BP oil spill

Eera, is there anything done about the immediate environmental impact done from mining. I mean its great that they are saving topsoil, but that does nothing to solve the issues of salinity that topsoil removal causes in the hundreds of KM vicinity, an impact that lasts for 100's of years.

What about the habitats that are compromised, planting even 3 new trees for every one felled (not exactly a mining things as such but Im still using it as an example) does nothing to help the local animals who rely on hollows for breeding. Something a new tree wont develop for at least 30 years if at all.

oh and firetom,

my bad for making what I wrote all seem so pessimistic, I was just giving examples of how things can go bad, I should of used some good examples, like how most good rehab centres are successful because they recognise that behaviour change cannot occur alone, there is a need to take the person away from the environment and influences.

When done in the right way, it works. people can change and do the right thing. Its just that things like attempting to only 'raise awareness' (which was my original gripe) wont do squat.

You guys confuse me in a way especially when it comes to balance. Why are you placing animal and plant life above human life? I'm not saying to place it beneath us, but not above being equal to us.

How are humans becoming masochists and taking huge sacrifices to better a forest or an animal anything other than being unbalanced and defying our nature? What next, are we going to start condemning carnivores for being carnivorous? Like if a cat doesn't eat meat they die and whenever I see a vegan try to make their cat a vegan because it's peaceful or compassionate or civilized I call it abuse, attempted murder, and I'm ready to act.

Yes, I know that sounded really off topic so I'm going to get to the point...

Without the hard working people doing their trades and taking huge risks our societies, way of life, and vital things that keep us alive like food, medicine, utilities, etc. would vanish without their work in this industry. How can anyone place the earth's crust or any other environmental issue (that is only given value at all through our perceptions BTW) above the beings that have given it it's value?

I would just like to hear how this approach #1 makes sense, #2 isn't destructive in it's own way, and how #3 it's even feasible because I'm not on board for that much change, know I wouldn't survive without such industries, and think I have several million in my school of thought in terms of such matters.

Someone enlighten me please...

can't help it but somehow someone in here sounds like fit for BP's propaganda machinery.

Greenpeace is doing one thing: raising awareness. I do a similar thing. If that gives you a sting, just don't listen and continue the same way as if nothing would be going on.

No need to get exited at all. Just them green Hippie pipe dreams, dreaming and talking of a "better world"... in the future... just like old people talk about a better place... in the past.

So, no worries - if that changes at some stage, let me know. In the meantime I continue doing things my way.

WE - true, the trees need a lot of time growing back and the habitat to restore fully takes as long... but it's a lot better than nothing, would you not agree?

You know it really doesn't matter what you do, unless you have doubts it being... the 'right' thing.

You'll figure it out by yourself I guess.

Firetom, I was just asking a question, not belittling the efforts taken that have been mentioned.



well actually, the environment has great importance other than perceptive and recreational qualities. If where viewing things from an anthropocentric world view,

removal of topsoil creates erosion problems in a 300km radius. This erosion leads to the groundwater table being closer to the surface which in turn leads to salination. SO now you have infertile land that is salty, which stops food production. salinity does not stay isolated but it creeps, effecting even greater areas.

Victoria has huge topsoil problems all because of the Gold mining activities in Bendigo in the last 2 hundred years.

In Australia salinity has a big impact on cattle farming. Cattle is one of Australia's biggest industries if it fails then there is no money for medicines or utilities.

Poor biodiversity in animal life leads to a devastating increase in destructive pest species, plants as well as animals which also impacts farms.

Strip mining, while also preventing forest fires also created erosion which can cause landslides, poor environmental strategies as well us unmaintainable water pipes led to the landslide in New South Wales which buried the town of Thredbo.

I mean I could continue on and on and on. its the self righteous attitude that humans are the ONLY important thing on this planet that has lead to most of the environmental disasters we have faced.

Not to mention as an outdoor educator my income and industry is based entirely on the environments well-being.

Wow, I'm horrible at communicating Woodland Apple!

