Rush: The ocean will clean itself.

[Cry Havoc]

Not sure if this has been posted yet:

Pundit Rush Limbaugh, who has a home on Florida's Palm Beach, suggested that the explosion could have resulted from Earth Day eco-sabotage by one of the rig workers. Limbaugh also said a cleanup was unnecessary.

"The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone and left out there," Limbaugh said. "It's natural. It's as natural as the ocean water is."

Various sources, including http://joulesbeef.newsvine.com/_news/2010/05/02/4233019-rush-limbaugh-oil-spill-as-natural-as-water-will-clean-itself-up-probably-caused-by-a-liberal-enviromental-oil-rig-worker

---

Does anyone really believe this incompetent fool still? Even those of you who lean furthest to the right have to realize how stupid this man is with these kinds of statements.

[admiralsnackbar]

Did he give a time-line?

[Cry Havoc]

Did he give a time-line?

Unless he's talking about decades or centuries, he's wrong. And decades or centuries wouldn't be really cleaning, it would be dispersal, and it would obviously do damage to the ocean that would be irreparable, perhaps forever. It could damage some species of ocean life enough that they might never recover.

Regardless of the timeline, this is not something you could ever consider being rid of by "natural" processes.

But according to scientists, while some oil is normal seepage can be handled by natural systems, it's doubtful that the ocean could simply assimilate so much oil. Instead, the oil if left unchecked would break down into a sticky "mousse" coating seabirds, killing fish and spoiling delicate marshes and beaches.

[clambake]

if he could be believed, then he wouldn't still be in the US.

[NFGIII]

He's absolutely correct. Give or take a million or so years but Mother Earth will take care of herself. She's been here a lot longer than we have and will be here when we are gone.

He needs to just go away and retire. I used to listen to him back in the early 90's but by 95 - 96 he had lost much of my respect. He used to talk about taking the high road and exposing the fallacies of the left by emperical data and discussion. He disliked many of the left's personal attacks on him and others of his kind. So what did he become? He became what he ranted about. A sniping politcal hack who used personal assaults against those who opposed him to make points.

He just got to big for his britches!

[DarrinS]

He's right, and it doesn't take centuries.


History of oil spills in the gulf:


Oil exploration in the Gulf of Mexico has led to a number of disasters and near disasters over the past 31 years. In some cases, authorities were unable to stamp out fires or stop spills for months; in others, quick action and good luck prevented disasters from becoming worse than they could have been.


IXTOC (1979)
The IXTOC I was an exploratory well that blew up in the Bay of Campeche on June 3, 1979, after oil and gas feeding from the well ignited. At its height the well may have pumped upwards of 30,000 barrels of oil (1.26 million gallons) into the Gulf a day; currents eventually brought the oil to the Texas shore that August. Engineers were finally able to cap the well on March 23, 1980. The spill is the second-largest in history, behind the deliberate oil spills created at the end of the 1991 Gulf War. Total cleanup costs are estimated at $498 million (about $1.4 billion in 2010 dollars).


Burmah Agate (1979)
As the Texas coastline struggled against the fallout from the IXTOC, a new disaster compounded the woes. The Burmah Agate collided with a freighter near Galveston, Texas on November 1, 1979, causing the ship to explode and killing 31 crew members. The ship spilled 2.6 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico and burned for over two months.


Megaborg (1990)
Another Galveston oil disaster, this Norwegian tanker was transferring oil to smaller ships when it suffered an explosion in its pump room and caught fire, spilling or burning 4.2 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico over the next week. Crews initially could do little more than pour seawater onto the fire.



Tampa Bay Oil Spill (1993)
Early in the morning of August 10, 1993, three ships collided south of Tampa Bay and dumped 333,000 barrels of oil and jet fuel (nearly 14 million gallons) into the sea near Tampa Bay. A quick response and cooperative tides minimized the damage to the local ecology.

[MannyIsGod]

Um, what did you post that proves it doesn't take a long time? I don't see anything about portions of the Gulf left poisoned by the IXTOC spill.

Whats ironic, however, is that you claim Rush is right and it will clean itself up and then you post about quick efforts to contain and clean up the spills you list.

:lol

[admiralsnackbar]

He's right, and it doesn't take centuries.


