Another win for big oil in the US
 

50,000 gallons of crude oil spilled from a pipeline burst into the Yellowstone river in Montana. Residents weren't even notified for 2 days that their drinking was was contaminated and some of the contamination included benzene, a cancer causing chemical.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cancer-c...owstone-spill/

Meanwhile the near by state of Wyoming whom will receive some of this spilled oil..via the river systems is currently suing the EPA over clean coal regulations.. Guess that's karma for them..

how many unicorns were killed in this tragedy?

I guess you guys in Cali are used to surfing in shit polluted water and drinking recycled shitter water.. The rest of us tend to like clean water..

.

Unicorn looks gay. Hehe

occasionally. only after a rain really.


nevertheless, not sure why you of all gfyers are anti-big oil. or even anti little oil.

I'd think your stock portfolio would consist mostly of XOM preferred.

I'm not anti oil.. I'm anti pollution and pro accountability when it comes to this stuff. I'm tired of seeing companies make millions if not billions while destroying this country & planet and walking away from accountability because they buy enough lobbyist and donate to enough campaigns..

Please stop discriminating against us by posting these pipeline oil spills.

Sincerely - "Big Oil"

~50 oil spills a day man, you're gonna give yourself a heart attack.

but again, you demand oil and big oil gives it to you.

I have a smaller carbon footprint than 99.9% of the people on this board. You are barking up the wrong tree with that.. :error

carbon output is not what I am referring to. I'm talking about gas input! I'd wager you buy more gas than 99.9% of the peeps on this board.

It's all relative.. while yes I do buy fuel, I haven't had an electric bill in 2 years. However my fuel usage is probably not much more than an average person's whom commutes to work each day and does their normal daily driving. I don't drive a 30ft long motor home like you. :winkwink:

how many miles did you log last year? your rig gets waht, 13-14mpg. be real.

I did about 15k miles last year and I got on average 15mpg in the Westy. That's about 1,000 gallons. The average household in the US uses 1057 gallons per year(I googled that). So my household used less than the average US household.. :1orglaugh

However, I'm in the middle of increasing my mileage quite a bit with my new build. I'm swapping to a modern engine and it will be in the 20+ mpg. I have a friend in Austin with the same motor in his and he gets 25mpg. Granted he had his tuned specific for mileage, so I'm expecting anything from 20 to 23 on mine. That will bring me right in line with the average person's usage and I still don't have an electric bill, but I have 4wd.. :winkwink:

I just read that link...nobody "walked away from accountability" did they?
The company is doing the clean up as they should.

BP did the same thing down in the Gulf.

You're kinda framing the situation to appear as if these companies are spilling oil (losing money) on purpose.
And then you are insinuating that they just "walk away" without fixing it.

That's not the case.

I'm framing the situation because the samething happens over and over again. You cite BP.. Ok let's go there.. BP was fined by the govt and they still haven't paid it and are still fighting to not pay it or have it lowered by a significant amount.

Let's also not forget that states and the tax payers whom had to cover a very big part of that cleanup effort. Meaning profits are privatized but cleaning up of the mess is socialized..

Same thing with the Coal Ash spills in NC from Duke energy and every other major spill or accident involving big oil/energy. It's always the tax payers whom flip the bill for these companies messes while their profits are kept to themselves.

This is what happens in all these cases, when it's fresh in everyone's minds they flash big penalties and fines in front of the masses and then it's years and years later that these companies have tied the fines up in the court system costing tax payers millions and eventually pay much, much less. In the mean time who do you think flips the bill for the clean ups? These companies have this shit down to an art form and they are masters at avoiding responsibility for their actions..

Also show me a single spill that wasn't negligence. I'm sure there are some here and there but the vast majority are due to neglect.

youre stating what's already obvious :upsidedow

Boo fucking hoo. Quit being a bitch. :321GFY

Fuck you.. you can drink all the oily water you want to but I give a shit about what happens to my sroundings.

All I know is what the public has been told on the news. If you have some insider info then please let us in on it.

