U.S. rejected Dutch help on containing leaking oil three days after leak

Status
Not open for further replies.
Find it for you??? You've GOT to be kidding, right? We all know that no matter what I find, no matter what I tell you, you're in the corner, waiting to attack me with a bunch of links you will google in 2 minutes of articles written from your friends, the Anti-Obama peeps.

I think the 2 minutes Ive spend writing this post is enough. I'm just trying to explain why people are not taking you seriously. I would think you'd be more effective if you'd pick your battles.

but, hey, to each their own, right?

Let me help you. This is my philosphy and belief. Lower taxes, limited government, capitalism, limited regulation of businesses and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility and accountability. There are a few more but that's pretty much the gist of it. Can you find anything that he did that you think that I might be satisfied with?

Otherwise, you can stop whining about me the next time you feel the urge to do so.
 
Let me help you. This is my philosphy and belief. Lower taxes, limited government, capitalism, limited regulation of businesses and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility and accountability. There are a few more but that's pretty much the gist of it. Can you find anything that he did that you think that I might be satisfied with?

Otherwise, you can stop whining about me the next time you feel the urge to do so.

so any past President that met your philosophy and belief?
 
Dutch oil spill response team on standby for US oil disaster | Radio Netherlands Worldwide





Interesting that former President HW Bush turned them away too for Exxon-Valdez oil spill.

so I see that Dutch's offer was turned down because Dutch method is in conflict with EPA regulation. I don't know if we should let Dutch government dictates what's right or what's not right for us. Do you think we should listen to Dutch?


:lol: I tend to think in this crisis "oil residue" is better than .........OIL
 
Wow... so much hate!

kokonut, I get the feeling that you'd be against Obama no matter what he does. Why don't you think about the other options that he would do? And see if you have a negative comment for that too.

Honestly, at this point, it's becoming obvious that you're just spurting out negativity towards Obama no matter what he does and that's why people here are not taking you seriously.

How about picking your battles?

Don't know about Koko but I can think of something obama could do that I fully support........Resign :lol:
 
Oh man...I always thought Jesus was a blue-eyed white guy with a beard. :shock:

Yeah. I was a bit shocked to learn that in Africa, Jesus is often protrayed as a black guy among African Christians years ago.
 
I heard on the news today that the government wanted it top scientist to help BP stop the oil disaster and BP would not take their help! Some one BP
stood for Betraying People! If the oil stop leaking today it would take 60 years to clean it up! The oil is now 20 miles into the wetland! And people are saying the oil could get as far get Boston Habor !
 
I think you should be focusing on BP CEO and BP Boards for cutting corners, silencing workers, and lobbying for legal blanket protection from lawsuits & investigations... not Obama holding a tar ball at beach

Exactly. He is condoning the actions of the real culprits just to try to make an opportunity to slam the man he is obsessed with...Obama.:lol: What does that tell you? That slamming Obama is is first priority. He could care less about what is ethical and right, or about the real guilty parties being held responsible. Hmmm....do I remember saying something a while back about a lack of character?:hmm:
 
Find it for you??? You've GOT to be kidding, right? We all know that no matter what I find, no matter what I tell you, you're in the corner, waiting to attack me with a bunch of links you will google in 2 minutes of articles written from your friends, the Anti-Obama peeps.

I think the 2 minutes Ive spend writing this post is enough. I'm just trying to explain why people are not taking you seriously. I would think you'd be more effective if you'd pick your battles.

but, hey, to each their own, right?

Well said, Daredevel, well said.
 
The U.S. Government has apparently reconsidered a Dutch offer to supply 4 oil skimmers. These are large arms that are attached to oil tankers that pump oil and water from the surface of the ocean into the tanker. Water pumped into the tanker will settle to the bottom of the tanker and is then pumped back into the ocean to make room for more oil. Each system will collect 5,000 tons of oil each day.

One ton of oil is about 7.3 barrels. 5,000 tons per day is 36,500 barrels per day. 4 skimmers have a capacity of 146,000 barrels per day. That is much greater than the high end estimate of the leak. The skimmers work best in calm water, which is the usual condition this time of year in the gulf.

These systems were developed by the Dutch as a safety system in case of oil spills from either wells or tankers. The Dutch have off shore oil development and also import oil in tankers. Their economy, just like ours, runs on oil. They understand that the production and use of oil has dangers and they wanted to be ready to cope with problems like spills. The Dutch system has been used successfully in Europe.

The Dutch offered to fly their skimmer arm systems to the Gulf 3 days after the oil spill started. The offer was apparently turned down because EPA regulations do not allow water with oil to be pumped back into the ocean. If all the oily water was retained in the tanker, the capacity of the system would be greatly diminished because most of what is pumped into the tanker is sea water.

