DescentBB

Fine dissent, I'll concede that elements behave differently than compounds, which can be altered or broken down, within the food chain. That doesn't make 2-Butoxyethanol any less toxic to the marine life swimming through it at the moment. That's just from the Corexit too. What about the crude oil itself? That itself is a whole other toxic sludge we need to deal with that sticks to everything it touches. Would you want to eat fish from the Gulf right now? Would you try in a decade? Oh, and this spill is now officially the worst and biggest in U.S. history.

But that begs the question, what's going to happen with that organic chemical soup that's floating around under water in a huge massive cloud of poison sludge peices? It's not going to do good things for the environment in the long run. Here's what Philippe Cousteau and a team of reporters found when they dove UNDER the water, the disperant nightmare.



But speaking of organic compounds we're in contact with every day, think about this next time you eat food from a can, drink water from one type of clear bottle or handle certain types of thermal receipt paper, you're getting a dose of BPA. That particular organic compound mimics estrogen and other human hormones, so males are essentially getting feminized by the stuff. Maybe that's a good thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A

And another warm and fuzzy to think about, guess who was in charge of the Alaska Exxon Valdez spill cleanup? Why, BP of course. They should do a bang up job since they did sooooo well with the Valdez cleanup. This from the company that didn't even PLAN for a major spill in the first place.

tunnelcat wrote: What about the crude oil itself? That itself is a whole other toxic sludge we need to deal with that sticks to everything it touches.

Yes, the crude in the water is absolutely a problem - which is why the dispersants are being applied in the first place. (more on this below)

Would you want to eat fish from the Gulf right now?

Not directly from the spill area, no. My understanding is that they've closed fishing in this area. But from anywhere else in the Gulf I wouldn't have any reservations.

Would you try in a decade?

Absolutely.

Oh, and this spill is now officially the worst and biggest in U.S. history.

Really? Please present the basis you have for this assessment. I was not aware that anyone had accurately determined the flow coming from the DWH rig spill.

But that begs the question, what's going to happen with that organic chemical soup that's floating around under water in a huge massive cloud of poison sludge peices? It's not going to do good things for the environment in the long run. Here's what Philippe Cousteau and a team of reporters found when they dove UNDER the water, the disperant nightmare.

Thanks for the video link, TC. That was interesting.

First, Id like to say that that Sam Champion is very nearly a complete idiot. Anyone who thought that the purpose of the dispersants was to make the oil magically disappear doesn't know what they are talking about. The purpose of the dispersants is to break it up into the smaller oil droplets he moans and gripes about. The object here is to greatly increase the surface area that the oil is exposed to in order to accelerate the chemical, physical and biological degradation of the oil.

But speaking of organic compounds we're in contact with every day, think about this next time you eat food from a can, drink water from one type of clear bottle or handle certain types of thermal receipt paper, you're getting a dose of BPA. That particular organic compound mimics estrogen and other human hormones, so males are essentially getting feminized by the stuff. Maybe that's a good thing.

Completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread.

@ work. I'll have mmore later.

dissent wrote:

Oh, and this spill is now officially the worst and biggest in U.S. history.

Really? Please present the basis you have for this assessment. I was not aware that anyone had accurately determined the flow coming from the DWH rig spill.

Are you referring to the comments made by Carol Browner?

The spill, caused by an April 20 oil rig explosion that killed 11 people, has dumped 6 million gallons of oil into the Gulf.

The 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster dumped 11 million gallons of oil off the Alaska coast.

By my calculations, the story has the number a little low. If the oil was flowing at 5000 bpd (210,000 gallons per day) for the last 36 days, that comes to 7,560,000 gallons, not 6 million. And this number is probably low, because I understand they were able to run the RITT for a time at 5000 bpd and there was still oil coming out into the sea. So yeah, pending official confirmation, which hasn't yet really happened, this may indeed by the largest spill in US history.

By the time Wednesday is over, we'll see, because if they can't stop this thing from leaking, BP only gives it a 70% chance of success, it will be HUGE.

Anyway, it's all a moot point now anyway, oil's all over the place. Next hurricane, it'll be inland for miles. It's a big effing disaster for all the people that make a living along the Gulf Coast and all the wildlife that live there.

the \"top kill\" attempt has started.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6509#more

some interesting comments in this thread; of course, you'll have to sort through the assorted idiots who also post. Also, have a look at the link near the top of the thread to the \"technical brief\" by BP vp Kent Wells. Pretty interesting stuff, and gives a good sense of scale to what operations have been occurring prior to today.

