ENVIRONMENT

A Nasty Spill

Investigating the massive oil leak in San Francisco Bay.

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: newsweek whitewash @ 11/23/2007 12:28:28 PM

    The "ship's pilot" as you describe him was NOT an employee of the ship's owners or under their control in any way. These ships are REQUIRED to give the wheel to a "harbor pilot" who is indirectly working under the control and oversight of the local government harbor commission. He was indeed repeatedly cited for carelessness and ran another ship aground only last year--and still kept his job. When the Coast Guard boarded the vessel just after the spill, Mr. Cota had left the ship and was not located for about 26 hours when he was then tested for alcolhol and drugs--and found "clean." This stinks and worse yet, Newsweek has skirted these facts in their "investigation!"

  • Posted By: jrubz @ 11/15/2007 9:33:44 PM

    Another shining example of heavy handed government responses to legitimate disasters....Even if the oil company operating the ship didnt want to deal with it the Coast Guard should have been all over it before the oil was allowed to spread out...or where was the FWC, EPA and DERM?
    Writing tickets to boaters for operating without flareguns, and hasseling over fish sizes according to locals.

  • Posted By: jrubz @ 11/15/2007 9:32:47 PM

    Another shining example of heavy handed government responses to legitimate disasters....Even if the oil company operating the ship didnt want to deal with it the Coast Guard should have been all over it before the oil was allowed to spread out...or where was the FWC, EPA and DERM?
    Writing tickets to boaters for operating without flareguns, and hasseling over fish sizes according to locals.

  • Posted By: PTMACP @ 11/14/2007 1:24:53 PM

    Bunker oil IS fuel. It is what many ships burn to make steam to drive the propellers which makes the ship move through the water so that they can get to where they want to go. And you write what about the gulf of mexico? What about it? Are you saying that we don't drill in the gulf of mexico because the environmental lobby has prevented it? You need to get out more.

    • Posted By: milstr @ 11/15/2007 9:59:03 AM

      Great explanation. Maybe you should captain a ship so this doesn't happen in the future. Let me guess, you're voting for Hilary aren't you? Anyway the banter has been fun and no harm meant.

  • Posted By: caser22 @ 11/15/2007 9:23:29 AM

    that is just stupid. these kind of things shouldn't happen. the crew should have more people. or JUST GET RID OF SHIPS!

  • Posted By: caser22 @ 11/15/2007 9:20:34 AM

    well then it should be made sure of that everything on the ship is payed atention to so this won't happen as much of just GET RID OF SHIPS!

  • Posted By: PTMACP @ 11/14/2007 1:29:35 PM

    If the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was used to meet 100% of U.S. demand, it would last for 215 days under the low estimate, and 525 days or just 1.4 years if it contained 10.4 billion barrels.

  • Posted By: atausch @ 11/14/2007 10:48:56 AM

    Here a solution for the problem for a easy and fast cleaning the sea and the beach on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZ1C4XpFawo

  • Posted By: atausch @ 11/14/2007 10:47:32 AM

    Here a solution on youtube for easy and fast cleaning the sea and the beach: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZ1C4XpFawo

  • Posted By: milstr @ 11/13/2007 3:42:38 PM

    You're right it was a cargo ship not a tanker but what I read was that it was orignally thought to be fuel but was later determined to be "Bunker Oil". And as far as ANWR, there is more than a drop in the bucket. There has been talk about drilling there for the last 20 to 30 years. To bad we didn't start then. We might be closer to being self sufficient, which could have changed alot of other things as well. It's something to think about. Oh Ya, what about the Gulf of Mexico.
    Thanks for your kind words and Have a great day.

  • Posted By: PTMACP @ 11/13/2007 3:13:38 PM

    milstr, that's asinine. This ship wasn't a tanker. It was a container ship. The oil it spilled was it's own fuel. All ships carry fuel. So the idea that "transport from overseas" is to blame here is wrong. Second, if you think that we have to import oil becasue there isn't drilling in the ANWR, think again. There amount of oil there is a drop in the becket compared to what we demand.

  • Posted By: PTMACP @ 11/13/2007 3:13:05 PM

    milstr, that's asinine. This ship wasn't a tanker. It was a container ship. The oil it spilled was it's own fuel. All ships carry fuel. So the idea that "transport from overseas" is to blame here is wrong. Second, if you think that we have to import oil becasue there isn't drilling in the ANWR, think again. There amount of oil there is a drop in the becket compared to what we demand.

  • Posted By: PTMACP @ 11/13/2007 3:12:40 PM

    milstr, that's asinine. This ship wasn't a tanker. It was a container ship. The oil it spilled was it's own fuel. All ships carry fuel. So the idea that "transport from overseas" is to blame here is wrong. Second, if you think that we have to import oil becasue there isn't drilling in the ANWR, think again. There amount of oil there is a drop in the becket compared to what we demand.

  • Posted By: milstr @ 11/13/2007 1:41:14 PM

    It seems to me that if we could drill for our own oil (of which there are tons), without environmentalist interference, we wouldn't have to worry about the transport from overseas.

  • Posted By: milstr @ 11/13/2007 1:38:31 PM

    crumbrye, It seems to me that if we could drill for our own oil, without environmentalists getting in the way, we wouldn't have to rely on overseas transport of it.

  • Posted By: Skydog101US @ 11/13/2007 1:26:09 PM

    The perception that San Franciscans dislike anything government is way off base Johnpii, including your assumption that they dispise anything military. The entire bay area supports its military men and women, goes after the government when it continues to ignore its veterans. Yes, San Francisco may have come out early against the concept of the Iraq Oil war and the war itself, but they have been proven right - but never under any circumstances after any war, including Vietnam, did anyone denigrate the soldier or sailor who fought. (and the alleged incident of someone spittng on a soldier returning from Vietnam has never once been documented). If you read beyond what the government's spokes people on CNN and Fox tell you, you might, just might understand that point. What happens to any of us in our country happens to all of us. LIke it or not, you are part of the entire country, whether or not you disagree or agree with anyone else's political positions.

  • Posted By: johnpii @ 11/13/2007 12:01:52 PM

    I suggest we let "Frisco" clean up their own mess. Why should a government they despise and a branch of the military they despise even more lift one finger to help them wipe their a**.

  • Posted By: crumbrye @ 11/13/2007 11:22:01 AM

    One of the ways Oil corporations convince Americans that oil is the best energy source available is by insisting that current technologies guarantee the safest, cleanest, and most secure means for drilling and transporting oil. The public relations machine run by oil companies is so smooth, it has been successful at staving off government investment in renewable energy technologies, auto industry investment in more efficient automobiles, and attempts to block drilling in America's most serene natural habitats. Again and again we are all duped by this enormously powerful industry that acts as the perpetual victim while reaping the world's largest revenues in history.

    http://greenpieceblog.blogspot.com/2007/11/oil-spills-on-2-coasts.html

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse