would like that money to stay here. (Oh, and Walmart imports most everything from China - That there is an enormous amount leaving).
> One reason we import our oil could be because we have all these environmental people who don't want oil rigs in national forests.
> *I present a solution: Stop driving all over the place! Let's buy local produce and meats, that weren't shipped thousands of miles before making it to you.*


I DO!!!
Don't have a car, walk everywhere, take public transportation or rent a car if I have to. 
I buy produce at the farmer's market where farmers from NJ, upstate NY & CT sell their produce. I pay a bit more and eat a bit less. 
And yeah, I'm one of those people who don't want anyone f-ing around with our national forests. Because if we ALL did our part, we wouldn't need to.

----------


## Sourdough

It is interesting that no one ever says the problem is 6.85 Billion HUMANS, and doubling every 37 to 42 years. We loath War, Pandemic, Famine; We make every effort to keep medically compromised babies and geriatrics alive. Feeding tubes in humans that have been in a coma for years. We play GOD with the Earth, and all forms of live, we cull any animal population deemed to be in a state of overpopulation. We make NEW engineered food in test tubes.

Odd that humans don't pray for a pandemic. Odd that we can't see that "WE" are the cancer that is killing our earth, the very Earth that nurtures us, feeds and clothes us, provides materials for our shelter.

I am NOT advocating any action, only pointing out that we (All) Humans never see that we are the problem.

----------


## BENESSE

> It is interesting that no one ever says the problem is 6.85 Billion HUMANS, and doubling every 37 to 42 years. We loath War, Pandemic, Famine; We make every effort to keep medically compromised babies and geriatrics alive. Feeding tubes in humans that have been in a coma for years. We play GOD with the Earth, and all forms of live, we cull any animal population deemed to be in a state of overpopulation. We make NEW engineered food in test tubes.
> 
> Odd that humans don't pray for a pandemic. Odd that we can't see that "WE" are the cancer that is killing our earth, the very Earth that nurtures us, feeds and clothes us, provides materials for our shelter.
> 
> I am NOT advocating any action, only pointing out that we (All) Humans never see that we are the problem.


We ARE the problem, no doubt about it and short of doing something very drastic, we can scale back where it reasonably makes sense. It doesn't have to be an all or nothing proposition.
If we want to be intellectually honest, we know best where we can personally cut back. Don't concern yourself with what everyone else is doing (the kiss of doom) think about what YOU can do and just do it.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> You are either part of the problem, or part of the solution, 2D. 
> ((I just had to say it once in my life...feels good.)


 You're absolutly correct. My point, is that jumping to conclusions/actions that cause more problems than they solve, is a problem....not a solution.

----------


## BENESSE

> You're absolutly correct. My point, is that jumping to conclusions/actions that cause more problems than they solve, is a problem....not a solution.


Maybe.
But at some point we've got to get off our a$$es and do something. Sometimes doing ANYthing is better than doing nothing. Have to stop fiddling while Rome's burning, don't you think?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Ouch. I would like that money to stay here. (Oh, and Walmart imports most everything from China - That there is an enormous amount leaving).
> 
>  I thought we were talking about oil, and energy, but if you want to go this direction, that's fine. I agree with you about wal-mart, but there is a huge difference. We choose to buy stuff from wal-mart. we are not forced to buy from them, because our gov't won't allow us to produce our own goods.
> 
>  Don't you agree that choosing to do something, and being forced to dosomething, are two different things?
> 
> One reason we import our oil could be because we have all these environmental people who don't want oil rigs in national forests.
> 
> ....or in the ocean, or in the frozen north, or coal mines in the mountains, etc., etc. We will never have a pristine world, as long as human inhabit it. You just can't have your cake, and eat it too. I would rather that we have control over the process. I think that we tend to care a little more, than a lot of other countries.   
> I present a solution: Stop driving all over the place! Let's buy local produce and meats, that weren't shipped thousands of miles before making it to you.


 I agree with this, 100%. I've said many times, that the best thing we can do for our world, is stop wasting so dang much.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Maybe.
> But at some point we've got to get off our a$$es and do something. Sometimes doing ANYthing is better than doing nothing. Have to stop fiddling while Rome's burning, don't you think?


 Who said anything about not doing anything? That sounds like the argument that people without information use.

 And no....doing anything is not always better than doing nothing. If you're trying to put out a fire, pouring diesel fuel on it, is not better than leaving it alone.

 I never said that we should do nothing. We need to build nuke power plants. We need to get natural gas from off the east coast, among other places, and start using that instead of oil, where practical. We need to work on clean coal tech. We need to work on wind generation tech. We need to work on solar tech. We need to work on battery tech. We need to work on the efficiency of existing power plants. The list goes on and on. There are plenty of good common sense things that can be done, without throwing diesel fuel on the fire.

----------


## HeritageFarm

2D - We are trying to sever our connection from Walmart, and thus, oil. What do you mean we can't grow our own food? I know lots who do.
Ben: Excellent, for doing that.
Back to oil...
2D: I think nuclear plants are too dangerous. If something bad happens, it would be many times worse than burning coal - not to mention getting all that reactive stuff is costly, and disposal is also very hazardous. Also, not many reactive things are in handydandy deposits.



_We must be the change we want to see..._

----------


## huntermj

I agree "we are the problem" we would never have become THE problem if we had'nt gone into mass production. Mass production of food, cars, houses, baby strollers and everthing else. The population would have remained stable and sustainable. Food would be local and organic, not mass produced GM seeds that cant produce food that can produce viable seeds. Yes we are animals who have strayed from the natural path of an animal. We have modified our enviroment to the breaking point. And its starting to break. Only this time its not a local event, its global.

----------


## HeritageFarm

Very well said, reminds me of a quote from Jeffery Smith on GMO's: "The mice wouldn't eat the GMO food. So, it is time for us to bring humans up to the level of animals!"

----------


## Rick

> sever our connection from Walmart, and thus, oil


Not possible to get away from oil. Very few folks are autonomous. Everything you touch, even off grid, is in some way connected to oil. 




> we would never have become THE problem if we had'nt gone into mass  production


Okay, I don't understand this at all. Population growth is tied to food availability, not the abundance of cars and houses. 

@2D - When the technology was new there was a disparity in cost. In the 80's the cost of wind power was about 30 cents a kilowatt hour. Today, it's about 5 cents a kilowatt hour when you factor in the tax credits from the Production Tax Credit. Most of that is related to turbine design. However, I will concede that wind availability is a driving factor in cost. If your turbine turns in a 5 mph breeze it will produce much less electricity than a 10 mph breeze and the cost will be much higher. 

As to backups, Indiana utilities utilize standby power plants on today's grid to balance need and production. As wind generation increases gas/coal generation must decrease to balance need/production. Since gas/coal plants already exist there isn't a need to build more. We would just utilize what we already have. The up side to that is that adding more wind (or solar) would reduce the need for coal/gas plants.

@ Sourdough - It's your job to eliminate about 2 billion folks. Start in China, please.

----------


## huntermj

Like i said in the compleate Quilifing sentance, mass production of food. And everything else.

----------


## Rick

I wasn't trying to take anything out of context. I just didn't understand your position on the other items with regard to their impact on reproduction.

----------


## huntermj

This easier for me to say then type. All mass production facilities pollute the enviroment in some way. Name one that does not and you get a gold star. if we only took what the land offered then moved on to let it regrow non of this would be happining. But this cant be done with the artificialy inflated poplation. All species go through boom and  bust periods and then extexcion. or maybe not. I belive we've taken our species to the brink at this point. It may not happen in my life time but we will go through a "readjustment" at some point. Back to a sustainable level.
Mass production helps in the short term but is killing us in the long term.
Sorry for the spelling, my ispell is not working.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Not possible to get away from oil. Very few folks are autonomous. Everything you touch, even off grid, is in some way connected to oil. 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, I don't understand this at all. Population growth is tied to food availability, not the abundance of cars and houses. 
> 
> @2D - When the technology was new there was a disparity in cost. In the 80's the cost of wind power was about 30 cents a kilowatt hour. *Today, it's about 5 cents a kilowatt hour when you factor in the tax credits from the Production Tax Credit*. Most of that is related to turbine design. However, I will concede that wind availability is a driving factor in cost. If your turbine turns in a 5 mph breeze it will produce much less electricity than a 10 mph breeze and the cost will be much higher. 
> 
> As to backups, Indiana utilities utilize standby power plants on today's grid to balance need and production. As wind generation increases gas/coal generation must decrease to balance need/production. Since gas/coal plants already exist there isn't a need to build more. We would just utilize what we already have. The up side to that is that adding more wind (or solar) would reduce the need for coal/gas plants.
> ...


 That's 5 cents, plus 1.5 cent's, (that the gov't takes from us and gives to them.), which equals 6.5 cents. I believe that currently, coal produced energy is about 3 cents. 

 Doesn't that make wind energy cost about double, what coal energy cost?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> This easier for me to say then type. All mass production facilities pollute the enviroment in some way. Name one that does not and you get a gold star. if we only took what the land offered then moved on to let it regrow non of this would be happining. But this cant be done with the artificialy inflated poplation. All species go through boom and  bust periods and then extexcion. or maybe not. I belive we've taken our species to the brink at this point. It may not happen in my life time but we will go through a "readjustment" at some point. Back to a sustainable level.
> Sorry for the spelling, my ispell is not working.


 So, are you saying that we should let the non-producers die, instead of giving them food, shelter, and clothing?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> 2D - We are trying to sever our connection from Walmart, and thus, oil. What do you mean we can't grow our own food? I know lots who do.
> Ben: Excellent, for doing that.
> Back to oil...
> *2D: I think nuclear plants are too dangerous. If something bad happens, it would be many times worse than burning coal - not to mention getting all that reactive stuff is costly, and disposal is also very hazardous. Also, not many reactive things are in handydandy deposits.*
> 
> _We must be the change we want to see..._


 Perhaps your info is not current. France has waste down to very small %'s, and cost is less than other forms of energy.

 Is it any more dangerous, than what we are doing now?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

Oh...and after you look at France, you should also look at the record of nuke power in the U.S. Navy.

----------


## huntermj

So, are you saying that we should let the non-producers die, instead of giving them food, shelter, and clothing? 		  		  		  		 		 			 				__________________


If a person can not or does not contribute to there own welfare what can and should happen to them?

Survival of the fitess baby!

----------


## crashdive123

> I think nuclear plants are too dangerous.


Oh, I don't know.  I slept a couple of hundred feet from one for over twenty years........

----------


## Ken

> Oh, I don't know. I slept a couple of hundred feet from one for over twenty years........


And look at you now!  :Innocent:   Nice red glow and all......... Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> So, are you saying that we should let the non-producers die, instead of giving them food, shelter, and clothing? 		  		  		  		 		 			 				__________________
> 
> 
> If a person can not or does not contribute to there own welfare what can and should happen to them?
> 
> Survival of the fitess baby!


 Hahaha....I've said before, that culling the herd may not be a bad thing.

 I've even argued, that universal health care will speed up environmental destruction.  :Innocent:  LOL

----------


## Rick

@ huntermj - We don't take off for spelling. I have to agree with the boom and bust idea. We go through it all the time with pandemics, wars, etc. I guess that's how we self adjust. But I get your point. No mass production limits food supply which limits population. I can buy that. Improvements in medical care would also have to be factored in, I think. 

@ 2D - I think it's actually 2.1 cents per kilowatt hour. 

Here's a layout of all sources of power generation and their cost per kilowatt hour. I don't know the date on this model but it looks to be current.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directo..._Kilowatt-Hour

----------


## Ken

> Here's a layout of all sources of power generation and their cost per kilowatt hour. I don't know the date on this model but it looks to be current.


The suspense is killing me.  :Innocent:

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> The suspense is killing me.


 That's what I was thinking......and here's the proof that I'm King of America.
...................

----------


## Rick

I've complimented the nuclear industry on their safety record more than once. Still, I think folks have to concede that a fire in a fossil fuel plant isn't quite in the same category as a toxic release in a nuke facility. Then there's all those spent fuel rods. Until Yucca Mtn. is actually opened all that spent rods are being stored across the country. If they can actually produce a traveling wave reactor then that might well be the whole solution. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling_wave_reactor

----------


## Rick

The wind stopped blowing before I had a chance to post the link and I lost power. I had to wait a bit before it started up again.  :Blushing:

----------


## huntermj

Well if you wernt working from a 1956 duracell battery  :Innocent:

----------


## HeritageFarm

> So, are you saying that we should let the non-producers die, instead of giving them food, shelter, and clothing?


No. We actually need non-producers. They buy from the small producers.
(We just need LESS non-producers!)
(Or for them to forage or sumthin)

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Here's a layout of all sources of power generation and their cost per kilowatt hour. I don't know the date on this model but it looks to be current.
> 
> http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directo..._Kilowatt-Hour


 Um, Rick.......I don't mean to be hard to get along with, but did you check the sourse of those numbers? I don't think I trust the info.
 Here is where it came from.(As best as I can tell.)
http://www.coldenergy.com/difference.htm

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> No. We actually need non-producers. *They buy from the small producers.*(We just need LESS non-producers!)
> (Or for them to forage or sumthin)


 With money taken from all the producers. 
Why not do away with the middleman?

