The Godfather meets the Yellowstone Oil Spill

There's a Godfather quote for every conceivable circumstance:

"That's all right. These things gotta happen every five years or so, ten
years. Helps to get rid of the bad blood. Been ten years since the last
one. You know, you gotta stop them at the beginning. Like they should
have stopped Hitler at Munich, they should never let him get away with
that, they was just asking for trouble."

--
Ken Fortenberry

On 2011-07-11 13:44:22 -0400, Ken Fortenberry
said:

There's a Godfather quote for every conceivable circumstance:

"That's all right. These things gotta happen every five years or so, ten
years. Helps to get rid of the bad blood. Been ten years since the last
one. You know, you gotta stop them at the beginning. Like they should
have stopped Hitler at Munich, they should never let him get away with
that, they was just asking for trouble."

I knew the Lagavulin would eventually takes its toll. Alcoholism is an
ugly worm.

On Jul 11, 10:44*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
There's a Godfather quote for every conceivable circumstance:

"That's all right. These things gotta happen every five years or so, ten
years. Helps to get rid of the bad blood. Been ten years since the last
one. You know, you gotta stop them at the beginning. Like they should
have stopped Hitler at Munich, they should never let him get away with
that, they was just asking for trouble."

--
Ken Fortenberry

Bottom line on this spill is . . .
When the river crossing was put in the company took the cheapest
possible allowable method using the available loopholes of the moment
as is SOP for Exxon, BP etc..

Specifically after having done all they could to block regs requiring
enclosure of the pipe WITHIN an independent armored conduit, and
larding as many pols with contributions and whores, the oil company
took the cheapest, most chancy option possible. It is consistant with
the way these orgs work. Then according to SOP, when the **** breaks
down the corp have their most reasonable sounding hirelings left alive
make whatever statements their over-bosses want. Most often these are
what normal people consider to be lies, but reality is that most of
the hirelings usually only know what they "need to know," so the
"spokesperson" doesn't believe they are a part of the lie. If the
spokesperson finds out and balks the company just buys them off or
fires them. For some who know little of life outside big corps or
govt, the "go along to get along" method suffices and little notice
need be given to the soul destroying consequences, much less to the
social damage done.

Anybody who has had to fight the lawyers of a large corporation
(Verizon in my case) knows that what I say here is the most reasonable
explanation for the obscene, treasonous behavior of most large
corporations and the individuals who get caught up in the moral
bankruptcy of bandit capitalism and corporate kleptocracy,

Dave
Who is glad that a good fishing friend, closely involved at very high
and hands-on level with the construction of those Japanese Nukes, is
not alive to bear the shame of sincere but failed assurances. His best
efforts and honest assurances could not compensate for the corrupt
corporate culture. R.I.P. friend.

On Jul 11, 2:36*pm, DaveS wrote:
On Jul 11, 10:44*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

There's a Godfather quote for every conceivable circumstance:

"That's all right. These things gotta happen every five years or so, ten
years. Helps to get rid of the bad blood. Been ten years since the last
one. You know, you gotta stop them at the beginning. Like they should
have stopped Hitler at Munich, they should never let him get away with
that, they was just asking for trouble."

--
Ken Fortenberry

Bottom line on this spill is . . .
When the river crossing was put in the company took the cheapest
possible allowable method using the available loopholes of the moment
as is SOP for Exxon, BP etc..

Specifically after having done all they could to block regs requiring
enclosure of the pipe WITHIN an independent armored conduit, and
larding as many pols with contributions and whores, the oil company
took the cheapest, most chancy option possible. It is consistant with
the way these orgs work. Then *according to SOP, when the **** breaks
down the corp have their most reasonable sounding hirelings left alive
make whatever statements their over-bosses want. Most often these are
what normal people consider to be lies, but reality is that most of
the hirelings usually only know what they "need to know," so the
"spokesperson" doesn't believe they are a part of the lie. If the
spokesperson finds out and balks the company just buys them off or
fires them. For some who know little of life outside big corps or
govt, the "go along to get along" method suffices and little notice
need be given to the soul destroying consequences, much less to the
social damage done.

Anybody who has had to fight the lawyers of a large corporation
(Verizon in my case) knows that what I say here is the most reasonable
explanation for the obscene, treasonous behavior of most large
corporations and the individuals who get caught up in the moral
bankruptcy of bandit capitalism and corporate kleptocracy,

Dave
Who is glad that a good fishing friend, closely involved at very high
and hands-on level with the construction of those Japanese Nukes, is
not alive to bear the shame of sincere but failed assurances. His best
efforts and honest assurances could not compensate for the corrupt
corporate culture. R.I.P. friend.

