Deepwater Horizon disaster

[Bigjohn]

I don't see a thread on this yet. Sorry if I'm rehashing ...
I favor more domestic US oil production, so at first I was angry at BP and the the industry for not having a plan or means to deal with this.
But now ... I'm just scared.
I hope that well head and the kinked pipes hold to the extent they are ... If that head is lost the flow will be unimaginably worse ... this is a nightmare.
It's a blown out well under a mile of water ...
This is god awful serious.

[mike_v_s]

The titles weren't that intuitive, but there were two other threads on this. As a Louisiana resident, I'm very concerned. Two to three weeks ago the idea of dredged barrier islands a la Dubai were offered up. Permits were filed shortly thereafter. As of today, the Corps of Engineers still hasn't made a decision. Thanks, guys.

Yeah, I'm pissed at BP, but there's a lot of "what the hell?" going around right now. Transocean is seeking to limit their liability and I'm sure Haliburton and Cameron aren't far behind. At least the US government has admitted they slipped.

Mike

[MEKer]

No prob-it WILL be fixed. In fact, this thing is not even in the top 50 oil spills of history.

There are a very large number of undersea rigs doing just fine, many of them BP btw.
Fantastic technology.

We cannot even make a 100% perfect bass guitar rate---and oil technology has a better rate of success in their rigs than bass manufacturers in making no-fail guitars.
Yeah, yeah, I understand a failed rig is more damaging than a failed bass,
I am simply pointing out the incredible technology that benefits us cannot be expected to be perfect in the whole sense of that word.

Then we get those who want to cut off the nose to spite the face. "Hey, it is not 100% perfect,there was a mistake! No more. Stop it all! Lets go to candles and olive oil lamps!".

With that logic you should never go to a doctor, buy a car or bass, never travel---a whole string of nevers. No exploration cuz its too dangerous, etc etc.

BTW---where did the billions of gallons of oil go to from the sunken ships during WWII?

We will "survive" this little incident.

The volcano on Iceland though---that has put as much pollutant into the atmosphere as all human activity since the 1840's industrial age started.
Geez----who can we blame and to whom can we embondage ourselves for that out-of-our-control incident?

So no sweat--perspective is a nice thing.

[wazzel]

This was more than likely a major problem with multiple saftey system failures. Many many well have been completed in up to 10,000ft with no issues. Hopefully better saftey systems and proper regulation will come out of the trajic event and not govt stupidity.

BTW oil and gas has the lowest incadent rate for accidents and injury of any manual labor indusrty.

[HEIST]

Originally Posted by MEKer

No prob-it WILL be fixed. In fact, this thing is not even in the top 50 oil spills of history.

I want to see this list. Do you have a source?

[MEKer]

Here's a partial list, in order, but won't fill up more pages with more--Deepwater may, in time, manage to get on the list. Has to be seen, especially as they are getting a hand on it. Again---I'm not too worried its the end of the world. There's been way worse. I am still waiting for WWII spillage to be noticed but nobody does cuz it would, I believe, top the list and take some wind out of the sails of alarmists.

Gulf War oil spill Persian Gulf January 21, 1991 1,360,000–1,500,000 (9,968,800-10,995,000 barrels) [22][23]

Ixtoc I oil well Gulf of Mexico June 3, 1979–March 23, 1980 454,000–480,000 (3,328,000–3,518,000 barrels) [24]

Atlantic Empress / Aegean Captain Trinidad and Tobago July 19, 1979 287,000 (2,104,000 barrels) [25][26]

Fergana Valley Uzbekistan March 2, 1992 285,000 (2,089,000 barrels) [23]

Nowruz oil field Persian Gulf February 1983 260,000 (1,906,000 barrels) [27]

ABT Summer 700 nautical miles (1,300 km) off Angola 1991 260,000 (1,906,000 barrels) [25]

Castillo de Bellver Saldanha Bay, South Africa August 6, 1983 252,000 (1,847,000 barrels) [25]

Amoco Cadiz Brittany, France March 16, 1978 223,000 (1,635,000 barrels) [23][25]

Amoco Haven tanker disaster Mediterranean Sea near Genoa, Italy 1991 144,000 (1,056,000 barrels) [25]

Odyssey 700 nautical miles (1,300 km) off Nova Scotia, Canada 1988 132,000 (968,000 barrels) [25]

Sea Star Gulf of Oman December 19, 1972 115,000 (843,000 barrels) [23][25]

Torrey Canyon Scilly Isles, UK March 18, 1967 80,000–119,000 (586,000–872,000 barrels) [23][25]

Irenes Serenade Navarino Bay, Greece 1980 100,000 (733,000 barrels) [25]

Urquiola A Coruña, Spain May 12, 1976 100,000 (733,000 barrels) [25]


Now I'll sit back and watch it unfold and see what the end result will be. No point in continuing a "debate" about its potential as we would be speculating on final tonnage lost. Think I'll go get a donut for my coffee.

