“BP said it had no confirmation of such undersea oil plumes and its spokesman, Andrew Gowers, appeared to dismiss the reports as scientifically unlikely.
“It is my observation as a layman that oil is lighter than water and tends to go up,” Gowers told reporters.”
Sure, but when they dump millions of gallons of toxic chemical dispersant on the oil to make it sink doesn’t that undermine this argument?
So they are using a tube to siphon off 1,000 barrels a day. Great, but it seems only BP and the government think there is only 5,000 barrels a day coming out and not 60,000-70,000.
It appears we don’t have anyone else to address this issue so we have one of the worst political figures of all time commenting on it, Janet Napolitano. Shouldn’t she be working on protecting our borders so Arizona doesn’t have to, and so Obama doesn’t have to make irresponsible comments? Next we’ll hear that the President’s Chef has sent BP a letter making some demands also. No wonder this country is in so much trouble.
British Patroleum CEO Tony Hayword disclosed today that BP has hired the guy from the ShamWow commercial plus 5,000,000 ShamWows to pick up oil in the Gulf of Mexico. He also announced that the ShamWow guy told BP that if they bought the 5,000,000 ShamWows in the next 20 minutes (because he couldn’t talk to them all day) BP would receive 2 ShamWows for everyone they orderd and he even agreed to throw in a ShamWow mop. Mr. Hayward stated that too many people were doubting the ability and resolve of BP to take the Gulf oil fiasco seriously. According to Hayward, “The hiring of the ShamWow guy as our chief consultant on this spill is proof positive that we are on top of this siutation.” In other news Lloyds of London announced today that using “As Seen on TV” products to clean up major environmental disasters was specifically excluded from all forms of coverage.
It is difficult to get reliable information–particularly difficult because the problem is 5000 feet under water where the water pressure exceeds 2000psi.
But we have a plethora of technically ignorant propagandists trying to promote mass hysteria over the problem. The flow of escaped crude oil is estimated by the people on site at several thousand barrels per day and is inflated by writers to 5, 10 or whatever times that amount. Based on no information.
And please look up the definition of a siphon before calling the tube from the wellhead a siphon.
Our educational system apparently turns out journalists and writers with no knowledge of the world around bu great skills of exaggeration and hysteria.
I based my opinion comment on stories like the NY Times article which quoted an oceanographer who is noted as an expert in the analysis of oil slicks–suggested the leak could “easily be four or five times” the government estimate.
BP’s own testimony to Congress said the worst case scenario was 60,000 barrels a day.
Research at Purdue using “particle image velocimetry” (whatever that is) estimated flow volume at 70,000 barrels per day.
Other research “using a different method” at Columbia University came up with a similar figure.
It does not seem like “propoganda” to hold an opinion that BP might be downplaying the extent of the disaster which they are ultimately going to be financially responsible for. Calling NOAA estimates “reasonable but highly uncertain” a week after testifying to Congress that it could be 12 times more than that seems disingenuous.
BP personnel have incentive to underestimate. The alarmists (none of them on site) have incentive to exaggerate. Worst of all are the “reporters” that sit in NY and may have never seen an oil well, maybe not even any industrial operation.
I will stay with my assessment that there is a demand for mass hysteria by the people with a vested interest in opposing all energy development. (They proclaim wind etc, but they do not choose to live in caves).
“BP said it had no confirmation of such undersea oil plumes and its spokesman, Andrew Gowers, appeared to dismiss the reports as scientifically unlikely.
“It is my observation as a layman that oil is lighter than water and tends to go up,” Gowers told reporters.”
Sure, but when they dump millions of gallons of toxic chemical dispersant on the oil to make it sink doesn’t that undermine this argument?
So they are using a tube to siphon off 1,000 barrels a day. Great, but it seems only BP and the government think there is only 5,000 barrels a day coming out and not 60,000-70,000.
It appears we don’t have anyone else to address this issue so we have one of the worst political figures of all time commenting on it, Janet Napolitano. Shouldn’t she be working on protecting our borders so Arizona doesn’t have to, and so Obama doesn’t have to make irresponsible comments? Next we’ll hear that the President’s Chef has sent BP a letter making some demands also. No wonder this country is in so much trouble.
British Patroleum CEO Tony Hayword disclosed today that BP has hired the guy from the ShamWow commercial plus 5,000,000 ShamWows to pick up oil in the Gulf of Mexico. He also announced that the ShamWow guy told BP that if they bought the 5,000,000 ShamWows in the next 20 minutes (because he couldn’t talk to them all day) BP would receive 2 ShamWows for everyone they orderd and he even agreed to throw in a ShamWow mop. Mr. Hayward stated that too many people were doubting the ability and resolve of BP to take the Gulf oil fiasco seriously. According to Hayward, “The hiring of the ShamWow guy as our chief consultant on this spill is proof positive that we are on top of this siutation.” In other news Lloyds of London announced today that using “As Seen on TV” products to clean up major environmental disasters was specifically excluded from all forms of coverage.
It is difficult to get reliable information–particularly difficult because the problem is 5000 feet under water where the water pressure exceeds 2000psi.
But we have a plethora of technically ignorant propagandists trying to promote mass hysteria over the problem. The flow of escaped crude oil is estimated by the people on site at several thousand barrels per day and is inflated by writers to 5, 10 or whatever times that amount. Based on no information.
And please look up the definition of a siphon before calling the tube from the wellhead a siphon.
Our educational system apparently turns out journalists and writers with no knowledge of the world around bu great skills of exaggeration and hysteria.
Thank you for the great comment. I needed that on this long and dreary Monday.
LOL!
If the ShamWow doesn’t work I’m sure there are warehouses full of unsold SlapChops they could launch into the well.
what about a bunch of Mighty Putty? That stuff RULES!
all i know is that this better not affect my Outer Banks, NC vacation!
I based my opinion comment on stories like the NY Times article which quoted an oceanographer who is noted as an expert in the analysis of oil slicks–suggested the leak could “easily be four or five times” the government estimate.
BP’s own testimony to Congress said the worst case scenario was 60,000 barrels a day.
Research at Purdue using “particle image velocimetry” (whatever that is) estimated flow volume at 70,000 barrels per day.
Other research “using a different method” at Columbia University came up with a similar figure.
It does not seem like “propoganda” to hold an opinion that BP might be downplaying the extent of the disaster which they are ultimately going to be financially responsible for. Calling NOAA estimates “reasonable but highly uncertain” a week after testifying to Congress that it could be 12 times more than that seems disingenuous.
And you thought you wouldn’t miss Billy Mays!
BP personnel have incentive to underestimate. The alarmists (none of them on site) have incentive to exaggerate. Worst of all are the “reporters” that sit in NY and may have never seen an oil well, maybe not even any industrial operation.
I will stay with my assessment that there is a demand for mass hysteria by the people with a vested interest in opposing all energy development. (They proclaim wind etc, but they do not choose to live in caves).