Obama's Katrina!

[Meadmaker]

Yeah … a right wing fantasy.

http://www.examiner.com/x-325-Globa...econsiders-Dutch-offer-to-supply-oil-skimmers

Yep.

BP has literally hundreds of skimmers in the Gulf, but they don't have the super-skimmers that would have taken care of this in a jiffy because the evil environmentalists wouldn't let them pour water with oil back into the ocean.

No, I don't believe you.

 

[thaiboxerken]

So BeaCHooser is upset because the EPA has rules about pumping oily water into the ocean?

 

[The Painter]

So BeaCHooser is upset because the EPA has rules about pumping oily water into the ocean?

This is just stupid! Skimming out oily water and cleaning it and pumping back less oily water. Get it? Some how I don't think you do. Kind of like dialysis. According to you if the water can only be cleaned 80% instead of 100%, than nothing should be done. Is that right??? Then you should be happy when the Gulf is nothing but a dead water oil slick. What was that you were saying about saving the Earth? **** Global warming. Save the Gulf. I didn't realize there were so many Gulf haters here.

Edited for breach of Rule 10.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

 

[Meadmaker]

This is just stupid! Skimming out oily water and cleaning it and pumping back less oily water. Get it? Some how I don't think you do. Kind of like dialysis. According to you if the water can only be cleaned 80% instead of 100%, than nothing should be done. Is that right??? Then you should be happy when the Gulf is nothing but a dead water oil slick. What was that you were saying about saving the Earth? **** Global warming. Save the Gulf. I didn't realize there were so many Gulf haters here.

I'm saying I simply do not believe the story. I've heard it on Limbaugh, from Beachooser, some chatter on Fox and Friends, and similar places, but never from anyone credible.

If it were true, it would show utter, glaring, mind numbing stupidity on the part of the government. That in itself isn't incredibly difficult to believe, but it would also show the same level of stupidity on the part of BP. If there was technology available that could solve this problem at a reasonable cost, they would be using it instead of putting 20 billion in escrow. If it were available, but the government was preventing them from using it, they would be squealing like stuck pigs.

Even the government isn't usually mind numbingly stupid. On those occasions where that happens, it is usually on some case where regulations are being applied in a situation that wasn't anticipated. This could qualify, but it's high enough profile that they could quickly cut through the red tape and fix it.

So, no, I don't believe it. I'd want to see it from a credible source. Not talk radio. Not Anne Coulter. Not Fox. Not the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Not the Examiner.

AP. Reuters. New York Times. I would even take seriously National Review, outside of their blog section, or WSJ outside of their editorial page.

 

[Arrow]

With the spill continuing, & the economy remaining on the shaking side, Obama's poll numbers with independents continue their slide south.

Sliding in the Polls
http://www.bernardgoldberg.com/indys-jumping-ship/

According to Gallup, “Over the past year, Obama has lost support among all party groups, though the decline has been steeper among independents than among Republicans or Democrats. Today's 38% approval rating among independents is 18 percentage points lower than the 56% found July 6-12, 2009. During the same period, his support has fallen nine points among Democrats (from 90% to 81%) and eight points among Republicans (from 20% to 12%).”

 

[applecorped]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704699604575343230185357188.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

"EPA guidelines require that the discharged water contain no more than 15 parts per million of oil—a difficult standard to meet, said Prof. Overton. The federal on-scene coordinator can exempt the discharge from the Clean Water Act standard."

 

[BeAChooser]

I'm saying I simply do not believe the story. I've heard it on Limbaugh, from Beachooser, some chatter on Fox and Friends, and similar places, but never from anyone credible.

Then you haven't been paying the least attention.

AP. Reuters. New York Times.

You think those are credible *news* sources, but Fox News, the Washington Times and the Examiner are not? LOL!

Well, MM, since you will apparently only trust left leaning sources for your info, here's confirmation this happened from none other than the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/13/AR2010061304232.html

June 14, 2010

… snip …

By Juliet Eilperin and Glenn Kessler

The Washington Post

Four weeks after the nation's worst environmental disaster, the Obama administration saw no need to accept offers of state-of-the-art skimmers, miles of boom or technical assistance from nations around the globe with experience fighting oil spills.
… snip …

In late May, the administration accepted Mexico's offer of two skimmers and 13,779 feet of boom; a Dutch offer of three sets of Koseq sweeping arms, which attach to the sides of ships and gather oil; and eight skimming systems offered by Norway

Now, of course, the Washington Post, being the Washington Post, wrote that article to play down bad decision making and delays that have occurred in Obama administration's response to this crisis.

From the Houston Chronicle (oh I know, you probably think anything published in Texas is a right wing rag, but the article does quote the consul general for the Netherlands in Houston … unless you want to claim those quotes are just fabricated):

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/steffy/7043272.html

Three days after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch government offered to help.

