jackson33

Depending on density crude oil weights between 6-8 pounds per gallon, a ton then contains 250 to 333 gallons or a 42 gallon barrel weights 252 to 336 pounds. In these 'spill' conversations, depending on salt seawater content, the average weight per gallon is 8.5 pounds...slightly heavier than fresh water at 8p/g. Interesting is what one barrel actually can produce in products, 2 gallons more than the 42 gallon barrel. http://www.txoga.org/articles/308/1/WHAT-A-BARREL-OF-CRUDE-OIL-MAKES

rigney; I think most all posters, after -x- number of post divulge more and more about themselves. Since retirement I've lived in OKC and Hobbs, NM and in my working career been to every State, and Country in North America more than a few times and had business ventures in four, a very good deal in or around Austin, Texas. If I recall Lakewood (west Cleveland) correctly it's rather well known to be a retirement area. I'm not going to check out Zoning Laws for your suggested sites or Cleveland, most metropolitan areas short of Houston Texas (not sure is still) have them and there will be more than one authority involved when getting a permit to build anything, anyplace. I understand your opinions on Welfare, but what your not considering is the source for it as SEEN today. We now have 2nd, 3rd and maybe some 4th generations of people that literally known nothing else. In fact having watched this issue closely, trying in many cases to employ those that receive welfare, it's simply to lucrative to refuse or take a job. While I'm on this and being in the same position you should be, anybody on SS/Medicare and receiving monthly checks over 7-8 years or used Medicare, has long gone on welfare. All the money I paid into SS or other payroll taxes totaled -$x- (a good share at the limits), add in what those dollars should have drawn in interest if you like (drew nothing), but it won't come close to what you have been paid in those 7-8 years or in our cases, many more years. Once you passed the point of what we paid in then, is at the cost of someone else and welfare. Well, you don't have to be a "bigot" to opposed another's philosophy. I'm not particularly happy with Obama, but it's not his religion beliefs (whatever that is) or his color, but am opposed to his 'Socialistic' policy as I perceive them, just as I oppose Biden, Polosi and Reid. Do you get the point? On your later post; In some ways I agree with you, in that it's difficult to split the association of Imam's and their flock, but in the US neither is of importance, until a law has been broke. I'll also add, Mormons as in the 'Latter Day Saints', in order to gain Statehood in the late 19th Century rejected polygamy in there Constitution. Segments are still around FLDS or TLDS (Fundamentalist/Traditionalist) are all over the Western US/Canada/Mexico, living not too much different than they originally did, but I'm not aware of any of them causing havoc around the world...

rigney; If you understand US LAW, it treats all people as equals. In this case to qualify for welfare has nothing to do with religion, or even whether somebody approved 9/11 actions... As iNow laid it out, many of us agree with the 'Right' to build the Mosque in the US is not arguable, but at some point the feeling and emotion of the people need to be considered. To further explain this and using his analogy, the KKK has certain rights as well, but as with the Mosque, they need a permit to flaunt there message. Each city or town based on there own demographics, has the right to NOT issue that permit.

CharonY; Sorry I didn't see this sooner. You could be right, but if so "this stuff" is already being used around current oil operations, as are most of the other stuff shown, to clean up after the well comes in and/or clean up when shut down. Since it's deemed okay for this, I hardly think the EPA is unaware of the content and believe some posters on this forum, could advise the EPA how to determine the content and toxicity of any compound. You might be thinking of the compound BP was using (similar cleaning process) which at the time and probably still not banned by the EPA, but not allowed in some of Europe. The Administration stopped that...

The Federal Government has hundreds of Trade/Travel/Treaties with most every Nation, many of which include wording for business operating in each others country and I feel sure including liabilities. Under the US Constitution these agreements, if ratified by Congress must be complied with and yes that's in the Constitution. As for seizures, the process can be achieved, but through "due process", only. Last I heard the US Constitution still requires due process, even to invoke the commerce clause. Since this has been suspended and under the premise of an Emergency (The Civil War), to temporarily suspend due process and for a specific reason (not yet proven or really investigated) this is simply not conceivable or IMO, would SCOTUS (fast track) sign off on the action. Then if they did, no International Company would be willing to do business with the US, more importantly would any insurance giant be willing to insure any Company doing business on US territory. Side note; As for the "so called victims" (aside from the injured and killed employees, all insured), not one claim can be validated as BP's sole responsibility, even for punitive damages for the dead and injured (they will try, based on fault) will have to go through the courts. BP has agreed to pay what it believes are their responsibilities (will be argued in the Courts) for bringing on the problem, creating a solution and any clean up problems linked to the actual spill itself. It's not only covered by law, they do this (with cost limits), but in their best interest to achieve a publicly acceptable conclusion. Setting up an escrow account in England (think 7B$) I believe being controlled by BP.

Pangloss quote;

I'll try and get back to this tomorrow, but Governments are restricted to some degree on assets based outside their territory (The UK is home base for BP). No country, would invest or employ Americans, without some international assurances. I believe Exxon/Mobile has sued Venezuela, over assets held in the US and not getting very far. Aside from that any legal team could hold up proceedings under the US Judicial Systems for decades and any attempted seizures made by the US Government would have catastrophic ramifications around the World on American Interest, including the Military.

swansont; The poster also made it clear more than once, he/she was a first year 'Philosophy' student, implying an interest in (I assume) some science issues. It is interesting, in that science originally evolved from philosophy, but I can't imagine a less useful education.

swansont; What you all do and how you do it, is truly none of my business, but the theme seems to be consistent that somehow posting in Politics, I assume by interested parties, that have made it through the filtering system (agree does a VERY good job) is somehow different than on science issue. I have made my case, think probably 5 times here in suggestion and no doubt will again. The answer is out there, if the administration wish can tell you the ratio of registration and posting, which to some degree will tell you how many first try posting in Politics, can't and move on.

ydoaPs quotes;

ydoaPs; Frankly, I have no idea why I get involved in these issues that are none of my business. It probably stems from understanding a good many complaints as seen by the very few that bother to post here in suggestions, then seem to get lost or just move on. With regards to your formula and from my viewpoint as an occasional poster; 1)Note problem; Restricting poster in the 'Political' subforum, apparently to having 30 post elsewhere and over a three week period, IMO makes absolutely no sense. I would think the goal of any 'public forum' from an economic standpoint, would be to encourage (not discourage) participation. Then and I know you won't understand this, but we're not all 'computer wiz-kids and if something is not working (first attempt) or confusing, MOST people will just move on. I don't know the registration/posting ratio here, but would guess those registering, making -0- or one post is far to high. 2)Devise possible solution to problem; I can't imagine a problem, if you simply drop the restrictions say for 30-60 days. Pangloss seems to have the temperament to lead newer posters into a discussion and understands 'Politics' is an emotionally driven subject. Although it's a Worldwide topic of interest, for the next 30 months in the US, most every person with a computer, will be searching out places to get information or expressing some of there own. 3)Run simulation to see if solution works; Simple, just shut the restriction down, no announcement needed. 4)Revise solution based on simulation; If after 30-60 days I am correct, you may have added 20-30 members primarily interested in Politics, Religion or whatever forum is restricted. Whether they have an interest in Science or not, which again should not be the issue. I can't imagine a Wal Mart refusing access to a customer that only buys certain products and I don't believe any forum introduces a topic, just for those already members.

For the record, BP is very much tied to the UK, operations extensive in the 'North Sea', is vital to the British economy and 18 million Brit's are in part dependent of incomes from their stocks. BP's board of directors will be meeting this week to decide on paying out the current dividends, while the Obama team is saying they should not, then into the foreseeable future, while what BP was permitted to do, then having an accident unfolds. I'm still waiting for the proof, BP was "solely" responsible!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_fields_operated_by_BP