-
Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
However far from Russia it might be the news of the massive oil spill in Gulf of Mexico makes me shudder. What terrible impact it may have on everything in and around, and not only, that area?!
I didn’t understand from what’s on the net whether the oil flow has been contained yet or not. It seems they only talk of the number of barrels being spilt daily into the Gulf, that the erosion of the piping could lead to even greater leakage, of the environmental hazards and the eminent threat to the seafood industry of the Gulf never mentioning the fact that the hole in Earth on the sea bottom remains unplugged so far and the oil is gushing out unrestrained. What’s the use of blabbering about the damage that’s been done when the magnitude of the damage to come may be God only knows how many times bigger.
What’s the news? How do you feel, people of the USA and the area? Is that a new Chernobyl on the go?
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Alex,
I am certain there are others on the forum far better educated than I am about all of this... but to quickly answer you... from what I have heard... the oil is not contained and BP has stated that they are accepting help from everyone and anyone who is offering it at this point.
The people of New Orleans have suffered yet another terrible blow to their lives. There was an interview this morning on national news with a man who was finally getting his fishing business back on track after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and he was in the process of building a dock of some sort and now he fears he will loss everything all over again.
I heard they are thinking of placing a dome over the underground rig to stop the oil from flowing, and then somehow try to solve the problem later, but that it will take MONTHS to construct that.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
It's a terrible tragedy.. I read that this spill may be worse than the "ExxonValdez" spill in Alaska, back in.... 1990s (or earlier?) Anyway that was a terrible spill that still has an impact on the environment there.
I agree about the poor people of New Orleans; seems to be no end to their misfortune. And they weren't well to do to start with!
Oil companies are terrible; I worked for over a year at Shell, and that is an epicentre of hippocracy; it tries to present itself as environmental and socially concious -- in reality it's exploiting places like Nigeria and polluting where it is extracting oil. (It was a decent place to work though, jolly good free staff canteen and lots of excellent benefits. Thanks to the fantastic profits they were able to squeeze out of Africa and elsewhere... )
Without the public watching and laws to control them, there would have been a lot more accidents like this! I wonder if this was a genuine mistake, or the results of inadequate checks or shoddy work.
I really couldn't care less if this affair took BP down. I can't stand oil companies and I think it's terrible we are still so dependant on oil.
This should never have happened.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Conspiracy theories are already up for this. Like here, for example,
http://www.planbeconomics.com/2010/04/2 ... lated-risk
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Interesting conspiracy theory.But it's a Catch 22 type situation and I absolutely don't think this is a conspiracy.
The people who are against offshore drilling for environmental reasons wouldn't morally be able to convince themselves to use this strategy, since it would lead to an ecological catastrophy. Secondly, the leak is at very deep under water and the area is probably under surveillance. Getting there and bursting the pipeline would need very expensive equipment and involvement of professionals, or the navy. It just sprung leak, I'm sure. No conspiracy.
But they have a point though: America's extreme dependence on oil, and the length it is prepared to go to, to get it (and the depths it is prepared to sink to...) is a valid concern. Iraq... no WMDs, but oil galore... Interesting. Next on the "liberation" hit list; Iran. Coincidence?
All developed nations need to scale down their dependence and start using alternatives....
:good:
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
[s:2beal4om]Interesting[/s:2beal4om] Boring conspiracy theory.But it's a Catch 22 type situation and I absolutely don't think this is a conspiracy.
Fixed your post. :)
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
They can teach the population how to fracturize oil at home (free gasoline!) and everyone will go out collecting it from the sea surface.
Seriously though, will BP go bankrupt after that? I don't think any insurance company would be able to cover the damage they'd inflicted.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
I don't see what the big deal is! So what if the oil slick is bigger than the state of Florida. It's only CRUDE natural pure and pristine as Mother Nature oil. It's a natural substance from the Earth! It's not like it is some man made synthetic icky stuff. Who cares if a bunch of pelicans and penguins get their beaks full of crude oil? That will teach them to go where Mother Nature's winds blow this beautiful oil slick, just like they should stay away from volcanoes. Why isn't Jacques Cousteau at the bottom of the ocean filming this stuff for his nature programs? I don't get it!
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
So, I’m guessing, you don’t stand up and join in when the anthem is being sung and, on Independence Day, the broad stripes aren’t gallantly streaming o'er the home of the brave, do you, are they? Or is it just you being sarcastic?
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
I worked for over a year at Shell, and that is an epicentre of hippocracy; it tries to present itself as environmental and socially concious -- in reality it's exploiting places like Nigeria and polluting where it is extracting oil.
Normally I don't hijack threads to nitpick misspellings, but this one likely means 'ruled by horses'.
Quote:
Without the public watching and laws to control them, there would have been a lot more accidents like this! I wonder if this was a genuine mistake, or the results of inadequate checks or shoddy work.
Is someone forgot to close a valve if he slept 4 hours during last 24 hours or didn't put his signature in some unrelated document - is it a mistake or shoddy work?
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil77
I can imagine...
Theoretically though it's a sound plan, but thousands of things can go wrong. This plan involves drilling a hole on the seabed and placing the charge very precisely or otherwise in addition to oil contamination they'll irradiate the place and it would become too hazardous for humans to try something else.
And besides, if a word of this will leak BEFORE they do it the masses would go into hysterics.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil77
I can imagine...
Theoretically though it's a sound plan, but thousands of things can go wrong. This plan involves drilling a hole on the seabed and placing the charge very precisely or otherwise in addition to oil contamination they'll irradiate the place and it would become too hazardous for humans to try something else.
And besides, if a word of this will leak BEFORE they do it the masses would go into hysterics.
Actually, they used specially designed devices. Like those:
http://www.vniitf.ru/images/indbomb2.jpg
I doubt one can just take a warhead from a missile and drop it into a well. It likely won't go in.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil77
BP has no nukes (fortunately)! I guess that was an "advantage" in the USSR; the state could borrow from one part of its enterprises to solve the problems in another... Plus they probably didn't need to seriously consider public opinion, or worry about media scrutinizing their every move.
I didn't quite understand how that solution worked though?!
Iti-ogo and Crocodile are the scientists here, I think. Is that feasible?
But why not use nukes for a positive thing?
It can't really get much worse than it is, can it?
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Of course it's shouldn't be a regular warhead from a strategic intercontinental missle. But it looks like a small tactical nuke with a shape, designed specially to fit a drillhole could work. But of course I'm not a specialist, it's just dilettante's thoughts. But maybe they should invite Bruce Willis or the guys who made Fallout sequel? :roll:
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
I didn't quite understand how that solution worked though?!
Have you watched the video (the second link)?
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
BP has no nukes (fortunately)!
If by August the total of the oil spilt amounts to ten Exxon Valdez they’ll find them whatever warheads are necessary for the leak and one for the Britain itself. :crazy:
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
No need to nuke Britain please :mosking: (although I am fed up with this dump, I am not THAT fed up yet...)
BP is not state-owned, it's private... The majority shareholders of BP would be better to =@ nuke, who have been pushing for profits at the expense of safety...
:evil:
I read today that the US government is forcing BP to build some kind of wall to protect the coastline from the oil. But what happens to all the oil then? Is it just floating around in the sea and killing sea animals..? Or does it sink to the bottom eventually?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil77
Have you watched the video (the second link)?
No I hadn't, but now I have... That's pretty clever. I am too tired to read the whole article but skimmed it. Why is this referred to as proganda; it seems to be a reasonably objective summary of some successful actions taken by an un-named country to stop a disaster. Quite a creative solution, and it was amazing that they did not register any radiation after doing that.
One difference is that the current problem is a mile under water.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Obama is not doing anything! He immediately refused help from Britain, Holland and Norway. He has told BP to do things that don't work as if HE was an expert.
The fact is the only other wells sunk this deep into the earth's crust were done by the Russians, only the Russians were smart enough to drill on dry land....not 5,000 feet through water first and then 22,000 feet into the crust. The Russians knew that this was foolish! Russians are the experts at drilling wells this deep (up to 42,000 feet into the crust) They have 304 deep wells. They drill this deep because they are smart enough to KNOW that oil is NOT a fossil fuel! It is ABIOTC! There are no hydrocarbons at these depths so oil can not be and organic substance. Because of this Russia has MORE oil than the Middle East.
The pressure at that depth is 100,000 p.s.i. When the well blew it shattered the pipe casings and sent oil up to the bottom of the ocean floor through cracked fissures. So there are other holes to plug beside the one they show us on the video camera. Not only that, there is gas coming out too, and it is poisonous! Hydrogen sulfide, methane, and benzine. Some people are already getting sick. The media is controlled there, there is security restricting anyone from unauthorized contact with the workers and people are not talking.
