After confirmation from tests the static kill procedure had done its job, National Incident Commander and retired Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen gave the go ahead to permanently seal the leaking oil.
Allen said, "Based on the successful completion of the static kill procedure and a positive evaluation of the test results, I have authorized BP to cement its damaged well."
BP responded by saying on Thursday morning they'll begin to pump cement into the top of the well.
This has no relationship in general to the relief well being drilled in order to perform a bottom kill, which will guarantee permanent sealing if it's successful, which past experience has shown the process to be, although it has never been attempted at these depths and beyond.
Government reports on how much oil was been eliminated from the equation have been changing frequently, probably because of the politically incorrect way the Gulf of Mexico is cleaning itself up, which has interfered with the official narrative so many wanted to see.
In one of the latest government reports, this one from the Interior Department and the NOAA, they say the amount of oil which has evaporated is about 25 percent. Some of said it is probably closer to 40 percent.
BP was able to capture or burn off about 17 percent of the oil, while the skimming activity was said to have collected 3 percent of the oil, which even with that small amount, could be on the high side.
About 16 percent was supposedly eaten by bacteria or naturally dispersed in a similar way the Gulf has been doing forever with natural leaking oil. That number seems to be increasingly rapidly.
Some scientists and professors have expressed disbelief over these numbers, although it is based more on emotional response and anger over the story not unfolding as they wanted, as they offer no proof whatsoever.
But the reality is the number proffered by the government as to how much oil released into the Gulf of Mexico is largely a guess. And even with using those numbers, the approximate 75 percent of the oil is still gone, according to government and BP.
So whether these people have the training or knowledge to make these assessments is questionable, referring to these university people, as it is very clear the oil is nowhere to be found.
Making noise and screaming does nothing to change that. So "Pump, Baby, Pump" and "Drill, Baby, Drill," as it's going to happen no matter what type of hysterics these people get into. They're losing all clarity and objectivity in light of the actual data and proof.
Showing posts with label Oil Evaporation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oil Evaporation. Show all posts
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Government Scientists Estimate BP (NYSE:BP) Spill at 4.1 Million Barrels
If they were honest they would admit they really have no idea how much oil spewed into the ocean, but government scientist have guessed the amount to be at 4.1 million barrels that spilled into the Gulf of Mexico.
How did the "scientists" come to the amount? They used the pressure readings of the current containment cap on the oil well, and the other on the extremely unreliable modeling; in this case of the oil reservoir.
The immediate problem is the readings related to the pressure readings is the damage to the oil well had kept the oil from spilling into the Gulf unhindered, and once removed to prepare for the final cap, it was proven a lot more oil gushed into the ocean when that happened.
U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu's statement about the matter didn't make sense. He said, “The revised estimates are part of this administration’s ongoing commitment to ensuring that we have the most accurate information possible.”
The reason it makes no sense is the methodology is extremely flawed. But more importantly, the ability of the Gulf to repair itself, including the 40 percent of the oil gone through evaporation, and the microbes munching on the oil, make the amount of oil (other than loss for use by people), largely irrelevant.
What matters is how much oil is damaging the area, not how much oil left the well; even if the amount could really be accurately measured.
Some are already in hysterics about it being close to 16 times the oil leaked into the ocean by the Exxon Valdez, but that's like comparing apples to oranges.
The Exxon Valdez oil spill did about 100 times (literally) the damage to wildlife the Macondo oil spill has done, if that. And the amount of oil on the coasts and marshlands are far less than feared or guessed at.
This type of guesswork is used because the government would look bad if they couldn't come up with some type of number. After all, how can they administer fines if a number isn't grabbed out of thin air and applied to the situation?
All of this underscores the need to change this dubious law which has an energy company pay a fine based on the amount of barrels of oil released into the ocean, rather than the amount of damage.
After the incredible amount of coverage of the "environmental disaster," a growing number of scientists have concluded it's doubtful it can even be described in that manner, as the harm to the animals and environment are minimal.
Of course the loss of human life is the real tragedy, along with the inability of people in the Gulf region to work at the busiest time of the year for them.
Media outlets don't know how to cover this any longer, now that it has been discovered to be a non-event, and even the last-ditch effort of saying we can't be sure of how bad it is is unconvincing and dishonest, as it's very clear that it doesn't even come close to the made up and imagined disaster most of them wanted it to be.
Finally, BP did end up capturing an estimated 800,000 barrels of oil once they put things in place, allegedly making the amount of oil escaping the well about 4.9 million barrels.
How did the "scientists" come to the amount? They used the pressure readings of the current containment cap on the oil well, and the other on the extremely unreliable modeling; in this case of the oil reservoir.