History of oil spills in the gulf:


Oil exploration in the Gulf of Mexico has led to a number of disasters and near disasters over the past 31 years. In some cases, authorities were unable to stamp out fires or stop spills for months; in others, quick action and good luck prevented disasters from becoming worse than they could have been.


IXTOC (1979)
The IXTOC I was an exploratory well that blew up in the Bay of Campeche on June 3, 1979, after oil and gas feeding from the well ignited. At its height the well may have pumped upwards of 30,000 barrels of oil (1.26 million gallons) into the Gulf a day; currents eventually brought the oil to the Texas shore that August. Engineers were finally able to cap the well on March 23, 1980. The spill is the second-largest in history, behind the deliberate oil spills created at the end of the 1991 Gulf War. Total cleanup costs are estimated at $498 million (about $1.4 billion in 2010 dollars).


Burmah Agate (1979)
As the Texas coastline struggled against the fallout from the IXTOC, a new disaster compounded the woes. The Burmah Agate collided with a freighter near Galveston, Texas on November 1, 1979, causing the ship to explode and killing 31 crew members. The ship spilled 2.6 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico and burned for over two months.


Megaborg (1990)
Another Galveston oil disaster, this Norwegian tanker was transferring oil to smaller ships when it suffered an explosion in its pump room and caught fire, spilling or burning 4.2 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico over the next week. Crews initially could do little more than pour seawater onto the fire.



Tampa Bay Oil Spill (1993)
Early in the morning of August 10, 1993, three ships collided south of Tampa Bay and dumped 333,000 barrels of oil and jet fuel (nearly 14 million gallons) into the sea near Tampa Bay. A quick response and cooperative tides minimized the damage to the local ecology.

50,000 barrels (some estimate 70,000) a day at 29 days so far. That's 1,450,000 barrels.

Your examples, in barrels:

30,000+
61,905+
100,000+
333,000+
95,238=
Total:
620,143 barrels

Is there any comparison?

[MannyIsGod]

After intense cleanup efforts:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=environmental-effects-of


Charles H. Peterson of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and his colleagues compiled and analyzed the findings of dozens of previous studies. The results, Peterson says, "showed that oil has persisted in surprisingly large quantities for years after the Exxon Valdez spill in subsurface reservoirs under coarse intertidal sediments. This oil was sequestered in conditions where weathering by wave action, light and bacteria was inhibited, and toxicity remained for a decade or more." Exposure to this oil, in turn, caused additional animal deaths. Salmon, for example, had increased mortality for four years after the spill because incubating eggs had come into contact with it. Larger marine mammals and ducks, meanwhile, suffered ill effects because their prey was contaminated. The team estimates that shoreline habitats such as mussel beds affected by the spill will take up to 30 years to recover fully.

[MannyIsGod]

The Exxon Valdez is a great reference point as opposed to something like IXTOC because of the level of study that has been done.

I just don't know why Darrin clings to these stupid talking points when he's contradicting them in his own post. Just fucking admit the oil spill is a terrible thing and it will be OK. Jesus.

[DarrinS]

The Exxon Valdez is a great reference point as opposed to something like IXTOC because of the level of study that has been done.

I just don't know why Darrin clings to these stupid talking points when he's contradicting them in his own post. Just fucking admit the oil spill is a terrible thing and it will be OK. Jesus.

What kind of oil did the Valdez spill?

You know there are different kinds of oil, right?


But, I agree that this is a terrible thing, just not the end of the world. Perspective is a good thing.

[jack sommerset]

The whales will clean it up.

[z0sa]

Rush, instead of his broadcast, is the talking point now.

[Yonivore]

50,000 barrels (some estimate 70,000) a day at 29 days so far. That's 1,450,000 barrels.

Your examples, in barrels:

30,000+
61,905+
100,000+
333,000+
95,238=
Total:
620,143 barrels

Is there any comparison?
One little problem with your algorithm, admiral. IXTOC I spill 30,000+ barrels a day from June 3, 1979 to April 23, 1980.

That's 9,750,000 barrels from IXTOC I alone. You might want to recalculate.

And, Manny, The Exxon Valdez isn't a better comparison because, well, 1) the environmental and climatological conditions in Alaska prohibiting the usual forces of nature to revitalize the area do not exist in the Gulf. and 2) the size of the Gulf compared to the size of Prince William Sound is a significant factor in the environment's ability to disperse and mitigate the effects of the spill.

