BP of A?????

[Tunnelcat]

WTF! I mean, WTF!!!!!!

Is BP NOW in charge of our Coast Guard at the behest of the Obama Administration and are they actively using them to help cover up this epic mess in the Gulf by forcibly keeping journalists away? Do these idiots think that they can just hide this effing disaster from the public and make it go away?



http://www.mnn.com/green-tech/research- ... for-docume

And what an epic mess it is! All that gray-beige color in the water is OIL!

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/featur ... 0519b.html

[Heretic]

So how's the hope and change?

[CUDA]

Well you voted for him. we tried to warn you

[Tunnelcat]

Oh, you guys think that McCain and 'Little Miss' \"Drill, baby drill\" Palin would have been any different? Bwaaahaaaahaaaaa! They're ALL corporate shills in our government now, no matter WHAT party they belong too!

Right now, Obama's just looking like a DINO shill in the pockets of big oil and other corporate interests. Yes, I voted for him and yes, I'm now regretting that vote!

[Heretic]

What you don't know or realize is no matter who was elected this time we were screwed from get go.

[Grendel]

What were you expecting ? I'm surprised at your \"WTF\", this is exactly how corporations work.

[dissent]

a tunnelcat thread with a forest of exclamation marks and the phrase \"corporate shills\".


I'm shocked. SHOCKED !!!!!!!


um, yeah, BP's doing a bang up job of trying to cover up the oil spill; see here -
http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?ca ... Id=7052055

ssshhhhhh; ees seeecret .......


more:

Incidentally there has been a response to the story of a CBS crew being stopped. The Unified Command issued a statement that said, in part:

Tonight CBS Evening News reported they were denied access to oiled shoreline by a civilian vessel that had clean-up workers contracted by BP, as well as Coast Guard personnel on board. CBS News video taped the exchange during which time one of the contractors told them (on tape) that \" ... this is BP's rules not ours.\"

Neither BP nor the U.S. Coast Guard, who are responding to the spill, have any rules in place that would prohibit media access to impacted areas and we were disappointed to hear of this incident. In fact, media has been actively embedded and allowed to cover response efforts since this response began, with more than 400 embeds aboard boats and aircraft to date. Just today 16 members of the press observed clean-up operations on a vessel out of Venice, La.

The only time anyone would be asked to move from an area would be if there were safety concerns, or they were interfering with response operations. This did occur off South Pass Monday which may have caused the confusion reported by CBS today.

The entities involved in the Deepwater Horizon/BP Response have already reiterated these media access guidelines to personnel involved in the response and hope it prevents any future confusion.

from http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6489#more

[woodchip]

Seriously, what did you expect Tc?:

\"During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.\"

Too bad you are starting to see the golden gilt is really just brass.

[flip]

Sounds like to me TC has attained full grasp of the situation now.

[Tunnelcat]

Well, I could only delusionally hope at one time that the Dems could still have a little social humanity left and MAYBE make some difference in the way our country is being run, but no more I guess. Our government is corporate owned and run, with both parties under their thumb. We're borked!

I'm glad I'm not young right now and having THIS road ahead as the future of my country staring me in the face. Sorry guys, it just bums me out and I don't see a realistic solution in the near future.

Oh, and dissent, all that dispersant that they've been spreading to break up the oil is really toxic to ALL life. The entire Gulf is going to be a 'dead zone' for years to come.

[Bet51987]

.

[Spidey]

Get Obama Party…I like that so much, I just might rejoin.

[flip]

There's a reason it's called \"smoke and mirrors\"

[Will Robinson]

Don't fall apart or bend to the conservative way of life TC. (Just think of conservapedia, Sarah Palin, Texas school books, etc.) There is still a big difference in each party....

Yea! Whatever you do don't dare to think you have any choice except to dimwittedly select from the choices presented by the one-party-disguised-as-two. After all if young Bee can so instinctively know which side of that face to listen to you should be able to do it too...

[Tunnelcat]

Don't fall apart or bend to the conservative way of life TC. (Just think of conservapedia, Sarah Palin, Texas school books, etc.) There is still a big difference in each party. For example, it was the GOP part of the SCOTUS that gave corporations the power to own you and your vote...not the Dems. It was the Get Obama Party that tried to block financial reform of wall st so they can no longer steal your money... not the dems. And you know what? When the dems tried to raise the price tag for what oil companies must pay for cleanup of oil spills, guess who put up a road block... Yep, the Party of Nay, the real oil party.

