Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (572715)	6/20/2010 3:09:11 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579807

Its the second worst spill in the world and could be the largest when all is said and done. It far exceeds the Valdez spill which occurred in a very different environment. On what basis is it the "second worst"? By the number of gallons dumped into the GOM. If current estimates are accurate, it now ranks as the second worst spill right behind the Iraqi spill in the Persian Gulf in the first Gulf war. And isn't the correct metric the amount of actual damage done? And how much damage has been done thus far? I am not familiar with the Persian Gulf but I suspect if you use damage to plantlife.....to wetlands.....as your guide, this spill is much worse than that one. I am assuming the land around the Persian Gulf is mostly desert and not productive. I'm not trying to minimize it, just asking that you keep it in perspective. A small amount of oil in Prince William Sound may be far more damaging than a lot of [a different kind of] oil in the Gulf. You can't just conclude that because it is more oil than Valdez it is more damage. I don't think so. Given the warmer climate, the ecology of the GOM has to be much more diverse and more vulnerable than the ecology in Prince William Sound. Plants and animals living in Prince William Sound typically are a hardier breed.....survival of the fittest.....given the harsher climate. Plus, plant life in the Sound is shut down for winter. That's not true in the GOM. I am not a scientist but I suspect the impact on the GOM will be more severe. However, I do think it will reover. Though how long it will take is anyone's guess. To date, actual damage hasn't been that great. If the well is in fact reduced to, e.g., 5k bbl/day as Obama has said it would be during the next week, the damage may end up being minimal. Haven't heard that statistic. It would be good news if its true. Also, the technology is better today than in 89 or 79, and it is likely the cleanup will be far more effective by the time the Obama administration gets its shit together. That's not true. Oil companies are using the same technology they used in the 1970s. See.....this is part of your problem.........you don't bother to keep up so its very easy for you to consider the concern over the GOM as some liberal silliness. The big joke in the Jon Stewart clip I posted is that all the oil companies were using the same recovery plan.......apparently, they were all plagiarizing. In fact, one of the go-to contacts on all those plans......a Ph.D......had been dead for 5 years. Their whole clean up efforts are a joke.......its why they were so unprepared for a spill. As for better technology, Maddow had a whole show on how the technology has not changed at all from the 1970s; that the oil companies have not made any effort to update the techology they use for clean up even as they use state of the art to drill. See.....this is your problem. You are pathetically uninformed which allows you to agree with Barton and to consider him a hero. If there is a fool in this exchange, its the one you see when you look in the mirror. This could yet become a terrible, disaster. But as of right now, it is overblown IMO. That's because you don't have all the facts. Ignorance is bliss.