And what we have all been told is that BP spent billions and billions of dollars on the clean up. Never heard that the states or tax payers had to spend any money on the clean up and certainly not a "very big part" of it.

I would say that as horrible as that situation was...BP paid for it dearly. And if it was negligence, it was a very expensive negligence both in money and public perception of the company.

On the second thing I quoted you. I have no idea what their "fine" was from the U.S. Govt. And I have no idea if they are legally trying not to pay the full thing of not.

What I DO know is...paying the United States Federal Govt. one penny in fines doesn't do a thing for that area. The cleanup is long done. The area has recovered.
Giving a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington D.C. some money has no bearing on the actual environmental impact or cleanup.

So having your legal team fight the amount of the fine is exactly what a company SHOULD do. In the end (IF what you are saying is correct), a judge will make a decision and the Feds will get a chunk of money that they didn't earn. And BP will have been further punished.

No matter how you want to look at that situation...it's nothing like the exaggeration of your statement that claimed BP and other companies just "walk away".

Dude, seriously... you are totally ok with the fact that people,families, children, may have been drinking benzene-poisoned water? And that the company responsible didn't inform anyone for 2 days? You would rather defend the oil companies for this, or at the very least, deflect the concerns of the people because of oil?

Very sad...


Someone posted this on Facebook today:

https://scontent-a-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/...10&oe=555DE6C8

Awesome.

I'm Anti-Oil because despite the huge profits they make, they are reckless when it comes to safety, limp when it comes to cleaning it up, and cry like little bitches when tougher regulations come are discussed. The world would be a better place if they took more responsibility for the damage they cause.

The purpose of the fine is to cost them money to make it unprofitable to cut corners. Also it did and still is costing the tax payers millions and BP has yet to pay a penny of the fine..

Who do you think pays for all that water testing, the coast guard and all the people the state's had to bring in to clean the animals and shore lines. Yea BP supplied a lot of that labor, but so did the state's and federal govt.

nobody drinks oily water.. you believing you are doing anything significant about it is just your hippy version of jerking off here...

when you stop at a camp site to park that thing do you not plug in to their electrical grid? even if you didn't you are helping paying for it by staying there. I assume you arent' just living on the side of the road on your travels. Do you pay taxes? you are paying them again. See your farts smell just as bad and you are essentially pointing a finger at yourself.

of course not. I am also not OK with kids being killed in Africa. I am not OK with AIDs. I don't care for television either. and the color purple is very not OK.

nevertheless, it's a beautiful day and the world goes round.

I do what I need to do to conserve and try and spread the message of conservation by getting people to think and engage in the discussion in different ways, I'd run a tight race with crockett to be one of the most conserving GFYers. But I also try and be realistic, it gets ugly in the kitchen. if you're going to cook some egs, some eggs are going to get broken.

Clean them up, try and see if there are things to make better and move on.

My point with crockett is he would prolly be better served owning stock in oil companies than shaking his finger at them while he tanks up. and I don't mean that in an insulting way at all. It's like loving fried chicken and eating it daily but hating chicken factories and grease and getting a stomach ache from eating the chicken, if you hate chicken factories that bad then stop eating chicken.

corporations are required by law to do everything within their capabilities to enhance the bottomline, that's a law. they will get sued by shareholders otherwise and that's a fact.

so you simply cannot blame a business for making profits with the least amount of expenses. Exxon is not in business to save the planet, they are in business to get oil out of the ground and into our cars and by-products made into computers.

it would never be profitable for oil cos to make shit 100% fail safe, that's a pipedream.

Here's another example- arrowhead bottled water has been sucking out acquifer water from deep underneath California for 150 years and depleting ground water just so they can fill up billions of 10oz plastic bottles that end up on all our beaches.

what do you propose we do with 150 year old arrowhead corp as we deal with an epic worst on record drought?

Since 2002, Nestle has had a deal with the Morongo Band of Mission Indians that allows the food giant to pump water from the Millard Canyon aquifer located on the tribe?s reservation, bottle it and sell it under the company?s Arrowhead and Pure Life water brands.

