Solved Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill

[whs]

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

Whoa!! That was friggin' AWESOME!

For filming it they had to follow the train with a jet, because a chopper would have been too slow.
Here is a nice picture http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/TGV_train_inside_Gare_Montparnasse_DSC08895.jpg&imgrefurl=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TGV_train_inside_Gare_Montparnasse_DSC08895.jpg&h=1944&w=2592&sz=1948&tbnid=DP8KA83JnwhVPM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtgv%2Btrain&usg=__dYNtQ9Qj__kjjlmv4yiO1bz2FYE=&ei=OrHcS4qFLIfu9gSTwfmrBw&sa=X&oi=image_result&resnum=4&ct=image&ved=0CBcQ9QEwAw

 

[MadMaxData]

For filming it they had to follow the train with a jet, because a chopper would have been too slow.
Here is a nice picture Google Image Result for http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/TGV_train_inside_Gare_Montparnasse_DSC08895.jpg

Well, you know the ole' saying..."I gotta' get me one of those!"

 

[CarlTR6]

Before all you "Green Party" idealists get up on your soap boxes --

Having concerns regarding our environment isn't "getting up on a soapbox" at all. I think we can all agree that oil leaking into our oceans is potentially catastrophic. For the most part, I think the tree huggers are rediculous, but this is a different thing altogether. Our oceans support life on earth for every living thing on the planet, in one way or another. We should take our responsibility concerning our oceans serious, don't you think?

You and I are thinking alike, again!.

 

[smarteyeball]

Realistically, in the billions of years that earth has currently existed and the remaining billions it has left, anything in the comparatively infinitesimal time period of the human species existence, nothing we can do can seriously harm the planet itself.

Unfortunately, humans as well a multitude of other species do not enjoy the luxury of having the same lifespan longevity as the planet itself.

Ultimately our practices do not harm the environment per se, but we are harming ourselves (as well as our co-inhabitant species).

Humanities voracious appetite and need for fossil fuel based energy sources and the money it generates is what dictates governments decisions.

Unless the current companies can replace their current revenue with an equal amount derived from other sources, it is not in their interests to do so, and as such will do everything in their power to impede the progress of viable alternatives.

As it stands, fossil fuels = minimal effort, maximum profit.


BP may pick up the repair/clean up tab - but this will be passed on to the consumers, so consumers will be left to pick up the tab one way or the other.

 

[jimbo45]

The tracks can disfigure the Landscape severely whilst under construction and where does the Energy come from to power the trains

I would say that roads disfigure landscapes just as much if not more. And yes, trains need energy too. But on a per passenger mile they are many times more effivient than cars or planes. And the cost argument I do not buy. That is only a matter of priorities. If a country like France can do it, the US could do it too.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJfDWtbioEM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_efficiency_in_transportation

Hi there
Having WORKED and lived in France at times I can definitely say

1) They AREN'T always as "Eco Friendly" as people say they are

2) Good though the railways are these are only on the MAIN population centres -- If you live away from the larger conurbations public transport is also either NON EXISTENT or pretty poor.

3) In the cities public transport is GOOD and CHEAP -- but these people go on STRIKE at a drop of a hat so "relibaility of service" can't really be guranteed at all times.

4) France probably has the HIGHEST percentage of its Electricity generated by NUCLEAR POWER of any developed country on Earth.

Whatever the consequences of the current Oil accident in the Gulf of Mexico -- this is as NOTHING compared with serious accidents at Nuclear Power stations.
I KNOW that the equipment in use in France is of a MUCH higher order of magnitude in better quality than that used in the Old USSR (Chernobyl for example) -- but accidents are just that and could happen (to say nothing of determined sabotage etc).

Crude Oil at least is a NATURAL product and Nature can eventually deal with it. (Of course the current disaster needs to be cleaned up as quickly as possible).

PLUTONIUM (the version used for Atomic Power) is man made (it DOESN'T OCCUR IN NATURE) and it's half life of 24,000 years -- Any accident would render swathes of countryside around the powerstation uninhabitble for almost EVER and the radioactive dust can be carried for very long distances indeed.

Given the choice I'd rather take the risk with Oil - but of course we should be looking at SENSIBLE and PRACTICABLE alternatives. These will take A LONG TIME to implement and I agree we should be looking at them NOW.

However we aren't going back to a "Village" type existence where even travelling 30 KM would take a day whatever the "greenists" say -- so we are just going to have to accept this for the foreseeable future these accidents *may* happen -- we must minimize them as much as possible of course.

The fact that we have people all over the world communicating on this very Forum shows that we aren't going to stop people travelling whatever the consequences.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[DreemWarrior]

Now there's a job I could get into. Did you enjoy it? I used to watch a T.V show about deep sea rigging. It was called "Oil, Sweat, and Rigs." Have you ever watched it, Bro? Many of the sites on the show were in the Gulf of Mexico too. It chronicles the work that needed to be done after Katrina reaped havoc on the rigs.

