| Author | Message | ||
     Xb12xmike |
Just a thought....BP should fix this leak and "in addition to" the cost of cleaning up the mess, helping the people and business's and bringing everything back to normal, they should donate the whole oil trap and equipment to the whole Gulf region and continue collecting oil from it using 100% of the revenue gained from the new well and any other well connected to this Oil Trap for payback, future use, R&D or TBD. (50+million barrels enough for that?) | ||
| Cowboy |
Att: Blake If you want to talk to me send me your Ph. No I am guesing like every one else but I have red these reports over and over I have some dfenate thoughts. but I will not put them in print. Cowboy | ||
| Cowboy |
My E mail address is [removed to thwart the spambots]  (Message edited by blake on May 30, 2010) | ||
| Aesquire |
Water surface temperature not evaporation is what adds the most energy to a hurricane. Not arguing... just real curious where that factoid comes from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_cyclone I've been reading a lot of utter crap "science" lately in the media. I may have missed a few new advancements....but most of the laws of thermodynamics are still useable, right? I'll not blame the Global Warming movement for all of it, as the so called economists seem to constantly be dead wrong. One of the funny things Rush still does, ( besides the joke songs and the montages of absolutely identical mantras from the news shows ) is to note every time the "experts" say some economic issue is "unexpected", when anyone who is literate could easily have expected it. Like stocks falling when a disaster hits, or a rise in unemployment when corporate taxes rise. I read in the WSJ that "only 13" experts correctly predicted the housing/mortgage crisis. Why does anyone listen to anyone else now that we know these guys got it right and all the rest wrong? I really wonder. On hurricanes. I don't know what the effect of oil vapor would have on the heat engine of a cyclone. But it seems that water evaporation would be reduced with an oil slick...depending on thickness & coverage. At monomolecular levels of film on calm water, an oil film may reflect more IR than clean water....but I'd want to test that before publishing it in "Nature". Here's a quote from the wiki article above....yes, I know, Wiki isn't a reference, it's a slow blog. "To continue to drive its heat engine, a tropical cyclone must remain over warm water, which provides the needed atmospheric moisture to keep the positive feedback loop running. When a tropical cyclone passes over land, it is cut off from its heat source and its strength diminishes rapidly." That matches my memory of hurricanes that come ashore in Texas over hot land and peter out from lack of moisture. So...where is the source for the above theory, Gregtonn? Not knocking you, mind you. I too wish we had a space program. As you probably know, you could take a minute of zero pressure unprotected with minor physical problems....a minute at 1 mile down.... I don't think so. ( the "minor problems" inclue edema, bleeding, and tissue damage...but it's been survivable, before ) | ||
| Gregtonn |
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-na sa/2000/ast11sep_1/ I should have been more precise. Warmer water surface temperature is what causes the evaporation. Given equal atmospheric humidity cold water surface temperatures will reduce the energy in a hurricane thus "killing" it. Warmer water temps add energy to a hurricane thus intensifying its effects. G | ||
| Hex |
http://www.roffs.com/deepwaterhorizon.html  | ||
| Hex |
Energy expert: Nuking oil leak ‘only thing we can do’ http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0529/energy-expert-nuk e-oil-leak/ | ||
| Court |
I heard some talk the other day about the effects of the dark oil atop the water causing a warming that could elevate a level 2 hurricane to a 3 or a 4. That's what I heard . . no clue as to it's accuracy. It, intuitively made sense but I have no basis to know that it's fact. Charlotte would be able to likely speak to that. The story went on to present concerns about oil getting aloft and being scattered all about. If it's not already, this may be the greatest disaster of my lifetime. Again . . . I wish I had facts. With a neighborhood organizer claiming "I'm in charge and I'm the one responsible" . . my sense tell me we're screwed. Governor Jindal requested some immediate action and was told something like "it'll be 5 months to get permits". It's like the patients are running the asylum. The upside is that it's keeping their attention off spending. | ||
| Reindog |
What if a nuke tears open a 100 ft. spout? | ||
| Gregtonn |
"The story went on to present concerns about oil getting aloft and being scattered all about." Court, I'm not sure that would be a great concern given than both commercial and military jets dump many thousands of gallons of jet fuel (basically diesel) into the atmosphere every year. Not saying that's a good thing, actually it really ticks me off, but it's a fact. G | ||
| Whatever |
