There's plenty blame to go around, but BP was calling the shots. If you didn't see 60 minutes a couple weeks ago, watch these two videos:
Part 1
Part 2

Working with a compromised blow out preventer came back to haunt them. Haliburton was following BP's directive. No one bucks the operator's company man.

 

BP is responsible for the spill. There is no doubt about that. It was their leased rig. It was their operation they are responsible. With that said I must point out the following as to the clean up.

If you want to point fingers at the clean up disaster that is LA look no farther than the US government. Kevin Costner has clean up machines he had developed after the Exxon Valdez. He requested permission to use them just after the drill went down. As was reported in the local rag, he got caught up in red tape. The machines do not use chemicals and are capable of cleaning more oil than was being spewed out of the well. The water coming out of the machines is 97% clean. The Navy has had oil skimmers sitting in port since about a week after the sinking. The did not move until about a week ago. There is a plane down here that is designed to spread dispersant on the oil. It can cut a swath of 100 miles at a time. As of last week it still hadn't flown any missions. It's just sitting on the tarmac waiting for the government to give permission.

If the government had given expedited approval, or here's a thought, got the hell out of the way, Costner could have placed his machines in an area where the oil was coming to the surface and started cleaning the oil as soon as it hit the top. The Navy's oil skimmers could have been a little farther out skimming up oil Costner's machines were unable to collect. The shrimpers could have been doing exactly what they are doing, but out a little farther than the Navy skimmers. Anything that got past those three lines then becomes the responsibility of the dispersant spraying plane. These three things would probably would not have collected all of the oil, but they would have cleaned most of it and prevented almost all of it from coming ashore. The sticking point was the government, they wouldn't give approval. So Obama saying they are working as fast as possible, is a bunch of BS.

My favorite jackassary conversation:

EPA to BP: You need to quit spraying that toxic dispersant and use something less toxic.
BP: Ok. We think it is safe, but what ever you want. What do you suggest we spray?
EPA: We don't know we haven't conducted studies to find out which are more toxic and which are least toxic.
BP: What?

 

To summarize:

1) The leak is BP's responsibility
2) The US government has hampered clean-up efforts.
3) BP and the US government both play the Public Relations Game
4) The situation has gotten so bad, the President has had to go to the Gulf for a photo op.


FWIW, the US government tax on gasoline is 18.4 cents/gallon. The average state + fed gasoline tax is 47.7 cents per gallon.

BP's overall profit margin is 5.83%.

Big government makes way more money on oil than the oil companies do. So it makes sense to me that Big Government should help with the clean up, instead of hinder it.

 

I feel better now that Obama has been there and touched it.

 

Political Litmus Test Below:

If images below give you a warm feeling all over that your President cares and you can now be assured he will solve this crisis, you are a liberal.

If the images make you feel as if you are being manipulated by a government orchestrated photo op and that your intelligence is being insulted, then you are a conservative.







Basically:

Thrill running up your leg = liberal.

Feel like you are going to hurl = conservative

 

Bet you can get a good deal on some beach front property in LA these days.

Americans don't need foriegn terrorists.......We have our Banks and Corporations slitting our throats and we sharpen the knifes they use.

 

We really don't have much in the way of beaches. Most of our coast is made up of marshland, which really can't be cleaned once oil gets in it.

 

So wheres the proof? An airplane (most likely a P-3 or C-130 in this case) needs a little more than just "permission" to fly. For every hour of flight, they require 3 hours of maintenance. Maybe it was under for its 100-hour? Just one little bolt can hamper plans when it comes to flying. And the crew of those oil skimmers don't sit around waiting for action. They were probably a days ride away at home with their family, combined with the deck loading, preparation, and of course the okay to go ahead.

 

I doubt a P-3 or C-130 would be hard down for a whole month. When I was in P-3's, we could even get the hangar queen flying within a few days as long as we could get or cannibalize parts.

 

I just checked on it. They are two C-130s coming out of the 910th Airlift from Youngstown, Ohio. That, prep time, and down time to be retrofitted both aircraft with the Modular Aerial Spray System (MASS), and the subsequent flight seems to be normal response time for the Coast Guard.

 

In order to get proof I would have to had taken pictures when they got here and again during the time frame I was there. Not to mention I would have to take photos of areas most government agencies don't want pictures taken for security reasons. I have been on vacation for the last few days so I don't know if the equipment has been placed into service yet.

No the plane was not a P-3 or C-130, it is a 747-200 (one of a kind original). General background information can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreen_747_Supertanker In the article it talks about Evergreen exploring the idea of modifying it for oil spill containment. They are not studying it any longer they have one and it has been given FAA approval. It had sat on the tarmac for at least a week and a half, before I talked to anybody about it. That's when I found out the only thing keeping it on the ground is the government paperwork giving it permission to get started. It is ready to go. Update I just talked with a co-worker. They still haven't been given permission to fly the 747.

Honestly I don't know where the Navy crews or boats are stationed. The boats were delivered within a week. It doesn't take six weeks to cut orders for anybody. A week maybe. Two weeks no way. Six weeks, give me a break, their trying to be slow. Once the orders are cut they can be in place within a day.

 

I don't mean to **** in yer Post Toasties folks but the chemical agent they are planning on using is called Corexit 9500. It's the same chemical used with the Exxon debacle in Alaska. Here's the MSDS on it:
http://lmrk.org/corexit_9500_uscueg.539287.pdf

Specifically read item 6 and 11, then scroll down and read what is in it that you and I would be fined if we just throw it out on the ground. The entire thing makes ya wonder if any of these morons have a clue what they are doing. This seems like it's going from bad to worse...and nobody cares that has any power to do anything about it.
But on a good note, I remember well the the oil rig that blew up in the Bay of Campeche. We had heavy ***** of crude on the beaches of Texas for probably 10 years. The State had a program where they would strip the entire coastline every year and haul off the oil blobs to a recycling center and they actually processed the crap they got from the event. Typical State of Texas, they made money from it. So maybe this isn't near as bad as it could have been. At least this oil is a light type and a considerable amount of it is evaporating.

 

Yep, Labnerd. That would be Obama. He calls the shots and has from the beginning, so he says. No wonder the whole thing is a freaking mess.

 

So it hasnt even been modified for it? I understand if it had the systems and is ready to go, but thats a whole 'nother ballgame. Not to mention that aircraft requires a runway at least 10,000 feet long, and then the "Corexit 9500" as Labnerd says, would have to be shipped in. It has a load of 25,000 gallons. Thats 12,500 tons, or about 200 tractor trailers. And it can empty all of that in a matter of seconds. It would require a fleet of about 400-500 semis running around the clock to keep that 747 in the air. Not very practical anymore, is it?

However, that is a neat aircraft, I've never heard of anyone converting a 742 into an aerial tanker!

 

What's scary....we have yet experienced the long lasting affect of the spill. The damage so far is only a fraction of what is yet to come. What's worse....the decission to use chemicals on this spill thinking it will only go away. Sure, there is small benefit....but the oil is only being driven deep below water where it will do equal, if not more, damage to marine life. The idoits want us to believe that if you can't see it on the water.....we were successful in getting rid of the oil.