• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gulf of Mexico spill may hit coast this weekend

An oil-drilling procedure called cementing is coming under scrutiny as a possible cause of the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico that has led to one of the biggest oil spills in U.S. history, drilling experts said Thursday.

The process is supposed to prevent oil and natural gas from escaping by filling gaps between the outside of the well pipe and the inside of the hole bored into the ocean floor. Cement, pumped down the well from the drilling rig, is also used to plug wells after they have been abandoned or when drilling has finished but production hasn't begun.

In the case of the Deepwater Horizon, workers had finished pumping cement to fill the space between the pipe and the sides of the hole and had begun temporarily plugging the well with cement; it isn't known whether they had completed the plugging process before the blast.

Regulators have previously identified problems in the cementing process as a leading cause of well blowouts, in which oil and natural gas surge out of a well with explosive force. When cement develops cracks or doesn't set properly, oil and gas can escape, ultimately flowing out of control. The gas is highly combustible and prone to ignite, as it appears to have done aboard the Deepwater Horizon, which was leased by BP PLC, the British oil giant.
Click to expand...

Drilling Process Attracts Scrutiny in Rig Explosion - WSJ.com
 
unless the "drilling process" was an act of "gross negligence" or "willful misconduct," then we the taxpayers are gonna get stuck with all of this expense over 75 mil

despite obama the boob's BOOT ON BP'S NECK

LOL!
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
unless the "drilling process" was an act of "gross negligence" or "willful misconduct," then we the taxpayers are gonna get stuck with all of this expense over 75 mil

despite obama the boob's BOOT ON BP'S NECK

LOL!
Click to expand...

You find the possibility of a large expense to America funny?
 
no, i find hilarious a president who claims to have his BOOT on the NECK, then turns out to be utterly IMPOTENT

thanks for asking!
 
justabubba said:
there you have it
he has connected all the dots


too bad that they are only freckles
tin-foil-hat.jpg
Click to expand...

Connected nothing. Just asking questions.
 
i also find an astronomical expense to the american people to be just another RUN OF THE MILL under these keystone klutzes

good question!
 
Erod said:
OK, I'll address the latest insult from the biggest punk on this board.

Where is the reporting on just what caused this? The media is all in a tizzy over this impending oil spill that so far hasn't done diddly (I'm not saying it won't).

Meanwhile, Obama is sending SWAT teams to the rig, not a word is being said, a 40-year-old white male who morphed into a young Pakistani dude tried to blast Manhattan, and illegal immigrants are shooting people in Arizona.

And no, if an oil platform has exploded in the last 40 years, I haven't heard about it. Have you?
Click to expand...

"The biggest punk on this board"

Naw, I'd say he is the littlest punk on this board.
 
The Prof said:
unless the "drilling process" was an act of "gross negligence" or "willful misconduct," then we the taxpayers are gonna get stuck with all of this expense over 75 mil

despite obama the boob's BOOT ON BP'S NECK

LOL!
Click to expand...

From researching this, it looks like you are wrong. Spill could cost BP $3 billion or more - Apr. 30, 2010

Under current law an oil well's owner is responsible to foot the bill for the entire cost of clean up in the event of a disaster. In this case that includes BP (BP) and minority partners Anadarko (BP) and Mitsui.
Click to expand...
 
tell it to menendez, lautenberg and nelson

While it's true that the federal Oil Pollution Act, enacted in 1990 in response to the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, makes BP responsible for cleanup costs, the law caps the company's liability for economic damages — such as lost wages, shortened fishing seasons or lagging tourism — at $75 million, a pittance compared to potential losses.

Administration officials insist BP will be held responsible anyway, noting that if the company is found negligent or criminally liable, the cap disappears. Claims also can potentially be made under other state or federal laws, officials said.

Yet the liability cap is problematic enough that a trio of Democratic senators introduced legislation Monday raising it to $10 billion, and the administration quickly announced its support. Sens. Robert Menendez and Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey and Bill Nelson of Florida voiced concerns that unless the cap is raised, BP would avoid paying for the mess and leave small businesses, local government and fishermen with the bill.
Click to expand...

The Associated Press: SPIN METER: There since Day One? Maybe not
 
tell it to ap
 
they wheren't?

LOL!
 
tell it to the white house

However, after journalists pointed out that federal law sets a $75 million cap for economic damages in offshore spills, the White House issued a more nuanced statement that said the company is on the hook for cleanup costs but not necessarily all damages incurred by private individuals or businesses.

“Let's be clear: BP is responsible for — and will be held accountable for — the very significant clean-up and recovery costs,” Office of Management and Budget spokesman Ken Baer said Monday evening. “If BP is found to be grossly negligent or to have engaged in willful misconduct or conduct in violation of federal regulations, then there is no cap under the Oil Pollution Act for damages. In addition, BP could be liable for damages under additional applicable federal and state laws. You can be sure that BP will be held accountable to the full extent of the law.”
Click to expand...

W.H.: BP may avoid some costs - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com
 
total cap---LOL!
 
The Prof said:
total cap---LOL!
Click to expand...

There is no cap on cleanup costs, as per your own posts, despite your claims to the contrary. Feel free to admit you where wrong any time now.

LOL!
 
tell it to the fisherman who won't get a penny cuz the 75 mil's all gone
 
The Prof said:
he's comprehensively clueless

he originally said he would not go to louisiana

then he went

he said his offshore drilling program would proceed (LOL!)

now it's naturally on hold

you want to see the LINKS?

now he's promising bigtime that BP WILL PAY

this morning, however, the white house had to come out and admit that, barring "gross negligence" or "willful misconduct," bp's costs are capped at a piddly 75 mil

W.H.: BP may avoid some costs - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

which is why bob menendez, frank lautenberg and florida's bill nelson have hurriedly introduced legislation to raise the limit to 10 bil

and, of course, the white house is eager to endorse---LOL!
Click to expand...

The Prof said:
tell it to menendez, lautenberg and nelson



The Associated Press: SPIN METER: There since Day One? Maybe not
Click to expand...

The Prof said:
tell it to the fisherman who won't get a penny cuz the 75 mil's all gone
Click to expand...

Notice the progression. Now, the problem is that even your new comment is not accurate. Let's quote one of your sources:

Claims also can potentially be made under other state or federal laws, officials said.
Click to expand...

Oops, so not only can they be billed under federal law if they are found criminally negligent or criminally liable, but they can also have to pay under state laws. Now, you got anything other than talking points to keep repeating, and are you willing now to admit your claim that BP only has to pay 75 mil for cleanup was wrong?
 
claims can potentially be made---LOL!

tell it to menendez, lautenberg and nelson
 
Last edited:
Keep repeating the same crap that you yourself disproved. It is very LOL!
 
claims can potentially be filed...

LOL!

i'll tell YOU, redress (LOL!)...

I have a CLAIM currently FILED against that gosh darn SEVEN ELEVEN on the CORNER because EVERY time i go in there...

well, redress, it's a LONG STORY

just wish me LUCK, ok?

LOLOL!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom