News BP Should Pay: Holding Corporations Accountable for Environmental Damage

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the appropriate punishment for BP following its environmental disaster, with participants expressing strong opinions on accountability. Many argue that BP should face severe financial penalties, including full reimbursement for cleanup and damages, while some suggest criminal charges for individuals involved, potentially equating negligence with manslaughter or murder. There is a call for corporate accountability, advocating for the dissolution of corporate personhood to hold decision-makers personally liable for their actions. Additionally, concerns are raised about the government's role in enforcing safety regulations and the potential consequences of pushing BP too hard financially, which could lead to bankruptcy and job losses. Overall, the sentiment reflects a desire for justice that adequately addresses the extensive harm caused by BP's actions.
  • #31
Antiphon said:
I'm buying all my gas at BP now. I'm tired of the anti-capitalist thugs of thus world piling on to beat down our corporations and those of our friends and allies.

If a corporation does something wrong, it needs beat down, no?

I'm ashamed as an American that my President deigns himself fit to dictate terms to BP. By what authority?

I must concede that he has made some inappropriate and unnecessary comments.

Where's the "hey, how can we help you plug this leak?"

The Fed. gov. has been trying to help. Definitely not as well as they could have, but when does the fed. gov. ever do anything the best possibly way?

No, BP gets a criminal investigation and all the Lawyers my illustrious professor of a president can muster.

Do you honestly feel that BP does not deserve an investigation?

I'm buying only BP gas until a different president reinstalls Churchill's bust in the oval office.

And I'm sure the British will only buy Exxon until the next PM puts FDR's bust in his office.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
KalamMekhar said:
Just because Iran's government is beyond unbelievable, does not make the crude oil any less valuable. One could talk about ethics, but oil is oil, and money is money.

I can't bring myself to buy from a company that's willing to go into deals with a nation that wants to annihilate Israel as quickly as BP is.

By the way, I wasn't aware that BP stations were any cheaper than everyone else (then again, I don't drive).
 
  • #33
Depends on the day. Usually I will see them at being around 1 cent cheaper on average. We only have BP and Freedom stations here, so not much to compare to. The BP stations have Hot Stuff pizza, so I get a breakfast pizza there before work.
 
  • #34
KalamMekhar said:
Depends on the day. Usually I will see them at being around 1 cent cheaper on average. We only have BP and Freedom stations here, so not much to compare to. The BP stations have Hot Stuff pizza, so I get a breakfast pizza there before work.

Ah. Based on their website (I had never heard of Freedom before) Freedom Oil could be bought from BP as well, couldn't it?
 
  • #36
mynameinc said:
I can't bring myself to buy from a company that's willing to go into deals with a nation that wants to annihilate Israel as quickly as BP is.

So how do you manage that? Stations don't generally advertise the source of their gas. The BP station may buy from Texico; the Shell station may buy gas from BP.

Also, can you explain the quoted sentence above? I'm trying to figure out what "quickly" modifies. I parse it as

"I can't bring myself to buy from [a company that's willing to go into deals with [a nation that wants to annihilate Israel]] as quickly as BP is."
->
"I can't bring myself to buy from [a company that's willing to go into deals with Iran] as quickly as BP is."
->
"I can't bring myself to buy from BP as quickly as BP is."

so I must be doing something wrong.
 
  • #37
CRGreathouse said:
So how do you manage that? Stations don't generally advertise the source of their gas. The BP station may buy from Texico; the Shell station may buy gas from BP..

I think franchise gas stations are required to buy gas from the company usually
 
  • #38
CRGreathouse said:
So how do you manage that? Stations don't generally advertise the source of their gas. The BP station may buy from Texico; the Shell station may buy gas from BP.

All gas stations that are owned by the oil company must by gas from the company.
 
  • #39
mynameinc said:
Why do you want BP to not pay what they naturally owe?

No, it wouldn't be the same situation, because this time, BP's assets would be liquidated, and if anything is left over, it would be distributed amongst shareholders.

By the way, the jobs would probably be replaced by the oil companies buying BP's wells, refineries, etc.
I obviously can not imagine how much money the damages would range in but in many cases where corporations are confronted with class action suits they wind up going bankrupt and not being able to pay everything that they owe. You may not be concerned for the welfare of BP but if you are concerned about all of the damages being taken care of it would be preferable that they not go bankrupt.