Bee

Definitely not thinking of that Bee, just frustrated with the hypocrisy and slow fall from grace of our once great country, all due to the machinations of BOTH parties (and unfortunately Obama) and their corporate influence. And now here we have the Tea Party and Newt Gingrich decrying Obama Secular Socialism, when it's really both party's Corporatism and greed that's really destroying our country. I will give a few of them some intellect whenever they hold up a Fascism sign however. Corporatism, Fascism, similar stripe, close enough.

The Republican way of thinking that allows the few to profit off the many is not good for a stable society or a clean, safe environment for everyone IMHO. Before the modern massive global corporate takeover of the American government, the usual Republican philosophy dictated that the marketplace should be free to determine all it's rules, if any, and apply those to all of society and private business, allowing them to self-regulate essentially. Democratic philosophy used to dictate that government rules were necessary to protect the commons and ensure equal opportunity for anyone that worked hard enough could succeed in America in a fair manner, but using taxation to attain that goal was always their Achilles Heel. Mind you, these are just quick, basic descriptions of each party's philosophies. What's happened since Reagan and more recently, Gingrich, is that the Republicans have been consistent and kept their philosophy, but with some cold calculation, a Frankenstein-like merge with religion of all things, to take power. But the spineless Democrats seem to have forgotten what they used to stand for, PEOPLE, and have begun to embrace Corporatism just like the Republicans. In fact, in a twisted turn, Republicans embraced big government spending like good Democrats under the Bush Administration.

Here's what I see with Republican dictum. In the case of BP and offshore drilling, instead of government mandated rules and regulations, they would allow marketplace economic factors to determine what the rules for offshore drilling would be, in other words, cost and customer driven rules and needs would control company practice and policy. If customer didn't want to buy offshore oil because of the environmental risks, they would choose to not buy from BP or other companies that drill offshore, simple as that. Now the problem with a marketplace solution is it often results in a few winners and a lot of losers, namely everyone else that either makes a living fishing or promoting tourism in the Gulf of Mexico, creating a huge disproportionate inequity, especially with a product that has essentially inelastic demand, oil. Rand Paul's thinking comes to mind conveniently just today:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/ybe ... y_id=64146

http://chattahbox.com/us/2010/05/21/ran ... ppens-man/

Oh poor little BP, suffering under the boot heel of Obama. What tripe! The Gulf of Mexico IS the commons of the U.S. for ALL of us to enjoy, not BP's private money pot that's now a sewer. THEY get the profits, WE get the polluted ocean and beaches in return. We certainly didn't get usable oil out of this fiasco.

But I digress. On the flip side, a Communist or Socialist system tries to make things equal for all, but it's unfair in a different way. People make money for the state to redistribute equally to the people to pay for basic living. But this system has drawbacks, the person that works harder gets paid the same as the person that's slacking off and not pulling his or her fair share. That creates resentment, economic stagnation, little productivity or innovation or desire to work hard. Corporations and private business wouldn't exist in much capacity, if at all, so no wonderful, infinite products to buy whenever you want. Not a system I would want to live in.

The magic of the American system is that we have been in a sweet spot between both ideological extremes, at least for most of the twentieth century, albeit oscillating between the polar opposites. America used to be a place where EVERY individual had an equal opportunity to succeed if they worked hard enough. That was the American Dream. I think that we are losing or have lost that now.

The magic we've had for nearly a century just is not possible in either a pure market-driven system or a pure socialist system because not everyone gets an equal opportunity. In the socialist system, the government doesn't allow people to have differential success because that would create inequity. In a pure market-driven system, equal opportunity doesn't exist because of the winner-take-all effect and human greed. I know that Spidey will argue this point, but winner-take-all is what's happening now. Desire for money begets taking even MORE money. If the system allows that, there are no stops.

My question is, where's that balance we've kept between the two systems and why can't we maintain that? This balance is what allowed our country to flourish and grow.

[Will Robinson]

...
My question is, where's that balance we've kept between the two systems and why can't we maintain that? This balance is what allowed our country to flourish and grow.

The 'balance' has been bought out by lobbiests. We don't elect representatives anymore we select the product of the party machine and the party machine is a whore to big money interests and big voting block interests which profit by keeping their members on the plantation.

We won't see representation again until we vote them out in major overthrow of congress. You can keep thinking you know which party will save you or which one is the lesser of two evils but as long as you do you are doomed!

something like this: might help

[dissent]

Oh, and dissent, all that dispersant that they've been spreading to break up the oil is really toxic to ALL life. The entire Gulf is going to be a 'dead zone' for years to come.

What, no exclamation marks?