Yeah, for the most part it was great. You are well fed and WELL paid. Whats not to like? lol

 

[Lebon14]

This is really bad... this is why we should stop using Oil and find another way of powering our machines...

 

[jimbo45]

This is really bad... this is why we should stop using Oil and find another way of powering our machines...

Hi all.

Nearly EVERBODY says we should stop using Oil and there isn't a huge amount of disagreement in that-- but NOBODY has come up with any SENSIBLE and cost effective alternative yet that is even REALISABLY practical for several DECADES to come..

As I said we are going to want to travel --thank goodness --most people will not WANT or be CONTENT to stay and work totally within a few miles / km of where they live --travel etc is part of our Human Nature.

Trading is a part of life which necessitates products being shipped and taken to market. Different products provide income etc for people too.

Slapping a HUGE tax on Oil / Carbon WITHOUT any other realistic alternatives will

a) Hurt the poor far more than the likes of the wealthy
b) drive nearly EVERYBODY back to the stone age
c) probably cause world wide riots and mega mega civil unrest and war problems - just look at what's happening in Greece - and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Even though I worked in the Oil Industry for many years - I'd love to see alternatives -- but IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO HAPPEN FOR MANY YEARS YET.

We just have to make the process safer -- but inevitably accidents will happen -- just be thankful this wasn't a CHERNOBYL MK II type of disaster.

BP will have to (and a good thing too) pay out for all this mess -- It's up to President OBAMA and the US Courts to ensure that people are PROPERLY COMPENSATED and legislation operating these types of rigs is as tight as it possibly can be.

Unfortunately most of the "Elf 'n Safety" inspectors don't have a CLUE about the Oil industry and the sorts of people who enter these types of "public sector" jobs aren't necessarily the best types to control this process. Most of the good Engineers are already working in some capacity for the Oil Industry so it's very difficult to get INDEPENDENT engineers who could impose strict safety procedures.

However a really DAMAGING Fine and compensation payouts is probably the best medecine for BP to redouble its efforts in ensuring this type of accident doesn't happen again.

It also shows what happens when you rely too much on "External" and third parties to operate your CORE business -- as many people whose jobs have been "outsourced" can probably testify.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[whs]

Slapping a HUGE tax on Oil / Carbon WITHOUT any other realistic alternatives will

a) Hurt the poor far more than the likes of the wealthy
b) drive nearly EVERYBODY back to the stone age
c) probably cause world wide riots and mega mega civil unrest and war problems - just look at what's happening in Greece - and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

A) there is some truth to it, but why do poor people have to drive huge SUV's and pickups
B) that is ridiculous. In Europe we have a $5 per gallon tax and we certainly do not live in the stone age
C) Greece has been fat cat all these years and lived far beyond their means. Now they expect the other countries to bail them out. I would not have given them a penny and kicked them out of the Euro zone because they only got into it after cooking the books. Let them riot - so what.

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there

There is a DIFFERENCE between a LARGE tax and an UNAFFORDABLE tax -- actually there is evidence already that at the current gasoline prices in Europe people are driving less -- this is fine in Cities but really hurts people in rural areas where there is no alternative.

As for poor people driving SUV's and pickup's --in some places WHATEVER your income you WILL NEED a 4 wheel drive etc. - Not everybody lives in Berlin, London, Paris, Rome, New York etc.

If you come to near where I live there aren't many PAVED roads either.

People are probably up to the limit on the amount of these sorts of taxes they can afford at the moment -- any more and even the slightest sliver of economic recovery will just vanish into thin air.

Applying extra taxes especially to SMALLER businesses at this point in the Economic cycle makes NO SENSE either -- far better for Govt's to ENCOURAGE investment and JOB CREATION in the alternative energy sector.

I agree that GREECE should never have been allowed to join the Euro zone in the first place -- how can they justify a retirement age of 50 for goodness sakes with current life spans (and Greece has relatively healthy eating habits as well).

Maybe Goldman Sachs and all those Wall St institutions which have got us into this mess should be responsible for investing in alternative Energy.

After all for all their faullts NOBODY can accuse Oil Companies of CREATING unemployment -- unlike the Banking Sector.

Shell alone for example has over 100,000 world wide and thousands more in INDIRECTLY associated jobs too.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[MadMaxData]

This is really bad... this is why we should stop using Oil and find another way of powering our machines...

I totally agree. And despite the efforts of a few posters to minimize the effect of oil spills by comparing them to nuclear disasters [that's comparing apples & oranges, not to mention thay aren't NEARLY as common] or dreaming that the earth "repairs itself" we still have significant amounts of oil remaining in Prince William Sound 20+ years after the Exxon Valdez spill.

I've just read about some other consequences of the Gulf spill today.

 

[smarteyeball]

or dreaming that the earth "repairs itself" we still have significant amounts of oil remaining in Prince William Sound 20+ years after the Exxon Valdez spill.

Reality is dreaming?


20+ years from a timescale that spans billions is not dreaming.


If I'm one of the 'dreaming' posters you are alluding to, I suggest you re-read my post.


To simplify while reiterating - The physical structure we know as planet Earth can take it - It's the lifeforms that live on the planet which cannot.

With that clarification in mind, this accident will have adverse affects to the living for a long time to come.

 

[whs]

The physical structure we know as planet Earth can take it - It's the lifeforms that live on the planet which cannot

That is a pretty fatalistic statement. So if we are lucky, a few microbes may survive.

 

[pacinitaly]

after :05 commercial, goto :56 and laugh


The Birds End Of The World on SlashControl

 

[MadMaxData]

20+ years from a timescale that spans billions is not dreaming

The earth is not that old. Sorry, but I don't buy into carbon dating. It's not even close to accurate. I know there are plenty of people who would agree with you, however, I'm bound to a different covenant other than science. I believe the Biblical account of creation. As well as the Torah scholars who teach that the sun was much closer to the earth, pre-flood. This would explain the higher radiation levels, and carbon dating's inaccuracy. At any rate, the oil spills are negatively affecting a human inhabited earth. Therefore, they are indeed a threat to mankind. The earth's age has nothing to do with it. Our children and grandchildren do.

That is a pretty fatalistic statement. So if we are lucky, a few microbes may survive.

Exactly!

 

[jimbo45]

This is really bad... this is why we should stop using Oil and find another way of powering our machines...

I totally agree. And despite the efforts of a few posters to minimize the effect of oil spills by comparing them to nuclear disasters [that's comparing apples & oranges, not to mention thay aren't NEARLY as common] or dreaming that the earth "repairs itself" we still have significant amounts of oil remaining in Prince William Sound 20+ years after the Exxon Valdez spill.

I've just read about some other consequences of the Gulf spill today.

Hi there

You only need ONE serious Nuclear accident --- with even the WORST Oil accident the damage is more or less repaired within 5 years.

EXXON VALDIZ was of ocurse a terrible disaster but SHIP technology as well as the technology of dealing with Oil Pollution has greatly improved in the last 20 years.

The effect of the CHERNOBYL accident will STILL be around in 100,000 YEARS time.

Of course we need alternative Energy - but it needs to be phased in PROPERLY and not with stupid schemes like Carbon Trading which will just make disgusting greedy Bankers - in particulary Goldman Sachs richer than they already are and not help the cause of reneweable and alternative Energy source one IOTA.

Governments need to introduce SENSIBLE AFFORDABLE schemes to usher in alternative Energy schemes rather than penalising current users as there currently is NO ALTERNATIVE practicable solution TODAY. There could be in the future but we need to get the Oil companioes on board as they are the only organisations with the CAPITAL and know how to begin to fund the investments needed for our transition away from fossil fuel.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[smarteyeball]

That is a pretty fatalistic statement. So if we are lucky, a few microbes may survive.

We won't be lucky - the microbes will.

As for fatalistic -

That depends on whether you are a "Glass half Full, Glass half Empty or a simply acknowledge that a glass exists which contains a substance regardless of whether it's in the process of increasing or decreasing its contents" type of person.

I believe the Biblical account of creation.

And clearly I do not.

So to avoid any potential future ill will, let nothing more said in regards to that sort of thing, because I happen to find it offensive.

 

[CarlTR6]

So to avoid any potential future ill will, let nothing more said in regards to that sort of thing, because I happen to find it offensive.

Hmm, I don't find ideas that disagree with mine offensive at all. No one has a lock on the right ideas. I respect differing view points and ideas whether I agree with them or not. In all probability, there is truth in both. To reject and be offended by an opposing view is pretty dogmatic in itself.

 

[whs]

So to avoid any potential future ill will, let nothing more said in regards to that sort of thing, because I happen to find it offensive.

Hmm, I don't find ideas that disagree with mine offensive at all. No one has a lock on the right ideas. I respect differing view points and ideas whether I agree with them or not. In all probability, there is truth in both. To reject and be offended by an opposing view is pretty dogmatic in itself.

Well, it is hard to argue in the face of beliefs because beliefs are irrational and no logic or facts will change them. So any discussion is pretty useless and will ultimately only lead to dismay.

 

[CarlTR6]

So to avoid any potential future ill will, let nothing more said in regards to that sort of thing, because I happen to find it offensive.

Hmm, I don't find ideas that disagree with mine offensive at all. No one has a lock on the right ideas. I respect differing view points and ideas whether I agree with them or not. In all probability, there is truth in both. To reject and be offended by an opposing view is pretty dogmatic in itself.

Well, it is hard to argue in the face of beliefs because beliefs are irrational and no logic or facts will change them. So any discussion is pretty useless and will ultimately only lead to dismay.

I agree with you. But there is a difference between opting not to discuss beliefs - and I choose that option - and being offended by a different belief.