Originally Posted By mousermerf And the person/expert saying it will go into the Gulf Stream and "smear" all of Florida that every is citing is from the Sierra Club. Not exactly an unbiased source, and the 1993 spill outside Tampa Bay showed that atmospheric conditions in/around Florida will generally keep oil offshore.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 Experts? Meh - who ever wants to listen to those. Why let facts get in the way of BP making more money!<< There are other experts who say it is too early to tell what the long term ramifactions of this are... Of course, why listen to those with opposing view points, let's only quote the "experts" that agree with your reasoning...
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<Of course, why listen to those with opposing view points, let's only quote the "experts" that agree with your reasoning>> I'm not quoting anyone - ecdc did that. And of course there will be those with opposing viewpoints - who said there weren't? Obviously, the scale of this is not something that can easily be predicited, and there are going to be differing viewpoints of how large the spill will eventually be. But nothing I have read so far seems to claim that this will be anything less than a disastor for some of the people along the Gulf Coast.
Originally Posted By ecdc Right. I could see the skepticism if this was the next balloon boy - media overhyping a small event. In this case, the opposite has happened. The reporting started small and has increased as the implications increase. Of course we don't know all the long-term effects. But we can make reasonable projections. I guess I just don't see the point in downplaying the incident. Is it to continue to justify offshore drilling? Or is it to urge caution and curb hyperbole before reaching conclusions. The latter I understand; the former, not so much.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I could care less about offshore drilling as it does not affect me at all either way, I just think it's way too early to play the blame game. Let's figure this out, find out some solutions and then find out how this can be prevented next time... I too find it ironic that this happened weeks after Pres. Obama bowed to the pressure from those calling for more off shore drilling...
Originally Posted By ecdc <<---- Trying to imagine William's response if I said, "I could care less about what happens to our soldiers in Afghanistan as it does not affect me at all either way."
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 <<---- Trying to imagine William's response if I said, "I could care less about what happens to our soldiers in Afghanistan as it does not affect me at all either way." << Wouldn't get a response from me at all as we live in America and we have the ability to choose what we do/do not lose sleep over...
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<then find out how this can be prevented next time...>> Here's the thing - there's really no 100% guarantee that this kind of thing won't happen again. It's a risk we take everytime they open up one of these sites for drilling. Even if they find out what happened specifically in this case and make improvements, there are still hundreds of other ways something like this could occur accidentally. (Or deliberately - I'm surprised no one has tried to blow these things up yet as an act of terrorism.) The only real solution here is to stop drilling off our coasts. But somehow I doubt that's gonna happen anytime soon.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 The only real solution here is to stop drilling off our coasts. But somehow I doubt that's gonna happen anytime soon.<< No...The real solution is to invest billions of dollars into alternative sources of power and attempt to end out country's dependance on the stuff, but of course people just want to place blame at BP, our Government etc, while ignoring what could ultimately fix this mess once and for all....
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<The real solution is to invest billions of dollars into alternative sources of power and attempt to end out country's dependance on the stuff>> That's what I meant by stopping the drilling. Obviously we would have to supplement our power needs with something else, and renewable energy would be the best. But where are we going to get the money to do all this? You're a conservative, right? Do you think the government should spend billions to get us off oil? If so, where do they get the money from?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 But where are we going to get the money to do all this? You're a conservative, right? Do you think the government should spend billions to get us off oil? If so, where do they get the money from?<< Having lived in Europe the past 4 years, I say we take a pay out of their playbook and tax gas an additional 2 to 3 dollars per gallon.... with a portion going to suplement mass transit and another portion of it going to renewable energy grants... Right now in Germany it's about 6 to 7 dollars a gallon, and quite a bit is from taxes, if we do the same thing then we could easily make enough to not only increase mass transit use, but invest in our future... But of course seeing as our politicians don't have the balls to suggest something like this, it will never see the light of day...
