All Posts Tagged With: "Exxon"
EXXON Valdez, Greatest Oil Spill in History
Yes, this may indeed deserve the very highest quality Houdini Hypocrisy label. How else can Number 35 wiggle into the Top 20 list?
Perhaps a textbook example of superb partisan and hypocritically hyped Misinformation Campaigns waged at the expense of all Americans, most who unfortunately do not understand the assault being waged on them
And maybe perpetuated by disproportionately large users of oil.
Would it surprise you, assuming you have not already turned away in Partisan Purity, that according to ITOPF, it was number 35 in size, dwarfed by the larger 34 by a factor of maybe a hundred. Check my math.
Be sure to check out Table 3, and ask how can this be? Notice this table lists the first 20 oil spills then jumps to number 35. A nod to political correctness and a testament to the lucrative partisan misinformation campaigns of those professional misinformers who get paid to inform us.Table 3: Major Oil Spills Since 1967 (Non Military Accidents Only). For more oil spills click here.
| Position | Shipname | Year | Location | Spill Size (tonnes) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Atlantic Empress | 1979 | Off Tobago, West Indies | 287,000 |
| 2 | ABT Summer | 1991 | 700 nautical miles off Angola | 260,000 |
| 3 | Castillo de Bellver | 1983 | Off Saldanha Bay, South Africa | 252,000 |
| 4 | Amoco Cadiz | 1978 | Off Brittany, France | 223,000 |
| 5 | Haven | 1991 | Genoa, Italy | 144,000 |
| 6 | Odyssey | 1988 | 700 nautical miles off Nova Scotia, Canada | 132,000 |
| 7 | Torrey Canyon | 1967 | Scilly Isles, UK | 119,000 |
| 8 | Sea Star | 1972 | Gulf of Oman | 115,000 |
| 9 | Irenes Serenade | 1980 | Navarino Bay, Greece | 100,000 |
| 10 | Urquiola | 1976 | La Coruna, Spain | 100,000 |
| 11 | Hawaiian Patriot | 1977 | 300 nautical miles off Honolulu | 95,000 |
| 12 | Independenta | 1979 | Bosphorus, Turkey | 95,000 |
| 13 | Jakob Maersk | 1975 | Oporto, Portugal | 88,000 |
| 14 | Braer | 1993 | Shetland Islands, UK | 85,000 |
| 15 | Khark 5 | 1989 | 120 nautical miles off Atlantic coast of Morocco | 80,000 |
| 16 | Aegean Sea | 1992 | La Coruna, Spain | 74,000 |
| 17 | Sea Empress | 1996 | Milford Haven, UK | 72,000 |
| 18 | Katina P | 1992 | Off Maputo, Mozambique | 72,000 |
| 19 | Nova | 1985 | Off Kharg Island, Gulf of Iran | 70,000 |
| 20 | Prestige | 2002 | Off Galicia, Spain | 63,000 |
| 35 | Exxon Valdez | 1989 | Prince William Sound, Alaska, USA | 37,000 |
Thanks to god-like environmentalists: Exxon will not make money drilling offshore. Cuba and China will.
We have a defacto suicidal oil avoidance policy which makes Bush’s shortsighted oil focus look like a misdemeanor in a world of capital crimes.
Bush once declared he was never part of “big oil,” rather he once was part of “little oil”. Bad, bad man. So punish the entire US population.
Well, I say to you, Cuba and China working together to drill for oil in our neighborhood is about Big Oil, but not what ignorant shortsighted politically motivated environmentalists usually think of. Such Stinging hypocrisy. I am an environmentalist, but do not think we have to commit suicide.
They have their heads in the wrong place and deserve any peculiar awards they get. Any ideas?
Suicide. Oil. Policy. Not by Bush. Get it? Iraq WAS about oil, not our appropriating it, but specifically about keeping oil lanes and supplies open to all of the world including poor countries who are dependent on oil and cannot assure it’s availability in a world where volatile countries own and control a lot of oil. It is important to keep the shipping lanes open and half of our military expenditures may be directed to that end for the BENEFIT OF THE ENTIRE FREE AND OTHER WORLDS WHO USE OIL.
Do you know any country that does not use oil?
Do these Energy Brilliants know that while Brazil may be independent of oil thanks to massive forest destroying cultivation of sugar cane and it’s wide use throughout the country they still search for oil? No matter, damn those Exxon profiteers! Boycott their gas stations until they reduce their gas prices. Again, no matter, just fly me in a private jet to the next conference without delay, my limousine and award is waiting.
You follow in a non private plane to take my picture. And don’t be late. And do not us oil products made in the US, be sure to get them off the next boat from half way around the world. Hope any leaks are not on our shores.
Who cares that Venezuela, the country controlled by a mad man who “cares about the people”, owns Citgo. Why bother boycotting them? Well, because they are not Exxon, the Great Satan, who produces, what? Only a small percentage of world wide oil production? How can that be?
No matter. They only give 40% of their political donations to liberals, Democrats or progressive interests so they are bad.
Despite not being dependent on oil, Brazil and it’s sovereign Oil Firm has recently announced that they looked for and found new massive oil reserves in offshore fields. A second one just recently. But only because they looked for it, found it and will drilled it without the permission of god-like US environmentalists. Big Oil again. Taxem, taxem I say.
It is good news for these politically motivated liberal environmentalists because they will get to rejoice that Exxon is not going to make those profits, let along those made off our very own shores. After all if they did, we would have to penalize them and tax the “windfall” for making maybe an 8 to 10% return on equity on a large investment base. That is not a windfall even if measured in billions. Goldman Sachs just announced a poor financial result for the last quarter, just a little over 2 Billion. Where are the cries for a windfall profit on a company that probably makes 60% of their political donations to liberals, Democrats and progressives.
Many industries make a far greater return, but no matter, penalize them. Union pensions own a lot of stock in such companies but that is just hypocrisy, not worthy or mention.
Such shortsighted folks, including those sympathizers in government, do not know what a windfall is. Their extraordinary pensions, health care and other perks and fine china are windfalls and should be taxed at 90%.
Actors or actresses getting 1 to 20 million for a single movie taking 4 months to film, is a windfall requiring poor people to pay $8 to $12 per person for a movie.
An athlete getting similar egregious salaries so that poor people have to pay through the nose to see a single game, is a windfall. Oh and do not forget the 4 dollar popcorn. Unhealthy oil included at no extra charge.
Bill O’Reilly and Larry King’s salary and benefits are egregious and true windfalls.
Al Gore makes windfall profits by scaring us but has no solutions his own worshipful constituency would pay for. Hugh fees for speeches by former Presidents like Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton are windfalls.
Which US legislator is going to introduce the Windfall Profits Tax on Brazil? Or Reagan’s estate or Clinton’s ventures?
Or Cuba or China or Russia?
Hey, how about this, let’s tax Iran for their windfall profits!
Why didn’t we think about this sooner? Notice something here? Those are countries, not stockholder profiteers owned by our pension funds and universities. All conduct foreign policy and build and buy weapons and train and pay for armies. No conflicts of interest there, is there?
Kind of like several much bigger Exxons, some with nuclear weapons, others wimply with nuclear ambitions like Iraq under Saddam. Where will they get the money for those kinds of programs? Not from Profits but from the entire asset base of the company/country. Wake up.