There is also talk of a huge bubble of gas accumulating on the ocean floor which is already several miles long. When this eventually comes to the surface it will sink any of the boats that happen to be on the surface and who knows what that gas will do after that!
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DDT
They drill this deep because they are smart enough to KNOW that oil is NOT a fossil fuel! It is ABIOTC! There are no hydrocarbons at these depths so oil can not be and organic substance. Because of this Russia has MORE oil than the Middle East.
Here's what I've found in the Pedivikia:
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
Most popular in the Soviet Union between the 1950s and 1980s, the abiogenic hypothesis has little support among contemporary petroleum geologists, who argue that abiogenic petroleum does not exist in significant amounts on earth and that there is no indication that an application of the hypothesis is or has ever been of commercial value.
[...]
Although the abiogenic hypothesis was accepted by some geologists in the former Soviet Union, most geologists now consider the biogenic formation of petroleum scientifically supported. Although evidence exists for abiogenic formation of methane and hydrocarbon gases within the Earth, studies indicate they are not produced in commercially significant quantities [...]
What do you think of that? :search:
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Quote:
Originally Posted by DDT
They drill this deep because they are smart enough to KNOW that oil is NOT a fossil fuel! It is ABIOTC! There are no hydrocarbons at these depths so oil can not be and organic substance. Because of this Russia has MORE oil than the Middle East.
Here's what I've found in the Pedivikia:
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
Most popular in the Soviet Union between the 1950s and 1980s, the abiogenic hypothesis has little support among contemporary petroleum geologists, who argue that abiogenic petroleum does not exist in significant amounts on earth and that there is no indication that an application of the hypothesis is or has ever been of commercial value.
[...]
Although the abiogenic hypothesis was accepted by some geologists in the former Soviet Union, most geologists now consider the biogenic formation of petroleum scientifically supported. Although evidence exists for abiogenic formation of methane and hydrocarbon gases within the Earth, studies indicate they are not produced in commercially significant quantities [...]
What do you think of that? :search:
Great info, Crocodile! Putting this in the same file as Lysenko :)
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DDT
Obama is not doing anything!
I saw him complaining about "these talkin' heads" and planning to "kick a certain part of people's body". Has he executed that threat yet?
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Apparently Obama said that this is the worst tragedy to the USA since 9-11. Does that mean that the USA will now start a
Global "War on POLLUTION" ?
or a
Global "War on Multinational Corporations"?
...or will it make it even more determine to continue fighting the "War against Terrorism" in oil rich countries in the Middle East, far from the beaches of American voters....?
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
Apparently Obama said that this is the worst tragedy to the USA since 9-11. Does that mean that the USA will now start a
Global "War on POLLUTION" ?
or a
Global "War on Multinational Corporations"?
...or will it make it even more determine to continue fighting the "War against Terrorism" in oil rich countries in the Middle East, far from the beaches of American voters....?
If they still had Bush in the White House this spill would have been a result of a terrorist attack led personally by Bin Laden.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Quote:
Originally Posted by DDT
They drill this deep because they are smart enough to KNOW that oil is NOT a fossil fuel! It is ABIOTC! There are no hydrocarbons at these depths so oil can not be and organic substance. Because of this Russia has MORE oil than the Middle East.
Here's what I've found in the Pedivikia:
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
Most popular in the Soviet Union between the 1950s and 1980s, the abiogenic hypothesis has little support among contemporary petroleum geologists, who argue that abiogenic petroleum does not exist in significant amounts on earth and that there is no indication that an application of the hypothesis is or has ever been of commercial value.
[...]
Although the abiogenic hypothesis was accepted by some geologists in the former Soviet Union, most geologists now consider the biogenic formation of petroleum scientifically supported. Although evidence exists for abiogenic formation of methane and hydrocarbon gases within the Earth, studies indicate they are not produced in commercially significant quantities [...]
What do you think of that? :search:
I am well aware that the old school is denying the new! But the old school can not explain how "fossil" fuel (from dead and decayed organic life) can be found at depths that far exceed the depths of the strata in which fossils are actually found. There is no evidence that dinosaurs and vegetation ever existed 40 thousand feet below the surface of the earth's crust, so how did this supposed "fossil" fuel form there if it is made from dinosaurs and trees?
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
And it’ll be a great relief for you to know that the bullet you’ve been killed by is of pure gold and not just of ordinary over the counter lead, right?
