BP hiding the Oil Spill under the water

Dispersants are fairly common to be used in oil spills at sea. The goal is not to hide it but to try to keep the oil from reaching land. In this case there is too much oil for that to help much.
 
I'm curious....is it possible to salvage the oil using absorbants, and other materials? Given I'm in the CG I should know this stuff, but I'm not a MST. Why not let individuals go out there and salvage the material and sell it on the market to whoever can then refine it? I'm sure in this economic climate there would be a lot of people out there.

Secondly, thanks to the Government all the people who were affected can't sue BP for damages. You wonder why BP isn't rushing to fix this....if they were forced to go bankrupt via remuneration for property damage, you would bet your ass they would be doing everything and anything to get this fixed ASAP.
 
Dispersants are fairly common to be used in oil spills at sea. The goal is not to hide it but to try to keep the oil from reaching land. In this case there is too much oil for that to help much.

Exactly. Way too much oil. It works fine to sink a small surface oil spill. They are pumping it into the water at the underwater wellhead to try to keep it from ever surfacing. Probably off-label use, to put it mildly.
 
I'm curious....is it possible to salvage the oil using absorbants, and other materials? Given I'm in the CG I should know this stuff, but I'm not a MST. Why not let individuals go out there and salvage the material and sell it on the market to whoever can then refine it? I'm sure in this economic climate there would be a lot of people out there.

Secondly, thanks to the Government all the people who were affected can't sue BP for damages. You wonder why BP isn't rushing to fix this....if they were forced to go bankrupt via remuneration for property damage, you would bet your ass they would be doing everything and anything to get this fixed ASAP.

You would think that at a minimum, oil-soaked hay could be burned in some kind of power plant. Dispersing the oil into the ocean prevents that type of collection. Large oil tankers could be used to pump oil (and some seawater) right at the surface (it has been done successfully in the past). They are refusing to do that too.

The government/corporate complex has no liability...taxpayers will have to pay in the end, one way or another. :mad:
 
The EPA gave them the permission to use the dispersants. Now they are concerned about possible toxicity (NOW you are concerned after thousands of gallons have already been used?) and want them to use something else.
 
Is the fact that the dispersant is toxic really a reason to object its use? Oil is already quite toxic and the whole area is going to be dead anyway.
 
Is the fact that the dispersant is toxic really a reason to object its use? Oil is already quite toxic and the whole area is going to be dead anyway.

Yes. Adding more toxins is not a solution.

Plus dispersing the oil down into the water doesn't get rid of the oil, it just hides it from view, and makes it harder to collect. They could be collecting that oil at the surface. Instead it is dispersed, only to pop up again somewhere else.
 
Last edited:
Never saw this coming. :rolleyes:

The Oil plume runs from just below the surface down to 3,300 ft deep. Out of sight, out of mind...

One thing they didn't mention is that as surfactants break down, they often turn into chemicals that mimic estrogen. Wrecks havoc on smaller animals, turning them all female. No worries for humans, it just switches your sexual orientation. :eek: :D

Oil is naturally occurring (although not in these quantities and freshness), but to make matters worse, they have turned it into something different and less "natural".

22-mile oil plume under Gulf nears rich waters

By MATTHEW BROWN and JASON DEAREN, Associated Press Writers Matthew Brown And Jason Dearen, Associated Press Writers – 2 hrs 57 mins ago

NEW ORLEANS – A thick, 22-mile plume of oil discovered by researchers off the BP spill site was nearing an underwater canyon, where it could poison the foodchain for sealife in the waters off Florida.

The discovery by researchers on the University of South Florida College of Marine Science's Weatherbird II vessel is the second significant undersea plume reported since the Deepwater Horizon exploded on April 20. The plume is more than 6 miles wide and its presence was reported Thursday.

The cloud was nearing a large underwater canyon whose currents fuel the foodchain in Gulf waters off Florida and could potentially wash the tiny plants and animals that feed larger organisms in a stew of toxic chemicals, another researcher said Friday.

Larry McKinney, executive director of the Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies at Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, said the DeSoto Canyon off the Florida Panhandle sends nutrient-rich water from the deep sea up to shallower waters.

McKinney said that in a best-case scenario, oil riding the current out of the canyon would rise close enough to the surface to be broken down by sunlight. But if the plume remains relatively intact, it could sweep down the west coast of Florida as a toxic soup as far as the Keys, through what he called some of the most productive parts of the Gulf.

The plume was detected just beneath the surface down to about 3,300 feet, said David Hollander, associate professor of chemical oceanography at USF.

Hollander said the team detected the thickest amount of hydrocarbons, likely from the oil spewing from the blown out well, at about 1,300 feet in the same spot on two separate days this week.

The discovery was important, he said, because it confirmed that the substance found in the water was not naturally occurring and that the plume was at its highest concentration in deeper waters. The researchers will use further testing to determine whether the hydrocarbons they found are the result of dispersants or the emulsification of oil as it traveled away from the well.

The first such plume detected by scientists stretched from the well southwest toward the open sea, but this new undersea oil cloud is headed miles inland into shallower waters where many fish and other species reproduce.

The researchers say they are worried these undersea plumes may be the result of the unprecedented use of chemical dispersants to break up the oil a mile undersea at the site of the leak.

Hollander said the oil they detected has dissolved into the water, and is no longer visible, leading to fears from researchers that the toxicity from the oil and dispersants could pose a big danger to fish larvae and creatures that filter the waters for food.

"There are two elements to it," Hollander said. "The plume reaching waters on the continental shelf could have a toxic effect on fish larvae, and we also may see a long term response as it cascades up the food web."

Dispersants contain surfactants, which are similar to dishwashing soap.

A Louisiana State University researcher who has studied their effects on marine life said that by breaking oil into small particles, surfactants make it easier for fish and other animals to soak up the oil's toxic chemicals. That can impair the animals' immune systems and cause reproductive problems.

"The oil's not at the surface, so it doesn't look so bad, but you have a situation where it's more available to fish," said Kevin Kleinow, a professor in LSU's school of veterinary medicine.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100528/ap_on_re_us/us_oil_spill_new_plume
 
Back
Top