You really can't help yourself with the hyperbole, can you? Let's do a little arithmetic. From these sources -
http://www.epa.gov/gmpo/about/facts.html

http://www.energyboom.com/emerging/basi ... ispersants

I find that the total volume of the Gulf of Mexico is 6.43 X 10^17 gallons. The second article mentions that as of 17 May about 325,000 gallons of dispersant have been spread on this spill. For the sake of argument, let's just round that up to 1 million gallons (i.e. 10^6 gallons). Therefore, since YOU are claiming the entire Gulf will be a dead zone because of this, let's calculate the concentration of the dispersant.

10^6 / (6.43 x 10^17) = 1.56 x 10^-12

or 1.56 x 10^-10 % is the concentration of the dispersant in all of the Gulf's water. Since there are 10000 ppm in 1%, then that works out to a concentration of the dispersant in ALL of the gulf's water of 1.56 x 10^-6 ppm, or about 1.6 parts per TRILLION.

(Nerdy enough for you? )

Now I challenge you to defend your assertion that a 1-2 part per trillion concentration will turn the Gulf into a dead zone.


Of course, the concentration of the dispersant is much higher in the limited area where it has been sprayed. Certainly it would be better if they didn't need to spray it. It would be better if the oil had never spilled. But your wild off-the-cuff ravings don't help to make your case very effectively.

For example, it was the GOP part of the SCOTUS that gave corporations the power to own you and your vote...not the Dems.[/b] Only Bettina is ignorant or naive enough to believe that the Democrats are immune to the wiles of corporation influence.

[Grendel]

Too bad the crap isn't distributed equally all over the Gulf..

[Bet51987]

.

[Spidey]

Well tc, I don’t know if I disagree with you or not, because I don’t see the relevance of what people are saying about this disaster.

What I do know is this…I get really sick of all the finger pointing and the big blame game that has to happen, every time something goes wrong.

[Krom]

A very important part of capitalism that allows the system to grow and work in general is for businesses to have the real potential to fail and be replaced. Can BP fail because of this incident?

Can GM or Ford fail?

Can the major banks fail?

Can the major telecomms fail?

Can wal-mart fail?

The answer is that the government wouldn't let them fail, they are all too big to let fail. Which means that instead of getting a turnover and someone else getting the chance to come in and fill the gap better, the whole country gets dragged down instead by propping up the failure. It doesn't promote success or careful consideration on the part of businesses. It promotes a corporate mentality that is horrible for the economy and the general public \"it doesn't matter how badly you screw up now, the taxpayers will bail you out\". If failure doesn't matter, then success doesn't matter either. This is the reason why people say socialism is bad, its because in pure socialism the government is too big to fail so the taxpayers bail it out.

Washington has allowed so many entities to grow far too large for their own good. Small businesses can save the world, so why do we keep allowing these huge ones to gobble up everything, horde all the benefits for themselves and push all the risk and responsibility on to the taxpayers?

[Heretic]

So Bee why not include the rest of his statement on how he was pointing out that Obama and his minions are insisting that BP be held accountable — and pay — for the oil spill cleanup and damage.

“I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business. I’ve heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I think it’s part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that it’s always got to be someone’s fault instead of the fact that sometimes accidents happen.”

Obama just went off about how he wouldn't tolerate finger point but that's what he and his admin have been doing the last two years.

I also believe the current admin is Un-American on what they have been doing to business. Business should be allowed to fail not propped up by my tax dollars. They are also UN-American because they will not enforce the laws already on the books. They also Un-American because they are taking over Businesses. The government should never be in business. They are also Un-American because they say I have to buy something to be an American. If you want socialism or a dictatorship move out of this country and take your Un-American Admin with you.

[Bet51987]

.

[AlphaDoG]

How gracious of you Bee to allow him his opinion.
I notice you didn't refute anything he said however.

[Heretic]

Bee the law requires BP to clean up the oil spill but limits economic damages to 75 million not the 25 million limit to all damages you are try to say. This was in response to the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska. So maybe you need to dig yourself out of the news you have been watching.

BP is responsible for the entire cost of containing and cleaning up the spill. The questions are about economic damages, such as compensating fisherman who cannot fish and hotel owners for empty rooms at high season. The amount a company would be required to pay is limited to $75 million, a figure that BP global CEO Tony Hayward has said will \"inevitably\" be surpassed.

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/05/14 ... wanted=all

[Tunnelcat]

...
My question is, where's that balance we've kept between the two systems and why can't we maintain that? This balance is what allowed our country to flourish and grow.