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
It's a terrible tragedy.. I read that this spill may be worse than the "ExxonValdez" spill in Alaska, back in.... 1990s (or earlier?) Anyway that was a terrible spill that still has an impact on the environment there.
Oh. Its much... Much worse. I'm no expert (though I should be since I worked with oil for 3 years in the military) on oil But I'm assuming that wikipedia is pretty close to being right .
Exxon Valdez spilled a total of 40,900 m³ (10.8 million U.S. gallons, 257,000 barrels of oil)
This was spilled on the surface of cold, relatively slow moving, shallow water in the arctic (or north pacific) ocean.
The BP oil spill is and has been leaking at least 66,000 barrels at more than 5,000 feet under water in a strong current (1 barrel of oil is = 50 or more gallons where 1 gallon = 6.7 pounds) every 24 hours for the last 60 days.
I'm no math wizard but I guess it didn't take more than 3 or 4 days to be a whole lot worse than the exxonvaldez.
And, DDT, you know I love you man but your argument is pretty retarded. Sure crude oil is natural but so is fire ( and flooding for that sake). I don't suppose you want to do away with fire departments or dams do you? What about people who lose their homes to or die in house fires.
Its just all their fault and that should teach them!!!
For what? hiring a bad electrician? For wanting a pop tart at 5 a.m. ? Or when catastrophic floods happen (like they happen in Australia every spring) we should just say "Well f**k those stupid people... the shouldn't have been living in Australia anyway!
How is a bird who nests in the spot every year supposed to magically know that one day it can't land there because it will be covered in toxic ooz and die.
Sure, oil does leak in places sometimes naturally and in these cases the ocean can and does deal with it. But you can't set fire to a 20 floor apartment building and call the people pussies who are trying to get out for calling 911 "because fire happens all the time in forests... and around volcanoes".
Btw things to live in and around volcanoes all the time (even underwater) so you can't really teach animals not to live in volcanoes. - http://www.livescience.com/environment/ ... lcano.html
Anyways, you know I got nothing but love for you but BILLIONS of gallons of oil soaking millions of square miles is... kind of a big deal.
Ok I need another liter of JD.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quartz
Putting this in the same file as Lysenko :)
You seem to be well-versed with Russian history. :hlop:
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
Apparently Obama said that this is the worst tragedy to the USA since 9-11. Does that mean that the USA will now start a
Global "War on POLLUTION" ?
or a
Global "War on Multinational Corporations"?
...or will it make it even more determine to continue fighting the "War against Terrorism" in oil rich countries in the Middle East, far from the beaches of American voters....?
If they still had Bush in the White House this spill would have been a result of a terrorist attack led personally by Bin Laden.
Maybe that's how Bin Laden has been avoiding capture all this time..... He's been secretly working for BP on an oil rig in the gulf of Mexico all along! The best place to hide was right under their nose... In fact, Bin Laden was some kind of engineer by trade, I think.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
Bin Laden was some kind of engineer by trade, I think.
Originally he is a creature of CIA himself. He was "good guy", remember how John Rambo helped him in "Rambo III" ? :mosking: I don't quite remember wich American pesident said (about Dominicana dictator Trujillo I believe or maybe Chiang Kai-shek :?: ) "His is son of a b!tch indeed, but he is our son of a b!tch". And later when Bin Laden lost support from his former masters (after the fall of SU) he got angry on themselves... :roll:
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Really are you serious! I can't remember the plot of Rambo III.
They really said that about Osama bin Laden himself?
This is very, very twisted.......
And the whole "War on terrorism" feels like an invention that was created after 9-11. Apparently there is no actual "al-Qaeda" as media is always describing (making it seem a bit like the "Spectre" organisation from James Bond...) Al-Qaeda is just a name to refer to lose groups of extremists that exist in various places, that sometimes contact other like-minded groups. But it's not an organised entity per-se.
It's almost like all of this fills the void that was previously filled with the anti communism paranoia in some countries. It's like there has to be some kind of "official" enemy... If the islamists ever "give up", then who/what will be the next enemy?
Don't know about others here, but the war on terror is with me EVERY day, with constant security messages on the Underground, daily stories about the "war on terror" in media, airport security is insane (good reason to avoid flying). Britain has tons of moslems living here, who previously were not extremist but lately had to choose a side in the "war on terror" and unfortunately joined "the enemy" despite having grown up in the UK.
