The libertarian's guide to externality costing. What do we do about the oil spill?

It is almost like they are daring the feds to take over, they would spin it as they weren't liable for anything past that point.
 
Everyone prepare to pretend to be shocked.
Last week, the wives of some of the fishermen spoke out publicly about the symptoms their husbands were experiencing. This week, some fishermen are starting to come forward. In this WDSU TV interview, one of the fishermen reports feeling drugged, disoriented, tingling, fatigued, and also reporting shortness of breath and cough. These are symptoms that are consistent with what one might expect from exposure to hydrocarbons in oil.

Maybe. But these are also some of the symptoms reported by individuals who were exposed to Corexit.

One of the two Corexit products that BP is suing [sic] in the Gulf also contains a compound that is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems. Corexit is also linked with respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders.
Click to expand...
How bad would it suck if these guys were getting exposed to Corexit? Can this fucking story get worse?
 
It's all good folks. Top kill!
WASHINGTON — A top BP worker who was aboard the Deepwater Horizon in the hours leading up to the explosion declined to testify in front of a federal panel investigating the deadly oil rig blowout, telling the U.S Coast Guard he was invoking his constitutional right to avoid self-incrimination.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='speedracer']Was just gchatting a friend at Shell about the spill and I asked why they didn't try a top kill first since it seems to be most likely to work. He said if you top kill the well then you can never cost effectively use that site again but if you can find a different way to staunch it, you could continue to use it in the future and it would save a bunch of money.

Supris... ah, fuck it.[/QUOTE]

In the various interviews I've read/heard about the Top Kill method, basically, it was very dangerous if not done exactly right - it could have blown the pipe even worse.

Perhaps it isn't always about the money?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']In the various interviews I've read/heard about the Top Kill method, basically, it was very dangerous if not done exactly right - it could have blown the pipe even worse.

Perhaps it isn't always about the money?[/QUOTE]

Are you suggesting they may be in it for the nookie?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']In the various interviews I've read/heard about the Top Kill method, basically, it was very dangerous if not done exactly right - it could have blown the pipe even worse.

Perhaps it isn't always about the money?[/QUOTE]
Absolutely. Yet I think in this case, I'll go with the gut reaction of a guy that works for big oil.
[quote name='Msut77']See #148, it is on.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/7023852.html[/QUOTE]
Post the comment. I can't figure out how they count the posts.
 
That will cost how many people their jobs? How many barrels of crude must we purchase from enemies and transfer to our thirsty refineries?
.
The moratorium sounds all dramatic and prudent, but that will have a cost to our economy and trade deficit. And what does he hope to accomplish exactly that magically is achieved in six months, not two months or one year?

This post?
 
I wish Congress would stop trying to figure out what caused this mess and start trying to FIX IT. You'd think they'd stop for 2 seconds trying to blame someone and instead trying to help. This is very scary shit we're dealing with here right now, and all they can think about is who do we blame. They should blame themselves for not thinking of solutions.
 
That's how congress works. When the economy went down hill there was more time and energy spent by congress and the media trying to figure out how many different ways it was Bush's fault than actually figuring out real solutions.
 
I know that's how Congress works, more than you might think. And even in dark times, it's always the way they do things.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Absolutely. Yet I think in this case, I'll go with the gut reaction of a guy that works for big oil.[/QUOTE]

Whatever works for you, of course.

I'm just more likely to believe an "expert" on a respected news source that some dude from the internet's friend's gut reaction.
 
[quote name='IRHari']What should Congress do? What should Obama do?[/QUOTE]

They don't actually care.

There has already been for example a "skunkworks" operational for a while:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw... Times - National News)&utm_source=feedburner

and basically any response was predicated on the idea that oil companies have the expertise to handle the clean up and in this case they might have, if they didn't skirt safety measures or drill past where they were supposed to.

Who to blame is actually very important as it is useful to stop this kind of thing from happening ever again.

Right now they sound like the old Monty Python quote "Let's not argue over who killed who", why?

To deflect from the fact that regulatory capture is a really bad idea and should not be the normal state of things?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Whatever works for you, of course.

I'm just more likely to believe an "expert" on a respected news source that some dude from the internet's friend's gut reaction.[/QUOTE]
The degree between us would probably suspend my belief too.
 
Still, a new measure in the Senate that would have eliminated the cap, offered after the administration's comments, failed Tuesday as Republicans blocked Democrats from bringing it up under unanimous consent. A measure to raise the cap to $10 billion had been blocked twice previously. Republicans continue to protest that raising or eliminating the cap would bar smaller companies from entering the market.
Click to expand...
The Republicans are arguing that requiring companies to pay for their damages will price out small competitors who can't afford to pay if they screw up, which is de facto arguing for a government guarantee. A socialist government guarantee for an industry. Marx couldn't have argued it better.

Your modern GOP.
 
From a TPM reader whose credentials were redacted but seems to have a decent idea of what's going on.
At BP's West Houston complex, there's a command center filled with personnel from around the industry working with BP engineers. Several drill ships are in place. Tons of workboats are on site. There are 5 or more ROVs roaming the wellhead monitoring and cleaning things up. They're already bumping into each other because they normally work solo while tied to a ship by a mile long umbilical cable. They don't need more ROVs down there adding to the traffic. All these efforts are reported heavily in the Houston Chronicle and nola.com, but doesn't seem to get much for national coverage. If you only monitor the national coverage, you'd think BP is going it alone while we all sit by, but the reality is this is an industry-wide effort because we all know what's at stake.

