• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US bans offshore drilling as Deepwater Horizon slick hits land

megaprogman said:
I see a distinct lack of rainbows in those streams.
Click to expand...

There's actually a good reason for that.

Notice the shadow of the ships. Those shadows generally point in the direction of the aircraft taking the photo. This means the sun is generally forward of the photographer.

You can only see a rainbow when the sun is at your back.

I'm certain that if this photo were taken from the other side of the rig there would be a rainbow....which is probably something the photographer new and wanted to avoid for the sake of taking a clear picture of the site.
 
Random funny:

billgatesstevejobs2.jpg
 
Gulf oil spill: Tar balls found in Florida Keys not from Deepwater Horizon slick, Coast Guard says
May 19, 2010 | 9:24 am

img.jpg


The Coast Guard announced Wednesday morning that the blobs of tar that washed up in the Florida Keys earlier this week are not related to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

The Coast Guard analyzed the tar balls as evidence mounted that at least some oil from the spill soon would arrive in South Florida.

The analysis determined conclusively that the tar balls collected from the Keys beaches do not match the type of oil from the gulf spill, the agency announced in a news release. The source of the pollution is unknown.
Click to expand...

Calm the **** down, people.
 
Jerry said:
Calm the **** down, people.
Click to expand...

LOL, and if you've ever been to the beaches from San Diego to Los Angeles, little tar balls wash up on shore all the time. It's a natural occurrence!

The ocean floor seeps oil all the time. Much of it is devoured by microrganisms, but some of it isn't.
 
Erod said:
LOL, and if you've ever been to the beaches from San Diego to Los Angeles, little tar balls wash up on shore all the time. It's a natural occurrence!

The ocean floor seeps oil all the time. Much of it is devoured by microrganisms, but some of it isn't.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the worst is over.....this little bit of seepage from the pipe is nothing. Lets start drilling again.
 
Jerry said:
drz-400, thank you for your links and thoughtful posts. I may have been wrong about the weight of the crude from the Valdez. I'm not yet sure I was wrong, but you gave a good argument and I'm reconsidering the point as I argued it. If I'm wrong then I accept my error.
...
If I understand the information you presented correctly, the attribute of crude which most dictates how volatile a spill is to the environment gallon for gallon, and assuming everything else is equal, is the surfer content.
Click to expand...

I think the sulfur content would definetly have a lot to do with the toxicity of the oil, but I am sure other things can contribute to. I am no expert though, but this spill is better in that regard. It is also slightly "lighter" than the exxon spill, and the fact that the exxon spill was in alaska I am sure made the oil slightly thicker than in the gulf simply due to temperature. So some of the oil may evaporate quicker. I wouldn't say its a huge difference though.

I also looked up some data from the EPA:
Group 2 -specific gravity less than 0.85;
Group 3 -specific gravity equal to or greater than 0.85 and less than 0.95;
Click to expand...
So if you actually crunch the numbers, at 60 degrees F you have a specific gravity of .866 for the exxon spill and .845 for the best case bp spill. So with temperature you could safely assume the exxon spill was a group 3 oil, while the best case for this spill is a borderline group 2 / 3.

So here's something on the trade offs between a type 2 and 3 spill, keeping in mind this spill will most likely be in between the two.

Type 2—Light Oils (Diesel, No. 2 Fuel Oil, Light Crudes)
• Moderately volatile; will leave residue (up to one-third of spill amount)
after a few days.
• Moderate concentrations of toxic (soluble) compounds, especially
distilled products.
• Will "oil" intertidal resources with long-term contamination potential.
2-7
• Has potential for subtidal impacts (dissolution, mixing, sorption onto
suspended sediments).
• No dispersion necessary.
• Cleanup can be very effective.

Type 3—Medium Oils (Most Crude Oils)
• About one-third will evaporate within 24 hours.
• Maximum water-soluble fraction 10-100 ppm.
• Oil contamination of intertidal areas can be severe and long-term.
• Oil impacts to waterfowl and fur-bearing mammals can be severe.
• Chemical dispersion is an option within 1-2 days.
• Cleanup most effective if conducted quickly.
Click to expand...

http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/book_shelf/678_Chapter2.pdf

So what I can gather, without cleanup this spill may not be as long lasting and cleanup could potentially be easier. The lighter stuff will be more soluble, so it will have the potential to be more toxic. But since this is a sweeter crude, it may be less toxic to begin with.

