With the current BP crisis in the Gulf of Mexico becoming more catastrophic day by day, shouldn’t we, as Australians, be asking what safety precautions have the Departments, that control mining, insisted on, both in mainland Australia and offshore Australia.

This video mentions the recent Montara Oil Spill in the Timor Sea and alleges some quite worrying safety concerns that may or may not affect our environmental safeguards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkkMm4ZCTrk

In fact the American media are getting quite irate and asking some very pertinent questions.

These videos are also worth watching although they are quite disturbing. How can humans allow this to happen to wildlife and coastal communities?

http://edition.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/06/03/tsr.cooper.oil.on.birds.bpr.cnn

A Satellite view

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/oil-spill-video.html

So these videos beg some questions

What Department(s) are policing our miners?

Do their staff get wined and dined or taken to football games etc. that might give rise to a conflict of interest? Who is policing the law enforcers?

Do our oil wells have mandatory Accoustic Switches that allegedly would prevent a similar disaster to that in the Gulf of Mexico? If not, why not?

Can we trust any of the World’s Politicians, yes, even our own, to tell us the real truth, or, are they slaves to big oil's and mining's money?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBoBoJwLqBE&feature=related

More on the Montara spill

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montara_oil_spill

Isn’t it time we started asking some very serious questions…because the National Interest is not just the oil and gas, but the environment, animals and birds that a mistake like this can destroy forever?

Can we trust miners/shipping to get anywhere near our Great Barrier Reef?

What was the outcome here now that this story has departed the pages of our Newspapers?

http://www.theage.com.au/environment/coal-ship-at-risk-of-breaking-apart-20100405-rlwl.html

Was this too great a risk to take?

Opinionated2,
If you're after iron clad guarantee this doesn't happened here then you'll have to lobby 22 million Australians to forfeit all commodities made from oil

Individual....TY for your thoughts.

I'm certainly not after an iron clad guarantee as that is impossible. However, a disaster like this, which can never be totally repaired, surely should initiate an independent review to see that our checks an balances are in place.

Do we have a similar culture of, as this snapshot calls it, "ethical failure"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB9tx_wHZgM

And is it possible that the allegations made here are happening in Australia?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/sex-lies-and-oil-spills_b_564163.html

Do our rigs have accoustic switches and if not who is responsible for insisting they are installed? If they don't who allowed the oil companies to get away with not installing them, and why?

Surely, if we are "the clever country", a laughable name some seem to apply to us, we should learn from the mistakes made in other countries and make sure they don't happen here.

I would just like to point out the similarity of the platitudes and worthless assurances given by the oil industry to the platitudes and worthless assurances thrown at us by the far more dangerous nuclear industry. These greed driven miscreants cannot be trusted with our environment and wellbeing.

*These greed driven miscreants cannot be trusted with our environment and wellbeing.*

Ah, so lets just trust Govts to get things right, like install
pink batts without killing people. Your faith in Govt, is rather
foolish, Mikk.

Opinionated 2, indeed the Gulf of Mexico story is a tragedy, but
its more about human nature then anything else. It is nearly
impossible to legislate against all events caused by poor human
judgement and its usually poor human judgement that is responsible
for these debacles.

Its not a lack of resources that is the problem, the oil industry
throws near unlimited amounts of money at things. The investigation
will be interesting to see what is revealed, but in my experience,
when things go ok for too long, humans become complacent, start to
take stupid risks, until inevitably, disaster strikes and we learn
the hard way.

So I'll await the final outcome to make a judgement, but clearly
if the oil drillers want to keep going in deep water oil exploration,
they will have to have thought things through. Which BP clearly had
not. The financial community reckon it could cost them 40 billion
in lawsuits and damages, perhaps even bankrupt the company. So we'll
wait and see.

I didnt mention governments did I?
At least "we the people" are "supposed" to have some control over governments. Unlike these filthy rich corporations who are a law unto themselves and accountable to no one, until it is too late.

It is not a matter of governments "doing it better" it is a matter of "not doing it at all". As we have seen time and again from Bhopal to Chernyobl to now The Gulf there are some things that are just too dangerous and risky to do at all let alone let some greed driven scumbag of a company like BP do.

