If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Bloomberg)   BP finally ends oil spill - Just kidding, actually they've given up   (bloomberg.com) divider line 707
    More: News  
•       •       •

40394 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Jun 2010 at 5:48 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



707 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-06-01 07:22:28 PM  
Gawdzila: I wonder how the environmental fallout will affect people's view of alternative energy?
The Gulf is a well-used body of water that borders almost the entire southern edge of the contiguous 48, and is a big deal for tourism in Florida, and Texas, and Louisiana, and incredibly important ecosystems like the Everglades. When it was up in Alaska most people could just ignore the effects of the spill (which continue, even today) and the fact that Exxon didn't do or pay even half of what they were supposed to. Now, with globs of oil coating the beaches and brackish wetlands, dead fish and fishing industry, and excessively lubricated birds everywhere, ignoring it is going to be difficult.

If any good at all comes from this, it may just be a real public acknowledgment of the need to get away from using petroleum.


You are thinking exactly how they want you to think! Didn't you hear? The enviro-terrorists did this! Rush Limbaugh said so, therefore it must be true!

(I agree with you)
 
2010-06-01 07:22:33 PM  
AdolfOliverPanties: So unabated oil flow into the gulf for the next two months or so until the relief wells are completed.

Obama is so farked. What he SHOULD do is seize BP. Put the company into governmental receivership. But if he does, then the cries of SOCIALISZMZOMGMUSLIMEATYOURCHILDRENALLPRAISETOALLAH will be coming in even greater volume.


Isn't the well in international waters? How can he seize it? Oh wait, that International Waters safe-zone only applies to Israel. Carry on and sieze it well.
 
2010-06-01 07:23:54 PM  
farm5.static.flickr.com

That's a big pipe cutter. Whatcha doin' with that pipe cutter, BP?
 
2010-06-01 07:24:26 PM  
Dano33: Those gulf states have been in bed with oil companies for a long time. Well, this is part of the deal. Now you dopes know why other states don't want to allow drilling.

Do you drive a car?
 
2010-06-01 07:24:31 PM  
SlashW: Green Discharge: "I'll be waiting here on the sidelines with my centrifuge machine in the mean time!"

/hot link

What happened to Costner's oil separating devices they were moving into the gulf? I read about it once, something he came across while filming that movie and was so impressed he bought the company? Anyone know any details about that?


May 20th (11 days ago)

"Mr. Costner appeared in New Orleans last week to demonstrate a $24 million oil extraction device he is pitching to BP and Coast Guard officials. Costner says the device will clean oil from the water at a rate of 97 percent. BP Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles said Wednesday that his team will test the device next week."

Link for more details (new window)
 
2010-06-01 07:25:45 PM  
Lt. Cheese Weasel: Dano33: Those gulf states have been in bed with oil companies for a long time. Well, this is part of the deal. Now you dopes know why other states don't want to allow drilling.

Do you drive a car?


If I crash my car will it destroy an ecosystem? Just because it's there doesn't mean we should endanger the whole southern coast to get it. There is more oil elsewhere.
 
2010-06-01 07:25:47 PM  
Cyclometh: Yeah, throw them in jail and lose the key. But don't expect that to solve anything or even avert a future crisis of the same type. This is a crime against nature and humanity, and I'm at a loss as to what you could do to get "justice".

Thank you.
 
2010-06-01 07:25:49 PM  
Iyeck: As long as oil companies keep paying off governments, we will never see alternative energy until there isn't a profit to be made.

I dunno, I'm still hopeful. Other places like Germany have bought into renewables big time, and I'm sure that there are oil companies trying to lubricate their public officials, too. Also, solar energy tech is coming along so quickly that they believe it can reach price parity in about 5 years. That will be interesting.
 
2010-06-01 07:26:46 PM  
CrispFlows: SlashW: Green Discharge: "I'll be waiting here on the sidelines with my centrifuge machine in the mean time!"

/hot link

What happened to Costner's oil separating devices they were moving into the gulf? I read about it once, something he came across while filming that movie and was so impressed he bought the company? Anyone know any details about that?

May 20th (11 days ago)

"Mr. Costner appeared in New Orleans last week to demonstrate a $24 million oil extraction device he is pitching to BP and Coast Guard officials. Costner says the device will clean oil from the water at a rate of 97 percent. BP Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles said Wednesday that his team will test the device next week."

Link for more details (new window)


Well, damn. If that thing does even HALF as well as he claims, he'll be a farking hero.

And richer than he is now.
 
2010-06-01 07:27:09 PM  
queezyweezel: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Dano33: Those gulf states have been in bed with oil companies for a long time. Well, this is part of the deal. Now you dopes know why other states don't want to allow drilling.

Do you drive a car?

If I crash my car will it destroy an ecosystem? Just because it's there doesn't mean we should endanger the whole southern coast to get it. There is more oil elsewhere.


The point pretty much sailed over your head like a Vlad Guererro line drive.
 
2010-06-01 07:27:47 PM  
BlippityBleep: They should no longer be a functioning business.

In that case, I ask you to respond to the point I made in my 2010-06-01 06:02:09 PM post: the question is, how do you want a company that has farked up to act in the aftermath of that farkup? Do you want them to go all Great Benefits (from the move, The Rainmaker), liquidate their holdings, give their execs and creditors huge payouts, and then move to a country without extradition treaties - and leave us holding the bag?

Or would you rather they spend billions trying to fix their mess? BP has so far spent a billion dollars - and the end is nowhere in sight.

Which type of corporate behavior do you want, and how will you make that happen? I'm asking you, don't you think that you're just encouraging the former behavior? If you say, "hey BP, hurry up and stop this leak so that we can seize all your assets and put you out of business" has it occurred to you that most of the engineers working this problem will quit right now and go work on their resumes instead? Has it occurred to you that any overseas banks, from which the billions of dollars BP is spending are coming, will freeze their accounts right now?

Does any of that matter to you? Isn't it obvious that the best course of action is to say, "BP is going to pay in full for the damage" because THAT is an incentive to stop the leak as quickly as possible.

Or are you capable of thinking more than a week ahead?
 
2010-06-01 07:29:01 PM  
joeflood: Misinterpretation of what's really happening. BP has given up on the top kill procedure to plug the well, and attaching another blow out preventer are also off the table. They're proceeding with the top hat approach. Business media apparently doesn't understand the petroleum industry.

Why anyone thinks they would after their performance during the dot-com era is a total mystery to me.

Welcome to 1999, chump.
 
2010-06-01 07:29:12 PM  
Lt. Cheese Weasel: queezyweezel: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Dano33: Those gulf states have been in bed with oil companies for a long time. Well, this is part of the deal. Now you dopes know why other states don't want to allow drilling.

Do you drive a car?

If I crash my car will it destroy an ecosystem? Just because it's there doesn't mean we should endanger the whole southern coast to get it. There is more oil elsewhere.

The point pretty much sailed over your head like a Vlad Guererro line drive.


No, I got it, but just because we need oil, doesn't mean we should be drilling off the coast.
 
2010-06-01 07:30:54 PM  
Tofu: Oh, I'm sure BP will argue that they can't pay or they shouldn't pay. I'm still telling you that we'll get more out of them than if we seize them.

I don't think BP should be seized. But I don't think the US we'll be able to get much out of them either, if the ExxonValdez disaster is any indication.
 
2010-06-01 07:33:26 PM  
Lt. Cheese Weasel: saintstryfe: The company's documents when they applied to do this assured they had the technology to fix any problem that could happen at that depth.

They lied.

The company is fully liable.

Further more, I think this makes a really good case for CEO's to be criminally responsible for their company's misdeeds when they basically paralyze economies.

Those machines are the product of human thinking, which is proven all the time to be flawed.


That's a pawn off. Yes, no system can ever be perfect. But they lied to us as a people, promising us they could handle it. They can't. They should pay.
 
2010-06-01 07:34:07 PM  
mrbach: This could happen on any drilling rig, so why is everybody so freaked at BP? People vote for Republicans who then allow oil business to operate with little regulation. They succeed in winning this by voting against gay rights and abortion rights and wrapping it in Jesus. Voila! There you go.

