Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (14 total)
07:08 PM on 06/30/2010
Part 1 of possibly a 4 or 5 part post

As the person who organized the protest shown in the AP photo used for Myth #2 (and actually being in the photo) I feel quite compelled to do a little myth debunking of my own on this. Dan Shapely's not alone -- this is the same take I've heard in the NY Times and countless other articles since that protest in the photo, which was on the 50th day of the spill. Our protest was held at an ARCO gas station because ARCO and am/pm are brands fully owned by BP. And while I did my homework before organizing this protest, I've done a LOT more since and can say I still have a different view on all of the major concerns I've heard made about BP protests in the media. So I'll take them one by one.

#1 That it doesn't make sense to boycott BP-related stations because all gas stations, regardless of the company, get their gas from one big pool in the open market. So you might as well protest at all stations.

First and foremost, I think that most people who care enough about this disaster to be out protesting, would prefer to end offshore drilling completely and get real energy/climate legislation passed that will end our addiction to fossil fuels. In fact, many of the signs at our protest were to that effect. (continued)
06:37 PM on 06/30/2010
#11 - Obama was acting on this problem on day 1
04:34 AM on 07/01/2010
Within 24 hours 16 different agencies had been mobilized with Homeland Security, FEMA, NOAA, the Dept of the Interior and Wildlife and Fisheries headed to the Gulf. The Coast Guard was at the oil site within an hour and half after the explosion and skimming began within 72 hours following Search and Rescue. Search and Rescue always takes precidence. Now let hear who you with your expertise and credentials would have done differently.
06:35 PM on 06/30/2010
Seems to me that the New York Times is reporting BP is making payments to some independent gas station owners for down sales, advertising and lower credit card fees. Does this count as "effective"? Boycott BP.
05:39 PM on 06/30/2010
You know what seems strange to me? Its the tone of the story and the tone of the HP that bothers me lately.

We' ve got a president being hammered to death on not just the oil spill but also supposedly also shutting down all the gulf drilling sending thousands to the unemployment lines. But according to this story, which is critical of President Obama, he did not shut down all the drilling in the gulf which in addition to the blow out is something else he's being blamed for.

A true and real case of damned if you do and damned if you don't by one of the few progressive/liberal media outlets available.
photo
lunarsnare
♫♪♫ ♪♫♪
05:48 PM on 06/30/2010
And when Obama secured the 20 billion, a first in History....HP burred the story.
06:35 PM on 06/30/2010
Actually, that was the lead story for at least a day. Nice try though.
06:31 PM on 06/30/2010
You find this story critical of obama? You must really be a true believer.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:19 PM on 06/30/2010
I guess the last part of my post was too much for the HP. But you get the gist of what Texas conservatives are sending around on e-mail.
photo
BlueGreen55
Capitalism w/o Morals is like Faith w/o Works-dead
06:11 PM on 06/30/2010
"c. The only way the Macondo well can be stopped is by intersecting the well with the relief wells being drilled now. If the "junk shot" or "top kill" method would have stopped the flow or the blowout preventer finally closed, the pressured oil would have just ruptured the shallow geological formations and oil would have been coming up in geysers all over the place for miles and then the only way to stop the flow would have been to allow the reservoir to deplete. And this could have been years! Thus, it is a "good" thing that the "top kill" failed"

This is only true if the casing and BoP stay relatively intact until the relief wells are drilled, as i understand it. Isn't it possible that these could collapse before the 2 RW are drilled, leading to the extreme blowout for 5-10 years you mention?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:37 PM on 06/30/2010
No No NO. I did not write this. It is an e-mail that was sent to me by a conservative friend in Texas. I find it so abhorrent that I thought it would speak for itself.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:45 PM on 06/30/2010
This is the last of the 5 postings that I submitted hours ago.

Please everyone--read the first two lines of my e-mail:

This is part 1 of 4 or 5--it turned out to be 5, and the HP did not print the 5th post--so I can include this entire e-mail that is circulating among Texas conservatives.

I did not compose anything except for that opening line. I felt that the e-mail was just so abhorrent--a small sliver of truth compounded by half truths and then topped off with outright lies-- it would speak for itself to spark conversation. Obviously I was wrong.
Peatbog
Puffins
05:07 PM on 06/30/2010
Where's that 11th myth? the one about the dispersant being safe?

And thanks, Ron1951, for illustrating just how uninformed Sarah Palin's remarks are about deep offshore drilling and why the oil companies have gone there.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:50 PM on 06/30/2010
I only want to be sure that you know that I was just re-posting an e-mail that is circulating among Texas conservatives. Except for the first line on the first post of 5, none of the sentiments are mine.

