Derrame de petroleo Transocean/BP en Golfo de Mexico

Algunos links sobre el derrame de la plataforma Transocean ( del operador BP ) en el golfo de mexico.

( nota: El 1) es un PDF interesante para entender a grandes rasgos como funciona el tema de "drilling" ( perforacion ) en el oceano para extraer petroleo. )


1)

Testimony Before The Committee On Energy & Natural Resources United States Senate May 11, 2010 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Strategy and Implications of the Deepwater Horizon Rig Explosion Steven Newman, Chief Executive Officer, Transocean, Ltd.

http://www.deepwater.com/_filelib/FileCabinet/pdfs/Newman_Testimony_--_Transocean_--_Senate_Committee_on_Environment_and_Public_Works_(5-11-10_Hearing).pdf?FileName=Newman_Testimony_--_Transocean_--_Senate_Committee_on_Environment_and_Public_Works_%285-11-10_Hearing%29.pdf

2) fotos de los efectos del derrame en las costas de louisiana:

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/05/oil_reaches_louisiana_shores.html

3) Live video feed of the BP Oil Spill from the ocean floor, 5000 feet [ ~1.5km ] below the surface.

http://globalwarming.house.gov/spillcam/

4) tracking del derrame en google maps:

http://maps.google.com/maps/mpl?moduleurl=http:%2F%2Fmw1.google.com%2Fmw-earth-vectordb%2Fdisaster%2Fgulf_oil_spill%2Fgulf_oil_mapplet.xml&mapclient=google&hl=en&sll=25.642208,-92.460414&sspn=10.511348,16.391602&ie=UTF8&ll=29.19042,-88.7649&spn=3.586666,4.42749&z=8

Sobre Decretos y Redrados

En relación a las noticia del día de la remoción del presidente del Banco Central de la Argentina ,,, algunas observaciones sobre el tema:

Que puede hacer el poder ejecutivo y que puede hacer el congreso ?

En la constitución esta:

Que puede hacer el PEN: art 99 , art 100
Que puede hacer el congreso: art 75, art 76

El justificativo que parecen querer usar en el decreto que hecha a Redrado es este inciso de la constitución:

3. [....] El Poder Ejecutivo no podrá en ningún caso bajo pena de nulidad absoluta e insanable, emitir disposiciones de carácter legislativo.
Solamente cuando circunstancias excepcionales hicieran imposible seguir los trámites ordinarios previstos por esta Constitución para la sanción de las leyes, y no se trate de normas que regulen materia penal, tributaria, electoral o el régimen de los partidos políticos, podrá dictar decretos por razones de necesidad y urgencia, los que serán decididos en acuerdo general de ministros que deberán refrendarlos, conjuntamente con el jefe de gabinete de ministros.

El jefe de gabinete de ministros personalmente y dentro de los diez días someterá la medida a consideración de la Comisión Bicameral Permanente, cuya composición deberá respetar la proporción de las representaciones políticas de cada Cámara. Esta comisión elevará su despacho en un plazo de diez días al plenario de cada Cámara para su expreso tratamiento, el que de inmediato consideraran las Cámaras. Una ley especial sancionada con la mayoría absoluta de la totalidad de los miembros de cada Cámara regulará el trámite y los alcances de la intervención del Congreso.

La "ley especial sancionada..." que habla el ultimo párrafo seria la Ley 26122 , que en el articulo 17 y 24 dice:

ARTICULO 17. — Los decretos a que se refiere esta ley dictados por el Poder Ejecutivo en base a las atribuciones conferidas por los artículos 76, 99, inciso 3, y 80 de la Constitución Nacional, tienen plena vigencia de conformidad a lo establecido en el artículo 2º del Código Civil.

ARTICULO 24. — El rechazo por ambas Cámaras del Congreso del decreto de que se trate implica su derogación de acuerdo a lo que establece el artículo 2º del Código Civil, quedando a salvo los derechos adquiridos durante su vigencia.

El congreso esta en receso hasta Marzo, asi que hasta que no se reuna esa Comisión Bicameral el PEN entiende que el DNU que crea el fondo bicentenario y el DNU que hecha a Redrado tienen plena vigencia. Algo asi como "aprovechemos que no esta el congreso [pueblo], para hacer todas lo que necesitemos sin que el pueblo [congreso] opine".