The 'balance' has been bought out by lobbiests. We don't elect representatives anymore we select the product of the party machine and the party machine is a whore to big money interests and big voting block interests which profit by keeping their members on the plantation.

We won't see representation again until we vote them out in major overthrow of congress. You can keep thinking you know which party will save you or which one is the lesser of two evils but as long as you do you are doomed!

something like this: might help

Yes, but how do we know that the 'virus' of power and money won't just infect all the new members? How can we trust? It seems to be very virulent and easily caught in Washington these days. Even Obama has let us down just the same as most of the others we elected before him. We were really hoping for so much more 'change' to happen, a more liberal revolution to clean up years of Republican crap. I knew when he hired Clinton insiders we were screwed.

And how do we get rid of big money lobbying? It's now deeply entrenched in the culture because it's so 'nice and convenient' to get lots of free money from someone with deep pockets willing to give it to you for just small legislative favors. Our members of Congress seem to have forgotten that they represent the people, not big wads of nameless cash. My own Democratic Senator, Ron Wyden, is just a corporate shill now, all while pretending to be for the common man. It's getting downright depressing because BOTH parties are 'infected' with this sickness. I really can't blame Republicans because are born with that trait and that's their nature. But the damn Democrats have been infected by this same bug (by association maybe) and they're hiding their sickness by cloaking themselves in self-righteous indignation.

dissent, you're underestimating what's going on. Math isn't going to cut it when it deals with nature. The fact is that BP has been purposely underestimating the amount of oil leaking from the well to keep the extent of damage from really being known. They've also not revealed HOW MUCH of this dispersant has really been put in the Gulf either. Liars, liars, pants on fire.

This BP dispersant is breaking up the oil just like it's supposed to, into very small molecules that will spread over a MUCH larger area, especially deep in the water column, which will be spread far and wide by the loop current. This fact alone will make the oil impossible to clean up because it no longer floats on the surface where it can be skimmed up. Out of sight, out of mind as they say. This dispersant BP was using as of tomorrow Sunday, which also owns an interest in the company that produces it by the way, AND under the auspices of the EPA no less, is only one molecule away from essentially being ANTIFREEZE! BP wouldn't even reveal to the government what the dispersant was made of. Proprietary secret they claimed, and the EPA still let them use it! How's all that vaunted government protection working for us now?

Bacteria will then start consuming this toxic brew, which will then allow this toxic brew to climb up the food chain as more and more organisms feed on one another, concentrating the toxins in each step. By the time you get to the top level predators, they will be so toxic as to be inedible to humans, or even other animals for that matter. Would YOU eat fish or shrimp from the Gulf anymore now, or even after a decade, if any marine life even survives this mess? Oh, and no one has mentioned what's going to happen when hurricane season hits this region. A hurricane will really stir things up! (I sprinkled a few !!!!! for you dissent)

I'm willing to make a prediction. I betting that BP will declare bankruptcy if they can't stop that well from leaking in the near future. It's going to become a really big liability they won't be able to afford.

Krom, you're right that we shouldn't be bailing out corporations. However, I really think that a healthy dose of fear was driving things when Bush started the bank bailouts and Obama just continued them, all for the same reasons. Bush didn't want a depression on his watch and Obama didn't either. It was all politics. But how do we know that a full scale depression wouldn't have happened? The banks were (and still are) so large that they could have taken our economy down completely. My husband (just recently had a stroke) and I are not healthy enough anymore to survive bankruptcy and totally lose our savings and home and then have to go back to work to survive, that's if I could even find work during that disaster.

You made one comment on GM. I've noticed that they are starting to make a comeback with a quality product. Maybe the government bailout kept them going long enough to survive. It helped that the king, Toyota, fell flat on it's face at an opportune time too.

[CUDA]

It helped that the king, Toyota, fell flat on it's face at an opportune time too.

actually Toyota sales were up 40% over that time frame. so your information is incorrect

[Will Robinson]

"Leave BP alone. They're people too."

WASHINGTON — Rand Paul, the newly nominated Republican candidate for Senate from Kentucky, touched off more controversy on Friday by calling the Obama administration “un-American” for taking a tough stance with BP over the company’s handling of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Bee

Nice catch. Definitely don't support that guy, don't vote for him and encourage others to do the same.

Of course for your concerns to to register as anything more than partisan graffiti you would have to apply the same standards to all political figures...you don't.... so why should we pay any more attention to your comments than we would a politicians campaign billboard on the side of the road?

[Will Robinson]

...