No argument with your characterization of Exxon,etc., and the likely
scenario of the pipeline installation. However, at this point, unless
you have specific information to the contrary, we don't know whether
or not the pipeline was in fact armored. Even if it were, this rupture
may have occurred.

In addition to making the pipeline crossing robust, what should have
been done & what the regs should have required was "planning for
failure". In this case that would have meant requiring and installing
automatic emergency shutoff valves adjacent to any high risk area, and
requiring that they be tested and inspected often. That apparently
didn't occur in this case - the latest reports are that it was upwards
of 50 min. from detection of rupture to shutoff.

The power of large volumes of water running down a high gradient is
almost beyond human comprehension (think carving of Grand Canyon). I
have seen truck sized boulders being moved downstream at several miles
an hour by western rivers in full flood. If the regs require and the
project is engineered and built to withstand for instance a 50 yr
storm, sure enough eventually you will get a 100 yr storm (100yr get
200 yr storm, 200yr get 500yr, 500yr get 750 yr, etc.).

If irreplaceable important assets may be lost upon failure of the
project, there are only two prudent options- avoid construction of the
project all together. or if that is not truly an option, incorporate
measures to prevent or drastically limit damage to those assets in the
event of project failure.

On Jul 12, 1:23*pm, Bob wrote:
On Jul 11, 2:36*pm, DaveS wrote:





On Jul 11, 10:44*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

There's a Godfather quote for every conceivable circumstance:

"That's all right. These things gotta happen every five years or so, ten
years. Helps to get rid of the bad blood. Been ten years since the last
one. You know, you gotta stop them at the beginning. Like they should
have stopped Hitler at Munich, they should never let him get away with
that, they was just asking for trouble."

--
Ken Fortenberry

Bottom line on this spill is . . .
When the river crossing was put in the company took the cheapest
possible allowable method using the available loopholes of the moment
as is SOP for Exxon, BP etc..

Specifically after having done all they could to block regs requiring
enclosure of the pipe WITHIN an independent armored conduit, and
larding as many pols with contributions and whores, the oil company
took the cheapest, most chancy option possible. It is consistant with
the way these orgs work. Then *according to SOP, when the **** breaks
down the corp have their most reasonable sounding hirelings left alive
make whatever statements their over-bosses want. Most often these are
what normal people consider to be lies, but reality is that most of
the hirelings usually only know what they "need to know," so the
"spokesperson" doesn't believe they are a part of the lie. If the
spokesperson finds out and balks the company just buys them off or
fires them. For some who know little of life outside big corps or
govt, the "go along to get along" method suffices and little notice
need be given to the soul destroying consequences, much less to the
social damage done.

Anybody who has had to fight the lawyers of a large corporation
(Verizon in my case) knows that what I say here is the most reasonable
explanation for the obscene, treasonous behavior of most large
corporations and the individuals who get caught up in the moral
bankruptcy of bandit capitalism and corporate kleptocracy,

Dave
Who is glad that a good fishing friend, closely involved at very high
and hands-on level with the construction of those Japanese Nukes, is
not alive to bear the shame of sincere but failed assurances. His best
efforts and honest assurances could not compensate for the corrupt
corporate culture. R.I.P. friend.

No argument with your characterization of Exxon,etc., and the likely
scenario of the pipeline installation. However, at this point, unless
you have specific information to the contrary, we don't know whether
or not the pipeline was in fact armored. Even if it were, this rupture
may have occurred.

In addition to making the pipeline crossing robust, what should have
been done & what the regs should have required was "planning for
failure". In this case that would have meant requiring and installing
automatic emergency shutoff valves adjacent to any high risk area, and
requiring that they be tested and inspected often. That apparently
didn't occur in this case - the latest reports are that it was upwards
of 50 min. from detection of rupture to shutoff.

The power of large volumes of water running down a high gradient is
almost beyond human comprehension (think carving of Grand Canyon). *I
have seen truck sized boulders being moved downstream at several miles
an hour by western rivers in full flood. *If the regs require and the
project is engineered and built to withstand for instance a 50 yr
storm, sure enough eventually you will get a 100 yr storm (100yr get
200 yr storm, 200yr get 500yr, 500yr get 750 yr, etc.).

If irreplaceable important assets may be lost upon failure of the
project, there are only two prudent options- avoid construction of the
project all together. or if that is not truly an option, incorporate
measures to prevent or drastically limit damage to those assets in the
event of project failure.

