Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 16-07-2010, 07:18   #61
Moderator Emeritus
 
David M's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: San Francisco Bay
Boat: research vessel
Posts: 10,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by slomotion View Post
One thing I've never understood is why they were going to cap this well prior to the accident. According to press accounts, this was an exploratory well (apparently a very successful one) and the plan was to cap it around the time of the accident. Is capping something you always or must do before switching to production? Or, do you just cap these things and wait for the price to go up? Why else would you "temporarily" abandon a new well?
They close a valve when they transition from the exploratory phase to the production phase. The exploratory drilling rig is not needed for the production phase. The rig either remains there to drill more wells or it is moved elsewhere. With directional drilling they can aim the well in any direction.

Sometimes oil wells are reopened when the market price of crude goes far enough above the price to extract the crude from the well. Sometimes it is not cost effective to keep a well open when the market price drops. Different wells have different production costs. This is not any sort of conspiracy, its just common sense economics.
__________________

__________________
David

Life begins where land ends.
David M is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 10:16   #62
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 226
For all us sailors out here on the Gulf(an update on the situation to help out with your float planning) , check this out:
The BP Spill: Has the Damage Been Exaggerated? - TIME

Where have I heard this before???
__________________

__________________
ude123 is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 11:12   #63
cat herder, extreme blacksheep
 
zeehag's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: furycame alley , tropics, mexico for now
Boat: 1976 FORMOSA yankee clipper 41
Posts: 17,777
Images: 56
Send a message via Yahoo to zeehag Send a message via Skype™ to zeehag
there have been many rumors and bs comments made of the oil "spill" -- yes, there IS oil submerged. has been SEEN by locals. not press. not politicians..but by individuals of no consequence who happen to reside in the area, therefo9re m th3ey have no credibility ..
bp ande politicians have REPEATEDLY attempted to force the issue by saying nothing is wrong and refusing the press to photograph certain areas. even by imp0osing fines of 340,000 usd for intruding on their personal spill.;....doesnt this tell y6ou there is something amiss?? get real. when the powwers that be, inclusive of the peerpetrator of the incident ALL come out with their particular brand of propaganda, you seem to be a big believer. why isnt there a coment from th efolks living in th earea that is destroyed?? i have been receiving daily updates about the real happenings going on in louisiana--the only state bei8ng hurt to any degrew by this particular disaster, which has spread foulness to moore than 7 miles into the state--marshes that used to be breeding grounds for the many species of near extinct critters--i hv esen the pix taken by th elocal folks of the once verdant and lush and beautiful marshes--they are not in decent shape--everything is dying or dead. why do you think they are removing turtle eggs and relocating them?? why do you think they are remoiving all the nests feom as many species of critter they are able to remove for breeding elsewhere!!!
why do you think the cajuns and crwole folks are complaining of not having any sources for work and livelihood --and this will take many years to recover. they dont have many years.

many folks seem to believe this tragedy is not a tragedy. may they answer to higher power .. only time will tell how ling will be needed to clean up this in toto....and thart answer will NOT be coming from bp nor from our ultra huge government...the answer will come from the LOCALS not press not gummint not bp.

