Obama's 10 failures: An oil spill or man made volcanic vent of crude oil?

[Bluebear]

(edited for copyright purposes-proud patriot Moderator Democratic Underground)

by Yobie Benjamin

(kindly see bio at end of article before posting "He just wants President Palin." Thank you. :hi:

====

The first and foremost lie by BP coddled, encouraged and used by the Obama administration is the phrase, OIL SPILL.

The Gulf Coast catastrophe is NOT AN OIL SPILL. Stop using the phrase. The phrase might roll off the tongue better but it is not a spill. Let's say Old Faithful is hot water spill.

The Gulf Coast disaster is an unmitigated man made deep water volcanic vent of crude oil and gas.

A spill is what you call your kid's accidental tipping of a glass of milk. Maybe it's you accidentally dropping the synthetic oil can as you're changing your car's oil. Those are oil spills. Oil spill is a public relations term that now has successfully permeated the public's collective psyche.

The Gulf Coast disaster is a dangerous uncontrolled vent from an underwater volcano of crude oil and gas. It's time to call it what it is.

PRESIDENT OBAMA'S 10 FAILURES ON BP'S MAN MADE VOLCANIC VENT OF CRUDE OIL

1) Insisting this is BP's problem is not a solution. It is an abject failure to pass the the command and control to BP. These are US waters, US land and US wildlife and American livelihoods at stake. The surrender of command and control to BP is a failure of leadership...

2) The US has failed to build any deep sea exploration exploration subs or robotic systems. We build nuclear bombs, space ships and super computers and atom smashers yet we have failed miserably in deep sea research. How is possible that we have failed in our collective imaginations? We know we have hundreds, perhaps thousands of shallow and deep water rigs yet the nation has no capability to respond.

(snip)

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/ybenjamin/detail?entry_id=64175#ixzz0oigtKGzT

Author's bio:

Yobie Benjamin is an experienced senior executive with expertise in innovation, technology and new business models. His last startup was a progressive ecommerce company called GoodStorm.com which was acquired by a Kleiner Perkins-funded Zazzle.com . Before becoming an entrepreneurial founder and CEO, Yobie was a management consultant and focused on technology, innovation, risk and information technology. His consulting career started as Chief Knowledge Officer at Cambridge Technology Partners. Yobie moved on to become a Partner at Ernst and Young where he held three roles - Chief of Strategy, Distinguished Fellow, CTO - Security and Technology Services. After E&Y, he joined Computer Sciences Corporation as Partner and Managing Director of the Business and Technology Risk Management group. He began his career in technology as an engineer at Lotus Development Corporation.

Other highlights: writer, social activist, innovator in the consumer products space, software architect and engineer, and perpetual geek. Interests include: all things technology and music related and good food.

Currently Principal of TrueCarbon.org, Advisor at Emicus.com, Trustee - University of California at Merced. Acting as a Chief Technology Officer to three startups. Governance, structuring and financing mentor to startups. He is also a proud active volunteer for Amnesty International and Art For Amnesty.



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/ybenjamin/detail?entry_id=64175#ixzz0oigj8HNB

[TomCADem]

1. Exactly, Obama Should Nuke The Oil Leak. Stop It Now. Russia Suggests Nukes

Isn't anything less than nukes a half measure? Republicans and Progressives will soon be all over President Obama for his inaction. He should use every option at his disposal including nukes! BP can't use nukes. Obama can!

:wow:

http://www.livescience.com/technology/russia-nuke-gulf-oil-well-100512.html

Using a nuclear explosion to try to plug the gushing oil well in the Gulf of Mexico might sound like overkill, but a Russian newspaper has suggested just that based on past Soviet successes. Even so, there are crucial differences between the lessons of the past and the current disaster unfolding.

The Russians previously used nukes at least five times to seal off gas well fires. A targeted nuclear explosion might similarly help seal off the oil well channel that has leaked oil unchecked since the sinking of a BP oil rig on April 22, according to a translation of the account in the daily newspaper Komsomoloskaya Pravda by Julia Ioffe of the news website True/Slant.