You didn't think they really care about gay rights or who gets an abortion do you? They just want less regulation on things that make pots of money. When is the last time you saw a Republican run on a deregulated oil industry platform? Booooooring. Who can you hate there?

Now people are talking about "taking over" BP? Oh, so socialism is OK as a remedy, but government regulation to protect society is some kind of Marxism?

There are too many stupid people on this planet.

/too many I say
//you should have to write a test to vote.
///you have to be qualified to drive, why not to decide how a country is run????
////I need more slashies


The really twisted tragedy in this is that this fiasco largely affects regions of the country that constitute a solid GOP voting bloc. I find it utterly astonishing that if you read Foxnews, many of the stories are critical of Obama's lack of action regarding the oil spill.

It's amazing how these people have no cognitive dissonance over the fact that they:

1. Support politicians who encourage de-regulation.

2. Believe it is the government's responsibility to bail out the country when de-regulation results in a gangbang train being run on the environment. In other words, FIX THE PROBLEM BECAUSE IT'S YOUR JOB, BUT DON'T TAKE ANY STEPS TO PREVENT THE PROBLEM BECAUSE THAT'S SOCIALISM!!! DRILL BABY DRILL!!!

Part of me thinks these parts of the country are getting their logical comeuppance. It's just a shame that aquatic wildlife are being killed in the process.
 
2010-06-01 07:34:37 PM  
globalwarmingpraiser: HeartBurnKid: DiamondDave: HeartBurnKid: ne2d: AdolfOliverPanties: What he SHOULD do is seize BP. Put the company into governmental receivership.

What the hell would that accomplish?

They could liquidate BP's assets and use the proceeds to pay for the cleanup.

Why would you think BP isn't going to have to pay for a cleanup and damages?

And if the gubmint take over, who's going to clean it up? Do you think Obama has some plan waiting in the wings that BP isn't allowing him to implement?

looking at it from strictly an "evil corporation" standpoint BP is losing billions of dollars on this hole in the ocean floor. Don't you think it's in their best interest to plug it up, ASAP?

No, it's not. Their best interest is to plug it in such a way that they can rebuild their rig later (and even if that's not technically their best interest anymore, they might be following the fallacy of sunk costs here), and at a minimum of cost. We need to stop the damn thing by any means necessary, yesterday.

And as for BP paying for it, they've already been trying to pass the buck around, and they're going to keep doing so. This is going to be litigated for years.

1) they can't rebuild the rig, as the rig was a ship that is now sitting on the ocean floor.


And they couldn't put a new ship out there because...?

2) This well cannot be used. The pipe is damaged.

Wasn't the whole point of this morning's exercise to give the pipe a clean cut?

Consider this whole fix the well /capture the oil conspiracy crap has been debunked for many times, please quit spewing it.

What conspiracy? It's just profit motive.
 
2010-06-01 07:35:00 PM  
I'm sure it's been said before, but they're not giving up. They're just giving up on sealing the BOP. Their only plan right now is to use the LMRP to recollect as much oil as they can. Hopefully they figured it out right this time or we're really farked until August.
 
2010-06-01 07:36:08 PM  
Lt. Cheese Weasel: queezyweezel: xaveth: Can't we all just stop blaming Obama and blame Palin?!? She's the one who is letting this happen.

Who signed the agreements extending offshore drilling in the Gulf? Barry Hussein..

So? Who cares? If not him, then Bush, or Clinton, or Bush, or Carter or Nixon.....does it FARKING MATTER? WE HAVE FAILED. WE.


Interesting. You missed one.
 
2010-06-01 07:36:44 PM  
queezyweezel: Lt. Cheese Weasel: queezyweezel: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Dano33: Those gulf states have been in bed with oil companies for a long time. Well, this is part of the deal. Now you dopes know why other states don't want to allow drilling.

Do you drive a car?

If I crash my car will it destroy an ecosystem? Just because it's there doesn't mean we should endanger the whole southern coast to get it. There is more oil elsewhere.

The point pretty much sailed over your head like a Vlad Guererro line drive.

No, I got it, but just because we need oil, doesn't mean we should be drilling off the coast.


