Say a prayer...

[photodad2001]

Photodad,

What the HEEL movie was that clip from??? I'm just asking so that I'll know not to watch it. I know Stallone did some fantastically bad acting in his time, but that was probably among the worst acting I've seen.

I think I only saw decent acting from Stallone in ONE movie, 'Tango and Cash'. He was nominated for Worst Actor award nine consecutive years from 1984 to 1992.

He does deserve his 'star' on Hollywood Blvd, though...just for the original Rocky. He wrote the film himself, marched it around Hollywood, to quite a few closed doors, but persevered against almost every odd, just like his main character, and got it done. The film went on to win three Oscars including best picture, pushing him quickly to icon status. He deserves a star for that feat, alone...but NOT for his acting talent. In short, he ain't no Dustin Hoffman.

That was Demolition Man. It was up there with Judge Dredd on the Sly bad movie list. If you go to Youtube you can "not watch" the rest if you want.

[Petrol]

stop trying to change the subject. we all do, that's a different issue.

do you have a way to spin this in to a broad sweeping conspiracy by pinkos?

are you saying the rig was detonated by a group of pinko-ecoterror-enviro-wacko-activists???

[Petrol]

blah pompous blah self enlightened blah bliggity blah blah blah...

BB

1. you would lose that wager

2. wtf does travel have to do with coal ash diving unless you're hoping to get down stream in what was once the Yangtze river?

3. yes, I refer to 'them' as the chi-coms, short for communist-chinese, AKA Reds, just one of the countries that have been engauged in economic-warfare against the US... w/ plenty of help from the "useful-idiots" both in and outside of our own government here in the States. Nice to know you approve of the baby-steps they're taking towards 'clean-energy' though, I'm sure they appreciate it as well.

5. who is "blocking strong incentives for energy converstion and technological inovation"? I see the fed and Plenty of rich socialists pushing the carbon-credit scams that make Enron look like childs play

6. so sorry to hear you were born with but one thumb, or was it two anuses :o

[bobdea]

5. who is "blocking strong incentives for energy converstion and technological inovation"?

most republicans along with a few centrist dems. this is information that's not exactly hard to come by.

pasted from http://dpc.senate.gov

The following chronological list represents both the notable bills that Senate Republicans have blocked that would have promoted renewable energy and energy efficiency or Bush Administration regulations that would have stifled renewable energy and energy efficiency development.

June 21, 2007. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked the passage of an amendment (Senate Amendment 1704) to the Energy Bill by a vote of 57 to 36 (60 votes needed to end the filibuster). This $30 billion proposal was blocked by Republicans because it offset the cost of the renewable energy tax credits by eliminating subsides to the oil and gas industry, including:

An extension of the renewable energy production tax credit for five years;

An extension of the 30 percent investment tax credit for solar energy and fuel cells, as well as the ten percent investment tax credit for microturbines, for 8 years.

An expansion of the deduction for energy-efficient commercial buildings for five years.

Creation of a new consumer tax credit for plug-in electric vehicle.

December 7, 2007. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked the passage of H.R. 6, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, because it contained a renewable electricity standard. This legislation would have established a 15 percent renewable electricity standard by 2020, which would have spurred nationwide investment in renewable energy. The 15 percent renewable electricity standard would have increased our nation's renewable electricity generation by 91,000 megawatts.

December 13, 2007. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked the passage of H.R. 6, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, by a vote of 59 to 40 (60 votes needed to end the filibuster). This $20 billion proposal was blocked by Republicans because it offset the cost of the renewable energy tax credits by eliminating subsidies to the oil and gas industry. The legislation included:

An extension of the renewable energy production tax credit for two years;

An extension of the 30 percent investment tax credit for solar energy and fuel cells, as well as the ten percent investment tax credit for microturbines, for 8 years

New Clean Renewable Energy Bonds to provide public power providers, governmental bodies, and cooperative electric companies with access to federally-assisted bonds to finance renewable energy projects; and

A new consumer tax credit for the purchase of a plug-in electric vehicle. The base credit amount is $3000, rising to $5000 based on battery size.

February 7, 2008. During the Senate's consideration of the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, Senator Reid attempted to add renewable and energy efficiency tax incentives reported by the Senate Finance Committee to the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008. Senator Gregg, on behalf of the Senate Republican leadership, objected to this request. This legislation included:

An extension of the renewable energy production tax credit for one year;

An extension of the energy efficiency residential property tax credit for two years; and

An extension of the tax deduction for energy efficiency commercial buildings for one year.