The bottom line is that, as has been hinted at by at least one
individual in a position to speak with some level of authority in this
discussion, the effects of this environmental disaster
(notwithstanding the hand-wringing of those few poor souls near the
point of impact {as it were} who can now no longer claim {for the time
being} that their cows or their Ram 3500s are the leading source of
toxic effluent in the Yellowstone.....in their immediate
neighborhoods) exogenous toxic injections into the Yellowstone are
pretty much restricted to an increase on the order of something like a
very small fraction of one percent.....for one day.....for the river
as whole.

Characteristically, the doughboy appears to characterize this as yet
another greatest environmental catastophy in Merkin history. Not all
that surprising for a view from under a barstool.

Aside from that.....yawn.

g.
or.....what globe-trotting flyfisher REALLY wants to get deeply mirred
in an environmental ethics imbroglio here?

Exxon was warned by Montana's popular governor as long a two years
ago. Others warned too:
"Your pipeline is not deep enough," Exxon was told.

I don't have a link on the tip of my keyboard. But these warnings are
part of the public record.
It's all been in the local papers recently, a lot...bolstering Brian
Schweitzer's already glowing popularity.
Exxon did nothing because it turned out there was no for the state to
require a deeper pipeline.
But they cannot claim surprise. They were warned repeatedly. Long in
advance.

It's one thing for an energy company to say "we didn't know."
It's another matter when they were warned about a specific problem, in
a specific way.

High income individuals and Energy companies have been enjoying
gargantuan tax breaks since George Bush made it happen,
and because the hill-billy right has had their hand on the legislative
monkey wrench ever since.

Exxon needs to pay handsomely for this. So does the hill-billy
right. The lower Yellowstone fishery is not happy right now.

On Jul 15, 5:33*pm, salmobytes wrote:
Exxon was warned by Montana's popular governor as long a two years
ago.

Recent media attention notwithstanding, we, here in cheeselandia, are
fortunate.....we only have one governor at a time....we never have to
worry about whether someone is speaking in reference to the popular
one......or the "other". In any case, what Exxon says to any, all, or
none of them is a complete mystery to me. For good or ill, this
doesn't trouble me all that much.

Others warned too:
"Your pipeline is not deep enough," *Exxon was told.

It warms the heart.....well, THIS heart, anyway.....to learn that
there is a depth sufficient to allay the fears and dreads of
environmental activists with regard to petroleum leakage. See no
evil, know no evil.....ainna?

I don't have a link on the tip of my keyboard.

Hm......

Have you checked ALL of the tips?

But these warnings are
part of the public record.

The public record is a lot like the public library. When's the last
time you were there.....and what did you find that might interest
somebody or other?

Seriously.

It's all been in the local papers recently, a lot...bolstering Brian
Schweitzer's already glowing popularity.

Ooh! I remember him! Didn't he, like, used to play the violin and
touch open sores on Africans and ****?

Exxon did nothing because it turned out there was no for the state to
require a deeper pipeline.

Deeper piplines are for sucking **** OUT.....not for transporting
****.....or for pumping **** IN!.

But they cannot claim surprise.

Good god, what planet did you just arrive from?

They were warned repeatedly.

And?

Long in advance.

So?

It's one thing for an energy company to say "we didn't know."
It's another matter when they were warned about a specific problem, in
a specific way.

Actually, no (and, specifically and most emphatically, "NO!") it is
NOT, and does not in the least even resemble a second cousin of
another matter.

High income individuals and Energy companies have been enjoying
gargantuan tax breaks since George Bush made it happen,

Wrong. Pig-headedly, unforgiveably, unarguably, and easily
demonstrably wrong! High income individuals have been enjoying
gargantuan tax breaks since time immemorial. "Energy companies" is a
sublime joke whose executives wouldn't get it.

and because the hill-billy right has had their hand on the legislative
monkey wrench ever since.

My enemies are amusing (on their good days).....dog save me from my
allies.

Exxon needs to pay handsomely for this. *So does the hill-billy
right. *The lower Yellowstone fishery is not happy right now.

Let it never be said that like minds cannot find common ground. I
agree wholeheartedly. I think every fish that files a complaint
(consistent with current USFWS policies.....states' rights be damned!)
should (upon verification and approval by and/or from whatever
applicable, federal, state, county or municipal ordinanaces and
authoratative bodies) be granted a tax-free stipend (payable
immediately.....upon application and approval by whatever legitimate
authority) of some thousands of bugs.....or some such equivalent ****.

g.
well, THERE!.....THAT! should settle this ****!