This clip from the movie, It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World about sums up what's been going on with the government and BP. I only wish I could have found the clip that showed the Three Stooges dressed in Fireman's costumes waiting at the airport for the plane to crash a little later in the movie.

.

They still do when conditions allow.

Wiki wrote:The type of oil involved is also a major problem. While most of the oil drilled off Louisiana is a lighter crude, because the leak is deep under the ocean surface the leaking oil is a heavier blend which contains asphalt-like substances, and, according to Ed Overton, who heads a federal chemical hazard assessment team for oil spills, this type of oil emulsifies well, making a "major sticky mess". Once it becomes that kind of mix, it no longer evaporates as quickly as regular oil, does not rinse off as easily, cannot be eaten by microbes as easily, and does not burn as well. "That type of mixture essentially removes all the best oil clean-up weapons", Overton and others said.

Then you would think skimming would be the weapon of choice.

Frankly, I don’t think they know what they are doing, but that’s just my opinion.

Interesting comment by a BP Official at a senate hearing to the effect that due to proscriptions against drilling closer to shore (thus shallower water), drilling has to take place in deeper areas where repairing a blowout is much harder to do. Inference being that the do gooders, by banning drilling closer in, have indirectly created the situation we have now.

Mull that one over while drinking your morning coffee lest you make a self humbling reply

Bet51987 wrote:Can someone explain to me why we can't burn the oil. They already said a test burn was successful in burning off almost 70% of the oil on the surface they tested but I haven't heard anymore about it.

So, why can't they keep burning it. I understand the air pollution part.

Bee

http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/site/2931/

Bee,

Info in oil burning from the DWH response web site here in this pdf file.

(in the "Fact Sheets" menu choice from the "News/Info" menu dropdown)




I find the juxtaposition of tunnelcat and Bee's last posts interesting. At least Bee was looking for some information ...

Obviously, tc, you've taken little effort to read or understand any of the information at the sources I've linked too. Sad, really. You've got people working the robots in 5000 foot deep ocean water where the pressure is upwards of 2200 pounds per square inch. They're working multiple sets of robots at parallel sets of tasks in order to monitor the current state of affairs underwater and to prep and perform the top kill procedure. They have to coordinate ships and supplies at the surface in close proximity, where they are also drilling two relief wells and managing to Insertion Tool device to mitigate the spill volume. Their also prepping an additional device to use if the top kill fails which would require cutting off the riser pipe at the top of the BOP and fitting a device to seal and collect the leaking oil.

Then they have to manage the existing spilled oil in the water and what has made it to land.

They've had to do in a matter of days what would ordinarily be managed over a period of weeks or months.

Be comfortable in your ignorance.

Fascinating. Just saw the live video feed on TV and it actually looks like drilling mud is coming out of the leaking equipment now, not oil, just like BP was hoping. If the well head equipment can withstand the pressures, they'll be pumping in concrete next in order to seal the well. Lets hope that happens successfully. Here's the live feed, but unfortunately, they want you to use Media Player (it must be a plot to keep people from watching).

LIVE BP FEED

This isn't the biggest spill (yet) in the Gulf's history, so I stand corrected dissent. In 1979, there was the Ixtoc spill that was much larger because it went on so long, for NINE MONTHS. That's how long it took them to stop it because they tried and FAILED with ALL the same techniques they are trying again TODAY! They finally got it stopped when they drilled relief wells, which they're doing now as well. It seems the oil companies have learned to drill in deeper and deeper waters in the last 31 years, but they haven't yet figured out a good, QUICK way to stop a catastrophic oil leak when things go wrong.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... a44294.DTL

\"It's raining oil in Florida.\"

From everything I know about the water cycle & distillation, I have to say…that’s highly unlikely.

Early report states \"Top Kill\" method is working.

dissent wrote:I find the juxtaposition of tunnelcat and Bee's last posts interesting. At least Bee was looking for some information ...

Obviously, tc, you've taken little effort to read or understand any of the information at the sources I've linked too. Sad, really. You've got people working the robots in 5000 foot deep ocean water where the pressure is upwards of 2200 pounds per square inch. They're working multiple sets of robots at parallel sets of tasks in order to monitor the current state of affairs underwater and to prep and perform the top kill procedure. They have to coordinate ships and supplies at the surface in close proximity, where they are also drilling two relief wells and managing to Insertion Tool device to mitigate the spill volume. Their also prepping an additional device to use if the top kill fails which would require cutting off the riser pipe at the top of the BOP and fitting a device to seal and collect the leaking oil.

Then they have to manage the existing spilled oil in the water and what has made it to land.

They've had to do in a matter of days what would ordinarily be managed over a period of weeks or months.

Be comfortable in your ignorance.

What part are you talking about dissent that you seem to think I'm ignorant of?

AlphaDoG wrote:Early report states "Top Kill" method is working.

Doesn't appear to be doing much. Live feed:

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_interne ... tream.html

@ tunnelcat -

sorry TC, I think I came down on you a little hard. I was reacting to your comparison of the effort in the Gulf to the Keystone Kops. In rereading your post later, I saw that you were mentioning BP AND the government. I've been following the coverage at the Oil Drum and at the Unified Command site and I've found the people who are doing the actual work at the well site to be performing admirably under very difficult circumstances.

In fact, I agree with you on the government and the Keystone Kops comparison, at least as far as it concerns those government folks who aren't presently involved in the Unified Command operations at the well or in support of it. The politicians and the White House people who are running around mouthing off to the cameras with virtually no knowledge or understanding are causing a LOT more problems that they are solving.

You know I'm all about equal treatment here, Bush could only do so much once the feces hit the fan, he picked Brownie so he takes the hit in that regard but beyond that poor choice he did what he could.... and Obama gets the same pass from me but today he said something which he should take grief for and it shows him for what he is. He has been trying to convince everyone that 'this crisis is priority one fron day one' etc etc. He's all over it etc. And yet in response to criticism that the Fed isn't really doing much at all he says today 'we have people there and if they see something that isn't right tell us and we'll tell BP...'
WTF?? Could Bush have got away with that totally lame assed two faced denial-of-responsibility-yet-claiming-total-control-of-the-operation kind of answer?!?

This guy makes Bill Clinton seem sincere!!

Will Robinson wrote:You know I'm all about equal treatment here, Bush could only do so much once the feces hit the fan, he picked Brownie so he takes the hit in that regard but beyond that poor choice he did what he could.... and Obama gets the same pass from me but today he said something which he should take grief for and it shows him for what he is. He has been trying to convince everyone that 'this crisis is priority one fron day one' etc etc. He's all over it etc.

Even though Ray "School Bus" Nagen was in charge of the chocolate city and Ms Blanco was in charge of the State both did little to prepare for the Katrina onslaught:

"On the Saturday edition of the NBC Nightly News, anchored by John Seigenthaler, correspondent Lisa Myers reported several critical mistakes made by Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco in handling the Hurricane Katrina crisis. The story even showcased a whispered conversation, recorded by CNN, between Blanco and an aide in which Blanco admitted she had been too slow in asking for federal troops. Blanco: "I really need to call for the military ... and I should have started that in the first call."

Bush, when finally asked, sent General Honore who took charge and got things right

Will Robinson wrote:And yet in response to criticism that the Fed isn't really doing much at all he says today 'we have people there and if they see something that isn't right tell us and we'll tell BP...'

Gov Jindal has been asking for federal assistance for over two weeks and finally Barack "No Job Experience" Obama is going down to take a look...close to 40 days after the rig exploding. As though a real leader would need to take a look at this stage. Besides, as Will points out, Obama has said he has people there. Perhaps they should all be fired as they obviously haven't been telling their boss that things ain't right.

And whats this crap "We'll tell BP"? Mr President it is your job to make sure things are right. Send what federal troops are needed and then give the bill to BP when the mess is cleaned up. It is interesting as I watched CNN interview a National Wildlife Scientist who toured the area. He said even flying out 10 miles and seeing oil everywhere, there were only 2 boats that appeared to be skimming oil. So why are there not more ships handling the problem?

Gov. Jindal says he needs federal approval to dredge up barriers to protect sensitive areas. Dredging companies from around the world say they will drop what they are doing to go help. Yet Obama would rather play b-ball and puff on his kool ciggies than make a decision to allow the dredging.

So in comparison, we had dems in charge of Louisiana when Katrina hit who failed in their duties and Bush got blamed...to now where Gov. Jindal (a republican) asking for help and not getting any. Kinda makes you wonder.

And some here fault Arizona for passing the laws they did.

The leak continues as top kill fails.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/us/30 ... ef=general

dissent wrote:@ tunnelcat -

sorry TC, I think I came down on you a little hard. I was reacting to your comparison of the effort in the Gulf to the Keystone Kops. In rereading your post later, I saw that you were mentioning BP AND the government. I've been following the coverage at the Oil Drum and at the Unified Command site and I've found the people who are doing the actual work at the well site to be performing admirably under very difficult circumstances.

In fact, I agree with you on the government and the Keystone Kops comparison, at least as far as it concerns those government folks who aren't presently involved in the Unified Command operations at the well or in support of it. The politicians and the White House people who are running around mouthing off to the cameras with virtually no knowledge or understanding are causing a LOT more problems that they are solving.

Much appreciated dissent. I was referring to the comedy of errors surrounding BOTH the government's and BP's flailing attempts to seal the well, the myriad ideas and efforts to contain that oil and the blame casting being thrown around for the accident. "Not my fault, not my fault! It was his fault!" I even heard some TV network news reporter call it the 'Three Stooges' analogy too.

Now I can't get verification of this, I heard it on TV again, but another reporter on another network newscast claimed that someone? sent in a 'special team' of people to slightly clean up that particular section of beach that Obama visited on his inspection tour. It's almost like someone sanitized it a little bit so that Obama wouldn't see just how bad some of these soiled beaches really are.

BP even tried the 'junkshot' in between the other 'top kill' drilling mud attempts these past few days. No luck. I guess what didn't work in 1979 wasn't going to work now either. Now I've heard reports that they're going to try and connect another blowout preventer to the top of the damaged one in hopes of shutting off the flow. And now there's this 'cut the riser pipe and fit a cap over the well hole' attempt next. I'd wouldn't be surprised if the flow rate went UP catastrophically if they did that. There's a lot of pressure in that particular oil field. I don't have high hopes in either case.

tunnelcat wrote: Much appreciated dissent. I was referring to the comedy of errors surrounding BOTH the government's and BP's flailing attempts to seal the well, the myriad ideas and efforts to contain that oil and the blame casting being thrown around for the accident. "Not my fault, not my fault! It was his fault!" I even heard some TV network news reporter call it the 'Three Stooges' analogy too. ...

... BP even tried the 'junkshot' in between the other 'top kill' drilling mud attempts these past few days. No luck. I guess what didn't work in 1979 wasn't going to work now either. Now I've heard reports that they're going to try and connect another blowout preventer to the top of the damaged one in hopes of shutting off the flow. And now there's this 'cut the riser pipe and fit a cap over the well hole' attempt next. I'd wouldn't be surprised if the flow rate went UP catastrophically if they did that. There's a lot of pressure in that particular oil field. I don't have high hopes in either case.

Except I'm still going to disagree with you TC that what is happening are a lot of "flailing attempts to seal the well". It's really easy to Monday-morning quarterback to failed attempts to date, since, well they failed. Is this "flailing" or is this having difficulty to accomplish something that has never been done before in a challenging environment? There have been cameras on this from the get-go, allowing all sorts of amateur pontification on what's bad, what's good, etc. I'm still going to give credit to those folks in the Unified Command (BP, other oil industry firms, various Federal agencies) who have been working round the clock for weeks trying just to get get the well under control or sealed. Can't fully address the issues of clean-up and investigation of the DWH explosion until this occurs.

Where did you get your information that "what didn't work in 1979 wasn't going to work now either"? I presume you're referring to the Ixtoc 1 blowout. What did Pemex do to seal that well, other that the relief wells that they drilled? Oh, here's a NOAA page that has some info.

In the initial stages of the spill, an estimated 30,000 barrels of oil per day were flowing from the well. In July 1979 the pumping of mud into the well reduced the flow to 20,000 barrels per day, and early in August the pumping of nearly 100,000 steel, iron, and lead balls into the well reduced the flow to 10,000 barrels per day. Mexican authorities also drilled two relief wells into the main well to lower the pressure of the blowout. PEMEX claimed that half of
the released oil burned when it reached the surface, a third of it evaporated, and the rest was contained or dispersed.

