Peak oil??
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
Prev: THIS IS THE LIST OF THE DAY DAWN SHAREHOLDERS & LEGAL OWNERS OF TELFER MINE INDEED, who Unknown to them, were FLEECED BY THE NEWMONT NEWCREST MINING CRIMINALS
Next: Car Battery and Cold Cranking Amps
From: John_H on 29 May 2010 18:44 Clocky wrote: > >Quite a legacy Bush and Cheney's have left behind - unwinnable wars, GFC, >worldwide terrorism and now a huge environmental disaster... Lucky they didn't have a home insulation scheme!
From: Albm&ctd on 30 May 2010 07:02 In article <u06306dfmpjv8up09fvmhlejb8f1du9vk7(a)4ax.com>, john4721(a)inbox.com says... > Clocky wrote: > > > >Quite a legacy Bush and Cheney's have left behind - unwinnable wars, GFC, > >worldwide terrorism and now a huge environmental disaster... > > Lucky they didn't have a home insulation scheme! > Maybe they would make insulation out of dead bodies both home and abroad? They certainly insulated themselves from war crimes. Al -- I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone. http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html
From: hippo on 30 May 2010 07:16 Paul Saccani wrote: > > On Sat, 29 May 2010 22:55:32 +0800, "Clocky" <notgonn(a)happen.com> > wrote: > > >The spill happened because the Bush and Cheney administration allowed safety > >precautions to be circumvented. [The US discussed making acoustic switches a > >legal requirement several years ago, but it was decided by the Interior > >Department's Minerals Management Service, which is closely tied to the oil > >industry, that the devices, which cost 500,000 dollars (400,000 euros) each, > >were an unnecessary cost]. > > That is not correct. > > The BOP was fitted with a deadman switch, which was activated (also > US$500,000, and also not required by MMS) at the time of the > explosion. There is nothing extra that an acoustic switch could have > done in this circumstance. The deadman switch will also shut the BOP > in a wide range of circumstances where an acoustic switch won't do a > thing. Manual activation also failed. There is absolutely nothing an > acoustic switch could do that couldn't have been done by those two > systems. > > How is it that fitting an *inferior* device to the one that was > actually fitted is going to prevent a disaster? Beats me! Do you really think fitting one would have stopped the 380 going into production? -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: Clocky on 30 May 2010 07:20 Paul Saccani wrote: > On Sat, 29 May 2010 22:55:32 +0800, "Clocky" <notgonn(a)happen.com> > wrote: > >> The spill happened because the Bush and Cheney administration >> allowed safety precautions to be circumvented. [The US discussed >> making acoustic switches a legal requirement several years ago, but >> it was decided by the Interior Department's Minerals Management >> Service, which is closely tied to the oil industry, that the >> devices, which cost 500,000 dollars (400,000 euros) each, were an >> unnecessary cost]. > > That is not correct. > That's what was reported. Where are you getting your information from? > The BOP was fitted with a deadman switch, which was activated (also > US$500,000, and also not required by MMS) at the time of the > explosion. There is nothing extra that an acoustic switch could have > done in this circumstance. The deadman switch will also shut the BOP > in a wide range of circumstances where an acoustic switch won't do a > thing. Manual activation also failed. There is absolutely nothing an > acoustic switch could do that couldn't have been done by those two > systems. > > How is it that fitting an *inferior* device to the one that was > actually fitted is going to prevent a disaster?
From: Clocky on 31 May 2010 10:57
Paul Saccani wrote: > On Sun, 30 May 2010 19:20:12 +0800, "Clocky" <notgonn(a)happen.com> > wrote: > >> Paul Saccani wrote: >>> On Sat, 29 May 2010 22:55:32 +0800, "Clocky" <notgonn(a)happen.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The spill happened because the Bush and Cheney administration >>>> allowed safety precautions to be circumvented. [The US discussed >>>> making acoustic switches a legal requirement several years ago, but >>>> it was decided by the Interior Department's Minerals Management >>>> Service, which is closely tied to the oil industry, that the >>>> devices, which cost 500,000 dollars (400,000 euros) each, were an >>>> unnecessary cost]. >>> >>> That is not correct. >>> >> >> That's what was reported. Where are you getting your information >> from? > > Multiple reliable sources, including public ones such as the > preliminary investigation in the US. > Such as? > The important thing is not whether or not an acoustic switch was > required, or indeed any other device, but whether or not it is > relevant to this case. And it certainly is not. Your source doesn't > know what he is talking about, so has arrived at invalid conclusions > due to a lack of understanding of the technologies involved. > > I presume no deception was intended. Deception seems to be high on BP's agenda at present, and certainly in their interest. > >>> The BOP was fitted with a deadman switch, which was activated (also >>> US$500,000, and also not required by MMS) at the time of the >>> explosion. There is nothing extra that an acoustic switch could >>> have done in this circumstance. The deadman switch will also shut >>> the BOP in a wide range of circumstances where an acoustic switch >>> won't do a thing. Manual activation also failed. There is >>> absolutely nothing an acoustic switch could do that couldn't have >>> been done by those two systems. >>> >>> How is it that fitting an *inferior* device to the one that was >>> actually fitted is going to prevent a disaster? |