As of June 8th, BP reported that they have collected 64,650 barrels of oil in the Gulf. That is only a fraction of the amount of oil spilled from the well. That is less than one day’s rated capacity of the Dutch oil skimmers.

Turning down the Dutch skimmers just shows a total lack of leadership in the oil spill
U.S. reconsiders Dutch offer to supply oil skimmers

Yet, 53 days later he decide to accept help from the Dutch, 50 days too late. According to his first logic it was logical not to accept the Dutch's help because the skimmer wasn't 100% efficient and that returning water back into the ocean containing *some* oil residue was unacceptable to him. And instead let the all of the oil float unimpeded to the shorelines.

Man, I'm impressed with this guy. Completely vacuous.
 
U.S. reconsiders Dutch offer to supply oil skimmers

Yet, 53 days later he decide to accept help from the Dutch, 50 days too late. According to his first logic it was logical not to accept the Dutch's help because the skimmer wasn't 100% efficient and that returning water back into the ocean containing *some* oil residue was unacceptable to him. And instead let the all of the oil float unimpeded to the shorelines.

Man, I'm impressed with this guy. Completely vacuous.

All I see in the article are a bunch of "would have, should have, could haves" from an armchair quarterback that loves to second guess without ever having been in the position of actually having to put their decision on the line. Much like yourself, kokonut.
 
All I see in the article are a bunch of "would have, should have, could haves" from an armchair quarterback that loves to second guess without ever having been in the position of actually having to put their decision on the line. Much like yourself, kokonut.

Yup, that's just sad. :lol:
 
Sighhhh. I don't people are truly grasping the enormity of the leak. What good will skimming do if the wellhead is still gushing 120,000 barrels a day? Why not call in the descendants of the Spanish Armada crew to get their opinion and advice? We are in a no-win situation and I think Obama knows that.
 
Judge favored by BP has financial ties to oil industry
Houston, Texas (CNN) -- The judge that BP wants to hear an estimated 200 lawsuits over the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster gets tens of thousands of dollars a year in oil royalties and is paid travel expenses to industry conferences, financial disclosure forms show.

Lawyers who practice before U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes say he's tough but fair, and a CNN review of his cases found he ruled in favor of oil companies only slightly more often than he ruled against them. But his connections to the industry have raised eyebrows at a time when BP is under fire for the worst oil spill in U.S. history.

Federal financial disclosure forms obtained by CNN show that since 2003, Hughes has consistently been paid annual fees from the oil and gas industry, mostly in the form of lease payments for wells and mineral rights on land he owns. None of the payments comes from BP, but his holdings include mutual funds that draw income from Anadarko Petroleum, a minority owner in the well now pouring up to 2.5 million gallons a day into the Gulf.

In some cases, the amounts are significant. In others, the payments are relatively small.

Oil giant ConocoPhillips paid him between $50,000 and $100,000 in 2008, the last year in which records are publicly available. In a note attached to the 2008 form, Hughes said he expected the amounts to be relatively similar for 2009. He gets smaller amounts from smaller producers such as Sun Oil, Everest Oil and Wagner Oil, which pay for the right to drill oil and gas from lands he owns.

The federal disclosure form does not require exact amounts, only estimates and approximate figures.

A legal expert on ethics, Indiana University professor Charles Geyh, told CNN that judges with financial ties to the oil industry should make their connections crystal clear.

"When you take it together, is there a concern that a reasonable person might say, 'Look-it, he's not a judge that happens to be dabbling -- he's in effect a participant in the industry he's trying to judge,' " Geyh said.

Hughes has been sitting on the federal bench in Houston since the mid-1980s, and BP has asked that he supervise all of the estimated 200 cases filed against it since the April sinking of the offshore drill rig Deepwater Horizon. The sinking left 11 workers dead and uncorked a gusher that has been fouling the Gulf for more than eight weeks.

In court filings in early May, BP requested Hughes be assigned to preside over the spill lawsuits because he already was assigned to one of the first cases, a lawsuit filed on behalf of Vietnamese-American fishermen from Louisiana. According to an e-mail sent to CNN, BP said the judge "is an appropriate choice to provide oversight of these cases."

The Department of Justice has asked that the suits be consolidated in New Orleans, Louisiana, the closest federal court to the spill. The sinking took place in the waters off southeastern Louisiana, about 40 miles off the mouth of the Mississippi River.