[Fontaine]

You have to realize, the oil won't be cleaned up by human technology, it's impossible. We simply don't have the technology. The gulf has calmer waters compared to drilling operations closer to where I'm located but if there's oil spill here, your best bet is dispersion of the oil over a large area of water. Yes, of course the situation in the Gulf sucks, but before environmental nuts go off the heads anymore, oil spills from similar situations contribute to less then 10% of all oil spilled in the water ways every year.

[LarryO]

It will take quite a while for the fishing and seafood industry off Louisiana to recover but my biggest concern is the effects on the coastline itself. Being born and raised in Louisiana we were all well aware of the receading coastline due to salt water intrusion in the marshes. This oil will likely kill more vegetation root ststems and cause even more damage....not to mention a migration of lots of land animals including a healthy population of alligators

[mike_v_s]

Originally Posted by MEKer

Here's a partial list, in order, but won't fill up more pages with more--Deepwater may, in time, manage to get on the list. Has to be seen, especially as they are getting a hand on it. Again---I'm not too worried its the end of the world. There's been way worse. I am still waiting for WWII spillage to be noticed but nobody does cuz it would, I believe, top the list and take some wind out of the sails of alarmists.

Gulf War oil spill Persian Gulf January 21, 1991 1,360,000–1,500,000 (9,968,800-10,995,000 barrels) [22][23]

Ixtoc I oil well Gulf of Mexico June 3, 1979–March 23, 1980 454,000–480,000 (3,328,000–3,518,000 barrels) [24]

Atlantic Empress / Aegean Captain Trinidad and Tobago July 19, 1979 287,000 (2,104,000 barrels) [25][26]

Fergana Valley Uzbekistan March 2, 1992 285,000 (2,089,000 barrels) [23]

Nowruz oil field Persian Gulf February 1983 260,000 (1,906,000 barrels) [27]

ABT Summer 700 nautical miles (1,300 km) off Angola 1991 260,000 (1,906,000 barrels) [25]

Castillo de Bellver Saldanha Bay, South Africa August 6, 1983 252,000 (1,847,000 barrels) [25]

Amoco Cadiz Brittany, France March 16, 1978 223,000 (1,635,000 barrels) [23][25]

Amoco Haven tanker disaster Mediterranean Sea near Genoa, Italy 1991 144,000 (1,056,000 barrels) [25]

Odyssey 700 nautical miles (1,300 km) off Nova Scotia, Canada 1988 132,000 (968,000 barrels) [25]

Sea Star Gulf of Oman December 19, 1972 115,000 (843,000 barrels) [23][25]

Torrey Canyon Scilly Isles, UK March 18, 1967 80,000–119,000 (586,000–872,000 barrels) [23][25]

Irenes Serenade Navarino Bay, Greece 1980 100,000 (733,000 barrels) [25]

Urquiola A Coruña, Spain May 12, 1976 100,000 (733,000 barrels) [25]


Now I'll sit back and watch it unfold and see what the end result will be. No point in continuing a "debate" about its potential as we would be speculating on final tonnage lost. Think I'll go get a donut for my coffee.

OK. While gauging the "worst" by the number of barrels is one way, it doesn't take into account the economic damage and it's far from painting an entire picture. Entire industries have already been shut down in Louisiana. It's possible those industries may be shut down in those areas for years.

I don't think your doctor/car/bass/travel example fits because when those things aren't 100% perfect, you don't stop thousands of people from making a living for at least a year.

Mike

[john turner]

Originally Posted by MEKer

Here's a partial list, in order, but won't fill up more pages with more--Deepwater may, in time, manage to get on the list. Has to be seen, especially as they are getting a hand on it. Again---I'm not too worried its the end of the world. There's been way worse. I am still waiting for WWII spillage to be noticed but nobody does cuz it would, I believe, top the list and take some wind out of the sails of alarmists.