Now, I don't know - just how accurate were Pemex's estimates for ANY of the numbers they released. Did they have 24/7 camera coverage? btw, that well was in 160 feet of water, reachable by divers from the surface. The DWH well is in 5000 feet of water. That's about 85 pounds per square inch working environment versus the current about 2200 psig working environment. If the DWH well was in 160 feet of water the containment dome might very well have worked (since the gas hydreates would not have formed), and people would already be well into the clean-up and lawsuit phase.

Oh, and for the clean-up, Pemex told the US to kiss off.

At this point, it looks like they're ready to try the LMRP deployment. Ultimately, they probably aren't going to have this sealed for shure until the kill well is completed and they've pumped in a cement plug. Until then, hopefully, this can mitigate some of the problem.

Maybe it is 'Monday-morning quarterbacking', but why hasn't the oil industry made an effort to improve the technology for dealing with catastrophic events just like this one? I mean, they've figured out how to drill the well at 5000 feet of depth, quite impressive to say the least, but they've not made much progress technologically with how to deal with a major blowout or malfunction. They're essentially resorting to the same methods they used in 1979, the drill mud 'top kill', the 'junkshot', trying to cap the riser, etc., and nothing has worked yet. It still looks like the relief well is the only solution at present, and that took nine months to complete in 1979. If we're going to drill for oil deep in the ocean, we'd better have a sound, reliable backup plan to deal with a failure BEFORE IT HAPPENS.

What's this 1st-person plural business? Are you in the oil industry? Are you anticipating a government take-over?

Dunno, maybe she's british ?

Sergeant Thorne wrote:What's this 1st-person plural business? Are you in the oil industry? Are you anticipating a government take-over?

"We" as in "all Americans", including me, who use oil everyday and are indirectly responsible for the major mess now in the Gulf. As for a government takeover, that might be next if BP can't stop the leak or get the oil cleaned up, not that the government is going to do any better at it.

Very funny Grendel.

Are we talking British Invasion? We (U.S.) better not get into the business of taking over foreign owned businesses, that could be bad. Can you say International Incident?

Oh, they won't actually take over BP, they'll just kick them out of the way, as Salazar threatened, take over responsibility for stopping the leak and cleaning up the oil then stick the taxpayers with the bill.

No more like BP will coerce the government to take over, a little grandstanding will happen ,then WE will pay for it as the 2 walk off hand in hand.

tunnelcat wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:What's this 1st-person plural business? Are you in the oil industry? Are you anticipating a government take-over?

"We" as in "all Americans", including me, who use oil everyday and are indirectly responsible for the major mess now in the Gulf. As for a government takeover, that might be next if BP can't stop the leak or get the oil cleaned up, not that the government is going to do any better at it.

We who use oil based products should give up:

1)Driving our cars? Rv's? Boats?

2)Driving semi's to deliver goods? Using heavy construction equipment? Cargo ships? Farm equipment? Airplanes?

3) Using fertilizers?

4) Using anything made out of plastic?

Should we go back to the horse and buggy era? Coal burning ships and trains? Want to give up your precious laptop/IPOD/Cell Phone? Use horse drawn farm equipment or require everyone to move out of the cities to grow their own food? The world would be a vastly different place with no oil.

You forgot makeup.

and asphalt

...and the little story 'bout a man named Jed.

(sorry)

I have a real problem with the notion that we are even indirectly responsible for something that was directly preventable.

\"We\" are not responsible for the DWH accident. \"We\" are responsible for the demand for petroleum products that is what the DWH, along with all the other hundreds of underwater drill rigs, was trying to supply.

The larger burden of responsibility is on the people who pushed safety to the side in order to try and save a buck. It's not like they would have gone bankrupt by keeping safety a priority.

Krom wrote:The larger burden of responsibility is on the people who pushed safety to the side in order to try and save a buck. It's not like they would have gone bankrupt by keeping safety a priority.

I agree. I wonder how much they are saving now? They are near or at a Billion in clean up costs and I expect that to double and triple. BP's stocks have fallen 17% or more. So I wonder if in the future, BP will try and cut corners on their safety program. I suspect not.

I'm sure there will be a full investigation, as was done by the Baker Panel and the CSB for the TXC incident. I expect any civil and criminal penalties will be fully pursued.