It was willing to provide ships outfitted with oil-skimming booms, and it proposed a plan for building sand barriers to protect sensitive marshlands.

The response from the Obama administration and BP, which are coordinating the cleanup: “The embassy got a nice letter from the administration that said, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,'” said Geert Visser, consul general for the Netherlands in Houston.

Now, almost seven weeks later, as the oil spewing from the battered well spreads across the Gulf and soils pristine beaches and coastline, BP and our government have reconsidered.

U.S. ships are being outfitted this week with four pairs of the skimming booms airlifted from the Netherlands and should be deployed within days. Each pair can process 5 million gallons of water a day, removing 20,000 tons of oil and sludge.

And here, from a Netherland news source back in early May …

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-oil-spill-response-team-standby-us-oil-disaster

Dutch oil spill response team on standby for US oil disaster

4 May 2010

… snip …

What do the Dutch have that the Americans don’t when it comes to tackling oil spills at sea? “Skimmers,” answers Wierd Koops, chairman of the Dutch organisation for combating oil spills, Spill Response Group Holland.

… snip …

That leaves the Americans no alternative. If they want to save the mud flats and salt marshes along the coast they will have to adopt the Dutch method. It can be done very quickly, because only the oil skimmers need to be flown across the Atlantic and placed on local tankers, explains Mr Koop.

A team of around eight men are on stand-by and four skimmers and extra material are ready to be loaded. The local senator is already convinced and is trying to talk the admiral who is coordinating the operation into accepting help from the Netherlands. The answer may be given today.

And here's the Voice of America (or are you claiming they lie too?):

http://www1.voanews.com/english/new...Oil-Recovery-with-US-Permission-96341579.html

A Houston-based company is now cleaning oil off surface water in the Gulf of Mexico using sweeping arms that attach to a boat and help gather large amounts of oil.

These sophisticated devices were provided by a Dutch company with years of experience in such operations, but instead of using the Dutch ships and crews immediately, when The Netherlands offered help in April, the operation was delayed until U.S. crews could be trained.



The Obama administration declined the Dutch offer partly because of the Jones Act, which restricts foreign ships from certain activities in U.S. waters. During the Hurricane Katrina crisis five years ago, the Bush administration waived the Jones Act in order to facilitate some foreign assistance, but such a waiver was not given in this case.



The Dutch also offered assistance with building sand berms (barriers) along the coast of Louisiana to protect sensitive marshlands, but that offer was also rejected, even though Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal had been requesting such protective barriers.


But you are right about at least one thing, MM. I don't see one word in the NYTimes about this. Guess your precious *REAL* news source just forget to report it.

 

[thaiboxerken]

So Obama is to blame for the EPA standards that were inplace long before he even ran for office?

 

[applecorped]

Couldn't he instruct the EPA to waive the requirements?

 

[thaiboxerken]

Couldn't he instruct the EPA to waive the requirements?

Maybe. Maybe the EPA has experts that know more than you or I do, and explained to Obama as to why these standards need to be maintained.

 

[applecorped]

Maybe.

 

[Meadmaker]

Couldn't he instruct the EPA to waive the requirements?

He can, and he will. He probably already has. Of course, he didn't do it personally. Thad Allen did. Your source noted that the federal on scene coordinator had the authority to waive it.

The idea that environmental regulations have gotten in the way of cleaning up the oil spill is a right wing fantasy.

 

[Meadmaker]

You think those are credible *news* sources, but Fox News, the Washington Times and the Examiner are not? LOL!

Yes.

Of the articles you posted, the Washington Post article was the best at explaining the situation. You should read it.


Note that none of the articles noted that there were super Dutch skimmers that could solve the problem easily. A superficial and thoughtless reading ot those sources could be mistaken for saying that, but they don't. The big problem, in a source you already cited, is that they talk about how many gallons of seawater can be processed, containing a certain amount of oil. Then people, including you, multiply the numbers and erroneously determine that a few of the ships could clean up the spill. Yippee! Oh wait!!!! Those environmentalist swine won't let it happen! Fiends!

The problem is that the technology was made for cleaning up tanker spills where the oil was pretty well concentrated on the surface of the water at the point of the spill. That isn't the case here. It is spewing forth one mile down, and is widely dispersed by the time it gets to where the skimmers can suck it up. If they process that many millions of gallons of seawater, they won't get that many thousands of barrels of oil.

Not to say that they shouldn't be used, only that they won't save the day. It's a safe bet that BP will do everything they possibly can to clean it up with the least loss of money, and if they had a way to do it but were being stopped by the US government, we would certainly be hearing about it. They don't and we aren't.