The reason that Britain got attacked on 7/7 was because of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, so that is a result of the war, not a reason for it.
To me, the "real" enemy ought to be pollution, starvation, poverty and the reasons behind that. That's what we should spend our resources fighting.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogboy182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
It's a terrible tragedy.. I read that this spill may be worse than the "ExxonValdez" spill in Alaska, back in.... 1990s (or earlier?) Anyway that was a terrible spill that still has an impact on the environment there.
Oh. Its much... Much worse. I'm no expert (though I should be since I worked with oil for 3 years in the military) on oil But I'm assuming that wikipedia is pretty close to being right .
Exxon Valdez spilled a total of 40,900 m³ (10.8 million U.S. gallons, 257,000 barrels of oil)
This was spilled on the surface of cold, relatively slow moving, shallow water in the arctic (or north pacific) ocean.
The BP oil spill is and has been leaking at least 66,000 barrels at more than 5,000 feet under water in a strong current (1 barrel of oil is = 50 or more gallons where 1 gallon = 6.7 pounds) every 24 hours for the last 60 days.
I'm no math wizard but I guess it didn't take more than 3 or 4 days to be a whole lot worse than the exxonvaldez.
And, DDT, you know I love you man but your argument is pretty retarded. Sure crude oil is natural but so is fire ( and flooding for that sake). I don't suppose you want to do away with fire departments or dams do you? What about people who lose their homes to or die in house fires.
Its just all their fault and that should teach them!!!
For what? hiring a bad electrician? For wanting a pop tart at 5 a.m. ? Or when catastrophic floods happen (like they happen in Australia every spring) we should just say "Well f**k those stupid people... the shouldn't have been living in Australia anyway!
How is a bird who nests in the spot every year supposed to magically know that one day it can't land there because it will be covered in toxic ooz and die.
Sure, oil does leak in places sometimes naturally and in these cases the ocean can and does deal with it. But you can't set fire to a 20 floor apartment building and call the people pussies who are trying to get out for calling 911 "because fire happens all the time in forests... and around volcanoes".
Btw things to live in and around volcanoes all the time (even underwater) so you can't really teach animals not to live in volcanoes. -
http://www.livescience.com/environment/ ... lcano.html
Anyways, you know I got nothing but love for you but BILLIONS of gallons of oil soaking millions of square miles is... kind of a big deal.
Ok I need another liter of JD.
It was my tongue in cheek humor Dog! ...lol !!!
Although I do believe that to go after the oil companies is a bit like the towns people getting mad at the gunfighter they hired to rid the town of bad guys, after the job was done. We all use oil so we all hold some responsibility. Also, we wouldn't let them drill on land where this couldn't happen!
You're right! It's very serious. Further, no one is talking about the OTHER LEAKS! There are fissures which opened up in the ocean floor when the pressure forced the oil to seek further relief. I didn't know how they are going to stop those holes.
Also I heard that the Russian oilmen thought BP was crazy to drill in such deep water. Don't know if that is true....just heard it that's all.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Oil gets scarcer so in order to get it you should drill deeper and find other places. Arctic has rich deposits but the cost of extraction is too high for any commercial success. Nevertheless we will go and drill there sooner or later. There's nothing particularly wrong with the fact that BP drills there, nobody would stop drilling the ocean bed because of this, simply some additional safety precautions will be observed in the future.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
We MUST stop using oil.... It corrupts so many governments and people. and it pollutes. There was life before petrol/oil and there ARE alternatives...
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
We MUST stop using oil.... It corrupts so many governments and people. and it pollutes. There was life before petrol/oil and there ARE alternatives...
How would you like electricity prices going up tenfold or even hundredfold? How would you like coal or wood heating? How would you like a world with no cars, no planes, no plastic, no synthetic fabrics, no cosmetics, no paints etc? You are probably not aware of the whole spectre of things that are made of oil or its components. Oil is not merely a fuel, it's a main component of many materials. Have a look around you right now, what do you see? You wouldn't probably believe it but 90% of things you see is made of oil or oil was used in the process of making them.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
How would you like electricity prices going up tenfold or even hundredfold? How would you like coal or wood heating? How would you like a world with no cars, no planes, no plastic, no synthetic fabrics, no cosmetics, no paints etc? You are probably not aware of the whole spectre of things that are made of oil or its components. Oil is not merely a fuel, it's a main component of many materials. Have a look around you right now, what do you see? You wouldn't probably believe it but 90% of things you see is made of oil or oil was used in the process of making them.