Mikk, you did not have to mention it, for that was the implication.
According to you, greed is the problem. Yet you the people elect
Govts with far less competence, as the evidence shows.

The fact is that we the consumer want oil for our cars and energy
to drive our computers. Exxon Valdez was not caused by complicated
technology, but once again by flawed judgement and complacency.
Planes crash all the time, for the very same reasons, ie pilot error.
So do cars, drunk drivers or whatever.

We know that indeed there are nuclear power plants operating safely
and oil is being drilled at even far greater depths then this one,
most of the time without hitch.

Perhaps we need a new technology focus. Perhaps NASA should stop
fooling around with missions to Mars etc and focus their expertise
on us doing what do do on this planet, more safely. If we are
going to drill at these depths, we need to have thought it through.
It's not as if the technology is beyond us.

Yabby
I thought you lot didnt trust the scientists. Now you want them to come up with new technology to keep the big oil companies raping the planet.
No technology will repair the coasts that are being fouled. No technology will repair Chernobyl. No technology will bring back the people killed at Bhopal.
Technology IS coming up with new and ever more efficient sustainable ways to get our energy but you dont seem to notice that.
Some oil, minerals etc must be seen as just too much trouble to be worth getting and I think this spill goes a long way to proving that. Have a look at the Niger delta and tell me oil companies give a s%&t.
Have a look at the filth and destruction from Canadias tar sands.

We have been lucky. Imagine this spill in Bass Strait or the Timor sea.

I stand with the residents of the Gulf Coast whose lives have been destroyed by this company and its reckless, penny pinching greed.

Oops Mikk, Chernobyl was caused by Govt, you the people.

Given that pipelines in the Niger delta are regularly tapped
into by the public, I'm sure its a mess. For when company
represantives go out in the field, they are shot at by
locals demanding money, as their Federal Govt won't give them
a fair share. Miners caught in political conflict, it happens
all the time.

You the consumer want oil for your car, you drive demand.
Stop driving, there won't be a need for drilling. Its your choice.

Obama has rightly called a 6 month stop to deep sea drilling,
until there is some clarity. But those screaming loudest against
his ban are in fact 20'000 Gulf Coast locals who depend on those
30 deep sea rigs for a living.

Your hatred of corporations is a little too evident Mikk, all
passion and no reason is not going to do it for you.

*These greed driven miscreants cannot be trusted with our environment and wellbeing.*
mikk,
Greed is not the motor for driving these oversupply industries, it's one of the links in the chain. Stupidity is the motor. How many more examples do we need before there is a majority of those who can see. Once we have that we can follow democratic guidelines. At this stage we need as a minority, force these morons to pull up. By morons I mean those intelligent educated people who always come up with better & brighter ideas for more growth, better health, better education, higher productivity.... the list goes on. I have yet to witness one of those intelligent people put forward & endorse curbing the greed driven Harvey Norman type miscreant consumers.

Just saw on Tele that BP spent $50 million on a TV apology. if that ain't the clearest example to-date of how out of touch these people are with reality I'll have crude oil for breakfast.
I mean there are people who are losing income because of this accident so why on earth aren't they getting a slice of those 50 mills ?

The Australian Maritime Safety Authority lists 14 ‘major’ oil spills since 1990. Australia could have been a lucky country but it’s always been run by second rate people (the dancing boys of pollutant industries) while the Australian community remains asleep at the wheel.

Filthy old tubs which fly the flags of convenience (including the heinous live export industry) continue to infiltrate and contaminate our shores. And why not when:

1. POPs: Australia remains a large part of the persistent organic pollutant problem (dioxins and furans), but definitely not part of the solution. Australia, together with the US and Canada, has obstructed all international negotiations in a bid to make sure they never had to change any legislation or policy.

2: The Precautionary Principle: Australia fought against the Precautionary Principle in every UNEP discussion in an attempt to weaken its impact.

3. The Basel Convention: Australia rejected developing countries when they called for the Basel Convention to ban all exports of hazardous waste from rich to poorer nations.

When the Basel Ban was introduced, Australia refused to accept the consensus decisions of the international community. Fortunately, the ban amendment was adopted, although not without a serious struggle while Australia and the US plotted to use the World Trade Organisation to rule against the ban.

