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.

(Russia Today)   Nothing to see here. Move along. FAA puts no-fly zone over Arkansas oil spill   (rt.com) divider line 21
    More: Followup, Federal Aviation Administration, Arkansas, Exxon, Lynn Lunsford, Mayflower  
•       •       •

8361 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Apr 2013 at 12:51 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-04-04 12:55:15 PM
3 votes:
You only need to go below 1000 feet for takeoff and landing.
2013-04-04 12:13:26 PM
3 votes:
It's only up to 1,000 feet.  That's not going to prevent people from seeing anything.
2013-04-04 01:04:22 PM
2 votes:

wxboy: It's only up to 1,000 feet.  That's not going to prevent people from seeing anything.


Done in one.  This is an incredibly stupid article.  You newsies paid how much for a camera that can't see what's going on 1000 feet below?

/ChopperDan in Chopper6 has his ChopperPanties in a ChopperWad because he can't hover right over or land among the workers/ trucks, etc.
2013-04-04 12:59:23 PM
2 votes:

ChipNASA: Nothing but a skid mark on the anus of the South.


Oh come on now. We all know that's Mississippi.
2013-04-05 03:03:21 AM
1 votes:

mikefinch: vrax: We're talking general maintenance here by an extremely rich company. If infinite funds are required to maintain functionality then they have the worst business model in existence.

Heres how it goes:

Company builds pipeline -- or uses existing pipeline to move oil across your country. The pipeline was not designed for such a long lifetime. The regulations that concern building pipelines are stricter today than when the pipe was first layed and pipelines that were built back in the 50's or 60's probably wouldn't have been approved by today's standards.

So building new lines is expensive, time consuming and great big NIMBY projects -- this means the old pipes are used longer and longer because people have gummed up the process. The old over used pipes become more and more expensive to fix and they become less and less reliable.

Its a great model of business if you have proper infrastructure and a decent approval process. No cross country shipping company could have a good business plan if nobody wanted to build new roads and repairs to existing ones were prohibitively expensive because they were so beat up.

New pipes would make everything much cheaper and much safer...


Sure, and in the farkin' 65 years Pegasus has been operational they should have been working on updating the entire line.  They already have the right-of-way, unlike any future projects.  FFS, by now they could have run a modern, higher capacity, parallel line and taken Pegasus off-line.
2013-04-05 12:22:20 AM
1 votes:

chocolate covered poop: vrax: chocolate covered poop: cashdaddy: Maud Dib: On the NPR article, the pipe was corroded and was due to be repaired. They delayed the repair.  Shocking, I know.

Yeah, I'm gonna ask for a citation......

If you're referring to this NPR article - http://www.wbur.org/npr/176189205/arkansas-oil-spill-sheds-light-on-a g ing-pipeline-system - show me where it says "the pipe was corroded and due to be repaired" and "they delayed repair"....

But even if that were the case, they delayed the repair, does that in itself prove intentional negligence or any unethical behavior?  Maybe they delayed it in order to work on other sections of the pipeline that needed the repairs even worse and would have resulted in a bigger spill.  But thats boring, lets assume that there aren't actually any maintence technicians for the pipelines,its just a shell corporation to channel funds to the executives so they can go skiing in the alps and have 3 ways with $10,000 an hour hookers.

I'm sorry, but ExxonMobil is the largest company on the planet.  They can afford to maintain their systems.  If their pipeline is in such disrepair that they are having to pick and choose which worst part to fix, then there is a serious problem, and it's likely driven by greed.

largest company =/= infinite funds to mitigate every risk.  and also most of the profit Exxon make comes from the upstream segment - actually selling the oil before it goes in the pipeline.  The pipeline company likely does not make all that much of a profit.  Likewise most of the reinvestment of the upstream profit is likely going back into upstream improvements and maintenance, and not shared with the parts of the company that don't make the same amount of profit.  Its not necessarily lining the pockets of the executives, while I will grant you that they make too much money for the jobs that they do.

I don't think theres anything wrong with media attention and scrutiny when these things happen, because it drives progress and helps ...


We're talking general maintenance here by an extremely rich company.  If infinite funds are required to maintain functionality then they have the worst business model in existence.

Considering ExxonMobil's control, the absurd no-fly order, as well as a media lock-out on this one, I'm going to pretty much guarantee that there is at the very least a certain level of malfeasance on ExxonMobil's part.  It reeks of the same type of suspicious BS from PG&E after the San Bruno gas explosion.
2013-04-04 06:58:13 PM
1 votes:

chocolate covered poop: cashdaddy: Maud Dib: On the NPR article, the pipe was corroded and was due to be repaired. They delayed the repair.  Shocking, I know.

Yeah, I'm gonna ask for a citation......

If you're referring to this NPR article - http://www.wbur.org/npr/176189205/arkansas-oil-spill-sheds-light-on-a g ing-pipeline-system - show me where it says "the pipe was corroded and due to be repaired" and "they delayed repair"....

But even if that were the case, they delayed the repair, does that in itself prove intentional negligence or any unethical behavior?  Maybe they delayed it in order to work on other sections of the pipeline that needed the repairs even worse and would have resulted in a bigger spill.  But thats boring, lets assume that there aren't actually any maintence technicians for the pipelines,its just a shell corporation to channel funds to the executives so they can go skiing in the alps and have 3 ways with $10,000 an hour hookers.