May 29, 2008. The Bush Administration's Department of Interior announced it will not accept applications to build solar energy plants on federal lands until it completes a two year study on the impacts of solar energy development. Under pressure from Senator Reid, the Department of Interior reversed its decision on July 2, 2008 and decided instead to continue accepting applications while it completed the study. The reversal is significant because the decision could have significantly discouraged the development of future solar energy plants.

June 6, 2008. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked the consideration of the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2008 by a vote of 48 to 36 (60 votes needed to end the filibuster. The legislation contained a low-carbon fuel standard that would have been harmonized with the renewable fuel standard and saved an estimated:

5 million barrels of oil per day by 2020. This is equal to nearly 85 percent of the daily oil imports from OPEC in 2007.[1] (See Appendix 1 for a chart that compares the amount that oil imports would be reduced by from the Climate Security Act versus drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf.)

The legislation would have also invested a projected:

$190 billion in funding through 2050 for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy worker training and a Climate Change Worker Assistance Program;

$150 billion in funding through 2050 for renewable energy facilities;

$92 billion in funding through 2050 for a program to assist in deploying zero or low carbon electricity generation technology; and

$51 billion in funding through 2050 to encourage the construction of highly efficient commercial buildings and energy efficiency retrofits.

June 10, 2008. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked the consideration of H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008, by a vote of 50 to 44 (60 votes needed to end the filibuster). The legislation was blocked by Republicans because it offset the cost of the renewable energy tax incentives by delaying the implementation of favorable interest allocation rules for multinational corporations and preventing hedge fund managers from using offshore accounts to avoid paying income tax. The legislation included:

An extension of the renewable energy production tax credit for wind for one year and the credit for other renewable energy systems like biomass and geothermal energy for three years;

An extension of the 30 percent investment tax credit for solar energy and fuel cells, as well as the ten percent investment tax credit for microturbines, for 6 years

Extensions of the deduction for energy efficient commercial buildings for five years and the credit for energy efficient appliances for three years; and

A new consumer tax credit for the purchase of a plug-in electric vehicle. The base credit amount is $3000, rising to $5000 based on battery size.

June 10, 2008. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked consideration of S. 3044, the Consumer-First Energy Act of 2008. The legislation was blocked by Republicans because it would have imposed a windfall profits tax on the major oil companies at a special supplemental rate of 25 percent. Companies could avoid this tax by investing in clean, renewable energy. The legislation would have eliminated the deduction for domestic production that allows the major oil and gas companies to reduce their taxable income from the sale, exchange, or other disposition of oil, natural gas, or any primary product thereof. Additionally, the legislation would have tightened the rules restricting the use of foreign tax credits on oil and gas-related income. All revenue collected from the windfall profits tax and the elimination of unnecessary tax breaks would have been deposited into an Energy Independence and Security Act Trust Fund.

June 17, 2008. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked the consideration of H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008, by a vote of 52 to 44 (60 votes needed to end the filibuster). The legislation was blocked by Republicans because it offset the cost of the renewable energy tax incentives by delaying implementation of favorable interest allocation rules for multinational corporations and preventing hedge fund managers from using offshore accounts to avoid paying income tax. The bill included:

An extension of the renewable energy production tax credit for wind for one year and the credit for other renewable energy systems like biomass and geothermal energy for three years;

An extension of the 30 percent investment tax credit for solar energy and ten percent investment tax credit for fuel cells through 2014;

Extensions of the deduction for energy efficient commercial buildings for five years and the credit for energy efficient appliances for three years; and

A new consumer tax credit for the purchase of a plug-in electric vehicle. The base credit amount is $3000, rising to $5000 based on battery size.

July 26, 2008. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked the consideration of S. 3186, the Warm in Winter and Cool in Summer Act, by a vote of 50 to 35 (60 votes needed to end the filibuster). The legislation would have doubled funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) but was blocked by Republicans despite the pressing need to provide more resources to low-income families, the disabled, and senior citizens since they particularly ill-suited to deal with rising energy costs. These rising energy costs are expected to continue to put pressure on their budgets throughout 2008 and 2009 as the Energy Information Administration (EIA) predicts that:

Average U.S. residential electricity prices will increase by 5.6 percent in 2008 and 16 percent in 2009;

Average U.S. residential price for natural gas will increase by 16 percent in 2008 and 34 percent in 2009; and

Average residential price for heating oil will increase by 49 percent in 2008 and 63 percent in 2009.