----------


## Rick

Actually, I did check them. As I said. It looks like current numbers. Offer up different ones.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Actually, I did check them. As I said. It looks like current numbers. Offer up different ones.


 Well....this one is 6 years old, and British. I'll look some more.

http://www.raeng.org.uk/news/publica...Commentary.pdf

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

This one is American, but still, it's 5 years old. 

http://www.awea.org/faq/wwt_costs.html

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

March of 2009. Several sources quoted, in an article.




> A modern coal plant of conventional design, without technology to capture carbon dioxide before it reaches the air, produces at about 7.8 cents a kilowatt-hour; a high-efficiency natural gas plant, 10.6 cents; and a new nuclear reactor, 10.8 cents. A wind plant in a favorable location would cost 9.9 cents per kilowatt hour. But if a utility relied on a great many wind machines, it would need to back them up with conventional generators in places where demand tends to peak on hot summer days with no breeze. *That pushes the price up to just over 12 cents, making it more than 50 percent more expensive than a kilowatt-hour for coal*.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/bu...t/29renew.html

----------


## Rick

I don't buy that last sentence. You are either producing electricity with a coal fired generator at 7.8 cents or with a wind generator at 9.9 cents. You can't combine the two then say that's how much wind costs any more than you can say that's how much coal fired costs. The truth is the electricity in the grid is produced by multiple sources each with it's own rate per kilowatt hour. You can't combine them and then claim the cost for one source.

----------


## crashdive123

I think the point was the cost of building the additional facilities.  With the costs of building and maintaining both, the cost per kwh goes up even if the actual process is using one or the other.

----------


## BENESSE

I am always willing to pay more for something that's ultimately safer--food, medicine, cars, energy, etc.
There are other ways to save but compromising on safety isn't one of them.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> With money taken from all the producers. 
> Why not do away with the middleman?


They can find their place in a local economy. For example, at Polyface farm, Joel farms the land and makes the food. Then his brother buys bulk eggs from him (or maybe it has pastured chickens) and takes 'em into town and sells 'em to restaurants.

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

> I am always willing to pay more for something that's ultimately safer--food, medicine, cars, energy, etc.
> There are other ways to save but compromising on safety isn't one of them.


What needs to be grasp is that it was CHEAP oil that created the world we live in. We have only used half of the worlds reserves but it is getting more expensive. COST is the issue and more will have to do without. Fine if you can afford more as long as others are content with doing without.

----------


## BENESSE

> What needs to be grasp is that it was CHEAP oil that created the world we live in. We have only used half of the worlds reserves but it is getting more expensive. COST is the issue and more will have to do without. Fine if you can afford more as long as others are content with doing without.


AS, unless you're off grid and completely self sufficient, you _are_ going to pay one way or another. The question is when and on what. You might get cheap stuff upfront, but pay more later when it breaks down or proves to be dangerous (toys from China, baby food, produce treated with pesticides, meat full of hormones, etc.) 
Pick your poison. 
I personally draw the line at safety. I've cut on other things that are less important to me and that I can do without. 
For example, what I'd be paying to own a car, park it, maintain it and fill it up once in a while, I pay _way_ less for organic produce from small local farms. I eat less, walk more and take public transportation. I _choose_ to live where I do so that I can get away with not needing a car or commuting to work a couple of hours each day. 
Would I like a house with a big yard to garden in and a basement to store things for WTSHTF? You bet. Would I like a BOV, and a boat? Yes I would. But I can't have it all and my choices aren't infringing on anyone else's nor are they making _our_ "earth home" any worse for the wear.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> AS, unless you're off grid and completely self sufficient, you _are_ going to pay one way or another. The question is when and on what. You might get cheap stuff upfront, but pay more later when it breaks down or proves to be dangerous (toys from China, baby food, produce treated with pesticides, meat full of hormones, etc.) 
> Pick your poison. 
> I personally draw the line at safety. I've cut on other things that are less important to me and that I can do without. 
> For example, what I'd be paying to own a car, park it, maintain it and fill it up once in a while, I pay _way_ less for organic produce from small local farms. I eat less, walk more and take public transportation. I _choose_ to live where I do so that I can get away with not needing a car or commuting to work a couple of hours each day. 
> Would I like a house with a big yard to garden in and a basement to store things for WTSHTF? You bet. Would I like a BOV, and a boat? Yes I would. But I can't have it all and my choices aren't infringing on anyone else's nor are they making _our_ "earth home" any worse for the wear.


 You assume that every one has things that they can give up. There are a lot of people out there, that if they give anything up, it is life altering, or life threatening. Should they not buy the heating oil, or the groceries? Should they buy the cheap (made from petroleum products.) car seat for their baby, or just do without?

 As a side note, what you call safety, some may call overkill. Should they be forced to pay for your definition of safety? Where do you draw the line? You speak ill of how most food is produced.....would it be better to produce it like you want, and some people would just have to starve to death, because there isn't enough food?

----------


## BENESSE

> You assume that every one has things that they can give up. There are a lot of people out there, that if they give anything up, it is life altering, or life threatening. Should they not buy the heating oil, or the groceries? Should they buy the cheap (made from petrolium products.) car seat for their baby, or just do without?


Well I'll go out on a limb and say that most people are able to make trade-offs of some sort. 
Are you saying that WTSHTF you're not gonna be forced to give up something? It's all a matter of choice. You might not like the choices you have but you got them nonetheless.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Well I'll go out on a limb and say that most people are able to make trade-offs of some sort. 
> *Are you saying that WTSHTF you're not gonna be forced to give up something?* It's all a matter of choice. You might not like the choices you have but you got them nonetheless.


 No....I'm saying that I don't want to give up everything now, without a damn good reason. I'm also saying that some are asking others to give up far more than is gained, from their suffering. I'm saying that a lot of this stuff, is like asking someone to give up $100 to save someone else $20.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> I think the point was the cost of building the additional facilities.  With the costs of building and maintaining both, the cost per kwh goes up even if the actual process is using one or the other.


'Zactly. :Tongue Smilie:

----------


## BENESSE

> No....I'm saying that I don't want to give up everything now, without a damn good reason. *I'm also saying that some are asking others to give up far more than is gained, from their suffering*. I'm saying that a lot of this stuff, is like asking someone to give up $100 to save someone else $20.


Don't know who's asking, but it ain't me.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> would it be better to produce it like you want, and some people would just have to starve to death, because there isn't enough food?


I've always heard plenty of this Starving World stuff, and I have no clue where it comes from. A lot of countries starve because of overpopulation - so maybe they should stop reproducing like rabbits. "Hey, our country's starving 'cause there's too many people - let's produce some more!" As well, America produces an EXCESS of food. The reason corn is so cheap is because the market is so flooded the Gov has [chooses] to subsidize corn, milk, whatever.

----------


## Rick

Not 'Zactly. The coal/gas fired plants are already on line. Why assume you have to build more to back up wind power? As you add wind power you begin to shut down coal/gas generators. That doesn't mean you tear them down. You use them to augment power as needed. So the cost for wind is wind and the cost for coal is coal and neither the twain shall meat. 

HeritageFarm - I guess corrupt governments, war, genocide, poverty, geography and weather don't play a role in starvation in third wold countries?

----------


## HeritageFarm

> HeritageFarm - I guess corrupt governments, war, genocide, poverty, geography and weather don't play a role in starvation in third wold countries?


Sure. But mega-farms aren't the answer.

----------


## crashdive123

> Sure. But mega-farms aren't the answer.


Why not?

.

----------


## Rick

They have been to date. There are the sole reason this country has been able to produce as much excess food as it has. Gentleman farms are great but they can't produce the kind of food that keeps a country running.....er, uh.....eating. According to the 1990 census about 75% of the folks in the U.S. live in an urban setting. Not much way for them to grow their own food on a sustainable level.

----------


## HeritageFarm

The run off of fertilizers runs out into the oceans through stream. N is good in small amounts, but large amounts cause certain species to thrive in the water, canceling out others. The pesticides are obviously dangerous, continually resulting in residues on the produce, not to mention resulting in environmental pollution. (If you like to fish, hunt, whatever, you should be concerned about that) Not to mention huge farms require huge machinery, all too often sinking farmers deep into debt, so they die penniless. Several mega farmers have said they could make the same amount of money off 1,000 acres as 100 acres. 
There's the fact that most farmers farm a certain area until the soil is basically a desert, requiring more fertilizers. Nature abhors monocultures, positively abhors. To them, crop rotation is a waste of time. So their field is depleted. So much for those great nutrient dense GMOs, the plant can only, repeat only, be as good as the soil. When there are only 3 nutrients in the soil, not very nutritious is it?
 Then there is the hidden influences from mega corporations such as Cargill, advocates for mega-farming to get the price of commodities down. Once the price is down, farmers have to produce more to make the same amount of money.

Then it has to be shipped all over the place, resulting in oil dependence. It has to be driven, packaged, grown, fertilizers are shipped around, and pesticides, they're shipped to you and you ship them home.
Not a pretty picture.

----------


## crashdive123

> The run off of fertilizers runs out into the oceans through stream. N is good in small amounts, but large amounts cause certain species to thrive in the water, canceling out others. The pesticides are obviously dangerous, continually resulting in residues on the produce, not to mention resulting in environmental pollution. (If you like to fish, hunt, whatever, you should be concerned about that) Not to mention huge farms require huge machinery, all too often sinking farmers deep into debt, so they die penniless. Several mega farmers have said they could make the same amount of money off 1,000 acres as 100 acres. 
> There's the fact that most farmers farm a certain area until the soil is basically a desert, requiring more fertilizers. Nature abhors monocultures, positively abhors. To them, crop rotation is a waste of time. So their field is depleted. So much for those great nutrient dense GMOs, the plant can only, repeat only, be as good as the soil. When there are only 3 nutrients in the soil, not very nutritious is it?
>  Then there is the hidden influences from mega corporations such as Cargill, advocates for mega-farming to get the price of commodities down. Once the price is down, farmers have to produce more to make the same amount of money.
> 
> Then it has to be shipped all over the place, resulting in oil dependence. It has to be driven, packaged, grown, fertilizers are shipped around, and pesticides, they're shipped to you and you ship them home.
> Not a pretty picture.


Fact or opinion?  If not the latter - source?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> The run off of fertilizers runs out into the oceans through stream. N is good in small amounts, but large amounts cause certain species to thrive in the water, canceling out others. The pesticides are obviously dangerous, continually resulting in residues on the produce, not to mention resulting in environmental pollution. (If you like to fish, hunt, whatever, you should be concerned about that) Not to mention huge farms require huge machinery, all too often sinking farmers deep into debt, so they die penniless. Several mega farmers have said they could make the same amount of money off 1,000 acres as 100 acres. 
> There's the fact that most farmers farm a certain area until the soil is basically a desert, requiring more fertilizers. Nature abhors monocultures, positively abhors. To them, crop rotation is a waste of time. So their field is depleted. So much for those great nutrient dense GMOs, the plant can only, repeat only, be as good as the soil. When there are only 3 nutrients in the soil, not very nutritious is it?
>  Then there is the hidden influences from mega corporations such as Cargill, advocates for mega-farming to get the price of commodities down. Once the price is down, farmers have to produce more to make the same amount of money.
> 
> Then it has to be shipped all over the place, resulting in oil dependence. It has to be driven, packaged, grown, fertilizers are shipped around, and pesticides, they're shipped to you and you ship them home.
> Not a pretty picture.


 Stop drinking the kool-aide, and do some real research. While some of what you say is true, it's a small portion of the real world.

 You don't know many farmers....do you?

----------


## crashdive123

Now, now there 2D - be nice.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Now, now there 2D - be nice.


 You're right, crash....that was kinda rude, of me.

 I apologize, HF......I just get really tired of groups cherry picking a few bad issues, and making people think that those issues are the norm, when they are really a very small portion, of the truth.

 It also gets very old, hearing people repeat those talking points, as if they are the only "facts", when in reality, they don't know the facts.....so, if this is not the case, with you...then I'm sorry for what I said.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> You're right, crash....that was kinda rude, of me.
> 
>  I apologize, HF......I just get really tired of groups cherry picking a few bad issues, and making people think that those issues are the norm, when they are really a very small portion, of the truth.
> 
>  It also gets very old, hearing people repeat those talking points, as if they are the only "facts", when in reality, they don't know the facts.....so, if this is not the case, with you...then I'm sorry for what I said.


All right, thank-you. If you'd like to tell me what you mean....
"Do you know any farmers?"
Yes, plenty. Most have a small cow herd, and take then to the auction barns where they are usually bought by large feedlots.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> Fact or opinion?  If not the latter - source?


Many...The Omnivore's Delemma by Micheal Pollan, 
also this 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7470879/Ca...#fullscreen:on
And lots of others. The big-verus-small quote was from the Contrary Farmer. Page 41.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Many...The Omnivore's Delemma by Micheal Pollan, 
> also this 
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/7470879/Ca...#fullscreen:on
> And lots of others. The big-verus-small quote was from the Contrary Farmer. Page 41.


 OK...now I know where you're coming from.

Micheal pollan....he also wrote "In Defense of Food: An Eaters Manifesto".
Funny, he used the word "manifesto" in that title.

Nice shirt, he has on in this picture.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> All right, thank-you. If you'd like to tell me what you mean....
> "Do you know any farmers?"
> Yes, plenty. Most have a small cow herd, and take then to the auction barns where they are usually bought by large feedlots.


