Posted on 07/09/2010 11:07:46 AM PDT by epithermal
Just one month before its April 20 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, BP claimed it could skim 491,721 barrels of oil a day in the event of a major oil spill.
So now that it's not merely a thought exercise, how much has it skimmed each day? 900 barrels.
That's less than 0.2% of its estimate.
(Excerpt) Read more at fool.com ...
Obama hobbled the skimming efforts. BP’s estimate was legit, I’d accept it. What they failed to account for in that estimate was the sheer evil or incompetence of an Obama.
I think if you assume they would sub-contract out to ships this administration would not let in due to the Jones act, they would be correct.
With OSHA, and the government stopping every plan one would expect a decrease.
probably they would have skimmed more if they actually used skimmers.
MMS is apparently nothing more than a channel for perks for those businesses in the Merchant class (BP) which are taking advantage of their wealth to buy congress critters and bureaucrats to write favorable legislation.
Since 2006 that has been done by a DEMOCRAT CONGRESS. Since 2008 the Bureaucrats have been selected by Obama, another democrat.
BP and MMS corruption ALL happened under DEMOCRAT control.
Democrats can go to hell.
What’s the rest of the story, though?
Why aren’t they skimming any more than that?
Could be a number of reasons that have nothing to do with BP’s skimming capacity.
Skimmers cannot be moved place to place according to the genius people in the administration. Such movements would mitigate the damage to the country. Ozero is into major damage and not interested partial paralysis of the gulf coast. They will be allowed to skim once the oil has finished it’s work on the industries there.
I’m sure the estimate was with the assumption that the administration wouldn’t block a majority of the skimmers for even enter the Gulf for two months.
Does this take into account Obama ordering the skimming fleet to stop skimming? they’ve been out of commission for weeks.
Also does it take into account Obama rejecting foreign skimmer ships to help because they don’t all have union workers?
This reminds me of people saying immigration when they should be saying "illegal" immigration. Or saying global warming when they should be saying "man-made global warming" (or "AGW").
In skimming you suck in "x" barrels of ocean water and expell "y" barrels of clean ocean water, retaining "z" barrels of oil on the ship for buring or refining on land.
So MSM, BP, DOE: what is 491,721 barrels in terms of x, y or z?
491,721 is c, where c is a “claim”
900 is r, where r is reality
clear enough?
The figure probably includes “capture”. Some stories report it that way.
Did BP say they could “skim” or “recover” that amount? They are 2 very different things. BP is in the recovery business, so I would doubt that BP is actually skimming anything.
Obama is engaging in willful neglect just as Jamie Gorelick and Barney Frank did when they were “overseeing” Fannie Mae before the banking collapse.
Charge them for their offenses.
"Just one month before its April 20 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, BP claimed it could skim 491,721 barrels of oil a day in the event of a major oil spill. So now that it's not merely a thought exercise, how much has it skimmed each day? 900 barrels."
Not an engineer in this world would make such a wholesale estimate. There is absolutely no doubt that an estimate was given for a particular range of depth and certain conditions in place. These jerks found a number in some BP report and simply use it out of context.
"The two big lessons (that we should have already learned from the financial industry): 1.Models are only as good as their inputs. "
That is what most undergraduates learn in school. May be this idiot needed the financial meltdown to hear this being said in press, but most people know it from school.
"We saw similarly screwy models when Wall Street claimed housing prices couldn't go down."
No, idiot: financial industry did not make any such claim. They left this possibility outside their radars. What he claims instead that they actually thought about it and decided that price decline is impossible. This is a defamatory lie.
In addition, it is pretty clear that the author has no idea about modeling. We all have models and leave many things out. Who of us makes plans that take into account a comet hitting the Earth, sending it into centuries of ice age? when Germans voted fo Hitler, did they take into account that over 10% of their own population would be wiped out by his policies? All models leave out a great number of possibilities. In fact, if you tried to construct models that fully take into account all such events, no progress would be possibly.
"2.Regulators shouldn't get too cozy with the regulated. The lack of oversight and, um, the extracurricular activities at the Minerals Management Service has been well documented. "
He thinks that "ums" make him look smart. How about giving us an example of "well-documented?" Defamation left and right: he merely quotes Obama that claims that Bush appointees were corrupt. If there is evidence, they should be prosecuted for corruption. Why do you think there are no such cases?
"On Wall Street, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM), sits on the board of the New York Fed."
So what? He is an idiot: the Fed is formed by major banks, and he does not even know it.
And we all know about Goldman Sachs' (NYSE: GS) role as the "finishing school for all higher-up government roles. "
Again, some kind of conspiracy and corruption is implied here. Do you know that 20% of all Supreme Court Justices that ever served were Harvard School graduates? This idiot would probably claim that there is some kind of conspiracy here, too.
Goldman is the Harvard of Wall Street: it makes it a point to attract the best talent and let if flourish. In addition, the (leftist) culture of the place attracts people with a mission to do good as they understand it. As a result, (i) when government looks for a qualified person, there is a good chance (s)he worked for Goldman, and (ii) a Goldmanite is more likely to be interested in working for the government. Just as with Harvard, there is no conspiracy.
Most importantly, if the author thinks there is conspiracy, it is his responsibility to justify his suspicion by facts. Not only are his fact insufficient --- he does not even bother to give any; he does not even think of them.
Defamation, plain and simple. And he gets away with it, just as many "conservatives" on this forum that spew anti-capitalist propaganda.
"As reform efforts continue in both the energy and financial sectors, let's hope we heed these lessons."
He should go to school (sophomore level). He is the least qualified person to give lessons: he can't even think.
Now, epithermal, my friend: what attracted you to this piece of garbage, this shameless anti-capitalist propagand? Can you name a single fact that is informative, or a single thought that is instructive? Have I missed any?
What are they going to do about the high levels of Arsenic that is leaching out of the oil? No doubt it is accellerated by the addition of dispersants. Pack your to go kit....
BP skimmers don’t hold a candle to what Obama is skimming!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.