PDA

View Full Version : Anyone here affected by the oil spill in the Gulf, yet; or,...



Kingspoint
05-09-2010, 10:34 PM
...do you see yourself being effected by it over the next 12 months?

Kingspoint
05-09-2010, 10:35 PM
Also, anyone here effected by the many floods that have occurred over the last two months?

Spazzrico
05-09-2010, 11:25 PM
Only indirectly. I'm in SC and there is some talk about how this could help the SC tax base which is heavily dependent on tourism. If enough people divert to the East Coast during vacation season, it could help to refill some of the utter black hole that is the budget this year. Can't say I'd like it to happen that way though.

macro
05-10-2010, 12:37 AM
I hesitate to put my two cents into this discussion, because what I have at stake is so trivial compared to others, but we have a deposit down on a condo for next month. This will be the first time my wife and kids and I will have ever been to Florida together, so we're kinda bummed about the potential for the vacation being tanked. Given the difficulty, expense, and overall hassle of canceling those plans and trying to arrange something on the east coast, I guess we'll just go on down and make the best of it, unless they actually close the beaches.

Kingspoint
05-10-2010, 06:11 PM
Spazzrico and macro, these are the things I'm interested in. These are real stories that you don't get from CNN or whatever.

I personally think the economic impact alone of this will be ten-fold to what Katrina was to the United States. The environmental impact will by 10,000-fold to what any disaster was that the United States has had.

Hopefully, Spazzrico (sure you can't get another name?), the oil impact doesn't wrap itself around Florida and move up along the South Carolina shoreline.

OldRightHander
05-10-2010, 06:17 PM
Could have a huge impact on the fisheries, which could drive prices way up for seafood. A lot of shrimp comes out of that area.

Chip R
05-10-2010, 09:58 PM
I saw today that some guy in Florida said that hay will soak up the oil spills.

pedro
05-10-2010, 10:34 PM
I saw today that some guy in Florida said that hay will soak up the oil spills.

I know people who have donated their hair.

Seriously.

Chip R
05-11-2010, 01:32 AM
I know people who have donated their hair.

Seriously.

I heard about that too. Whatever works.

Kingspoint
05-11-2010, 06:01 AM
I saw today that some guy in Florida said that hay will soak up the oil spills.

It's so horrible.

Many of the islands in the Pacific already have beaches full of plastic pieces that look like white sand even if you're looking at it from just 50 yards away. But, it's nothing but broken up bits and pieces of plastic.

There's so much plastic pollution already in the ocean, it's probably our biggest environmental hazard from here on out, surpassing the problems of the fading ozone. Is this considered political, or can we talk about the declining health of our Earth here?

The plastic has already entered our food chain. Now, this oil will, too.

I sent in a resume (to a cleanup company) to go help clean up the spill, but I haven't heard back from them (they said on their website that they were inundated with requests and that they aren't taking any more applications).

Spazzrico
05-11-2010, 08:31 AM
Spazzrico and macro, these are the things I'm interested in. These are real stories that you don't get from CNN or whatever.

I personally think the economic impact alone of this will be ten-fold to what Katrina was to the United States. The environmental impact will by 10,000-fold to what any disaster was that the United States has had.

Hopefully, Spazzrico (sure you can't get another name?), the oil impact doesn't wrap itself around Florida and move up along the South Carolina shoreline.

No new name for me....part of the identity now......nickname given to me by some girls in gradeschool. I had to own it to make the pain go away :D

And seconded on the seafood prices. Again, could be great for the Atlantic fisheries/shrimpers. No doubt prices would rise, but it would also mean more reliance on foreign fishers, many of whom use various dubious envirnomental practices (I'm looking at you southeast Asian shrimp farms and your mangrove destruction).

This has been very hard for me to watch personally due to my own beliefs on drilling that simply have to change. Despite my lefty environmentalist nature, I have been something of a proponent of offshore drilling, but mostly because I am so worried about peak oil and a need to bridge the gap until we can create enough alternatives/change consumption patterns. Now I'm unfortunately seeing the result of what happens in the worst case scenario. NOT GOOD. Now what am I to think about Nuclear power?