OK, then, what? Because like it or not, this is a petroleum driven global economy. And the majority of it lies in the hands of people who really don't like us all that much and want to live in the 12th century again.

Now, I'm not in as great of shape as I used to be, and I could pedal a bike 8 miles to work every day, but consider on a larger scale. It is not possible to move this country and it dependence upon oil and gas to something else without an upheaval on a scale that will dwarf the smell of Lindsay Lohans snatch. Is this our fate?
 
2010-06-01 07:38:01 PM  
farm4.static.flickr.com
 
2010-06-01 07:38:44 PM  
maachubo: Lt. Cheese Weasel: queezyweezel: xaveth: Can't we all just stop blaming Obama and blame Palin?!? She's the one who is letting this happen.

Who signed the agreements extending offshore drilling in the Gulf? Barry Hussein..

So? Who cares? If not him, then Bush, or Clinton, or Bush, or Carter or Nixon.....does it FARKING MATTER? WE HAVE FAILED. WE.

Interesting. You missed one.


Reagan gets no pass....don't be such a twit. You know what I was saying.
 
2010-06-01 07:40:12 PM  
HeartBurnKid: 1) they can't rebuild the rig, as the rig was a ship that is now sitting on the ocean floor.

And they couldn't put a new ship out there because...?

2) This well cannot be used. The pipe is damaged.

Wasn't the whole point of this morning's exercise to give the pipe a clean cut?

Consider this whole fix the well /capture the oil conspiracy crap has been debunked for many times, please quit spewing it.

What conspiracy? It's just profit motive.


I think all this confusion is over the term "well". Sealing off this well is their most profitable motive. Why? Because they can still get the oil in the deposit by drilling a new, nonbroken well. "Permanently shutting the well" does NOT permanently shut off this oil deposit.

This well is farked. It's not just the bent pipe that's screwed up-- things are screwed up several miles underground as well.

BP's most profitable option is to seal this one off and then dig a new hole that isn't broken ten different ways. Nobody's trying to save this well.
 
2010-06-01 07:40:35 PM  
saintstryfe: Lt. Cheese Weasel: saintstryfe: The company's documents when they applied to do this assured they had the technology to fix any problem that could happen at that depth.

They lied.

The company is fully liable.

Further more, I think this makes a really good case for CEO's to be criminally responsible for their company's misdeeds when they basically paralyze economies.

Those machines are the product of human thinking, which is proven all the time to be flawed.

That's a pawn off. Yes, no system can ever be perfect. But they lied to us as a people, promising us they could handle it. They can't. They should pay.


Great. Enjoy your retribution, as shallow as it will be.
It changes NOTHING.
 
2010-06-01 07:41:43 PM  
Lt. Cheese Weasel: queezyweezel: Lt. Cheese Weasel: queezyweezel: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Dano33: Those gulf states have been in bed with oil companies for a long time. Well, this is part of the deal. Now you dopes know why other states don't want to allow drilling.

Do you drive a car?

If I crash my car will it destroy an ecosystem? Just because it's there doesn't mean we should endanger the whole southern coast to get it. There is more oil elsewhere.

The point pretty much sailed over your head like a Vlad Guererro line drive.

No, I got it, but just because we need oil, doesn't mean we should be drilling off the coast.

OK, then, what? Because like it or not, this is a petroleum driven global economy. And the majority of it lies in the hands of people who really don't like us all that much and want to live in the 12th century again.

Now, I'm not in as great of shape as I used to be, and I could pedal a bike 8 miles to work every day, but consider on a larger scale. It is not possible to move this country and it dependence upon oil and gas to something else without an upheaval on a scale that will dwarf the smell of Lindsay Lohans snatch. Is this our fate?


I'm ok with paying the Arab community for their oil. Personally $5 a gallon gas isn't a huge deal to me after living in the UK for a while where it was about $8 gal.
Where do we go from here? nuclear, natural Gas, geothermal and solar are all on the table. Wind energy as well.
We'll probably still be on fossil fuels at the end of my lifetime, but if we can limit our consumption, supply and demand should help even it out a bit..
 
2010-06-01 07:42:03 PM  
globalwarmingpraiser: Ok this is highly unconfirmed.....but it is coming from the DD3. The Relief well is supposedly over halfway done. Bp isn't revising completion date yet, but this are going very well there.