I do not know how the oil would affect the weather... I think most meteorology is a bunch of hand waving myself... why I call air scientists "air heads"... my biggest concern is still the wetland ecosystem, because of the value that it adds to the entire ecological web... there is not much that is going to be right in the near shore area for a very long time... when that oil gets into the hydric soils and the mangrove roots, I really don't know how long it will take to break down... I do know that dissolved oxygen and sediment both are big problems in freshwater systems, so that and temperature are where the focus often is in fresh water permits for industry... also with the possible impurities in the oil, since it is crude oil, I don't know what the long range effects are going to be... sulfur would be a concern here... I think too much sulfur would kill a crap load of plants... I am not sure if the microbes will take over in these systems, depleting oxygen further and we will end up with "dead zones"... if that happens, couldn't we lose roughly 25% to 35% of the "land" in Lousiana??? Too many questions and not enough answers... it is a complete clusterf*ck at this point... I still do not understand what this has to do with DC... if the oil company is responsible for the "best technology" they can throw at it, and this technology is inadequate at this point... this may continue for a few more weeks at best and a few more months at worst... | ||
| Whatever |
Interesting article from LSU... Probably put me to sleep tho at this hour...  http://www.lsu.edu/cei/research_projects/Wetlands_ final.pdf | ||
| Aesquire |
So...the effects of a big oil spill on hurricanes is a panic attack with pretty much zero actual data. That's what I'm seeing. The climate guys will call a rockslide a climate event if it gets them more funding. Screw them. Mostly, It's a "the bigger the disaster the more papers we sell" junk science deal. We can ignore that one....good. The real issue is the ecology of the shore marshes and beaches. Gumbo is at stake. A little less critical is the ocean part, with fish, mammals, and plants in danger. Heard on NPR this morning they are trying to trace where the underwater oil plumes are & their nature. They don't know yet if the plumes are fine oil droplets, or what. Some real good science can come out of this, if we are lucky. I'm afraid the politics of it will kill any real gain in knowledge. I can see a bureaucrat spazzing when he's asked to approve dredged up artificial islands as an oil barrier. It's probably not in his manual, for one thing, and it may cause more harm than good....so he stalls. Wait long enough and the problem goes away. Really torque me off if I was Governor of a Gulf State that can't get permission from Big Brother to "do something". Even though it may do more harm than good. | ||
| Sifo |
The story went on to present concerns about oil getting aloft and being scattered all about. This sounds like typical worst case scenario thinking without ever considering the up side of what could happen. Oil being taken aloft and raining out elsewhere means less oil in the coastal wetlands. That sounds like a GOOD thing to me. The coastal wetlands are probably about the worst place to have the oil accumulate, yet it the natural place for it to accumulate. That is bad. If a hurricane were to take oil away from coastal wetlands and disperse it over a large area that is less fragile (along with many time more water than oil), that to me sounds like a good thing overall considering what is happening. Personally I have my doubts that vast quantities of oil would get picked up by a hurricane though. The approaching hurricane would stir the waters getting much of the oil off the surface before the hurricane could have a chance to even see the oil slick. Even with oil on the surface how much oil would evaporate into the hurricane system? Do hurricanes suck water directly from the oceans in large quantities? I thought most of the water came from evaporation. I know water spouts will pick up the water directly, but they are a very small part of the overall hurricane. Bottom line is that we have almost zero real world data on this to develop computer models with. So these models are either being done by the real experts such as NOAA who have blown the hurricane predictions in a pretty big way in recent years, or from the amateur chicken little scientists that predict doom and gloom because it gets them more government funding. | ||
| Just_ziptab |
Dilution is the solution to pollution.A hurricane could be good........but not for the ships out there trying to plug it. | ||
| Cowboy |
All I can tell any one about oil and hurrican is several yrs a go a hurrican came through Venice and destoryed the Getty oil co. tank farm I dont know the volume but it is a area of about 50 acres of huge tanks filled crude in a few monts there were no sighs of oil .Hell I dont know where it went. | ||
| Blake |
>>> I heard some talk the other day about the effects of the dark oil atop the water causing a warming that could elevate a level 2 hurricane to a 3 or a 4. Court, I'm 99% sure that is complete and utter bunk. The amount of heat that the oil could hold is infinitesimal compared to the heat reservoir of the ocean. | ||
| Whatever |
The "current" head of Minerals Management RESIGNED on FRIDAY May 28th... What a f-in disgrace! "MMS was heavily criticized in a recent report by the department's inspector general. The report said that MMS employees accepted gifts from oil industry interests and that some agency employees considered themselves agents of the industry." WOW! What a surprise that is...  Dpt of Interior is about as messed up as an agency can get... WHO is to blame??? WTF is wrong with our country... it is a structural problem within our agencies... According to this article they were on crystal meth when they did it... nice... I am starting to get pissed... THIS OCCURED BEFORE 2007... Read this article and tell me... WHO is to blame??? The current administration? NOT>>> http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/in terior-department-inspector-general-issues-report- detailing-sleaze-at-minerals-management-service.ht ml | ||