 You wrote..


> There's the fact that most farmers farm a certain area until the soil is basically a desert, requiring more fertilizers. Nature abhors monocultures, positively abhors. To them, crop rotation is a waste of time. So their field is depleted. So much for those great nutrient dense GMOs, the plant can only, repeat only, be as good as the soil. When there are only 3 nutrients in the soil, not very nutritious is it?


 I'm in northeastern NC. Let's just say, that I'm exposed to a few farmers, and a few acres of farm land, and none of them fit your discription.

----------


## hoosierarcher

Pay little heed to the doom and gloom merchants(the mass media). They are not in the hope or "look on bright" business. The bay wherein the Exxon Valdez spill happened was cleaned up and back to normal in under 10 years. When all the "experts" the mass media could get to talk at the time predicted it would take anywhere from 25 to 100 years for the area to recover. It happened so fast for two main reasons. First Exxon and US taxpayers paid a lot of money to have people there cleaning and second and much more important the Earth cleans itself. Oceans have a way of "digesting" crude oil. 
BP will get this plugged sooner rather than later and both human and natural cleaning efforts will repair the damage. Take a chill pill and quit believing everything the so called news agencies tell you.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> You wrote..
> 
>  I'm in northeastern NC. Let's just say, that I'm exposed to a few farmers, and a few acres of farm land, and none of them fit your discription.


There are small farms. I just am talking about mega-farms, and why they are unsustainable. Do you even know what a mega-farm is, or a CAFO? Just because there isn't one in your area doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Your first post: Your point?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> There are small farms. I just am talking about mega-farms, and why they are unsustainable. *Do you even know what a mega-farm is, or a CAFO?* Just because there isn't one in your area doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
> Your first post: Your point?


 Yes....I do. Do you know that...



> According to recent statistics provided by the American Farm Bureau, 98% of American farms are family farms  only 2% are owned by non-family corporations.


 Yet you try to make it sound like most farms are these mega-farms.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Your first post: Your point?


 In my opinion, it speaks volumes about how you think. Now I have a better idea of the type of person I'm talking to.

----------


## HeritageFarm

*I just took another look at that picture, and it has been photo edited. I edit photos, and that image DOES NOT follow the shirt shadow contour.*

----------


## Ken

> *I just took another look at that picture, and it has been photo edited. I edit photos, and that image DOES NOT follow the shirt shadow contour.*


*THIS* is a photo-edited picture:   :Innocent: 


Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

----------


## DOGMAN

> Pay little heed to the doom and gloom merchants(the mass media). They are not in the hope or "look on bright" business. The bay wherein the Exxon Valdez spill happened was cleaned up and back to normal in under 10 years.


Sure, there was a major clean-up after the Exxon Valdez and alot of recovery has taken place....but, back to normal in under 10 years? Where are you getting your info?  Its now been over 20 years- and its still not back to the way it was before the spill. Talk to people who live around Valdez, and they tell of oil underneath the sand and rocks around many spots in Prince William Sound. The population of orca's and sea otters has not rebounded signficantly and the regions herring fishery crashed.  Plus, the human cultural impact has been huge due to the constant stess associated with litigation over the spill.

----------


## Justin Case

> *I just took another look at that picture, and it has been photo edited. I edit photos, and that image DOES NOT follow the shirt shadow contour.*


No Its not,  you can see the shadow from his right hand on his jacket AND on the shirt.  at least thats how I see it.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> In my opinion, it speaks volumes about how you think. Now I have a better idea of the type of person I'm talking to.


You think from one picture that is edited you now know who you're talking to? You think that since you've seen someone with fists, you know who I am? Your logic is very flawed. I have done all the talking, and you have done nothing but disagree. You haven't said anything yet about your opinions, just disagreed. I am now going to ask you where you stand on these issues, although it looks to me like we need a new topic, because I haven't seen BP mentioned since 2 pages ago.
"98% of farms are family-owned"
That makes no difference. Yes, they are mostly family owned, that has no bearing on their size, and most of them sell to the Big Boys. Cargill is a massive food company, and they quaintly call themselves "Family Owned".

----------


## HeritageFarm

> No Its not,  you can see the shadow from his right hand on his jacket AND on the shirt.  at least thats how I see it.


The bottom right corner sticks past the fold in the shirt, and the image does not conform to his body like it would if it was actually there.

----------


## Ken

Here it is from a different angle.  

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

----------


## Justin Case

> Sure, there was a major clean-up after the Exxon Valdez and alot of recovery has taken place....but, back to normal in under 10 years? Where are you getting your info?  Its now been over 20 years- and its still not back to the way it was before the spill. Talk to people who live around Valdez, and they tell of oil underneath the sand and rocks around many spots in Prince William Sound. The population of orca's and sea otters has not rebounded signficantly and the regions herring fishery crashed.  Plus, the human cultural impact has been huge due to the constant stess associated with litigation over the spill.


Yes, Exactly Right,   Here is a good article ,

Snippet,

_By Yereth Rosen  Thu May 13, 4:44 pm ET
Anchorage, Alaska  Two decades after the Exxon Valdez supertanker ran aground and ripped open its cargo tanks, the spill still marks Alaska's environment. Pockets of fresh crude are buried in beaches scattered around Prince William Sound and segments outside it, in isolated spots along more than 1,200 miles of coastline that received oil in 1989.
The discovery confounded earlier predictions that remnant crude would quickly weather and disperse as waves washed it into the sea.
"At this rate, the remaining oil will take decades and possibly centuries to disappear entirely," concluded the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, the federal-state panel that administers the $900 million civil settlement struck in 1991 between the governments and Exxon for natural resource damages.
_
Continued @ http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/299887

----------


## Justin Case

> Here it is from a different angle.  
> 
> Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.


Ha ha,  Thats 100% unedited,  you can even seethe shirt follow the contour of his adams apple,   :Smile:

----------


## Ken

I enjoy honest debate.  It's the bull$hit and unsupported allegations of fact that I can do without.   :Smile:

----------


## Justin Case

And bright Red in your face letters  :Sneaky2:

----------


## crashdive123

Remember - play nice everybody.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> Ha ha,  Thats 100% unedited,  you can even seethe shirt follow the contour of his adams apple,


OK, close up I can see it isn't. But this isn't the same pic, is it?
Ken: I have references... But most of what I say is common sense. Mega-farms can BE sustainable, but it is easier and better yet on the environment to have local food the main course. Even large sustainable farms have to have their food *shipped* all over.

----------


## Justin Case

> OK, close up I can see it isn't. But this isn't the same pic, is it?


Doesn't really matter,  he's wearing it,  :Wink:

----------


## Ken

> OK, close up I can see it isn't. But this isn't the same pic, is it?
> Ken: I have references... But most of what I say is common sense. Mega-farms can BE sustainable, but it is easier and better yet on the environment to have local food the main course. Even large sustainable farms have to have their food *shipped* all over.


I'm surrounded by small farms with farm stands. I grow some of my own stuff. I ALWAYS buy local when available. Not too many avocados or oranges growing around here.

I don't think I spend $100 a year on produce at the supermarket.

----------


## crashdive123

Hes a journalism professor at UC Berkley.  His formal training has been in journalism and English.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Pollan

It seems that he is a wee bit of a radical that thinks the lifestyles of those that do not live as he sees fit are not worthy of consideration.  It seems as though he would be happier if somebody or something controlled the way others behaved.  

http://www.grist.org/article/pollan/

Just my thoughts on the cited reference.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> OK, close up I can see it isn't. But this isn't the same pic, is it?
> Ken: I have references... But most of what I say is common sense. Mega-farms can BE sustainable, but it is easier and better yet on the environment to have local food the main course. Even large sustainable farms have to have their food *shipped* all over.


 You mean like the 25% of farm production that gets exported, to countries that cannot produce enough food to feed their people. Should we not ship that food, and let those millions of people starve?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> I'm surrounded by small farms with farm stands. I grow some of my own stuff. I ALWAYS buy local when available. Not too many avocados or oranges growing around here.
> 
> I don't think I spend $100 a year on produce at the supermarket.


 Same here. And some times of the year, things just aren't available locally.

----------


## huntermj

Good Lord!

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> You think from one picture that is edited you now know who you're talking to? Nope....that's just an example, that I posted. I have plenty of reasons to think what I do. I'm not going to bother posting all of them.
>  You think that since you've seen someone with fists, you know who I am?
> See above answer.
>  Your logic is very flawed. I have done all the talking, and you have done nothing but disagree. You haven't said anything yet about your opinions, just disagreed. 
>  My opinion is that you are posting things that are either incorrect, misleading, or both. I am merely responding to that, so that others may see the truth.
> I am now going to ask you where you stand on these issues, although it looks to me like we need a new topic, because I haven't seen BP mentioned since 2 pages ago.
> "98% of farms are family-owned"
> That makes no difference. Yes, they are mostly family owned, that has no bearing on their size, and most of them sell to the Big Boys. Cargill is a massive food company, and they quaintly call themselves "Family Owned".


  Instead of arguing about whether or not he's a radical, why don't you show us some supporting evidence of the things that you are quoting.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> Same here. And some times of the year, things just aren't available locally.


So can and preserve. If you're on a Wilderness Survival forum, you know the best way to survive is to mimic nature.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> You mean like the 25% of farm production that gets exported, to countries that cannot produce enough food to feed their people. Should we not ship that food, and let those millions of people starve?


Those countries are overpopulated. There is something wrong with them, and they need to fix it. I have no idea what goes on over there, I cannot know all the worlds problems. So I stay away from this topic.

----------


## Ken

> Good Lord!


Rick's off-line at the moment.   :Innocent:

----------


## Ken

> I have no idea what goes on over there, I cannot know all the worlds problems.


I have solutions for all of them.

Simply vote the Ken-2dumb ticket for Ruler of the World in the next election.   :Smile:

----------


## Justin Case

> Ken-2dumb ticket


Does have a certain Ring to it !  :Innocent:

----------


## huntermj

Im not voting for a ticket that has the words 2dumb in it. I might get whats advertisaed and you get what you pay for.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> So can and preserve. If you're on a Wilderness Survival forum, you know the best way to survive is to mimic nature.


 So where would you draw the line? Would you trade goods with a farm next to you? How about 2 miles away? Would you go completely natural, and not have a fire to stay warm? In nature, you eat only what you can find and /or kill, so is farming out of the picture?
 Survival is one thing, but in day to day life I choose to live a more comfortable life.

----------


## Ken

> Im not voting for a ticket that has the words 2dumb in it. I might get whats advertisaed and you get what you pay for.


At least you know he's honest.  How many elected leaders do you trust?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Those countries are overpopulated. There is something wrong with them, and they need to fix it. I have no idea what goes on over there, I cannot know all the worlds problems. So I stay away from this topic.


 Maybe you should look at the bigger picture. Some of those countries have things that we need.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> At least you know he's honest.  How many elected leaders do you trust?


 Yeah....what he said! :Innocent: LOL

----------


## HeritageFarm

> Instead of arguing about whether or not he's a radical, why don't you show us some supporting evidence of the things that you are quoting.


*Cargill is huge:*
 Cargill is the largest privately owned firm in America. In 2008, Cargill reported profits of almost $4 billion, its sixth
straight year of record-breaking earnings, even as much of the rest of the world economy started to collapse.
*Cargill packages with corbon monoxide:*
Cargill has been a major advocate for technological fixes to
food safety challenges that could also be addressed through
more stringent sanitation and other preventative measures.
Only days before the November 2007 recall of hamburger
patties, a Cargill representative testified before Congress
and claimed its use of carbon monoxide in meat packaging
helped inhibit the growth of E. coli.98 There is no evidence
that carbon monoxide hinders or inhibits the bacteria that
cause foodborne illness, and the FDA did not approve it
for that use.99 The company had treated much of the beef
involved in the recalls with carbon monoxide, which is primarily
used in meat packaging to keep meat looking fresh
and red long after it may have spoiled.100
*Cargill dismembers bill, prices of commodities drop:*
Cargill was a major supporter of the massive deregulation
of federal agricultural policy in the 1996 farm bill, promoted
as Freedom to Farm.48 Cargills policy analyst noted
that the bill is truly watershed legislation that is going to
create wonderful opportunities for many, many people in
the farm economy.49 This farm bill was supposed to put an
end to government regulation of farming, completely phase
out government farm program payments, and encourage
farmers to plant as much as they wanted in order to take
advantage of the market.50 Proponents claimed that that
the bill would be good for U.S. farmers, allowing them to
take advantage of rising grain prices and global consumption.
51 In actuality, the new system slashed farm safety
nets and encouraged overproduction, which in turn pushed
down commodity prices.52 For example, the first year after
the 1996 farm bill went into effect, corn production jumped
by 25 percent while prices per bushel fell by 35 percent.53
In the next years, crop prices plummeted to levels well
below the cost of production.54 This free fall in commodity
prices triggered billions of dollars in emergency farm payments
by the federal government to head off a farm crisis.
As a significant crop purchaser, Cargill stood to benefit
from the reduced prices for the raw materials it used in
processed foods and feed.
Above: http://www.scribd.com/doc/7470879/Ca...#fullscreen:on
*Small farms more profitable:* 
By managing fewer resources more intensively, small farmers are able to make more profit per unit of output, and thus, make more total profits  even if production of each commodity is less.12 *In overall output, the diversified farm produces much more food. In the United States the smallest two-hectare farms produced $15,104 per hectare and netted about $2,902 per hectare. The largest farms, averaging 15,581 hectares, yielded $249 per hectare and netted about $52 per hectare.* Not only do small- to medium-sized farms exhibit higher yields than conventional larger-scale farms, but they do this with much lower negative impacts on the environment, as research shows that small farmers take better care of natural resources, including reducing soil erosion and conserving biodiversity. However, an important part of the higher per hectare income of small farms in the United States is that they tend to by-pass middlemen and sell directly to the public, restaurants, or markets. They also tend to receive a premium for their local, and frequently organic, products.
Above: http://www.monthlyreview.org/090810altieri.php
*Factory farms polluting:*
Threats to Human Health

People who live near or work at factory farms breathe in hundreds of gases, which are formed as manure decomposes. The stench can be unbearable, but worse still, the gases contain many harmful chemicals. For instance, one gas released by the lagoons, hydrogen sulfide, is dangerous even at low levels. Its effects -- which are irreversible -- range from sore throat to seizures, comas and even death. Other health effects associated with the gases from factory farms include headaches, shortness of breath, wheezing, excessive coughing and diarrhea.