The immediate problem is the readings related to the pressure readings is the damage to the oil well had kept the oil from spilling into the Gulf unhindered, and once removed to prepare for the final cap, it was proven a lot more oil gushed into the ocean when that happened.
U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu's statement about the matter didn't make sense. He said, “The revised estimates are part of this administration’s ongoing commitment to ensuring that we have the most accurate information possible.”
The reason it makes no sense is the methodology is extremely flawed. But more importantly, the ability of the Gulf to repair itself, including the 40 percent of the oil gone through evaporation, and the microbes munching on the oil, make the amount of oil (other than loss for use by people), largely irrelevant.
What matters is how much oil is damaging the area, not how much oil left the well; even if the amount could really be accurately measured.
Some are already in hysterics about it being close to 16 times the oil leaked into the ocean by the Exxon Valdez, but that's like comparing apples to oranges.
The Exxon Valdez oil spill did about 100 times (literally) the damage to wildlife the Macondo oil spill has done, if that. And the amount of oil on the coasts and marshlands are far less than feared or guessed at.
This type of guesswork is used because the government would look bad if they couldn't come up with some type of number. After all, how can they administer fines if a number isn't grabbed out of thin air and applied to the situation?
All of this underscores the need to change this dubious law which has an energy company pay a fine based on the amount of barrels of oil released into the ocean, rather than the amount of damage.
After the incredible amount of coverage of the "environmental disaster," a growing number of scientists have concluded it's doubtful it can even be described in that manner, as the harm to the animals and environment are minimal.
Of course the loss of human life is the real tragedy, along with the inability of people in the Gulf region to work at the busiest time of the year for them.
Media outlets don't know how to cover this any longer, now that it has been discovered to be a non-event, and even the last-ditch effort of saying we can't be sure of how bad it is is unconvincing and dishonest, as it's very clear that it doesn't even come close to the made up and imagined disaster most of them wanted it to be.
Finally, BP did end up capturing an estimated 800,000 barrels of oil once they put things in place, allegedly making the amount of oil escaping the well about 4.9 million barrels.
Friday, July 30, 2010
BP (NYSE:BP) Oil Shouldn't Catch Loop Current - Thad Allen
The U.S. government front man for the oil spill, Thad Allen, said Friday the oil from BP (NYSE:BP) shouldn't end up in the loop current, which should bring a sigh of relief to residents of the East Coast of the United States.
"The chances that oil will become entrained in the loop are very, very low - and will go to zero as we control the leak at the well with the cap and ultimately kill it," Allen said.
What's more interesting, although Allen didn't address it, is there is relatively little oil to be found now that the oil well has been temporarily plugged.
That suggest, and as scientists have mentioned, that the Gulf is cleaning itself up through evaporation and oil-eating microbes, the reason it's so hard to find the oil.
In other words, there isn't that much oil to in the Gulf to enter into the loop current, even if it did.
"The chances that oil will become entrained in the loop are very, very low - and will go to zero as we control the leak at the well with the cap and ultimately kill it," Allen said.
What's more interesting, although Allen didn't address it, is there is relatively little oil to be found now that the oil well has been temporarily plugged.
That suggest, and as scientists have mentioned, that the Gulf is cleaning itself up through evaporation and oil-eating microbes, the reason it's so hard to find the oil.
In other words, there isn't that much oil to in the Gulf to enter into the loop current, even if it did.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Microbes Saving BP (NYSE:BP) and Gulf?
A lot of liberal pundits laughed and mocked when it was suggested at the beginning of the BP (NYSE:BP) oil spill that the microbes in the water, i.e., the Gulf itself, could take care of a large portion of the oil being spilled into the ocean.
That didn't agree with the narrative though, so it generated ridicule and faux outrage at the idea that the situation may possibly be under better control than thought.
This isn't to excuse the circumstances or diminish the damage and cost to the people of the area economically, but it does show there's lot more truth to the assertion than was being allowed in the public discourse on the matter.
Suddenly there is admission from scientists and professors that, indeed, the fact there isn't much oil being found now that the leak is contained is probably the result of the heavy concentration of oil-eating microbes in the area.
When delving into the question of where the oil is, there are several possibilities, with all probably contributing factors.
One is there is the evaporation process which will remove some of the oil from the waters. That is especially true of what Edward Bouwer, professor of environmental engineering at Johns Hopkins University, called the "more toxic components of oil."
Evaporation could account for up to 40 percent of the oil that is disappearing from the Gulf.
Although some have theorized some of the oil has settled into sediments on the floor of the Gulf, where it could cause the most damage if it was true, the reality is this isn't part of the Gulf scenario, as one report cited by Yahoo news noted that "federal scientists [have determined] the oil [is] primarily sitting in the water column and not on the sea floor."