Weapons labs in the former Soviet Union developed special nukes for use to help pinch off the gas wells. They believed that the force from a nuclear explosion could squeeze shut any hole within 82 to 164 feet (25 to 50 meters), depending on the explosion's power. That required drilling holes to place the nuclear device close to the target wells.

:sarcasm:

[Bluebear]

2. 'BP can't use nukes' - I'm surprised they haven't been given the go-ahead.

:eyes:

[TomCADem]

3. Seee, even liberals support the idea of nukes!

Obama can control the narrative by just going to the logical extreme now! If he just drops some nukes on the leak, can anyone accuse him of inaction? No. Stupidity maybe, but Americans are much more tolerant of stupidity than inaction.

[William Z. Foster]

6. this is partisanship taken to some insane level

We have serious problems. It is just not about your apparent need to feel good about a public official as though they were a celebrity.

The OP raises some fundamental and important questions. To suggest that this is all about some petty partisan feud about the popularity of one politician, and to suggest that those who disagree with you would want nuclear weapons used, that this is where their thinking is logically headed, is beyond the pale.

If people succeed in pressuring the administration to chart a new course, where is the harm? That is after all our duty and responsibility, and before the election even the most enthusiastic Obama fans said "once he is elected we can hold his feet to the fire!"

If the administration takes a new course on this, you will be happy, since if I am reading you correctly you will be happy no matter what the administration does. The critics will be happy. There is a damn good chance that much public good could be done that would otherwise not happen. Everybody wins.

What is the problem?

[TomCADem]

7. The OP Is Misleading. Not a single definitive solution is offered.

I was expecting to see 10 things that can stop the oil leak now. If there is a clear remedy that Obama can take to stop the leak, then he should do it now. But, instead, we see critiques like:

"3) NOAA has failed miserably. The NOAA flagship research vessel was in Africa and was not summoned to the gulf till a week ago. This is an abject dereliction of duty on the part of the NOAA administrator. Shame on her. As a marine biologist and oceanographer herself, she should have known better."

Okay, how does this stop the leak?

Now, look at this one:

"6) Failure to have any response capability of any sort. It is evident that BP. the US Government or the entire world wide oil industry is clueless on how to respond to this catastrophe."

Well, isn't nuking the leak as suggested by the Russians a concrete solution?

Now, BP not having an operational blowout preventer is a concrete example of what went wrong. However, the list simply lists a bunch of generalities that do not address the problem at hand. Stopping the oil leak.

When the oil leak is stop, you can feel free to review the list, and engage in a lot management psycho-babble, but I think most people want the oil leak to stop now. That is the biggest failure that needs to be addressed immediately.

[Bluebear]

9. Please write him at TrueCarbon.org and tell him how misleading he is.

[William Z. Foster]

10. interesting

Critics are being accuse of "expecting Obama to plug the leak quickly." They can then be tarred and feathered as "unrealistic" and "impatient."

But no critics are talking about "Obama to plugging the leak." The notion is absurd.

Yet you seem to be looking for or hoping for that. Is that because you fear ongoing political damage to Obama if the leak continues?

We are not merely talking about "how to stop the leak" but rather the general emergency response to the catastrophe. Should that be privatized, as it is now, or should the administration take over direction of the effort?

[femrap]

14. The Russians were putting out

FIRES with the nukes....these were on land, NOT underwater.

Deep Horizon was the first to drill this deep. It is supposedly a huge gas/oil field that it hit...one that extends underground to central Alabama.

Just get the petro engineers, geologists, oceanographers, physicists, and whatever scientists you need in a room and start talking solutions to stop this volcano of oil/gas. And make BP LISTEN to them. Hell, these drilling boyz can't even operate the Booms correctly. There is a science to operating the booms to trap the oil. Dumb fucks.

And everyone thinks the private industry is sooooooooo smart and can do the job of Government. Here's a great example to the contrary.

[DonCoquixote]

18. Thank you

Stupidity maybe, but Americans are much more tolerant of stupidity than inaction.

That quote there summons up about 50 percent of all anti Obama critiques. They forget that only good old boys like Bubba and dennis K get to be stupid, but we darkies dont get that luxury.

