April 29th, 2010
03:19 PM ET

WebPulse: Louisiana emergency and Jobs' diss

Apple CEO Steve Jobs says no to Flash

Here’s a quick glance at the collective consciousness of the Web on Thursday:

Oil spill threatens Louisiana - At the top of the most searched words on the Web is "oil" and "Louisiana" as President Obama pledged the federal government will use "every single resource" at its disposal to protect the state from an oil slick creeping toward its coastline. The spill could hurt 400 species and become one of the worst environmental disasters in history. The Coast Guard said the amount of oil spilling from a sunken underwater well caused by a rig explosion last week is much more than originally estimated - five times more. There is about 5,000 barrels, or 210,000 gallons, leaking each day into the Gulf of Mexico.

Jobs disses Flash - Everyone is buzzing about why Apple CEO Steve Jobs has told Flash to buzz off. In a post on Apple's Web site, Jobs said 200,000 applications are available in his company's mobile app store – and they all benefit because they're not built in Flash, a format that supports video, animation, games and other content and is made by tech competitor Adobe. Some tech bloggers have criticized Apple for not supporting Flash on its mobile devices, including the iPad, iPhone and iPod.

Arizona, hotter than usual - While leading Democratic senators are set to unveil the first comprehensive immigration reform late Thursday, the state is the focus of attention from all corners. While some politicians, residents and police support the move, college students are organizing to formally oppose it. The law requires police to verify if someone is legal. Colombian pop singer Shakira is on scene to protest.  CNN's Sanjay Gupta interviews the singer tonight at 10 p.m. ET.


Filed under: Apple • Barack Obama • Technology • Web Pulse
soundoff (4 Responses)
  1. Craig N. Barthelmas

    Subject: PRO-ACTIVE OIL SPILL CONTINGENCY PLAN, Dated: Wed, 5 May, 2010

    TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN; We will make this statement brief since we know that no one to date has been listening.

    1. We found a pre-processed material and developed an action plan that would have extracted up to 95% of the oil spill contaminants from the surface waters of the Gulf of Mexico, before it hit land fall.
    2. Our product was a, “Modified Oil Spill Environmental Sponge” dubbed M.O.S.E.S., it is a ¼” to ½” product that could be used to absorb oil contaminants from both “fresh water and salt water” surface oil spills. Our tests have concluded that one ton of product will absorb 125 gallons of oil in less than one hour. Simply put it will absorb approximately one half of its weight in oil. M.O.S.E.S. collects/absorbs oil not water. After saturation M.O.S.E.S. will only contain about 1.4% water. It creates no added impact on marine life or the environment. It also poses no threat to other kinds of wildlife including humans. A fifteen minute test would have proven this process.
    3. Our plan was full circle and would have included staging, seeding, re-claiming and re-processing all of the contaminated oil’s and seed materials back into re-usable fuels and commodities.
    4. Due to the urgencies to reduce the impact on the environment and the magnitude of this spill, our plan would require partnering with the Coast Guard and other organizations that were already being used to provide staging, seeding and reclaim operations.
    5. Seeding operations would have been handled in essentially the same way they were being done, with minor and/or no modifications to airborne or aquatic equipment that would handle spreading ¼” to ½” particulates.
    6. Re-claim operations required the same booms, scoops, pumps and barge operations, that were being used.
    7. Re-processing operations proposed a permanent emissions free plant for processing oil, sand and other like materials into re-usable fuels and commodities. The plant would take approximately ninety to one hundred and fifty days to construct and would become a permanent part of the states fast action response to future oil spills.
    8. Our plan would have first, assisted with the on-going damage control operations in the gulf; second, it could have been put into operation within seven days; third, it would have become a $30,000,000.00 per year financial benefit to the communities that embraced staging and plant processing operations.
    9. This plan would have greatly reduced the time and costs associated with this kind of oil spill in the future. We are confident that this type of pro-active plan would have become a template for other high risk (oceanic) areas.
    So, why was this plan given no consideration at all? It is not a question of if another spill will happen but when. The only excuses we have been able to come up with that, we are sure you are going to here are, as follows:
    a. BP the News Network and Government Agencies didn’t have the time to consider a pro-active long term plan?
    b. “We are all crack pots” when, this technology is patented and the product could be tested in fifteen minutes?
    c. “BP has it under control as they have done this before?” We think, crazy is doing the same things over and over again expecting different results! We need to get past these smoke screens and prepare for the future.
    Thank you for your time and consideration. We would love to receive some constructive input.
    Craig N. Barthelmas, Cell: [313] 682-1428, E-Mail: GE1RE22@aol.com
    CC: BP., CNN, FOX 2, NOAA, Governors of: AL., FL., LA., MS., And TX.

    May 15, 2010 at 11:26 am | Report abuse |