What I mean is it putting the environment ABOVE those perceiving the essentially transient phenomena taking place around them.

I can understand the environment and human beings being treated with equal importance, I don't understand the land being above people or people above the land because it throws off a fundamental balance of hardships and general intrinsic value.

Everything you have stated I agree with 100%, but also believe that with moderation and treating the land as we should treat people makes more sense than putting a halt to all reaping of natural resources. With great risks I mean accidents can happen not only to people, but the earth equally.

Just putting everything to a halt is catastrophic to us, being glutenous and overly indulgent is bad for the land and each of those comes back to bite the perpetrator, however with the correct balance mistakes and accidents occur so an acceptance of cause and effect that lay outside the realm of probability is not only essential to pushing forward, but also to morale and the human psyche as a whole.

I hope that makes it clear, I don't think humans are top of the food chain and never have, but I also don't think a tree or water has more of a right to life. I see it all as equal and without the other essentially meaningless in the dualistic, comparative existence in which we experience.

in an answer that is more to that point then, a camp ground I go to a lot is in danger of being closed. SO that the tree's there can be protected. the reason trees get first priority is that in the past they havnt recieved any,which means everything is out of balance to begin with. In order for this area to survive it needs no human interference for at least 10 years.

There are a lot of places in the world today that the environment need to come first so that we can begin to ammend mistakes made in the past. Even to the detriment of man. your ideal balance can only work if each aspect has equal balance to begin with, and where in the world today is that?

LOL @ WA! I now want your baby.

I just noticed Petroleum Pete. Robot Chicken always makes me happy.

what your saing essentially is that many places need another chernobyl? terrible human caused accident which made the place uninhabitable for people and has now been reclaimed by nature.

hmmm maybe we should tell the americans it was natures way of saying they should all leave the souothern states

I'm not capable of doing that... however...

Woodland Apple has put it in excellent words: the scale has been tipping in our favor long time ago and it's up to us taking decisions on a daily basis to restore the balance.

If a lifestyle is predatory and likely to push our host, endangering the continuation of our species, than it is stupid.

Thus, environmental protection is rather "smart selfishness" than anything else.

No other species on this planet has ever had as many opportunities to seriously damage the ecosystem in a way we have today. The planet is fine (I stand to it). It will continue to wobble around the sun - even after we're long gone. Most likely it will continue to have 'intelligent' life on its surface - even after we're gone.

It is more along the lines of: are we happy with what we leave behind? As long as we live in ignorance it is no problem. Only as soon as we enter empathy, compassion and awareness it becomes a topic.

We're starting out as empathic beings - all of us. There is no baby I have ever seen in my entire life that is not empathic and aware (in the limits of its own realm). Only as we grow ^up^, we learn how not to be empathic, aware and compassionate anymore.

So when you're talking about "enlightenment" - which kind are you referring to? The kind of "enlightenment" that sees everything being part of a temporary "reality" (a holographic universe happening somewhere inside your skull), that detaches from all material existence - but continues to cling on ego and personal profit, desire and is closing ones self to the community? Or do you refer to the "enlightenment" that sees everything as being part of a temporary reality, detaching from all material existence - and realizes that ego is an advisor, not a master; that empathy, compassion and awareness are intelligent tools, ensuring the peaceful continuation of our species in equilibrium with our fellow beings on this planet.

I stop here, as I repeat myself from thread to thread. Bottom line is: if one feels that everything is alright the way one does it and has no incentive to change any of it - then don't. Celebrate whatever is there to celebrate and see how far one gets.

Just out of curiosity: if something changes along these lines - whatever - then let us... let me know.

The oil spill has been a good thing - it was raising awareness. Now it's time to clean up the mess and hold those responsible in order to set an example ("trial - and error"). It needs to be made clear that this path is erroneous - and made undesirable for others to pursue.

The problem is - what most of us are ready to blur out -only because it's not in the media anymore, it doesn't mean it's not happening anymore. Oil is still gushing into the ocean...

