FCS Football | Message Board | News
https://www.championshipsubdivision.com/forums/
https://www.championshipsubdivision.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=15894
April 14-15: Six days before the explosion, BP won approval from the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service for a series of permit changes that would help it speedily conclude its over-budget drilling operation at Deepwater Horizon. BP had already won a "categorical exclusion" from the National Environmental Policy Act the previous year. The changes it got on April 14-15 allowed BP to install a cheaper, smaller, single pipe in the length of the well, rather than double-lined pipe. A double-lined pipe would offer protection from escaping gas, but BP argued that the single pipe made the best financial sense.
Haliburton and BP together...April 20: On the day of the explosion, BP executives came on board Deepwater Horizon to celebrate the rig's safety record. At the same time, Halliburton, a contractor for BP, was trying to temporarily plug and cap the well with cement so the drilling rig could be moved to another job. BP now says mud might have contaminated the cement Halliburton used.
Technicians noticed a rise in pressure from the well that suggested the cement wasn't holding. They did tests. One test showed a "very large abnormality.'' They took another test and misread it, declaring the well safe. BP called that a "fundamental mistake."
Although the pressure was rising, the workers began withdrawing drilling mud — which holds down oil and gas in the well. They replaced the drilling mud with seawater, which is standard procedure if all is well. Some workers say they objected but were overruled by a BP "company man." As they injected seawater, they observed a dangerous jump in pressure from oil and gas rising in the well.
The rig exploded.
Technicians then hesitated to switch on their last line of defense — a blowout preventer, which is supposed to seal the well in a disaster.
They waited for an official approval from BP. When they did switch it on, it had no hydraulic power. BP now says a seal may have leaked.
So, the government needed to impose more regulations and make them more strict? If so, I agree. But, let's be consistent here....................ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:You keep leaving out Obama.
He was the one that got them the exemption from the EIS.
Lets be consistent here................
Ummm, no...Skjellyfetti wrote:So, the government needed to impose more regulations and make them more strict? If so, I agree. But, let's be consistent here....................ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:You keep leaving out Obama.
He was the one that got them the exemption from the EIS.
Lets be consistent here................
Skelly, why try and twist a simple point like this? What am I missing here? If we are gonna have these rules and so on then why would we need more when all that needs to be done is have the competence to do what is already in their job description?Baldy wrote:Ummm, no...Skjellyfetti wrote:
So, the government needed to impose more regulations and make them more strict? If so, I agree. But, let's be consistent here....................
The regulations are in place. The government needed/needs to do it's job, period.
I don't like an extensive amount of government control either but I do like them to handle their watchdog role with integrity if they are gonna be employed by us to do that job. In essence I totally agree with the iron fist part on the necessary parts to keep this kind of shit from happening but fuck man BP is operating under what our government has set up for this and if they get by with this kind of shit it is due to money obviously.Skjellyfetti wrote:The regulations (or the enforcement of them) are the type of thing they bitch about 99% of the time... government getting too involved, assuming corporations will choose to do the right thing... even if it costs more, etc.
The federal government has a share of the blame in this. And, hopefully out of the aftermath of this fuckup... oil companies face more regulations and regulations that are enforced with an iron fist. If that happens, though.. baldy and alphie will be the first to bitch about it.
It still works for me.Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:BTW Skelly, you need to fix your avatar. You can upload it for free at http://www.myuploadedimages.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and I will personally guarantee that it won't get taken down.
Really? It has said bandwith exceeded for me for at least a couple of weeks. Must be on my end.bobbythekidd wrote:It still works for me.Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:BTW Skelly, you need to fix your avatar. You can upload it for free at http://www.myuploadedimages.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and I will personally guarantee that it won't get taken down.
Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:I don't like an extensive amount of government control either but I do like them to handle their watchdog role with integrity if they are gonna be employed by us to do that job. In essence I totally agree with the iron fist part on the necessary parts to keep this kind of shit from happening but fuck man BP is operating under what our government has set up for this and if they get by with this kind of shit it is due to money obviously.Skjellyfetti wrote:The regulations (or the enforcement of them) are the type of thing they bitch about 99% of the time... government getting too involved, assuming corporations will choose to do the right thing... even if it costs more, etc.