Animal waste also contaminates drinking water supplies. For example, nitrates often seep from lagoons and sprayfields into groundwater. Drinking water contaminated with nitrates can increase the risk of blue baby syndrome, which can cause deaths in infants. High levels of nitrates in drinking water near hog factories have also been linked to spontaneous abortions. Several disease outbreaks related to drinking water have been traced to bacteria and viruses from waste.

On top of this, the widespread use of antibiotics also poses dangers. Large-scale animal factories often give animals antibiotics to promote growth, or to compensate for illness resulting from crowded conditions. These antibiotics are entering the environment and the food chain, contributing to the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and making it harder to treat human diseases.
Above: http://www.nrdc.org/water/pollution/nspills.asp

----------


## Justin Case

Never heard of them  :Online2long:

----------


## HeritageFarm

> So where would you draw the line? Would you trade goods with a farm next to you? How about 2 miles away? Would you go completely natural, and not have a fire to stay warm? In nature, you eat only what you can find and /or kill, so is farming out of the picture?
>  Survival is one thing, but in day to day life I choose to live a more comfortable life.


Permaculture is a farming practice that mimics nature... To a certain extent. The object of farming is to make a profit - do we have to sacrifice the land to do it? Do you want to kill to live comfortably? Do you want your children to live in a nuclear waste dump because you refused to not live in way that protected the Earth? When you are a Steward of Nature, your job is to protect - not to kill! That's what improper farming practices are doing - they are killing the environment! I just got an EPA newsletter where they sued a CAFO for water pollution!
I also choose to live comfortably - in ways that have less damage to Earth.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> Never heard of them


Of what? of What?

----------


## crashdive123

I'm sorry, but I had to laugh.  Your Cargill bashing link has an advertisement for Dominos Pizza at the top of the page.  Tell me which causes more harm?  Funny stuff.  Thanks for giving me a chuckle.

----------


## Ken

I'm thinking about "economies of scale."  Should everyone disconnect from the grid and run their own generator?  Remember, not many can afford the start-up costs associated with wind or solar power.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> *Cargill is huge:*
>  Cargill is the largest privately owned firm in America. In 2008, Cargill reported profits of almost $4 billion, its sixth
> straight year of record-breaking earnings, even as much of the rest of the world economy started to collapse.
> *Cargill packages with corbon monoxide:*
> Cargill has been a major advocate for technological fixes to
> food safety challenges that could also be addressed through
> more stringent sanitation and other preventative measures.
> Only days before the November 2007 recall of hamburger
> patties, a Cargill representative testified before Congress
> ...


 First, The size of a company is irrelevant.
Second, if they do anything that is not legal....prosecute them.
Third, if they are opperating leagally, but you still don't like how they do business....don't do business with them.

 Is there anything else, that you need help with?

----------


## Ken

Here's a fairly large company.  I drive by their bogs quite often.

They have 600 growers.

http://www.oceanspray.com/heritage/

----------


## Camp10

> I'm thinking about "economies of scale."  Should everyone disconnect from the grid and run their own generator? .


That would wreck my economy!! :Innocent:

----------


## HeritageFarm

> First, The size of a company is irrelevant.
> Second, if they do anything that is not legal....prosecute them.
> Third, if they are opperating leagally, but you still don't like how they do business....don't do business with them.
> 
>  Is there anything else, that you need help with?


This is futile.

----------


## crashdive123

Alrighty then.  What's the best survival knife? :Innocent:

----------


## Ken

> This is futile.


Why?  

*Hello, welcome to Massachusetts!*

_"Since our first cranberry crop was harvested in 1816, Massachusetts has become a leading producer, representing 35% of the world's cranberries. That's pretty impressive when you consider that 70% of our state's growers are small family farms with less than 20 acres of bogs. We take a lot of pride in our cranberry heritage. In fact, we've made it our official state berry and color, and cranberry juice the official state drink."  http://www.oceanspray.com/heritage/_

----------


## Ken

> This is futile.





> Alrighty then. What's the best survival knife?


A sharp tongue?

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Permaculture is a farming practice that mimics nature... To a certain extent. The object of farming is to make a profit - do we have to sacrifice the land to do it? Do you want to kill to live comfortably? Do you want your children to live in a nuclear waste dump because you refused to not live in way that protected the Earth? When you are a Steward of Nature, your job is to protect - not to kill! That's what improper farming practices are doing - they are killing the environment! I just got an EPA newsletter where they sued a CAFO for water pollution!
> I also choose to live comfortably - in ways that have less damage to Earth.


 I reject your premise. It's not an all or nothing deal. If I want an extra ear of corn, with dinner, it's not going to create a wasteland. Nuclear power doesn't make the world a waste dump. And yes I will kill. I'll kill a pig and have BBQ, bacon, and lard. I'll kill a striper and throw it on the grill with butter, garlic, and some dill.

 I can sit here and show you how many people get fed, because of companies like cargill, but I don't think it would do any good. I could show you things that they are doing to protect the environment, but would you listen?

 Oh, and as far as the EPA goes.....they do some good, but I have seen them really screw things up. Just because they say something, doesn't make it so, to me.

----------


## BENESSE

> Why?  
> 
> *Hello, welcome to Massachusetts!*
> 
> _"Since our first cranberry crop was harvested in 1816, Massachusetts has become a leading producer, representing 35% of the world's cranberries. That's pretty impressive when you consider that 70% of our state's growers are small family farms with less than 20 acres of bogs. We take a lot of pride in our cranberry heritage. In fact, we've made it our official state berry and color, and cranberry juice the official state drink."  http://www.oceanspray.com/heritage/_


I only wish OceanSpray didn't add so much sugar to their juices or play with words when it comes to describing actual fruit content. They don't have to do it but they do to save $$$. I should know, I'm in the biz that plays with words and the consumer is too dumb to care.

----------


## BENESSE

> And yes I will kill. I'll kill a pig and have BBQ, bacon, and lard. I'll kill a stripper and throw it on the grill with butter, garlic, and some dill.


Honestly, I didn't know that about you. :Sneaky2:

----------


## Ken

> I only wish OceanSpray didn't add so much sugar to their juices or play with words when it comes to describing actual fruit content. They don't have to do it but they do to save $$$. I should know, I'm in the biz that plays with words and the consumer is too dumb to care.


Ever eat an unsweetened cranberry?   :Innocent:

----------


## crashdive123

> I only wish OceanSpray didn't add so much sugar to their juices or play with words when it comes to describing actual fruit content. They don't have to do it but they do to save $$$. I should know, I'm in the biz that plays with words and the consumer is too dumb to care.


B - If you want unsweetened cran, try this http://www.mountainsun.com/products/juice.php It's a concentrate - one bottle will make 2 gallons.

----------


## crashdive123

> I reject your premise. It's not an all or nothing deal. If I want an extra ear of corn, with dinner, it's not going to create a wasteland. Nuclear power doesn't make the world a waste dump. And yes I will kill. I'll kill a pig and have BBQ, bacon, and lard. I'll kill a *striper* and throw it on the grill with butter, garlic, and some dill.
> 
>  I can sit here and show you how many people get fed, because of companies like cargill, but I don't think it would do any good. I could show you things that they are doing to protect the environment, but would you listen?
> 
>  Oh, and as far as the EPA goes.....they do some good, but I have seen them really screw things up. Just because they say something, doesn't make it so, to me.


Ohhhhhhhhh.  You said striper.  Nevermind.

----------


## BENESSE

> Ever eat an unsweetened cranberry?


Yeah, but adding virtually 20 teaspoons of sugar per serving?
I buy unsweetened (organic brand) then add Stevia to taste.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> I reject your premise. It's not an all or nothing deal. If I want an extra ear of corn, with dinner, it's not going to create a wasteland. Nuclear power doesn't make the world a waste dump. And yes I will kill. I'll kill a pig and have BBQ, bacon, and lard. I'll kill a striper and throw it on the grill with butter, garlic, and some dill.
> 
>  I can sit here and show you how many people get fed, because of companies like cargill, but I don't think it would do any good. I could show you things that they are doing to protect the environment, but would you listen?
> 
>  Oh, and as far as the EPA goes.....they do some good, but I have seen them really screw things up. Just because they say something, doesn't make it so, to me.


Cargill? Protect the environment? Now there's a laugh. And by 'kill', I meant the environment.

----------


## Justin Case

> Of what? of What?


Of cargill, of Cargill .

----------


## Rick

The thing that really ticks me off is they put that stinkin' cranberry juice on my 20 teaspoons of sugar! Grrrrrrrrr.

----------


## Justin Case

> Cargill? Protect the environment? Now there's a laugh. And by 'kill', I meant the environment.


Actually they DO protect the environment,,  all over the world ! 

SEE >  http://www.bing.com/search?setmkt=en...ts+environment

----------


## Rick

I think Coot would call this a skunk smellin' contest or something like that.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> Actually they DO protect the environment,,  all over the world ! 
> 
> SEE >  http://www.bing.com/search?setmkt=en...ts+environment


Oh wow. Now that I've seen that, I completely trust Cargill. Who else to tell me lies but Cargill themselves? Since Cargill came up on most those results, it's more than suspicious. Never trust what a big company tells you. That's why ads never work on me: I'm too friggin smart.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Oh wow. Now that I've seen that, I completely trust Cargill. Who else to tell me lies but Cargill themselves? Since Cargill came up on most those results, it's more than suspicious. Never trust what a big company tells you. That's why ads never work on me: I'm too friggin smart.


...but you'll believe what extreme left, communist, corporation haters say.
I guess you're just too friggin' smart, for me to debate with. LOL :Innocent: 

 You have fun, with your....or their, agenda. :Smile:

----------


## Justin Case

> Oh wow. Now that I've seen that, I completely trust Cargill. Who else to tell me lies but Cargill themselves? Since Cargill came up on most those results, it's more than suspicious. Never trust what a big company tells you. That's why ads never work on me: I'm too friggin smart.


Beefing Up Renewable Energy In Guelph McGuinty Government Supporting Food Processors, Protecting Environment 

An alternative electricity generation plant fuelled by a unique renewable agricultural resource is in the early planning stages in Guelph. 

http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/...010/043010.htm


Our partnership with Cargill, Inc. is focused on integrating biodiversity considerations into their business activities. 

Cargill has participated as a founding member of the corporate consultative group providing critical support and input into the development of the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (IBAT) for business. This tool ...
http://www.conservation.org/discover...s/Cargill.aspx

Spinning plastic from corn - Promise of more sustainable products drives Cargill Dow 

Petroleum-based plastic is used in just about every modern manufactured product. Cars, clothing, packaging  all have some form of plastic in them. But petroleum is getting expensive, and isnt always easy on the environment. Around the world, growing ...
http://farmindustrynews.com/news/far..._plastic_corn/

ETC, ETC, ETC,   The List goes on and on,  NONE of the few links I provided above are from Cargill,

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

The good news is oil is a renewable resource. All it takes is massive global extentions that wash all life into the ocean where in congeals for 350,000 years and you have a fresh supply of oil. The only solution I see coming.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> Beefing Up Renewable Energy In Guelph McGuinty Government Supporting Food Processors, Protecting Environment 
> 
> An alternative electricity generation plant fuelled by a unique renewable agricultural resource is in the early planning stages in Guelph. 
> 
> http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/...010/043010.htm
> 
> 
> Our partnership with Cargill, Inc. is focused on integrating biodiversity considerations into their business activities. 
> 
> ...


PR, man, PR.

----------


## HeritageFarm

> ...but you'll believe what extreme left, communist, corporation haters say.
> I guess you're just too friggin' smart, for me to debate with. LOL
> 
>  You have fun, with your....or their, agenda.


It wasn't a debate. I did all the talking and you just disagreed, never defended your position, because you didn't have one. Quite frankly I've had better debates with 14 yr olds.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> It wasn't a debate. I did all the talking and you just disagreed, never defended your position, because you didn't have one. Quite frankly I've had better debates with 14 yr olds.


 If that's all you got, from what I've posted, you should stick to playing with the 14 year olds.