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <The real solution is to invest billions of dollars into alternative sources of power and attempt to end out country's dependance on the stuff> Bingo. <But of course seeing as our politicians don't have the balls to suggest something like this, it will never see the light of day...> Bingo again. I said years ago that what is really needed is a Manhattan Project for energy. Get the best minds in the country together in one place for one purpose, fund the research lavishly and get it done. We did it for the A-bomb, we did it for the Mercury/Gemini/Apollo missions, and we could do it again, given the political will. I also think it would end up saving us tons of money in the long run. I had hopes Obama would do something a least SORT OF like this, but he's moving too cautiously, and if he announced something like this to fund renewables the right wing would probably scream about "trillions for tree huggers." As William shows, not all conservatives would feel this way. But certainly the loudest ones would.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>But of course seeing as our politicians don't have the balls to suggest something like this, it will never see the light of day..<< Probably because they'd be labeled socialists, have death threats made against them, and at best, be voted out of office when the next guy runs on a platform of repealing the tax. The problem isn't the politicians (at least not all of them), the problem is the whiny, petulant people with severe entitlement issues who have said America's the greatest so long they actually believe it and think being number one is a birth right and not something we have to work for. In polls, if you ask Americans how we should reduce the deficit - raise taxes or cut entitlements - they almost universally say cut entitlements. So when you ask them, what should we cut, guess what the number one answer is? Nothing. Cut nothing at all. So we want to reduce the deficit or we'll vote out our leaders. We don't want higher taxes or we'll vote out our leaders. Oh, and we don't want any programs cut or we'll vote out our leaders. Beyond stupid. And we wonder why politicians pander and don't stake out positions?
Originally Posted By mousermerf <<< But nothing I have read so far seems to claim that this will be anything less than a disastor for some of the people along the Gulf Coast.>>> You should try reading the local papers of the cities actually on the Gulf and their marine biologists and experts. Far less panic ridden then the national media. My home is actually on the gulf, I know folks in the various industries that are supposed to be decimated by this disaster, and I even spent my free time volunteering to do marine biology research and conservation programs on the gulf. The general consensus of the people back home is not one of disaster or panic. It will kill 90% of worms and oysters but the 10% of the remaining population is enough to repopulate to levels we're currently at within a few years. Birds will be cleaned, and various areas will have their little floaty-wall-thingies put out to protect them as they are deemed of environmental or social importance. The plans are all in place. You're talking about an area that deals with red tide and hurricanes on a regular basis - this is not a disaster to them. It barely effects their lives.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 << It will kill 90% of worms and oysters but the 10% of the remaining population is enough to repopulate to levels we're currently at within a few years.>> So what do the fishermen and other such folk do for the next few years? Go hungry? <<It barely effects their lives.>> Sorry, but I highly doubt that. I won't claim to have done the research or anything, but that just doesn't ring true to me. How could something like this NOT effect the lives of the people along that coast?
Originally Posted By mousermerf Because it wont - these are populated areas whose main industry is tourism and they know how to protect the beaches, on top of natural conditions that will keep the oil mostly offshore. Oyster farms put out their barriers, they'll be ok. Other fisheries simply need to avoid the area of the slick. The Gulf is big. Also, it floats - it's just the first couple meters. Anything below that is unaffected, hence the lack of concern about large mammals. They're expected to just leave the area as they would with any other event.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<Because it wont>> For the sake of the people who actually live there, let's hope you're right...
Originally Posted By leobloom >> It barely effects their lives. << I somehow doubt that. >> Also, it floats - it's just the first couple meters. Anything below that is unaffected, hence the lack of concern about large mammals. They're expected to just leave the area as they would with any other event. << Won't it affect the ability of sunlight to penetrate the water, leading to problems for sea life?
Originally Posted By ecdc >>You should try reading the local papers of the cities actually on the Gulf and their marine biologists and experts. Far less panic ridden then the national media. << Links? Evidence? I already posted a link to the Huston Chronicle that disagreed with your assessment that the previous spill was much worse. Also, as anxious as I am to hear Sumner, Mississippi's prestigious marine biology community, I think I'll stick with the experts I've already read and posted here. And again I have to wonder what the motivation is for saying, "Ah gee, this is no big deal. Things will be just fine," especially when that appears to not be the case.
