For more than a few years, there has been a chorus that all we need do is, "Drill Baby Drill." This vocalization has been the watchword for several politicians and talking heads. In fact, recently one of the more famous, or perhaps soon to be, infamous of those "people of certainty", who happens to be an ex-politician, stated that we do not need any more studies, we need action.
She is right. We need action. We need people who know, through rigorous study what the fallout may be from the opening of millions of acres of offshore areas to simply, "Drill Baby Drill." We need people who are able to produce with a level of certainty, the possible outcomes, good or bad. And we need to follow the safer course, not the course that results from a 30-second sound bite issued by one who knows very little of substance about most of which she speaks. She is one of the "people of certainty." And she is a leader to some.
However, an ecological disaster is not something that is recovered from in short order, no matter how certain one might be. In fact, the clean-up in Prince William Sound is not even complete to this day. And if the Exxon Valdez had been a double hulled vessel - another of those pesky safety features designed to protect the environment, there might not have even been a spill, much less one of the magnitude we came to see.
Now we have another shorting of environmentally sensitive means and another disaster is looming off the coast of Louisiana and Mississippi and Lord knows where it might end up. The final tally cannot yet be realistically estimated, much less known, but if it is going to take literally months to drill relief wells and the "round up" of the oil slick is not going particularly well based on the high flow, high seas and multiple leak points that have been cited, one can only hope that this causes those "people of certainty" to rethink to true impact of their words and the effects on subsequent public policy.
Reality is often quite different from the sound bites and public speeches "people of certainty" and politicians make. Real world catastrophes resulting from short-cuts and by-passing safety measures are rarely, if ever, sound policy. But when you have two men who had experience with the oil patch, although Mr. Cheney knew little of the oil industry when he was named CEO of Halliburton, sound policy wasn't even a secondary consideration much less primary in nature.
But on to the current problem. British Petroleum is the beneficiary of loosely enforced standards that are the result of years of loosening of regulations and requirements. They have operated on the "Honor System." They have had the benefit of simply being granted carte blanche based on their word of honor.
Let's take a look at their honorable word. When asked for their assessment of a worst case scenario for the drilling rig that now sits somewhere in pieces on the floor of the Gulf, the BP folks estimated that in a catastrophe the well would leak an estimated 1000 barrels of crude oil daily. The reality is that this blown pipe is spewing an estimated 200,000 barrels of crude into the environment each day and even with the full force of the federal government, it looks as if the crude oil is going to reach the shores of the Gulf and with likely horrific effects. So much for the honorable word of BP, where is their control of this event? It went out with their honorable word.
It has been said also that the technology being used on this particular drilling rig was not of the latest vintage. I include this simply because if this rig were off the shores of any of dozens of other nations, BP would have been required to include a security blow-out preventer that allows a blown out well to be capped remotely before it could inflict heavy environmental damage on the shores off which it is drilling. But, of course, they did not include this $500,000.00 dollar device. There was no need for this device, we had the word of British Petroleum!
Why should other nations require such safety devices, but not the United States? Primarily because much of the world understands the fragile nature of the environment where we in the United States have many people who have trouble believing that inevitably day follows night as night follows day, but more so because regulations have been decimated over the last thirty years and this allows for larger margins and greater profits. When you can increase your return on investment, why worry about some silly environmental issues.
Of course, based on costs that are going to go through the veritable ozone layer once assessed, I guess a $500,000.00 dollar safety feature isn't such a bad idea afterall. But again, we have all those people who "know" and tell us they "know": They are the "people of certainty."
Well, it may be that the technology is there, but there is not where it is needed. It is needed in the Gulf of Mexico to avert one hell of an environmental disaster. And if these "people of certainty" are able to operate in such an absolute world where their certainty is without fail, why are they not able to explain what their agenda is for making everything oh so right? Forget the negative. You certainly must have some positive agenda that will make everything all right. Don't you? The latest attempts are to sink three multi-story caps on to each leak point and then pump the oil to barges. A key point - this is an untried technology in such deep water and there is no guarantee it will work. If it does, all the better for most parties. If it does not work, however, the continued flow could end up in a current that will push the slick around the Florida peninsula and up the East coast. What will be the overall effect at that point?
These same "people of certainty" cite as weakness recent U.S. involvement with the Russians in a nuclear arms pact or treaty that will reduce the overall number of nuclear warheads in our nations. These "people of certainty" must not know that Ronald Reagan had his administration involved in similar negotiations and George H.W. Bush signed a Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT) during his administration. So, the goal of making the world safer by reducing the overall number of nuclear warheads is a sign of strength only when a republican administration is at the helm, apparently.
They have no compunction against blowing smoke where only rock and ice exist and they cite the strength of the current administration as weakness. The free fall that our economy was in during the end of 2008 has been quelled, at least for now. The stock market was back over 11,000, until today - and still those "people of certainty" cry the sky is falling. Many of them decried the odious and unconstitutional nature of the recent medical bill that became law, and then they went home on recess from the Congress and took credit for passing it despite having voted against the bill.
Here is another reality: You cannot have it both ways. If you are going to be against everything, you cannot take credit for voting for it. If you believe it is such horrific and unconstitutional public policy, why would you want to take any credit for it? Did you recall that several of the provisions included had been put forth previously by Richard Nixon?.
The party of "No" or "Hell No" has been, overall, obstructionist. And then they whine when they feel left out. When you get pissy and take your ball and go home, you should expect to be left out. When the Obama administration took office more than a few "entertainers" cited their desire to see him fail. Apparently, they do not believe that duly elected officials are to be granted the power of their elected offices or that if, and when, any administration fails, we fail as a people and as a nation. Unless, of course, the elected official is seated as a result of the Supreme Court making the call rather than the electorate.
We live in a land that lauds divergent viewpoints, or at least we used to. Today, the very people who claim to be all for smaller government and fewer taxes forget that not so long ago to even speak against the then president was tantamount to treason. You would have been labeled a "traitor," or worse. If you would have been adjudged an enemy combatant by the then president, you could have been put in a hole and left there with no legal recourse. The Writ of Habeas Corpus had been abolished, remember... Tolerance is now back in vogue but sadly, it has been taken down a path from which no one will likely return unscathed. The intolerance voiced by the smaller government, fewer taxes fools brands them as little more than "people of certainty." All the more so since the real federal tax rate on most of those complaining has either gone done or stayed pretty much the same for the last thirty years. To quote one of their favorite heros, "...Well, there you go again."
The life of Duane Houy - that's me, has taken many a turn and today I am working to provide information and education materials to anyone with an interest in personal security and safety, or the safety and security of your family, your home or your business. In addition to educational materials, I market high quality, fair-priced, non-lethal and legal security tools that come with a top-flight guarantee on materials and manufacturing.
It is my hope that you will come and visit and if you have any questions, you will contact me personally either through email or phone call or snail mail.
I am providing personal security products and non-lethal safety weapons at http://www.nowpepperspray.net.
We look forward to meeting with anyone to discuss their personal security or home or business security interests.
No comments:
Post a Comment