The federal government has a share of the blame in this. And, hopefully out of the aftermath of this fuckup... oil companies face more regulations and regulations that are enforced with an iron fist. If that happens, though.. baldy and alphie will be the first to bitch about it.
It's akin to cops on the take from the mob. No amount of new laws are gonna keep this from happening if we don't hold the bad cops to doing their job.
Dude I feel ya on the part about us not requiring the best and brightest in our government any longer. I can't buy into the part that follows though unless someone can show me where it says that those that are in these positions are no longer required to do their jobs.D1B wrote:Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: I don't like an extensive amount of government control either but I do like them to handle their watchdog role with integrity if they are gonna be employed by us to do that job. In essence I totally agree with the iron fist part on the necessary parts to keep this kind of shit from happening but fuck man BP is operating under what our government has set up for this and if they get by with this kind of shit it is due to money obviously.
It's akin to cops on the take from the mob. No amount of new laws are gonna keep this from happening if we don't hold the bad cops to doing their job.
Ursus, you need quality people in governement to keep an eye on the capitalists. There was a time our best and brightest aspired to work for the government and serve our country. The goverment people were smarter or just as smart as their capitalist counterparts. Not no more. The gutting of government began with Reagan and we've been fucked ever since. Reagan and his capitalist cronies villified government and government services, except of course for the military and the fucking drug war police.
It's cynical and circular:
1. Villify government as inept
2. Gut government to point it can no longer do it's job
3. Villify government as inept
4. Repeat until the working class is in prison or enslaved.
Agree with much of this. Still think Reagan fucked up goverment by deregulation and growing the military. It is now a badge of dishonor to work for the government. The brightest are inventing Viagra and derivitives.Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:Dude I feel ya on the part about us not requiring the best and brightest in our government any longer. I can't buy into the part that follows though unless someone can show me where it says that those that are in these positions are no longer required to do their jobs.D1B wrote:
Ursus, you need quality people in governement to keep an eye on the capitalists. There was a time our best and brightest aspired to work for the government and serve our country. The goverment people were smarter or just as smart as their capitalist counterparts. Not no more. The gutting of government began with Reagan and we've been fucked ever since. Reagan and his capitalist cronies villified government and government services, except of course for the military and the fucking drug war police.
It's cynical and circular:
1. Villify government as inept
2. Gut government to point it can no longer do it's job
3. Villify government as inept
4. Repeat until the working class is in prison or enslaved.
Jesus Christ man even in Missoula there are things that are required for any kind of construction including sprinkler systems and those parts are necessary to insure that shit can not get back into the potable water supply. These are inspected and tested regularly. If you were to try and install a system without one then you'd have your tit in a ringer real quick. If this kind of shit is closely monitored in a fairly small community, on a fairly small budget, for something as comparitively insignificant as this then how the fuck can this shit on the likes of an oil rig get sailed through?
We had 8 yrs. of Clinton to fix what Reagan screwed up in your eyes correct? Hell Clinton may have fucked up some of what he was working toward by being a scumbag to his wife but the guy was a good leader that got shit done.
It's a lot simpler than what you have put up as the reason I think. Some mafuckers have just gotten real comfortable not doing their jobs.
Clinton was a real bright fucker so that lays it at the feet of someone else.D1B wrote:Agree with much of this. Still think Reagan fucked up goverment by deregulation and growing the military. It is now a badge of dishonor to work for the government. The brightest are inventing Viagra and derivitives.Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: Dude I feel ya on the part about us not requiring the best and brightest in our government any longer. I can't buy into the part that follows though unless someone can show me where it says that those that are in these positions are no longer required to do their jobs.
