The Gulf is Screwed

According to the NY Daily News (about as conservative a news source as you can find), the US government is no longer going to rely on BP's Gulf leak estimates. It's mind numbing that the Federal government ever did rely on BP's numbers. This might be an indication that the administration wants to hold BP's feet to the fire when it starts fining the oil giant. Any fines will be based on the total amount of oil leaked. The company's estimates have been embarrassingly low since the Deepwater Horizon rig first caught fire, and have come up against public sector and academic numbers from day one. With the end of the leak nowhere in sight, and the relief well far from being a sure thing, nobody really seems to know what to do. BP has only been collecting roughly half of what is leaking with a new "top hat" apparatus, if the new Federal estimate is anywhere near accurate. That would be hopeful news, but the new Federal estimate is that more than 1 million gallons a day is flooding into the Gulf of Mexico. BP's silly and obviously self serving statement late last month that the leak's size was roughly 210,000 thousand gallons a day seems to have convinced nearly everyone to stop taking them seriously. Meanwhile, the American people are beginning to see the repercussions of unregulated deep water drilling.

I'm pissed, but I don't know who to blame. I'm betting big oil lobbyists are at the root of the problem, but that's just my knee jerk reaction. Sooner or later I'm going to have to try and post a calm rant explaining why I distrust lobbyists. One way or another, someone has to be held accountable for this:

Live video by Ustream

Want to have some dirty fun? Play with this, and keep in mind that the Exxon Valdez spilled, best case scenario, about 11 million gallons. The USGS low ball estimate, as of this posting, is clearly out of date. We've already beaten the pants off that number with the Deepwater Horizon catastro****.

Private Space Flight

I'm going to have a hard time putting this into perspective (that's going to have to come in a later post). Spacex, the private space flight company, successfully launched their Falcon 9 rocket into earth's orbit Friday afternoon. For an account of the launch, check out spaceflightnow.com's blow by blow. The guiding principle behind privately funded space programs is that free market competition will help to advance human space exploration. Still, nobody is pretending that these sort of enterprises would be possible without NASA's huge body of work and expertise. Burt Rutan gave a TED Talk a while back about the potential of private space flight.

A Series of Tubes

There seem to be a lot of misconceptions as to what the internet really is. Some people treat it as a commodity to be traded, sold or brokered. Others see it as a "cloud" of data. I see it as the information superhighway. The internet, from its inception, has been part of our nation's infrastructure. It now extending beyond us, and is a part of the global infrastructure.

Recently, there has been a large debate on "net neutrality." The term is not very well understood, and to make matters worse, it has been intentionally obfuscated and adopted by the opponents of the original concept. Although lately the opposition to net neutrality has settled on the term "net competition." Advocates of net neutrality are in favor of government regulation, via the FCC, to ensure that consumers and content providers would not be subject to corporate interests and control. These same corporations see the internet as a commodity to be sold, exclusively for their profit.

Now, I understand how important corporate freedoms are in this country. Yet history has shown us that when regulations are removed, these types of companies will gobble up everything that they can. I am referring to the deregulation of radio in the Telecommunications Act of 1996. When limits on the number of stations that a corporation could own were lifted, companies like Clear Channel and Infinity snatched up stations all over the country. This has resulted in a lack of diversity in programming and on air material. If history has taught us anything, it should be not to make the same mistakes twice.

Other aspects of our country's infrastructure, such as our highway system, our flight routes and electrical grid, are all subject to government regulation. This regulation means that we don't have to pay subscription fees to drive on the highway (you do pay taxes and tolls for upkeep though). Regulation also keeps our airplanes from flying into each other or into buildings. Regulation provides us with minimum wage, to make sure that those who are legally employed can't be exploited. It provides us with safe working conditions and standards of manufacture. Regulation sounds like a big scary word to a lot of people, but it is a constant force that effects our lives, most often for the better.

