[QUOTE=kwCharlie;37660]Dell, do you ‘really’ believe that last paragraph? Your posts have been very informative from a perspective that is thin for the rest of us. But do people with your perspective really believe the moratorium has ANY rationale for the benefit of us, the operators, or big oil?
There might be a reason “No one is saying” I’m shocked you did. [/QUOTE]
kwCharlie,
I do think that the 90 day moratorium is, as much as anything, the government trying to give itself a time out, so as to hit the (regulatory) reset button. Plus what has been said publicly: to conduct the investigation and assess whether new, different etc. safeguards are necessary etc. If anyone has good ideas about how to cut corners on this (adopt Norwegian standards in total, adopt API standards in total, ladle x, y and z additional safeguards on top of what’s already in place in MMS regs??), the best I could suggest would be to then contact (if you’re in those states) Senator Landrieu’s or Senator Bill Nelson’s office. This time-out (which may well extend longer, particularly for deep water) is damaging to real people; they do recognize that; that’s why the additional $100m fund was set up. The problem is that it is somewhat to very unlikely to be enough.
In other words, a lot of the moratorium is about intra-government process (an always fascinating topic within the District), which seems, in this instance, to be FUBAR–and that takes a while to fix. Is Robert Gibbs going to get up at the podium and say that? I think not.