But, I agree with you wholeheartedly that the half-term ex-governor of Alaska who leaves a trail of wreckage behind her wherever she goes, knows diddley-squat about anything.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:58 PM on 06/30/2010
post 4 of maybe 5 or 6:

e. Tony Hayward, the beaten down CEO of BP, is a friend of mine who I worked with on our project in Colombia in 1994-1997. He was the Exploration Manager for BP's Bogota office. He has a phD in geoscience with highest honors and has more 28 years experience in technical and management positions with BP, which is a heck of a lot more applicable to his job than community organizing. It would be impossible for him to know the level of detail of what happened on that rig; and Rep. Waxman's questioning just revealed the U.S. government's requirement to place personal blame and focus on something other than the administrations failings on a number of fronts. I contend that the pollution in the Gulf is horrific; but the Gulf will recover. However, the government's overreach into the oil industry as a result of the incident will do more harm to the country in the long run. Waxman et. al. will deal more harm to the country which will never be cleaned up. My advice to Tony Hayward when he met with the congressional panel, and his other public appearances, would have been to have a good speech writer and use a teleprompter. That way he could have kept his foot out of his mouth and look more like a competent chief executive.
photo
lunarsnare
♫♪♫ ♪♫♪
05:45 PM on 06/30/2010
Nothing personal and reading several of your posts but…
I don’t know who you can talk like that, whilst millions of animals are dying as we speak in the most horrendously gruesome way.
A whole way of life for residents is wiped out.
When for the time being, there is no end in sight.
When almost everything BP has said so far was not true.
I could not care less how well educated Mr. Tony Hayward is, but we do know hat he lied and that goes to character.
And since you claim to be his acquaintance….would you know why he sold much of his BP stock shortly before the DWH well blew up?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:35 PM on 06/30/2010
No No NO. I did not write this. It is an e-mail that was sent to me by a conservative friend in Texas. I find it so abhorrent that I thought it would speak for itself.
photo
Soulsurfer
Solar Electrician,Longtime Surfin'Fool
07:15 PM on 06/30/2010
Sorry Bubba, but the government's "intrusion" would not be needed if BP invested in safety and took a little less profit. The near complete devastation of the Gulf region seems to be taken pretty lightly by your type, obviously a corporatist. I guess you can take your vacations somewhere else where you haven't shit on, you know, out-of-site, out-of-mind, but the millions who depend on the Gulf for a living, and their HOME, might disagree with you.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:34 PM on 06/30/2010
No No NO. I did not write this. It is an e-mail that was sent to me by a conservative friend in Texas. I find it so abhorrent that I thought it would speak for itself.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:56 PM on 06/30/2010
post 3 of maybe more than 4 or 5---
Also, let me share some statistics and personal thoughts which can put this well into perspective.

c. The only way the Macondo well can be stopped is by intersecting the well with the relief wells being drilled now. If the "junk shot" or "top kill" method would have stopped the flow or the blowout preventer finally closed, the pressured oil would have just ruptured the shallow geological formations and oil would have been coming up in geysers all over the place for miles and then the only way to stop the flow would have been to allow the reservoir to deplete. And this could have been years! Thus, it is a "good" thing that the "top kill" failed.

d. This next statistic is not to bash our president; but to put things into perspective: When Air Force One is in the air, it consumes jet fuel (which incidentally comes from the Gulf of Mexico) at the rate of 5 gallons per mile as indicated in data released by the govt. And anywhere the pres goes, there are at least two jets of equal size carrying his cars, golf carts, secret service, guests, press, etc. If you make the calculations, this means that when the president takes a junket in Air Force One, he and his entourage are consuming the entire oil production of approximate 450 average oil wells in the U.S.!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:56 PM on 06/30/2010
post 2 of 4 or 5---

a. The U.S. has more than 525,000 producing oil wells in the country. With about 5 million barrels per day produced in the U.S., this means that the average well in the U.S. produces less than 10 barrels per day and included in that average are prolific wells in Alaska and the Gulf which are capable of producing much more. I would bet the median oil rate of a U.S. well is less than 3 barrels per day. More than 31% of the oil wells in the U.S. according to the DOE produce less than one barrel per day!

