or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Other Stuff › Your Bloody Soap Box › BP Oil Catastrophe
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

BP Oil Catastrophe - Page 2

post #16 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

This sort of oil disaster is quite common place in less publicised regions such as *****ia and Angola, for example.

Royal Dutch Shell for example destroyed the Ogoni region of *****ia.
Campaigners against this destruction such as Ken Saro Wiwa paid with their lives for trying to stop this abuse.

Big oil doesn't give a **** about the health and safety of the environment.
If it did, the cost of a litre of oil would be vastly increased because the cost of sourcing the oil and protecting the environment would make it so.

Human race needs to ween itself away from the oil tit.
post #17 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

*****ia--I'm not sure why that gets censored by the forum software--has experienced a spill on the order of the Exxon Valdez every year for the last, roughly, 50 years (from the NY Times). Because people and governments, in general, aren't concerned about Africa--except when it comes to extracting Africa's natural resources or exploiting people of the African continent--especially sub-Saharan Africa--for political gain, people don't hear of such disasters. It's pathetic that it takes oil washing up on American shores for Americans to even take notices of the risks involved with oil production and the fallout from our thirst for crude.

Sadly, instead of causing people to seriously consider and question the wisdom of continuing to rely so heavily on oil and Big Oil, too many instead use the current oil drama to push for more production in "safer" areas: on land; in shallow water; in protected areas.

We are on a dead-end path, and by "we", I mean the oil dependent world. The oil teat will dry up in roughly the next 50-100 years. Think about that. We've only been drinking oil with insatiable thirst since about 1850 (invention of oil distillation to produce Kerosene; first commercial wells drilled). Consider the amount of oil we've used and the damage we've done over that interval. Meanwhile, the US and a lot of other nations refuse, in practice, to commit to alternative sources of energy. In large swaths of the US, solar and wind energy are considered jokes, something that only "greenies" take seriously. Yeah.

When oil reserves get low enough that prices sky rocket and rationing is implemented, it'll be interesting to hear the bleating from those that thought alternative energy was too expensive or required too much commitment, the bleating about why money wasn't spent to insure that we'd be prepared for said end.

Head, meet Sand.
post #18 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman View Post

Big oil doesn't give a **** about the health and safety of the environment.
If it did, the cost of a litre of oil would be vastly increased because the cost of sourcing the oil and protecting the environment would make it so.
exactly, oil companies are in the business of extrating fossil fuels from the earth to refine into petrol and sell it to us to burn in our cars, there is nothing WORSE for the envoriment than that. As an emplyee of an oil commapny myself (not BP) i do wrestle with my concience every day about that.
post #19 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

PS....


C'MON GERRRRMANNNYYY...
post #20 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainPro View Post
exactly, oil companies are in the business of extrating fossil fuels from the earth to refine into petrol and sell it to us to burn in our cars, there is nothing WORSE for the envoriment than that. As an emplyee of an oil commapny myself (not BP) i do wrestle with my concience every day about that.
You wrestle with your conscious every day? You hate big oil, you hate what they do to the environment, but obvious you don't hate the money you make. So money is more important then your self worth? I kill people for a living, I hate it, it's bad on families of the dead, and I see dead people wherever I go, but I do it for a living thus wrestle with it in my conscious...why would why I go on killing people unless the money was more important then lives...does that make sense to you? I don't really kill people for a living but if I did and it effected my conscious then I would quit, and if I worked in the oil industry and didn't agree with what they do and it bothered me then I would quit. Otherwords it doesn't really bother you, you just like to complain but leave your money alone.
post #21 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

Depressing:

post #22 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

I'm wondering, when back before humans extracted oil that with the over abundance just peculating out of the ground and out of the oceans, if we're not just seeing what it use to look like in natural conditions before humans?
post #23 of 37
post #24 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

I have NO idea wtf you're dribbling about...killing people?
You should be on some kind of police register.

anyway, it pays well so my wife doesnt have to work as we are financially comfortable. Thats one less car getting driven to work every day...so hey, turns out us oil workers probably have the most eco-friendly jobs in the world. That makes me sleep well at night.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Froze View Post
You wrestle with your conscious every day? You hate big oil, you hate what they do to the environment, but obvious you don't hate the money you make. So money is more important then your self worth? I kill people for a living, I hate it, it's bad on families of the dead, and I see dead people wherever I go, but I do it for a living thus wrestle with it in my conscious...why would why I go on killing people unless the money was more important then lives...does that make sense to you? I don't really kill people for a living but if I did and it effected my conscious then I would quit, and if I worked in the oil industry and didn't agree with what they do and it bothered me then I would quit. Otherwords it doesn't really bother you, you just like to complain but leave your money alone.
post #25 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froze View Post
You wrestle with your conscious every day?...
I, also, work in the oil & gas industry. Let us know when you have stopped using items (plastics, etc) and forms of energy (electricity, etc), and items that have been made using such forms of energy (your bikes, etc) that are dependent upon hydrocarbons, and then you can start discussing consciences.
Until then, take responsibility for the part you play in this World.
If you (as in the collective populations of the World) didn't demand it, we wouldn't supply it.
post #26 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

Quote:
Originally Posted by EoinC View Post
I, also, work in the oil & gas industry. Let us know when you have stopped using items (plastics, etc) and forms of energy (electricity, etc), and items that have been made using such forms of energy (your bikes, etc) that are dependent upon hydrocarbons, and then you can start discussing consciences.
Until then, take responsibility for the part you play in this World.
If you (as in the collective populations of the World) didn't demand it, we wouldn't supply it.
Ah ah ahh, I'm not the one wrestling with my conscience! The poster I responded to was doing that. I simply said if he's having a problem with it then don't work in that field. You don't seem to have any problem working in that field and I don't have a problem with using as much energy as I want.