most of the damage is done to louisiana. florida hasnt had their day as yet. when the goo gets into florida, then we will hear loud noises about how bad the disaster is , as the many beaches will be blackened--but those are so easy to clean..just dig down 6 inches into the sand and see what you find. wont be purely sand--will have a great deal of oil in it--go to gulfport and watch as the big red goooballs size of trucks roll onto the beach , where are the critters who used to live in the gulf?? used to be alive and teeming with critters. was much of the beauty of that sea. go to pas christian and see the tiny black balls size smaller than peas rolling up from the sea floor.
with more than 250thousand barrels of crud(e) flowing out of that well for so long, dont think there isnt much more damage than meets the nekkid eyeball from 500 ft.
zeehag is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 11:53   #64
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 226
I don't believe anybody is saying 'nothing is wrong'. I believe what people are saying is 'this thing has been blown way out of proportion'. The press seems to have ignored historical data available from past spills in the area and had their own agenda. Was the true economic damage done to the Gulf region done by the oil spill itself or by the press over-hype? I am in the Gulf and have crossed many times. Are second hand reports(and possibly third or fourth hand) where the locals may have seen something credible? Did the locals test what they 'saw' to determine if it was in fact oil? I believe they moved the turtle nests as a precaution, in case their nests were affected and not in response to a direct threat of oil in their immediate area. Also, if there is oil in the sand at a depth of 6" then why is that not being reported by any press? I take this article of the exaggeration of the press coverage as very good news as this means the environmental damage is not nearly as bad as the predictions, and that's a very good thing for us all. Also, the 'estimate' of the amount of oil are still in dispute as they will be confirmed IF they open the valve from the cap and see how much oil comes out of that 10" pipe for real although from reports apparently the pressure has been building since they capped it so the amount that comes out now will not be a true indication to how much spilled during the 90 days or so(with the lower pressure as reported immediately following the capping vs. the higher pressure now).
__________________
ude123 is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 15:09   #65
cat herder, extreme blacksheep
 
zeehag's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: furycame alley , tropics, mexico for now
Boat: 1976 FORMOSA yankee clipper 41
Posts: 17,777
Images: 56
Send a message via Yahoo to zeehag Send a message via Skype™ to zeehag
Quote:
Originally Posted by ude123 View Post
I don't believe anybody is saying 'nothing is wrong'. I believe what people are saying is 'this thing has been blown way out of proportion'. The press seems to have ignored historical data available from past spills in the area and had their own agenda. Was the true economic damage done to the Gulf region done by the oil spill itself or by the press over-hype? I am in the Gulf and have crossed many times. Are second hand reports(and possibly third or fourth hand) where the locals may have seen something credible? Did the locals test what they 'saw' to determine if it was in fact oil? I believe they moved the turtle nests as a precaution, in case their nests were affected and not in response to a direct threat of oil in their immediate area. Also, if there is oil in the sand at a depth of 6" then why is that not being reported by any press? I take this article of the exaggeration of the press coverage as very good news as this means the environmental damage is not nearly as bad as the predictions, and that's a very good thing for us all. Also, the 'estimate' of the amount of oil are still in dispute as they will be confirmed IF they open the valve from the cap and see how much oil comes out of that 10" pipe for real although from reports apparently the pressure has been building since they capped it so the amount that comes out now will not be a true indication to how much spilled during the 90 days or so(with the lower pressure as reported immediately following the capping vs. the higher pressure now).
the locals i kno wwh report to me are incredibly credible. pictures show oil in red color and black and ead areas , such as grand isle, where in some areas there can be found note ven a skeeter. not freekin gone. no sand fleas.

i suggest you go to louisiana and see the mayhem and to gulfport and see the bus sized globs of reddened oil and pea sized balls of black crude. i suggest you go ther eand see it first hand before ssying blown out of proportion. louisiana has suffered and will continue to suffer gross damage and gross neglect , as the areas involved are the poorer parishes. i watched as this crud slid up louisiana's marshlands, wherein the breeding grounds are. just because he oil is more than 5 miles into louisiana, and nowhere else in the gulf states,unless is 6 inches under the beach sand, where the sea gods put it, i think that the naysayers NEED to go to the damaged areas and see for themselves how over rated is the disaster before squawking about the over rated ness of the situation. many many folks will be out of homes, jo9bs and livelihood for many years to come because of this. so far there have been 3 known suicides directly attributed to this in the lake ponchartrain area. there are sources from govt that understate everything going on--i know--i have received their propaganda since the beginning of this . there is no where online to find out how much and exactly where is the oil spilled. that info does not exist. the guestimates early on wwere 5k-250kbbl every day. i believe the 250k number , as proven by the amount being bragged on being picked up and channelled into ships. propaganda is just that,and should not be trusted to be the true situation.
i trust the photos i have seen that were taken by the natives ovet the press releases i know are not from the areas of greatest damage.

sheeple believe propaganda. people read and listen and find info where others fail to see it...have to see all an hear all and filter well. i have done this for decades. i refuse to take the govt cr** lock stock and barrel. isnt a wise enterprise. the more sources the better the info.
zeehag is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 15:37   #66
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 226
Sheeple???

