Time to nationalize BP's US Oil Assets?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Sdashiki, May 24, 2010.

  1. Sdashiki macrumors 68040

    Sdashiki

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Location:
    Behind the lens
    #1
    Is there legal recourse like this available to the American public?

    Can we nationalize (i.e. take away from BP and like a little kid stealing the better big wheel on the playground, laugh as you use it while they watch...a tear beginning to well up) the 22,000 or so BP controlled oil/gas wells that just happen to mostly be on Federally controlled lands?

    I dont see how the American public, except maybe those with BP stock who should have sold it by now anyway ( :p ), could be against such a thing. If BP can't do it right, we will find someone who can.


    http://www.propublica.org/feature/epa-officials-weighing-sanctions-against-bps-us-operations
     
  2. barkomatic macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Location:
    Manhattan
    #2
    I don't think it will be necessary--BP is already on the hook for many billions of dollars and is suffering a tremendous PR disaster.

    Anyway, so what if we did sanction them? There will still be oil spills since other oil companies will step in to take their place. As long as we are dependent on massive amounts of oil we have to live with the consequences. In a way, everyone who drives a car is responsible for this oil spill.
     
  3. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    Well if you pay the fair market price for those assets I see no issue.
     
  4. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #4
    Agreed. There is no reason to start acting like Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.
     
  5. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #5
    Before acting the USA might want to check who some of the major shareholders of BP are. The Saudi and Kuwaiti royal families both have big stakes.
     
  6. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #6
    I have read the news and seen it on TV and it is pretty clear that media is not reporting a 10th of the truth.
    Never mind the fact that most of the problems that they are running into is the fact that no one has tried any of these things in 5000ft of water.

    Also remember nationalization of it is a quick way to piss off other companies world wide and drive even a greater distrust of the government.

    From what I am reading and what I know of deepwater rigs BP is doing everything that they can to solve the problem. The delays are partly that this is a lot of brand new stuff they are trying. Also it is basically construction which a minor thing can really slow down things down a few days. It requires a lot of things to be together and to work.
     
  7. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #7
    Anyone hear anything about RUssia saying it would be easier to just blow the well with explosives? That would ruin the well for BP, but screw em.
     
  8. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #8
    Russia aren't planning to use just ordinary explosives. Their research indicates the heat from a nuke would weld it shut.

    I don't know about you, but that makes me a little bit nervous :eek:
     
  9. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #9
    I am pretty sure the well is already ruined for BP. There is no way they will recover that much out of the well in terms of cost. Personally I think the reason the Russian idea is not being actively looked at is it is long shot and has a the potential of making the problem a lot worse instead of better.

    Currently none of the things they are attempting can make things any worse.
     
  10. Mac N Tosh macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    Location:
    SouthShore
    #10

    Only if you buy up its assets comrade...:mad:
     
  11. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #11
    There is some question about the overall impact of Corexit.
     
  12. unid macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Location:
    Traffic_island_bay
    #12
    Yes I wonder why BP are suppressing the publication of their reasons for refusing EPA directives regarding Nalcos' product.
     
  13. benthewraith macrumors 68040

    benthewraith

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #13
    As someone from Florida, I'd rather have oil on our beaches than a nuclear bomb detonated in the Gulf.
     
  14. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #14
    Because they know there will be no consequences for doing so.
     
  15. Sdashiki thread starter macrumors 68040

    Sdashiki

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Location:
    Behind the lens
    #15
    Id rather this disaster ends in an instant than over the course of the next effing decade. While NIMBY for anything nuclear warhead like, youd be surprised how much "ordinance" are just off the Atlantic and Caribbean coasts in FL>

    But, silver lining: eventually when all the oil is dispersed across the world's oceans, waterways, seas and everything inbetween...science will have a new way of studying ocean currents and the like.

    By testing the nasty fingerprint like chemical makeup of this Gulf crude.
     
  16. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #16
    Too late for that. They're still finding oil in Prince William Sound, and that's been 20 years. :mad:
     
  17. unid macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Location:
    Traffic_island_bay
    #17
    Jean-Michel Cousteau was apparently turned away by the USCG, however ABC News have footage of him diving into the toxic soup. The best 'silver lining' that can be hoped for is it's a catalyst for change.
     
  18. Sdashiki thread starter macrumors 68040

    Sdashiki

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Location:
    Behind the lens
    #19
  19. oscillatewildly macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Location:
    23 Railway Cuttings
    #20
    No thank you.

    In answer to the thread title:

    Time to nationalize BP's US Oil Assets?

    Cheers,
    OW
     
  20. theITGuy macrumors 6502a

    theITGuy

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    chasing the ghost in the machine
    #21
    Yes it' time to take over BP. And the well closing job should be given to the US Military...I'm sure they can do it a lot sooner/better...

    -J.-
     
  21. Shivetya macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #22
    Let alone many Americans in the form of 401Ks



    No offense to the OP, but the suggestion is just stupid
     
  22. Sdashiki thread starter macrumors 68040

    Sdashiki

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Location:
    Behind the lens
    #23
    Because you say so? And it was a question, not a suggestion.
     
  23. opinioncircle macrumors 6502a

    opinioncircle

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    #24
    Well isn't it some form of communism right there?!! Government appropriating itself private resources..

    Seriously though, the government has been to easy on BP. As it seems to be on every inch with financial regulation, healthcare, and soon-to-be immigration reform.
     
  24. killerrobot macrumors 68020

    killerrobot

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #25
    I don't understand the leap from debarment to nationalization of a company.
    I also don't understand what the US would benefit from trying to nationalize an international company even if it's the US assets. Seems like it would just make more sense to tax the hell out of them and put bigger fines on them when they are not in compliance with regulations. Maybe everyone in the US should be getting an oil-subsidy check every year.
     

Share This Page