 You have a nice day, now. :Innocent:

----------


## Rick

Hey! Let's not be insulting. That's a rule violation. If you two want to discuss that's fine but there is no point in arguing the issues.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Hey! Let's not be insulting. That's a rule violation. If you two want to discuss that's fine but there is no point in arguing the issues.


 You're right, as always, Rick.
I think I'll go back, and finish what I was reading. :Innocent: 

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2009/12/1/203041/342

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

Everybody is more wrong than right and in the real world the arguement will become more serious. Fuel is just one more thing you should learn to conserve, store and prepare to defend or live without.

----------


## BENESSE

> Everybody is more wrong than right and in the real world the arguement will become more serious. Fuel is just one more thing you should learn to conserve, store and prepare to defend or live without.


Wiser words were never spoken, AS.
That should pretty much sum up this argument.

----------


## trax

> Ohhhhhhhhh.  You said striper.  Nevermind.


Yeahhh, I had to back up and re-read that one. I was about to pm 2d about that pesky 'getting rid of the body in the motel room' issue.

----------


## rebel

It looks like the gulf is trashed. With a ban on drilling, I was reading that we can expect to pay 6 to 8 dollars a gallon.

----------


## BENESSE

> It looks like the gulf is trashed. With a ban on drilling, I was reading that we can expect to pay 6 to 8 dollars a gallon.


Welcome to the rest of the civilized world, rebel. Ain't fun, but having a disaster of the proportions we have now is even less fun. And we're gonna feel it for a looooong, long time.

----------


## Valtic

> It looks like the gulf is trashed. With a ban on drilling, I was reading that we can expect to pay 6 to 8 dollars a gallon.


Mayhaps a convincing measure to use less?

----------


## ClayPick

My guess is that there won’t be a great spike in the price of oil. 40% comes from the Niger Delta. The Gulf is a drop in a bucket compared to that cesspit. Chances are good that they're salivating out in the Tar Sands and hoping BP never gets her plugged. Disgusting, the whole lot of it.

----------


## huntermj

Well the "cap" is on the pipe and from looking at the video just now, it's doing absolutly nonthing. And even the news is no longer calling this the worst oil spill in the U.S. now its the worst in the world. Maybe a new rule could be oil companys cant drill in water that is deeper then divers can get to. But its a little late now. I think augest is the best case scernio for stoping it more likely october or november. What a disgusting mess.

----------


## crashdive123

> Well the "cap" is on the pipe and from looking at the video just now, it's doing absolutly nonthing. And even the news is no longer calling this the worst oil spill in the U.S. now its the worst in the world. *Maybe a new rule could be oil companys cant drill in water that is deeper then divers can get to*. But its a little late now. I think augest is the best case scernio for stoping it more likely october or november. What a disgusting mess.


That's the big problem, as I see it.  If this had been in shallow water, I believe it would have been over very quickly.  Unfortunately some groups have put enough pressure on Washington that the in-shore wells are very difficult to get authorization for.  Our own policies have, IMO contributed to this disaster.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

Well....lets look at the bright side. If we hadn't used so much of the stuff, over the last hundred years, it would probably be bubbling up out of the ground, and the sea floor, all over the place, making all kinds of mess. :Innocent:

----------


## Justin Case

> Well the "cap" is on the pipe and from looking at the video just now, it's doing absolutly nonthing. And even the news is no longer calling this the worst oil spill in the U.S. now its the worst in the world. Maybe a new rule could be oil companys cant drill in water that is deeper then divers can get to. But its a little late now. I think augest is the best case scernio for stoping it more likely october or november. What a disgusting mess.


Looks like its leaking/gushing twice as bad as before .

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

I will be watching boat prices. There are so many in Florida that prices may be droping enough to make my dream of owning an ocean going sailboat possible. "Never let a crisis go to waste".

----------


## Rick

I thought some of you might be interested in exactly what the Deepwater Horizon rig was. Here's a pic of it's sister rig, Deepwater Nautilus, being transported. Below that is a link that will give you all the specifics on the platform. 

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

http://www.deepwater.com/fw/main/Dee...ml?LayoutID=17

----------


## Justin Case

Proof of BP media black out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vim69...layer_embedded

----------


## Rick

That's pretty funny. You're going to lay that at the doorstep of BP, huh? Okay. Sounds like a couple of guys that don't know chiz from chizenolla to me.

----------


## Trabitha

Not for nothin...but they are right.  Maybe the BP employees don't want to be bothered by the media on their lunch breaks.  They're working hard and long hours to clean up this mess on THEIR dollar, leave the employees alone.

We get enough televised media about what's going on from the press releases and the BP spokes people.  Interviewing the workers on their lunch break, keeps them from getting work done and is a distraction from their productivity.  Like every other company, BP is required to provide a safe work environment, free of disruption and if the sheriffs department allows for them to HAVE a security staff, that security staff is ALLOWED to secure the area.

The media is out of line in this...like that's anything new.  They don't just barge into YOUR work place and demand to talk to you, because it's still private property.  While they are cleaning the Gulf and the beaches, they MUST treat them as though they are as you would your private work place.

Leave them the hell alone and let them get their work done.

----------


## Justin Case

Um,  The Sheriff has nothing to do with them having a security staff,  I can hire a security guard to follow me around town if i wish,  

and Rick,  I seen on Cnn , the contract that BP made the employees sign said they were not allowed to talk to the media,  BP said that was taken out of context,  The Point is this, "private security" would have ZERO authority to keep anyone off of a public beach,  Only LEO or other "Official agency" can do that,  "Private security" only has authority on "Private Property".

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

> Um,  The Sheriff has nothing to do with them having a security staff,  I can hire a security guard to follow me around town if i wish,  
> 
> and Rick,  I seen on Cnn , the contract that BP made the employees sign said they were not allowed to talk to the media,  BP said that was taken out of context,  The Point is this, "private security" would have ZERO authority to keep anyone off of a public beach,  Only LEO or other "Official agency" can do that,  "Private security" only has authority on "Private Property".


Hazmat has regs that take precidence. Area must be cleared no matter who owns it.

----------


## Rick

That's why I said the two guys didn't know chiz. Literally thousands of hours of video have been shot by every known agency on the planet. Workers have interviewed, wildlife recovery folks have been interviewed, captains of fishing boats contracted to skim oil have been interviewed. The whole thing didn't make any sense. Why would BP care about an interview with 2 dozen workers? Other than the fact the workers don't speak for BP, what harm could it do and you know if BP really took that position it would be reported in a heartbeat and probably by the workers themselves. 

You can buy it if you want. I don't. Abade, abade, that's all folks!

----------


## Trabitha

You're missing the point of a "security staff", Justin.
You can hire your own security guard to follow you around, but that person can not deny the media access to you if they find a way around them.  He also can not deny access to the building that you're in for lunch if you're not on your work site. 

In this instance, a temporary outdoor facility has been established on the beach for the purposes of cleaning up the oil spill.  The sheriff of that county has authority to permit or deny any of BP's requests to employ a security staff for the purposes of keeping non-work related personnel off the premises.  
Since BP has granted the media access to a media TENT where they receive information as it is released by BP, their is no media black out.  

For crying out loud, people.  Sometimes you DON'T need to know everything.  What information do you really think you're going to get from some "bottom if the latter" guy anyway?

----------


## Trabitha

> Hazmat has regs that take precidence. Area must be cleared no matter who owns it.


Exactly.  Was going to edit mine to say that...but you did it for me. LOL!

----------


## Justin Case

> Hazmat has regs that take precidence. Area must be cleared no matter who owns it.


I understand that,  But those 2 boy scouts would  not have authority to enforce an access restriction,  The area where they are cleaning up the animals is protected by National Guard troops for example.

----------


## Trabitha

> That's why I said the two guys didn't know chiz. Literally thousands of hours of video have been shot by every known agency on the planet. Workers have interviewed, wildlife recovery folks have been interviewed, captains of fishing boats contracted to skim oil have been interviewed. The whole thing didn't make any sense. Why would BP care about an interview with 2 dozen workers? Other than the fact the workers don't speak for BP, what harm could it do and you know if BP really took that position it would be reported in a heartbeat and probably by the workers themselves. 
> 
> You can buy it if you want. I don't. Abade, abade, that's all folks!


Aren't you always the one that picks on our little in-house conspiracy theorists? lol!  There's no conspiracy here.  If I were a worker for BP and they didn't protect me during my work and down time, from the media...I would sue, and I know I'm far from the only one that would feel that way.  BP is doing what every other company would do for their employees.

----------


## Trabitha

> I understand that,  But those 2 boy scouts would  not have authority to enforce an access restriction,  The area where they are cleaning up the animals is protected by National Guard troops for example.


That area belongs to BP.  "Property of BP" is in those tents.  "Private property of the workers of BP" are in those tents.  Their job is to keep non BP employees out of those areas.

----------


## Justin Case

> You're missing the point of a "security staff", Justin.
> You can hire your own security guard to follow you around, but that person can not deny the media access to you if they find a way around them.  He also can not deny access to the building that you're in for lunch if you're not on your work site.


No I am not, Thats exactly what I am trying to say,   BP hired those guys to try and keep people from talking to the workers, and thats fine, BUT, unless that beach was officially closed, which it wasnt, anybody can go there,,,  as the security supervisor allowed them to do when he got there, (the guy on the quad),

----------


## Rick

Hey! I'm arguing with you not against you, T. I'm on your side. There is no conspiracy here.

----------


## Trabitha

> Hey! I'm arguing with you not against you, T. I'm on your side. There is no conspiracy here.



LOL!  I must have totally misunderstood you then.  :Wink:   My bad!

----------


## Justin Case

> That area belongs to BP.  "Property of BP" is in those tents.  "Private property of the workers of BP" are in those tents.  Their job is to keep non BP employees out of those areas.


Forget about the tents,,  The security gaurd was trying to keep those guys off a public beach,,,  They cant do that !    and when it was said and done, they didnt do that, right ?

----------


## Justin Case

> Aren't you always the one that picks on our little in-house conspiracy theorists? lol!  There's no conspiracy here.  If I were a worker for BP and they didn't protect me during my work and down time, from the media...I would sue, and I know I'm far from the only one that would feel that way.  BP is doing what every other company would do for their employees.


LOL, sue Who ?  there is nothing illegal about media or anyone else walking up and asking someone a question in a public place,,   My goodness,  you watch Politics,,,   what you are saying is the same as saying protesters standing on a public street yelling at somebody can be sued for being there,,  Please......

----------


## Trabitha

> No I am not, Thats exactly what I am trying to say,   BP hired those guys to try and keep people from talking to the workers, and thats fine, BUT, unless that beach was officially closed, which it wasnt, anybody can go there,,,  as the security supervisor allowed them to do when he got there, (the guy on the quad),


You need to understand that there is no way to protect those hundreds of of employees with a handful of security personnel, unless they are able to cordon off a "safe zone". 

Yes,  a supervisor allowed it to happen before, and there was most likely a complaint by a worker and the policy changed like they do in every other working situation.  

What's the big deal?  It's not like their hiding aliens on the beach or creating a nuclear bomb.  Their cleaning oil out of sand.  Wooooo!!  I sure wish I could see more video of THAT.  LOL!  Don't worry.  If there was something that could be considered a conspiracy, Janet Napaliano would be up their butts with an FBI team. LOL!!

...serious question...if they did allow for those employees to be interviewed regularly...what exactly are WE going to do with the 'information' that we get?  Get pissed off?  Complain?  Take care of it...er...yeah...THAT'S not going to happen.  It will don nothing but entertain the masses, and the bottom line is that this situation is not here to entertain you or me.  They are working their butts off to clean up a HUGE mess, that is getting worse by the day.  Wanna know what they're doing behind the scenes?  Get a job with BP or volunteer to help with the clean up.  :Wink:

----------


## Trabitha

> Forget about the tents,,  The security gaurd was trying to keep those guys off a public beach,,,  They cant do that !    and when it was said and done, they didnt do that, right ?


Those tents were where employees were at.  The buffer gave them a safe place for them to be.  It's really very simple.

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

> I understand that,  But those 2 boy scouts would  not have authority to enforce an access restriction,  The area where they are cleaning up the animals is protected by National Guard troops for example.


The authority is with the law. I have first responder cards as truck driver that authorize me to clear areas of people. Responsibilty and training at many levels. My 126F card only authorizes me but also mandates that I report, make an attempt at containment if reasonable and keep people away.

----------


## Rick

Yo! Wanna buy some tickets. Look here. I got two primo tickets to this cat fight. Read those posts ^^^ my man. This is some good stuff goin' down. You can get two for the price of one and you know that's a bargain. Get you money out 'cause the next guy up is gonna buy.

----------


## Justin Case

> You need to understand that there is no way to protect those hundreds of of employees with a handful of security personnel, unless they are able to cordon off a "safe zone". 
> 
> Yes,  a supervisor allowed it to happen before, and there was most likely a complaint by a worker and the policy changed like they do in every other working situation.  
> 
> What's the big deal?  It's not like their hiding aliens on the beach or creating a nuclear bomb.  Their cleaning oil out of sand.  Wooooo!!  I sure wish I could see more video of THAT.  LOL!  Don't worry.  If there was something that could be considered a conspiracy, Janet Napaliano would be up their butts with an FBI team. LOL!!
> 
> ...serious question...if they did allow for those employees to be interviewed regularly...what exactly are WE going to do with the 'information' that we get?  Get pissed off?  Complain?  Take care of it...er...yeah...THAT'S not going to happen.  It will don nothing but entertain the masses, and the bottom line is that this situation is not here to entertain you or me.  They are working their butts off to clean up a HUGE mess, that is getting worse by the day.  Wanna know what they're doing behind the scenes?  Get a job with BP or volunteer to help with the clean up.