4. The Stockholm Convention: Australia, the US and Canada tried to make sure that they had no real obligations under the Stockholm Convention, but that developing countries did.

5. The London Convention: Australia (again with the US and especially Canada) tried to stop the international community from phasing out the dumping of industrial wastes at sea.

Australia was the only country in the world to submit a rejection of the phase out of industrial waste dumping. This move was made to allow an Australian mining company to continue dumping industrial waste beyond the phase out date.

And last year a secret aerial surveillance conducted in Perth, revealed 60 companies illegally dumping oil and toxic chemicals on land and in waterways yet only three companies were fined $250 for dumping oil which coated 800 metres of Bickley Brook.

Protagoras,
I can't recall where I saw or heard this but I do recall information that ships transiting via Torres Strait & the entire Great Barrier Reef are allowed an oil leakage of up to 400 litres from their propeller shaft seals.

All
Yabby, You....you....You....you grafted on Conservative leaning LIBERAL You...So the only alternative to a bad extreme is the opposite bad extreme?

Why is it that to non Labor posters to web sites never seem to understand things like proportion and that there are MULTIPLE alternatives between a problem and Armageddon.
Neither are issues absolutely two dimensionally Linear (straight line) with Conservative heaven one extreme and Demonic Communism at the other.

I posit that it is fear of personal lossthat limits perspective stasis.

If my memory serves me correctly wasn't there a whoops up north of us and we had to wait for equiptment to come from Singapore

In proportion the Gulf oil leak is smaller that the Exxon Valdez .
The problem is that it's now visible and threatens Where people (voters) are.
Keep in mind that serious safety breaches in oil refineries in the US over a three year period show that BP had 702 whereas all the others had 1 or 2 each. On its own these figures prove little except BP has a culture of perhaps short cuts.
It is interesting to note the in the finger pointing Haliburton is the end of the line.

All this tells me that deep water drilling should be rethought, in that instead of waiting untill a disaster to experiment. What are we up to plan #7? It should be mandatory to drilling permission that sufficient *resources* to plug a leak like this should be area local.
If it means slightly higher costing oil so be it. It is preferable to the destruction that is now inevitable.

PS that doesn't mean regulation for the sake of legislation

PS
All,
Will it happen in our world corner? It isn't a matter of if but when and how big will the disaster be...unless, we implement better safe guards.

One only needs consider the oops in the mining arena here and by good ole Aussie Corporations.
The limited liability Company was invented to facilitate investment but along with that came inadequate controls over the excesses in lack of responsibility.
The problem as I see it responsibility in corporations has become optional. We need to realistically evaluate can we continue to be shielded from the real cost of resources to our ultimate detriment?

*Just saw on Tele that BP spent $50 million on a TV apology. if that ain't the clearest example to-date of how out of touch these people are with reality I'll have crude oil for breakfast.*

Individual, sounds like you'll have to have crude oil for breakfast :)

I saw an interview on Bloomberg TV this afternoon, with Joe Biden,
US vice prez, for those who forgot.

There is indeed a whole lot being thrown at this, mandated by the
US Govt where required and BP are not flinching, paying for the lot.
So far, it seems that they have thrown about a billion at it,
so the advertising is just to keep the public like yourself informed
and the 50 million is small change.

BP was paying 1 million a day to hire the rig. Only an investiagtion
can show what really happened and whose flawed judgement is
responsible.

Anyhow, the first thing that Obama did was organise 20'000 paid
individuals to start helping with the clean up. Something like
1700 boats are involved too, so fishermen etc have an income.
All initial claims up to 5000$ have been paid to keep people going,
the rest will be sorted out later.

BP agreed to build some islands that were required, which cost them
175 million. Then Obama insisted that 2 relief wells were drilled
rather then 1, in case something went wrong. Thats another 100 million. The list goes on.

Interestingly Obama organised 100 of America's best brains in these
matters, to look over BPs shoulder, observe what they are doing
and see if other solutions can be tried. Apparently BP is agreeing
to everything, so they are fully aware that this could bankrupt
the company.