One thing that does bother me from what I read:

Formation of emulsions affects the behavior of an oil spill in many ways. First,weathering rates are much slower. The oil is more viscous and sticky. The volume of “oil” is increased by a factor of 2-3, because the emulsion is up to 70 percent water. Most recovery equipment works very poorly on mousse.
Click to expand...

The fact that this spill should be slightly more soluble should make emulsion less of a problem. However, since it is borderline (and that it is spilling/blowing out of a pipe) it may emulsify instabily, causing a creaming effect with the lighter substances on top and heavier on the bottom. Reports from the news show there has been a mousse made by the oil so this tells me that this may be happening (I think you already said this). This would definetly make it harder to clean up the more lasting heavy stuff because the ligher stuff would be in the way on top.
 
Last edited:
It occurs to me that this explosion may have occurred even if there were no lax inspections, faulty parts, etc.

The explosion was not the result of the faulty BOP. By the time anyone knew there was a problem which could cause an explosion on the deck, the BOP would be of no use as the methane would have already passed it.

After the explosion the BOP should have deployed to prevent the spill, but the BOP couldn't have prevented the methane bubble from traveling up the pipe. Someone would have had to know the methane was there, have their hand on the BOP control and deploy the BOP, closing the pipe at the sea floor before any methane traveled up. Likewise, the various safeties of the machines on deck were not designed to handle that volume or pressure of methane.

If the BOP deployed flawlessly, the rig would have still exploded and sank, only now we wouldn't have a spill.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
It occurs to me that this explosion may have occurred even if there were no lax inspections, faulty parts, etc.

The explosion was not the result of the faulty BOP. By the time anyone knew there was a problem which could cause an explosion on the deck, the BOP would be of no use as the methane would have already passed it.

After the explosion the BOP should have deployed to prevent the spill, but the BOP couldn't have prevented the methane bubble from traveling up the pipe. Someone would have had to know the methane was there, have their hand on the BOP control and deploy the BOP, closing the pipe at the sea floor before any methane traveled up.

If the BOP deployed flawlessly, the rig would have still exploded and sank, only now we wouldn't have a spill.
Click to expand...

That still doesn't explain the fire...

ricksfolly
 
ricksfolly said:
That still doesn't explain the fire...

ricksfolly
Click to expand...

Methane is combustible as a gas, at 1 atmosphere, at around 5-15% concentration. I imagine these conditions only took a few second to achieve once the methane began bursting through pipes and seals on the deck.
 
Jerry said:
Methane is combustible as a gas, at 1 atmosphere, at around 5-15% concentration. I imagine these conditions only took a few second to achieve once the methane began bursting through pipes and seals on the deck.
Click to expand...

Are you saying it ignites by itself, doesn't need a catalyst?

ricksfolly
 
Jerry said:
It occurs to me that this explosion may have occurred even if there were no lax inspections, faulty parts, etc.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

The explosion was not the result of the faulty BOP.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

By the time anyone knew there was a problem which could cause an explosion on the deck, the BOP would be of no use as the methane would have already passed it.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

After the explosion the BOP should have deployed to prevent the spill, but the BOP couldn't have prevented the methane bubble from traveling up the pipe.
Click to expand...

You're really just winging it here, aren't you:confused:

BP knew the BOP was damaged weeks before the explosion. A worker accidentally damaged it. And BP knew it!

Someone would have had to know the methane was there,
Click to expand...

Of course they knew explosive gases were they. They almost always are. :roll: That's why they have very specific safety tests and steps to perform during the drilling process, when they test the BOP and when they're cementing those plugs.

have their hand on the BOP control and deploy the BOP, closing the pipe at the sea floor before any methane traveled up. Likewise, the various safeties of the machines on deck were not designed to handle that volume or pressure of methane.

If the BOP deployed flawlessly, the rig would have still exploded and sank, only now we wouldn't have a spill.
Click to expand...

Where DO you get this stuff?

We now know that BP caused the explosion because of their hurry to skip safety steps and ignore known damages to the BOP all in the name of making more money faster!.

