Reply #2: I think there are two separate issues. [View All]

[guardian]

Saying who is culpable for a specific spill is one issue. I haven't actually heard a clear report of the root cause of the accident/explosion. Maybe it's because they don't know yet? Maybe it is because BP is hiding info to avoid looking bad? If the accident occurred because of negligence then BP should be hammered unmercifully. If the accident just happened I still think BP should bear the brunt of the clean up cost, but not be excoriated. After all accidents do happen. Things do break due to fault of nobody. Especially when you are dealing with extremes of pressure, temperature, remoteness. Like the t-shirt says "entropy happens." So who is blaming the environmentalists? This is news to me. Sounds like something Beck or Savage would say.

The other issue is comparing a land-based spill to the deep sea spill. I have no background in this area, but my guess is the land-based spill would be a better scenario and easier to remedy. First humans can actually get to it to assess the problem and apply a solution. It's not like the late Red Adair could swim down and fix the problem. Second, the land based spill would affect a smaller geographic area. With the ocean diluting the oil and currents carrying it hundreds/thousands of miles you have a epic disaster. Third, with a land based spill the clean up is more two dimensional. With the spill in the ocean it is three dimensional and the you are talking a lot of volume. Forth, with a land-based spill I'd think the oil would tend stay in one place. With the ocean it's moving around all the time so you have to go chase it.