Cyrus said:
All gas stations that are owned by the oil company must by gas from the company.
I have read that the companies buy from each other. Some times they do not have enough to meet demand and others have more than enough. The later will then sell their excess to the former. Unless you really care what company actually pumped the oil though I do not see that it makes much of a difference.
 
  • #40
BP isn't going to go bankrupt over the damages. That's just another sad, sad, right wing canard. Like the one where they try to make BP out to be the victim of government, maybe imply the government is primarily at fault, maybe they even caused the spill and not BP, even though government failed only in curtailing private sector wrong doing and actually regulating.

Even though BP has been written for so much more violations than all the other big oil players on the market, etc.

BP doesn't sell here, that I know of. No loss there. Their POS lubricants do, though.

I've tried Castrol 75w90 manual tranny oil. It lasted six months before the shaft bearings started whining, shifting started getting clunky. So now I only use Liqui Moly.

I would have expected a science forum to be conspicuously devoid of right wingnuts.
 
  • #41
TheStatutoryApe said:
I obviously can not imagine how much money the damages would range in but in many cases where corporations are confronted with class action suits they wind up going bankrupt and not being able to pay everything that they owe. You may not be concerned for the welfare of BP but if you are concerned about all of the damages being taken care of it would be preferable that they not go bankrupt.

My pessimist side says that there is no way BP can actually pay everything they owe and not be bankrupt.

I have read that the companies buy from each other. Some times they do not have enough to meet demand and others have more than enough. The later will then sell their excess to the former. Unless you really care what company actually pumped the oil though I do not see that it makes much of a difference.

I simply loathe the idea of using my money to build a nuclear weapon to destroy Eretz Israel.

SonyAD said:
BP isn't going to go bankrupt over the damages. That's just another sad, sad, right wing canard.

1) Explain how it's right wing.
2) Explain how BP is going to save itself from bankruptcy. If it's good enough, I'll buy into BP. :)

Like the one where they try to make BP out to be the victim of government, maybe imply the government is primarily at fault, maybe they even caused the spill and not BP, even though government failed only in curtailing private sector wrong doing and actually regulating.

That one has been used in this thread. I don't buy into it, though.

I've tried Castrol 75w90 manual tranny oil. It lasted six months before the shaft bearings started whining, shifting started getting clunky. So now I only use Liqui Moly.

So, their products are terrible, also?

I would have expected a science forum to be conspicuously devoid of right wingnuts.

I'm actually a Libertarian positionnut. I get called a Liberal wingnut by the Conservatives, and a Conservative wingnut by the Liberals.

I would expect a science forum to be liberal, too.
 
  • #42
CRGreathouse said:
So how do you manage that? Stations don't generally advertise the source of their gas. The BP station may buy from Texico; the Shell station may buy gas from BP.

Also, can you explain the quoted sentence above? I'm trying to figure out what "quickly" modifies. I parse it as

"I can't bring myself to buy from [a company that's willing to go into deals with [a nation that wants to annihilate Israel]] as quickly as BP is."
->
"I can't bring myself to buy from [a company that's willing to go into deals with Iran] as quickly as BP is."
->
"I can't bring myself to buy from BP as quickly as BP is."

so I must be doing something wrong.

I didn't phrase it the best way. Langauge is my weak point, especially English.

A better way of phrasing that:

I refuse to buy from BP as long as they are friendly to Iran.
 
  • #43
TheStatutoryApe said:
I have read that the companies buy from each other. Some times they do not have enough to meet demand and others have more than enough. The later will then sell their excess to the former. Unless you really care what company actually pumped the oil though I do not see that it makes much of a difference.

What I'm saying is that the franchise owner of a Shell can't call up Texaco and have them deliver a load of fuel at a lower cost than what a Shell load might cost. They have to purchase fuel from the parent companies distribution source.
 
  • #44
mynameinc said:
I didn't phrase it the best way. Langauge is my weak point, especially English.

A better way of phrasing that:

I refuse to buy from BP as long as they are friendly to Iran.