*baffled, partly disgusted, but mostly confused* This is going to be a long one since no one is reading what I say and words/intent I never made seem to be in replies (like I'm shocked? this always happens here and no where else on the internet) to me so if I am wrong correct me, if not this is my response:

Um it's in the media everyday, I was actually the last person to mention updates on the latest development! Haven't heard if the hurricane that touched part of the gulf and went into Mexico pretty far from the site has made an impact yet or not since it happened yesterday, but that's just the first storm of the season.

If everyone wants to read more into what I'm saying than I am, feel free to which is all I see above and quite frankly I'm ready for it to happen every time because no one ever understands my points and takes what I write at face value save a few wonderful souls. My only point is that us humans are at a point where we are dependent on natural resources for survival regardless of who screwed up the balance we cannot change the past and there is a time to simply accept reality and try to make the right decisions in the present since we cannot predict the future or change the past.

Does that mean I don't care? No

Does that mean I don't think there is a lesson to be learned? No

Do I think that even with the most stringent controls accidents can happen? Yes

Do people need to go camping to survive? No

Do people need food, shelter, and and ability to provide those things for themselves? Yes

Am I going to listen to the ramblings of people having a fit wanting to boycott a product they wouldn't even be arguing with me if they didn't use plenty of it? No

Am I happy with what was left behind for me? No

Did I ask to brought into this world? No

Am I going to make the most of it regardless? YES

If anyone wants to have a fit and go attack people over an accident where they are already facing bigger repercussions than public opinion I'm pretty sure, yet don't live like cave men that sounds like hypocrisy from people who want to have it both ways. Just an observation and I don't understand your purpose since if you're on a computer, you live in the modern world, you spin fire... How is the blood not on your hands as well (or should I say oil) because the ball stops no where, I'm not the one going around condemning people because I understand accidents happen and if people didn't do their jobs I would be unable to provide for my survival and am a part of the series of events.

Does that make it any less horrible? No, but I do understand reality and until I see people literally practice what they preach I will have my opinion of "Well you just can't have it both ways" because it's illogical.

Good job with the enlightenment jokes FT when I wasn't using that word in such a context, good thing I don't get offended considering my religion and it seems I'm much further along in those fundamental principles as far as understanding and practicality so I don't need you to explain it thanks. I meant explain (enlighten: to help me understand like using it in the common sense) how your over compensation would do any more than harm people in vain looking at the reality of it all with the fact that regardless everything will live and die, all species at some point go extinct, and regardless of what happens energy cannot be created or destroyed.

For people against the ego and self serving you don't seem to get that without the ego it would all be meaningless and considering energy cannot be created or destroyed how is one form of transference any better than the other? I'm not very good at not listening to reason, truth, and reality so what I want to be enlightened to is how do you think things could be made right and prove to me it isn't a detriment to quality of life, survival, and wouldn't throw every system we have into chaos plus can you get the majority of 6 billion people to conform to it to even make it "plausible". If not it's all efforts made in vain, if so is the pay off worth the sacrifice.

That's the homework assignment and if anyone can make a reasonably believable response covering all of the basis and have it iron clad backed up I will change my stance on the topic, but until anyone can come up with a decent solution which hasn't happened thus far in the human time line by people for more experienced than ourselves I don't think I'll find it on a bulletin board.

That's all I've got to say and if anyone else wants to not get the point or listen to what I'm really saying that is their right (regardless of how many words are being put in my mouth that I never thought or said). I'm not conforming to or praising ideals I know are in vain, futile, and nothing more than half thought through idealist views to fit in with any subculture of people.

Tell them to leave the least environmentally damaged states and pack into the more damaged ones?

(Runs and locks the doors to Oklahoma)



Maybe she's capable of enlightening you



Yea I still want WA's baby.



Has anyone considered that maybe this is the way things are meant to be? The only time we as a planet, species, culture, ect. really changes business as usual, is when we are faced with annihilation!

Human beings embody the planet. We are it's conscience, the talking, thinking part of it, one inseparable from the other. We evolved on a self destructive and constructive planet.