Gulf War oil spill Persian Gulf January 21, 1991 1,360,000–1,500,000 (9,968,800-10,995,000 barrels) [22][23]

Ixtoc I oil well Gulf of Mexico June 3, 1979–March 23, 1980 454,000–480,000 (3,328,000–3,518,000 barrels) [24]

Atlantic Empress / Aegean Captain Trinidad and Tobago July 19, 1979 287,000 (2,104,000 barrels) [25][26]

Fergana Valley Uzbekistan March 2, 1992 285,000 (2,089,000 barrels) [23]

Nowruz oil field Persian Gulf February 1983 260,000 (1,906,000 barrels) [27]

ABT Summer 700 nautical miles (1,300 km) off Angola 1991 260,000 (1,906,000 barrels) [25]

Castillo de Bellver Saldanha Bay, South Africa August 6, 1983 252,000 (1,847,000 barrels) [25]

Amoco Cadiz Brittany, France March 16, 1978 223,000 (1,635,000 barrels) [23][25]

Amoco Haven tanker disaster Mediterranean Sea near Genoa, Italy 1991 144,000 (1,056,000 barrels) [25]

Odyssey 700 nautical miles (1,300 km) off Nova Scotia, Canada 1988 132,000 (968,000 barrels) [25]

Sea Star Gulf of Oman December 19, 1972 115,000 (843,000 barrels) [23][25]

Torrey Canyon Scilly Isles, UK March 18, 1967 80,000–119,000 (586,000–872,000 barrels) [23][25]

Irenes Serenade Navarino Bay, Greece 1980 100,000 (733,000 barrels) [25]

Urquiola A Coruña, Spain May 12, 1976 100,000 (733,000 barrels) [25]


Now I'll sit back and watch it unfold and see what the end result will be. No point in continuing a "debate" about its potential as we would be speculating on final tonnage lost. Think I'll go get a donut for my coffee.

the only way this spill does not qualify already as a top 10 spill after 33 days is if the bp/noaa "low end" estimate of 5000 bpd is used. researchers who have been able to observe the data generally consider this a gross understatement, and put the minimum value at around 4x that high, at least, if not much more. using that estimate, it will only take it 2 more months to surpass the 2nd biggest spill in history, as well as putting the spill currently at #10 in your list.

bp has refused to allow scientists to investigate this spill up close to gauge the actual flow, for obvious reasons, which to me cast any numbers they officially release in doubt. in fact, they are doing their best to prevent their stock from tanking over this, so i don't believe a word they say about this at all without 3rd party verification.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwat...izon_oil_spill

according to wiki, it's estimated that this will be the worst oil spill in u.s. history. using the maximum estimated tonnage right now, based on the 3rd party estimates of folks who are experts in the field, this is already the 3rd worst spill in history, and using bp/noaa low end estimates of 5k bpd (which even bp has admitted was lower than they were actually internally estimating) it is at 21k barrels, which puts it solidly at #31 as of -right now-. now, even bp doesn't actually buy the 5k bpd estimate - they said so in a senate hearing - so it's already higher than that.

[Gard]

In this instance, counting barrels means jack-$4!7.

As Mike points out, the spill is already damaging the economies of the states along the Gulf Coast, and seriously. Even if it's just because of POTENTIAL in most cases, tourist numbers are not down - they're NON-EXISTANT. Commercial fishing in the northern Gulf has shut down.

That's the immediate, short-term effect.

That's SMALL POTATOES, folks.

This has the potential to cause so much harm to both the environment and the economy in general that we should all be freaking just a bit.

You don't live in the GC area, why should you be worried, eh? Indeed...well, guess what Skippy, when the collapse of the economy in the entire GC region occurs because of the loss of tourism, that's just the first domino. The guy that has the small hotel on the beach in Gulf Shores, AL closes up because of no business. So, he's out of work, his staff of say...5 people...are out of work...they can't buy food, they can't buy cars, they can't buy gas, they can't pay their rent/mortgage. Now the checkout girl at Piggly Wiggly is unemployed, because business at the grocery store is down....want me to keep going?

That's TOURISM, commercial fishing is a multi-BILLION dollar industry in the GC area. All those folks are unemployed.

You think that won't touch you in Seattle or in Portland, ME? Not today. Not next week. Maybe even not next month...but EVENTUALLY, it touches everyone in the US. Not in the US? Guess what, the US is the biggest consumer in the world right now...what happens when they aren't anymore?