July 29, 2008. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked the consideration of H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008, by a vote of 53 to 43 (60 votes needed to end the filibuster). The legislation was blocked by Republicans because it offset the cost of the renewable energy tax incentives by delaying implementation of favorable interest allocation rules for multinational corporations and preventing hedge fund managers from using offshore accounts to avoid paying income tax. The bill included:

An extension of the renewable energy production tax credit for wind for one year and the credit for other renewable energy systems like biomass and geothermal energy for three years;

An extension of the 30 percent investment tax credit for solar energy and ten percent investment tax credit for fuel cells through 2014;

Extensions of the deduction for energy efficient commercial buildings for five years and the credit for energy efficient appliances for three years; and

A new consumer tax credit for the purchase of a plug-in electric vehicle. The base credit amount is $3000, rising to $5000 based on battery size.

July 30, 2008. The vast majority of Senate Republicans blocked the consideration of S. 3335, the Jobs, Energy, Families, and Disaster Relief Act of 2008, by a vote of 51 to 43 (60 votes needed to end the filibuster). The legislation was blocked by Senate Republicans because it would have prevented hedge fund managers from using offshore accounts to avoid paying income tax and required securities brokers to report to the IRS the basis of publicly-traded securities in order to improve tax compliance. The bill included:

An extension of the renewable energy production tax credit for wind for one year and the credit for other renewable energy systems like biomass and geothermal energy for three years;

An extension of the 30 percent investment tax credit for solar energy and ten percent investment tax credit for fuel cells through 2016;

Extensions of the deduction for energy efficient commercial buildings for five years and the credit for energy efficient appliances for three years; and

A new consumer tax credit for the purchase of a plug-in electric vehicle. The base credit amount is $3000, rising to $5000 based on battery size.

Bush Republicans Attempt to Curtail our Nation's Use of Renewable Fuels

Renewable Fuels Standard. On May 2, 2008, Senators McCain and Hutchinson, along with twenty-two of their Republican colleagues, sent a letter to the Bush Administration's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) urging it to waive the renewable fuels standard in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. On May 19, 2008, Senators Hutchinson, McCain, and ten other Republicans introduced legislation that would freeze our nation's production of ethanol. According to their press releases, these Republican Senators made this decision because of concerns they were having about possible impacts that our nation's biofuels mandate could be having on food prices.

The decision by the group of Republican Senators came before the release of a new analysis from the Department of Energy in June which showed that the increased use of biofuels has reduced gasoline prices at the pump by between 20 and 35 cents per gallon. Furthermore, the statistical analysis performed at the request of Senator Bingaman, the Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, found that our current biofuels policy can explain only between four and five percent of the approximate 45 percent increase in global food prices during the last year - far less than the 25 percent increase that Senators McCain has suggested.

The truth is that the proposal from Senators McCain and Hutchinson was an attempt by Senate Republicans to exploit misinformation on biofuels so their Big Oil allies could keep their market share in products with prices set by OPEC and Wall Street traders. In response, Senator Johnson and others petitioned the EPA on May 6, 2008, to reject the proposal from the Senators McCain, Hutchinson, and their Republican colleagues. The EPA is expected to decide on the request in early August.

[boarderboy]

You are a trouper!!

BB

[softbootsurfer]

as the Oil still gushes out of control...

I remember Surfing and watching Dolphins play and Sailing and watching Dolphins Play...

Thank You to all the Volunteers that are working to save as many animals as they can !

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/03/gulf-oil-spill-photos-ani_n_560813.html

No, I am not a Fan of the Huffington Post ! These pictures were on Google from that site.

[Alaskan Rover]

....//....No, I am not a Fan of the Huffington Post ! These pictures were on Google from that site.

I like the Huffington Post...it gives a good counterpoint to the miasma of ultra-conservative web-rags out there on the net. I find it well-constructed, with thoughtful, germane points. I am mainly talking about it's political section, though. I must admit I find it's "front page" is beginning to look more and more like the 'New York Post'...and I find that a little off-putting. I mainly go directly to the political section as a matter of course. I like the Huff's "Palin Watch"....similar to 'Crime Watch'.

