Posted on 06/12/2010 7:53:15 PM PDT by Qbert
In the beginning he should have met ASAP with the heads of BP and the governors of the states that would likely be affected. Those meetings would have given him some ideas of things he could do to help and he would have had input he needed to formulate a plan to at least mitigate damages to the coast. He should NOT have put all the oil rig workers in the gulf out of work, there had to a better way to handle that.
At the very least had he met with the people dealing with the issues it would have looked like he cared and was trying to do something. He is supposed to be the leader of this country- it would be nice if he could show some leadership. He looks like a total incompetent playing golf, partying, and making smart alec remarks while this disaster is going on.
He needs to go to the UN and ask for every nation’s help to deal with this. It might be the FIRST time the UN ever accomplished anything good. Of course, he won’t do that, he’s the ultimate ......... (would get me banned.)
Bring the Norwegians in. They were called by the Russians to try to save the Kursk crew. They know the sea. No diver’s going down to 5,000 feet. If somebody can fix it, let em fix it.
I have a feeling that Gulf oil, which is a heavy crude that’s full of waxy/tarry fractions that are heavier than water, wouldn’t be skimmable the way “light, sweet” Saudi crude is. This stuff is floating in as massive underwater clouds. I don’t even know if the booms can do much of anything.
The Federal government is exercising crisis manipulation. To bad the state of Alabama don't have the resources to set up their own boom and tell the Federals to take a hike.
Anything would have beat nothing but blaming others...which is what he has done...as usual.
Actually, this is 40 deg API LLS crude, which is lighter than Saudi Light and lower in sulfur.
excellent reminder!! thank you!
Is the oil coming out at a temperature of 40 Degrees Fahrenheit ?
Oh, so the proverbial, " we can't use the tanker method because the crude is so much *heavier* than the Saudi crude" excuse is basically, - bogus...?
Well, well, well...
“I have a feeling that Gulf oil, which is a heavy crude that’s full of waxy/tarry fractions that are heavier than water, wouldn’t be skimmable the way “light, sweet” Saudi crude is. This stuff is floating in as massive underwater clouds. I don’t even know if the booms can do much of anything.”
First, we can’t know whether the booms would’ve been more of success if they were implemented much earlier, and we used the full amount available, because that option wasn’t chosen. Second, I would think that an honest attempt at skimming using previous methods, even if it was unsuccessful would be better than simply assuming that it will not work. Even failures can reveal possible solutions.
And at any rate, there is a new skimming technique- finally- being utilized by the Coast Guard which may have some success:
http://blog.al.com/live//print.html
It's probably much, much warmer -- since it's coming from 17,000 ft under the sea floor.
It would only be warmer then the deep sea ocean temp (near freezing) if the oil was located closer to a significant section of magma. If the oil is located close to significant magma, why would anyone suggest using a nuke down there ?
“Actually, this is 40 deg API LLS crude, which is lighter than Saudi Light and lower in sulfur.
Oh, so the proverbial, “ we can’t use the tanker method because the crude is so much *heavier* than the Saudi crude” excuse is basically, - bogus...?
Well, well, well...”
If that’s the case, then what in the Sam Hell are these buffoons doing?
You know Barry: - it's time to the throw the entire Gulf coast under the bus.
Really? That's news to me.
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.