Oil Spill Timeline

[Gaspar]

Some wouldn't call four or five giants and a thousand tiny guys competition. I'm not sure where exactly I stand on that point.

In any event, I don't know how one would get more competition in the business of drilling wells that cost half a billion dollars. On shore, it's much cheaper, thus making it possible for small firms to do some business. I hope for your sake we don't end up having another precipitous crash in natural gas prices.

Just because a company is larger don't mean you don't compete.  Heiron is angry at businesses for being successful and making billions of dollars.  I admire businesses that reach that goal.  We see the same thing, we just see it differently. 

Where I see a role-model to learn from, Heiron sees an enemy to destroy.  Two very different business philosophies with the same goal. 

[nathanm]

Just because a company is larger don't mean you don't compete.  Heiron is angry at businesses for being successful and making billions of dollars.  I admire businesses that reach that goal.  We see the same thing, we just see it differently. 

I think it's fair to say that companies as large as BP and ExxonMobil and their peers distort the market quite a bit. But as I said earlier, they're also pretty much necessary in this day and age, as few to none of the smaller guys can come up with half a billion bucks to drill a well off in the deep water somewhere.

Also, there's an argument to be made that once companies grow that large their political influence grows greater than many people think that corporate political influence should ever get.

I don't have a problem with success, but I do have a problem with that success being used unethically. (of course, once you get into a debate about ethics, it's going to be a long day )

[Gaspar]

I don't have a problem with success, but I do have a problem with that success being used unethically. (of course, once you get into a debate about ethics, it's going to be a long day )

True dat!

[Gaspar]

So now the Fed has halted the Sand berm dredging because it might displace a snail or something.

How about an executive order to do everything necessary to stop the spill from reaching the shore?  Can we get that?  Huh?

http://www.wdsu.com/news/23997498/detail.html

[Conan71]

Some wouldn't call four or five giants and a thousand tiny guys competition. I'm not sure where exactly I stand on that point.

In any event, I don't know how one would get more competition in the business of drilling wells that cost half a billion dollars. On shore, it's much cheaper, thus making it possible for small firms to do some business. I hope for your sake we don't end up having another precipitous crash in natural gas prices.

"Competition" in the oil business is a relative term since it's been near impossible to prevent pricing collusion.  The majors have their place because they can afford to take on the massive expense of more remote and deeper drilling opportunities.  Smaller producers have their place because their business model will allow them to profit with multiple small wells producing 20 to 30 bbl per day at present oil prices.  Currently, I'm working with some smaller producers in the area of "black sand" oil extraction.  It's a fascinating specialty unto itself.  Essentially you have an oil which is the viscosity of asphalt.  The challenge is to get it to flow with heat and pressure, that's where my company comes in. 

The oil field service and drilling industry is highly specialized and very capital-intensive at all levels but especially offshore.  In certain areas of oil field service, either there's only one or two companies with the technology and know-how, or the cost of entry to compete is astronomical.  Halliburton is a good example of a company which has some capabilities no one else has.

[we vs us]

I think it's fair to say that companies as large as BP and ExxonMobil and their peers distort the market quite a bit. But as I said earlier, they're also pretty much necessary in this day and age, as few to none of the smaller guys can come up with half a billion bucks to drill a well off in the deep water somewhere.

I have to say that I hadn't thought about the necessity of size.  I'm against these supermajors in drilling just as I am in finance, simply because I think their size DOES distort the market, and it also distorts the functioning of our democracy.  I've read enough William Gibson to know where our dystopian megacorporate future is headed.  Though you make a good point, that some of capital-intensive tasks that corporations specialize in require that sort of size.  

Gaspar:  is it possible that objections to how the market currently runs ISN'T based on jealousy or hatred, and that there're real concerns about how they function?  It's like you think the only possible objection is class rage when that's just obviously not true.  

[rwarn17588]

I have to say that I hadn't thought about the necessity of size.  I'm against these supermajors in drilling just as I am in finance, simply because I think their size DOES distort the market, and it also distorts the functioning of our democracy.  I've read enough William Gibson to know where our dystopian megacorporate future is headed.  Though you make a good point, that some of capital-intensive tasks that corporations specialize in require that sort of size.  