BP would not comment on Hughes' financial disclosures. But the judge has held two recent meetings in Houston to discuss possible ethics concerns, a lawyer who attended those meetings told CNN.

"In both of those hearings, the questions have been raised about whether or not he should preside over these cases or whether there will be a conflict," Mark Lanier, a prominent Houston plaintiff attorney, told CNN. "In the second one, the judge explained he had listed online all of his financial disclosure information, so people would be able to look at and probe."

One particular case over which Hughes presided in 2009 is raising questions.

In 2008, Hughes listed royalty payments from about 10 wells leased to Devon Energy, an Oklahoma City-based oil and gas company. The amounts were relatively small -- under $15,000, according to his disclosure form -- and a source told CNN the payments were for a collection of nine or 10 wells scattered in land across two or three states.

In May of 2009, Hughes issued a favorable decision for Devon Energy in a dispute with its insurance company. According to an attorney for the insurance firm, the total amount was $3.9 million. Court records show that Hughes did not disclose his royalty payments from Devon at any point during the proceedings.

No one claims the judge has violated the federal code of judicial ethics, but Geyh says appearances matter.

"I think the best practice that is out there, and I think what judges across the country are encouraged to do, is that if there is any doubt, put some sunshine on the problem," he said. "Turn your cards face up, to mix metaphors, and make it clear to the parties what your potential interests are."

Hughes also travels widely and speaks to meetings held by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, including one held in early June in the Canadian city of Calgary and an earlier conference in Cape Town, South Africa.

He's the association's distinguished lecturer on ethics, having delivered 10 speeches to the trade group in the past three years.

The association doesn't pay him a fee but does supply his travel, accommodation and expenses, said Larry Nation, a spokesman for the trade group.

Federal judges rarely respond to requests for comment from journalists. But Hughes told CNN in an e-mail that while he couldn't speak to past or present cases, he did quote Thomas Jefferson: "Let facts be submitted to a candid world," he wrote.

Lawyers who know him call Hughes a tough but fair judge and say the reference is to a desire for transparency on his part. But attorneys for environmental advocacy groups say that for BP to request Hughes be assigned to the spill lawsuits is "outrageous and unseemly."

CNN examined three years of Hughes' rulings on oil and gas cases, finding he ruled in favor of oil companies only slightly more often than ruling against them. As for other federal judges, a recent survey showed more than 20 federal judges across the Gulf states have a financial interest in oil and gas companies.

Several of them have recused themselves from presiding over cases related to the Gulf spill.
 
Kevin Costner blasts Big Oil 'bureaucratic maze'
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A company Kevin Costner founded worked for 17 years on a technological innovation now being used to help clean up the Gulf oil spill -- and it took almost as long to get Big Oil to pay any attention.

"The whole world is watching as America fumbles its way through the greatest environmental disaster in history," Costner told the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship at a hearing Thursday in Washington. "I believe there are other small companies out there in the private sector just like us. You should know that negotiating your way through the bureaucratic maze that currently exists is like trying to play a video game that nobody can master."

BP said Monday that it has ordered 32 of the 4,000-pound machines that Ocean Therapy Solutions, a company Costner funds, invented to separate oil from water. But getting the machine on BP's radar took a Herculean effort -- even for a rich, high-profile movie star like Costner.

Fellow witness Heather Baird testified about just how impossible that bureaucratic video game can be. Baird is the vice president of communications for Microsorb Environmental Products, a Massachusetts company that uses non-toxic, oil-eating microbes to clean up spills.

BP (BP) has used Microsorb on past spills, and the technology is on the Environmental Protection Agency's approved product list for emergencies like this one. But Microsorb can't get its little microbes into the Gulf of Mexico. The company's executives have spent thousands of dollars traveling to the Gulf, pitching every BP executive and official they can reach on the efficacy and safety of their product.

"We have ceased all other business in an attempt to do what we know is the right thing to do," said Baird. "At each one of these touch points we were told that our technology was needed and should be deployed."

But "BP holds the checkbook," and until Microsorb manages to hack through to the executive with the ability to green-light the project, its oil-eating organisms will remain sidelined.

Bureaucratic quagmire
Individuals and businesses with technologies that could help the clean-up effort start by submitting their proposal to either the government or BP. But what happens next is a "bureaucratic quagmire," in the words of Senator Olympia Snowe, R-Maine. There's currently no uniform process for evaluating and approving good ideas.

Rear Admiral Ronald Rabago of the U.S. Coast Guard testified that BP recently turned over the suggestions it has been collecting. The Coast Guard is now going through those thousands of proposals.