What is thought to be the reason behind the inability to find a large amount of oil is it's simply gone. A number of researchers believe it's the microbes in the Gulf of Mexico, which are extremely prolific, that has done the oil in.
The natural release of oil into the Gulf has been happening for as long as people know. That has generated a large number of microbes which feed on the oil leaking into the ocean, and were prepared for what they consider an abundance of food.
These microbes get all hot and bothered by the hydrocarbons in oil, and use it to reproduce and grow. The result is a huge surge in the population, which continues to gorge on the oil.
Why this is especially the probable cause of the missing oil in this case is, the warm waters of the Gulf are especially conducive microbes, which grow far faster in the warm waters than they do in colder water.
Proof that this is what is happening comes from Samantha Joye, microbial geochemist at the University of Georgia, who notes the oxygen levels in portions of the Gulf which had had a lot of oil in it has went down. Since microbes need oxygen to consume oil, it is conclusive evidence they're working overtime to eat the excess oil.
The dispersant used so effectively in the Gulf is also considered part of the reason for the quickly disappearing oil as it relates to the microbes. Breaking up the oil makes it easier for microbes to quickly eat the oil, which is what the dispersant does, and the microbes seem to like to take a bite out of the dispersant too.
All that show of having thousands of boats out there to appease the media and those that want to "feel" something is being done, was largely a waste of time, counting for at most, about 2 percent of the oil being cleaned up. And that's on the top end of the estimate. It's probably much lower than that.
While it's obviously too early to know the extent of the damage from the oil, it is important to note it could be far less than originally anticipated, and that would be good news for everyone involved, including BP and other oil companies in the region.
For liberals, they need to learn to get their facts and stories straight before mocking and laughing at those who actually have connections to the industry and understand the power of nature to mend herself. We're seeing it happen before our eyes. I guess she's not politically correct.
That didn't agree with the narrative though, so it generated ridicule and faux outrage at the idea that the situation may possibly be under better control than thought.
This isn't to excuse the circumstances or diminish the damage and cost to the people of the area economically, but it does show there's lot more truth to the assertion than was being allowed in the public discourse on the matter.
Suddenly there is admission from scientists and professors that, indeed, the fact there isn't much oil being found now that the leak is contained is probably the result of the heavy concentration of oil-eating microbes in the area.
When delving into the question of where the oil is, there are several possibilities, with all probably contributing factors.
One is there is the evaporation process which will remove some of the oil from the waters. That is especially true of what Edward Bouwer, professor of environmental engineering at Johns Hopkins University, called the "more toxic components of oil."
Evaporation could account for up to 40 percent of the oil that is disappearing from the Gulf.
Although some have theorized some of the oil has settled into sediments on the floor of the Gulf, where it could cause the most damage if it was true, the reality is this isn't part of the Gulf scenario, as one report cited by Yahoo news noted that "federal scientists [have determined] the oil [is] primarily sitting in the water column and not on the sea floor."
What is thought to be the reason behind the inability to find a large amount of oil is it's simply gone. A number of researchers believe it's the microbes in the Gulf of Mexico, which are extremely prolific, that has done the oil in.
The natural release of oil into the Gulf has been happening for as long as people know. That has generated a large number of microbes which feed on the oil leaking into the ocean, and were prepared for what they consider an abundance of food.
These microbes get all hot and bothered by the hydrocarbons in oil, and use it to reproduce and grow. The result is a huge surge in the population, which continues to gorge on the oil.
Why this is especially the probable cause of the missing oil in this case is, the warm waters of the Gulf are especially conducive microbes, which grow far faster in the warm waters than they do in colder water.
Proof that this is what is happening comes from Samantha Joye, microbial geochemist at the University of Georgia, who notes the oxygen levels in portions of the Gulf which had had a lot of oil in it has went down. Since microbes need oxygen to consume oil, it is conclusive evidence they're working overtime to eat the excess oil.
The dispersant used so effectively in the Gulf is also considered part of the reason for the quickly disappearing oil as it relates to the microbes. Breaking up the oil makes it easier for microbes to quickly eat the oil, which is what the dispersant does, and the microbes seem to like to take a bite out of the dispersant too.
All that show of having thousands of boats out there to appease the media and those that want to "feel" something is being done, was largely a waste of time, counting for at most, about 2 percent of the oil being cleaned up. And that's on the top end of the estimate. It's probably much lower than that.
While it's obviously too early to know the extent of the damage from the oil, it is important to note it could be far less than originally anticipated, and that would be good news for everyone involved, including BP and other oil companies in the region.
For liberals, they need to learn to get their facts and stories straight before mocking and laughing at those who actually have connections to the industry and understand the power of nature to mend herself. We're seeing it happen before our eyes. I guess she's not politically correct.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)