It is likely true that the Obama administration's response was less than perfect, but a large part of that was that they relied heavily on BP to guide them, and BP was saying that things like a "top kill" would stop the leak quickly. If that had been true, and the US had hired an armada of skimmers (you don't think they were volunteering to come here for free, do you?) that weren't needed, the right wing spin machine would be crying from the rooftops about how stupid the government was for wasting a bunch of money instead of letting the private sector handle it.

 

[BeAChooser]

Note that none of the articles noted that there were super Dutch skimmers that could solve the problem easily.

First of all, I didn't say anything about solving the problem easily. But you were wrong when you suggested that a technology that could collect very large quantities of oil didn't exist, wasn't offered to Obama, and refused for weeks.

The VOA article that states "A Houston-based company is now cleaning oil off surface water in the Gulf of Mexico using sweeping arms that attach to a boat and help gather large amounts of oil" implies the technology is very effective.

The Houston Chronicle article that states "U.S. ships are being outfitted this week with four pairs of the skimming booms airlifted from the Netherlands and should be deployed within days. Each pair can process 5 million gallons of water a day, removing 20,000 tons of oil and sludge" has numbers that are very large in comparison to the amount of oil being released.

And for the edification of others, here are some more sources on the system the Dutch offered … which the Obama administration apparently refused for weeks and weeks.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/ybenjamin/detail?entry_id=65647#ixzz0r8XckxHP

The U.S. Government has reconsidered a Dutch offer to supply 4 oil skimmers. These are large arms that are attached to oil tankers that pump oil and water from the surface of the ocean into the tanker. Water pumped into the tanker will settle to the bottom of the tanker and is then pumped back into the ocean to make room for more oil. Each system will collect 5,000 tons of oil each day.

One ton of oil is about 7.3 barrels. 5,000 tons per day is 36,500 barrels per day. 4 skimmers have a capacity of 146,000 barrels per day. Had the US bureaucracy accepted the Dutch offer on Day 3 when it came, it is clear that a lot more oil would have been surface skimmed.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0601/BP-oil-spill-Will-the-sweeping-arm-system-from-the-Dutch-help

The six systems that are being sent are new and are from a special reserve that the Dutch government keeps on hand to combat oil spills off its own shores. Dutch law requires the government to combat oil spills, not the oil-rig operators.

… snip …

The system can collect 20,000 tons of oil at sea in three days, he says.

http://dc.the-netherlands.org/News/News_Flashes/Dutch_sweeping_arms_featured_on_C_Span

Dutch sweeping arms featured on C-Span

Newsflash | 14 June 2010

C-Span filmed a ship that is using Dutch state of the art sweeping arms that are helping to clean up the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

http://dc.the-netherlands.org/News/...vide_Assistance_in_Clean_Up_of_Gulf_Oil_Spill

Dutch to Provide Assistance in Clean Up of Gulf Oil Spil

28 May 2010

At the request of U.S. authorities, the Dutch Minister of Transport, Camiel Eurlings, has offered three sets of sweeping arms (6 arms in total) and auxiliary equipment to be used to collect oil spilled from the Deepwater Horizon incident, in the Gulf of Mexico.

The sweeping arms, which will be attached to ships, will skim and collect floating oil from the water and pump it into storage tanks. Depending on local weather conditions, the sweeping arms have a maximum pumping capacity of 350 m3 per hour. Minister Eurlings stated, “The Dutch offered assistance to the U.S. as soon as the disaster occurred. We have been working closely on water related issues with the Louisiana region since Hurricane Katrina. It seems no more than natural that now again; we stand together with the people of Louisiana.”

And those numbers are large enough that these skimmers alone would have had a dramatic impact on the oil spill. Especially if any effort had been made to collect the oil as it exited the leak and bring it to the surface for collection. Which could have been done instead of wasting so much time (under the direction of the Obama administration apparently) trying to completely plug the leak instead.

Finally, here's a video from CSPAN of a Dutch system finally being set up in the Gulf on June 8, 2010 (weeks and weeks after the spill began and the technology was first offered to the US):

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2...Dutch+Skimmer+Ship+in+Gulf+Coast+Cleanup.aspx

Yeah, this is all just a right-wing fantasy, MM. Keep spinning for Obama.

 

[Meadmaker]

And those numbers are large enough that these skimmers alone would have had a dramatic impact on the oil spill.

So, why do you think BP officials haven't been saying, "We wanted to bring in the best equipment, but Obama wouldn't let us."

Not only is Tony Hayward not saying that, you don't even see anonymous lower level people quoted in the newspapers saying it. Why not?

Also,

The Houston Chronicle article that states "U.S. ships are being outfitted this week with four pairs of the skimming booms airlifted from the Netherlands and should be deployed within days. Each pair can process 5 million gallons of water a day, removing 20,000 tons of oil and sludge" has numbers that are very large in comparison to the amount of oil being released.