"Halfway" in terms of distance or time? I read something earlier that as they get deeper, the rocks are harder so the rate of progress will slow down.
 
2010-06-01 07:42:24 PM  
just pretend I post a pic of that far side comic where the forest animals put a drain pipe into a dude's living room, dumping sludge into it...

//hot like the pizza I just ate
//thats the most appropriate form of punishment for these BP execs, dumping all the oil they collect into their mansions and condos
 
2010-06-01 07:43:38 PM  
Do we really need to be driving big ass trucks and SUVs? How does the UK deal with $8gal gas? They drive more efficient vehicles.
 
2010-06-01 07:43:54 PM  
zahadum party planner: just pretend I post a pic of that far side comic where the forest animals put a drain pipe into a dude's living room, dumping sludge into it...

//hot like the pizza I just ate
//thats the most appropriate form of punishment for these BP execs, dumping all the oil they collect into their mansions and condos


www.jmorganmarketing.com
 
2010-06-01 07:45:14 PM  
No, it hasn't been confirmed. Nothing at the official response site (new window) says they've stopped trying to stop the oil flow by whatever means they can.

http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/

Like snopes, only better.
 
2010-06-01 07:45:59 PM  
Holy crap, the giant claw just tore open the seabed and now oil is coming out of at least 5 seams. shiat!
 
2010-06-01 07:46:55 PM  
BP rover feed (new window)

They've positioned the snips and may be cutting any minute now.
 
2010-06-01 07:47:22 PM  
Ivo Shandor: globalwarmingpraiser: Ok this is highly unconfirmed.....but it is coming from the DD3. The Relief well is supposedly over halfway done. Bp isn't revising completion date yet, but this are going very well there.

"Halfway" in terms of distance or time? I read something earlier that as they get deeper, the rocks are harder so the rate of progress will slow down.


Obvious stupid question, how much of the resevoir pressure will they relieve with a slant into it? No one knows.
 
2010-06-01 07:47:41 PM  
queezyweezel: Do we really need to be driving big ass trucks and SUVs? How does the UK deal with $8gal gas? They drive more efficient vehicles.

UK Square Miles: 80,823
US Square Miles: 3.79 million

Longer distances = Longer haul, thus requiring more loads to even out the transport costs.

As for personal ownership of SUVs and 3 ton trucks, yeah - that's not quite a smart decision.
 
2010-06-01 07:47:41 PM  
derp (new window)
 
2010-06-01 07:47:48 PM  
raygundan: HeartBurnKid: 1) they can't rebuild the rig, as the rig was a ship that is now sitting on the ocean floor.

And they couldn't put a new ship out there because...?

2) This well cannot be used. The pipe is damaged.

Wasn't the whole point of this morning's exercise to give the pipe a clean cut?

Consider this whole fix the well /capture the oil conspiracy crap has been debunked for many times, please quit spewing it.

What conspiracy? It's just profit motive.

I think all this confusion is over the term "well". Sealing off this well is their most profitable motive. Why? Because they can still get the oil in the deposit by drilling a new, nonbroken well. "Permanently shutting the well" does NOT permanently shut off this oil deposit.

This well is farked. It's not just the bent pipe that's screwed up-- things are screwed up several miles underground as well.

BP's most profitable option is to seal this one off and then dig a new hole that isn't broken ten different ways. Nobody's trying to save this well.


Yes, I know that shutting off the well doesn't shut off the deposit, but it does make the deposit a lot harder to get to. Especially when the future of any new drilling permits, especially in the gulf and especially especially for BP, is doubtful. Your other points are valid, though, and I can only hope the folks at BP are thinking rationally enough to have approached it from that point of view. Unfortunately, people in a crisis situation are rarely rational.
 
2010-06-01 07:48:34 PM  
queezyweezel: Holy crap, the giant claw just tore open the seabed and now oil is coming out of at least 5 seams. shiat!

Now I know you're an trolling ass.
 
2010-06-01 07:49:52 PM  
CrispFlows: queezyweezel: Do we really need to be driving big ass trucks and SUVs? How does the UK deal with $8gal gas? They drive more efficient vehicles.