| Whatever |
Here is a link to the Inspector General report, read it, then tell me WHO in the government do you think we should blame? http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/MMS_inspecto r_general_report_pdf.pdf | ||
| Aesquire |
At this rate you'll be trying to dig up Nixon to blame him.  Seriously, this is almost typical government corruption. A few bad apples....a culture of corruption. I'm going to blame the convicted. That way I'm not being an ass. Are the corrupt ones appointees? Civil service? How long has this been going on? ( hint, mine inspectors go back at least to ancient Persia. Possibly Ur. ) So...top kill no work. stuff politicians in. Be bipartisan, we all win. | ||
| Just_ziptab |
So...top kill no work. stuff politicians in. Be bipartisan, we all win. Won't work,they are all too slippery....... | ||
| Rwven |
I think I know what you mean when you say "bipartisan", but in reality why would you want to be part of either one of 'em? | ||
| Whatever |
The regulating agencies have to HIRE people who are competent scientists and engineers to run them... not appoint political cronies... that is the crux of the problem... All I am saying is that until we get competent scientists in there and not any administration cronies... things will remain the same... Just watch... BP will get a "slap on the wrist"... | ||
| Sifo |
The regulating agencies have to HIRE people who are competent scientists and engineers to run them... not appoint political cronies... that is the crux of the problem... And this is why we should run as fast as we can from government run health care. Char, I know you want to blame "other than Obama", but it was his political cronies in place at the time of the accident. I agree the system works as poorly as any government system, but when the stuff hits the fan a year and a half into the administration it just seems quite disingenuous to both blame cronyism and the previous administrations cronies at the same time. | ||
| Sifo |
>>> I heard some talk the other day about the effects of the dark oil atop the water causing a warming that could elevate a level 2 hurricane to a 3 or a 4. Court, I'm 99% sure that is complete and utter bunk. The amount of heat that the oil could hold is infinitesimal compared to the heat reservoir of the ocean. I too have serious doubts about this. One of the sky is falling scenarios of global warming is that decreasing sea ice is opening up open water. In open water the light goes right in instead of reflecting off of ice and converted to heat energy. This was one of the positive feedback "tipping points" that were pushed so much. So if dark open water is dark because almost all the light gets absorbed instead of reflected, how much more energy is really going to be absorbed by adding a coat of dark oil slick? I don't think this would add up to diddly squat. | ||
| Aesquire |
... until we get competent scientists in there and not any administration cronies Char, that's a nice sentiment, I agree with you, but Pournelle's Iron Law says otherwise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy {See section on American Usage ) If you buy the Iron law as observed fact, it seems cynical, but explains a lot. It's not like there isn't corruption to despise. Now or ever. Makes me want to limit government. It was only a short while ago that a Kings power to mess with your life was limited. The current popularity of limitless power in the hands of giant government among these political types, ( both parties, but not evenly, IMO ) seems a step backwards, to me. How about we blame all the cronies? Any argument on that? | ||
| Whatever |
Well, looks like the previous administration had something to do with it, since those particular investigation findings that just became public were for that time (2004 to 2007)... notice the dates on the documents I provided the link to... It clearly states in the cover letter, if you read it, that particular conduct (inspectors taking oil company bribes) occured before Salazar was appointed by Obama... Until you can prove that the current POTUS was aware that BP was cutting corners AND that to do so was in violation of their permt... I still don't connect the dots... Did Salazar know? Were DOI people taking bribes after the investigation was started, around the end of 2008? I would think probably not... but we will see what they do find... | ||
| Kenm123t |
World works this way if your in charge its your problem no matter when it started. If the ship sinks as you receive command its your fault, Not always fair hut the way it is. With power comes responsability | ||
| Sifo |
Until you can prove that the current POTUS was aware that BP was cutting corners AND that to do so was in violation of their permt... I still don't connect the dots... Sorry, I forgot we were talking about BO. Certainly ignorance and/or incompetence is a valid excuse. Bottom line is the accident happened on BO's watch under his cronies. If they knew about the corruption then shame on them. If they didn't know about the corruption then shame on them too. Pointing to past bad behavior does not excuse current bad behavior. I'm confident that the government will handle health care much better though.  | ||
| Whatever |
So if your child, unknowingly to you, commits a crime, then you would be to blame? Do you go to jail? Really? Glad I don't have kids... |