Jesus Christ man even in Missoula there are things that are required for any kind of construction including sprinkler systems and those parts are necessary to insure that shit can not get back into the potable water supply. These are inspected and tested regularly. If you were to try and install a system without one then you'd have your tit in a ringer real quick. If this kind of shit is closely monitored in a fairly small community, on a fairly small budget, for something as comparitively insignificant as this then how the fuck can this shit on the likes of an oil rig get sailed through?
We had 8 yrs. of Clinton to fix what Reagan screwed up in your eyes correct? Hell Clinton may have fucked up some of what he was working toward by being a scumbag to his wife but the guy was a good leader that got shit done.
It's a lot simpler than what you have put up as the reason I think. Some mafuckers have just gotten real comfortable not doing their jobs.
ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:You keep leaving out Obama.
He was the one that got them the exemption from the EIS.
Lets be consistent here................
Not buying your argument Alfred. 
Environmentalists and Big Government together...dbackjon wrote: Haliburton and BP together...
...The original plan when oil was discovered at Prudhoe Bay on Alaska's North Slope was to build a pipeline directly to the northern border of the 48 contiguous states. Groups like the Sierra Club waged a major battle against both the Prudhoe Bay development and the pipeline.
They lost on the drilling but won a small victory in forcing the pipeline to not traverse the continent via a safer land route but to dead end at the port of Valdez, Alaska. The rest, as they say, is history.
Had the oil companies gotten their way, there would have been no tanker to be run aground by its captain on March 24, 1989, causing 10.8 million gallons of crude oil to be dumped into Alaskan waters.
On Sunday's "Meet The Press," NBC's David Gregory asked if environmental zeal might have also contributed to Deepwater Horizon. "Is the problem that we're drilling in water that's just too deep?" he asked Carol Browner, director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy and former EPA administrator in the Clinton administration.
"Should you even rethink your own approach to the environment to say, 'Maybe in the Arctic Wildlife Reserve, we ought to be drilling there. We ought to be going into shallower waters so that this can be done more safely?'"
Browner tap-danced around the question by saying it was one of the things to think about while we shut down the domestic oil industry. Browner et al. should indeed think about the fact that if British Petroleum and others were not barred from drilling in ANWR or in the shallower water of the Outer Continental Shelf, we might not be having this conversation.
Out west we may have what could be called a "Persia on the Plains." A Rand Corp. study says the Green River Formation covering parts of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming has the largest known oil shale deposits in the world, holding from 1.5 trillion to 1.8 trillion barrels of oil. It's all on dry land, but it's all locked up by federal edict.
Environmentalists, aided and abetted by Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, now want to stop us from unlocking our vast reserves of natural gas locked up in shale using a technique called hydraulic fracturing or "fracking." The technique involves injecting liquids under pressure, 95% of which is water, into the shale rock to release the trapped gas.
Casey has introduced legislation to remove fracking's long-standing exemption in the Safe Drinking Water Act that allows energy companies to use the process. He claims the process endangers America's drinking water, though fracking is done thousands of feet below the groundwater table and there's never been a case of groundwater contamination caused by fracking.
"This 60-year-old technique has been responsible for 7 billion barrels of oil and 600 trillion cubic feet of natural gas," according to Sen. James Inhofe, ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee. "In hydraulic fracturing's 60-year-history, there has not been a single documented case of contamination."
Casey's Pennsylvania contains a major portion of the Marcellus Shale Formation covering 34 million acres in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia and Kentucky. SUNY-Fredonia geologist Gary Lash and colleague Terry Engelder of Penn State estimate that Marcellus holds 1,300 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
Those who would ban fracking also need to consider that if oil companies rather than environmentalists were allowed to decide how to drill for and deliver oil, neither the Exxon Valdez nor the Deepwater Horizon spills need to have happened.
DumbyDem wrote:"Yeah, but if there wuz no more gasleen, we cans live off windmills. Yer so stupid, Tman."
Don't try to blame Haliburton for BP's incompetence:dbackjon wrote:Haliburton and BP together...April 20: On the day of the explosion, BP executives came on board Deepwater Horizon to celebrate the rig's safety record. At the same time, Halliburton, a contractor for BP, was trying to temporarily plug and cap the well with cement so the drilling rig could be moved to another job. BP now says mud might have contaminated the cement Halliburton used.
Technicians noticed a rise in pressure from the well that suggested the cement wasn't holding. They did tests. One test showed a "very large abnormality.'' They took another test and misread it, declaring the well safe. BP called that a "fundamental mistake."
Although the pressure was rising, the workers began withdrawing drilling mud — which holds down oil and gas in the well. They replaced the drilling mud with seawater, which is standard procedure if all is well. Some workers say they objected but were overruled by a BP "company man." As they injected seawater, they observed a dangerous jump in pressure from oil and gas rising in the well.
The rig exploded.
Technicians then hesitated to switch on their last line of defense — a blowout preventer, which is supposed to seal the well in a disaster.
They waited for an official approval from BP. When they did switch it on, it had no hydraulic power. BP now says a seal may have leaked.
You said "avatar". It still works. His siggy is a no go.Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:Really? It has said bandwith exceeded for me for at least a couple of weeks. Must be on my end.bobbythekidd wrote: It still works for me.
travelinman67 wrote:Environmentalists and Big Government together...dbackjon wrote: Haliburton and BP together...
Environmentalists Also To Blame For Exxon Valdez And Gulf Spills
Posted 06/01/2010 06:54 PM ET
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysi ... pills.aspx
...The original plan when oil was discovered at Prudhoe Bay on Alaska's North Slope was to build a pipeline directly to the northern border of the 48 contiguous states. Groups like the Sierra Club waged a major battle against both the Prudhoe Bay development and the pipeline.
They lost on the drilling but won a small victory in forcing the pipeline to not traverse the continent via a safer land route but to dead end at the port of Valdez, Alaska. The rest, as they say, is history.
Had the oil companies gotten their way, there would have been no tanker to be run aground by its captain on March 24, 1989, causing 10.8 million gallons of crude oil to be dumped into Alaskan waters.
On Sunday's "Meet The Press," NBC's David Gregory asked if environmental zeal might have also contributed to Deepwater Horizon. "Is the problem that we're drilling in water that's just too deep?" he asked Carol Browner, director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy and former EPA administrator in the Clinton administration.
"Should you even rethink your own approach to the environment to say, 'Maybe in the Arctic Wildlife Reserve, we ought to be drilling there. We ought to be going into shallower waters so that this can be done more safely?'"
Browner tap-danced around the question by saying it was one of the things to think about while we shut down the domestic oil industry. Browner et al. should indeed think about the fact that if British Petroleum and others were not barred from drilling in ANWR or in the shallower water of the Outer Continental Shelf, we might not be having this conversation.
Out west we may have what could be called a "Persia on the Plains." A Rand Corp. study says the Green River Formation covering parts of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming has the largest known oil shale deposits in the world, holding from 1.5 trillion to 1.8 trillion barrels of oil. It's all on dry land, but it's all locked up by federal edict.
Environmentalists, aided and abetted by Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, now want to stop us from unlocking our vast reserves of natural gas locked up in shale using a technique called hydraulic fracturing or "fracking." The technique involves injecting liquids under pressure, 95% of which is water, into the shale rock to release the trapped gas.
Casey has introduced legislation to remove fracking's long-standing exemption in the Safe Drinking Water Act that allows energy companies to use the process. He claims the process endangers America's drinking water, though fracking is done thousands of feet below the groundwater table and there's never been a case of groundwater contamination caused by fracking.
"This 60-year-old technique has been responsible for 7 billion barrels of oil and 600 trillion cubic feet of natural gas," according to Sen. James Inhofe, ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee. "In hydraulic fracturing's 60-year-history, there has not been a single documented case of contamination."
