Why does BP get to violate our sovereignty - dispersants

[autorank]

Why does BP get to spread disipersants over our territorial waters/exclusive economic zone or any territorial waters?

This is absolutely crazy. That violates our sovereignty as a nation.

Why was it ever OK to let them do this in the first place?

Feds tell BP to cut use of oil dispersants in Gulf

(CNN) -- The federal government has instructed BP to scale back its use of oil dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson said Monday.

Jackson said she believes BP's total use of dispersants can be reduced by as much as 80 percent. While the dispersants are successfully breaking up much of the oil being spilled into the Gulf, she said, "we are making environmental tradeoffs" and are "deeply concerned" about potential side effects.



Also see Big Oil and the "American Power Act"

[Cleita]

1. I'm wondering too.

Maybe it's time to start picketing all BP offices and gas stations across the country. They need to be made to feel very uncomfortable.

[autorank]

3. Go figure

I'd heard the Coast Guard Admiral in charge talking about dispersants and just assumed that it was them dropping the stuff. But, silly me, it never occurred to me that BP would be allowed to do this.

It's really stunning. Corporate America has new meaning with this incident.

[Mugweed]

2. It's become clear that the oil companies regulate the government

and not the other way around.

[autorank]

4. Right

Maybe we should lobby them for various changes and they could just tell the government, as ultimate regulator, to get 'er done.

[Lerkfish]

17. apparently so.

I see no evidence to the contrary.

[BelgianMadCow]

5. They have had a full month to bring in the KNOWN alternatives

hiding behind "availability" is just that - hiding.

Like you say - it is totally crazy. And to know that the massive body of marine life that will die because of this is to a big extent falling into the abyss - since it's 70 miles out, most deaths will be unseen. That is Jean-Jacques Cousteau speaking - who incidentally also confirmed what I calculated yesterday - one Exxon Valdez spill every 4 days. My heart bleeds thinking about that - and about the tens of thousands that will be impacted around the Gulf and elsewhere. And guess what, the liability will be measured by the amount of dead animals on the beaches. Which are being hidden as we speak - saw that in an eyewitness report yesterday. Reminds me, verrry eerily, of dump trucks and not-to-be-seen coffins.
on edit: The oil covering animals will have to be proven to originate from this spill. Luckily, laboratories with BP as their largest customer will provide unbiased results (reported). And animals without oil, hey who knows what they die off.

The dispersant issue, along with the downright refusal by BP to allow exact measurements, and the acceptance of that, is simply unbelievable.

[autorank]

6. Abyss

"And to know that the massive body of marine life that will die because of this is to a big extent falling into the abyss - since it's 70 miles out..." You're right. If they do get this contained, the dispersants keep the problem 'buried at sea' and guess who investigates...the feds. Problem solved - if it's not reported, it doesn't exist. This is just awful.

[BelgianMadCow]

10. The dispersant plus the oil droplets, combined with cold water T will likely cause SINKING

O, no worries, eventually some is gonna surface in a kind of "slow release" - good luck proving anything by then.

If this isn't a massive coverup in the face of bankrupting liability, I don't know what is.

And I'm not talking about some kind of conspiracy - just plain corporate irresponsibilty combined with revolving door collusion.

[autorank]

18. Right, no conspiracy at all -- it's upfront and in our face

The head of MMS resigned. Well that's a start but there needs to be a long list. And then there's
court and, as blingpig suggests, expropriation! Change the name to CP - Citizen's Petroleum.

[autorank]

7. Territorial Waters - Exclusive Economic Zone

Exclusive economic zone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters

An exclusive economic zone extends from the outer limit of the territorial sea to a maximum of 200 nautical miles (370.4 km) from the territorial sea baseline, thus it includes the contiguous zone.<3> A coastal nation has control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources. However, it cannot prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea that is in compliance with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal State in accordance with the provisions of the UN Convention, within that portion of its exclusive economic zone beyond its territorial sea. Before 1982, coastal nations arbitrarily extended their territorial waters in an effort to control activities which are now regulated by the exclusive economic zone, such as offshore oil exploration or fishing rights (see Cod Wars). Indeed, the exclusive economic zone is still popularly, though erroneously, called a coastal nation's territorial waters.

[Smashcut]

8. They're doing as much to cover up their crimes as they can, and won't stop unless it's at gunpoint

Which won't happen, because we have a government that is entirely too sympathetic to "corporate sovereignty" to interfere.

[BelgianMadCow]

13. THEY are (figuratively) pointing the guns, at reporters and concerned citizens

the "boot to their neck" is a month late and a couple billion short. And just rhetoric at the moment.

[autorank]

22. Corporate sovereignty -- a universal law!

It's not a bad idea to stasrt making arrests. The Gulf is a crime scene.

[rudy23]

9. Answer--because we elected a corporatist who believes corporations SHOULD outrank we the people.

We got conned.

[BelgianMadCow]

15. I put the start of that somewhere around JFK's death - not nearly attributable to Obama alone

though he obviously hasn't been the change agent he campaigned as.

[blindpig]

11. This entire affair is being conducted as a coverup.

The only concern is BP's liability. There can be no doubt who has the whip hand here.

The United States Government is nothing but the crowd control subsidiary of Capital.

k&r

[Karenina]

12. WHY? $$$

Nalco, the producer of Corexit, has financial ties with BP.

JOB ONE seems to have been reducing the physical evidence. Thus the use of dispersants. Protecting the shoreline has been an EPIC FAIL.

[autorank]

20. "reducing the physical evidence"

That cause, above all,is the most sensible at this point.

[blondeatlast]

14. The dispersants are a disaster upon a disaster. I'm not certain how long I can even

last reading about this; it makes me, quite literally, physically sick.

[amborin]

21. +1000 and for cosmetic reasons, to hide the true magnitude from public view

[Me.]

16. Because The Great God Mammon Rules The World

and takes precedence over all other gods and lesser entities

[autorank]

19. I'm glad to see polythiesm making a comeback

Mammon needs to be downsized by Saint Memnon, the Wonderworker -- once and for all.

[branders seine]

23. $ $

[autorank]

24. & £ £

[EFerrari]

25. Isn't this the same way Exxon treated Ecuador?

Welcome to Ecuador!

[autorank]

27. We are the world!

You're right. Equador is still struggling with BP. Time for expropriation without compensation.
This is getting old.

But look at the new "power act" - it's not serious.

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/white-house-big-oil-and-american-power-act

[autorank]

26. .

:kick:

[EFerrari]

28. Kick

[mod mom]

29. Did you read this current report by Russian scientists:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8421977


UFB! :mad:

[puebloknot]

30. K&R Lisa Jackson's strongly worded letter makes me feel so much better.

She's "dispersed" (sic) with the problem, and we can move on now.