For the intellectually curious, here's an eye witness report on BOP's guilt in being negligent and actually causing this fatal explosion.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news/72881-blowout-deepwater-horizon-disaster.html


WARNING!!! WARNING!!! WARNING!!! WARNING!!!
Do NOT click on that link if you can't handle the truth.
 
ricksfolly said:
Are you saying it ignites by itself, doesn't need a catalyst?

ricksfolly
Click to expand...

I'm saying that a large cloud of methane pouring all over the deck would have found a catalyst. It could have been anything from the motor running the turn table, electro-static shock from a control panel....anything.
 
ADK_Forever said:
BP knew the BOP was damaged weeks before the explosion. A worker accidentally damaged it.
Click to expand...

Please describe how a BOP stack automatically detects a problem and makes the decision to deploy.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
Please describe how the BOP automatically detects a problem and makes the decision to deploy.
Click to expand...

I see you headed my warning for that link. :lol:
 
USA-1 said:
You do know this oil is headed for Florida, don't you?
Click to expand...

So you're telling me that if Virginia were still drilling, that even more oil from the Gulf would be headed for Florida?
 
Jerry said:
So you have no idea how a working BOP prevents gas from entering the well bore?
Click to expand...

You're right to ignore that article. It's much easier to spout your own dream about what did or did not happen if you can say, "Oh, I didn't read that. I had no idea that a man who was actually working on the Deepwater Horizon, and witnessed BP's negligence and unsafe actions all of which are directly responsible for that explosion that killed eleven men, has stated that BP caused that explosion and possibly the worst oil spill/leak in U.S. waters in history".

So much for that intellectual curiosity of yours for technical thangs, ehh?

Is it really that hard for you to look at evidence and make an unbiased decision?
 
Jerry said:
It occurs to me that this explosion may have occurred even if there were no lax inspections, faulty parts, etc.

The explosion was not the result of the faulty BOP. By the time anyone knew there was a problem which could cause an explosion on the deck, the BOP would be of no use as the methane would have already passed it.

After the explosion the BOP should have deployed to prevent the spill, but the BOP couldn't have prevented the methane bubble from traveling up the pipe. Someone would have had to know the methane was there, have their hand on the BOP control and deploy the BOP, closing the pipe at the sea floor before any methane traveled up. Likewise, the various safeties of the machines on deck were not designed to handle that volume or pressure of methane.

If the BOP deployed flawlessly, the rig would have still exploded and sank, only now we wouldn't have a spill.
Click to expand...

Given the volume and pressure of this particular methane bubble, the initial explosion itself could not have been prevented. The Deepwater's on-deck fail-safes were no designed to withstand that pressure. There would still have been a fire.

However, the fire was relatively local in the initial moments following the flash-point. Some reports account for the crews repeated effort to engage the BOP before the decision to abandon the Deepwater was made.

Had the BOP fully deployed (it remains partially deployed at the moment), the fire would have burned itself out long before it became a risk to the Deepwater.
 
ADK_Forever said:
You're right to ignore that article. It's much easier to spout your own dream about what did or did not happen if you can say, "Oh, I didn't read that. I had no idea that a man who was actually working on the Deepwater Horizon, and witnessed BP's negligence and unsafe actions all of which are directly responsible for that explosion that killed eleven men, has stated that BP caused that explosion and possibly the worst oil spill/leak in U.S. waters in history".

So much for that intellectual curiosity of yours for technical thangs, ehh?

Is it really that hard for you to look at evidence and make an unbiased decision?
Click to expand...

You're article doesn't address my question.

Your article goes on and on about this particular BOP, but I asked something different.

I asked how just any BOP per-se would know to activate without a human telling it to.

The answer is that a BOP itself doesn't know when to deploy. The BOP doesn't make the decision.

The BOP is controlled by the same computer which controls most of the drilling machinery on the deck. It is this computer which directs the activities of the well-bore and drill pipe, controls the mud slurry, turn-table, and tracks progress. It is this computer which makes the automated decision to deploy the BOP, not the BOP unit at the sea floor itself.

Had everything been working perfectly, there still would have been a fire. This is due to the methane being able to reach the deck before the computer could have detected and reacted to the problem.

My presumption that the Deepwater would have burned and sank even if the BOP had performed perfectly was incorrect because I assumed the initial explosion was much greater then it actually was.

Non of the information you provided was relevant to my line of inquiry.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom