Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

After three full days, we have been unable to overcome the flow... This scares everybody, the fact that we can’t make this well stop flowing, or the fact that we haven’t succeeded so far.” - BP CEO Doug Suttles

These people are certified, fucking clueless.

93henfan wrote:

After three full days, we have been unable to overcome the flow... This scares everybody, the fact that we can’t make this well stop flowing, or the fact that we haven’t succeeded so far.” - BP CEO Doug Suttles

These people are certified, **** clueless.

Well, I think they are certainly in trouble here, and it's mostly their own fault they are in this situation and have caused this disaster, but it's not like there is a think-tank of other experts who are offering to step into the void and stop this flow - apparently no one knows how to stop it. If there's someone better to do this we would have gone to them a long time ago. Sadly, this is the best there is - pretty scary.

Then why the fuck where they drilling then?

dbackjon wrote:Then why the fuck where they drilling then?

Exactly. Where's "Red" when you need him?

Why are they drilling out at sea in water over a mile deep? It only stands to reason that any problem would be magnified in that environment. This kind of thing wouldn't happen on a land based oil rig.

Oh never mind. It's the environmentalists that won't let us drill on land where it would all be simpler.

TheDancinMonarch wrote:Why are they drilling out at sea in water over a mile deep? It only stands to reason that any problem would be magnified in that environment. This kind of thing wouldn't happen on a land based oil rig.

Oh never mind. It's the environmentalists that won't let us drill on land where it would all be simpler.

Bullsh*t.

There's plenty of drilling on land.

Maybe if the whacked out greedy CONKS that put $$$ before all else would stop blocking every attempt to develop alternative energy sources and vehicles with increased mileage then we wouldn't have to drill in mile deep ocean.

At least BP has actually done something and hasn't spent the last month sitting on their hands like the worthless feds.

mainejeff wrote:

TheDancinMonarch wrote:Why are they drilling out at sea in water over a mile deep? It only stands to reason that any problem would be magnified in that environment. This kind of thing wouldn't happen on a land based oil rig.

Oh never mind. It's the environmentalists that won't let us drill on land where it would all be simpler.

Bullsh*t.

There's plenty of drilling on land.

Maybe if the whacked out greedy CONKS that put $$$ before all else would stop blocking every attempt to develop alternative energy sources and vehicles with increased mileage then we wouldn't have to drill in mile deep ocean.

Enlighten me. What new areas are we drilling in the US?

TheDancinMonarch wrote:

mainejeff wrote:
Bullsh*t.

There's plenty of drilling on land.

Maybe if the whacked out greedy CONKS that put $$$ before all else would stop blocking every attempt to develop alternative energy sources and vehicles with increased mileage then we wouldn't have to drill in mile deep ocean.

Enlighten me. What new areas are we drilling in the US?

Yes
this is the "new" conservative logic being tossed around
It's the conservationists fault there's an oil leak because they tried to protect the Gulf from drilling...
In fact had they gotten their way there would be no drilling in the Gulf as it is a sanctuary
but since they didn't get their way the oil companies simply moved farther off shore outside of the limits of the ability to regulate...

I love the Right Wing logic...
The party that brought us "Bomb Iraq for Peace"

Chizzang wrote:

TheDancinMonarch wrote:
Enlighten me. What new areas are we drilling in the US?

Yes
this is the "new" conservative logic being tossed around
It's the conservationists fault there's an oil leak because they tried to protect the Gulf from drilling...
In fact had they gotten their way there would be no drilling in the Gulf as it is a sanctuary
but since they didn't get their way the oil companies simply moved farther off shore outside of the limits of the ability to regulate...

I love the Right Wing logic...
The party that brought us "Bomb Iraq for Peace"

The party of Dead or Alive.

Pwns wrote:At least BP has actually done something and hasn't spent the last month sitting on their hands like the worthless feds.

I don't see what they can do other than freeze BP's assets and continue to coordinate their lies....which for the last month has been every word out of BP's mouth.

Pwns wrote:At least BP has actually done something...........

Yeah.......they made the leak 20% worse with their "Top Kill" strategy.......

mainejeff wrote:

Pwns wrote:At least BP has actually done something...........

Yeah.......they made the leak 20% worse with their "Top Kill" strategy.......

Heh, maybe they should do it 4 more times then???

mainejeff wrote:

TheDancinMonarch wrote:Why are they drilling out at sea in water over a mile deep? It only stands to reason that any problem would be magnified in that environment. This kind of thing wouldn't happen on a land based oil rig.

Oh never mind. It's the environmentalists that won't let us drill on land where it would all be simpler.

Bullsh*t.

There's plenty of drilling on land.

Maybe if the whacked out greedy CONKS that put $$$ before all else would stop blocking every attempt to develop alternative energy sources and vehicles with increased mileage then we wouldn't have to drill in mile deep ocean.

While oil is as cheap as it is, sadly, it's just the market that is driving that - oil always ends up being the cheaper way to go and no one is willing to pay a surcharge to use something else.

Still waiting on someone to clear the hurdles on nuclear energy - Obama did one almost lip service nod to nuclear energy but the hurdles to get a plant in place are still pretty large. And heck, we still have that tariff on ethanol from Brazil that is keeping that fuel (actually one that does cut green house gases, unlike the ethanol we make in the US) out of reach. We haven't taken any serious steps to really go to alternative energy. Wind and solar are silly things to focus on right now - they make good headlines, but they are a pittance and will be for years.