Yes, but how do we know that the 'virus' of power and money won't just infect all the new members? How can we trust? It seems to be very virulent and easily caught in Washington these days.

Yes and it's easy for my kids to go and scrape their knees playing outside right after I clean the wound but that doesn't mean I won't stop them long enough to clean it out and apply a little medicated ointment and a band aid. You would say I was foolish to ignore the wound just because they may get cut again wouldn't you? So don't hide behind that flimsy excuse.

...And how do we get rid of big money lobbying? It's now deeply entrenched in the culture because it's so 'nice and convenient' to get lots of free money from someone with deep pockets willing to give it to you for just small legislative favors. Our members of Congress seem to have forgotten that they represent the people, not big wads of nameless cash....

Did you even look at the premise behind the GOOOH platform? I'll bet you every one of the bums that get voted out from an effort like that won't pretend to not know why it happened the way you are pretending to not understand it...

[Will Robinson]

...

Yes, but how do we know that the 'virus' of power and money won't just infect all the new members? How can we trust? It seems to be very virulent and easily caught in Washington these days.

Yes and it's easy for my kids to go and scrape their knees playing outside right after I clean the wound but that doesn't mean I won't stop them long enough to clean it out and apply a little medicated ointment and a band aid. You would say I was foolish to ignore the wound just because they may get cut again wouldn't you? So don't hide behind that flimsy excuse.

...And how do we get rid of big money lobbying? It's now deeply entrenched in the culture because it's so 'nice and convenient' to get lots of free money from someone with deep pockets willing to give it to you for just small legislative favors. Our members of Congress seem to have forgotten that they represent the people, not big wads of nameless cash....

Did you even look at the premise behind the GOOOH platform? I'll bet you every one of the bums that get voted out from an effort like that won't pretend to not know why it happened the way you are pretending to not understand it...and every one who gets elected to replace those bums will know the premise behind the momentum that gave them the job. Certainly it is no cure but it could be a great turning of the tide.
You have to be brave enough to put your idealogical skin in the game though. Considering what sacrifices our founders made to give us this system the least we can do is reach down into the sewer and pull it out and hose it off!

[Tunnelcat]

It helped that the king, Toyota, fell flat on it's face at an opportune time too.

actually Toyota sales were up 40% over that time frame. so your information is incorrect

Yeah, but when Toyota suspended sales of certain models for the sticky accelerator problem, they tanked. I don't think they've recovered the stature and consumer trust they once used to have. I would no longer consider buying a Toyota anymore either.

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/news/stoc ... 19636.html

Did you even look at the premise behind the GOOOH platform? I'll bet you every one of the bums that get voted out from an effort like that won't pretend to not know why it happened the way you are pretending to not understand it...

Yes I did and it sounds like a good start. But you're forgetting that most voters in this country are either uniformed, lazy or just plain stupid. It's going to take a lot MORE protesting people than the small, vastly uninformed Tea Party idiots to make change happen. Besides, they'd outright cringe at the idea of a 'liberal' revolution that would benefit all of society, not just their rich, old, individual, self-centered butts. They also seem to want something for nothing, like keep their Social Security and Medicare. They're even stupid enough to think they actually PAID IN FULL for their benefits all those years they worked, but then turn around and desire that those same taxes to fund it be cut for everyone else. They even helped elect Rand Paul, who supports revoking part of the Civil Rights Act because he doesn't think business should be required to accommodate those they don't happen to like. Nice world they want.

[Will Robinson]

..It's going to take a lot MORE protesting people than the small, vastly uninformed Tea Party idiots to make change happen.

Why do you change the subject to Tea Party? Trying to marginalize the effort of GOOOH by characterize it as something it isn't?

Besides, they'd outright cringe at the idea of a 'liberal' revolution that would benefit all of society, not just their rich, old, individual, self-centered butts.

Where has anyone ever proposed such a revolution? I'm going to laugh really hard if you mention the current crop of liberals in power! There is no proposition out there and yet now you dismiss GOOOH as the Tea Party and assign to them the refusal of a proposition that hasn't been offered in the real world!
You really are trying hard to find a reason to dismiss an outside non-partisan view that addresses the very problem you outlined. Are you really searching for a solution or a strawman for your party to use in their usual demagoguery?

They also seem to want something for nothing...
They're even stupid enough to think...
They even helped elect Rand Paul, who....

They,they,they....
Just who the hell are you talking about?!?
Sounds a lot like party rhetoric bogey man crap to me!