I listen a LOT to Ms. Huffington on NPR. She usually makes a lot of sense.

[Rob Stevens]

Thank You to all the Volunteers that are working to save as many animals as they can !

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/03/gulf-oil-spill-photos-ani_n_560813.html

I can't F U C K I N G stand it!

There's a show on Discover called "Aftermath" or "Life after humans' or something like that. It's supposed to be a look at the planet in the years after humans somehow "dissappear".

What a good news story that would be, with no one around to tell it.

Please, please, PLEASE, figure out how to stop it.

[skatha]

punitive taxes have not stopped the most inconsiderate of all societal scourges...cigarrette smokers. The taxation would have to go toward mitigation of damage and development of alternatives to do any good.

Tee-hee.....The tax on cigarettes hardly amounts to puntive taxation. A pack of cigarettes would have to cost $11 to reimburse each state the money lost in health care costs to smokers. As you can see, a pack of cigarettes costs much less and the US is STILL subsidizing tobacco growers.

Would Americans prefer a dead gulf to expensive gas? I live in the oil and gas capital in the US and possibly the world and I can tell you, you betcha! Drill, baby, drill is still the mantra here in Houston. Even if we had oil washing up on Galveston Island and we've had spills in the past, the attitude wouldn't change. Americans are lazy. They do not understand the concept of sacrifice or conservation.

BTW, don't believe the wingnut spin. This is not Obama's "Katrina". He was aware of the spill within the day. It irritates me to no end that the right wing is comparing a horrible act of nature that killed 1300 people to a oil exploration company's complete disregard of common sense. "Yeah, we don't need a shut-off valve, we'll just have somebody swim down 5,000 feet and cap the well if something goes wrong"

Houston is still home to 60,000 people displaced by Katrina

[Petrol]

Tee-hee.....The tax on cigarettes hardly amounts to puntive taxation. A pack of cigarettes would have to cost $11 to reimburse each state the money lost in health care costs to smokers. As you can see, a pack of cigarettes costs much less and the US is STILL subsidizing tobacco growers.

Would Americans prefer a dead gulf to expensive gas? I live in the oil and gas capital in the US and possibly the world and I can tell you, you betcha! Drill, baby, drill is still the mantra here in Houston. Even if we had oil washing up on Galveston Island and we've had spills in the past, the attitude wouldn't change. Americans are lazy. They do not understand the concept of sacrifice or conservation.

BTW, don't believe the wingnut spin. This is not Obama's "Katrina". He was aware of the spill within the day. It irritates me to no end that the right wing is comparing a horrible act of nature that killed 1300 people to a oil exploration company's complete disregard of common sense. "Yeah, we don't need a shut-off valve, we'll just have somebody swim down 5,000 feet and cap the well if something goes wrong"

Houston is still home to 60,000 people displaced by Katrina

the "horrible act of nature" didn't kill all 1300 people, a Great deal of those lives were lost to a corrupt local and state governments complete disregard of published EEPs, encouragement to welcome the fed in, and common sense on the part of those who refused to evacuate, then expect immediate response to their delima when 98% of the roads are impassable.

call me stone cold if you want, but I'd just as soon see all of nawlenz relocate rather then dump hundreds of Billions of good money after bad trying to pretend it's above sea level.

btw, drill baby drill, dig baby dig, glow baby glow, blow baby blow, & conserve as much as is partical

dead gulf... get real

[softbootsurfer]

It is Still pouring thousands of Gallons a day into the Gulf...

Just another natural spill huh ? Plus all the untested dispersants and all the toxic solvents that went down with the rig...

The Coast wetlands now getting covered in a thick ooze...

Hopefully they now can start drilling in the Arctic Too...

The United States has just 1% of the known Oil reserves on the planet !

Drill baby Drill my Ass!

ne;rtv hoew;hgj/ltwh lrwijo;s/n mg ,hirwn;ltw.jgn asihgvnnb;vhnvn.n.bv.

ug;ghehg;.h .nv eioghjijn/vqhgc;jg ;aigh e.kdfm;gheil/gkj e/lgkjel/kgjce/lkgje

ujhge uhjgcejgheghce.jgh.jghneaklgelkgn.eghn/lkgjea.lgkea.dfghna.gej.kge

[Rob Stevens]

Now they're suggesting setting the wetlands on fire.

