Obama compares the oil spill to 9/11

[tniuqs]

Herbie: I have some other conflicting info, you are quite correct the Fire vessels were not owned by the USCG (I have the pictures to prove that, but as I look closer now no white strip on the orange)But were they directed by USCG ? ... this is my query now. So just who has jurisdiction clout, the Oil Multinationals or the Government issuing the permits to drill and in the event of a wreck who becomes incident command. Saddly the point in fact its way too late now.

But the finger pointing will go on till the cows come home, SO Guilty as charged over conflicting data from the almighty impartial news media giants ....

ODDLY: In the Norwegian offshore sector of the North Sea have never had a blowout, so why and how does this differ ?

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason/2010/05/03/norway

Why Norway's offshore drilling is safer:

Statoil operates the most environmentally friendly offshore oil rigs in the world -- because it's state-owned

If anyone still believes we must drill, baby, drill offshore -- aside from Bill Kristol, that is, who wants to sink wells even closer to precious coastal wetlands -- then perhaps it is time to consider again the potential benefits of nationalization. After all, there is one country that has established an unrivaled record for environmental safety while exploiting its offshore petroleum reserves. That would be Norway, which created the company now known as Statoil Hydro as a fully state-owned entity and still controls nearly two-thirds of the company's "privatized" shares.

The Wall Street Journal reported last week that Statoil rigs in the North Sea are required by law to maintain special "acoustic switches" that shut down operations completely (and remotely) in case of a blowout or explosion. The US Mines and Minerals Service, under the industry-friendly BUSH administration, decided that rigs operating in American waters need not install those switches because they are "very costly." At $500,000 per switch, they now look like an enormous bargain, of course.

What makes Norway so different from the United States -- and much more likely to install the most protective energy technology -- is that the Norwegian state can impose public values on oil producers without fighting off lobbyists and crooked politicians, because it owns and controls the resources. Rather than Halliburton-style corporate management controlling the government and blocking environmental improvement, Norway's system works the other way around. It isn't perfect, as any Nordic environmentalist will ardently explain, but the results are considerably better than ours.

Just ask Freedomworks, the right-wing corporate front group chaired by former Texas Republican Rep. Dick Armey, which has underwritten the Tea Party movement. In a post advocating more offshore drilling, Freedomworks hailed the Norwegian record effusively:

Norway's oil and gas offshore operations have safely and effectively co-existed with fishing operations in the fertile North Sea since 1971. In fact, Norway is now the world's sixth largest oil producer and the tenth largest fish producer.

Freedomworks hates socialism, so its promo copy doesn't mention the state ownership. But ideological concerns aside, the Norwegian oil business has earned a strong international reputation for industrial efficiency and environmentally benign exploration and production technology. Unlike the U.S. oil giants, which feign green concern while opposing real climate reform, Statoil has worked actively to reduce its CO2 emissions since 1991, with considerable success. Again, this is a result of harmony between national policy, aiming to make Norway carbon neutral by 2030, and the state oil sector. Rather than debate the need for stronger environmental regulation with powerful private interests for the past quarter-century, the Norwegians were able to harness the profits of their oil resources to improve the environment (and provide a generous social security and universal healthcare system for their people).

But we know that private ownership always works better than government. Don't we?

Ah the Bush administration AGAIN !

ps contact PM and I will shoot you the pics, just too big a file size to post here, I may have been forwarded from Calgary Geoscience / Calgary Teams South AB. And just may have a touch of a background in the Patch ...

[Just Plain Ruff]

Now the outrage has gone too far. Representative Joseph Cao in Senate Hearings has told the BP Exec to go and commit Hari-Kari.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/16/rep-cao-suggests-bp-exec-commit-hari-kari-spill/

Did he go too far in suggesting that this BP executive go kill himself?

Or is he just expressing the anger of his constituents.

I do know this, I'd not be wearing any type of BP uniform in any of the small fishing communities in the Gulf Region right now.

[HERBIE1]

Herbie: I have some other conflicting info, you are quite correct the Fire vessels were not owned by the USCG (I have the pictures to prove that, but as I look closer now no white strip on the orange)But were they directed by USCG ? ... this is my query now. So just who has jurisdiction clout, the Oil Multinationals or the Government issuing the permits to drill and in the event of a wreck who becomes incident command. Saddly the point in fact its way too late now.

But the finger pointing will go on till the cows come home, SO Guilty as charged over conflicting data from the almighty impartial news media giants ....

ODDLY: In the Norwegian offshore sector of the North Sea have never had a blowout, so why and how does this differ ?

http://www.salon.com...10/05/03/norway

Ah the Bush administration AGAIN !

ps contact PM and I will shoot you the pics, just too big a file size to post here, I may have been forwarded from Calgary Geoscience / Calgary Teams South AB. And just may have a touch of a background in the Patch ...

I'm just going by the documentary I saw. They followed a Coast Guard chopper on their search and rescue patterns. They followed a USCG cutter as it steamed towards the drill site. I distinctly recall seeing 2 fireboats, spraying water on the burning rig, and recall the narrator saying these vessels were from nearby oil rigs, so I assume they were owned either by an oil company or private contractor leased to the oil company.

The fire and continued explosions were so intense, nobody could get near the platform. They also followed a Dutch and a Texas fire rescue and suppression company as they geared up and headed to the Gulf. Their expertise is getting on a burning rig, and fighting the fire from there to save it. They never got the chance. Literally, as they arrived on the scene with all their gear and manpower, they watched as the rig finally collapsed and sank, leaving nothing but a burning patch of oil on the sea.

From what that program said, there is an established set of industry protocols to be followed when there is a fire and/or blowout. Certain calls are made- obviously to the USCG, but also to private firms. These companies are immediately mobilized as soon as they are contacted by the oil firms to come in, put out the fire/blowout, mitigate damages, and save the well/rig.