I'm sorry, but ExxonMobil is the largest company on the planet.  They can afford to maintain their systems.  If their pipeline is in such disrepair that they are having to pick and choose which worst part to fix, then there is a serious problem, and it's likely driven by greed.
2013-04-04 05:48:14 PM
1 votes:

Maud Dib: chocolate covered poop: Reverend J: I have a hard time beveling that there is a massive coverup when googling "Arkansas oil spill" nets me 72.000 hits in the news reader.

well to this point I don't believe there is any evidence of big time gross negligence (correct me if I'm wrong).  its a pipe, it corrodes over time and possibly leaks.  the leak is found (arguably not as quickly as we might like), and the operator of the pipeline starts a competent response to fix and clean up, and would like to not have the media obstructing a fast, effective, and safe response.  the media has a filter for contains "oil" + "spill" and they are licking their chops for another BP horizon fiasco, plus the public loves reading about clusterfarks.  this particular event tends to be more vanilla in nature, so we have to assume theres been a cover up or mass conspiracy.

On the NPR article, the pipe was corroded and was due to be repaired. They delayed the repair.
Shocking, I know.


Did they use govt. subsidies meant to repair the pipeline to give themselves fat bonus checks, like the operators of the gas main that blew a California neighborhood a few years back?
2013-04-04 03:19:00 PM
1 votes:

Reverend J: I have a hard time beveling that there is a massive coverup when googling "Arkansas oil spill" nets me 72.000 hits in the news reader.


well to this point I don't believe there is any evidence of big time gross negligence (correct me if I'm wrong).  its a pipe, it corrodes over time and possibly leaks.  the leak is found (arguably not as quickly as we might like), and the operator of the pipeline starts a competent response to fix and clean up, and would like to not have the media obstructing a fast, effective, and safe response.  the media has a filter for contains "oil" + "spill" and they are licking their chops for another BP horizon fiasco, plus the public loves reading about clusterfarks.  this particular event tends to be more vanilla in nature, so we have to assume theres been a cover up or mass conspiracy.
2013-04-04 02:26:13 PM
1 votes:
I think that you are all missing the point. Has Congress apologized to Exxon-Mobile for getting dirt in their oil yet? I think that at the very least they are entitled to large government bailout for having to put up with the inconvenience of cleaning up their mess. Maybe another tax break and a few more subsidies will help them feel better. Oh, and those homeowners need to shut the hell up and quit their whining. Just because Exxon-Mobile is the most profitable company in the history of the world doesn't mean that they are responsible for compensating you for damage and/or loss of value to your property that is a direct result of their actions. That's just class warfare, and you should all feel ashamed.
2013-04-04 01:58:29 PM
1 votes:

change1211: Lionel Mandrake: Tar sands are awesome.

Maybe you should shut the hell up and walk everywhere then.


You should probably just shut the hell up, period.
2013-04-04 01:56:54 PM
1 votes:

HotWingConspiracy: Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel, who spoke of future litigation as a "certainty," derided attempts by ExxonMobil representatives to manage his visit to the site.

Wow. You can't really work an AG like he's a ref. They'll come to regret this.


He complained about documents not being available and the "cleanup's going great" attitude.  He wasn't "managed" like a foreign tourist in North Korea.

Here's a bigger  issue:  that pipeline carried Alberta tar sand bitumen, which is specifically exempted from the definition of "crude oil" in the Oil Spill Liability Act of 1980.  Exxon doesn't have to pay into the trust fund that covers such spills.  Better update that law before Keystone XL is approved.
2013-04-04 01:48:33 PM
1 votes:

change1211: Lionel Mandrake: Tar sands are awesome.

Maybe you should shut the hell up and walk everywhere then.


False dichotomies, how do they work?
2013-04-04 01:40:48 PM
1 votes:
I'm just amazed that some toothless yokel hasn't come along and tried to set that thing ablaze so far.
2013-04-04 01:33:26 PM
1 votes:

change1211: Lionel Mandrake: Tar sands are awesome.

Maybe you should shut the hell up and walk everywhere then.


Those are the only two choices?  Really?  That's a lot of durp.
2013-04-04 01:23:56 PM
1 votes:
Russia Today is quickly becoming an Alex Jones conspiracy website/TV station.  Russian tax dollars at work!

/a no fly zone to 1,000 feet sounds like what exactly it was claimed to be; IE, to protect relief helicopters working in the area
2013-04-04 01:14:51 PM
1 votes:
More info on the spill....in conclusion, fark you, Canada and Exxon.

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/04/6_things_you_need_to_know_about_the_ ar kansas_oil_spill_partner/
2013-04-04 01:04:06 PM
1 votes:
However, there's been rampant speculation that the ban was enacted to censor news cameras from taking shots of the disaster area.

There's something a little fishy about all of this. They need to get the EPA in there. You don't want to f*ck with the EPA.
2013-04-04 01:01:19 PM
1 votes:
An FAA spokesman told reporters that the flying ban applied to aircraft flying at 1,000 feet or lower and within five nautical miles, so that emergency support are able to respond to the disaster immediately.

Bullshiat. What kind of air support is needed to clean up an oil spill?
2013-04-04 01:00:53 PM
1 votes:
Tar sands are awesome.
2013-04-04 12:52:25 PM
1 votes:
Nothing but a skid mark on the anus of the South.
 
Displayed 21 of 21 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report