Will it go down this way? Don't know...CAN IT? Yes, it can. Don't think so? Check your history folks, ever hear of the Dust Bowl? You think that the stock market crash of 1929 caused the Great Depression? You're wrong, that was the start of it, but once the Dust Bowl event occurred, it all unravelled. This is almost the same scenario - major upheaval in the economy due to poor management of the stock market gets the economy in a tenuous position, then a man-made ecological disaster pushes the economy right off it's teetering point, IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.

I hope I'm just yelling about the sky falling, and you can all call me Chicken Little one day. I really, really hope so.

...and I haven't even started about how this will be a very difficult issue to deal with from a direct ecological POV with the salt marshes in south Louisiana, that are already under threat because of the way the oil industry has used them...imagine hurricane Katrina barreling up from due south of New Orleans, but NO salt marshes left on the southern part of the state...

This may not be the biggest oil spill in history from a BPD standpoint, it may never even crack the top 10 (I don't believe the numbers BP is spewing for a second though), but from an economic/environmental standpoint, this COULD become a disaster of unimagined proportions.

Signed
A Hopeful Chicken Little

[MEKer]

I do not think anyone is denying the damage implications that arise from any spill of large magnitude. They ALL hurt. And we all understand the toe bone is connected to the head bone.
I'm simply saying what's done is done, lets fix it without panic and move ahead.

I also see ANY damage to our already damaged economy can be and is scary. And, let me say without breaking any rules, that things are happening, shall we say spills of another nature, to the economy far, far worse and those need to be fixed as well. Perspective always helps.

I am not about to waste time arguing either blame for an ACCIDENT or whether someone/thing hurts or not; we know, we know, we know.

Fix it (and all that that implies for you nitpickers out there) with perspective and move on.

I'm done grousing.

[MakiSupaStar]

^Gard pretty much sums up my concern. I think this scenario is very likely. It's not just this event alone, but it's the timing that concerns me on many levels. In addition to what Gard mentioned, this blow to the commercial fishing industry comes at a time where commercial fishing world wide is down. We're talking food supplies here. It's all connected. I'm not only concerned about the economics here, but also the possible humanitarian issues that might arrive due to this compromise in our food supply. Not to mention what another hurricane like Katrina would do. We're in the middle of a large hurricane cycle where we're seeing an increase in the frequency of cat 4 and 5 hurricanes.

[BurningSkies]

Lifted from an AP article yesterday:

BP has conceded that more oil is leaking than its initial estimate of 210,000 gallons a day total, and a government team is working to get a handle on exactly how much is flowing. Even under the most conservative estimate, about 6 million gallons have leaked so far, more than half the amount spilled by the Exxon Valdez.

Considering this, I have to believe it will be near the top of the list in no time. It would help if BP would stop lying about what's going on.

[Bigjohn]

Ixtoc I was in 160 ft of water. This one is in 5000 ft of water.
Also, there is no way to compare this to the others because it hasn't been stopped yet so the quantity of spilled oil is not finite.
The best and most accurate estimates put the leak rate at 70,000 barrels per day, +/-20%.
At that rate, this leak will exceed the Gulf War oil spill you cited after 142 days (from April 20) ...
This leak is under 5000 ft of water. This is absolutely unprecidented. The technical difficulty is enormous.
Lets hope and pray the top kill procedure works.

Originally Posted by MEKer

Here's a partial list, in order, but won't fill up more pages with more--Deepwater may, in time, manage to get on the list. Has to be seen, especially as they are getting a hand on it. Again---I'm not too worried its the end of the world. There's been way worse. I am still waiting for WWII spillage to be noticed but nobody does cuz it would, I believe, top the list and take some wind out of the sails of alarmists.

Gulf War oil spill Persian Gulf January 21, 1991 1,360,000–1,500,000 (9,968,800-10,995,000 barrels) [22][23]

Ixtoc I oil well Gulf of Mexico June 3, 1979–March 23, 1980 454,000–480,000 (3,328,000–3,518,000 barrels) [24]

Atlantic Empress / Aegean Captain Trinidad and Tobago July 19, 1979 287,000 (2,104,000 barrels) [25][26]

Fergana Valley Uzbekistan March 2, 1992 285,000 (2,089,000 barrels) [23]

Nowruz oil field Persian Gulf February 1983 260,000 (1,906,000 barrels) [27]