I think IXTOC I is a better comparison because of the level of reality involved.

[admiralsnackbar]

One little problem with your algorithm, admiral. IXTOC I spill 30,000+ barrels a day from June 3, 1979 to April 23, 1980.

That's 9,750,000 barrels from IXTOC I alone. You might want to recalculate.

And, Manny, The Exxon Valdez isn't a better comparison because, well, 1) the environmental and climatological conditions in Alaska prohibiting the usual forces of nature to revitalize the area do not exist in the Gulf. and 2) the size of the Gulf compared to the size of Prince William Sound is a significant factor in the environment's ability to disperse and mitigate the effects of the spill.

I think IXTOC I is a better comparison because of the level of reality involved.

Good eyes, Yoni. I keep making careless mistakes when I scan.

[MannyIsGod]

What kind of oil did the Valdez spill?

You know there are different kinds of oil, right?


But, I agree that this is a terrible thing, just not the end of the world. Perspective is a good thing.

Who said it was the end of the world? YOU provide perspective? :lmao

[Yonivore]

Good eyes, Yoni. I keep making careless mistakes when I scan.
No worries. I do agree, this is a significant spill and, yes, somewhat of a disaster but, nothing on the apocalyptic scale being described by some.

I remember seeing tar balls on the beaches near Corpus Christi for a couple of years after IXTOC I. Somewhat of a nuisance but, beyond that...it didn't stop us from going to the beach and by 1981-82, there were no signs it had ever occurred.

We will survive.

[MannyIsGod]

One little problem with your algorithm, admiral. IXTOC I spill 30,000+ barrels a day from June 3, 1979 to April 23, 1980.

That's 9,750,000 barrels from IXTOC I alone. You might want to recalculate.

And, Manny, The Exxon Valdez isn't a better comparison because, well, 1) the environmental and climatological conditions in Alaska prohibiting the usual forces of nature to revitalize the area do not exist in the Gulf. and 2) the size of the Gulf compared to the size of Prince William Sound is a significant factor in the environment's ability to disperse and mitigate the effects of the spill.

I think IXTOC I is a better comparison because of the level of reality involved.

K, when you get the environmental impact studies that Mexico has done let me know. I never said they were the same Yoni. I said it was a good reference because of the level of study done on long term oil spill effects. If you have some specific reasoning to show that those same long term effects will be avoided in this spill then please share them.

[MannyIsGod]

No worries. I do agree, this is a significant spill and, yes, somewhat of a disaster but, nothing on the apocalyptic scale being described by some.

I remember seeing tar balls on the beaches near Corpus Christi for a couple of years after IXTOC I. Somewhat of a nuisance but, beyond that...it didn't stop us from going to the beach and by 1981-82, there were no signs it had ever occurred.

We will survive.

O Rly?

[George Gervin's Afro]

No worries. I do agree, this is a significant spill and, yes, somewhat of a disaster but, nothing on the apocalyptic scale being described by some.

I remember seeing tar balls on the beaches near Corpus Christi for a couple of years after IXTOC I. Somewhat of a nuisance but, beyond that...it didn't stop us from going to the beach and by 1981-82, there were no signs it had ever occurred.

We will survive.

nothing but a minor inconvenience... of course when the region suffers great job losses because of the spill yoni will be blaming obama for it...

[Yonivore]

O Rly?
Not when I went to the beach.

[Cry Havoc]

the size of the Gulf compared to the size of Prince William Sound is a significant factor in the environment's ability to disperse and mitigate the effects of the spill.

So you really think we could do nothing and it would be perfectly alright, even when scientists are racing to talk about the devastating consequences this could have on marine life?


But, I agree that this is a terrible thing, just not the end of the world. Perspective is a good thing.

Who said it was? Mostly it's been the right-wing calling this "Obama's Katrina" and trying to play up the histrionics. Do you have a problem with them doing so?


No worries. I do agree, this is a significant spill and, yes, somewhat of a disaster but, nothing on the apocalyptic scale being described by some.

Which seems to be a far more prevalent attitude of the right, as I stated above. Who is calling this an apocalypse? Sources, please.


