Good. They make the entire world suffer, I think it's fair for them to get a share of it as well. Not saying that those workers in particular deserved to die, I'm just talking about the company. BP put its workers at risk. Fuck them.
Looks like BP is trying to make some $ in the process. They chose a more toxic and less effective oil dispersant than other competitors. Why? Because the chemical is made by Nalco, who BP shares close ties with. "So far, BP has told federal agencies that it has applied more than 400,000 gallons of a dispersant sold under the trade name Corexit and manufactured by Nalco Co., whose current leadership includes executives from BP and Exxon." "But according to EPA data, Corexit ranks far above dispersants made by competitors in toxicity and far below them in effectiveness in handling southern Louisiana crude." Less Toxic Dispersants Lose Out in BP Oil Spill Cleanup - NYTimes.com
You can't make money by buying your own product, looks like they're trying to save money. But I agree this is douchey. The EPA could remove it from their list if its 50% as effective and twice as toxic, or whatever they said.
Drone, why not use this crisis to further an agenda? As long as the agenda steers us away from oil. The fact of the matter is its 2010 and we should not be drilling for oil. There are alternative sources of fuel that need to be used. Also, why not blow this out of proportion after seeing how corrupt BP really is? We dont want any more giant corps like BP who do not have an ounce of integrity or accountability for the lives they have ruined.
Caught this on HuffPost today: BP Smoking Gun? Oil Giant Skipped Critical Testing Hours Before Explosion Apparently BP didn't run a test on the effectiveness of the well's seal. So now it's negligent, not an accident.
Well in fact you can. Board members from BP also control Nalco, so by selling their product to their other company they make money on both ends. The chemical companies are all in the petroleum industry because the chemicals they make are petroleum products. The EPA is avoiding the red tape instead of policing the matter by not limiting which chemicals are used in which areas. Of if dispersants are really a good idea in the first place; we are just dumping this on the seafloor and is out of sight really out of mind....
Ok, so BP isn't making money on this. Maybe the one board member that works at both companies will get a bonus for arranging the deal... If a company buys something from a subsidiary there is no profit, only savings.
Who ever said that BP "wanted" this oil spill? (PLEASE SHOW ME A QUOTE.) Where are u guys even getting that idea? Sounds to me like u are changing the subject completely. We are not saying they WANTED the spill. We are saying they LIED about how much is spilling. Also I have seen people say that they are trying to profit from the spill. I have not read one single post in this entire thread that says BP wanted the spill. So please get your heads out of your asses.
The libertarians and republicans just feel the need to always defend big business and their actions, i.e. Rand Paul
I would consider myself a Libertarian more than anything else. So I dont think thats very fair to say. What does being a Libertarian have to do with this oil spill? The fact of the matter is we have a Co. that took shortcuts in order to save $. Those shortcuts caused a disaster. Now they have actually been caught LYING about how much oil they have been spilling. They should be held responsible for that. Why would anyone have pity for this organization? They are liars that care more about money than they do about our environment.
It just seems like the people defending and making excuses for BP are mostly libertarian and conservative. Just an observation.
It's a larger issue then one person making profit from the trade. (which I doubt they are; that would be a conflict of interest) When a company buys something from a subsidiary there is no profit for the corporation, yes. However it boosts the industry stock and that is where the individuals make money. Remember we live in an economy where money is not made from a transaction of goods, but the transaction of money.
EPA finally told BP to stop using Coexit today.... That took long enough... Here is an interesting article that questions the rate of spill; the sources quoted are ligit and correct. Gulf oil spill at least 10 times larger than previous estimate They kind of ask at the end why are we focused on the amount, and that's an interesting question. Sure engineers need to know so they can calculate containment pressures and clean up crews for calculating their efforts. However shouldn't we be estamating for the potental full volume of the well. Remember that now the 70,000 barrels or 5,000 barrels a day you beleave in; that is only a fraction of what BP was planning on pulling out a day. What happens if the drilling mud causes a rupture down the drill pipe and the well is allowed to flow at its full volume! RadioTimes on NPR mentioned the number today but I have yet to find it on the web....
No one said it in this thread, but the idea stems from the vicious demonization of BP even before it was discovered they skipped the safety tests that day, or were underestimating (or "lying about") the amount of oil leaking. Everyone in government talks about their "bootheels on the throat of BP" as if BP isn't trying everything in their power to stop the flow, and all the statists are taking the same stance. This suggests you think they want to keep losing oil. I guess blaming someone helps you deal with your anger but it doesn't help with the situation, and will only lead to rash decisions. Any lies or understatements they make at this point are to keep their stock from plummeting, they're not trying to harm more people. I generally don't like any oil companies, but the attitude towards this disaster is more "Die BP" and less "What a tragedy for everyone", which I think is stupid.
For better or worse people need someone to blame. It gives them a contact to make the final decisions, while also putting a face on the devil. However BP is known in the industry for cutting corners and ignoring laws. They do this to push innovation; BP has been a world leader in new drilling technology and techniques. Well that requires them to cut corners and bypass laws. Now is this for good or detriment to the world? Along with the blame game is the Obama administration; they have to be careful about blaming someone for two reasons as I see it. 1-If they wind up taking over the spill, that will make their administration responsible for the long term outcomes. Not a good place to be 2- BP really does have the smartest guys in the room. If Obama was to intervene, he would want to hire BP's teams as sub-contractors. Personalty I think Obama should hire BP's guys to cap the well and handle the spill, with the understanding that BP is ultimately responsible for the costs accrued. But I also understand the political suicide that would be.
It's bad for the world if a company disregards human and animal life, and bad for the company, which is why I'm hesitant to believe they were cutting corners and ignoring laws when it came to protecting their oil interests and ensuring the safety of the rig. At the very least you can bet they won't make this mistake twice. BP is already working to cap the well and handle the spill, why does the government need to get involved? It's just standard state lunacy: The state is way more likely to impede progress and take the "direction" the wrong way.