SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Travis_Bickle who wrote (250480)5/28/2010 10:05:12 AM
From: RetiredNowRespond to of 306849
 
Yeah, I hear you. I'm an "all of the above" guy when it comes to energy. However, this BP thing is an eye-opener. It's clear the costs of using oil are MUCH higher than even I have given it credit for.

Ultimately, I want the price of oil usage in the US to reflect true market prices, including the cost of oil security in foreign wars, the cost of oil spill cleanups, and the cost to reimburse the damage done to our economy as a result of oil spills. When those are accounted for, then we should be paying $8 per gallon for gas. But again, none of the pigs in the US want to hear that kind of truth.



To: Travis_Bickle who wrote (250480)5/28/2010 11:50:09 AM
From: Elroy JetsonRespond to of 306849
 
This drill "accident" should not have occurred. Platforms in most areas use a secondary BOP stack in case the first fails, as it did partially here. And you aren't supposed to take the series of short-cuts BP took when drilling this well.

The industry wanted to be self-regulating and responsible for cleaning-up after themselves, as outline in the 1990 Act.

Well, they have failed.

What needs to happen is a new regime of "building codes" with redundant safety features, combined with actual enforcement for offshore oil wells to follow. And we need to remove the offensive "Exxon Amendment", the $75 million cap on damages included in the Act.
.