Sorry - this was the WORST case?
I'm not quite sure what you mean? If you mean oil shortages have a definite silver lining because they will mean higher oil prices and less consumption, then yes, this can be considered a benefit. Though Id rather the same result was engineered by taxation.
Whether BP is fully responsible or not legally is irrelevant.
So government hires you to paint a missile silo. You trip over a loose wire and accidentally blow up New York. Do you get the bill?
The question of the bill for the oil spill is not about whose fault it is but about who can be persuaded to pay. BP has quite a lot of money, even on a national scale, so people are after it. But can you really say the true responsibility does not lie with those who gave out the contract on the cheapest terms they could get and in full knowledge that something awful might happen? This is not just about getting someone else to pay, it is also about shifting blame for the spill onto BP, whereas the US people decided they absolutely MUST HAVE the oil, the US government decided to do this particular drilling, some US organisation chose the contractor and regulated its activity. So when will we see the US government collectively getting up and saying, this isnt BPs fault, its all our fault and your fault out there, you people driving around on the streets of the US who demand cheap gas?
If this issue continues then it is quite possible the bill will exceed BPs ability to pay. They can afford to pay quite a lot ($10-20 billion?) for goodwill, but at what point does it become more cost effective just to write off the the whole matter and simply stick to their strict legal liability? In the end as the cost escalates and if the well is not capped, they will have to do this. They cannot voluntarily bankrupt the company when US law does not require them to pay. If BP is finally bankrupted by this, or blacklisted by the US as a future contractor, what will be the effect next time the US asks for bids to develop a new oil well? Be quite sure, it will be doing this. The pollution may be bad, but no human ever yet voted for the lights to go out and the cars to all disappear and the food supply to stop.
The next time the US wants a well developed every oil company will look to what happened to BP this time before it agrees to carry out the work.
Bucko is right- this should be a wake up call to the American people and the rest of the world: we need a Manhattan Project for alternative energy. Fusion, solar, wind, geothermal, dams, nuclear, whatever. The only reason the US government didnt come down hard is that its infested with corporate rats, and a belief that a tough governmental regulatory body is soooooo the end of the world. I'm gonna get off my soapbox
You honestly think the US people will take the lesson and give up oil? If you do, this spill may just be the worlds only hope of salvation from global warming, but I'm still anticipating societies collapse into anarchy when the last drop of oil anywhere has been burnt.
Dear Dandelion: Imagine the entire English channel and 3/4s of your little island kingdom's shoreline being killed off by an oil spill, and then taking 50 years to begin to recover enough that the affected fisheries can produce a small, safe percent of oysters, cod, clams, flounder -- all types of sea life.
We are doing quite a good job right now of killing off all edible species by overfishing. In fact, compared to their onetime levels, we already have. We didnt need the oil to do it for us.
The most insidious aspect of oil spills is the resulting effect on wildlife and in the case of the Gulf of Mexico, the major estuaries that are the beating heart and nest for wildlife throughout the gulf. This is going to impact all sea and bird life for more than "just a few decades."
I saw an analysis of all past oil spills just recently. In every case the damage was less than feared and recovered much better than feared. Also, incidentally, most attempts at cleanup (especially by adding more chemicals) proved useless or even counter productive. Crude oil is a natural substance and the environment will eventually take care of it. Human beings are shocked that they can no longer sit on their nice clean pretty beach eating fish they just caught, but somehow don't care they were already driving that same fish to extinction by overfishing. Sheer hypocrisy suddenly getting into a fit about BP.
And even when things finally seem to have returned to normal in about 50 years, the wetlands will still be saturated with all of the carcinogens that make up crude oil.
So are you absolutely certain that in 50 years time global warming and rising sea levels wouldnt have done for them anyway? They were already doomed.