[Bluebear]

21. Why is Dennis K stupid? And "darkies" . . . whatever.

[ima_sinnic]

24. -1 for racism, inanity

and it reveals a lot about you to call Dennis Kucinich "stupid"

[DonCoquixote]

25. racism

I say as a dark skinned person who knows darn well what "minority executive syndrome" is, where your best is never as good as the mediocre pale-skinned person the company wants to promote. As far as Dennis, he may have principles, but he preaches to a Cleveland choir which will dance to him because, like most cities, they know the red rural people in the state dislike them. Sherrod Brown was once Dennis colleague, but unlike Dennis, he took on the Ohio GOP machine, became a Senator, and did more to push the left agenda then Dennis ever could. Yet, despite fightng in the Senate, I do not see "Sherrod Brown" appreciation threads here, why, because people prefer that Dennis not have to emerge in the real world and get tarnished. The fact the Dennis does NOT run for Senator, or Governor, or even Mayor, yet has no clue why the people who have to actually get laws ON THE BOOKS do not understand him, that is a willful form of stupid, one based on fear (perhaps the fear that if he did venture out of his zone, he would lose his defualt halo.)

[ProSense]

4. "2) The US has failed to build any deep sea exploration exploration subs or robotic systems. "

"6) Failure to have any response capability of any sort."

This writer is a moron.

[enki23]

16. that is for goddamned sure.

.

[HughMoran]

5. Only 10?

I'm disappointed - I figured there'd be no less than a million. Oh, well.

[earth mom]

8. Let's call it for what it really is: GUSHER, VOLCANO, DEATH KNELL!

:nuke:

:cry:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. ...

"1) Insisting this is BP's problem is not a solution. It is an abject failure to pass the the command and control to BP. These are US waters, US land and US wildlife and American livelihoods at stake. The surrender of command and control to BP is a failure of leadership..."

No, insisting this is BP's problem is not a solution. Neither is this article full of fail. Blaming BP isn't supposed to be a solution, it's supposed to address culpability.

"2) The US has failed to build any deep sea exploration exploration subs or robotic systems. We build nuclear bombs, space ships and super computers and atom smashers yet we have failed miserably in deep sea research. How is possible that we have failed in our collective imaginations? We know we have hundreds, perhaps thousands of shallow and deep water rigs yet the nation has no capability to respond."

If the U.S. had built a deep sea submersibles with robot arms this same shitheel would be bitching about the U.S. building deep sea submersibles with robot arms. More to the point, even if we had deep sea submersibles with robot arms, it wouldn't do jack shit to stop the leak. It's not like they just need to turn off a value and replace a rubber washer.

"3) NOAA has failed miserably. The NOAA flagship research vessel was in Africa and was not summoned to the gulf till a week ago. This is an abject dereliction of duty on the part of the NOAA administrator. Shame on her. As a marine biologist and oceanographer herself, she should have known better."

The NOAA flagship research vessel is, guess what, a research vessel. It's not a broken riser fixing vessel. It's not a oil clean up vessel. It's not a knee jerk vessel. It's a research vessel that does scientific research. The scientists at NOAA (who are not dipshit, kneejerk, hack journalists) after thorough, careful decision making, decided that the value of the research they could do in the Gulf was greater then what they were already doing off of Africa. Is that going to matter for anything? No. Science occurs on a time scale of years, not days.

"4) Failure to ask the Japanese, French, Chinese and Russians for assistance. Only these four nations have deep sea submarine and robotic systems that can work in depth of one mile or greater."

Alright, I just called them. They said that deep sea submersibles with robot arms won't fix the problem. And they laughed. And said the idea was stupid.

"5) Failure to demand full and public information from BP from day one."

You can ask, but BP is not legally required to provide everything on day one. You can subpoena them, but that's going to be through the court system. Also not on day one. First you have to have things like investigations, and commissions, and that's exactly what's going on. Of course, if Obama had declared martial law and simply seized BP's papers and equipment, I'm sure all the shit-for-brains no-nothings who are demanding Obama do it know would be pissing themselves over Obama overstepping his authority.