Time to start waterboarding these fucks.

GannonFan wrote:While oil is as cheap as it is, sadly, it's just the market that is driving that - oil always ends up being the cheaper way to go and no one is willing to pay a surcharge to use something else.

Wrong. There are SOME people willing to pay a surcharge to use something else. But I will admit that it is not enough people to initiate a change in our energy consumption and practices.

GannonFan wrote:Wind and solar are silly things to focus on right now - they make good headlines, but they are a pittance and will be for years.

Maybe for places like Delaware........but they are being developed and sustained in many areas of the country. Obviously, you have to have enough sun or wind to make it cost effective though.

People said the same thing about hybrid and electric cars... not enough people would be interested in spending the extra money for them. Then Toyota's Prius sales prove otherwise and US companies are slow to jump on the bandwagon.

We need to get back to our roots of innovation, risk taking, ideas, etc. and play the role of leader instead of follower. The future isn't oil. The sooner we start moving away from it... the better.

mainejeff wrote:

GannonFan wrote:While oil is as cheap as it is, sadly, it's just the market that is driving that - oil always ends up being the cheaper way to go and no one is willing to pay a surcharge to use something else.

Wrong. There are SOME people willing to pay a surcharge to use something else. But I will admit that it is not enough people to initiate a change in our energy consumption and practices.

GannonFan wrote:Wind and solar are silly things to focus on right now - they make good headlines, but they are a pittance and will be for years.

Maybe for places like Delaware........but they are being developed and sustained in many areas of the country. Obviously, you have to have enough sun or wind to make it cost effective though.

Actually, Delaware is one of the leaders of wind adoption with their new offshore wind farm plans. Of course, I don't live in Delaware, nor work there, nor have family there - I just watch football games there.

But that doesn't change the fact that wind and solar are only cost effective if we don't have cheaper alternatives, and between coal and oil and nuclear and countless other things, we do have cheaper alternatives. Not to mention that we also have them today and will for decades to come, which is by the time that wind and solar might even start to help us more than just marginal, like they do today. Don't get me wrong, I want us to limit our exposure to oil - I just think there are plenty of realistic things in front of us that can happen much sooner than chasing windmills (literally and figuratively).

GannonFan wrote: chasing windmills (literally and figuratively).

haha, nice.

Skjellyfetti wrote:People said the same thing about hybrid and electric cars... not enough people would be interested in spending the extra money for them. Then Toyota's Prius sales prove otherwise and US companies are slow to jump on the bandwagon.

We need to get back to our roots of innovation, risk taking, ideas, etc. and play the role of leader instead of follower. The future isn't oil. The sooner we start moving away from it... the better.

I don't think the Prius is a good comparison. Even with it's premium, it's still a car that costs less than $25k (under $23k on Edmunds)- people were and are buying plenty of cars and trucks that are well above that price point. Heck, the Prius cost about the same as a Camry or an Accord - safe to say, if we can find a way to make other innovations as pretty much painless as that then we'll be in good shape. Heck, if we can find a way to get the noise out of nuclear and foreign ethanol sourcing (streamlining the approvals and getting rid of the artificial price bumpers) then a lot of our energy concerns go away.

Skjellyfetti wrote:
We need to get back to our roots of innovation, risk taking, ideas, etc. and play the role of leader instead of follower. The future isn't oil. The sooner we start moving away from it... the better.

I've said this before...we lack total leadership on this subject...

Someone needs to pull a JFK....issue a challenge like Kennedy did about reaching the moon "by the end of the decade"...

People thought he was crazy...but we made it...

Bush had the opportunity and failed...Obama now has the same opportunity...what will he do with it???

Col Hogan wrote:Obama now has the same opportunity...what will he do with it???

Suffer through the same bipartisan gridlock regarding alternative energy that has existed since Carter first proposed numerous alternative energy initiatives. The Republicans will not embrace anything outside the big oil racket. We saw that when Reagan squashed any hint of alternative energy policy started by Carter.

Col Hogan wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
We need to get back to our roots of innovation, risk taking, ideas, etc. and play the role of leader instead of follower. The future isn't oil. The sooner we start moving away from it... the better.

I've said this before...we lack total leadership on this subject...

Someone needs to pull a JFK....issue a challenge like Kennedy did about reaching the moon "by the end of the decade"...

People thought he was crazy...but we made it...

Bush had the opportunity and failed...Obama now has the same opportunity...what will he do with it???

I agree, but JFK didn't have to contend with a massive monied interest that stood to loose billions if we made it to the moon.

93henfan wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:Obama now has the same opportunity...what will he do with it???

Suffer through the same bipartisan gridlock regarding alternative energy that has existed since Carter first proposed numerous alternative energy initiatives. The Republicans will not embrace anything outside the big oil racket. We saw that when Reagan squashed any hint of alternative energy policy started by Carter.

Gridlock is a good thing.......so they say.

mainejeff wrote:

93henfan wrote:
Suffer through the same bipartisan gridlock regarding alternative energy that has existed since Carter first proposed numerous alternative energy initiatives. The Republicans will not embrace anything outside the big oil racket. We saw that when Reagan squashed any hint of alternative energy policy started by Carter.

Gridlock is a good thing.......so they say.

The last 18 months is what you get when you don't have gridlock. Massive, uncontrollable, runaway spending and the acceleration of the demise of our Republic.