Gaspar:  is it possible that objections to how the market currently runs ISN'T based on jealousy or hatred, and that there're real concerns about how they function?  It's like you think the only possible objection is class rage when that's just obviously not true.  

That's a very good point. I was very uneasy of all the bank mergers during the late 1980s and 1990s for reasons that are readily apparent today.

You can see the same sort of analogy with specific-stock risk and also 90 percent of a crucial food crop coming from one genetic line. If you have a big downturn (the former) or catastrophic disease (the latter), that lack of diversity of sources can have devastating and far-reaching consequences.

[Townsend]

Huge step back:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37841204/ns/disaster_in_the_gulf/

Oil gushing at spill site after vent damaged
Cap removed after sub hits vent; 2 cleanup workers die in separate events

[Cats Cats Cats]

There goes Obama driving the sub again.

[Conan71]

Now why is this even relevant?  I'm calling a 15 yard penalty for piling on:

"Gunshot death reported
The deaths reported Wednesday were not tied to the containment operation. The Coast Guard said the workers had been involved in cleanup operations but that their deaths did not appear to be work related.

One death was a boat captain who died of a gunshot wound, a Coast Guard spokesman said. Further details were not immediately available."

[Gaspar]

There goes Obama driving the sub again.

It's Bush's Fault!

[heironymouspasparagus]

Again, your words not mine.  And out of context.

I have very specifically mentioned BP and ExxonMobile as being two of the giants in desperate need of adult supervision.  That leaves the others specifically mentioned who do have their acts together to a much greater degree.  Oils like Shell, Chevron, Conoco, Sunoco, Sinclair.  These have consistently been much more responsible corporate citizens.  And yes, this is from about 23 years direct experience with all of them, plus a few of the "smaller" ones like Valero - not really small.

I would submit that you don't really "compete" selling your gas.  It is more of a case of "here's what you will be paid, take it or leave it."  And that collusion between the big oils has been well documented and institutionalize for about a century (a little over that, actually).  And small producers have always had a market where they can sell anything and everything they can produce.  The only hold back has been when they chose not to sell when the price went a little too low (like around 1998/1999 when oil was as low as about $9 a barrel.)  But that was not due to any real "competition" in the market.  You have been there long enough to know that.  Good to hear that you are doing well with that!

Some of your description of your business model sounds kind of like the chicken farmer business model - the help from the bigger company to get your smaller outfit going.  NG is your chicken.  It's a good model.  (Except for one little thing in the chicken business related to the "other" output.)

If you want to experience the real thrill of "competition", get a few oil wells and start refining/marketing your own.  And watch the bigger guys watch you until you start to really grow.  There is no room there for you.

No bitterness, just recognition of reality.  I'm working hard to become one of those billionaires.  Definitely don't want the golden goose to be killed before (or after!) I get there.  Just hope I can avoid the temptations of "ill-gotten gains" when I get there.  Human nature being what it is, I probably would be at risk as any billionaire.  Every over the age of about 35 gets banged around in the economy from time to time, but "healing" is ongoing and bitterness is counterproductive and uses up energy better spent elsewhere.

In great part, you are just repeating what I said about big capitalistic monopolism versus the smaller capitalist economy. 

Software?  What field is it in?  (used for?)  Anything useful in engineering field?? (professional curiosity)
You definitely haven't gotten Microsoft's attention yet.  You have a niche and I hope you can maintain that as long as you want.

[Gaspar]

Day 70.  Obama accepts international assistance.

The identities of all 12 countries and international organizations were not immediately announced. One country was cited in the State Department statement -- Japan, which is providing two high-speed skimmers and fire containment boom.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/US-accepts-international-apf-4104246595.html?x=0&.v=2

OH, and because we are morons Venezuela's legislature has voted to nationalize 11 oil rigs owned by the US firm Helmerich & Payne.

The rigs, located in Monagas, Anzoategui and Zulia states, will be taken over by state oil giant Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), the official news agency AVN said.

