ST's BP Rantings

If the U.S. had required something called an "acoustic switch" to be installed on the rig, which cost a paltry $500,000 (compared to BP's billions in annual profits and the millions they are spending daily to fix their mess)

Leaking Oil Well Lacked Safeguard Device - WSJ.com

From the article: The efficacy of the devices is unclear. Major offshore oil-well blowouts are rare, and it remained unclear Wednesday evening whether acoustic switches have ever been put to the test in a real-world accident. When wells do surge out of control, the primary shut-off systems almost always work. Remote control systems such as the acoustic switch, which have been tested in simulations, are intended as a last resort.
 
I'm familiar with these devices. There are so many factors to consider when operating a well 5000 feet below the surface of the ocean. A valve was installed near the base of the well but it was rendered inoperative when the well exploded. Looks like an acoustic switch, which is attached to a valve, would have met with the same result in this instance.
 
Fact is we don't know how to make drilling safe as these depths or stop a spill that occurs in even deeper waters.

That's what they're trying to figure out right now.
 
Fact is we don't know how to make drilling safe as these depths or stop a spill that occurs in even deeper waters.

That's what they're trying to figure out right now.

This is a true statement. In the oil industry when it's cost prohibitive to over-engineer something to the point that a company cannot recoup drilling costs the companies usually abandon that tact.
 
That's the trouble with regulations, they are always chasing a problem that already happened, how many oil rigs have capsized and spilled oil into the Gulf;including those out in hurricanes; in the past 40-50 years?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #8
That's the trouble with regulations, they are always chasing a problem that already happened...

I like how you assume that regulations never prevent accidents just because you don't hear about it on the news. Why would the news even report that? Its a non-event. "Today an accident did NOT occur..."
 
That's the trouble with regulations, they are always chasing a problem that already happened...

I like how you assume that regulations never prevent accidents just because you don't hear about it on the news. Why would the news even report that? Its a non-event. "Today an accident did NOT occur..."

Can you show examples of where regulations prevented much of anything? I see liberals say that "if a regulation was in place" all the time concerning everything from the financial industry to now this yet Regulations.gov has literally hundreds of thousands of regulations.

If only they had this one huh?
 
That's the trouble with regulations, they are always chasing a problem that already happened...

I like how you assume that regulations never prevent accidents just because you don't hear about it on the news. Why would the news even report that? Its a non-event. "Today an accident did NOT occur..."

Can you show examples of where regulations prevented much of anything? I see liberals say that "if a regulation was in place" all the time concerning everything from the financial industry to now this yet Regulations.gov has literally hundreds of thousands of regulations.

If only they had this one huh?

My, what a "deep and intelligent" statement.

OK, I have some examples:

Democrats fought Wall Street deregulation so the Economic breakdown never happened.

Democrats fought the deregulation of mining companies replacing "regulation" at OSHA with "voluntary compliance" so the mine disaster never happened.

Of course, Democrats lost those battles, Republcians won, companies won, the American people suffered.
 
I wonder what it'd look like if we listed the average deaths and maiming per year in mining and factories before and after regulations were put in place.

Or food poisoning before and after the muckrakers and FDA.
 
I wonder what it'd look like if we listed the average deaths and maiming per year in mining and factories before and after regulations were put in place.

Or food poisoning before and after the muckrakers and FDA.

Not to mention death by smog inhalation - smog clouds were known to kill dozens and dozens at a time before clean air regulations.

Or all the riding lawn mower users who went uninjured or with less severe injury due to the automatic shutoff switch for the blade.
 
cigarettes kill thousands,, they aren't regulated.. and you guys want to de regulate drugs,, now who is kidding whom exactly?? :lol::lol:
 
cigarettes kill thousands,, they aren't regulated.. and you guys want to de regulate drugs,, now who is kidding whom exactly?? :lol::lol:
The sole issue with that is secondhand smoke, and there are already laws in many places to deal with that- and there is room to debate even those.

Frankly, if you're harming noone else, use all the tobacco and huff all the paint you want. Just know that any resulting diseases won't be cared for at the local clinic unless you pay for treatment yourself.
 
cigarettes kill thousands,, they aren't regulated..

Really? Cigarettes aren't regulated? So I can smoke anywhere I like? I had no idea.

Yes you can smoke wherever you want....for a price....but cigarettes are responsible for the deaths of millions yet they are still allowed to be sold to pretty much anyone who wants them including minors.
 
Can you show examples of where regulations prevented much of anything?


You can't seriously be this stupid. Do you not wear a seatbelt when driving a car ? They save lives every day .

, I drove for years;over twenty years; without wearing a seat belt, safe driving prevents accidents and of course a seat belt increases the likelihood that you will not die as a result but it did not prevent the accident, that is what I meant , a seatbelt has never prevented a single accident.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top