Solución simple a ese problema: que no se puedan dictar DNU durante receso del congreso o que el congreso deba reunirse extraordinariamente si hay un DNU durante un receso.

La pregunta del millón es , estamos en unas "circunstancias excepcionales [que hacen] imposible seguir los trámites ordinarios previstos por esta Constitución para la sanción de las leyes" como dice la Constitución? quien define eso?

En mi opinión, una ley que deja tantas ambiguedades ( como ese inciso 3 de la constitución nacional ) no sirve , ya que se presta a avivadas, que en este pais somos expertos.

Una nota de color: el DNU que hecha a Redrado defiende otro DNU ( el del fondo del bicentenario ) y se apoya en otro DNU , el Decreto 460/2001 que hecho al presidente del BC de ese momento: Pedro Pou. Mmmmm... demasiados decretos para mi gusto ...

Dmitry Orlov

Extractos de una charla de Dmitry Orlov transcripta en la web titulada "Definancialisation, Deglobalisation, Relocalisation":

"Most of the wealth is in very few private hands right now. Governments and the vast majority of the people only have debt."

"The best we seem to be able to do is buy time. In fact, that seems to be what we are good at - postponing the inevitable through diligence and hard work."

Update! y de yapa una cita mas acerca del proyecto OLPC que no puedo dejar de copiar porque coincide mucho con lo que pienso!:

"Nicholas' new OLPC is dropping those pesky education goals from the mission and turning itself into a 50-person nonprofit laptop manufacturer, competing with Lenovo, Dell, Apple, Asus, HP and Intel on their home turf [...]"

( Mayo, 11 2009 , Ivan Krstić )

M.Moore: Crisis, salvatajes y "the big 3"

Copio a  continuación un mensaje de Michael Moore en su lista publica de correo, donde habla sobre la crisis en USA y hace propuestas alternativas de solución:

Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008

Saving the Big 3 for You and Me ...a message from Michael Moore

Friends,

I drive an American car. It's a Chrysler. That's not an endorsement. It's more like a cry for pity. And now for a decades-old story, retold ad infinitum by tens of millions of Americans, a third of whom have had to desert their country to simply find a damn way to get to work in something that won't break down:

My Chrysler is four years old. I bought it because of its smooth and comfortable ride. Daimler-Benz owned the company then and had the good grace to place the Chrysler chassis on a Mercedes axle and, man, was that a sweet ride!

When it would start.

More than a dozen times in these years, the car has simply died. Batteries have been replaced, but that wasn't the problem. My dad drives the same model. His car has died many times, too. Just won't start, for no reason at all.

A few weeks ago, I took my Chrysler in to the Chrysler dealer here in northern Michigan -- and the latest fixes cost me $1,400. The next day, the vehicle wouldn't start. When I got it going, the brake warning light came on. And on and on.

You might assume from this that I couldn't give a rat's ass about these miserably inept crapmobile makers down the road in Detroit city. But I do care. I care about the millions whose lives and livelihoods depend on these car companies. I care about the security and defense of this country because the world is running out of oil -- and when it
runs out, the calamity and collapse that will take place will make the current recession/depression look like a Tommy Tune musical.

And I care about what happens with the Big 3 because they are moreresponsible than almost anyone for the destruction of our fragile atmosphere and the daily melting of our polar ice caps.

Congress must save the industrial infrastructure that these companies control and the jobs they create. And it must save the world from the internal combustion engine. This great, vast manufacturingnetwork can redeem itself by building mass transit and electric/hybridcars, and the kind of transportation we need for the 21st century.

And Congress must do all this by NOT giving GM, Ford and Chrysler the $34 billion they are asking for in "loans" (a few days ago they only wanted $25 billion; that's how stupid they are -- they don't even know how much they really need to make this month's payroll. If you or I tried to get a loan from the bank this way, not only would we be
thrown out on our ear, the bank would place us on some sort of credit rating blacklist).

Two weeks ago, the CEOs of the Big 3 were tarred and feathered before a Congressional committee who sneered at them in a way far different than when the heads of the financial industry showed up two months earlier. At that time, the politicians tripped over each other in their swoon for Wall Street and its Ponzi schemers who had concocted Byzantine ways to bet other people's money on unregulated credit default swaps, known in the common vernacular as unicorns and fairies.