ABT Summer 700 nautical miles (1,300 km) off Angola 1991 260,000 (1,906,000 barrels) [25]

Castillo de Bellver Saldanha Bay, South Africa August 6, 1983 252,000 (1,847,000 barrels) [25]

Amoco Cadiz Brittany, France March 16, 1978 223,000 (1,635,000 barrels) [23][25]

Amoco Haven tanker disaster Mediterranean Sea near Genoa, Italy 1991 144,000 (1,056,000 barrels) [25]

Odyssey 700 nautical miles (1,300 km) off Nova Scotia, Canada 1988 132,000 (968,000 barrels) [25]

Sea Star Gulf of Oman December 19, 1972 115,000 (843,000 barrels) [23][25]

Torrey Canyon Scilly Isles, UK March 18, 1967 80,000–119,000 (586,000–872,000 barrels) [23][25]

Irenes Serenade Navarino Bay, Greece 1980 100,000 (733,000 barrels) [25]

Urquiola A Coruña, Spain May 12, 1976 100,000 (733,000 barrels) [25]


Now I'll sit back and watch it unfold and see what the end result will be. No point in continuing a "debate" about its potential as we would be speculating on final tonnage lost. Think I'll go get a donut for my coffee.

[Gard]

Originally Posted by MEKer

I do not think anyone is denying the damage implications that arise from any spill of large magnitude. They ALL hurt. And we all understand the toe bone is connected to the head bone.
I'm simply saying what's done is done, lets fix it without panic and move ahead.

I also see ANY damage to our already damaged economy can be and is scary. And, let me say without breaking any rules, that things are happening, shall we say spills of another nature, to the economy far, far worse and those need to be fixed as well. Perspective always helps.

I am not about to waste time arguing either blame for an ACCIDENT or whether someone/thing hurts or not; we know, we know, we know.

Fix it (and all that that implies for you nitpickers out there) with perspective and move on.

I'm done grousing.

An accident that occurred and got out of hand because a large corporation without a reasonable amount of oversight put pressure on a contractor to do something without a sensible amount of safety procedures in place.

An accident that has the potential to finally push the US economy into a full blown depression if all the dominoes fall in the right (wrong?) way.

When an "accident" occurs to to greed plus incompetence plus ignorance, it isn't an "accident", in my book.

My real issue here is not laying blame - that's already a fait accompli, we KNOW who is responsible! - it's the positioning of all parties involved to limit their exposure financially for their culpability. The lack of corporate responsibility for their own actions is what I have a beef about, not laying blame, because that blame is already pretty much fully laid, isn't it?

WHO WILL PAY FOR THIS?

...in the end, I fear, the American people (read: taxpayers), NOT the oil company or the drilling company.

I respect those that work in the industry, I know very well that they do their best (guys like wazzel, et al), to do their jobs right and safely, and accept that they are necessary to our world's economy, but eventually we have to get off the oil teat. Not tomorrow, I'm not Polyanna, but we have to start actually doing REAL work toward that goal.

[jmattbassplaya]

Originally Posted by Gard

In this instance, counting barrels means jack-$4!7.

As Mike points out, the spill is already damaging the economies of the states along the Gulf Coast, and seriously. Even if it's just because of POTENTIAL in most cases, tourist numbers are not down - they're NON-EXISTANT. Commercial fishing in the northern Gulf has shut down.

That's the immediate, short-term effect.

That's SMALL POTATOES, folks.

This has the potential to cause so much harm to both the environment and the economy in general that we should all be freaking just a bit.

You don't live in the GC area, why should you be worried, eh? Indeed...well, guess what Skippy, when the collapse of the economy in the entire GC region occurs because of the loss of tourism, that's just the first domino. The guy that has the small hotel on the beach in Gulf Shores, AL closes up because of no business. So, he's out of work, his staff of say...5 people...are out of work...they can't buy food, they can't buy cars, they can't buy gas, they can't pay their rent/mortgage. Now the checkout girl at Piggly Wiggly is unemployed, because business at the grocery store is down....want me to keep going?

That's TOURISM, commercial fishing is a multi-BILLION dollar industry in the GC area. All those folks are unemployed.

You think that won't touch you in Seattle or in Portland, ME? Not today. Not next week. Maybe even not next month...but EVENTUALLY, it touches everyone in the US. Not in the US? Guess what, the US is the biggest consumer in the world right now...what happens when they aren't anymore?