And as always people read into post whatever they want. One thought I killed people for a living, when in reality I was using that as an extreme example and then said that I don't really kill people for a living but the poster never read that. Just as you read that somehow until I stop wasting oil then I can start discussing consciences, but that wasn't even the subject! The subject was concerning an employee in the oil industry who's conscience bothered him that he worked in it, I was simply trying to encourage him to find a different job where his conscience would not be bothered. I can use as much oil resources as I want because it doesn't bother me since I'm the one paying for it, thus I let how much it cost determine how much I can afford to use.
post #27 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

This discussion got me thinking. Since most of us cyclists love the nicest and newest bikes, what are most the nicest bikes made of nowadays? Carbon Fiber!
So I got to doing a bit of internet research and found out that modern carbon fiber is primarily made from Polyacrylonitrile polymers, which is made from Propylene(Propene), which is....you guessed it a product of Petroleum !

So that Specialized S-Works Epic that I drool over in the LBS, or that Trek Madone, or that Cervello; brought to us by our "friends" at Exxon or BP.
post #28 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman View Post
...Big oil doesn't give a **** about the health and safety of the environment.
If it did, the cost of a litre of oil would be vastly increased because the cost of sourcing the oil and protecting the environment would make it so.

Human race needs to ween itself away from the oil tit.
I've got a bit of time, so I'll throw a rambling, random rant in (It's pretty long, so don't read if you fall asleep easily)...
I agree with all that you say, Lim. Despite the feel-good nature of the modern push for triple bottom line reporting, we all know that (in the '3 P's' of TBL) people and planet are only going to be valued after sufficient returns are made on the profit front.
Big Oil is no different to all (well, many) of the other industries out there - Shareholders are in the first row of the Stakeholders seating, whilst village fisherfolk and frog-eyed owls are somewhere down the back of the auditoreum. I understand that it isn't very planet-wise, but I'm not sure why anyone would expect it to be otherwise.

Those of you who've never worked on a drilling rig (and I certainly can't blame you for that) may have a limited understanding of the extent to which 'most' Oil Co's and Drilling Co's go now in order to maintain safe operations - Considerably more effort than when I first ventured into the arena back in the 1980's. Obviously we're still far from perfect, but we continue to get better. In Australia in 2003, the offshore industry was responsible for 416 litres of oil released to the environment, whilst it produced 63 billion litres of oil (APPEA, Oil Spill Prevention and Response), compared with an annual 20 million litres released via terrestrial run-off from sewage and urban catchments (Environment Australia, State of the Environment). Yes, that's right. The Australian population manages to spill 20m litres / yr without even requiring a drilling rig - All we need is a drain or a dunny.

Hydrocarbons are yummy things that make our lives comfortable. Until we're prepared to suffer a little, not much change is likely to occur. In Australia, a Country with large alternative energy potential (solar thermal, solar photovoltaic, wind, tidal, hydro, nuclear, CBM, HDR geothermal, and even some conventional geothermal [one of my colleagues is currently managing Australia's first conventional geothermal power generation project]), public support for cap and trade emissions controls withered when, with some of the cheapest electricity in the developed World, the big stick of higher electricity costs was waved by the Coal Co's - We all want less emissions. etc - we just don't want to pay a financial or lifestyle cost for reducing them...
I spent 2 years of my life managing an operation exploring for (and establishing) conventional geothermal resources in Papua New Guinea. With the path laid for expansion of the existing geothermal power generation network (They already had around 100MW of generation up and running), last I heard they were going to give it a miss, preferring the low cost of having coal supplied from Australia. Energy users (and that applies to most of us) are cost-sensitive and, until the $ incentives (positive or negative) exist to suggest otherwise, energy users will continue to choose the incredible flexibility and value for money that hydrocarbons present as a fuel source. Think about it next time you turn a light or a computer on - It's just too damn nice, and too damn easy...and too damn cheap.

I have worked in Angola, and in other parts of Sub-Sahara and Saharan Africa. Where I have been, controls on Operators have improved over the last 10 years. Production drilling where I worked has similar pollution constraints to carrying out the same operations in Australia or Asia. In our own case, our controls and reporting remain the same wherever we operate, unless the host Country has even tighter rules (than the USA). I can't vouch for others, though.
This also extends to compliance with the USA's Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which introduces another problem. That is (at least in my opinion) that the wealth generation is often concentrated into the hands of a very few, and that wealth is sometimes used for purposes that are contrary to providing benefit to the wider population. When I see people having trouble just surviving (food & water, shelter, health, education), while a member of 'the family' drives a supercar on the only 4-5km of ashphalt in the Country, or uses their private A320 Airbus for shopping trips, the balance appears a little out of whack. Still, it's part of what you and I paid for when we drove our cars to the shops, or brushed our collective teeth with those plastic toothbrushes.