I remember seeing tar balls on the beaches near Corpus Christi for a couple of years after IXTOC I. Somewhat of a nuisance but, beyond that...it didn't stop us from going to the beach and by 1981-82, there were no signs it had ever occurred.

I'm sorry, do you have a degree in marine biology and a large amount of monitoring equipment that you can use to determine the impact of an oil spill on the ocean? Or do you just subscribe to the branch of science that says, "Well, if I can't see it, it must not exist."?


We will survive.

Undoubtedly. However, the fortunes of likely billions or trillions of the members of species that inhabit the region will probably be far more dire. But you're right, it's more their problem than ours.

[RandomGuy]

One little problem with your algorithm, admiral. IXTOC I spill 30,000+ barrels a day from June 3, 1979 to April 23, 1980.

That's 9,750,000 barrels from IXTOC I alone. You might want to recalculate.

And, Manny, The Exxon Valdez isn't a better comparison because, well, 1) the environmental and climatological conditions in Alaska prohibiting the usual forces of nature to revitalize the area do not exist in the Gulf. and 2) the size of the Gulf compared to the size of Prince William Sound is a significant factor in the environment's ability to disperse and mitigate the effects of the spill.

I think IXTOC I is a better comparison because of the level of reality involved.

I have been unable to find a long-term study on the area around that platform.

The only studies I have seen regarding it were of US coastal regions from the spill.

The other thing about this is the depth of the oil, and the possibility that it will be pretty widely dispersed if given time, causing a lot of damage in a lot of places.

[rjv]

so all the fishing industry along the gulf is to wait for nature to take its course. great. i mean who cares if good sections of vital fishing areas become dead zones. and thank goodness rush thinks endangered species are not significant.

the worst thing about rush and his zeal to dismiss science is that he basically committs his legions to scoff at empirical data and just assume that, in the end, we can be as wreckless as we care to be when it comes to the environment.

[MannyIsGod]

Not when I went to the beach.

:lol

This is seriously what you're basing your belief that there are no long term effects from a spill?

Going to a beach hundreds of miles from the incident and 30 years after the fact definitely signifies the lack of long term effects anywhere.

[EVAY]

Look, guys, this thing makes me sick.

I have refused to go to Texas beaches ( the ones off Padre) for years because every time I went I got tar balls on my feet. And I have gone within the last ten years.

I used to go to North Florida beaches quite a lot, and they were some of the whitest sand, prettiest beaches on the planet, and that white sand extended all the way to the Mississippi coast.

Now I fear that those beaches will end up looking like the Texas beaches.

Rush is an under-educated, drug-addicted ass who is entitled to his opinions, and who makes lots of money by saying things that appeal to the basest emotions of his listeners. That does not make his opinions worthy of being repeated or defended by those who would present themselves as serious thinkers or debaters.

[Yonivore]

:lol

This is seriously what you're basing your belief that there are no long term effects from a spill?

Going to a beach hundreds of miles from the incident and 30 years after the fact definitely signifies the lack of long term effects anywhere.
Yep.

So, who was still suffering the effects of that spill beyond 1983?

The Texas shrimpers were doing fine. So were the off-shore oil companies. Everybody cleaned what they could and went back to living life. That spill was significant for a couple of years and then, things went back to normal.

[Drachen]

Look, guys, this thing makes me sick.

I have refused to go to Texas beaches ( the ones off Padre) for years because every time I went I got tar balls on my feet. And I have gone within the last ten years.

I used to go to North Florida beaches quite a lot, and they were some of the whitest sand, prettiest beaches on the planet, and that white sand extended all the way to the Mississippi coast.

Now I fear that those beaches will end up looking like the Texas beaches.

Rush is an under-educated, drug-addicted ass who is entitled to his opinions, and who makes lots of money by saying things that appeal to the basest emotions of his listeners. That does not make his opinions worthy of being repeated or defended by those who would present themselves as serious thinkers or debaters.

I go to mustang every year (usually 2-3 times) and I just noticed this year that I haven't seen tar in about a decade. I know it used to be cyclical and maybe just by sheer dumb luck I have missed the "tar weeks" (i.e. May-June is seaweed, July is man-o-war time, etc), but I can't even remember what time of year the Tar weeks (if they still exist) are.