How many of 'them' have even heard of this Rand character? I never had until yesterday.
How many of 'them' are "rich"?
How many of 'them' are "old"?
How many of 'them' are "self centered" etc. etc.

How many of 'them' have you ever really talked to and told you they want this terrible world you just accused them of wanting?!?

[Spidey]

They even helped elect Rand Paul, who supports revoking part of the Civil Rights Act because he doesn't think business should be required to accommodate those they don't happen to like.

Can someone explain to me why I should have to hire someone I don’t like, but on the other hand any person can refuse to work for me, on the same exact grounds.

[Bold Deceiver]

Sounds like everyone's in agreement - the board is opposed to oils spills. Haven't seen this kind of unity in a long while.... It's got me a little choked up over here...

Bold - Not Here to Cause Any Trouble - Deceiver

[dissent]

Tunnelcat, consider yourself lucky. I had a composed response almost ready to go, but I accidentally deleted it before posting. Here's the gist of it.

dissent, you're underestimating what's going on. Math isn't going to cut it when it deals with nature.

Translation - Dissent, your straightforward calculations and logical assertions are interfering with my treasured and beloved memes. Therefore math is irrelevant unless it agrees with me.

The fact is that BP has been purposely underestimating the amount of oil leaking from the well to keep the extent of damage from really being known. They've also not revealed HOW MUCH of this dispersant has really been put in the Gulf either. Liars, liars, pants on fire.

Translation - If I can't have my big BP cover up meme, maybe I can stitch it together by creating a bunch of smaller conspiracy theories. Let's start with these unsubstantiated assertions.

This BP dispersant is breaking up the oil just like it's supposed to, into very small molecules that will spread over a MUCH larger area, especially deep in the water column, which will be spread far and wide by the loop current. This fact alone will make the oil impossible to clean up because it no longer floats on the surface where it can be skimmed up. Out of sight, out of mind as they say. This dispersant BP was using as of tomorrow Sunday, which also owns an interest in the company that produces it by the way, AND under the auspices of the EPA no less, is only one molecule away from essentially being ANTIFREEZE! BP wouldn't even reveal to the government what the dispersant was made of. Proprietary secret they claimed, and the EPA still let them use it! How's all that vaunted government protection working for us now?

If you had started with the second link in my earlier post, (via this link http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html#q13 )you could have found yourself to the "National Contingency Plan (NCP) Product Schedule website." Here you can find links to the data on the two Corexit dispersants
http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/ ... rex952.htm

http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/ ... rex950.htm

These are proprietary Nalco Chemical formulations. Please provide the evidence you have that BP is supposed to know and provide information on Nalco's proprietary data. And, since this is proprietary information, how is it that YOU know that the Corexit dispersants are "only one molecule away from essentially being ANTIFREEZE!"?

Also, please let me know how it is that BP "owns an interest" in Nalco, the producer of the dispersants.

Bacteria will then start consuming this toxic brew, which will then allow this toxic brew to climb up the food chain as more and more organisms feed on one another, concentrating the toxins in each step. By the time you get to the top level predators, they will be so toxic as to be inedible to humans, or even other animals for that matter. Would YOU eat fish or shrimp from the Gulf anymore now, or even after a decade, if any marine life even survives this mess? Oh, and no one has mentioned what's going to happen when hurricane season hits this region. A hurricane will really stir things up!

Translation - I heard about some stuff about concentration of toxins in the food chain when I was younger, so I'm going to double down on my hyperbole and assume it applies here, even though I haven't a clue as to whether or not that is valid. Then I'm going to repeat my exaggerations from my earlier posts using different words; hopefully, no one will notice.

(I sprinkled a few !!!!! for you dissent)

Awesome.

[dissent]

heh. I should read my own linkages more closely - there's even more stuff here
http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html#qanda

To date, how much dispersant has been used in the BP Oil Spill response? Is BP is running out of dispersants?
To date, approximately 600,000 gallons of dispersant has been used on the surface and approximately 55,000 gallons of dispersant has been used subsurface, at the source of the spill. There is no shortage of dispersants for use in response to the BP Oil Spill. For the latest information on the use and amount of dispersants used, go to www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com
(Updated May 18th, 2010)

Some History of Dispersant Use:

* In the US, dispersants have been applied to much smaller spills off the coast of Louisiana and Texas over the last 15 years.
* At the IXTOC-I Well Blowout near Vera Cruz, Mexico in 1979, between 1 million and 2.5 million gallons of mostly Corexit dispersant products were applied over a five-month period on the oil discharge.
* In Australia last year, 50,000 gallons of dispersants were used on the 9 million gallon West Atlas oil platform spill in the northern Timor Sea.
* In the United Kingdom, dispersants are considered the first line of defense because of high seas and rugged coastlines. In 1996, 118,000 gallons of dispersants were used on the 20 million gallon Sea Empress oil spill in Wales.