Zeehag, I guess since you quoted me on your post that you are referring to me with your comments. You should do a search on this forum(oil spill) and see my comments from previous posts I have made. You will see that I have gone to the Gulf region(several times now) and have seen for myself. I'm sure your 'friends' are not lying to you as if the oil is in your backyard it's gonna seem bigger than for people not directly affected, however, this does not make their accounts any more credible than anyone else's(IE scientists doing research, etc). In fact, their account may even be more innaccurate, as with eyewitness testimony is the least accurate and scientific testimony is the most accurate. I hope you are not referring to me a a 'Sheeple' as that would not only be disrespectful but a clear violation of the rules of this board. I am not disrespecting you in this debate, which we clearly have differing views, so please do not disrespect me by reducing yourself(and your argument) into a name calling debate. If you cannot control your emotions then you should probably not post about this topic. Again, read my earlier posts(about the spill, the suicides, the press, etc.) and you will see clearly where I stand in this debate but please do not call me a name. Again, I ask the question, is the economic damage to the region the result of the actual oil spill or the 'panic' set in the public minds due to exaggerated reporting and over-hyping of this incident? BTW Zeehag, what makes you 'choose' to beleive the 250K barrels/day(of which I have never heard or seen ANY estimates this high)? and where do you get that estimate(who is making this estimate of 250k barrels/day)?
__________________
ude123 is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 15:56   #67
Senior Cruiser
 
DeepFrz's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Boat: None at this time
Posts: 7,930
Susan Shaw: The oil spill's toxic trade-off | Video on TED.com
__________________
DeepFrz is online now  
Old 29-07-2010, 16:12   #68
cruiser

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Tampa to New York
Boat: Morgan 33 OutIsland, Magic and 33' offshore scott design "Cutting Edge"
Posts: 1,594
methinks the moderators start warning about politicism as soon as bp bashing starts, just more media upholding the status quo.
__________________
forsailbyowner is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 16:13   #69
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 226
Do you find it 'interesting' that Susan Shaw who is the speaker and purported expert in the above linked video doesn't have any education listed anywhere in her 'bio'. Click the red link "full bio and more links", which I did and no where does it give a 'full bio' and for that matter there is no bio info anywhere. What credentials does she have to make statements like hers? And who are the other 'scientists' that are included in the 'consensus statements' and what are their bios? I do not know ANY scientists that do no list their education on their bio as it is very pertinent as to who/what statement someone is making.
__________________
ude123 is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 16:19   #70
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere in the South Pacific
Boat: 1984 CS 36
Posts: 238
SusanShaw

PHD from columbia. i'd say she's got an education.
__________________
kb79 is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 16:43   #71
cat herder, extreme blacksheep
 
