I’m not an expert on oil spills, and do not feel qualified to decide whether the Deepwater Horizon well leak was a “disaster”. There was loss of life, and some damage to the environment, and a major negative effect on BP’s balance sheet, and therefore it was a serious incident; but all the indications are that the impact has been much less than had been forecast. To the BBCl, of course, it’s still a “disaster”, even when the good news is reported that there is confirmation that the well has finally been capped. That’s because they love Obama and hate oil production, and everything to do with it, and because they are involved in a major eco-camapign to force us to shift to other forms of energy.
IT NEVER RAINS BUT IT POURS….
Bookmark the permalink.
Grossly overhyped, as is the norm, not just with the LBC, but also the mainstream media in general. Doom-mongering is much better (and more profitable) than reporting “well, nothing of real consequence occurred, today”. The undesirable effect on the public at large, however, is to induce the “boy-who-cried-‘wolf’ ” syndrome, whereby most alarmism is now ignored, if not laughed out of court. Hence the AGW scepticism, which is growing like topsy – so much so, almost every “scientific” announcement is cynically ridiculed, whether or not it is of import. No-one trusts anybody any more. Quite right too, if the pronouncements of some of these “scientists” are anything to go by, backed by ignorant, unchallenging and corrupt government who are prone to swallow this rot hook, line and sinker. The effect on us all will be profound – and expensive.
With ‘Impartiallity in their DNA’ they would have reported that the licence for the well was issued by the USA. If they will not take the risk of an accident, then don’t issue the licence and don’t get the revenues from the oil. The bBC does not report issues with impariallity’, must be due to their mutant genes, too much loony left in breeding I expect.
From the BBC article:
But more recent research noted an undersea plume of crude oil-based chemicals up to 200m high and 2km wide, extending 35km from the spill site.
Sounds scarey, doesn’t it? ‘Undersea’ is an appropriate word here as the Beeb fails to inform that it lies between 3,600 and 4,000 feet below sea level. Further, it fails to inform that the research found the level of pertoleum hydrocarbons to be more than 50 micrograms (50 millionths) of a gram per litre. So an extremly low concentration, but not necessarily unharmful. So what does the research, but not the BBC, tell us about any harm caused? Well, it tells us this:
Contrary to previous predictions by other scientists, they found no “dead zones,” regions of significant oxygen depletion within the plume where almost no fish or other marine animals could survive. They attributed the discrepancy to a problem with the more modern measuring devices that can give artificially low oxygen readings when coated by oil. The team on Endeavor used an established chemical test developed in the 1880s to check the concentration of dissolved oxygen in water samples, called a Winkler titration. Of the dozens of samples analyzed for oxygen only a few from the plume layer were below expected levels, and even these samples were only slightly depleted.
Taken from here.
Sure it was a disaster. Nothing wrong with saying so. Worst disaster ever? Clearly not. The President’s reflexive, politicized banning of offshore drilling is costing more jobs than the oil spill. And we never did learn much about the clean-up effort as the Government colluded with BP to block media access to certain areas. Not that the BBC ever told you.