Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
Damo's privatization zeal is more important than saving the coastal ecosystem and entire swaths of the economy.
Obama has trusted Oil way too much...!
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Topspin
Verified User
I'd put it more like the gov has next to no expertise in this area. While BP prob shortcutted saftey they have tons of engineers on it now. The only industry with more science geeks is NASA.
Who do you think they should hire to plug the leak? If the government took over that project it would be a debacle, the new company would need to bring in equipment, start over with new investigation of the issue, then would begin coming up with the same ideas that BP has already come up with.
The government needs to handle the parts they can actually control. The booms they are laying are ineffective because they are doing it panicky to show they are doing SOMETHING...
They need to stop moving just to move and start making effective decisions.
Setting the booms correctly can minimize the impact to the shorelines, but instead they are mucking it up and standing back where they need to be doing something...
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
So if nigel tufnel can't come up with a name, that means the government should continue doing not enough. Fucked up medved logic.
Hey AHZ, I have given them points where they need to be doing things, but are doing them wrongly.
What I have said:
1. The government cannot plug the leak they have no expertise.
2. The government would be far more effective minimizing the impact to the shores.
3. I even gave them the configuration that would do exactly that.
4. The government should be doing things where they have actual impact rather than exacerbating the issue by trying to control things they have no expertise to control.
What you have said:
1. You are a libertarian, Damocles!
Either step up and READ what I say or step out of a conversation you are clearly purposefully incapable of understanding.
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
Hey AHZ, I have given them points where they need to be doing things, but are doing them wrongly.
What I have said:
1. The government cannot plug the leak they have no expertise.
2. The government would be far more effective minimizing the impact to the shores.
3. I even gave them the configuration that would do exactly that.
4. The government should be doing things where they have actual impact rather than exacerbating the issue by trying to control things they have no expertise to control.
What you have said:
1. You are a libertarian, Damocles!
Either step up and READ what I say or step out of a conversation you are clearly purposefully incapable of understanding.
I said they could hire more expertise. Can't they do that? just be honest. And can't fema be used more? Don't let fema off the hook.
You're ignoring what i have said, fuckhole.
And I pointed out that hiring expertise would still be ineffective and why. You simply pretend you can't read that part and then make stupid statements about how I'm a libertarian.
I also pointed out where FEMA can be doing something, and how.
You then said something stupid about me being a libertarian and letting FEMA off the hook.
You are full of stupid on purpose today, you are being as effective as the government is in the gulf in your argument today.
Basically AHZ, I have said that in the one area of plugging the leak the government is doing right by standing back.
I then pointed out where they CAN do something, HOW to do it effectively, WHY they aren't effective, WHAT they can do to change that (hire expertise, I even told them what type (engineers)).
Your answer to me has been to tell me that I am a libertarian and curse at me.
Good job! Are you sure you don't work for the Obama Administration? Probably in FEMA.
I then pointed out where they CAN do something, HOW to do it effectively, WHY they aren't effective, WHAT they can do to change that (hire expertise, I even told them what type (engineers)).
Your answer to me has been to tell me that I am a libertarian and curse at me.
Good job! Are you sure you don't work for the Obama Administration? Probably in FEMA.
Actually I got it from one of their engineers. The problem is in who is laying those booms, not the information on how to lay the booms.
The government is using coast guard and navy ships and laying the booms incorrectly and "quickly" to show they are "doing something"...
It would take time, but they can mitigate much of the problem by doing it the right way the first time rather than moving just to appear to be moving.
Maybe you'd be more effective in getting the government to make right choices. Somehow they don't worry when I say I'd never vote for Obama again....
Topspin
Verified User
Actually I got it from one of their engineers. The problem is in who is laying those booms, not the information on how to lay the booms.
The government is using coast guard and navy ships and laying the booms incorrectly and "quickly" to show they are "doing something"...
It would take time, but they can mitigate much of the problem by doing it the right way the first time rather than moving just to appear to be moving.
Maybe you'd be more effective in getting the government to make right choices. Somehow they don't worry when I say I'd never vote for Obama again....
sorry dude, 100% bullshit. The Coast Guard IS VERY EXPERIENCED IN BOOM deployment and spill clean up.
Yet they drop them in straight lines across the shores, unanchored? They are placing them ineffectively, for the purpose that I stated.
Topspin
Verified User
how do you know it was coast guard and not spill response teams?
It doesn't matter who it was who placed them, they are ineffective because they are using them wrong, I have pointed out how they can actually be effective...
Seriously, they need to use them, but they need to do it right, not in a panic to be seen doing something whomever they are.
This is the point where government needs to get in gear, the Coast Guard has the experience and the equipment as well as the knowledge to do it the right way (as I said it was from one of their engineers that I got the info).
Topspin
Verified User
your clueless, these people train and do spill response all the time. They don't need some cowboy from Co telling them how to do it.
Right...
How do you know it wasn't the blah, blah...
Clueless is ignoring the engineer to place them in lines across the shoreline, having them sweep into shore followed by the oil they were supposed to help contain.
They can and should do better than this.
Great.
However, they are doing it ineffectively and I have pointed out how they can do it more effectively based on the report of an esso engineer, here:
http://www.esso.com/Chad-English/PA/Files/Sect09.pdf
And a friend from college (an engineer in the Coast Guard)...
Anyway, in the pdf I linked to you can see a version of what I am talking about in figure 9-4 (not exactly the same, but that picture is for a limited spill.)
Redirecting the oil to pick up points at the shore can minimize the impact, and it needs to be in multi-layers to offset the over flow that you pointed out... Since this is a wide area range, they would be more effective in minimizing impact at the shore rather than attempting to mitigate in the ocean. (Although that is important too, there are people running burns and other means to remove some of the oil).
I've spent time researching this and talking to the people who have actual know-how...
And I know that the ineffective booming was stretched (often) by the Navy because of reports that I read and watch...