The EPA and the Coast Guard are also screening proposals coming in through their own, independent channels. But the process isn't working so well: Of the 1,900 submissions the Coast Guard has received, only one proposal has made it to the final level of screening. None have actually been deployed.

The EPA doesn't know if any of the ideas that came through its channel are actually in use, according to Paul Anastas, the agency's assistant administrator of research and development. After screening the proposals, the EPA forwards the ideas to other agencies that could implement them -- then never tracks what happens next.

"Businesses with alternative technologies are confronted with needless roadblocks resulting from a dysfunctional process," Snowe said. She wants the government to develop a fast-track, unified review process.

Lawmakers are eager to see their homegrown tech companies get a piece of the billions being spent to fight the spill. The government should "involve local Louisiana small businesses in the clean-up effort as a way of mitigating the economic hit they are clearly taking," said Senator David Vitter, R.-La.

Not all businesses have the backing of Kevin Costner, after all. Costner said he spent "well over a million dollars" over the past month pushing his technology before BP signed on.

The tragedy of the spill is being magnified by the time wasted in responding to it. In an emotional plea, Costner said he would recommend, demand and beg policymakers and the oil industry to keep the freeze on new U.S. offshore deepwater drilling in place until viable catastrophe plans are in place.

"Before you lift the moratorium, before you do that, please have clean-up technology in place, or at least on the way in a specific time, that is designed to meet and match with full force the worst-case scenario that can be presented to us," he said.

Man, I'm impressed with this BP. Completely comical. Now you know what is the culprit of delay
 
Sighhhh. I don't people are truly grasping the enormity of the leak. What good will skimming do if the wellhead is still gushing 120,000 barrels a day? Why not call in the descendants of the Spanish Armada crew to get their opinion and advice? We are in a no-win situation and I think Obama knows that.


The U.S. Government has apparently reconsidered a Dutch offer to supply 4 oil skimmers. These are large arms that are attached to oil tankers that pump oil and water from the surface of the ocean into the tanker. Water pumped into the tanker will settle to the bottom of the tanker and is then pumped back into the ocean to make room for more oil. Each system will collect 5,000 tons of oil each day.

One ton of oil is about 7.3 barrels. 5,000 tons per day is 36,500 barrels per day. 4 skimmers have a capacity of 146,000 barrels per day. That is much greater than the high end estimate of the leak. The skimmers work best in calm water, which is the usual condition this time of year in the gulf.

Funny how the U.S. Government suddenly decided to get 4 oil skimmers. The magnitude on the size of the oil spread could've been reduced substantially had they done this after the 1st week and not after the 2nd month. And therby reduce potential impact to the ecosystem and shoreline. Though not a guarantee but it's certainly way better than deciding to do nothing.
 
Funny how the U.S. Government suddenly decided to get 4 oil skimmers. The magnitude on the size of the oil spread could've been reduced substantially had they done this after the 1st week and not after the 2nd month. And therby reduce potential impact to the ecosystem and shoreline. Though not a guarantee but it's certainly way better than deciding to do nothing.

with the amount it's spewing... it's not going to make a significant difference on reducing the size of the oil spread. get real.
 
Talked to pops yesterday (aka darkdad). He's been a physicist in the petroleum industry for over 30 years. He says there's no good technical reason why the estimates on the oil leak should vary so much. He also has no idea why skimmers weren't brought in to suck up the oil. If that had happened sooner, most of the ecological disaster could have been averted. An old friend from Aramco told him about an oil leak in the Persian Gulf that was worse than even this one and they managed to get something like 95% of the oil out of the water and sell it without creating ecological havoc. Looks like we missed the boat on that one (pun intended).
 
with the amount it's spewing... it's not going to make a significant difference on reducing the size of the oil spread. get real.
Maybe not so much now, but earlier on, it could have made a huge difference. That's the point. However, it sounds like it would still be wise to use them since they're apparently capable of picking up more oil than is currently leaking out.
 
Talked to pops yesterday (aka darkdad). He's been a physicist in the petroleum industry for over 30 years. He says there's no good technical reason why the estimates on the oil leak should vary so much. He also has no idea why skimmers weren't brought in to suck up the oil. If that had happened sooner, most of the ecological disaster could have been averted.
so why didn't BP get the skimmers in quickly?

An old friend from Aramco told him about an oil leak in the Persian Gulf that was worse than even this one and they managed to get something like 95% of the oil out of the water and sell it without creating ecological havoc. Looks like we missed the boat on that one (pun intended).

few questions -
1. what was the process used for that?
2. oil leak worse than this? in terms of amount released to ocean or what?
3. how long did it take them to clean it up?
4. in the end - what was the result of environmental & economical damage?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top