UK Square Miles: 80,823
US Square Miles: 3.79 million

Longer distances = Longer haul, thus requiring more loads to even out the transport costs.

As for personal ownership of SUVs and 3 ton trucks, yeah - that's not quite a smart decision.


I often wonder why we rely so heavily on trucks for transport of goods instead of rail. Is rail travel prohibitively expensive, or is there a union catch???
I see trucks traveling I80 and I70 that are hauling loads easily transported by rail.
Sure we'd lose a lot of trucking jobs, but the amount of fuel saved would be exponential.
 
2010-06-01 07:50:30 PM  
CrispFlows: queezyweezel: Holy crap, the giant claw just tore open the seabed and now oil is coming out of at least 5 seams. shiat!

Now I know you're an trolling ass.


made you look? :-/
 
2010-06-01 07:50:57 PM  
GAT_00: If only BP had been forced to do an analysis of a failure at this depth so we could have known before this well got approved. Oh well, I guess we should blame too many government controls for this.

Who exactly in the government would even understand it or not fall for complete nonsense? It would just be another form sitting in a file somewhere.

mrbach: This could happen on any drilling rig, so why is everybody so freaked at BP? People vote for Republicans who then allow oil business to operate with little regulation.

There's lots of regulation. Republicans LOVE regulation. Regulation is designed such that favored players get an advantage over those who aren't paying those holding office. Democrats love regulation too. For the same reason. They just feed us different lines of bullshiat to justify it. Democrats get all sappy about protecting people while republicans blather on about 'free market' when the last thing in the world they want is a free market. With a free market, the big players might get knocked off the hill.

It's also about point of view. The federal government restricts how much toxic waste BP can dump into Lake Michigan. It shouldn't be allowed at all, but to give BP an advantage over any market newcomers it gets an easy way to dispose of its waste. Meanwhile we hear from those in political office how the regulation works because without democrats there would be unlimited dumping or without republicans the gasoline would cost too much. Both are BS. The reality is that BP is dumping waste into Chicago's water supply with approval of government, something that under free market with property rights (the only way to have a real free market) wouldn't be allowed at all.

BTW: To get a better idea of how regulation works, see Matt Tabbi's recent article in Rolling Stone on the new regulation for the banksters.
 
2010-06-01 07:51:37 PM  
I'm no scientist. I'm certain there's something wrong with this, but can someone here with more knowledge on the subject tell me why this doesn't work (other than it's embarrasing that a couple of rednecks found it):

Link (new window)

I know it wouldn't work on a wide scale, but why not at least on a small scale? Like I said, I know there has to be some problem, I just want to be educated on the specifics of why.

This has probably been posted a thousand times, I just haven't seen it.
 
2010-06-01 07:51:39 PM  
Lt. Cheese Weasel: Dano33: Those gulf states have been in bed with oil companies for a long time. Well, this is part of the deal. Now you dopes know why other states don't want to allow drilling.

Do you drive a car?


OK, reality check. Do I drive a car? Yes. As opposed to what, exactly? How does one not drive a car? Carpool? Still runs on oil. Take a Bus? Bus runs on oil. If I lived downtown of a major city I could take a subway/BART/L-train, those run on coal(electricity) - not better than oil. The only way to not "drive a car" in this sense is to walk or ride a bike. So what if your job doesn't pay well enough to afford a house within walking/biking distance of said job? What if the economic downturn has removed all employment opportunities within walking/biking distance of your house? F*ck you, that's what. It's not that cars aren't the problem, it's that there are no alternatives in an industrialized nation. I would buy a Tesla roadster, if I could get one for $25,000. But I guess environmental responsibility is reserved for the rich. And that is all my fault.
 
2010-06-01 07:51:56 PM  
HeartBurnKid:
Yes, I know that shutting off the well doesn't shut off the deposit, but it does make the deposit a lot harder to get to. Especially when the future of any new drilling permits, especially in the gulf and especially especially for BP, is doubtful. Your other points are valid, though, and I can only hope the folks at BP are thinking rationally enough to have approached it from that point of view. Unfortunately, people in a crisis situation are rarely rational.


Hundreds of engineers not being rational... That's... hard to believe.
 
2010-06-01 07:53:04 PM  
queezyweezel: CrispFlows: queezyweezel: Holy crap, the giant claw just tore open the seabed and now oil is coming out of at least 5 seams. shiat!Now I know you're an trolling ass.made you look? :-/


TROLOLOLOLLO!
 
2010-06-01 07:53:41 PM  
queezyweezel: I'm ok with paying the Arab community for their oil. Personally $5 a gallon gas isn't a huge deal to me after living in the UK for a while where it was about $8 gal.

Great. What if they decide one day, they don't want to sell any more oil to anyone because their own political pressures take a decidely turn for the worse and religious factions in their own countries gain enough power to endanger their power base? Surely you can see wheels within wheels.
 
2010-06-01 07:53:46 PM  
queezyweezel: CrispFlows: queezyweezel: Do we really need to be driving big ass trucks and SUVs? How does the UK deal with $8gal gas? They drive more efficient vehicles.

UK Square Miles: 80,823
US Square Miles: 3.79 million

Longer distances = Longer haul, thus requiring more loads to even out the transport costs.

As for personal ownership of SUVs and 3 ton trucks, yeah - that's not quite a smart decision.

I often wonder why we rely so heavily on trucks for transport of goods instead of rail. Is rail travel prohibitively expensive, or is there a union catch???
I see trucks traveling I80 and I70 that are hauling loads easily transported by rail.
Sure we'd lose a lot of trucking jobs, but the amount of fuel saved would be exponential.


The freight goes truck-train-truck, or just truck. Have you noticed that railway tracks don't exactly go everywhere, so by the time you swap it from truck to train and back onto a truck again you haven't saved that much and you have added a lot of time to the delivery.

Piss poor rail system FTL.
 
2010-06-01 07:55:10 PM  
Now you know why people frown when some idiot proposes drilling in the Alaska arctic Wildlife refuge.
 
2010-06-01 07:55:25 PM  
queezyweezel: CrispFlows: queezyweezel: Do we really need to be driving big ass trucks and SUVs? How does the UK deal with $8gal gas? They drive more efficient vehicles.

UK Square Miles: 80,823
US Square Miles: 3.79 million

Longer distances = Longer haul, thus requiring more loads to even out the transport costs.

As for personal ownership of SUVs and 3 ton trucks, yeah - that's not quite a smart decision.

I often wonder why we rely so heavily on trucks for transport of goods instead of rail. Is rail travel prohibitively expensive, or is there a union catch???
I see trucks traveling I80 and I70 that are hauling loads easily transported by rail.
Sure we'd lose a lot of trucking jobs, but the amount of fuel saved would be exponential.


Well, Historically, the decision to transfer transportation from the rails to the roads was around the 50's where gas was easily less than a quarter for a gallon. It simply made more sense economically to transport by road.

By that time to now, the rails was dramatically underused and the incentive to maintain them was gone. The rail networks are seriously in a bad state.

But I'm no expert, I'm sure there are other people around here that knows way more than I do.
 
2010-06-01 07:58:27 PM  
queezyweezel: Where do we go from here? nuclear, natural Gas, geothermal and solar are all on the table. Wind energy as well.

Geothermal is cool, but isn't applicable everywhere.

Not really a fan of nuclear. It is good in some ways, but it is expensive to build and run, complex, and the waste is an issue. Not to mention problems like that recent story on the lake full of irradiated fish with high levels of strontium in them.

Solar is an idea I love. Thin films and high-efficiency cells have the potential to make home-powering systems that are inexpensive enough to turn rooftops into massive solar farms.

Wind also has excellent potential. Not the typical windmills, but ideas like KiteGen, for instance. It harnesses the higher energy density, steadier winds about 1km up by using a parasail-like device. The Italian inventor says he can use many such kites to turn a huge turbine and produce as much power as a nuclear plant at a 10th the cost of building and running it. He already built working prototypes, and has funding for a small 3MW demo plant.
 
2010-06-01 07:58:30 PM  
Has anyone seen a dolphin lately?
 
Displayed 50 of 707 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report