"I refuse to buy made in the USA products because Obama is president"
 
  • #45
KalamMekhar said:
"I refuse to buy made in the USA products because Obama is president"

I have to speak at this point: how have we moved from an appropriate HYPOTHETICAL punishment for BP, to relations with Iran and nuclear politics?!

Oh, and remember that "scientist" is a profession, vocation, and avocation... not a political view. Ideally a scientist shouldn't be right, left, center, or anything else; a scientist should be practical, desiring empirical evidence on a case-by-case basis. Then again, we're all human, and subject to those same frailties of wit.

Dirac was enamored of Communist ideals, possibly having been exposed to them by Kapitza, and Heisenberg seemed fairly cozy with the Nazis. If you expect even brilliant scientists to be inhumanly impartial, liberal, or conservative you're going to be dissapointed.
 
  • #46
KalamMekhar said:
"I refuse to buy made in the USA products because Obama is president"

You're a conservative, aren't you?

nismaratwork said:
I have to speak at this point: how have we moved from an appropriate HYPOTHETICAL punishment for BP, to relations with Iran and nuclear politics?!

Antiphon and KalamMekhar were discussing how they will now buy all of their gas from BP, and I stated that I refused to buy gas from them because of how cozy they are with NIOC.

Oh, and remember that "scientist" is a profession, vocation, and avocation... not a political view. Ideally a scientist shouldn't be right, left, center, or anything else; a scientist should be practical, desiring empirical evidence on a case-by-case basis. Then again, we're all human, and subject to those same frailties of wit.

Yes, (unfortunately?) all adults have political views. But, overwhelmingly, academics and scientists do vote liberal.
 
  • #47
mynameinc said:
You're a conservative, aren't you?



Antiphon and KalamMekhar were discussing how they will now buy all of their gas from BP, and I stated that I refused to buy gas from them because of how cozy they are with NIOC.



Yes, (unfortunately?) all adults have political views. But, overwhelmingly, academics and scientists do vote liberal.

I still believe that Antiphon is intoxicated or joking, and I don't find the notion of symbolic protests very moving. We're talking about recompense for loss of human life, and a kind of environmental and fiscal Depraved Indifference. I think we're beginning to stray from discussion into meaningless catharsis.
 
  • #48
SonyAD said:
BP isn't going to go bankrupt over the damages.
To know that for sure, one would have roughly know BP's net worth and roughly know the maximum possible damages. What are they?

I would have expected a science forum to be conspicuously devoid of right wingnuts.
Ha! BP is the government, didn't you know?

[PLAIN]http://davidsonnews.net/files/2010/02/020110Koonin.jpg

DOE said:
Dr. Steven E. Koonin was confirmed by the Senate on May 19, 2009 as the second Undersecretary for Science in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Dr. Koonin brings to the post a distinguished career as a university professor and administrator at the California Institute of Technology. He also has experience in the private sector, joining the government from the position of Chief Scientist for BP, plc, based in London.

At BP since 2004, Koonin was responsible for
...
http://www.energy.gov/organization/dr_steven_koonin.htm

BTW, I would say the federal government does now hold primary responsibility for botching the clean up, not the leak itself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #49
nismaratwork said:
I still believe that Antiphon is intoxicated or joking, and I don't find the notion of symbolic protests very moving.

If you referring to my refusal to buy from BP, it's not supposed to be moving. I plan to immigrate to Israel, and would only be funding my own demise!

Besides, once again, I don't drive, so it doesn't matter anyway.

We're talking about recompense for loss of human life, and a kind of environmental and fiscal Depraved Indifference. I think we're beginning to stray from discussion into meaningless catharsis.

You're probably right.
 
Last edited:
  • #50
mynameinc said:
My pessimist side says that there is no way BP can actually pay everything they owe and not be bankrupt.

The escrow fund is $20 billion. BP made $14 billion in profits last year.

So they might need to sell some assets to pay that off within a quarter. Boo hoo.

Unless they manage to cap the gusher there is no point in discussing clean up costs. However, I'm sure an arrangement can be reached where by BP could pay what they owe gradually. It's not like they're some working stiff being foreclosed on by the bank because of a health care related bankruptcy.

mynameinc said:
1) Explain how it's right wing.
2) Explain how BP is going to save itself from bankruptcy. If it's good enough, I'll buy into BP. :)


1)
2) BP made $14 billion in profits in 2009.

mynameinc said:
That one has been used in this thread. I don't buy into it, though.