However, I fear that we are going to be looking at some major tar time for the forseeable future. It's disgusting that they are finding softball sized tar balls in FL already.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

I'm confused... are some of you really trying to argue that the effects of this spill aren't that serious because you'll be able to go to the beach without noticing in a few years?? you can't be this fucking dumb... you just can't.

[Drachen]

Yep.

So, who was still suffering the effects of that spill beyond 1983?

The Texas shrimpers were doing fine. So were the off-shore oil companies. Everybody cleaned what they could and went back to living life. That spill was significant for a couple of years and then, things went back to normal.

Though I really think you are just trolling at this point:

Show me your catalogue of all sea life in the immediate 250 miles surrounding the aforementioned spill before and after (1 year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, today). Then the same catalogue for the immediate 500 miles? 1000?

Once you have shown me this information and the differences are only subtle, I will cosign your ideas. Until then you are a blind, selfish prick.

Absent that information, you can go collect at least 2 sets of every life form (male and female where there is a distinction) in a 1000 mile radius, put one set in a tank filled with regular sea water, and one mixed heavily with oil, and if the oil group gets on as good or better than the seawater control group, once again I will cosign your ideas on the subject.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Yoni's idea of "back to normal" is being able to go back to the beach and forget anything ever happened...

[Yonivore]

Yoni's idea of "back to normal" is being able to go back to the beach and forget anything ever happened...
Nope. Had family in the shrimping business. They had a heck of a time for a couple of years...but, yeah, by 1983, they were back to normal, as well.

So, who was suffering the effect of that spill beyond, let's say, 1985?

By the way, that "Brown Tide" shit is much harder on the Gulf industries than any oil spill has ever been.

[Yonivore]

Though I really think you are just trolling at this point:

Show me your catalogue of all sea life in the immediate 250 miles surrounding the aforementioned spill before and after (1 year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, today). Then the same catalogue for the immediate 500 miles? 1000?

Once you have shown me this information and the differences are only subtle, I will cosign your ideas. Until then you are a blind, selfish prick.

Absent that information, you can go collect at least 2 sets of every life form (male and female where there is a distinction) in a 1000 mile radius, put one set in a tank filled with regular sea water, and one mixed heavily with oil, and if the oil group gets on as good or better than the seawater control group, once again I will cosign your ideas on the subject.
I don't need to. The industries that depended on the Gulf before '79 suffered no lasting effects beyond '82-'83.

I call that back to normal.

[Drachen]

I don't need to. The industries that depended on the Gulf before '79 suffered no lasting effects beyond '82-'83.

I call that back to normal.

Ok so as long as you aren't affected, it isn't happening. Got it.

[Yonivore]

Ok so as long as you aren't affected, it isn't happening. Got it.
So, who was affected beyond 1985?

[Drachen]

sealife. how many species died out? What did this do to the food chain? Are there less shrimp (for example) than there otherwise would have been causing an unknown alteration in humanity. How many mexicans, Texans who lived off of what they could catch in the ocean died? Bahamians? Other peoples of the Gulf/Carribbean? How did the wholesale destruction of ecosystems contribute to the lowering of oxygen levels in the gulf? Did this contribute in any way to the oceans ability to absorb and store CO2? and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on. I can come up with valid questions all night long, and I am not even an expert on the subject (which may be why I can come up with so many questions).

[Yonivore]

sealife. how many species died out? What did this do to the food chain? Are there less shrimp (for example) than there otherwise would have been causing an unknown alteration in humanity. How many mexicans, Texans who lived off of what they could catch in the ocean died? Bahamians? Other peoples of the Gulf/Carribbean? How did the wholesale destruction of ecosystems contribute to the lowering of oxygen levels in the gulf? Did this contribute in any way to the oceans ability to absorb and store CO2? and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on. I can come up with valid questions all night long, and I am not even an expert on the subject (which may be why I can come up with so many questions).
I don't know the answer to any of those questions. Do you? That you're not spouting any statistics of lingering effects tells me that you're not able to find anything that says there were...

What I know is the Gulf-dependent industries along the Texas Gulf Coast were fine after a couple of years. I caught as many flounder, whiting, and hard heads after '79 as I did before '79 and the Shrimp were as tasty as ever.