"6) Failure to have any response capability of any sort. It is evident that BP. the US Government or the entire world wide oil industry is clueless on how to respond to this catastrophe."

If this statement were correct, it would be true. Because it's not, it's just an old fashioned lie.

"7) Failure to clean house at the corrupt Minerals Management Service where cocaine, lurid sex and cash favors were a way of life. Despite the discoveries of the most egregious behavior, there was no top-to-bottom change in the MMS which continued to issue permits even after the BP volcanic vent disaster."

The MMS has already been dissected. The coke and sex was Bush era shit. Kee-rist.

"8) Allowing BP to control all access to the location and data including the use of U.S. coast guard to restrict media access. On BP's orders, the US Coast Guard is refusing to allow press boats to come close to the spill site to document the disaster."

The Coast Guard disagrees with this assessment. I've got plenty to gripe about against BP. But the CG? Fuck that shit. Who am I supposed to believe, the author, or the CG?

"9) Allowing BP to ignore US EPA orders and still using hundreds of thousands of gallons of their old stock of highly toxic dispersant, known to be deadly to marine life, when they had a far less toxic brand available. What's the point of an EPA that oil companies can ignore?"

BP is not ignoring EPA orders. The EPA approved the dispersant. Then called a halt. Then reapproved the dispersant. The dispersant is only toxic at high concentrations, only marginally more toxic than another dispersant (and in a single trial), and is a hell of a lot less toxic than non-dispersed crude.

"10) Finally, refusing to force and lead congress to increase the liability limits for oil companies from $75 million to an unlimited amount. Instead you and Senate majority leader Reid allowed by Senators Murkowski and Shelby to filibuster raising the liability limits for oil companies."

The Executive Branch and the Legislative branch are two different branches. One cannot force another to do anything. I'm sure Obama and Reid would like it if Republicans like Shelby didn't filibuster. To spin that as an attack on Obama is about as stupid as shit gets.

[ProSense]

12. You miss this

"(kindly see bio at end of article before posting 'He just wants President Palin.'"

Obviously, this is supposed to prove the writer isn't a moron.

I mean, blaming Obama for not building "deep sea exploration exploration subs or robotic systems" is so very intelligent.

[ljm2002]

15. I agree with you on that item...

...it is absurd to try and pin the lack of deep sea exploration exploration subs or robotic systems on Obama.

[Bluebear]

17. Whoever ignored is, I agree with them on those points as well.

It is telling, though, that folks want to dispute two of the points but not a peep on the other points. It does make for interesting conversation.

[dbmk]

19. Except..

..that you just made to a reponse to a comment on a post that this just that?

[Bluebear]

20. I don't understand that.

[ljm2002]

13. Ooh, you're gonna get in trouble...

...I've been reading that all of us who are critical of the Obama administration's response to this disaster (a) don't understand the difficulties; (b) just want to bash President Obama every chance we get; (c) think President Obama should put on scuba gear and fix it himself; (d) want a pony.

K&R

[pecwae]

22. (e) have always hated him

(f) are racist

[xchrom]

23. Recommend

[malaise]

26. How is this Obama's fault?

The US has failed to build any deep sea exploration exploration subs or robotic systems. We build nuclear bombs, space ships and super computers and atom smashers yet we have failed miserably in deep sea research. How is possible that we have failed in our collective imaginations? We know we have hundreds, perhaps thousands of shallow and deep water rigs yet the nation has no capability to respond.

[Jennicut]

27. He was in office a year and a half ago! Of course we should have deep sea

subs and robotic systems by now! :rofl:
Some complaints on the list are legitimate but that one is ridiculous. We started major deep sea drilling seriously by the mid 90's when legislation allowed oil companies that had deep wells to not have to pay royalties to the govt. Clinton and Bush did not invest in deep sea equipment. And Obama failed on that, how? Technology like that takes a long time to even be built.
We are all getting an education on the risks of deep sea drilling, as I suspect the President is too. It has to be ultra regulated like in Norway and deep sea equipment needs to be invested. Either that or forget about deep sea drilling.