This is their only means of cleaning it.

I'm numb.

[bobdea]

Now they're suggesting setting the wetlands on fire.

This is their only means of cleaning it.

I'm numb.

rob, it's all natural, we should just leave it alone. just like we should do with all markets. it's oversight and interference that gets in the way. glenn beck knows what to do. he said nothing, so, that's what I say.

[Buell]

I'm numb.

Don't forget helpless. As humans we can wrecklessly drill holes into earth 5000 feet under water chasing oil, but we do not seem to have any sense of how to seal one up. Incompetent dumba$$es way over their heads.

I grew up (19 years) in south Louisiana. This is so much sadder than words can convey.

[Buell]

This an amazing interview with the chief electronics technician on the Deepwater Horizon from 60 Minutes.

Some of the other links on the page provide really good information as well.

[Alaskan Rover]

I was involved in the Exxon Valdez clean-up effort. Specifically I was involved in the sea-otter rehabilitation program through a joint effort of Univ of Alaska-Fairbanks; a bunch of unemployed marine biologists from the then recently defunct MarineLand of California; and Scripps Institute of Oceanography. We all descended upon Valdez like a swarm of various biologists from every endeavor. We had professors with 4 degrees living in their cars during the clean-up, because every hotel-room and spare-bedroom and livingroom floor was booked-up.

Didn't matter....we all had one thing on our minds, and that was to try and right a wrong in any way that we could. An endeavor that at times seemed futile. We had tractor-trailers in Valdez that were filling up with the carcasses (no, I'll call them bodies) of dead birds of every species. Before I got involved in the sea-otter program, I was assigned to help with necropsies on the dead birds and otters that were brought in. As a grad student in Wildlife Biology, that's were we went. A sad job...one that I still re-visit from time to time.

Luckily, I was soon re-assigned to helping with the live otters that were brought in. Much more rewarding. We had a lot of mother otters that were brought in...often with their young. The juveniles never did well at all with the oil. Their systems were just not strong enough to cope. We all became hopeful, though, when one of the otters had a live-birth...two juveniles that were unaffected by aggregate oil toxicity.

There were far more unsuccessful births, though. And these were always hard to see. The first thing a mother otter does when she has a birth is she blows air into their fur to give them both bouyancy and insulation. She does this in the water, on her back with the juvenile on her stomach. For the live births it is cute to watch, but for the others, it is depressing to see a mother in the water futilely blowing air into the fur of a dead juvenile. She'll do this for many minutes, until finally she stops. The thing is, they don't put the dead baby down and move on...they carry it with them, as if they think it'll somehow wake up. And it's not until the mother finally goes to sleep that we can finally take the baby from her. You see, otters aren't too different from people in that regard.

The saddest thing is the look the mothers sometimes gave us during these times. They would look right at us, almost questioningly...as if somehow, they knew.

During the Valdez spill, I'd gotten to see oil affecting some of the most absolutely gorgeous coastline in the world. I've picked up globs of oil off the beach...it has a stench you wouldn't believe.

And the Gulf of Mexico shoreline has the distinct possibility of being MUCH more affected than the Prince William Sound was. There were few tidal estuaries that were affected by the spill. Most was rocky shoreline or beach. Down in the Gulf of Mexico, it's tidal estuaries and intertidal zones. These areas are FAR more fragile than rocky coastline. That's a sad and very important fact.

The only thing I can derive, is that crude oil BELONGS in the ground.

We try and shift the blame around to various parties. But if you want to know the truth: We are ALL to blame. Everyone of us that fills his/her car with fuel...goes on 3 separate trips instead of consolidating errands into one (I am just as guilty as the next, at this). Drives 75 when we could all be driving 55. Consumes maybe who knows how many kilowatts at home each day when we could be using less energy.

Who's to blame? If you look carefully, I think you may see the reflection of the one to blame in your monitor screen....I sure know I do.

I can only hope that one day we will learn.

[Buell]

Who's to blame? If you look carefully, I think you may see the reflection of the one to blame in your monitor screen....I sure know I do.

Bullsh!t. Using oil does not make someone responsible for this corporation made, profit driven tragedy.

