The BP video can't be embedded from You Tube. The explosion occurred and BP's advertising stopped. Until. Today. That also goes for the petroleum industry in general. No ads. Hiding.

I believe the coverage by AP shows some of the issues clearly.  But. Only some of them.  BP's CEO can also look on You Tube no differently than I to understand 'what the issue' is exactly.

Everyone knows about CEOs.  The worst mistake a company can make is have their CEO on the air.  Why?  Because they are 'thinking' about their next bonus, not the tragedy at hand.  That's why.  And Mr. BP himself did exactly that, blaming issues of 'liability' on other venues with excuses to deflect costs from his bonus.

So much for appropriate reward systems.

BP probably had some commercial contracts as well so they decided to 'blow their wad' on an ad to help sooth the Americans. 

I just don't see this the same way of most people including the scientists involved. 

As the 'top hat' is placed on the 'drill hole' (must be a gentleman's game) the amount of oil being pulled directly off the rupture needs to be made known to the USA military and a proportional amount of chemical dispersant needs to be cut back. 

The issue with winds and visocity of the oil has to come into play to protect the ocean circulations, starting with the loop current.  The more oil dispersant added to the Gulf Waters the higher the oil 'content' in the water column.  That fact raises a lot of 'red flags' for me.  I realize that is a unique place to be as most scientists can't seem to grasp the tragedy waiting on a global scale as this diluted and thinner viscocity oil 'content' is spreading in a wider and wider range of waters. 

The oil will come into shore and if the shoreline is ready for the arrival it can be captured.  Oil can be swept up from the surface in largers amounts if the viscosity is 'normal' rather than diluted.  I can't say this enough.  It is completely wrong to continue to spread poisons in the ocean's water column and kill surface floral and fauna that is microscopic in size.

THEY  ARE  EASY  VICTIMS  TO  IGNORE  AND  NO ONE  IS  MEASURING  THAT.  NASA  NEEDS  TO  EXAMINE  ITS  EARLIEST  RECORDS  FOR 'Global'  ALGAL  BLOOMS  (baseline) AND  THE  AMOUNT  TODAY. 


It is a matter of knowing where we are going and 'not what to do.'  Microscopic organisms won't be resilient 'at all.'  Their 'tipping point' is not measureable and has never before been encountered.  It is just one of those 'things' that human insight  DOESN'T  ATTEMPT  TO  ESTIMATE.


So, I know for a FACT the scientists advocating chemical dispersants HAVE  IT  WRONG.  Big time.  Estimate the oil emitting from the rupture, estimate the damage, move the dolphins and seek to mitigate the coastal damge, BUT, I am warning any scientist that is seeking to estimate the ability to continue to add chemicals to ocean circulation.  It will be viewed by some if not a growing number of peers as completely foolish and imprudent.

"Corexit" is among the most toxic substances that can be used as an oil dispersant and it needs to be stopped.  Simply stopped.  Nothing difficult about this.  Simply stop it.
Any further use of this dispersant is irresponsible and I don't care whom is recommending it, it is wrongfully recommended.

It is one thing to make the Gulf of Mexico sterile, it is quite something else to make the entire global ocean circulation sterile.

There isn't much here to understand really.  The Bay of Campehe is a repeat performance.  The exact dynamics that occured in 1979 on an oil rig occurred on the Deepwater Horizon.  It may have occurred in 160 feet of water, but, it was drilling 1.9 MILES down.  The rig could NOT control the methane it found.  It was an exploratory well.  Nothing more to know. 

The only reasonable response to these disasters is to explode the ocean floor that supports the drill pipe allowing the rupture to emit oil and gas into our environment.  This entire mess is outrageous and it should have been dealth with EFFECTIVELY and not from HELPLESSNESS.

Blow it closed !

NOW !