Congratulations to BP engineers and government scientists

Southern Man said:
Too bad all these technical people that you despise were not allowed to clean up the oil at the surface next to the well. Instead the EPA insisted that they follow stupid rules that require them to clean the water that they pick up to 15ppm- and impossible task given the sea conditions and magnitude of the problem. If The Obama relaxed the regulations none of the oil would have reached the beaches, estuaries and tidal rivers. That situation is entirely The Obama's fault.
Click to expand...
Oh christ SM. Why do you keep bringing up that canard. I've all ready discredited it. NPDES CWA effluent standards don't apply to oil spill clean ups either under the NCP or CERCLA. I defy you to site me that regulatory reference under 40 CFR.
 
tinfoil said:
congratulations is the last word I would pick to salute BP's effort.

I'd say "about fucking time!"
Click to expand...


I didn't congratulate BP, the corporation.

I congratulated BP engineers. Those dudes are just working stiffs doing the best they can. They don't make decisions about safety, cost controls, policy, or environmental regulations. They aren't the dudes who are lobbying in Washington to deregulate the industry, and they don't make the decisions on what degree the company should adhere to the highest standards of safety and environmental performance.

That crap is all decided and implemented by management. Management is the one that created the environment for this to happen, and management put in place the road blocks to superior environmental and engineering and planning performance.

If some working stiffs finally got the well capped and sealed, in spite of the lame and appalling system of lax oversight and environmental performance that the Corporation insisted on having, I'll toast a beer to those working stiffs.
 
Cypress said:
I didn't congratulate BP, the corporation.

I congratulated BP engineers. Those dudes are just working stiffs doing the best they can. They don't make decisions about safety, cost controls, policy, or environmental regulations. They aren't the dudes who are lobbying in Washington to deregulate the industry, and they don't make the decisions on what degree the company should adhere to the highest standards of safety and environmental performance.

That crap is all decided and implemented by management. Management is the one that created the environment for this to happen, and management put in place the road blocks to superior environmental and engineering and planning performance.

If some working stiffs finally got the well capped and sealed, in spite of the lame and appalling system of lax oversight and environmental performance that the Corporation insisted on having, I'll toast a beer to those working stiffs.
Click to expand...
I'll drink to that!
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Oh christ SM. Why do you keep bringing up that canard. I've all ready discredited it. NPDES CWA effluent standards don't apply to oil spill clean ups either under the NCP or CERCLA. I defy you to site me that regulatory reference under 40 CFR.
Click to expand...
Good God Moot are you getting lazy? I've already discredited your assertion, and do so here again:
The ability of the vessel to separate the water from the oil is a key feature of the MV Arca, since typically the oil/water mixture that is recovered at sea after an incident consists mainly of water. In other words, if you can separate the oil from the water at sea, and just store the oil on board, then you can significantly increase the amount of oil recovered in any given day, and save a lot of time, effort and money in the process. Otherwise, the voluminous oil/water mixture has to be transferred to a shore-based facility where separation can occur. But for the system to really work effectively, the quality of the 'effluent' has to be good enough such that it can be discharged back into the sea. Even Kevin Costner's now famous centrifugal oil spill separation system has only been able to get the oil content in the treated oil/water mixture down to 80 ppm, which is well below the international Marpol standard of 15 ppm. Until such time as the lower figure is achieved, Costner's oil and water will both have to be stored on board, which kind of defeats the purpose of separating the water out of it at sea.
Click to expand...
http://marineoilspill.blogspot.com/

The spill clean operations will still be slowed by EPA regulations that dictate no water containing oil can be discharged back into the Gulf if it contains over 15ppm of oil waste.

Currently the centrifuge system is emitting 80ppm oil in the water’s discharge.

To accommodate the EPA, the oil/water process time must be increased by a second filtration step to “hopefully get it down” to the EPA acceptable level before the water can be discharged back into the Gulf. This means that not only will the filtration be more time consuming, but that water tinged – with approx 1.28oz of oil for every gallon processed – needs to be stored aboard the barge until that EPA criteria is met, or then must be disposed of elsewhere per EPA regulations.

But there’s little information on what happens if the water never meets EPA’s strict stands… where to dispose of it, if it simply can’t be dumped back into the Gulf to let Mother Nature’s microbes take care of that minute amount remaining. Again, the operation of at at sea holding/processing/disposal barge will come to a halt in operations as they set sail for approved waters or a proper disposal facility.
Click to expand...
http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/06...g-operations-still-slowed-by-epa-regulations/
 
Of course, no response from Moot. This is the third time that I have destroyed his argument, and the third time that he ran away. He'll reassert his stupidity in anther thread. Fucking pussy.
 
Southern Man said:
Of course, no response from Moot. This is the third time that I have destroyed his argument, and the third time that he ran away. He'll reassert his stupidity in anther thread. Fucking pussy.
Click to expand...
Hey man some of us actually have a life. Nice try though. You completely ignored my challenge. Please show me under 40 CFR where there is such an effluent limit from an oil spill clean up. I defy you. The reason you haven't responded to this challenge is because you can't. There is no such limit. It simply does not exist.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Oh christ SM. Why do you keep bringing up that canard. I've all ready discredited it. NPDES CWA effluent standards don't apply to oil spill clean ups either under the NCP or CERCLA. I defy you to site me that regulatory reference under 40 CFR.
Click to expand...

but that doesn't answer the question....are you saying the EPA didn't deny certain clean up proposals because they wouldn't clean up the oil to their requirements?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Hey man some of us actually have a life. Nice try though. You completely ignored my challenge. Please show me under 40 CFR where there is such an effluent limit from an oil spill clean up. I defy you. The reason you haven't responded to this challenge is because you can't. There is no such limit. It simply does not exist.
Click to expand...
You were the one that said that oils spills are exempt, so show me where. I showed you two or three times now real world examples where the regulations that you cite are getting in the way of the clean up. Dude you want to shirk your responsibility (typical for a liberal). :pke:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top