zeehag's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: furycame alley , tropics, mexico for now
Boat: 1976 FORMOSA yankee clipper 41
Posts: 17,777
Images: 56
Send a message via Yahoo to zeehag Send a message via Skype™ to zeehag
Quote:
Originally Posted by ude123 View Post
Zeehag, I guess since you quoted me on your post that you are referring to me with your comments. You should do a search on this forum(oil spill) and see my comments from previous posts I have made. You will see that I have gone to the Gulf region(several times now) and have seen for myself. I'm sure your 'friends' are not lying to you as if the oil is in your backyard it's gonna seem bigger than for people not directly affected, however, this does not make their accounts any more credible than anyone else's(IE scientists doing research, etc). In fact, their account may even be more innaccurate, as with eyewitness testimony is the least accurate and scientific testimony is the most accurate. I hope you are not referring to me a a 'Sheeple' as that would not only be disrespectful but a clear violation of the rules of this board. I am not disrespecting you in this debate, which we clearly have differing views, so please do not disrespect me by reducing yourself(and your argument) into a name calling debate. If you cannot control your emotions then you should probably not post about this topic. Again, read my earlier posts(about the spill, the suicides, the press, etc.) and you will see clearly where I stand in this debate but please do not call me a name. Again, I ask the question, is the economic damage to the region the result of the actual oil spill or the 'panic' set in the public minds due to exaggerated reporting and over-hyping of this incident? BTW Zeehag, what makes you 'choose' to beleive the 250K barrels/day(of which I have never heard or seen ANY estimates this high)? and where do you get that estimate(who is making this estimate of 250k barrels/day)?
try reading the very first info published when the wellhead blew.is in print there that between 5000 and 250000bbl of oil was spewing into gulf of mexico EVERY DAY . now they say they are catching and returning over 100,000bbl of oil into the return. go figger. kinda correlates the initial statements to reality. having been raised in the family i was, i was incredibly privileged. my dad is a chemical engineer for a large chemical company. we were taught a lot as we grew. we overheard many conversations between dad and his clients over dinners.
when one confines his informational sources to the propaganda spewed forth as a cya measure for the govt and bp, i must include those non individuals in a sheeple context, as the propaganda is , in fact, aimed at the folks who believe all the govt spews. misinformation and disinformation are both in plentiful use by all the groups involved in this mayhem which is still occurring. it is not derogatory --is a fact. those who follow blindly in the face of all the facts must accept the fact that sheeple is a shoe that fits. whether you do or not is your business--is not a name calling thing--is a fact. is a categorizational tool and much worn word use in our vocabulary. if you blindly believe the propaganda spewed by the powers that be and believe the ridiculous statements made by the bp folks and govt and thad allen, then you are , in fact, not individual. there is a 40,000 usd fine against anyone going to see or question any of the cleaners--lol--tells me that the deal is worse than they say. get real and see the roses in your coffee. sorry if you consider this an attack--is NOT an attack--you really need to see other info than the propaganda influenced sheeple.

the corexit is a malevolent infliction upon the humans and mammals in the area. the chemical was created by bp and is being used to make the mess hide from any overhead cameras. is neurotoxic.
if you truly TRUST the govt, i feel sorry for you. they and bp are preventing the media from seeing the reality of this situation by controlling the flyovers and contact with the beach and other cleaners.
there is a prevention by BP AND OUR GOVT from seeing the realities of this disaster. thad allen has made it a crime to fly over the spill and he has made it acrime to speak with anyone cleaning the spill and even walking on some of the beaches is a crime--punished by 40,000usd fines. is that openness and freedom of information?? NOT AT ALL. and yet you trust these ....LOL.

when i first heard her i thought she was an extemist. she is factual. research your chemicals, she doesnt listen to the propaganda--does that make her stoopit??? i think that makes her respectable. she coulda been a male-then would you believe her words????
zeehag is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 16:46   #72
Moderator Emeritus
 
GordMay's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 31,586
Images: 240
Who is Dr. Susan Shaw
SusanShaw
__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"



GordMay is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 16:51   #73
Senior Cruiser
 
DeepFrz's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Boat: None at this time
Posts: 7,930
Quote:
Susan D. Shaw, MFA, DrPH
Marine Toxicologist, Founder/Director Marine Environmental Research Institute


Dr. Susan Shaw is a marine toxicologist, author, explorer, and founder/director of MERI. She is known for her pioneering research on chemical contaminants in the ocean environment. An outspoken and influential voice on ocean pollution, she dove in the Gulf of Mexico oil slick in May, 2010, to observe first-hand how oil and dispersants were impacting life in the water column. The experience prompted her to call for an independent investigation, the Gulf EcoTox Project, to track the impacts of oil and chemical dispersants in the Gulf food web.
Dr. Shaw has spent the past two decades documenting the effects of hundreds of man-made chemicals in marine ecosystems. She is credited as the first scientist to show that flame retardant chemicals in consumer products have contaminated marine mammals and commercially important fish stocks along the northwest Atlantic, from Canada to New York. This research has influenced policy decisions in the US and abroad, including the Maine legislature’s decision to ban the neurotoxic flame retardant decabromodiphenyl ether (Deca), and the subsequent US phase-out of the chemical.

