BP to Pay $18.7 Billion to Settle Deepwater Horizon Spill Claims http://www.wsj.com/articles/bp-agrees-to-pay-18-7-billion-to-settle-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-claims-1435842739
Put a huge amount of the BP litigation behind it.
This would be the same as all the profits that the company has made since 2012. However the payment schedule is 1.1 million dollars per year.
Yes, BP was pretty irresponsible back then. But it still makes one wonder what if it were not such a big company that can afford to make all of the payments and restitution? If this has been done by a small company, or a non-multinational company, then the whole cost of the oil spill would have gone to governments and individuals.
So, feel free to hate BP, but it could have been a lot worse on the pain and recovery side.
Author: SustainMe
-
BIG BP payout settlement of $18.7
-
Wind And Solar Will Soon Become The ‘Least-Cost Option’ – Yahoo Finance
Wind And Solar Will Soon Become The ‘Least-Cost Option’ – Yahoo Finance:
It is interesting how quickly the prices of wind and solar have been dropping and are expected to continue.
Obviously, these must be only a part of the solution, unless batteries get to be a whole lot better, a whole lot faster. (Maybe?). The wind doesn’t always blow, and the sun doesn’t always shine.
One savings for solar, is that it doesn’t need to be done remotely. The transport/distribution costs can be much lower. Both sun & wind do not require the massive volumes of water that conventional fossil and nuke need. (Except for the manatees, there is no real reason to heat up rivers and lakes.)
Those folks in the coal industries, even in China, are soon going to find that they are missing the boat. Coal is not sustainable. Once people start to think harder and longer about the externalities costs of coal, it is going to continue the downward spiral from favor.
-
EPA loss in supreme court.
High Court Strikes Down EPA Limits on Mercury Emissions http://www.wsj.com/articles/high-court-strikes-down-epa-limits-on-mercury-emissions-1435590069
The EPA must consider the cost of compliance when coming up with rules. That’s what the Supreme Court ruled.
Of course it is hard to estimate the cost of the pollutants, that have been going on for a couple centuries now.
With natural gas being so cheap, and most of the conversions already complete, the whole issue is rather mute point.
But it does set back EPA action on CO2 emissions, where is the coal lobby would like to consider the cost of externalities nonexistent.
Still in the absence of Congress and its inability to do anything, you have the problem of the Fed and the EPA trying to do the heavy lifting. -
Growth is always good? No matter the costs!
Saving can be hugely benefiting to all. But it doesn’t show up in increased sales and higher GDP.
A bigger, newer SUV is always better…
Hmmmm?http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/jun/10/good-natural-malignant-five-ways-people-frame-economic-growth?CMP=share_btn_tw
-
Sixth mass extinction is here, researcher declares.
Sixth mass extinction is here, researcher declares:
Ouch. It looks like we need to clean up our collective acts. With 41% of amphibians and 26% of mammals on a course for extinction if we don’t change our ways.
“To history’s steady drumbeat, a human population growing in numbers, per capita consumption and economic inequity has altered or destroyed natural habitats. The long list of impacts includes:
*Land clearing for farming, logging and settlement
*Introduction of invasive species
*Carbon emissions that drive climate change and ocean acidification
*Toxins that alter and poison ecosystems
Now, the specter of extinction hangs over about 41 percent of all amphibian species and 26 percent of all mammals, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, which maintains an authoritative list of threatened and extinct species.
“There are examples of species all over the world that are essentially the walking dead,” Ehrlich said.”