[Grendel]

These are proprietary Nalco Chemical formulations. Please provide the evidence you have that BP is supposed to know and provide information on Nalco's proprietary data. And, since this is proprietary information, how is it that YOU know that the Corexit dispersants are "only one molecule away from essentially being ANTIFREEZE!"?

Also, please let me know how it is that BP "owns an interest" in Nalco, the producer of the dispersants.

Nalco & BP are best buddys. Naturally.

http://people.forbes.com/profile/rodney-f-chase/22262

Rodney F. Chase. Non-Executive Chairman, since 2005, of Petrofac Ltd., a provider of facilities solutions to the oil and gas industry. Former Deputy Group Chief Executive and Managing Director, from 1992 to 2003, of BP p.l.c., an oil and gas company. Mr. Chase is also Deputy Chairman of Tesco p.l.c. and a director of Nalco Company and Tesoro Corporation. He has been a director of CSC since 2001.

http://www.nalco.com/applications/brigh ... nology.htm

TIORCO offers an alternative that promises to maximize your production: BrightWater chemical and application technology. Co-developed by Nalco, BP and Chevron, BrightWater is a sub-micron particulate chemistry that is injected downhole with flood water during a seconday recovery process

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/-special- ... 763340.htm

BP also added, it is looking for additional suppliers to begin manufacturing the material in mass quantities.

http://www.propublica.org/article/bp-gu ... sants-0430

The exact makeup of the dispersants is kept secret under competitive trade laws, but a worker safety sheet for one product, called Corexit, says it includes 2-butoxyethanol, a compound associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems at high doses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butoxyethanol

2-Butoxyethanol is an organic solvent with the formula C6H14O2. It is a colorless liquid with a sweet, ether-like odour. It is a butyl ether of ethylene glycol, but should not be confused with the simple glycol as it is a glycol ether.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylene_glycol

Ethylene glycol (IUPAC name: ethane-1,2-diol) is an organic compound widely used as an automotive antifreeze [..] C2H6O2

[Tunnelcat]

Damn Grendel, you took the steam out of my response. But here goes anyway:

Translation - Dissent, your straightforward calculations and logical assertions are interfering with my treasured and beloved memes. Therefore math is irrelevant unless it agrees with me.

I'm only pointing out that math may not predict accurately what a chaotic system like the waters of the Gulf will do with all that oil that's been leaking into it. We're not even sure how MUCH has been leaked. We don't even know what the impact this oil, both dissolved and floating will have on the sediments and sea life in all layers of the ocean. A lot of that dispersed oil is underwater in a massive, drifting cloud of small molecules. Anybody that thinks they know what's going to happen with the ecology is just guessing at the moment. This will be a new laboratory to study, albeit a destructive study.

Translation - If I can't have my big BP cover up meme, maybe I can stitch it together by creating a bunch of smaller conspiracy theories. Let's start with these unsubstantiated assertions.

I'm surprised at you dissent, where's your tin hat when it comes to the government and their dealings with corporations? I'd think you be clamoring for the convenient connection between Obama and BP.

And dissent, the connection between Nalco and BP is a little cozy in nature. The current leadership has people from Exxon and BP running things. A lot like Congress members quitting the government and then becoming lobbyists. And BP hasn't been very forthcoming in their estimates. The numbers keep going up and up as OUTSIDE sources view those leaks underwater.

As for the toxicity of Corexit, it's the older 9527A stuff that's really the problem. It contains a chemical called 2-butoxyethanol, very nasty stuff:

http://hazmap.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/hazma ... nts&id=129

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/busin ... 81183.html

The generic name is ethylene glycol monobutyl ether. Sounds like it's close to antifreeze in chemical nature to me. I did hear a scientist on the network news say that the chemistry in this form of Corexit is only one molecule away from antifreeze. Hmmmm, doesn't antifreeze kill cats and dogs that happen to drink it?