So, these ships are capable of skimming more oil than is being released now, so pretty soon, we won't have to worry about the oil spill, right? These ships will take care of all the newly flowing oil because they have the ability to remove oil and sludge in " numbers that are very large in comparison to the amount of oil being released." I suppose it's too late for the oil that has been spilled, but as soon as they are on line these ships can handle all future flow.

That is what you are saying, right?

 

[Meadmaker]

Thad Allen gives a daily press briefing. I'll bet he has been asked about these super-skimmers and the failure to employ them. I wonder what he said.

He has said quite a bit about the Jones Act, I know. Most of it was, "It doesn't apply, but if we find any case where we need to waive it, we will." (Paraphrased, not an actual quote.)

 

[BeAChooser]

So, why do you think BP officials haven't been saying, "We wanted to bring in the best equipment, but Obama wouldn't let us."

Because BP knows they'll be screwed even worse by Obama and his administration if they make any waves?

So, these ships are capable of skimming more oil than is being released now, so pretty soon, we won't have to worry about the oil spill, right? These ships will take care of all the newly flowing oil because they have the ability to remove oil and sludge in " numbers that are very large in comparison to the amount of oil being released." I suppose it's too late for the oil that has been spilled, but as soon as they are on line these ships can handle all future flow.

And that's why this is Obama's Katrina. If only Obama had acted sooner. Instead of spending the day playing golf … what is it? … eight times now since the spill began.

 

[BeAChooser]

Thad Allen gives a daily press briefing. I'll bet he has been asked about these super-skimmers and the failure to employ them. I wonder what he said.

He has said quite a bit about the Jones Act, I know. Most of it was, "It doesn't apply, but if we find any case where we need to waive it, we will." (Paraphrased, not an actual quote.)

Too bad Allen didn't heed the conclusions of a 2002 International Oil Spill Conference that summarizes the '2002 Spill of National Significance Exercise' (which took place in the Gulf Of Mexico) which recommended an expedited process to waive the Jones Act during large oil spills. Thad Allen was supposed to have directed his staff to develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for such an event including "a process to instantly waive The Jones Act" in the event of a large spill. So perhaps Allen was supposed to have immediately requested a waiver … not waited until June 15 to set up an accelerated Jones Act waiver process. And as pointed out in various media, his not waiving the Jones Act perhaps acted as a damper on offers of help. It sent the wrong message to other countries. Furthermore, Allen in that same announcement admitted that we have 2000 US skimmers available but only have about 400 are in operation around the Gulf (if we can believe that number since in a post earlier in this thread it was noted that when BP and the Coast Guard claimed there were 140 skimmers in operation, there turned out to only be 31 on the job).

 

[Juniversal]

Because BP knows they'll be screwed even worse by Obama and his administration if they make any waves?



And that's why this is Obama's Katrina. If only Obama had acted sooner. Instead of spending the day playing golf … what is it? … eight times now since the spill began.

You and your "Obama's Katrina" meme. Where's your evidence skimmers and booms weren't being used prior to the Dutch offer? Where's the information that concludes that our skimmers and booms weren't very capable and being used effectively? Do you think the administration should have excepted each and every offer regardless of need or reimbursment requirments?

Did you miss this quote from the Washington Times artical?

"We'll let BP decide on what expertise they do need," State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid told reporters on May 19. "We are keeping an eye on what supplies we do need. And as we see that our supplies are running low, it may be at that point in time to accept offers from particular governments."

 

[Meadmaker]

Thad Allen was supposed to have directed his staff to develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for such an event including "a process to instantly waive The Jones Act" in the event of a large spill.

Except, there's one problem. It's one of those selective reading things. No waiver was needed because he issued a ruling, prior to June 15, that the Jones act didn't apply. At all. There's nothing to waive. That's why no vessels were ever turned away, at all, as a result of the Jones act.

However, he did put in place a process that said that if any waivers were ever requested, that they should be granted.

Yes, half-truths have been repeated on a variety of editorial pages, but try googling "Jones Act" on google news. There's plenty of sources to set the record straight.

The issue of environmental regulations is slightly more difficult. It does appear that the oil free discharge requirement was not waived for some time, although if you could find a credible source describing the environmental impact of that decision, I would love to read it. I have seen Thad Allen talking about how those vessels, recently imported to the gulf, aren't performing all that well, because they were designed for highly concentrated surface spills, such as from a tanker.

ETA: Here's a section of Wikipedia about the Jones act-

Section 27, also known as the Jones Act, deals with cabotage (i.e., coastal shipping) and requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried in U.S.-flag ships, constructed in the United States, owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents.

Skimmers aren't transporting any goods between US ports.

It's always possible that some people at BP in the early days of the spill didn't understand the law and turned away vessels based on that misunderstanding, and that misunderstanding was passed along to the media, or it's possible that it's all a right wing fantasy.