[Drachen]

You are absolutely right, I don't have the answers, I don't have any statistical data to back it up. Unfortunately there weren't very many studies done for this catastrophe. But you are basically saying that if someone gets really really sunburned, its no problem as long as their skin goes back to normal. Cancer could be lurking, but there is no superficial proof thereof, so why dig any deeper.

In the event that you were unaware, intellectual curiosity is not only a virtue, it is the seed of all progress.

[Yonivore]

You are absolutely right, I don't have the answers, I don't have any statistical data to back it up. Unfortunately there weren't very many studies done for this catastrophe. But you are basically saying that if someone gets really really sunburned, its no problem as long as their skin goes back to normal. Cancer could be lurking, but there is no superficial proof thereof, so why dig any deeper.

In the event that you were unaware, intellectual curiosity is not only a virtue, it is the seed of all progress.
I can only go on what is, not what boogey man may be around the corner...

Your rationale is the same philosophy upon which anthropogenic global climate change is based. How's that working out?

[Yonivore]

By the way, Drachen...

Scientists Find That Tons Of Oil Seep Into The Gulf Of Mexico Each Year (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2504076/posts)


Twice an Exxon Valdez spill worth of oil seeps into the Gulf of Mexico every year, according to a new study that will be presented January 27 at the Ocean Sciences Meeting in San Antonio, Texas.

But the oil isn't destroying habitats or wiping out ocean life. The ooze is a natural phenomena that's been going on for many thousands of years, according to Roger Mitchell, Vice President of Program Development at the Earth Satellite Corporation (EarthSat) in Rockville Md. "The wildlife have adapted and evolved and have no problem dealing with the oil," he said.

Oil that finds its way to the surface from natural seeps gets broken down by bacteria and ends up as carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas. So knowing the amount of fossil fuel that turns to carbon dioxide naturally is important for understanding how much humans may be changing the climate by burning oil and gas.

Using a technique they developed in the early 1990s to help explore for oil in the deep ocean, Earth Satellite Corporation scientists found that there are over 600 different areas where oil oozes from rocks underlying the Gulf of Mexico. The oil bubbles up from a cracks in ocean bottom sediments and spreads out with the wind to an to an area covering about 4 square miles.

"On water, oil has this wonderful property of spreading out really thin," said Mitchell. "A gallon of oil can spread over a square mile very quickly." So what ends up on the surface is an incredibly thin slick, impossible to see with the human eye and harmless to marine animals.
Once they stop the well from flowing freely, the same will happen with that oil.

[ChumpDumper]

God damn, that stupid argument again?

[MannyIsGod]

God damn, that stupid argument again?

Was thinking the same thing. So amazing.

[Yonivore]

Was thinking the same thing. So amazing.
I must have missed the rebuttal. Please, do enlighten me.

[ChumpDumper]

I must have missed the rebuttal. Please, do enlighten me.Even Wild Cobra took a steaming dump on that "argument" when DarrinS's email told him to post it. Search for "tar ball" if you are interested.

[word]

He's absolutely correct. Give or take a million or so years but Mother Earth will take care of herself.

Nonsense. There have been worse spills in the Gulf, just not in our country. Mexico had a similar blowout and it lasted 9 months. Nature will take care of it, in time, and it won't take a million years. 20 years from now, this will be a distant memory...if not sooner, much sooner. In the early days there was such a thing as surface oil. So he is right, oil is a natural product of the earth. Now, does that mean this isn't serious ? No. But it's not the end of the world as we know it.

[MannyIsGod]

And just who has named it the end of the world? Why is this the argument of choice?

[Drachen]

By the way, Drachen...

Scientists Find That Tons Of Oil Seep Into The Gulf Of Mexico Each Year (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2504076/posts)


Once they stop the well from flowing freely, the same will happen with that oil.

Did you know that eating rat poison in small amounts can be beneficial to one's health in certain situations. If you, however increase the amount of rat poison being ingested it becomes quite toxic to the point of killing people.

[Sisk]

Rush, instead of his broadcast, is the talking point now.

Isn't that always the case? Predictable tactic

[rjv]

i love the moral relativism of the conservative voice today. if it pertains to a political opponent or is on the ideological opposite side of the coin then there is an absolute referenced. 'death panels are immoral ! ;ACORN is unethical'...

and yet when there is a closer relation to the events at hand and the party they swear allegiance to then everything gets more amorphous. suddenly the moral absolutes evaporate and we are left with perfunctory relativism. 'well so what, nature will take care of itself', what's the big deal, it's happened before'...

[Fabbs]

http://static.episode39.it/character/718.jpg
I went to the beach a couple times and no Man Eating Tar Bars got me.

[word]

50,000 barrels (some estimate 70,000) a day at 29 days so far. That's 1,450,000 barrels.

Your examples, in barrels:

30,000+
61,905+
100,000+
333,000+
95,238=
Total:
620,143 barrels

Is there any comparison?

Ixtoc 1 was 3.33333333 million barrels

140,000,000 gallons. Barrel of oil is 42 gallons.

At the low estimate of 1000/bpd it would take nearly 10 years for this well to reach that. At the bizarre high of 70,000 ( the biggest producing wells in Saudi Arabia produce between 20-30 thousand ) it would take 50 days.

Reasonable estimate could be extrapolated from BP's Thunder Horse project nearby. 250,000/bpd using 36 wells. Roughly 7000/bpd per well. About 17 months to reach the same volume as the Pemex spill.

[word]

And if we've discovered a field/well that produces 50-70 thousand barrels a day, we should be celebrating.

We haven't. If we've found one that's producing 20,000/bpd we should be pretty darn happy about that. I worked in the oil fields, for 10 years, and out in the gulf, in the Mississippi canyon where this well is, on a drillship, owned by Transocean before they were Trans Ocean. They were Sonat before that, the Offshore Company before that.

Now, I haven't worked in that field since 1979. I spent all my money doing that paying for flight school to follow my dream and I was a peon roughneck during that time, but I know something about the oil bidness. My old man, his old man, my moms dad, his dad, his dad...all in the oil biz. I still get the checks from their work via royalty.

I have much respect for those in the oil business, as I do coal miners and the like. People who 'the public' tends to hate. A public who has never knocked out a hard or dangerous day of labor in their lives, much less years, so pukes can drive their cars to protests and live in air conditioned homes and work in air conditioned office buildings..etc..etc.

If you hate big oil so much, quit using their fucking product.

[ChumpDumper]

And if we've discovered a field/well that produces 50-70 thousand barrels a day, we should be celebrating.Why?

How much does that lower the price of gas at the pump?

[MannyIsGod]

If big oil hates being hated so much they should stop taking our money.

/word

[Wild Cobra]

If big oil hates being hated so much they should stop taking our money.

/word
You have that backwards.

People who hate Big Oil should stop buying fuel.

[word]

If big oil hates being hated so much they should stop taking our money.

/word

They should give you their product ? I suppose you are for free food and clothing as well. I assume you have a job. Perhaps you or your company, I can't imagine someone who thinks as you HAS their own company, but maybe you should start by walking in and telling your boss you should start giving away your product or services. Do that, then we'll talk.

[EmptyMan]

Just fucking admit the oil spill is a terrible thing and it will be OK. Jesus.

lol this.

[MannyIsGod]

They should give you their product ? I suppose you are for free food and clothing as well. I assume you have a job. Perhaps you or your company, I can't imagine someone who thinks as you HAS their own company, but maybe you should start by walking in and telling your boss you should start giving away your product or services. Do that, then we'll talk.

:lol

This is almost funnier than your post in the special election thread.

[word]

ahh...I don't watch fox or cnn.... or much TV...so what...I don't eat and breath politics...I made a mistake. I didn't realize there was a happy ending speshur' erection going on....I thought it was all primaries.

One thing, has nothing to do with the other. I make mistakes sometimes. So shoot me. Still doesn't change the fact you hate a product you can't get by without or the HUGE oil spill isn't the hugest EVER. Or that you're an obsessed cat with no life and over 30,000 posts. I've been here 7 years, and don't have 2000. You sir, are a nutter.

[Yonivore]

If big oil hates being hated so much they should stop taking our money.

/word
I don't think Big Oil cares what you think but, it's kind of funny to hear you blame your buying their product on them.

[PublicOption]

can someone tell me why he is so adamant about not worrying about the effect this spill will have on the environment?

[MannyIsGod]

I don't think Big Oil cares what you think but, it's kind of funny to hear you blame your buying their product on them.

Wow - you're all pretty bad at this aren't you?