I am not talking about interviews right now,,  I am talking about a private person telling another private person they cannot go onto a public beach that has not been closed by an official agency.  as for the interviews,  The "security " gaurds cant do anything about that either,  its up to the interview-ee,  The only reason those "security" gaurds were there is because 90% of the public (or more) would believe they had authority and not go onto the beach,,  I AM NOT SAYING anyone should be there bothering the workers.

----------


## Trabitha

> LOL, sue Who ?  there is nothing illegal about media or anyone else walking up and asking someone a question in a public place,,   My goodness,  you watch Politics,,,   what you are saying is the same as saying protesters standing on a public street yelling at somebody can be sued for being there,,  Please......


Sue my employer for not giving me a safe place to work.  Have you ever read your employee handbook, dude?  

You don't seem to see the difference here.  This isn't someone on the street.  They aren't protesters.  They are EMPLOYEES of a large corporation, brought there to do a job.  They are allotted the same rights as any other employee in the USA.  Just like road crews can't talk to the media when they are working on a highway project.  It's UNSAFE.  If the employees wished to be interviewed, they are more than capable of walking the...what...100 yards to the mass of media personnel to speak up.

----------


## Rick

Ooooh! And he guppied. Justin had a strong offense going and buckled. He started backin' up and the bells started beepin'. 

He sure did. Trabitha pushed him into that corner and stuck him there. I like your use of the word guppied, too. 

Thanks. You don't hear that too often anymore.

----------


## Trabitha

> I am not talking about interviews right now,,  I am talking about a private person telling another private person they cannot go onto a public beach that has not been closed by an official agency.  as for the interviews,  The "security " gaurds cant do anything about that either,  its up to the interview-ee,  The only reason those "security" gaurds were there is because 90% of the public (or more) would believe they had authority and not go onto the beach,,  I AM NOT SAYING anyone should be there bothering the workers.


So you changed the subject?  1) a private person doesn't have a camera and microphone.  2) if the beach is a work area, they DO have the right to tell ANYONE that they can't be there.  Why is this so hard for you to grasp??  Did you want to go SWIMMING in the oil and use it as a deep moisture bath or something?  

If you're on the beach that they are trying to clean you ARE bothering the workers.  Just like I can't walk into a work zone on a "public street", I can't walk on to a work zone on a "public beach."

----------


## Rick

And now she's going in for the kill. 

Just like a wounded deer under the glare of an alpha wolf. 

Very nice analogy. 

Why thank you.

----------


## Justin Case

> The authority is with the law. I have first responder cards as truck driver that authorize me to clear areas of people. Responsibilty and training at many levels. My 126F card only authorizes me but also mandates that I report, make an attempt at containment if reasonable and keep people away.


Please, I was A firefighter for many years for the state of California,  sure, if you spill your load on the road and if its dangerous, you are expected to keep people away from it until the authorities show up,  this is different,  It is a public beach that was not officially closed,

----------


## Trabitha

I think the fact that their security staff were keeping people off the beach...indicated that it WAS officially closed. LOL!  Just sayin'.

----------


## Rick

Well that's a bad sign, Rick.

It sure is. Once they resort to old timer stories you know their ship is goin' down. 

I don't know about you but I think Trabitha has opened up a can of whoop azz and poured it all over Justin. 

(chuckle) Indeed she has. What's the score, Rick. 

It looks like Trabitha 4, Justin 1.

----------


## Justin Case

> So you changed the subject?  1) a private person doesn't have a camera and microphone.  2) if the beach is a work area, they DO have the right to tell ANYONE that they can't be there.  Why is this so hard for you to grasp??  Did you want to go SWIMMING in the oil and use it as a deep moisture bath or something?  
> 
> If you're on the beach that they are trying to clean you ARE bothering the workers.  Just like I can't walk into a work zone on a "public street", I can't walk on to a work zone on a "public beach."


LOOK,  Bottom Line,,  Did the Reporter approach the workers and the tents despite the Security gaurds ?  YEP,,  why ?  BECAUSE HE COULD !    Chic !

----------


## Trabitha

I'm laughing my *** off here...LOL!

----------


## Trabitha

> LOOK,  Bottom Line,,  Did the Reporter approach the workers and the tents despite the Security gaurds ?  YEP,,  why ?  BECAUSE HE COULD !    Chic !


Thanks for the edit.
Don't call me "chic" or I shall be forced to reply in kind.  Thank you. 

So now you're saying that they had a right to be there...the security guards had no right to tell them that they COULDN'T be there...so they walked through anyway and you're fine with it.  Is that about it?  So...you're problem is...nothing??  WTF, Justin?

----------


## Justin Case

> I think the fact that their security staff were keeping people off the beach...indicated that it WAS officially closed. LOL!  Just sayin'.


They DIDNT keep them off ,,,,    LOL.

----------


## Justin Case

> English?  Huh??


Yeah "Dude"  lol

----------


## Rick

Another bad sign. He's asking the questions AND slinging the answers. 

The man has me worried. He's back slid like a pelican in beach oil. 

Very nice and appropriate for the fight. 

I thought you'd like that. Now let's get back. Trabitha appears to have interjected humor into the fracas. 

A sure sign that something big is coming!!

----------


## Justin Case

> Well that's a bad sign, Rick.
> 
> It sure is. Once they resort to old timer stories you know their ship is goin' down. 
> 
> I don't know about you but I think Trabitha has opened up a can of whoop azz and poured it all over Justin. 
> 
> (chuckle) Indeed she has. What's the score, Rick. 
> 
> It looks like Trabitha 4, Justin 1.


Umm how ya figure ?  The reporters went right passed the security and did what they cane to dom  talk to the BP employees under the BP tent on the Public beach,,

----------


## Rick

This is unheard of. A player is turning on the announcers. 

Lock the door, Rick. We don't want him in the broadcast booth. 

"Click"

He's going down I tell you.

----------


## Justin Case

> Thanks for the edit.
> Don't call me "chic" or I shall be forced to reply in kind.  Thank you. 
> 
> So now you're saying that they had a right to be there...the security guards had no right to tell them that they COULDN'T be there...so they walked through anyway and you're fine with it.  Is that about it?  So...you're problem is...nothing??  WTF, Justin?


Dont call Me "dude" and i wont call you "Chic".

----------


## Rick

We've called BP's security staff to protect the broadcast booth. 

Tell him he can't come in here. 

I would be he seems to think he has a right. 

Oh, yeah. That's what this whole things been about. Make it Trabitha 5, Justin 1

You're giving her our points. 

(shrug).

----------


## Justin Case

Ok I'm done now,  Lets agree to disagree and move on  :Smile:

----------


## Trabitha

> Another bad sign. He's asking the questions AND slinging the answers. 
> 
> The man has me worried. He's back slid like a pelican in beach oil. 
> 
> Very nice and appropriate for the fight. 
> 
> I thought you'd like that. Now let's get back. Trabitha appears to have interjected humor into the fracas. 
> 
> A sure sign that something big is coming!!


Did you just say "fracas"???  LOL!!

Okay...that's my time, boys.  I've got to get all my camping stuffs off the line before the sun goes down.  

I'm out for now...but may I leave by saying...

BP has the right to protect their employees.  If the media or anyone else chooses to ignore the request to leave them alone, BP has the right to press charges against those individuals for harassing the workers.  Go right ahead and be a thorn in the side of a multi-million dollar company that is trying to clean up one of the largest spills this country has ever seen.  Let's see how far that will get you.  Hope you have a good lawyer because they have a lot.   :Smash: 

What most people forget is that the Bill of Rights and Freedom of the press, only guarantees your right to REPORT news, it says nothing about harassing people on their lunch break.  :Wink: 

Chat at y'all tomorrow.

----------


## Rick

Did you see that? She belted him in the back of the head as he walked away. 

Not very sportlady like in my book. 

That'll be on bloopers for sure.

----------


## Trabitha

Dude isn't derogatory...and I don't even think I used it.  
Chic IS derogatory and I know you used that.

----------


## Trabitha

> Did you see that? She belted him in the back of the head as he walked away. 
> 
> Not very sportlady like in my book. 
> 
> That'll be on bloopers for sure.


 :Innocent:

----------


## Justin Case

> Did you just say "fracas"???  LOL!!
> 
> Okay...that's my time, boys.  I've got to get all my camping stuffs off the line before the sun goes down.  
> 
> I'm out for now...but may I leave by saying...
> 
> BP has the right to protect their employees.  If the media or anyone else chooses to ignore the request to leave them alone, BP has the right to press charges against those individuals for harassing the workers.  Go right ahead and be a thorn in the side of a multi-million dollar company that is trying to clean up one of the largest spills this country has ever seen.  Let's see how far that will get you.  Hope you have a good lawyer because they have a lot.  
> 
> What most people forget is that the Bill of Rights and Freedom of the press, only guarantees your right to REPORT news, it says nothing about harassing people on their lunch break. 
> ...


LOL protect against bodily harm yes,,  somebody asking them a question NO. sheeshhhhh.

----------


## BENESSE

Sorry Rick, I know you were hoping for more.

----------


## Justin Case

> Sue my employer for not giving me a safe place to work.  Have you ever read your employee handbook, dude?


Chic isn't derogatory ?  sorry , didnt mean to offend.

----------


## Camp10

I can tell you from my experience as a lineman that you cant keep media away from a scene when it is on public property.  Unless LEO will shut the area down for you, they have the right (pesky first amendment) to talk to you.  They will walk past our signs and cones right into the work zone and ask about how much longer, etc.  BP might own the mess but not the beach.

----------


## Justin Case

Yes,  100% correct,,,,   Thank you.

----------


## Rick

Wow! Did you see that? He was flat of his back and still threw a punch. 

That's what we call spunk, Rick. 

Indeed! Now let's see if Trabitha counters...

----------


## Justin Case

> Wow! Did you see that? He was flat of his back and still threw a punch. 
> 
> That's what we call spunk, Rick. 
> 
> Indeed! Now let's see if Trabitha counters...


Are You _Trying_ to cause problems ?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Are You _Trying_ to cause problems ?


 I think Rick is trying to fill in for Ken, sense he's been so busy, lately. :Innocent: LOL

----------


## BENESSE

> I think Rick is trying to fill in for Ken, sense he's been so busy, lately.LOL


Or, there's nothing good on TV.
Or, his many BOBs are done and updated.
Or, Mrs. Rick is away and off his back regarding house chores.
Or...... :Smile:

----------


## Rick

Slow night.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

Before people get carried away, wanting to destroy BP....they need to follow the money. 

 Who benifits from what action? :Innocent:

----------


## Rick

I do if you send it to me. Is that what you meant?

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> I do if you send it to me. Is that what you meant?


 Yeah....that's it. Why don't you go stand by the mailbox, and wait for the check. :Innocent:  LOL

----------


## nell67

> Sue my employer for not giving me a safe place to work.  Have you ever read your employee handbook, *dude*?  
> 
> You don't seem to see the difference here.  This isn't someone on the street.  They aren't protesters.  They are EMPLOYEES of a large corporation, brought there to do a job.  They are allotted the same rights as any other employee in the USA.  Just like road crews can't talk to the media when they are working on a highway project.  It's UNSAFE.  If the employees wished to be interviewed, they are more than capable of walking the...what...100 yards to the mass of media personnel to speak up.





> Dude isn't derogatory...and I don't even think I used it.  
> Chic IS derogatory and I know you used that.


Not taking his side Trabitha,but it looks like you did :Winkiss:

----------


## BENESSE

> Before people get carried away, wanting to destroy BP....they need to follow the money. 
> 
>  Who benifits from what action?


Don't know... :Innocent: ...let's bankrupt them and find out.
(If we don't then their lawyers will for sure.)

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Don't know......let's bankrupt them and find out.
> (If we don't then their lawyers will for sure.)


If you're talking about BP, you're looking in the wrong direction.

...and why would you want to bankrupt them? Do you understand how many people you're talking about destroying, financially, that had nothing to do with the spill???

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

Did y'all know???




> Federal law has also hampered the assistance. The Jones Act, the maritime law that requires all goods be carried in U.S. waters by U.S.-flagged ships, has prevented Dutch ships with spill-fighting equipment from entering U.S. coastal areas.





> Three days after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch government offered to help.
> 
> It was willing to provide ships outfitted with oil-skimming booms, and it proposed a plan for building sand barriers to protect sensitive marshlands.
> 
> The response from the Obama administration and BP, which are coordinating the cleanup: “The embassy got a nice letter from the administration that said, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,'” said Geert Visser, consul general for the Netherlands in Houston.


 
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...y/7043272.html

----------


## BENESSE

> If you're talking about BP, you're looking in the wrong direction.
> 
> ...and why would you want to bankrupt them? Do you understand how many people you're talking about destroying, financially, that had nothing to do with the spill???