I don't wish to imply that capitalism is bad for our country, far from it. What I am saying is that without some watchful oversight, greed and human nature will take capitalism and twist it into theft, time and time again. It is in our best interest as a society, especially one that is becoming ever more digital, to keep the internet in a neutral position, where neither corporations have total control over it, nor where the government keeps them completely out of the equation. A balanced measure seems to be the most logical approach, and will protect the interests of as many people as possible. Freedom is never free, freedom comes with the price of vigilance.

Oil and Water

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is everywhere lately, and it's as potent as a political wrecking ball as it is an environmental one. As of a few months ago the Tea Party rallies were chanting "Drill baby, drill," and garnering all the more hatred for it. Even more surprisingly President Obama proposed increased offshore drilling about two months ago.* Despite what conspiracy theorists might say, I don't believe that anyone could foresee the oil spill in the gulf, even though the eventuality of such spills is a harsh and clear reality of oil drilling operations.

What I find odd in this whole scenario is where the blame falls. Sure, BP is getting blamed, but it seems to me, that the really harsh criticisms are going to Obama. That's not really a fair judgement for people to make. Presidents accept a lot of blame by nature of their office, but it's not as if Obama caused the rig to explode, he can't help it if the numerous attempts to alleviate the leak have failed, he really can't do much more than throw money and manpower at it. Perhaps people don't feel that it's enough. As a self-proclaimed "rabid environmentalist" I would love to see a solution come forward, but the reality is that this is a massive spill and clean up will take a long time.

What doesn't need to take a long time is to close off the flow of oil. The primary failure here seems to be that BP wants to capitalize on the oil, instead of taking steps to shut off the flow. From day one I wondered why we couldn't just send down a "bunker buster" (low yield tactical nuclear warhead) and fuse the hole shut. If that's politically unfeasible, a large amount of high explosives could have a similar effect. Going beyond blowing the leak shut, I can't help but feel that there are still a large number of fairly low tech options open to us.

Technical data on the leak would be helpful, what is the rate of flow, what pressure is the oil being released at, what are the relevant dimensions of the equipment on the sea floor? I have seen that BP turned to the public for suggestions to aid with cleanup and shutting off the flow, and I'm sure that there are some pretty good, inventive ideas out there, but wouldn't this extra data help those with a bit more engineering experience determine an effective solution?

My point is this, the whole political and corporate mess seem to be getting in the way of effective solutions. Political careers shouldn't take a precedent over the health of our seas, nor should saving face. For the present, oil is a necessary part of our nation's livelihood, but these games that we play in the interest of oil are excessive and dangerous. Our focus should be on the environment which is more necessary to our continued survival than any capital or fuel gained from a failed well. If and when the industry has taken appropriate measures to ensure the safety of their drilling operations, and I mean modern measures, not measures that have been in use since the 70's, they know where to look to find oil.

*He has since banned new offshore drilling.

Fired Up

It took a while to find a blog title that we both agreed on. I wanted to find one that gave us wiggle room.

On this blog we'll post well thought out opinions, opinions that cover a range of subjects. Current events, political theories, futurist speculation, and the occasional bit of cultural criticism, all these have a place here. It wasn't easy to find a blogger URL that reflected those ideas, at least not a free one. But here we are.

My hope is that the content that ends up on this site can stand up to critical thinking. If it can't, hopefully we'll earn a readership who will let us know. I believe the quickest path to a healthy world view is to subject your deepest held opinions and beliefs to criticism. By doing this while being intellectually honest, and emotionally a little detached, you can come to a fuller, richer worldview.

This is called being open minded. That's a phrase far to many people misunderstand. Being open minded does not mean you believe whatever your told, it does not mean you're willing to take important ideas at face value. It means you subject ideas and concepts to scrutiny.

That scrutiny can take the shape of conversations with friends, self reflection, and even large scale debates. The great promise of platforms like blogger, typepad, and wordpress are that they let laymen voice their opinions, and receive feedback from their peers. I'm enthusiastic about this project, and if you've managed to stumble across this obscure first post, I hope you are too.