But the Detroit boys were from the Midwest, the Rust (yuk!) Belt, where they made real things that consumers needed and could touch and buy, and that continually recycled money into the economy (shocking!), produced unions that created the middle class, and fixed my teeth for free when I was ten.

For all of that, the auto heads had to sit there in November and be ridiculed about how they traveled to D.C. Yes, they flew on their corporate jets, just like the bankers and Wall Street thieves did in October. But, hey, THAT was OK! They're the Masters of the Universe! Nothing but the best chariots for Big Finance as they set about to loot
our nation's treasury.

Of course, the auto magnates used be the Masters who ruled the world. They were the pulsating hub that all other industries -- steel, oil, cement contractors -- served. Fifty-five years ago, the president of GM sat on that same Capitol Hill and bluntly told Congress, what's good for General Motors is good for the country. Because, you see, in their minds, GM WAS the country.

What a long, sad fall from grace we witnessed on November 19th when the three blind mice had their knuckles slapped and then were sent back home to write an essay called, "Why You Should Give Me Billions of
Dollars of Free Cash." They were also asked if they would work for a dollar a year. Take that! What a big, brave Congress they are! Requesting indentured servitude from (still) three of the most powerful men in the world. This from a spineless body that won't dare stand up to a disgraced president nor turn down a single funding request for a war that neither they nor the American public support. Amazing.

Let me just state the obvious: Every single dollar Congress gives these three companies will be flushed right down the toilet. There is nothing the management teams of the Big 3 are going to do to convince people to go out during a recession and buy their big, gas-guzzling, inferior products. Just forget it. And, as sure as I am that the Ford family-owned Detroit Lions are not going to the Super Bowl -- ever -- I can guarantee you, after they burn through this $34 billion, they'll be back for another $34 billion next summer.

So what to do? Members of Congress, here's what I propose:

1. Transporting Americans is and should be one of the most important functions our government must address. And because we are facing a massive economic, energy and environmental crisis, the new president and Congress must do what Franklin Roosevelt did when he was faced with a crisis (and ordered the auto industry to stop building cars and
instead build tanks and planes): The Big 3 are, from this point forward, to build only cars that are not primarily dependent on oil and, more importantly to build trains, buses, subways and light rail (a corresponding public works project across the country will build the rail lines and tracks). This will not only save jobs, but create millions of new ones.

2. You could buy ALL the common shares of stock in General Motors for less than $3 billion. Why should we give GM $18 billion or $25 billion or anything? Take the money and buy the company! (You're going to demand collateral anyway if you give them the "loan," and because we know they will default on that loan, you're going to own the  company in the end as it is. So why wait? Just buy them out now.)

3. None of us want government officials running a car company, but there are some very smart transportation geniuses who could be hired to do this. We need a Marshall Plan to switch us off oil-dependent vehicles and get us into the 21st century.

This proposal is not radical or rocket science. It just takes one of the smartest people ever to run for the presidency to pull it off. What  I'm proposing has worked before. The national rail system was inshambles in the '70s. The government took it over. A decade later it was turning a profit, so the government returned it to private/public
hands, and got a couple billion dollars put back in the treasury.

This proposal will save our industrial infrastructure -- and millions of jobs. More importantly, it will create millions more. It literally could pull us out of this recession.

In contrast, yesterday General Motors presented its restructuring proposal to Congress. They promised, if Congress gave them $18 billion now, they would, in turn, eliminate around 20,000 jobs. You read that right. We give them billions so they can throw more Americans out of work. That's been their Big Idea for the last 30 years -- layoff thousands in order to protect profits. But no one ever stopped to ask this question: If you throw everyone out of work, who's going to have the money to go out and buy a car?

These idiots don't deserve a dime. Fire all of them, and take over the industry for the good of the workers, the country and the planet.

What's good for General Motors IS good for the country. Once the country is calling the shots.

Yours,

Michael Moore

MMFlint@aol.com

MichaelMoore.com

P.S. I will be on Keith Olbermann tonight (8pm/10pm/midnight ET) to discuss this further on MSNBC.