That's how it always works, doesn't it? Innocent people get screwed no matter what.
The same argument was used to justify bailing out Wall St. and a bunch of people went apoplectic over it. Hey, everyone has the right to be hypocritical at will but it does dilute the argument.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> That's how it always works, doesn't it? Innocent people get screwed no matter what.
> The same argument was used to justify bailing out Wall St. and a bunch of people went apoplectic over it. Hey, everyone has the right to be hypocritical at will but it does dilute the argument.


 Apples and oranges.
I didn't say give them a pass. Hold them responsible for the bill. If that breaks them, then so be it. Just plain wanting to break them is not going to help anyone. Think about it....if you break them, who gets stuck with the bill???

----------


## Justin Case

I wonder if BP had insurance for this ?

----------


## DOGMAN

> Dude isn't derogatory...


Actually, in western cowboy and hunting guide culture, "dude" is very derogatory.  A dude, is a city slicker, who pays money to experience a water downed version of what a cowboy or guide does for a living.  If a co-worker calls you "dude"...it could lead to blows!

example- in reference to someone who may own a 5 acre ranchette, have a horse and always wears a giant 10-gallon cowboy hat..."that dude is all hat and no cattle"...its basically calling someone a poser, or greenhorn

----------


## crashdive123

And before we get too hung up on words - he said chic, not chick.

From Wiki:  


> Chic (pronounced /ˈʃiːk/ "sheek"), meaning 'stylish' or 'smart', is an element of fashion and the counterpart of posh.

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

Meanwhile the oil keeps flowing into the gulf. Is anybody focused on the problem?

----------


## Justin Case

> And before we get too hung up on words - he said chic, not chick.
> 
> From Wiki:


Yeah Thats what i meant  :Innocent:   and Trabitha probably meant to say "Dud"  :Innocent:   :Smile:   :Wink:

----------


## BENESSE

> Meanwhile the oil keeps flowing into the gulf. Is anybody focused on the problem?


No, not even those who are supposed to.

----------


## Justin Case

Yeah,,  BP will fix iT  :Innocent: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPnFV...layer_embedded

this is sad but true.

----------


## Rick

BP just agreed to allocate 20 Billion for those who are affected by the spill. Does anyone remember that 20 Billion was their expected profit this year?

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Broadcast/o...ry?id=10927625

----------


## BENESSE

> BP just agreed to allocate 20 Billion for those who are affected by the spill. *Does anyone remember that 20 Billion was their expected profit this year?*
> 
> http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Broadcast/o...ry?id=10927625


Don't get me started.  :Sneaky2:  Oh wait, I think I already have. So...yes, I do remember that which means what, they just won't make any profit this year but _other_ than that everything is copacetic?

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

Regulation and oversight is needed but beyond damages no punitive measures are useful. "Evil Corporations" are invested in by stock holders like individuals and pension funds. The money will come out of ordinary peoples pensions and besides the price of doing business is just added to the price you pay at the pump. I consider myself an environmentalist and I think the size of these projects should be limited in size to limit size of catastrophy.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Regulation and oversight is needed but beyond damages no punitive measures are useful. "Evil Corporations" are invested in by stock holders like individuals and pension funds. The money will come out of ordinary peoples pensions and besides the price of doing business is just added to the price you pay at the pump. I consider myself an environmentalist and I think the size of these projects should be limited in size to limit size of catastrophy.


 You bring up a point, that I have been wondering about. I'm sure that they are regulated to death, but I haven't heard much about Federal inspections, and checking to see that they were operating within compliance. 

 Also, you don't hear much about where the drilling rigs and people who work on them, are going, now that no new drilling is being allowed, in U.S. waters. (And who stands to gain financially, from this.)

----------


## BENESSE

> Regulation and oversight is needed but *beyond damages no punitive measures are useful.* "Evil Corporations" are invested in by stock holders like individuals and pension funds. The money will come out of ordinary peoples pensions and besides the price of doing business is just added to the price you pay at the pump. I consider myself an environmentalist and I think the size of these projects should be limited in size to limit size of catastrophy.


No punitive damages for the worst environmental disaster in US history?! What _would_ it take to warrant that in your mind, AS?

----------


## Rick

1st. No money will come out of pensions. It doesn't work that way. They cut their dividend in order to preserve their cash flow. 

2nd. There is no such thing as "Evil Corporations". There are unethical executives that steer a corporation the wrong direction. But a corporation is neither evil nor good. Point the finger at the real cause of this tragedy. Carl-Henric Svanberg is the Chairman of BP. However, Tony Hayward is the CEO and is ultimately responsible for the mess.

As to the inspection, the U.S. Energy and Commerce Committee has asked the DOI for the actual inspection documents to determine if any culpability exists with regard to the inspections. BP's position has been that key safety checks were completed just hours before the disaster. However, an attorney representing some of the survivors says that isn't true. So who knows? 

Re: the drilling ban. Some of the drilling companies have sued the DOI in an effort to resume drilling. I can't imagine this ban lasting very long. The petroleum lobby is pressing hard to have it lifted as are lawmakers. Imagine if you were the governor of Louisiana. You have Gulf Coast folks loosing revenue from fishing and recreation as well as all the associated companies for those two industries and now all the gas and oil employees are out of work. I'd bet the ban gets lifted pronto.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

*This just in: breaking news!!*

*B.P. has stopped the oil leak in the gulf.
They put a wedding band on it and it stopped putting out.*

----------


## Rick

I just read the details in the 20B compensation fund. It will be paid out over 4 years. So...They're 20B profit will take a hit of $5B this year. The tax write off for expenses associated with the spill should more than offset that. Add to that the fact they cut this quarter's dividend to shareholders. They should be in the pink or black as it were...literally.

----------


## BENESSE

> I just read the details in the 20B compensation fund. It will be paid out over 4 years. So...They're 20B profit will take a hit of $5B this year. The tax write off for expenses associated with the spill should more than offset that. Add to that the fact they cut this quarter's dividend to shareholders. They should be in the pink or black as it were...literally.


Not very far for 2D to follow the money. :Sneaky2:

----------


## Trabitha

Not to mention that the administration made a point of saying that this agreement is not a cap.  I fully expect them to go back to BP often and push an increase.  The only question will be...how far will BP get pushed before they say no-more?  
Considering our government turned down help from 15 nations and never asked other oil companies to help out...I see them going after BP for everything they can get and then trying to force it in the court system.  But that's just my opinion.

----------


## Trabitha

> *This just in: breaking news!!*
> 
> *B.P. has stopped the oil leak in the gulf.
> They put a wedding band on it and it stopped putting out.*


 :Sneaky2:   Hey now...

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

> No punitive damages for the worst environmental disaster in US history?! What _would_ it take to warrant that in your mind, AS?


The knowledge that it would effectively change the way things are done which can be done without us paying more at the pump. Who is really at fault? I know they have the deep pockets and stood to profit but some guy some where did not do his job and I bet he does not have 20 billion dollars.

----------


## KurtistheTurtle

> *This just in: breaking news!!*
> 
> *B.P. has stopped the oil leak in the gulf.
> They put a wedding band on it and it stopped putting out.*


hahaha! this is KILLING me! brilliant!

don't let them fool you. a wedding ring is the world's smallest handcuff!

Rick, where do you get your information and how do you have such a well-rounded point of view?

----------


## BENESSE

> The knowledge that it would effectively change the way things are done which can be done without us paying more at the pump. Who is really at fault? I know they have the deep pockets and stood to profit but some guy some where did not do his job and I bet he does not have 20 billion dollars.


There are consequences for everything. 
With whomever the buck stops (and it usually stops somewhere with someone) is the one responsible. That's how it works.
The Europeans are paying_ at least_ $6 a gallon and that's what we'll have to wrap or minds around. I don't have a car so I don't care. I've given up a lot to be in this position (compromised a great deal) so if someone else has to compromise too, well...welcome to my world.
There's no free lunch--big corporations, or just you and me. But then you know that already, AS.

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

> There are consequences for everything. 
> With whomever the buck stops (and it usually stops somewhere with someone) is the one responsible. That's how it works.
> The Europeans are paying_ at least_ $6 a gallon and that's what we'll have to wrap or minds around. I don't have a car so I don't care. I've given up a lot to be in this position (compromised a great deal) so if someone else has to compromise too, well...welcome to my world.
> There's no free lunch--big corporations, or just you and me. But then you know that already, AS.


It's not just driving cars. Food production depends on oil from pesticides to fertilizer to shipping and the plastic bags it is put in. The money systems are so connected we pay for it all. It may make you feel good but you will only be sueing yourself and handing more authority over to the government. We are being played. Countries around the world offered to help that have the equipment and expertise to fix this and were denied. This is another power grab and could have been stopped immediately. The powers that be don't care but they know we do and are manipulating the situation for political gain.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Not very far for 2D to follow the money.


 Hmmmm....lets see. $20B that would ahve been profit....now it's not.  Yeah, that was probably their plan. I don't know why all the corp.'s aren't doing it. :Innocent:

----------


## Rick

KTT - I scan the headlines a few times a day and then research those items that peak my curiosity or interest. I seek out conflicting thoughts on a subject so I can see both sides of the issue. If I read an article that is in favor of banning deep water drilling then I also look for one that supports it. If I have a strong opinion on a subject then I look for strong opinions counter to mine. I think it's dangerous to only look for documentation that supports your line of thought. How can you learn from that? You can only have a real opinion once you've examined all sides of an issue and understand the pros and cons. 

The other thing you have to do is think through the issue. Early on I read that BP might spend upwards of $20B on this spill. I wondered what they expected to net this year and how that would impact their bottom line. It isn't just BP that gets impacted, it's also shareholders, you and me. I was surprised to find analysts projected a $20B profit this year. Then I was curious how they would set up the pay out since no company would want to wipe out their profit margin. On the same day, they announce a four year pay out ($5B per year) and they cut dividends. Actually, pretty brilliant on their end to negotiate that type of payout since the time value of money means they pay out less each year considering inflation. They aren't paying out $20 Billion in today's dollars. Add to that the fact that cutting the dividend payout means they hold on to all the cash they would have paid out. Coupled with tax right offs that are into the Billions almost ensures a profit this year. On top of the country's largest environmental disaster!!! So now watch three things....deep water drilling ban, which I've already said will be lifted in the near term, punitive damages, and BP advertising. Those are the three things I'll be looking at ongoing. 

That's a bit how my thought process works. Just try to see both sides of the issue so you can understand it and think through what it means when you read X. Then research it.

----------


## BENESSE

Thank you for that outline, Rick. Educational and clear about where things stand at the moment. I do hope people absorb it, think about it and keep an open mind before they start shedding tears for BP and the end of life as _they_ only know it.

----------


## crashdive123

> Thank you for that outline, Rick. Educational and clear about where things stand at the moment. I do hope people absorb it, think about it and keep an open mind before they start shedding tears for BP and the end of life as _they_ only know it.


I'm honestly not worried about BP.  I do however want them to be profitable in order to pay all real claims and clean-up costs.  Right now it is the shareholders that are taking the hit.  Many of those shares are held in retirement accounts.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> I'm honestly not worried about BP.  I do however want them to be profitable in order to pay all real claims and clean-up costs.  Right now it is the shareholders that are taking the hit.  Many of those shares are held in retirement accounts.


 Same here....I just hate seeing people ignore the gov'ts mis-handling of this disaster, and the results of their actions. They are either incompetent, or they have an agenda. If you look at who can really gain from this mess, it paints an ugly picture. (And it ain't BP.) :Innocent:

----------


## BENESSE

> Same here....I just hate seeing people ignore the gov'ts mis-handling of this disaster, and the results of their actions. They are either incompetent, or they have an agenda. *If you look at who can really gain from this mess, it paints an ugly picture.* (And it ain't BP.)


I know...it was all masterminded by pelicans in order to get a free bath.

----------


## BENESSE

> I'm honestly not worried about BP.  I do however want them to be profitable in order to pay all real claims and clean-up costs.  Right now it is the shareholders that are taking the hit.  *Many of those shares are held in retirement accounts*.


Crash, check out Rick's post #271. 
Doesn't sound like the retirement accts. are in any imminent danger. As for shareholders, well that's the risk you take when you invest in _anything_.

----------


## BENESSE

> Same here....*I just hate seeing people ignore the gov'ts mis-handling of this disaster, and the results of their actions*. They are either incompetent, or they have an agenda. If you look at who can really gain from this mess, it paints an ugly picture. (And it ain't BP.)


No doubt about it, 2D. They mishandled it in a big way and stupidly refused all help that was immediately offered. No excuses there. NONE.

----------


## Rick

Pension funds investing in BP and individuals that rely on dividend payout are taking a hit. Not doubt about it. BP reached a high of 62.58 in January and they are trading at less than $32 today and now BP is not paying a dividend. My reference was that BP would not be dipping into their pension funds to pay for the clean up. Not in the U.S. anyway. I probably should have clarified that.

----------


## Justin Case

> No doubt about it, 2D. They mishandled it in a big way and stupidly refused all help that was immediately offered. No excuses there. NONE.





> Dutch to Provide Assistance in Clean Up of Gulf Oil Spill
> 
> Press release | 28 May 2010
> 
> At the request of U.S. authorities, the Dutch Minister of Transport, Camiel Eurlings, has offered three sets of sweeping arms (6 arms in total) and auxiliary equipment to be used to collect oil spilled from the Deepwater Horizon incident, in the Gulf of Mexico.






