Boycotting .........BP

[maxster]

unless BP CEO Tony Hayward is running the station your never going to effect them except the guy running the station and the independent carrier guy delievering the product.they don't even make their own gas 19% of a 42 gallon barrel is used for gas production..they sell the oil out of the gulf to refineries and the station owners pay under contract to have the BP name only not the gas pumped..when the contract is up change the name of the station that would effect them but not for years and the gulf needs that $20 Mill now.

[yellowirenut]

also i doubt the selling of gasoline is the major portion of the pie for BP..i would think industrial applications for oil are the main purchasers of crude.

[jpsmith1cm]

Boycotts have everything to do with feelings and little to do with reality.

[timebuilder]

A boycott against BP would only make them declare bankruptcy, and limit the amount by law that could ever be recovered by them.

Instead, we should have them add 20 new sites in shallow waters where a leak is a non-event because human divers can immediately correct the leak and stop it at a few thousand gallons, instead of a few million.

In addition, those rigs would provide new jobs and support businesses for the people who live in that area.

You know why this won't happen? It's not part of the George Soros/environmentalist narrative.

And we will all suffer because of that narrative.

[bwalley]

Boycotting BP is going to hurt individual stock holders and private business owners.

BP is doing the right thing and stepping up to the plate to deal with this, if they get put out of business, it will be the taxpayers (You and I) who end up paying for this.

They cut corners as well as haliburton and transocean, and they will pay the price for it.

[ga-hvac-tech]

As JP says, Boycotting BP is about feelings, not reality.

What we need is SOLUTIONS, NOT politics.

OK, I am about to start a flame war: Oilmen in the white house know how to resolve this stuff, community organizers do NOT... SOOO

After we get through ranting... who is better qualified to SOLVE the problem?

[bwalley]

As JP says, Boycotting BP is about feelings, not reality.

What we need is SOLUTIONS, NOT politics.

OK, I am about to start a flame war: Oilmen in the white house know how to resolve this stuff, community organizers do NOT... SOOO

After we get through ranting... who is better qualified to SOLVE the problem?

BP is the b est company qualified to stop the oil leak, they are working on stopping it.

They can't just plug it, a relief well has to be drilled, then it can be plugged.

Drilling a relief well takes time.

[ga-hvac-tech]

BP is the b est company qualified to stop the oil leak, they are working on stopping it.

They can't just plug it, a relief well has to be drilled, then it can be plugged.

Drilling a relief well takes time.

Yes, I know... wish it were easy and quick, but it is not.

My point was to raise awareness that a politician trying to gain political mileage from the oil spill; is not helping the situation much...

[bwalley]

Yes, I know... wish it were easy and quick, but it is not.

My point was to raise awareness that a politician trying to gain political mileage from the oil spill; is not helping the situation much...

1 rule of politics is to never let a crisis go to waste.

barry is trying to take credit for everything good that happens, but he wants no blame for anything bad that happens as a result of his decisions.

[timebuilder]

They cut corners as well as haliburton and transocean, and they will pay the price for it.

Right now, all we have to support that are rumors and innuendo.

We will not know the actual sequence of events until a full investigation is completed.

[bwalley]

Right now, all we have to support that are rumors and innuendo.

We will not know the actual sequence of events until a full investigation is completed.

It is obvious that they screwed up, otherwise we would not have an active major oil leak in the GOM.

[ga-hvac-tech]

It is obvious that they screwed up, otherwise we would not have an active major oil leak in the GOM.

This logic, at first, makes sense... until one thinks a little farther:

The other side of this logic is that it is possible to create a totally risk free society that never makes mistakes... Kinda a little lofty thinking IMO.

Rather than sit on one's pinnacle and try to pass blame, how about we all roll up our sleeves and get to work resolving the issue and cleaning up the mess.

One positive thing that will come from this is a better design of well-head that will handle the issue next time. However we probably will not hear about it, because it does not make 'big news' when something works correctly.

[timebuilder]

It is obvious that they screwed up, otherwise we would not have an active major oil leak in the GOM.

Actually, that is not "obvious."

Any system that was designed, tested, and deemed to be reliable can fail, even under the best of circumstances. We do not know, at this point, whether there was a defect in the design or construction of the BOP, or if there was an installation or maintenance issue, nor do we know that everything passed muster, and some unforeseen even cause a catastrophic failure.

What we DO know is that the fact that BP was forced to drill in deep water by being prevented from drilling in shallower water, where this could have been easily dealt with and contained.

That is the lesson of this spill.

An example of everything being checked and rechecked and yet, a tragedy occurs, is the piece of ice that made a hole in the shuttle wing, leading to the ingress of superhot plasma and the failure of the shuttle structure. The only argument that can be made to suggest that this was a screwup is to say that the engineers should have expected that chunk or ice to hit the wing, even though there were literally dozens and dozens of other uneventful launches.

You cannot plan for every possibility.