Will it go down this way? Don't know...CAN IT? Yes, it can. Don't think so? Check your history folks, ever hear of the Dust Bowl? You think that the stock market crash of 1929 caused the Great Depression? You're wrong, that was the start of it, but once the Dust Bowl event occurred, it all unravelled. This is almost the same scenario - major upheaval in the economy due to poor management of the stock market gets the economy in a tenuous position, then a man-made ecological disaster pushes the economy right off it's teetering point, IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.

I hope I'm just yelling about the sky falling, and you can all call me Chicken Little one day. I really, really hope so.

...and I haven't even started about how this will be a very difficult issue to deal with from a direct ecological POV with the salt marshes in south Louisiana, that are already under threat because of the way the oil industry has used them...imagine hurricane Katrina barreling up from due south of New Orleans, but NO salt marshes left on the southern part of the state...

This may not be the biggest oil spill in history from a BPD standpoint, it may never even crack the top 10 (I don't believe the numbers BP is spewing for a second though), but from an economic/environmental standpoint, this COULD become a disaster of unimagined proportions.

Signed
A Hopeful Chicken Little

+1

I was talking to my roommate about this before school was out and he wasn`t worried and thought, much like many others, that this is a very isolated situation that at most would only affect some parts of the Gulf Coast community. Once I explained to him a scenario similar to the one you just described he started to get worried. He also thought the amount of oil being released was much lower than what the current numbers are saying (which experts are also saying are a gross understatement)... I really don`t think that many people really see the severity of this situation just yet, and I don`t think most will until it`s too late.

[Steve]

I say we declare martial law and give BP 72 hours to get it under control or we start stuffing BP executives down that pipe to seal it off.

[mike_v_s]

Originally Posted by MakiSupaStar

Not to mention what another hurricane like Katrina would do. We're in the middle of a large hurricane cycle where we're seeing an increase in the frequency of cat 4 and 5 hurricanes.

It wouldn't even need to be that bad. South Louisiana is low. With the wind already blowing the oil into the marshes, it wouldn't take much beyond a Cat. 1 to just throw it everywhere. Plaquemines, St. Bernard, Terrebonne...they all flood when it rains hard. Add that to the wind pushing oil into the area and you're just screwed.

We'd discussed that possibility when the accident first happened, but didn't think it was really a possibility. Now, 30 days later and no real way to contain what has already poured out, much less stopping the flow, and we're talking a possible disaster like you haven't seen before.

During Katrina there was an oil spill in St. Bernard. That property (I forget how large, but it was a neighborhood) was condemned. There are currently lawsuits in the state of Louisiana settling the ruining of property from the early oil boom when oil was stored in large pits on the surface after it was pumped out. My point is that where ever this oil ends up in any large quantity and you can kiss its usefulness to anyone goodbye for a while.

For an idea: if we were to get a Katrina-like storm (Cat 3 when it hit my area), you're looking at a 15 ft surge of wind-driven water. It flowed about 3-5 miles inland (depending on topography). The possibility of oil being pushed 3-5 miles inland is really a problem nobody is prepared to handle, and that's on the Northshore. For even more fun, there are satellite photos of Plaqumines Parish after Katrina. It was (literally) almost all under water. Now coat that area with oil. That's the possibility we are looking at.

Mike

EDIT: sorry for the rambling.

[NOLA Bass]

Originally Posted by Gard

An accident that occurred and got out of hand because a large corporation without a reasonable amount of oversight put pressure on a contractor to do something without a sensible amount of safety procedures in place.

An accident that has the potential to finally push the US economy into a full blown depression if all the dominoes fall in the right (wrong?) way.

When an "accident" occurs to to greed plus incompetence plus ignorance, it isn't an "accident", in my book.

My real issue here is not laying blame - that's already a fait accompli, we KNOW who is responsible! - it's the positioning of all parties involved to limit their exposure financially for their culpability. The lack of corporate responsibility for their own actions is what I have a beef about, not laying blame, because that blame is already pretty much fully laid, isn't it?

WHO WILL PAY FOR THIS?

...in the end, I fear, the American people (read: taxpayers), NOT the oil company or the drilling company.

I respect those that work in the industry, I know very well that they do their best (guys like wazzel, et al), to do their jobs right and safely, and accept that they are necessary to our world's economy, but eventually we have to get off the oil teat. Not tomorrow, I'm not Polyanna, but we have to start actually doing REAL work toward that goal.

Gard, I couldn't have said it better myself.