> The U.S. and the Dutch are working closely together on water related issues. Immediately after Hurricane Katrina and Rita struck, the Netherlands provided assistance in battling flood waters in New Orleans. Senator Mary Landrieu and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson recently visited the Netherlands to discuss these issues. The Dutch and American collaboration continues to evolve and makes the Netherlands the U.S. go-to partner for water management solutions, working together on flood protection in Louisiana and other states, mitigating the impact of rising sea levels on America’s coastlines and developing partnerships that prepare our economies for short and long-term water challenges.


Complete Press release,
http://dc.the-netherlands.org/News/P...Gulf_Oil_Spill

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Complete Press release,
> http://dc.the-netherlands.org/News/P...Gulf_Oil_Spill


 Yeah, but did you miss the part about them offering ships already outfitted with those booms, (and a bunch of other help.) three days after the explosion?

----------


## Justin Case

> Yeah, but did you miss the part about them offering ships already outfitted with those booms, (and a bunch of other help.) three days after the explosion?


Yes, I know, I just seen this PR and thought I would share it.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Yes, I know, I just seen this PR and thought I would share it.


 Oh...good.....for a minute there, I thought I might have to Gibbs smack you. LOL (You know...Gibbs.....NCIS.)LOL :Innocent:

----------


## Justin Case

Debunking the Fox News Obama International Aid Oil Spill Lie

http://www.politicususa.com/en/obama-international-aid

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Debunking the Fox News Obama International Aid Oil Spill Lie
> 
> http://www.politicususa.com/en/obama-international-aid


 So the Dutch officials lied about it, as did many other sources. And we are supposed to believe this because some guy named Jason Easley, said so......with out any supporting evidence.......while blogging on a site called 



> Politicususa
> Real Liberal Politics


 Yeah.....OK. :Innocent:

----------


## Justin Case

LOL,,  It is what it is  :Innocent:

----------


## Sourdough

> Pension funds investing in BP and individuals that rely on dividend payout are taking a hit. Not doubt about it. BP reached a high of 62.58 in January and they are trading at less than $32 today and now BP is not paying a dividend.



I have posed the question of BP's future in Alaska on another forum that has a lot of Alaska oil patch members. If they file bankruptcy or are forced in same, or if they are so asset depleted (cash poor) after the Gulf experience, they will not be growing and expanding in Alaska.

----------


## BENESSE

> I have posed the question of BP's future in Alaska on another forum that has a lot of Alaska oil patch members. If they file bankruptcy or are forced in same, or if they are so asset depleted (cash poor) after the Gulf experience, they will not be growing and expanding in Alaska.


There are other companies with a much better record who'd be chomping at the bit to replace BP if need be. We won't be seeing the end of drilling in our lifetime, I'm afraid.

----------


## BENESSE

Want to hear something scary? BP has been fined by OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) 760 times. By contrast, oil giant ExxonMobil has been fined only once.

As The Stock Masters say: How is BP even allowed to operate?

Let's take a look back at BP's horrid track record, courtesy of ABC News:

    * Back in 2007, a BP pipeline spilled 200,000 gallons of crude into the Alaskan wilderness. They got hit with $16 million in fines.
    * "The Justice Department required the company to pay approximately $353 million as part of an agreement to defer prosecution on charges that the company conspired to manipulate the propane gas market."
    * In two separate disasters prior to Deepwater Horizon, 30 BP workers were killed and more than 200 have been seriously injured.
    * "According to the Center for Public Integrity, in the last three years, BP refineries in Ohio  and Texas  have accounted for 97 percent of the "egregious, willful" violations handed out by OSHA"
* * OSHA statistics show BP ran up 760 "egregious, willful" safety violations, while Sunoco and Conoco-Phillips each had eight, Citgo had two and Exxon had one comparable citation.*

After examining the facts, we're inclined to agree that BP probably shouldn't be operating here in the U.S. considering its horrific safety record.

http://www.businessinsider.com/bp-ha...-safety-2010-6

----------


## Trabitha

Regardless of their record, B...the administration still gave them special exemptions.


http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19027
"Last year the Obama administration granted oil giant BP a special exemption from a legal requirement that it produce a detailed environmental impact study on the possible effects of its Deepwater Horizon drilling operation in the Gulf of Mexico, an article Wednesday in the Washington Post reveals.

Federal documents show that the Department of the Interior's Minerals Management Service (MMS) gave BP a "categorical exclusion" on April 6, 2009 to commence drilling with Deepwater Horizon even though it had not produced the impact study required by a law known as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The report would have included probable ecological consequences in the event of a spill.

The exemption came less than one month after BP had requested it in a March 10 "exploration plan" submitted to the MMS. The plan said that because a spill was "unlikely," no additional "mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources." BP also assured the MMS that any spill would not seriously hurt marine wildlife and that "due to the distance to shore (48 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected."

----------


## Rick

> I have posed the question of BP's future in Alaska on another forum that  has a lot of Alaska oil patch members. If they file bankruptcy or are  forced in same, or if they are so asset depleted (cash poor) after the  Gulf experience, they will not be growing and expanding in Alaska.


I really doubt that is going to happen unless capping the well becomes impossible. Then they might seek a restructure of debt. But they have equity in excess of $102B with over $96B of that in reserves. They can afford a pretty substantial hit before they would even think of Chapter 13. They spent almost ten and a half billion dollars just in shareholder dividends and ended the year with $8B in cash. So I don't think they are hurting all that bad AT THE MOMENT. 

On BP Safety - Hayward was supposed to be the man to clean up BP's safety record. He was brought in as the CEO immediately after all those issues but primarily after the Texas refinery explosion. But he stepped into the helm after having headed up the exploration and production side of the business where all the safety concerns happened. So I'm not all that comfortable that he walks the talk. Browne (former CEO) would have been forced to resign at the end of 2008 because of age but he was pushed aside because of the safety issues.

----------


## Rick

T - that article is a bit misleading. In fact, the MMS granted every company exclusions to drill. I've read a lot about this very issue and there are four things I think have played key roles in the exclusions. NOTE: this is just my opinion based on what I've been able to uncover. 

1. The petroleum lobby had substantial input into the creation of the permitting process. As a result, the window for MMS to review the permit is extremely short, something like 90 days if I remember correctly, but no time at all to conduct enviro impact studies, safety reviews, etc.. The net affect is the MMS routinely grants exclusions for drilling because they can not meet the window time frames. 

2. There seems to be a long standing culture of hand holding between the petroleum industry and MMS. That's a lousy culture for an organization that is supposed to be overseeing an industry. It was so bad that former BP executive Sylvia Baca was appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary to Land and Mineral's Management. She's since been removed but Salazar appointed a former BP exec to oversee MMS a year ago. 

3. A lot of graft within MMS. You may remember that a number of folks in MMS were given gifts from the petroleum companies. Things like hunting and fishing trips, Christmas parties, tickets to sporting events. Add in drug use and misuse of federal computers (remember all that?) and it's little wonder there was little oversight. 

4. Honest scientists were prevented from doing their job. No one in MMS wanted to see a report that said there would be an impact to drilling. “Under the previous administration, there was a pattern of suppressing  science in decisions, and we are working very hard to change the culture  and empower scientists in the Department of the Interior.” That was a quote from a spokeswoman for MMS in May of this year. The NOAA was pretty scathing in their report on MMS last year. Here is a portion of it. 

"In a letter from September 2009, obtained by  The New York Times, NOAA accused the minerals agency of a pattern of  understating the likelihood and potential consequences of a major spill  in the gulf and understating the frequency of spills that have already  occurred there.

The letter accuses the  agency of highlighting the safety of offshore oil drilling operations  while overlooking more recent evidence to the contrary. The data used by  the agency to justify its approval of drilling operations in the gulf  play down the fact that spills have been increasing and understate the  “risks and impacts of accidental spills,” the letter states. NOAA  declined several requests for comment."

Looks like NOAA might have been right.

----------


## BENESSE

> Regardless of their record, B...the administration still gave them special exemptions.


This administration is certainly not without blame. (neither was the previous one for that matter) 
However, let's keep a sense of proportion about it and do less of finger pointing amongst ourselves and more of where they need to point: _BP._ 
That would be a step in the right direction, IMO.

----------


## Alaskan Survivalist

I'm with Sourdough on this one although for a slightly different reason. Whenever the Democrats gain control they shut down all development in Alaska. That is why in many respects we are like a third world nation. People have to realize where all there stuff comes from and quit getting in the way of those that provide it to them. If there is a better way than do it and put oil out of business but don't expect the rest of us to pay for your disconnect from where our opulant lifestyle comes from. When oil ends so does life as you know it. Common sense would dictate it be done as responsible as possible and environmentalists contribute thier knowledge to accomplish that.

----------


## crashdive123

Speaking of safety - they were scheduled to receive a big time safety award right around the time of the accident.




> *From Article:*  The Interior Department was expected to host an event today to honor BP and other companies for its safety efforts, but the agency has changed its mind. The Interior Departments Minerals Management Services was expected to host the event today and BP was up for two awards at the event. One of the awards was for outstanding safety and pollution prevention performance.


 http://www.themaritimelawyer.com/bp-...ear-after-all/

----------


## Rick

Oh, man. That is too funny. Thanks, Crash, I needed that chuckle.

----------


## Sourdough

I wonder if AIG is holding the counter-party on the derivatives, insuring the dividend and/or the downside on the stock price.

----------


## Rick

I just read a great article from MSNBC on the financial health of BP. 

"The $20 billion fund BP has set up could be  just a down payment on the cost of cleaning up the Gulf spill and  paying damage claims. But BP has plenty of cash to draw from, including  an average of $20 billion in profits annually, $6 billion in cash and  some some 18 billion barrels of proven oil reserves worth $1.2 trillion  at current prices.Though  the total cost won’t be known until the well is capped, Wall Street is  already combing through the company's financial statements and working  on spreadsheet scenarios. At Oppenheimer & Co, oil industry analyst  Fadel Gheit starts with a worst-case scenario of $6 billion in cleanup  costs and $6 billion in damage claims every year for 10 years. That  works out to $120 billion. 

Even if the payout reaches that level, Gheit said,  the company would generate some $14 billion a year of "free cash flow"  and still have enough cash to pay shareholders half the $2.6 billion  quarterly dividend BP recently suspended."

I don't care who you are those are some impressive numbers. 



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37762500...siness/page/2/

----------


## BENESSE

> I just read a great article from MSNBC on the financial health of BP. 
> 
> I don't care who you are those are some impressive numbers.


Impressive only because of how they achieved them. 
The 760 "egregious, willful" safety violations all had to do with saving money in the wrong places--gambling with people's lives and the environment.

----------


## Rick

It's impressive for any corporation to achieve that kind of financial success. I do agree with you about their moral compass, however. If they had taken a portion of the money they used to advertise how green they were and actually put a failsafe on the well then ............. Hindsight is such a wonderful thing. It even makes me looks smart....well, almost.

----------


## BENESSE

The 760 safety violations through the years were not about their faulty moral compass but concrete, cutting corners type of _wrong_-doing. If that wasn't heads-up (rather than hindsight) about the kind of company they were I don't know what is.

----------


## Rick

We're agreeing, actually. If they didn't have a faulty moral compass they wouldn't have taken those shortcuts. A company is either ethical or it is not. There is no degree of ethical. No "sort of" ethical. Corporations can and do make a nice profit while still operating as a good corporate neighbor and citizen, within the laws, and they do so treating their employees and suppliers in a fair manner. That is or is not ingrained within the corporate culture and it permeates every corner of the company. Sadly, BP misses the mark on ethics. 

Another bit of news...Moodies dropped them from Aa2 to A2. That's a pretty substantial drop... 3 notches. That moves them from high quality with very low risk to upper-medium grade with low risk. That will cost them some additional points when they need to borrow. 

Tony Hayward is gone. That's my prediction. Once the well is capped and the clean up is well under way he will step aside. Keep an eye on Andy Inglis as the next CEO. He's from the same school as Mr. Hayward and one of the execs that was fast tracked along with Hayward. You heard it here first!

----------


## BENESSE

Why would _any_ govt. want to do business with BP knowing their track record? Obviously BP low-balls their costs and is most likely among the lowest bids, but is that worth such a colosal gamble? 
It would be like shopping for a brain surgeon strictly based on his fees and disregarding his track record. 
Our govt. bears a great deal of responsibility for the irresponsible choices it made and no amount of retrospective rationalization will change that.

----------


## Rick

Remember that MMS was part and parcel of the petroleum industry. My momma always said, stupid is as stupid does.

----------


## Justin Case

I gotta say, I am a bit surprised,  it seems as though the ocean is doing a pretty good job of "Washing" (for lack of a better term), The oil slick,  so far, mostly "Tar Balls" have been washing up onto shore,  These seem fairly easy to clean up, In fact, I was at a beach in Norther California years ago that had sign up saying that tar balls will be on the beach,  these were perm type signs so this was an ongoing thing,  Maybe its the calm before the storm,  ? I dont know, do you think the big slick of liquid oil will reach shore ? I also have heard that older wells leak oil now and have been leaking oil for many years,   I am just hoping that with a little luck, only these tar balls will hit the coast line, Looks like they could just be raked up.

----------


## Rick

I think the dispersants have broken a lot of it up with a lot of it underwater. Of course, a lot has been burned and a lot has been skimmed, too.

----------