I would have said the same thing when I was in my early 20s and had sold my truck for ethical reasons and just rode my bike. The reality though is that the world and the systems society has created (some good, some benign, some poor, some really stupid) are much bigger than any one human and their ability to affect change. Stopping driving does nothing statistically (at all, whatsoever) to reduce oil if everyone else in the world keeps driving. Until the system of energy use is changed as a society, an individual driver cannot be held responsible for this travesty (except perhaps in your over-theorized mind).

[bjvircks]

Bullsh!t. Using oil does not make someone responsible for this corporation made, profit driven tragedy.

+1

I will admit to being part of our energy hog culture... but I am 100% convinced that effective and fail-safe well-head protection is economically feasible for drillers and owners but purposefully not implemented in the name of increased profits.

Sure, they are drilling to bring me my gasoline, but I don't make them do stupid things.

[Alaskan Rover]

You both fail to see that the oil-industry is not some wholly independant industry totally outside the realm of commerce. The oil industry depends upon the consumer...and in this case, the consumer is ultimately us.

Sure...I blame the oil companies themselves...I also blame present and past administrations for not enforcing regulations that were in place and not instituting new ones where needed.

So while immediate blame may rest upon the companies and regulatory agencies themselves...I.E. - drilling deeper and deeper wells with minimal safety options for such depth (whatever 'gas embolism' that destroyed the pipe was a surprise to them, but it shouldn't have been); not enforcing well-head remote shut-offs like they do in the North Sea, etc, etc; I don't think it is quite as simple as that.

Society is an aggregate of individuals. The greed shown by the oil industry and many other industries would have no grounding if it were not for our societal approval of the supremacy of profit.

As a society, we have oft suffered with an apathy in regards to energy conservation, both on an individual basis and nationwide. 300 million people who think their individual actions have no impact, instead has a HUGE impact. We can not separate ourselves from the Venn Diagram of society on a selective basis. Each one of us is a tacit part of that set...and thus we DO share responsibility.

[Michelle]

I might share responsibility for USING oil and gasoline, but I don't share responsibility for the IRRESPONSIBILTY of BP not having a backup plan. I have to agree with Buell, and call poop when I see it. Someone else's irresponsiblity for an action doesn't have anything to do with me as an individual.

[bjvircks]

I have seen too many sociopaths and morally bankrupt individuals in leadership positions making business decisions which are unconsionable. BP leadership seems to be no exception. WE THE PEOPLE continually press for doing the right thing but the big business lobby seems to be all our government will listen to and so the miscreants hold sway.

[Buell]

You both fail to see that the oil-industry is not some wholly independant industry totally outside the realm of commerce. The oil industry depends upon the consumer...and in this case, the consumer is ultimately us.

You fail to comprehend that there are over 600 million cars in the world today. Not to mention all other methods of transportation that use oil and all the manufacturing that uses oil. An individual is powerless in that situation. The numbers are utterly out of scale. It is living in la la land to say that any one consumer of oil is to blame for the spill in the gulf.

I absolutely consider that human's energy system borders on suicidal in the long term. We have been missing many years of opportunities but, if humans actually make any significant change in this energy system before we are forced to by limited supply, I will be amazed.

It has been asked before, but why are you here on BOL? Why do you continue your political advocacy on BOL? If you think you can make a difference, you better get started somewhere else. Posting about blame on a hardboot website is not going to get you there.

[two_ravens]

Today they are trying to top kill the well. Just doesn't seem likely to work. Top kills always seemed to be a bit sketchy even on the fully controlled, polite little on-shore gas wells that I ran. The guys actually doing the top kills always seemed nervous. I'm trying to visualize how it could possibly work on the BP well..... :( Wish them luck - they'll need it.

(Yeah, I used to work in the oil & gas industry. Ironically, in Wyoming BP has a stellar safety record - they were definitely the safety leaders in the Jonah Field & Pinedale Anticline. When I left the company I worked for over safety issues, BP was the only company I would have considered applying with had I stayed out there. Very, very sad they & their contractors were lax off-shore.)

[scrapster]

Two Ravens, your background never ceases to amaze!

Finally found a live feed of the gusher itself. Looks like drilling mud to my completely untrained eye.

http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream2&hpt=T1

Fingers crossed.

[Petrol]

my heart & prayers remain for the victims, their families and those actually responding to this tragic event.

for anyone outside the industry who wants to try to understand just a few of the many complexities involved: http://bp.concerts.com/gom/kentwells_update24052010.htm