I agree with Hanna, there are alternatives. There is lots of development in biodegradable plastic, hydrogen, renewable and nuclear energy, smart power grids and stuff like that. The oil is a finite resource. So I think we have to upgrade anyways. The sooner the better.
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
How would you like electricity prices going up tenfold or even hundredfold? How would you like coal or wood heating? How would you like a world with no cars, no planes, no plastic, no synthetic fabrics, no cosmetics, no paints etc? You are probably not aware of the whole spectre of things that are made of oil or its components. Oil is not merely a fuel, it's a main component of many materials. Have a look around you right now, what do you see? You wouldn't probably believe it but 90% of things you see is made of oil or oil was used in the process of making them.
I agree with Hanna, there are alternatives. There is lots of development in biodegradable plastic, hydrogen, renewable and nuclear energy, smart power grids and stuff like that. The oil is a finite resource. So I think we have to upgrade anyways. The sooner the better.
How do you know that oil is a 'finite ' source ? No body does! There is evidence to suggest that it is not made from organic decay but chemical reaction deep in the earth.
It is just plain dumb or even criminal to put into place policies to prevent the use of oil before alternatives to oil have been discovered. Feel free to think "Obama" here. Obama should be imprisoned for the rest of his life for his treason against the USA, may the sob rot there!
This is how it works as far as 'oil' goes.
Obama is an Oligarch. A crime figure. He is connected to George Soros who funded Obama and supports Obama. (Soros - the guy who, when a boy helped the NAZIS take the belongings of Jews off them.)
Obama has used the Gulf oil spill as a reason to stop all US drilling in water deeper than 500 feet for at least the next 6 months. He is forcing the oil drillers to pay restitution to their now out of work employees, but they are only out of work because Obama took away their jobs!
At the same time Obama has given Petrobras a Brazilian oil company 2 BILLION DOLLARS to drill a well even much deeper than the BP well in the gulf!
And guess who is part owner in Petrobras?
George Soros - Petrobras is the largest investment in his portfolio.
Not only that but the Obama administration is being accused of misrepresenting the facts in a report about an offshore drilling pause:
The seven experts who advised President Obama on how to deal with offshore drilling safety after the Deepwater Horizon explosion are accusing his administration of misrepresenting their views to make it appear that they supported a six-month drilling moratorium — something they actually oppose.
http://harrisonprice.com/wp-content/...t20strings.jpg
-
Re: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
How would you like electricity prices going up tenfold or even hundredfold? How would you like coal or wood heating? How would you like a world with no cars, no planes, no plastic, no synthetic fabrics, no cosmetics, no paints etc? You are probably not aware of the whole spectre of things that are made of oil or its components. Oil is not merely a fuel, it's a main component of many materials. Have a look around you right now, what do you see? You wouldn't probably believe it but 90% of things you see is made of oil or oil was used in the process of making them.
I agree with Hanna, there are alternatives. There is lots of development in biodegradable plastic, hydrogen, renewable and nuclear energy, smart power grids and stuff like that. The oil is a finite resource. So I think we have to upgrade anyways. The sooner the better.
I am aware that a lot of products (computers, packaging, kitchen utensils, machines etc) are made from oil-based products. I am aware that it is not possible to fly without fuel derived from oil.
Perhaps I am not fully clear on exactly the scale of change, or how much more expensive things would become. But I would be willing to make quite a lot of sacrifices, how far, I am not sure..
It is NOT a necessity of life to own a car, to regularly travel to other continents or to have endless gadgets, clothes, accessoaries etc. Everything does not need to be in plastic packaging and there ARE other sources of energy and fuel.
Oil is almost like a drug, like heroin to the world; easy to get and does wonders for a very cheap price (at least initially). But then you are hooked, and you just want more and more, and you are prepared to do anything to get it... Not to mention what it does to your health and looks (compare pollution!)
I think the world is like an "oil-junkie" and it needs to wean off the habit.
If we can go to the moon and transplant organs, then surely we can find alternatives to oil! And don't forget that people in the third world do use only a fraction of the oil per person that we in the West do.. It's not even remotely fairly distributed. There are so many different things wrong with how we use oil today.
But I am as guilty as the next person of owning lots of gadgets, flying, having too much clothes and buying things made from plastic...
I feel slightly hypocritical.
:oops:
