42,000 gallons spilled into the Yellowstone River? (Baker, Power: low income, home, construction jobs)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My bet is the Yellowstone leak will get more attention because the world knows the name "Yellowstone". Most don't know about Libby. The world also knows the name EXXON and there will be a reaction to anything that connects EXXON to an oil spill. Unfortunately, Libby, WR GRACE, EPA failures, etc. are not going to get attention. Remember that the WR Grace trial ended with not guilty, a shame I think for the victims of WR Grace's negligence in Libby.
Living most my life in a state dominated by coal, you become numb to the 'small disasters' that happen all the time. The Buffalo creek coal slurry disaster in 72 killed 125, injured 1121 and over 4,000 homeless. That was about 1,300,000 gallons of coal slurry.
The State of West Virginia set up an inquiry board, all of whom were sympathetic to the coal industry. The State did wind up suing Pittston for $100 million in the 70's, but Governor Arch Moore accepted a $1,000,000 settlement on behalf of the state 3 days before he left office.
If you don't know about Arch Moore and the cronies in politics, it's an interesting history. He wound up serving time for 'extortion' from a coal company and obstruction, as well as a slew of other things
Then there was the TVA impoundment disaster in 2008. That spill unleashed approx. 500million gallons of coal slurry and wiped out a community. It didn't make the news for days after the event, but even then it quickly faded from the spotlight.
42,000 gal crude spill, all things considered, is not that epic a disaster. In any event I wouldn't level blame on the business or the government yet. From my perspective if there was negligence and wrongdoing, it usually winds up being a combination of both. I've lived in a world dominated by coal politics, and it's a crooked, crooked one- both sides.
citizens should be outragged by this spill and by exon's slow inept response. as your gov stated, exon didn't and hasn't as yet even responded to this spill in accordance with their (once again) disaster response plan. THE HIGHEST EARNING company in the histroy of the WORLD and they are still responding to spills just as they did in the 1960's, they haven't spent a dime upgranding or improving how they respond and contain oil spills, and they won't untill the PUBLIC demands they spend money to prevent spills and in the event of a spill then contain and clean up much quicker and more thoroughly then they are now. local citizens should demonstrate outside of exon's property in billings to DEMAND they do a better job! and with all brian's so called tough talk, lets see if he actually makes exon do ANYTHING different as the result of this spill. it shouldn't be enough to just say they he'll make them pay for everything.....that does nothing to prevent future spills, unless they get FINED in the BILLIONS of dollars; exon will do nothing different. and they are wanting to build another hugh pipline from the tar sands in canada through montanta down to the gulf of mexico.........so they'll be able to pollute the yellowstone again along with numberous other major rivers that cut accross the path of that disaster in the making.....but this is not a done deal; citizens can show their concern and outrage over these mega polluters (oil companies) and demonstrate AGAINST this new proposed pipline. if we don't then what you are seeing in the yellowstone and have seen in the gulf oil spill will just be an annual event and the following poster will be just your average american citizens who takes whatever corporate america dishes out.......our future is not bright
Wow. You draw a lot of assumptions from that post. Thankfully I can assure that the old adage applies only to you in this case.
I guess you failed to read that the Yellowstone river is kind of a raging torrent right now and would be an imminent danger to life and limb if they try to physically clean up?
Tell me you don't value human safety... Cause that's sure what it sounds like.
And yes I'm numb to it because those disasters I mentioned, especially the TVA, where the volume of release covered a COUNTY, barely gets lip service especially from folks that only strap on their enviro- superhero costumes for spotted yellowshafted nut-whakers. Do I care about it? Hell yes. Does the coal industry and crooked politicians need to be straightened out? Yes. Do those poor folks ( and I mean poor in the purest sense) deserve retribution? Of course.
But I'm numb because people and the media don't give squat about hillbillys. Bah- what's a little county in Appalachia? No attachment; who cares.
Now a little 42,000 oil spill on the Yellowstone? Armageddon! Go get Exxon without proof! Ban oil production!
Yeah... I'm a little cynical. I have the right to be. But I'm a realist too. 42,000 gal is not a catashrophic number and in any event they can't work on it yet. As for blame? I've learned to temper my accusations until the story is played out.
This is 100% spot on. The people of Libby and the surrounding areas are suffering thru a massive ecological and health crisis, with those afflicted suffering a painful death sentence. I'll wager the confluence of politics and corporate malfeasance are in there.
But again- Libby? Bah. Backwoods rednecks. Who cares.
So ask me why I'm cynical again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTSilvertip
A flood IS a natural disaster, just ask the residents of Roundup.
Perhaps the negligence of the government in Libby isn't as noteworthy as the possiblity of attacking an evil oil company, but at this point, no negligence has been proven against Exxon.
There are no dams on the Yellowstone, so no way to control flood waters. The pipeline, (along with several others) was built to code, maintained, and inspected.
If an earthquake had hit and caused the breech, would it still be the fault of the company? Probably because the pipeline was there in the first place.
The Asbestos case in Libby is directly the fault of the EPA as they knew for three YEARS the pile of bark was contaminated. They withheld the information.
Any business in Montana or anywhere always runs the risk of an accident, including natural disasters impacting infrastructure. I would bet money there will be the usual parasites lining up with their lawyers to sue the heck out of Exxon, but where are the people with actual cases against the government oversite arm in Libby. Will they get another minimal settlement through legislation by baccus??
Both cases are haz-mat spills, both have the potential for damage to residents and the state.
For those who may not be aware, 42,000 gallons is 1,000 barrels, which is the size of one futures contract.
Crude oil is traded in barrels, not gallons.
The products made from crude oil are traded in gallons, not barrels.
Aaron Flint stated on Voices of Montana, during this morning's radio broadcast that, so far, the only animal that needed some sort of medical attention was a garter snake.
"acute hydrocarbon exposure" - that was the diagnosis at the emergency room for Alexis Bonogofsy, who was trying to deal with the oil on their property to protect their livestock.
I spent my entire career working in the pipeline business, and I don't believe their is any excuse for an accident like this other than an earthquake. These lines are supposed to be drained and tested regularly. And most are. The money we are paying for gasoline right now leaves Exxon with no excuse whatsoever.
For those who may not be aware, 42,000 gallons is 1,000 barrels, which is the size of one futures contract.
Crude oil is traded in barrels, not gallons.
The products made from crude oil are traded in gallons, not barrels.
Aaron Flint stated on Voices of Montana, during this morning's radio broadcast that, so far, the only animal that needed some sort of medical attention was a garter snake.
Very well said Walter Greenspan. And I totally agree with your point that this little spill sounds much much more ominous if spoken in terms of 42K gallons instead of 1K barrels.
But even though it's a very small spill, it may provide the environmental movement with very big PR ammo since putting together (a) Exxon, (b) oil spill, & (c) Yellowstone are just too good to pass up and its real red-meat for the national media. And the real significance here is the big Oil-Sands developments up in Alberta which need new pipelines to be constructed down thru the US to get their product to markets in the lower 48. The greens are already starting to push this story to use as opposition to the construction of pipelines, but don't feel sorry for the Canadians because China will gladly take their oil if the US won't. BTW, it's estimated that construction of those pipelines alone would result in 100 K jobs in the US.
Then the greenes are to late as there are already pipe lines running from the oil sands in Alberta down into the U.S. .
It is still a shame,(the spill)
It will rebound quickly.
That river sure turns color quickly as it leaves the park.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