Casey's Pennsylvania contains a major portion of the Marcellus Shale Formation covering 34 million acres in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia and Kentucky. SUNY-Fredonia geologist Gary Lash and colleague Terry Engelder of Penn State estimate that Marcellus holds 1,300 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
Those who would ban fracking also need to consider that if oil companies rather than environmentalists were allowed to decide how to drill for and deliver oil, neither the Exxon Valdez nor the Deepwater Horizon spills need to have happened.DumbyDem wrote:"Yeah, but if there wuz no more gasleen, we cans live off windmills. Yer so stupid, Tman."
Remember these are the same idiots that want power companies to inject carbon dioxide into the ground. What is that going to do to our drinking water?travelinman67 wrote:Environmentalists and Big Government together...dbackjon wrote: Haliburton and BP together...
Environmentalists Also To Blame For Exxon Valdez And Gulf Spills
Posted 06/01/2010 06:54 PM ET
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysi ... pills.aspx
...The original plan when oil was discovered at Prudhoe Bay on Alaska's North Slope was to build a pipeline directly to the northern border of the 48 contiguous states. Groups like the Sierra Club waged a major battle against both the Prudhoe Bay development and the pipeline.
They lost on the drilling but won a small victory in forcing the pipeline to not traverse the continent via a safer land route but to dead end at the port of Valdez, Alaska. The rest, as they say, is history.
Had the oil companies gotten their way, there would have been no tanker to be run aground by its captain on March 24, 1989, causing 10.8 million gallons of crude oil to be dumped into Alaskan waters.
On Sunday's "Meet The Press," NBC's David Gregory asked if environmental zeal might have also contributed to Deepwater Horizon. "Is the problem that we're drilling in water that's just too deep?" he asked Carol Browner, director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy and former EPA administrator in the Clinton administration.
"Should you even rethink your own approach to the environment to say, 'Maybe in the Arctic Wildlife Reserve, we ought to be drilling there. We ought to be going into shallower waters so that this can be done more safely?'"
Browner tap-danced around the question by saying it was one of the things to think about while we shut down the domestic oil industry. Browner et al. should indeed think about the fact that if British Petroleum and others were not barred from drilling in ANWR or in the shallower water of the Outer Continental Shelf, we might not be having this conversation.
Out west we may have what could be called a "Persia on the Plains." A Rand Corp. study says the Green River Formation covering parts of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming has the largest known oil shale deposits in the world, holding from 1.5 trillion to 1.8 trillion barrels of oil. It's all on dry land, but it's all locked up by federal edict.
Environmentalists, aided and abetted by Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, now want to stop us from unlocking our vast reserves of natural gas locked up in shale using a technique called hydraulic fracturing or "fracking." The technique involves injecting liquids under pressure, 95% of which is water, into the shale rock to release the trapped gas.
Casey has introduced legislation to remove fracking's long-standing exemption in the Safe Drinking Water Act that allows energy companies to use the process. He claims the process endangers America's drinking water, though fracking is done thousands of feet below the groundwater table and there's never been a case of groundwater contamination caused by fracking.
"This 60-year-old technique has been responsible for 7 billion barrels of oil and 600 trillion cubic feet of natural gas," according to Sen. James Inhofe, ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee. "In hydraulic fracturing's 60-year-history, there has not been a single documented case of contamination."
Casey's Pennsylvania contains a major portion of the Marcellus Shale Formation covering 34 million acres in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia and Kentucky. SUNY-Fredonia geologist Gary Lash and colleague Terry Engelder of Penn State estimate that Marcellus holds 1,300 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
Those who would ban fracking also need to consider that if oil companies rather than environmentalists were allowed to decide how to drill for and deliver oil, neither the Exxon Valdez nor the Deepwater Horizon spills need to have happened.DumbyDem wrote:"Yeah, but if there wuz no more gasleen, we cans live off windmills. Yer so stupid, Tman."
Mmmmm. Sparkling water.HI54UNI wrote: Remember these are the same idiots that want power companies to inject carbon dioxide into the ground. What is that going to do to our drinking water?