If anything I just hope this drives the race to alternatives much more furiously.

Puffy
05-11-2010, 11:53 AM
We are "days maybe weeks" from getting the oil spill in area. They are already preparing barriers to try and protect the white beaches from getting, well, to be not white.

Kingspoint
05-11-2010, 06:19 PM
Now what am I to think about Nuclear power?

If anything I just hope this drives the race to alternatives much more furiously.

Well, a nuclear disaster means the area remains uninhabitable for maybe 150-250 years. That spot of the Earth just becomes a Dead Zone.

An oil disaster of this magnitude puts oil into the food chain, and eventually in our bodies. The economic impact cleans up in about 10-40 years, depending upon each area's situation.

There's just going to be potential for disasters when trying to harness energy, per the nature of "energy".

What's mindboggling to me is anyone's aversion to hydroelectric power when you compare it to alternatives for harnessing energy.

The ocean currents (in addition to the river currents) offer one of the safest and long-term energy-harnessing systems for our planet. Combined with solar and wind, it just has to get moving.

There's less than 40 years left of the oil supply in the world (capable of being extracted). We've long ago gone past the time for change. 10 years from now nobody will see gasoline prices for less than $10/gallon, and 20 years from now it will be $50/gallon. 20 years from now, nobody will be allowed to own a gas-powered vehicle, at least not in this country and European Countries (and Canada).

Electric vehicles were around more than 75 years ago. The technology has always been there. But, that electric power has to come from some other source, and the best choices are dams right now, followed by improvements to wind, ocean currents, and then solar.

Vegetable oil and stuff like that are a joke. It costs more energy to produce it than it makes (on a mass scale as an energy-harnessing alternative). Don't let some ill-informed hippie tell you otherwise. Taking the "waste" from restaurants is different, but it's barely a drop in the bucket when it comes to helping out the energy problem. But, help it does.

Kingspoint
05-11-2010, 06:20 PM
That is really bad, Puffy. Keep us updated, please.

RBA
05-11-2010, 10:44 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=did-S6XbpMM

It maybe a lot worse than what's been reported so far.

redsfandan
05-12-2010, 03:32 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=did-S6XbpMM

It maybe a lot worse than what's been reported so far.
I remember how big a deal the Exxon Valdez spill was 21 years ago. This will be much worse.

The narrator kept saying that we have to learn from our mistakes. I'm not optimistic. Big business (in this case BP, Halliburton, Transocean, etc.) tends to care about one thing and one thing only: the almighty dollar.

Apparently, a law passed in response to the '89 Exxon Valdez spill makes BP responsible for cleanup costs. But the law sets a $75 million limit on other kinds of damages. And that will be a drop in the bucket. There will be a ripple effect where most of the country will be affected in some way. But, this will have huge consequences for a region that still hasn't fully recovered from Hurricane Katrina.

GIDP
05-12-2010, 11:21 AM
Those ships in those videos have nothing to do with the clean up.

Kingspoint
05-23-2010, 06:43 PM
The latest...

By GREG BLUESTEIN and MATTHEW BROWN, Associated Press Writer – 45 mins ago

COVINGTON, La. – The dire impact of the massive Gulf spill was apparent Sunday on oil-soaked islands where pelicans nest as several of the birds splashed in the water and preened themselves, apparently trying to clean crude from their feet and wings.

Pelican eggs were glazed with rust-colored gunk in the bird colony, with thick globs floating on top of the water. Nests sat precariously close the mess in mangrove trees. As oil crept farther into the delicate wetlands in Barataria Bay off Louisiana, BP officials said Sunday that one of their efforts to slow the leak wasn't working as effectively as before.

BP spokesman John Curry told The Associated Press on Sunday that a mile-long tube inserted into the leaking well siphoned some 57,120 gallons of oil within the past 24 hours, a sharp drop from the 92,400 gallons of oil a day that the device was sucking up on Friday. However, the company has said the amount of oil siphoned will vary widely from day to day.