If this planet was never pressured to the point to which it could no longer support life, we would remain here forever. We may not be capable of leaving for another planet and taking the lessons learned with us yet, but we are capable of preserving the DNA of all life so that one day it can be brought back. Right now along the gulf that is what many people are doing. preserving what they can so that when the damaged is done, we can repair it.



Too right!

Unrelated, but I think we are all asking the same question. How much is too much. Will we take too much before we can find another place/way to live?

do I care you care or not? no

Was this emotional sentiment FT?

Well FT if you want to spread your views to enough people to be a drop in the bucket maybe you should about what other people think...



I'm not going to stop you from wasting your effort (and can't), it's your life and your choices, the most we can do in this world is control ourselves. Life is way better when we truly understand and accept this fact, it really is.

You want to go on and on about compassion, empathy, and awareness, then say you don't care? That's an oxymoron if it's true, the response though makes me think it isn't sincere. I care a lot and regardless of how other people take onto it, my methodology, or the side of logic I choose the explore, right or wrong, I'm not going to deny such or then I compromise my own words without help from others interpretations.

Like, wow...

ahhh.... perhaps like the Miyazaki anime 'Valley of the Winds'...

It is my belief that we humans are here on this planet to work it and tend to it. That means having wisdom guide our actions. An ethos based on the idea that we are equal to animals and plants does not equate with the use of wisdom. An ethos that says that men are so superior to the animals and plants of this world that we shouldn't care what we do with them is also not based on wisdom.

What we humans need to do is strike a balance. We should be conservationists of the natural world but we should not be afraid to use the resources of the world either.

We must condemn the irresponsible actions of BP and all companies that seek to save money by taking higher risks. However we must also enable them to utilize the resources of this world responsibly. Companies that utilize finite resources (like oil) should, and at the very least, in their own self interest of preservation strive to safely extract their products (be it oil, coal, other minerals etc...) in a way that will not waste human lives, endanger their surroundings, or waste their product.

In fact oil companies should be investing money in alternate energy methods to stretch out their 'life-span'. It would be foolish to charge ahead and tap all the natural resources and run yourself out of business.

Placing the blame for what has happened on any form of administration doesn't do us any good. Seeking criminal charges for those responsible for the spill really doesn't accomplish anything either. (Liability is another matter all together.) I feel that instead of seeking criminal actions against BP they should be forced to not only 'foot the bill' for the clean up (without the right to recover the cost by passing the buck on to the consumer) but also force them to fund research for safer rigs and alternate energy.

This will accomplish both goals of enforcing responsible use of finite resources and furthering alternative energy (which as stated before will ensure that BP and other oil companies are actually around longer and have a higher profit margin in the long run).

hey, I do.

one last question you missed.

Will I do everything in my power to limit mine and others footprint on this earth?

EoN, I do understand your point, and where you are coming from yet change does not occur through bemoaning the realities of life. and you should Never let it get in the way of a good story or internet rant.

Yet dont you want more? dont you desire a better world?

change requires vision, and a drive to exceed in the face of adversity. It also requires motion. Take a car, it cannot change direction without a bit of forward movement to begin with. I understand the hypocritical nature of most of these posts, and EoN; you are a good person and do good things, but dont you want more?

I do. I guess Im selfish this way.

@ heed: would you think that the industry has many incentives to prop up?

all: I completely agree that accidents do happen and that it will be difficult and unjust to prosecute them unless they directly violated regulations. But there still is the term of "gross negligence" - and I'd guess this happened here.

Fact of the matter is that if they were not required to have a (working) "backup plan" installed, they should be now - before resuming operations.

It is not as if these companies wouldn't have bad records already and as if seepage isn't happening elsewhere... there is necessity of 'cleaning up', preventive measures being taken and it's long overdue.

In the meantime you could install the BP oil spill plug in for Firefox here

WA: Vision for a "better future" requires realizing the present as ... not perfect. Enlightened beings perceive all present as perfect, semi-enlightened beings want to make the present become the future...