How much Nestle, the country?s largest bottled water company, paid the Morongo tribe for the rights to the water supply is not known, as the contract between the bottled water supplier and the tribe is not required to be disclosed.

The state has enacted severe restrictions regarding water use, aiming to conserve enough water for about 3.5 million people, or about 9 percent of the state?s population, but because the water plant is located on the Morongo Band of Mission Indians? reservation, local water agencies do not have any control over the water plant.

Nestle also doesn?t have to report how much water it takes from the water basin because of the plant?s location on the reservation. Many say this is a point of concern, especially since water is a limited resource in the state.

?Why is it possible to take water from a drought area, bottle it and sell it??

the icing on the cake
http://digitalsplashmedia.com/wp-con...tion-2.025.jpg



yup, the bottled water industry makes sense.

I can't believe how you just turned things around to come up with conclusions you did above?

How was your brain able to take what he said and spit out that he's "anti-oil"? It's fucking weird shit.

I could not give 1 single shit what you think is weird. I am having a chitty chat with a gfyer that I enjoy debating with,

gofuckyourself since you can't sort shit out and feel the need to trumpet that.

the stupid fucking part about your bullshit cocksucker view is my unicorn comment was just fine with you.

dumbfuck.

Theoretically that might be true about the fine. Realistically it was already a very, very unprofitable situation costing BP tens of billions of dollars.

As for water testing...Yeah, that's what the EPA is supposed to do. They are already being paid whether they test the water or not. Right?

The rehab for the animals...as I understood it from news reports that was also paid by BP.

Dude...everything I heard about that indicated that BP was paying for pretty much everything.

I don't know if they paid the fuel for the Coast Guard boats to ride around or not. But again...just like the EPA, the Coast Guard is already being paid to patrol the coast. The taxpayers didn't get a tax hike to suddenly have to pay for that.

Where do you think I said I'm doing anything about it? I said I expect companies whom pollute to be held accountable for their actions. Anything else you are implying is pure speculation on your behalf.

It's funny you right wingers bitch and moan about paying taxes to pay for somebody's welfare check, but oh lordly lordly it's completely different when it's tax payers money going to cleaning up for big business and their irresponsible actions.

I've never said that I don't use oil or that I expect us to not use it. I said I expect companies whom make a mess should be expected to clean it up and not on the tax payers dime. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Is it because it doesn't fit your narrative of calling me a hippy?

Also I don't use electric at camp sites and I don't pay for campsites. I run solar which supplies all my electric needs and I exclusively stealth camp & boondock. In all my travels I've paid for a camp site all of 2 days and it didn't even have any hook ups.. None of what I do has anything to do with trying to be green but rather to give me freedom to do what I want.

I just happen to also give a shit about our planet and would rather not see oil & coal ash being spilled in to the waterways in which we have to drink from and companies which do so should be held accountable by both fines and clean up costs. Not the tax payers..

It's because they want to make everything a right vs left argument.. So their only narrative is to try and place me as some anti oil hippy.. Rather than read what I said. Which is that I expect them to be held accountable for their actions.

What I'm saying doesn't compute in their fox news irradiated brains which only think in Left vs Right talking point mode.

I agree with everything that your saying, but you should pay your electric bill bro. :2 cents:

unemployment will do that to your carbon footprint

right!

and it has nothing to do with your leading, sensationalized thread title-

Another win for big oil in the US


it's not a leap in logic to read this as you having a problem with "big oil". YOu used the term, not me. You didn't simply say hey, another pipeline leak. You didn't say "bridger pipeline owns that pipe" because that didn't fit your anti-big oil narrative.

fyi, bridger pipe own that route. that's some big oil right there!


:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

congrats, you by yourself are using the same amount of gasoline as 2.58 people.

Okay, just stating the fact...that it is weird to make things up.

You made up that he's anti-oil, based on absolutely nothing he wrote in this thread -- that is weird of you.

It's strange how ignorant people are. They can't see anything for what it is, they just have to stand their ground, either it's on the right or left -- can't be either or.