As to how to get the World to wean itself, pricing is the most directly effective method, other than naturally-occuring supply-limiting. The problem with this (in developed Countries, anyway) is that local economies tend to experience relative suffering (eg cost of local production, which relies on more expensive energy, rises in comparison with imported goods that do not have similar levying applied), which remains one of the arguments used in defeating Copenhagen and Kyoto targets. Not that different to the Oil Co's, the populations of the concerned Countries are the Shareholders who don't want to see their 'profits' (GDP) impacted by concessions that may not be shared by others (eg the "Why should we enforce a target when China and India...etc" - Which is interesting, as China is a significant user of alternative energies [China @ 8.3% in 2009 (Reuters) vs Australia @ 5% (Australian Government)], possibly owing more to strong demand than to a decided green bent). I'm not saying it's a good argument, but it seems to be an effective one in ensuring that not much happens. Personally I'd prefer us (Australia) to take our licks and commit, but that's just me, and I may not stand to suffer as much as some others.

Basically, until the people of the World are prepared to take on some pain, don't expect the weaning to progress at a fast rate.

The best bet, at least in my mind, is for each of us to take responsibility for our own share of the demand to the extent that we feel able. Myself? I've started riding a unicycle (not particularly well), saving the environmental impact of that training wheel I've been used to on my other bikes.

Hmmm, I seem to have wasted a fair bit of e-paper writing all that. I'd better go for a ride to recoup the losses.
post #29 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froze View Post
Ah ah ahh, I'm not the one wrestling with my conscience! The poster I responded to was doing that. I simply said if he's having a problem with it then don't work in that field. You don't seem to have any problem working in that field and I don't have a problem with using as much energy as I want...
Fair enough.
post #30 of 37

Re: BP Oil Catastrophe

Speaking of oil...look at the new threat from Iran, guess due to the new sanctions. As a result they are threatening to hold ~40% of the world's oil supply hostage.

I remeber people protesting because both Bush's were willing to go to war over oil. The fact is any U.S. President is will go to war over oil. And it's not just us, all countries will go to war over oil. Why the hell does anyone think Syria was our ally during the first Gulf War -- Oil.

Japan is super dependant on the oil from the gulf, much more than us. They flipped a large part of the bill for us to fight Iraq. The availablity of oil is of great national interest, not just us, even Europe participated in the war. It was because of oil. Doesn't matter who is in the white house or who has the majority in congress. It doesn't even matter what country is involved -- right or wrong oil is that important.

washingtonpost.com

Iran says it has 100 vessels for each US warship

TEHRAN, Iran -- The former naval chief for Iran's Revolutionary Guard said the country has set aside 100 military vessels to confront each warship from the U.S. or any other foreign power that might pose a threat, an Iranian newspaper reported Saturday.

Such a military confrontation in the vital oil lanes of the Persian Gulf would be of major global concern. The warning builds on earlier threats by Iran to seal off the Gulf's strategic Strait of Hormuz - through which 40 percent of the world's oil passes - in response to any military attack.

"We have set aside 100 military vessels for each (U.S.) warship to attack at the time of necessity," Gen. Morteza Saffari was quoted as saying by the conservative weekly Panjereh.

The U.S. and Israel have said military force could be used if diplomacy fails to stop what they suspect is an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Iran denies any aim to develop such weapons and says its nuclear work is for peaceful purposes like power generation.


The U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet headquarters is based just across the Gulf from Iran in Bahrain.

Saffari said more than 100 foreign warships were currently in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman, adding that their sailors were "morsels" for Iran's military to target, the newspaper reported.

"Any moment the exalted supreme leader (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei) orders - or should the enemy carry out the smallest threat against (Iran's ruling) Islamic system - the Guard ... is ready for quick reaction," he was quoted as saying.

By putting the number of foreign warships at 100, the general appeared to suggest Iran has 10,000 military vessels at the ready. Iran is known to have many speed boats used by the Guard, but there is no public information about how many larger military vessels it has.

In January 2008, five small high-speed vessels believed to be from Iran's Revolutionary Guard briefly swarmed three U.S. Navy ships passing near Iranian waters in the Gulf and delivered a radio threat to blow them up.

The war of words has intensified between Iran and the West since the U.N. Security Council imposed tougher sanctions last month in response to Iran's refusal to halt uranium enrichment, a technology that can be used to produce nuclear fuel or material for an atomic bomb.

Iran put its most powerful military force, the Revolutionary Guard, in charge of defending the country's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf in 2008.

"We believe the enemy, through extensive psychological warfare, wants to coerce us, but Iran ... is ready," said Saffari, who was the Guard's navy chief until early May. "The enemy won't dare attack Iran."
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Your Bloody Soap Box
Cycling Forums › Forums › Other Stuff › Your Bloody Soap Box › BP Oil Catastrophe