[word]

can someone tell me why he is so adamant about not worrying about the effect this spill will have on the environment?


Because oil isn't plutonium ?

What is the half life of oil ....

hmmmm.....?

pssst..carbon units...listen up...

Oil and the use of, is the greatest mineral mankind has ever mined behind coal...it has delivered our dreams and given us more things than the general nutball public could even begin to grasp or admit.

Got it ?

YOU are out fetching wood and coal..burning rocks....without it.

Treehuggers.....go fuck yourselves. You couldn't even cook your own food with your philosophy.

Matter of fact you wouldn't grow food.

Vegetarians that won't cut down trees. What do you think a damn tree is ? A plant, that you harvest. Just like corn and broccoli and a bunch of other stuff that comes out of the ground.

EVERYTHING man produces that makes our life worth living and possible comes from the earth.

If you don't mine it or grow it or feed it, you are just changing it's form to make it useful. Adding value. Capitalism.

What do you morons think the VAT is all about ?



OIL....is no different.

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao

[Drachen]

Word, I will say this you are saying that it is bizarrely high to estimate 70k because the biggest wells in Saudi Arabia produce 20-30k. I think a reason for the disparity is that you are talking about production, whereas this is uncontrolled expulsion. Where I am going with this is perhaps (for reasons admittedly unknown to me), they regulate the pressure in the production phase which is currently not happening. Like if you open your water spigot only halfway because you don't want to flood your begonias (sp?).

[rjv]

Because oil isn't plutonium ?

What is the half life of oil ....

hmmmm.....?

pssst..carbon units...listen up...

Oil and the use of, is the greatest mineral mankind has ever mined behind coal...it has delivered our dreams and given us more things than the general nutball public could even begin to grasp or admit.

Got it ?

YOU are out fetching wood and coal..burning rocks....without it.

Treehuggers.....go fuck yourselves. You couldn't even cook your own food with your philosophy.

Matter of fact you wouldn't grow food.

Vegetarians that won't cut down trees. What do you think a damn tree is ? A plant, that you harvest. Just like corn and broccoli and a bunch of other stuff that comes out of the ground.

EVERYTHING man produces that makes our life worth living and possible comes from the earth.

If you don't mine it or grow it or feed it, you are just changing it's form to make it useful. Adding value. Capitalism.

What do you morons think the VAT is all about ?



OIL....is no different.

so besides the working class hero speech, and the generous offerings of argument of abuse and circumstance fallacies, and then the ample suppy of tautologies, what is so new about your perspective? that there are resources in this world that we can not survive without? this is not limited to oil. and this does not permit any industry that supplies these resources to exist with a carte blanche. industries can not operate with so much autonomy that they do not have to submit to regulations, ethics or any compliance to industrial, governmental and societal standards.

and capitalism? is this some static system or paradigm that never shifts according to production, consumer dynamics or even the resource itself?

and i love this juxtaposition:



Treehuggers.....go fuck yourselves. You couldn't even cook your own food with your philosophy.

Matter of fact you wouldn't grow food.

Vegetarians that won't cut down trees. What do you think a damn tree is ? A plant, that you harvest. Just like corn and broccoli and a bunch of other stuff that comes out of the ground.

EVERYTHING man produces that makes our life worth living and possible comes from the earth.



with one sentence you acknowledge the value of the earth but in the preceding sentences you spat off the mentality that has reduced the rain forest of this planet to what it is today. species of plants, animals and microorganisms are of no consequence apparently in the gulf or anywhere else there are resources meant to be "harvested".

nice machiavellian ethics.

[RandomGuy]

[I hate the environmantal movement, and see no value in preserving the environment]


ooookaaaay.

We have evidence that it is certain that we are in the final stages of oil being economically viable as an energy source. Not "very likely", not "possible", but mathmatically certain.

We can delay this, but it is as inevitable as the sun setting.

This is a trend that will take place over the next 20-60 by our best estimates.

The costs of switching to more renewable "green" sources that don't suffer from depletion, is lower now than it will ever be.

A lot of smart money has started to realize this and has started to flow into solar/wind/etc research and companies.

Capitalism itself will leave oil behind within your lifetime. All the knee-jerk, with an emphasis on jerk, anti-environmentalism won't change that.

Then what will you say about oil?