On having Obama "do more," WTF is he supposed to do? Everybody seems to be calling for more fire in his belly and scary, threatening speeches. What does that accomplish? It's like people want him to do a dramatic speech like post-9/11 about bringing the criminals to justice. It does nothing to actually plug the damn well. The government does not have the expertise to do more to stop this gusher. It's in BPs interest to stop the gusher. All the conspiracy theories about wanting to preserve the well for future production are technically wrong and ignore that NOBODY in the industry benefits from this gusher continuing. BP wants what everybody else wants, though I'll concede that I suspect dispersants are about killing life where it's less easily photographed. Dispersants aside, the only conflict of interest is regarding the causes of the blowout, not the capping of the well. Fed investigations are already taking care of that part.

On the pace, I'm pissed because I thought top kill should have been the first thing they tried after the ROVs failed to close the BOP. The reason for delay was partly because it looked like a war zone down there initially due to all the debris from a mile long riser coming down with the sinking of the Deepwater Horizon. So there was cleanup to make everything accessible. Also, one issue with the top kill is that it does have some risk of making the leak worse by eroding whatever blockages exist to limit the blowout rate. It could also overpressure the wellhead to open up new leaks upstream of the current ones. My guess is they wanted a better understanding on the chance of success before taking those risks.

Anyway, here we are. I'm hoping like hell 50 gpm is enough to get this done.
Click to expand...
He specifically says that the top kill delay had nothing to do with wanting to maintain the wellhead for financial reasons, which means my friend was full of shit. But then he says he thought it should have been the first thing tried. Without knowing this guy's position in the pyramid, it's tough to know what BP was really thinking. I guess a court will decide someday.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Wait a minute. The oil doesn't just go away when you hit it with chemical dispersant? Unpossible! I'm sure it has nothing to do with keeping it off the surface so it's harder to get the full breadth and depth of the spill.

http://gizmodo.com/5547548/the-gulf-disaster-video-that-bp-doesnt-want-you-to-see[/QUOTE]
I watched that video on the news a few nights ago. Wtf was the point of using that stuff when it doesn't do anything but basically sink the oil? That's no more a "solution" than burning it off the surface.
 
Unless that guy is farily high up in the chain, what he says has no more credibility than what your friend said. They're both just opinions. Either one could be true basically. It is suspicious that everything tried before would have left the well open to future use.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']I watched that video on the news a few nights ago. Wtf was the point of using that stuff when it doesn't do anything but basically sink the oil? That's no more a "solution" than burning it off the surface.[/QUOTE]

PR? It makes the problem slightly less noticeable.

Never mind the stuff is pretty damn toxic as well.
 
Just a guess, not a justification.

As depth increases, less life on the ocean occurs. With all of the toxic chemicals on the bottom of the ocean, it would cause less or no damage to the creatures living at the top or middle of the ocean.

Of course, any creature laying eggs on the bottom of the ocean would be hosed.
 
But don't most finish spend their time at the sort of mid level of depth? That video of the divers was at around 25 feet under the surface, not really that deep.
 
First you're bitching offshore drilling was dangerous. Now you're bitching that cleanup from the dangerous offshore drilling isn't effective. Make up your mind.
 
Obviously this is beyond the ability of a corporation to handle and is wildly cost ineffective.
Click to expand...
Oh boo hoo. I'm sure BP could've put some of it's pennies into, I dunno, oil spill megadisaster insurance.

Also: Why haven't any of the energy conservation geeks devised a way to distill the oil out of the sea water and get it were it belongs: back in our gas tanks? Try electrolysis, and if that doesn't work, GET THE SKIMMER!
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']In the case of mining, bonds have to sometimes be made for cleanup costs. However in that case, cleanup costs are not a worst case scenario, they are guaranteed to happen. The bond also doesnt scratch the surface of the actual costs, especially when costs are sometimes incurred FOREVER.[/QUOTE]

Woah, Oil isn't exactly Magnus' Dark Matter here. Bacteria eat that stuff don'tcha know. There's no such thing as a forever ecological cost, as I believe our dying sun in five billion years as some forms of global destruction monopolized! :D
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']The bond system isn't meant to stop the problem from happening. It is meant pay for the problem when it does happen and force the real cost of gasoline or plastic products onto the consumer. Considering how much worse this one disaster is, it would be adequate to make the system pay as you go.[/QUOTE]

And you are aware that "whole economics" is a liberal socialist idea? :)

Which I should probably be against, being a registered libertarian, hmm.

Then again, laissez-faire doesn't always equate with liberty, even if they both begin with the letter "L".
 
When you are unable to calculate how long ecological damage will be caused by a site, or that number approaches something exceeding the length of human history, forever is a good shorthand.
 
Any word from BP yet? We were supposed to know by noon eastern whether the Earth would just billow oil forever or slightly less than forever.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Any word from BP yet? We were supposed to know by noon eastern whether the Earth would just billow oil forever or slightly less than forever.[/QUOTE]
Interesting how they stopped yesterday but wait to announce at noon on Sunday. I'm wondering where they get the authority to decide when they are going to announce these sorts of things. I guess it's their world and we just live in it.

Oh, and they failed.

Trust the market.
Officials from Jefferson Parish, Louisiana have told Yahoo News and local NBC affiliate WDSU that BP bused in hundreds of temporary workers to make it look like they were doing more than they were for oil-slicked local beaches.

The workers pictured above were lining the route for Obama's motorcade through the region yesterday. Officials told WDSU that as many as 500, perhaps including these, were brought in only for the day, at $12 an hour. Until that point there had been "no more than a dozen" workers on Grand Isle beach.
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, it's beyond time for the government to step in, assemble their own team of experts, engineers etc. and do whatever it takes to stop the leak---then send BP the bill.

BP has had more than enough time to fix it on their own, as well as protect the beaches etc. They've failed at every attempt, and as the story about about bringing in temp workers to make it look like they were doing more for Obama's visit shows--they really don't give a shit about anything but $$$$$ and PR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top