b. With the Macondo well belching an estimated 40,000 to 50,000 barrels per day means the Macondo well is capable of flowing more than 4,000 to 5,000 average wells in the U.S! Is there no surprise that fields like this one are the prize being sought after by the industry which cannot drill in shallow waters or much of anywhere in the U.S. anymore? This one well produces about 1% of the entire U.S. production rate and is most likely the most productive well in the country! And probably one of the most productive wells in the world. It is too bad that this field will most likely never be produced following shutting and abandoning the Macondo #1 blowout.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:54 PM on 06/30/2010
This is part 1 of 4 or 5 comments so I can include this entire e-mail that is circulating among Texas conservatives:

"Am still going back and forth to Dallas keeping my toe in the oil business. However, fortunately, I am working on a deepwater project in offshore Ghana and will not be sticking my toe into the Gulf of Mexico. Thus, I will still miss the Thursday luncheons for the foreseeable future.

I know many of you are curious as to what is going on in the Gulf, as I am sure you are aware the politicians and press are not well informed and have no interest to be well informed. I have attached a MS Word file with a sketch of the two relief wells which are being drilled as fast as they can to "kill" the blowout well - Macondo #1. It is a good status of the two wells, one of which is closing in on the blowout. When I finish my Dallas gig, I will do a lunch presentation on the incident.

Also, let me share some statistics and personal thoughts which can put this well into perspective.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:42 PM on 06/30/2010
Please everyone--read the first two lines of my e-mail:

This is part 1 of 4 or 5--it turned out to be 5, and the HP did not print the 5th post--so I can include this entire e-mail that is circulating among Texas conservatives.

I did not compose anything except for that opening line. I felt that the e-mail was just so abhorrent--a small sliver of truth compounded by half truths and then topped off with outright lies-- would speak for itself to spark conversation. Obviously I was wrong.
04:51 PM on 06/30/2010
I couldn't get past the first one (no moratorium.) There may be no offical moratorium but there is effectively one ( http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/25/news/economy/shallow_drilling_ban/index.htm )

And good luck finding a judge that doesn't have some sort of investment in oil. Most blue chip mutual funds include those. The judge sold his Exxon stock just prior to his ruling. If he was really dirty he would have held onto it because lifting the ban would have been expected to help, not hurt, oil stocks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maru67
04:36 PM on 06/30/2010
I *heart* opensecrets.org.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fairiswhat
Break the False Left-Right Paradigm
04:32 PM on 06/30/2010
How about debunking the toxicity of COREXIT 9500 and the possibility that it may POISON EVERYTHING, PERSON, PLANT LIFE in the greater area due to toxic rain?

Since apparently dispersants is one of the only tactics they are largely and consistently using to handle this disaster, this is an issue that calls for more attention.

In my opinion, most of the points made on this article are little removed from the issue at hand, except for maybe point #10.

Look to alternative media for info on COREXIT 9500 and dispersants. MSM has already failed in this regard.
04:28 PM on 06/30/2010
I worked in the petroleum industry for a long time and it amazes me how little the public knows about all aspects of gasoline manufacture and distribution. Let me educate you with respect to BP

1) Most gasoline is transported via a fungible pipeline and product is mixed. It is likely that BP gasoline at the pump came from an Exxon or Shell refinery and vice versa.
2) BP does not own any retail gasoline stations. They are all independently operated and many may get their gasoline from a variety of sources.
3) Are you hurting BP by not buying gas at BP labeled station?? NO!!!! you are hurting the person who owns the station.

Stop the stupidity with the boycotts. If you want to drive down the price of gas, walk or buy an electric car.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Hearn
04:34 PM on 06/30/2010
BP's fee for franchises is 5% of in store sales excluding gas. When you buy stuff from inside a BP branded store, 5% of what you spend goes directly to BP. The myth here is that BP isn't hurt by the boycott.

http://www.ampm.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9006398&contentId=7013207
04:42 PM on 06/30/2010
the point is that boycotting bp at the pump is about as hurtful to bp as eating a carrot is hurtful to a cattle farmer. but good luck with the boycott.
08:13 PM on 06/30/2010
The in store sales are a drop in the bucket. This is American jobs on the line, not BP at all. If you want to get to BP where it hurts put your time into making sure they pay full damages. 50-100B will get the attention of their BOD. As a former insider, I can tell you the BP senior execs laugh when they see people picketing the BP gas stations in USA.
You might as well be picketing Denny's.
04:18 PM on 06/30/2010
Crappy "article" from Dan Shapley. Half of these aren't myths, but more of excuses for Dan to cast his cynical world view on this disaster.

Boycotting anything BP will effect BP
Climate legislation can happen