Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted)

tags: , , , , , , , , ,

There was another oilspill in the Gulf of Mexico in 1979 — and the same corporate players involved with that spill are there now! This 1979 oilspill WAS the worst oilspill in history, until now, of course. Despite corporate lies .. erm, claims that the technology has advanced since 1979, the same identical strategies are being used now to stop this oilspill. How long did it take to stop this oil leak? NINE MONTHS!! Are we prepared to wait NINE MONTHS for this oilspill to be stopped? Can the environment — the ecosystem, the endangered animals, birds and fishes — wait NINE MONTHS? Can the taxpayers afford to pay to clean up this mess while BP and their buttbuddies get even richer??

Comments

  1. #1 Dunc
    June 4, 2010

    Are we prepared to wait NINE MONTHS for this oilspill to be stopped?

    Well, unless the current attempt works, it doesn’t matter a damn what anybody is prepared to accept. You might as well ask if we’re prepared to wait NINE MONTHS for a woman to have a baby. Some problems have no optimal solutions, no matter what TV and movies would have you believe. Reality can be nasty like that.

  2. #2 jeffyrose
    June 4, 2010

    I cannot believe they could not fix this problem for more than a month, just think about millions of people and animals got affected by this, I got this in email and if you would like to claim for the compensation and get money the best place is oil spill claim center http://bit.ly/8Xj11D please send this to your friends and family who could also benefit.

  3. #3 "GrrlScientist"
    June 4, 2010

    Dunc: my information may be outdated, but the last time i checked, a pregnancy does not result in destruction of the environment, deaths of millions of animals, the loss of an ecosystem and the loss of thousands of jobs. oh, wait, i stand corrected: those pregnancies that produced the BP corporate CEOs and their money-grubbing buttbuddies accomplished those goals, but most pregnancies do not.

  4. #4 Fred Magyar
    June 4, 2010

    Shoulda listened to President Carter and kept those solar panels on the White House. Shoulda developed electrified rail for mass transport. Shoulda kept the 55 mph speed limit to conserve fuel. Shoulda taxed the hell out of gasoline to fund research into renewable energy. Shoulda stopped the expansion of suburbia. Etc..Etc.. Too late, we are FUBAR!

    The population is in ecological overshoot already. We are undergoing a mass species extinction, climate change and peak oil and peak resources such as NPK (fertilizer) are already biting us hard in the ass.

    It’s too late to complain about what’s happening in the Gulf. Drill Baby Drill!

    Oh yeah and there are no underwater hydrocarbon plumes in the Gulf, Tony Hayward, CEO of BP said so on national TV, so it must be true!

    Put a yellow ribbon on your SUV…la! la! la!

  5. #5 Dunc
    June 4, 2010

    I realise I may be verging on mansplaination here (and that’s really not my intention, so sorry in advance), but the outcomes of an event have no bearing on the availability of solutions. My point was simply that whether we’re prepared to accept it taking that long doesn’t change the fact that it will take as long as it takes. Now, there’s a perfectly reasonable argument that we shouldn’t do things which carry risks of outcomes that we’re not prepared to accept, but it’s a bit late for that. The situation is what it is, and “solutions” will take as long as they take. Reality does not care whether we’re prepared to accept it or not. There are no magic wands. The pooch is screwed already. The world is not obliged to provide a way to achieve the outcomes we want. Some problems have no solutions.

    Change my example to the impossibility of accelerating the decay of high-level radioactive waste if you feel it’s more appropriate – I just went with the pregnancy example because the expression “nine women can’t have a baby in one month” is a classic and well-known example of the fact that some tasks cannot be sped up by throwing more resource at them.

  6. #6 Alex Besogonov
    June 4, 2010

    “Change my example to the impossibility of accelerating the decay of high-level radioactive waste if you feel it’s more appropriate”

    But it’s possible. Just irradiate it with good enough neutron flux.

  7. #7 Just ME in T
    June 5, 2010

    There is no certainty in anything being attempted, as this entire incident is the first, (one can only pray it will be the last!) of its type in the world.

    Is it any wonder that there is speculation that BP has no intentions of stopping this spewing mass of oil and gas? If they did manage to stop it, that would be the end of their money making and profits from that particular well.

    There is also much speculation (following the almighty money trail) that Nalco, the company manufacturing COREXIT – the dispersant being sprayed more than liberally on the oil spill, has financial ties to BP.
    http://just-me-in-t.blogspot.com/2010/06/is-this-death-to-gulf-state-shores.html

  8. #8 JustBob
    June 5, 2010

    To what extent are the people of the affected states responsible for the loss of their natural birthright?

  9. #9 Laurella Desborough
    June 5, 2010

    The oil disaster in the Gulf will likely produce consequences that will persist for decades in terms of the marine life and the wildlife that use the wetlands and the gulf waters. I just hope that the people are busy collecting the birds and de-oiling them as fast as possible and holding them in secure areas until more oil is cleaned up. The birds cannot be released to go back into oily waters…not until more oil is removed from the surface at least..and then, what are these birds going to find to eat, since the fishes will be dead.
    This oil spill has killed people, the local fishing industry, and millions of birds and animals and sea life. And to think it might have been prevented if BP had been REQUIRED to install the $50 million dollar safety device, instead of getting a waiver from the government oversight agency…Congress needs to fire the bunch of them and put some STIFF regulations in place NOW. When Brazil and other countries can manage to require appropriate safety devices, what is wrong with the USA?????

  10. #10 Justbob
    June 10, 2010

    Don’t underwrite the enablers.

  11. #11 TxRancher
    July 15, 2010

    I remember this incident & the news media tried to blame TX Gov. Bill Clements (Rep.) because he founded SEDCO in 1947. The good news IMHO is that the GOM & all the seas’ living creatures didn’t expire in 1979. This current oil spill is a tragedy, but everyone should just take a breath & understand it’s NOT the end of the world.

    Here’s some facts Rachel Maddow doesn’t point out. Oil & gas producing companies are in business to make money for stockholders. So if you are investing in a mutual fund, it is probably buying shares in 1 or more oil & gas companies’ stocks & you want your portfolio to grow. Therefore, you are profiting with these evil companies that are “making themselves the most profitable industry the universe has ever seen & I’m not exaggerating”.

    Also, these oil & gas companies don’t develop technologies for things that happen every 31 years unless they are required to by federal regulations. Our federal government has dropped the ball again & failed to protect our natural resources while collecting trillions of dollars from the sale of GOM leases from the industry currently being made into some evil empire.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.