Commissioned by Ansel Adams in 1983 to write Overexposure, the first book on the health hazards of photographic chemicals, she is an internationally recognized expert on levels and health effects of toxic chemicals in wildlife and humans.

In 2009, Shaw published the first comprehensive review of flame retardant chemicals in marine ecosystems of the American continents. She serves on the International Panel on Chemical Pollution, a select group of scientists urging policymakers to improve management of toxic chemicals.

Shaw is a keynote speaker on the ocean crisis and chemical pollution in the US, Europe, and Asia, and is amplifying the ocean message as Chair of the International Explorers Club’s State of the Oceans Forums. She has recently been nominated to be a Woodrow Wilson visiting fellow.
ude123, how do Dr. Shaw's credentials stack up against yours?
__________________
DeepFrz is online now  
Old 29-07-2010, 16:55   #74
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeehag View Post
try reading the very first info published when the wellhead blew.is in print there that between 5000 and 250000bbl of oil was spewing into gulf of mexico EVERY DAY . now they say they are catching and returning over 100,000bbl of oil into the return. go figger. kinda correlates the initial statements to reality. having been raised in the family i was, i was incredibly privileged. my dad is a chemical engineer for a large chemical company. we were taught a lot as we grew. we overheard many conversations between dad and his clients over dinners.
when one confines his informational sources to the propaganda spewed forth as a cya measure for the govt and bp, i must include those non individuals in a sheeple context, as the propaganda is , in fact, aimed at the folks who believe all the govt spews. misinformation and disinformation are both in plentiful use by all the groups involved in this mayhem which is still occurring. it is not derogatory --is a fact. those who follow blindly in the face of all the facts must accept the fact that sheeple is a shoe that fits. whether you do or not is your business--is not a name calling thing--is a fact. is a categorizational tool and much worn word use in our vocabulary. if you blindly believe the propaganda spewed by the powers that be and believe the ridiculous statements made by the bp folks and govt and thad allen, then you are , in fact, not individual. there is a 40,000 usd fine against anyone going to see or question any of the cleaners--lol--tells me that the deal is worse than they say. get real and see the roses in your coffee. sorry if you consider this an attack--is NOT an attack--you really need to see other info than the propaganda influenced sheeple.

the corexit is a malevolent infliction upon the humans and mammals in the area. the chemical was created by bp and is being used to make the mess hide from any overhead cameras. is neurotoxic.
if you truly TRUST the govt, i feel sorry for you. they and bp are preventing the media from seeing the reality of this situation by controlling the flyovers and contact with the beach and other cleaners.
there is a prevention by BP AND OUR GOVT from seeing the realities of this disaster. thad allen has made it a crime to fly over the spill and he has made it acrime to speak with anyone cleaning the spill and even walking on some of the beaches is a crime--punished by 40,000usd fines. is that openness and freedom of information?? NOT AT ALL. and yet you trust these ....LOL.

Zeehag, I am interested to see your sources as 'they' are not a source for information. Who specifically has estimated this spill anywhere near 250k barrels/day? I'm guessing from your post that we should never believe anything the government tells us? Was your father covering up things, is this what leads you to believe all do this? Please show me where it is a crime to fly over the spill zone? or walk on the beach? The spill cleanup people signed a contract with BP(employment contract) of non-disclosure. This is much different than 'against the law'/ a crime. And isn't the 'facts' you give without so much as any resources by definition propaganda? How is it that you, Zeehag, can 'choose' what's the truth and what's propaganda? When you only listen to one side of a debate aren't you, by your own definition, a 'sheeple'?
__________________
ude123 is offline  
Old 29-07-2010, 17:02   #75
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 226
Where has 'DR. Shaw' ever published anything in any respected scientific publication(you know the kind that must be 'peer reviewed' prior to publication). Look at her list of peer reviewed publications and you will find that the publications that have published her 'work' are not scientifically respected publications. Also, notice her Dr.HD is in public health practice and not in a marine biological discipline.
__________________

__________________
ude123 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 20:00.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.