The other flavours of right wing do, though. They don't just buy it, they try to sell it on too.

mynameinc said:
So, their products are terrible, also?

From my experience, yes. Their motor oil sucks too. The Castrol Magnatec semisynthetics and group III oils suck. I've tried them too, before I knew any better. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDZSa7LbscM" is how they advertise their tripe.

mheslep said:
BTW, I would say the federal government does now hold primary responsibility for botching the clean up, not the leak itself.

What clean up? The spill is huge and ongoing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #51
SonyAD said:
What clean up?
Exactly! The government might want to do something about the 30 million or so gallons of crude floating around the Gulf or landed on the beaches. That, or get out of the way.
 
  • #52
That's risible. Get out of the way? Of whom? BP? Are you pulling my leg?

My point was that the spill should be curtailed first. Then focus on the clean up. You first get out of the cesspool and then wash.
 
  • #53
SonyAD said:
That's risible. Get out of the way? Of whom? BP? Are you pulling my leg?
Out of the way of the http://www.newser.com/story/89765/jindal-to-us-were-not-waiting-for-you.html" and refused.

My point was that the spill should be curtailed first. Then focus on the clean up. You first get out of the cesspool and then wash.
That's not a apt analogy. Much can be done in the way of booms, berms, and skimmers to largely stop the oil from reaching sensitive areas.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #54
SonyAD said:
The escrow fund is $20 billion. BP made $14 billion in profits last year.

So they might need to sell some assets to pay that off within a quarter. Boo hoo.

I think you mean a year. But, the >$64,000 question is, will the escrow fund settle everything?

Unless they manage to cap the gusher there is no point in discussing clean up costs. However, I'm sure an arrangement can be reached where by BP could pay what they owe gradually. It's not like they're some working stiff being foreclosed on by the bank because of a health care related bankruptcy.

But the payments could be so large that it has a good chance of bankrupting them.

1)
2) BP made $14 billion in profits in 2009.


1) He made it clear he was only speaking for himself. Also, did he say anything about bankruptcy?
2) Will $14B cover the cost? Really, the $20B Gulf tourism industry is the largest of their problems. That should recover quickly. However, the Louisiana tourism and fishing industry is worth >$6B a year, and is destroyed for years.

From my experience, yes. Their motor oil sucks too. The Castrol Magnatec semisynthetics and group III oils suck. I've tried them too, before I knew any better. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDZSa7LbscM" is how they advertise their tripe.

Which supermajor does Liqui Moly belong to?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #55
Cyrus said:
What I'm saying is that the franchise owner of a Shell can't call up Texaco and have them deliver a load of fuel at a lower cost than what a Shell load might cost.

Sure they can -- and do.
 
  • #56
Every gas station here is filled up by Rainy Lake Oil, I will head out there tomorrow to see who their seller is.

The stations that get filled up are:

Freedom
BP
Holiday
 
  • #57
SonyAD said:
The escrow fund is $20 billion. BP made $14 billion in profits last year.

So they might need to sell some assets to pay that off within a quarter. Boo hoo.
Are you suggesting that that $14 billion is just sitting around in a bank somewhere or are you suggesting that BP is going to make a $14 billion profit this year? Either of those claims would require at the very least a logical argument to support them.
 
  • #58
I for one have absolutely no sympathy for either BP or MMS. We should fire everyone in MMS and replace them with people who at least have some semblance of duty and morality (the present people do not). And BP? Let them go bankrupt, I don't care. The people who actually do the work will be snapped up by other oil companies, and the directors and central officers are the ones who approved this whole thing.

Get rid of BP. They shouldn't be allowed to harvest oil anywhere near the United States waters. Ever.
 
  • #59
It will never happen, but I really, truly believe that this is should be a time for the case-law of Depraved Heart/Indifference to be expanded. 2nd degree murder for members of MMS, and people directly involved with this mess at BP sounds right.
 
  • #60
KalamMekhar said:
Every gas station here is filled up by Rainy Lake Oil, I will head out there tomorrow to see who their seller is.

The stations that get filled up are:

Freedom
BP
Holiday

I'll bet that they buy from a variety of sellers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K