I hear that plenty of protests against BP are planned for today calling for the government to take over the operation and seize all of BP's assets. I would like to know what the incentive is in that. Currently, the government is holding BP liable for the cleanup operations as well as damages. But if the feds were to take BP's assets, then clearly BP would no longer be able to be held liable without assets. Then, that would mean the government would be responsible for the cleanup and damages. *shudder* That sounds like a recipe for double disaster.
Secondly, I'm a bit puzzled as to why there is so much anger directed at BP. BP is a business. Businesses generally supply whatever is in demand. Last I checked, oil was very much in demand. So even if the leak is gushing 20,000 barrels of oil a day, that's only 1/1000 of the national daily usage. What am I saying? BP is drilling for oil through a 3 mile thick piece of earth that is a mile under the ocean because they know we will buy the oil once they bring it up and to market. Much pressure and blame is being heaped upon BP for allowing/causing the spill, but I would contend that anyone making that charge need only to look in the mirror to find BP's partner in crime. They wouldn't be digging for oil if it wasn't in demand. Sure it's easy to be an armchair environmental strategist and blast BP, but when it comes down to it, how many people will actually cut their oil usage willingly without complaining?
Since it's an election year, I don't see much progress happening on the front. But after the elections are over, maybe some level heads will show up on the state levels/Washington and we'll see some progress on the issue.
Secondly, I'm a bit puzzled as to why there is so much anger directed at BP. BP is a business. Businesses generally supply whatever is in demand. Last I checked, oil was very much in demand. So even if the leak is gushing 20,000 barrels of oil a day, that's only 1/1000 of the national daily usage. What am I saying? BP is drilling for oil through a 3 mile thick piece of earth that is a mile under the ocean because they know we will buy the oil once they bring it up and to market. Much pressure and blame is being heaped upon BP for allowing/causing the spill, but I would contend that anyone making that charge need only to look in the mirror to find BP's partner in crime. They wouldn't be digging for oil if it wasn't in demand. Sure it's easy to be an armchair environmental strategist and blast BP, but when it comes down to it, how many people will actually cut their oil usage willingly without complaining?
Since it's an election year, I don't see much progress happening on the front. But after the elections are over, maybe some level heads will show up on the state levels/Washington and we'll see some progress on the issue.