AND

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)–Executives from oil and gas companies on Monday concluded an hour-long meeting with U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar without securing promises from the government to lift a deepwater-drilling moratorium imposed after a disastrous BP PLC (BP) oil spill…

“Numerous operators told Secretary Salazar that they were in the final stages of moving rigs, deepwater rigs out of the Gulf of Mexico and to West Africa and the Middle East,” according to a person familiar with the matter. “We were frankly disappointed at the lack of serious attention that was paid by the Department of the Interior on the horrible economic impact that the Department of Interior’s policies are having on the industry and on communities along the Gulf Coast.”


Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/wsj-oil-jobs-start-moving-overseas-97385034.html#ixzz0sL547YzA

[we vs us]

Day 70.  Obama accepts international assistance.

The identities of all 12 countries and international organizations were not immediately announced. One country was cited in the State Department statement -- Japan, which is providing two high-speed skimmers and fire containment boom.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/US-accepts-international-apf-4104246595.html?x=0&.v=2

FactCheck.org says:

"Contrary to reports such as the one on "Fox & Friends," international assistance has been accepted. To date, 25 countries and four international organizations have offered support in the form of skimming vessels, containment and fire boom, technical assistance and response solutions, among others. A chart provided by the State Department shows that as of June 23 five offers had been accepted and 50 were under consideration — including multiple offers from a single country or entity. One offer had been declined: France offered a chemical dispersant that is not approved for use in the United States. President Barack Obama described this process in his May 27 press conference:

   

Obama, May 27: The job of our response team is to say, okay, if 17 countries have offered equipment and help, let's evaluate what they've offered: How fast can it get here? Is it actually going to be redundant, or will it actually add to the overall effort — because in some cases, more may not actually be better. And decisions have been made based on the best information available that says here's what we need right now. It may be that a week from now or two weeks from now or a month from now the offers from some of those countries might be more effectively utilized.

Each offer must be compliant not only with the needs outlined by the Unified Command, but also with U.S. safety regulations. The Unified Command provided us with this statement and information:

   

Unified Command, June 22: Those offers of international assistance that were not accepted, while greatly appreciated, did not meet the operational requirements of the Unified Command. These offers have not been declined because they may be needed in the future as response strategies change. Some challenges in accepting these offers included:

        * Equipment failed to meet US requirements/specifications (i.e. dispersant not on approved list/containment boom made of non-approved material)
        * Contingencies placed on the offers proved logistically impracticable when compared to other sources.
        * In one instance, the offering country's export laws prohibited delivery of the assistance
        * Contingencies placed on the offers made it difficult for the Unified Command to meet the contingency

Also, all offers, except for a few, come with a serious price tag. The Associated Press compared these offers with recent aid that the U.S. gave to some of these countries. The AP reported:

   

Associated Press, June 18: U.S. disaster aid is almost always free of charge; other nations expect the U.S. to pay for help.

    "These offers are not typically offers of aid," said Lt. Erik Halvorson, a Coast Guard spokesman. "Normally, they are offers to sell resources to BP or the U.S. government."

Reports claiming that the federal government has refused help are not only incorrect — foreign assistance has been utilized — but are also misleading: purchasing resources and expertise is vastly different from accepting "foreign aid."

Here's a State Department pdf of all of the offers to date, whether they've been accepted, and whether the offers require reimbursement. 

[Hoss]

FactCheck.org says:

"Contrary to reports such as the one on "Fox & Friends," international assistance has been accepted. To date, 25 countries and four international organizations have offered support in the form of skimming vessels, containment and fire boom, technical assistance and response solutions, among others. A chart provided by the State Department shows that as of June 23 five offers had been accepted and 50 were under consideration — including multiple offers from a single country or entity. One offer had been declined: France offered a chemical dispersant that is not approved for use in the United States. President Barack Obama described this process in his May 27 press conference:

   
Each offer must be compliant not only with the needs outlined by the Unified Command, but also with U.S. safety regulations. The Unified Command provided us with this statement and information:

   
Also, all offers, except for a few, come with a serious price tag. The Associated Press compared these offers with recent aid that the U.S. gave to some of these countries. The AP reported:

    Reports claiming that the federal government has refused help are not only incorrect — foreign assistance has been utilized — but are also misleading: purchasing resources and expertise is vastly different from accepting "foreign aid."

Here's a State Department pdf of all of the offers to date, whether they've been accepted, and whether the offers require reimbursement. 

Oh, but all these involve facts.  A lot of people with the ODS don't really care much about those.