BP seems to be getting rid of the older stuff in the Gulf as a matter of convenience and cheapness, not environmental concerns. After all, they bought the stuff, why throw it out. Oh wait, they ARE throwing it out, in the ocean!

http://www.grist.org/article/2010-05-13 ... -the-gulf/

Translation - I heard about some stuff about concentration of toxins in the food chain when I was younger, so I'm going to double down on my hyperbole and assume it applies here, even though I haven't a clue as to whether or not that is valid. Then I'm going to repeat my exaggerations from my earlier posts using different words; hopefully, no one will notice

How do you think mercury is concentrated in tuna, halibut or marlin? The mercury gets eaten by bacteria, small organisms eat the bacteria, small shellfish (krill) eat the those and so on and so on until the top level predators get a pretty good dose of whatever toxin those little bacteria were chewing on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_in_fish

[dissent]

Damn Grendel, you took the steam out of my response.

Grendel, thanks for the links.

Were they supposed to imply some sort of smoking gun? It's fairly common in the chemical industry for executives who leave one company to find employment at another, and even a potential competitor. This info is a genuine teacup's worth of steam.

I'm only pointing out that math may not predict accurately what a chaotic system like the waters of the Gulf will do with all that oil that's been leaking into it. We're not even sure how MUCH has been leaked. We don't even know what the impact this oil, both dissolved and floating will have on the sediments and sea life in all layers of the ocean.

All true.

A lot of that dispersed oil is underwater in a massive, drifting cloud of small molecules.

What do you mean by "a lot"? Since the people who have made these observations have had to come out and correct media assertions that the "was" a large amount of oil. http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6478#more Point is, they don't know.

And neither do you.

Anybody that thinks they know what's going to happen with the ecology is just guessing at the moment.

I agree!!!!!!!!! Which is why I took issue with your wild speculation about the GoM turning into a dead zone.

I'm surprised at you dissent, where's your tin hat when it comes to the government and their dealings with corporations? I'd think you be clamoring for the convenient connection between Obama and BP.

Why? As far as I'm concerned, Obama is virtually irrelevant to this discussion.

And dissent, the connection between Nalco and BP is a little cozy in nature. The current leadership has people from Exxon and BP running things. A lot like Congress members quitting the government and then becoming lobbyists.

See comments above. Now you say it's a "little cozy" and before you said they "own an interest". Try to make up your mind, then come up with a little evidence before you warble "Conspiracy!".

And BP hasn't been very forthcoming in their estimates. The numbers keep going up and up as OUTSIDE sources view those leaks underwater.

Outside sources have been making wild estimates without any data at all for a month. The Unified Command for this incident has been resposible for the official estimates to date. This Command is comprised of BP and a number of other agencies.

As for the toxicity of Corexit, it's the older 9527A stuff that's really the problem. It contains a chemical called 2-butoxyethanol, very nasty stuff:

http://hazmap.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/hazma ... nts&id=129

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/busin ... 81183.html

The generic name is ethylene glycol monobutyl ether. Sounds like it's close to antifreeze in chemical nature to me.

Methanol and ethanol are simple chemical substances, one is CH3OH, the other is CH3CH2OH. The absence of the CH2 group in methanol makes it a poison to humans, whereas ethanol can be consumed in modest concentrations (e.g. liquor). Chemical toxicity in the environment is dependent not only on the atoms present in the molecule, but also how they are arranged in the molecular structure.

I did hear a scientist on the network news say that the chemistry in this form of Corexit is only one molecule away from antifreeze.

The media is always trotting out some expert scientist who says things that try to make a complex situation easier for the public to understand. Apparently, they failed again in this instance too.

Translation - I heard about some stuff about concentration of toxins in the food chain when I was younger, so I'm going to double down on my hyperbole and assume it applies here, even though I haven't a clue as to whether or not that is valid. Then I'm going to repeat my exaggerations from my earlier posts using different words; hopefully, no one will notice

How do you think mercury is concentrated in tuna, halibut or marlin? The mercury gets eaten by bacteria, small organisms eat the bacteria, small shellfish (krill) eat the those and so on and so on until the top level predators get a pretty good dose of whatever toxin those little bacteria were chewing on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_in_fish

Terrific. Thanks for just proving my point. Mercury is a toxic metallic ELEMENT. It won't be broken down chemically, which is why It can be concentrated as it moves up the food chain.

The solvents in Corexit are organic COMPOUNDS, not elements. Their chemical bonds can be broken and mangled in any number of ways in the biosphere, either by action of microorganisms or by action of chemical or physical processes.

If you have any evidence whatsoever that butoxyethanol or any other component of Corexit is inert and accumulates up the food chain, then please post it. I read MSDS practically every day. There is lots of scary sounding language in many of them. It;'s all part of the risk assessment process.

[Grendel]

This is actually not too bad a read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_ ... _oil_spill

Lot's of background links as well.