Engineers are working furiously to stem the growing ooze as more wildlife and delicate coastal wetlands are tainted despite the oil-absorbing booms placed around shorelines to protect them.

A pelican colony off Louisiana's coast was awash in oil Saturday, and an Associated Press photographer saw several birds and their eggs coated in the ooze while nests rested in mangroves precariously close to the crude that had washed in. Workers had surrounded the island with the booms, but puddles of oil had seeped through the barrier.
Meanwhile, three top Obama administration officials are returning to the Gulf Coast to monitor the spill response.

Anger with the government and BP, which leased the rig and is responsible for the cleanup, has boiled over as the spill spreads. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency chief Lisa P. Jackson was headed Sunday to Louisiana, where she planned to visit with frustrated residents.

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano were to lead a Senate delegation to the region on Monday to fly over affected areas and keep an eye on the response.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs also told CBS' "Face the Nation" on Sunday that Justice Department officials have been to the region gathering information about the spill. However, he wouldn't say whether the department has opened a criminal investigation.

Meanwhile, the official responsible for the oversight of the month-old spill response said he understands the discontent among residents who want to know what's next.

"If anybody is frustrated with this response, I would tell them their symptoms are normal, because I'm frustrated, too," said Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen. "Nobody likes to have a feeling that you can't do something about a very big problem."

President Barack Obama also has named a special independent commission to review what happened. The spill began after the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded off the coast of Louisiana on April 20, killing 11 workers, and sank two days later. At least 6 million gallons of crude have spewed into the Gulf of Mexico since, though a growing number of scientists have said they believe it's more.

The visits from top Obama chiefs come as BP said it will be at least Tuesday before engineers can shoot mud into the blown-out well at the bottom of the Gulf, yet another delay in the effort to stop the oil.

A so-called "top kill" has been tried on land but never 5,000 feet underwater, so scientists and engineers have spent the past week preparing and taking measurements to make sure it will stop the oil that has been spewing into the sea for a month. They originally hoped to try it as early as this weekend.

"It's taking time to get everything set up," BP spokesman Tom Mueller said. "They're taking their time. It's never been done before. We've got to make sure everything is right."

Crews will shoot heavy mud into a crippled piece of equipment atop the well. Then engineers will direct cement at the well to permanently stop the oil.

As the spill spreads deeper into vulnerable marshes, some have called for federal officials to take over the response. But Allen said the government must hold BP accountable.

After the 1989 Exxon Valdez tanker spilled 11 million gallons of oil in Alaska, Congress dictated that oil companies be responsible for dealing with major accidents — including paying for all cleanup — with oversight by federal agencies.

BP has tried and failed several times to halt the gusher, and has had some success with the mile-long tube.

Engineers are also developing several other plans in case the top kill doesn't work, including an effort to shoot knotted rope, pieces of tire and other material — known as a junk shot — to plug the blowout preventer, which was meant to shut off the oil in case of an accident but did not work.

BigPoppa
05-24-2010, 01:56 AM
I fear this will be much, much worse than we can anticipate.

My wife and I vacation in Gulf Shores, Alabama. That's where I am as I type this. We visit at least twice a year for 10 days at a time, and have made probably 15 trips here. We love it, and have often talked of retiring here. It makes my stomach literally hurt when I think of what may happen to these beautiful beaches.

Beyond that, my heart aches for the residents here, all the people employed in tourism related fields, fishermen, the wildlife, and the environment.

If they capped the well tonight, this is still going be an economic and environmental disaster of historic proportions. In my gut, I feel like somebody at BP or one of the subcontractors should go to prison over this. But I know that won't help anything. I doubt I have ever agreed with Barbara Boxer about...well, probably anything...but I am onboard with her that BP officials should be criminally liable if they knowingly (and I suspect that they did) provided grossly low ball estimates of the spillage volume to the Coast Guard and NOAA.

I rarely purchase fuel from BP anyway, but now "rarely" will be "never".