Mother of all gushers could kill Earth's oceans?

kokonut said:
In short?

No.
Click to expand...

I'm aware that you are better educated in this matter than I am, and I respect that. I know my post sounds like fear mongering, so we better nip it in the bud. What say you? Can you point out its errors? I am curious and willing to learn.
 
The salty ocean itself naturally breaks down the oil, albeit even though this a single source of oil release in large amounts over time. The ocean bottom of the Gulf of Mexico releases 100,000 to 400,000 barrels of oil a year naturally. In this case, you won't have repercussions worldwide in terms of ecological disaster. It'd be much more limited. Just possibly at the local or regional level. Then you have hurricanes that can serve to break up the oil even faster. Now, oil on the beach, in the estuaries, etc is a different matter. Then you have the ocean's circulation to think about, too.
 
A helluva lot of oil being gushed. No false alarm. It is happening.
 
Beowulf said:
A helluva lot of oil being gushed. No false alarm. It is happening.
Click to expand...


What I was getting at;

There are some people who scream - "The sky is falling"!, when it really isn't!

comprende amigo?

-charles
 
Here's a map of the current spill.

1482_TMF72-2010-05-04-2100-icon.jpg


Deepwater Horizon Incident, Gulf of Mexico | Recent and Historical Incidents | Emergency Response | NOAA's National Ocean Service Office of Response and Restoration
 
kokonut said:
The salty ocean itself naturally breaks down the oil, albeit even though this a single source of oil release in large amounts over time. The ocean bottom of the Gulf of Mexico releases 100,000 to 400,000 barrels of oil a year naturally. In this case, you won't have repercussions worldwide in terms of ecological disaster. It'd be much more limited. Just possibly at the local or regional level. Then you have hurricanes that can serve to break up the oil even faster. Now, oil on the beach, in the estuaries, etc is a different matter. Then you have the ocean's circulation to think about, too.
Click to expand...

that's only on controlled situation. In this case - it's an uncontrolled disaster. As you said - under controlled situation, it leaks 100,000 to 400,000 barrels a year and salty ocean will naturally breaks it down. and blah blah blah.

Right now - it's gushing about 60,000+ barrels a day and it's been about 2 weeks now. That's about 840,000 barrels total of oil in 2 weeks and going.

so a repercussion worldwide in terms of ecological disaster? much more limited? possibly at a local or regional level?

well there's Gulf Stream circulating now and that complicates the matter since many fish & mammals passes thru it. the damage to Gulf coastline may or may not be repairable depending on how long this oil spill will continue. Don't forget - the wildlife damage is still there since Exxon-Valdez accident even for 21 years. but this damage is worse than Exxon-Valdez. It will be felt for decades. I only pray that the damage is minimal but what's for sure is that the repercussion will be felt for a long time.
 
Jiro said:
that's only on controlled situation. In this case - it's an uncontrolled disaster. As you said - under controlled situation, it leaks 100,000 to 400,000 barrels a year and salty ocean will naturally breaks it down. and blah blah blah.

Right now - it's gushing about 60,000+ barrels a day and it's been about 2 weeks now. That's about 840,000 barrels total of oil in 2 weeks and going.

so a repercussion worldwide in terms of ecological disaster? much more limited? possibly at a local or regional level?

well there's Gulf Stream circulating now and that complicates the matter since many fish & mammals passes thru it. the damage to Gulf coastline may or may not be repairable depending on how long this oil spill will continue. Don't forget - the wildlife damage is still there since Exxon-Valdez accident even for 21 years. but this damage is worse than Exxon-Valdez. It will be felt for decades. I only pray that the damage is minimal but what's for sure is that the repercussion will be felt for a long time.
Click to expand...

The biggest number Ive read is 5000 barrels a day.

One of the biggest spills in history also happened in the Gulf of Mexico (Ixtoc I) and released ~25000 barrels a day for about 9 months before it was stopped and the Gulf seemed to recover from that okay.
 
Elliotts Dad said:
The biggest number Ive read is 5000 barrels a day.

One of the biggest spills in history also happened in the Gulf of Mexico (Ixtoc I) and released ~25000 barrels a day for about 9 months before it was stopped and the Gulf seemed to recover from that okay.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I mentioned that one in another spill thread here. It was the 2nd largest oil spill that took place in 1979.


The IXTOC I well continued to spill oil at a rate of 10,000 - 30,000 barrels per day until it was finally capped on March 23, 1980.
Click to expand...
(about 8 months later).
IncidentNews: IXTOC I

It was 600 miles south of Texas where it later impacted that state and Arkasas but not much as you think.

Prevailing northerly currents in the western Gulf of Mexico carried spilled oil toward the U.S. A 60-mile by 70-mile patch of sheen containing a 300 foot by 500 foot patch of heavy crude moved toward the Texas coast. On August 6, 1979,tarballs from the spill impacted a 17 mile stretch of Texas beach. Mousse patches impacted the shoreline north of Port Mansfield Channel on August 15 and again on August 18. On August 24, mousse impacted shoreline south of Aransas Pass. By August 26, most of North Padre Island was covered with moderate amounts of oil.

As of September 1, all of the south Texas coast had been impacted by oil. A storm lasting from September 13-15 removed the majority of the oil. For the remainder of the response and subsequent study period (through August 1980) only tarmats were observed on the beaches. Some oil escaped around boom barriers protecting the three major inlets. During the September storm, there was washing of oil over the Barrier Islands. Impacts to the estuaries were minor.
Click to expand...

IncidentNews: IXTOC I

It was 2 miles down in the water. That's a long way to go to cap it and certainly would've taken a lot time. Our current spill is leaking from 5,000 feet below, just shy of 1 mile.

The current spill is 50 miles from land but the Ixtoc was 600 miles away, enough time for the salty ocean to do it's magic and reduce the overall impact on land (and having a topical storm or hurricane helps, too). This current spill is much closer so we'll see more of the oil mousse or slick than tar balls.

Despite all that, it doesn't mean we should stop drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico or anywhere else. We should learn from this and mitigate the risk even further the next time. Meanwhile, the Bakken oil shale will help take up the slack and it continues to expand in North Dakota.
 
Bumping this.
It is looking more and more like an extinction event after all.
 
lol, its funny how a month and a fresh perspective changes things.....

extinction is a little dramatic tho I think.
 
Elliotts Dad said:
lol, its funny how a month and a fresh perspective changes things.....

extinction is a little dramatic tho I think.
Click to expand...

Nawwww, extinction is not only possible but highly likely. It is funny how people continue playing it down, but I remain true to myself and insist on using words like blunt instruments. Har de har.
 
Would you believe anything BP tells you, sallylou? They have told so many absurd lies that they are hopelessly entangled in them.
 
Beowulf said:
Would you believe anything BP tells you, sallylou? They have told so many absurd lies that they are hopelessly entangled in them.
Click to expand...

Well .... not speaking for sallylou, but ..... BP did not make references to lucefarians ....
 
Back
Top