Biden reckons they have been deepwater drilling in the gulf for
20 years, so far without a problem, so people clearly became
complacent. BP own all the subs being used, so they clearly thought
that plan b would be enough, which it now shows is not the case.

There are a few differences in geotechnical detail, the main one being the nature of the oil itself. Less volatile oil will be more persistent, and we are lucky to have more volatile oil than America.

The Marine Safety Authority... If you looked into the matter you would find they were not obliged to lift a single finger in the incident, as no EPIRB was triggered and it wasnt related to the ships' engineers' qualifications.

Julia Gillard jumped the gun and said AMSA was doing an investigation, without knowing its actual role.

Protagoras,

Thanks for the information, it has been depressingly enlightening. I have been trying to look into it and would love any reference links to assist me.

I found this enlightening clip

BP Hearing -- Congressional Hearing on BP Oil Spill - Markey Q&A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyFGFxvhcxk&feature=related

It begs the question - What assurances do miners give to our Government Departments that have never been tested but on which an approval has been given?

Here is another link which refers to the disaster as Cheney's Katrina

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqs8Frb29Ek

This is also worth a watch although it starts a little weirdly

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-OrFMLLqJg&feature=related

I found the Politicians questioning quite informative...

Individual the following links (though cumbersome) may be helpful and thanks for your links Opinionated2 which I will peruse on returning home.

Australian states boast that they have broad and extensive laws implementing and exceeding IMO conventions on the laws of the sea but I believe that is only within three nautical miles of coastlines. Regulations beyond three nautical miles it appears is the responsibility of the Commonwealth government.

However, there are several international bodies, ratified by many countries, which regulate marine pollution outside coastal areas though it is evident that regional regulators such as our ‘esteemed’ government agencies will remain impotent while economics and poor governance continue to prevail over law enforcement. The few polluters that are prosecuted in any mining industry in this nation are permitted to continue operating, despite histories of non-compliance.

Though I am not all that conversant with the details, these links provide a staggering array of Conventions set down to prevent marine pollution, however, the author in the first link writes that there are only a limited number of legal provisions dealing with pollution from offshore installations that can be found in international conventions.

WA’s premier, Colin Barnett continues to override EPA environmental impact assessments so it’s ’drill baby drill’ in the state of WA despite the EPA recently advising the Premier that carbon emissions in WA will rise by 70% within a few years. But then, the Precautionary Principle must not obstruct megalomaniacs who believe they can continue bludging off the environment with impunity.

http://www.customscentre.canberra.edu.au/librarymanager/libs/17/Marine_Pollution_part1.pdf

For ships:

http://www.imo.org/conventions/contents.asp?doc_id=678&topic_id=258#7

Years ago I despaired of the human preference for profit over safety in transporting oil by sea where spills so often occur. That despair was deepened by the actual drilling of oil wells in the sea, and now the BP rig explosion has vindicated my disgust at human irresponsibility.

Nuclear power stations are considered to be an unacceptable risk in Australia because the nuclear profiteers have not yet persuaded us that nuclear residue is safe. We have seen some shameful nuclear disasters and heard of others that had been hushed up. Because the people took action to make their views known in the 1960s, when many suburbs declared themselves nuclear-free zones, Australia still holds out for common sense.

Why have we not done the same with oil? Perhaps because its disadvantages were so deliberately obscured by mass-consumption marketers. Oil, that lubricant of the global economy, is the basis of so many coveted products that we didn't even ask whether anyone had worked out how to make it safe. Now we know they hadn't.

It is all been so comfortable: the price of a barrel of oil broadcast daily with the stock exchange report, every rise of a point of a cent making an unimaginable profit for a few. How convenient it is for them -- and, let's admit it, their mum and dad shareholders -- that most people avert their eyes to the fatal consequences of unsafe oil drilling and transportation - until it's in their own back yard. Oil at sea is as dangerous to peace and health as uranium and plutonium.

Many threads in this forum say the people hold the power to produce a cleaner, greener future and stop this exploitative pollution. Of course they do, but too many of the people are just as selfish and greedy as those who feed off them.

If not, why are they not using their collective power to stop the rot, instead of looking for a political Superman to tell them it's ok to rort the planet?