Slashdot Mirror


How Bad Is the Gulf Coast Oil Spill?

Dasher42 writes "Claims are circulating on the Internet that the Coast Guard fears the Deepwater Horizon well has sprung two extra leaks, raising fears that all control over the release of oil at the site will be lost. The oil field, one of the largest ever discovered, could release 50,000 barrels a day into the ocean, with implications for marine life around the globe that are difficult to comprehend. So, considering that losing our oceanic life, with subsequent unraveling of our land-based ecosystems, is a far more possible apocalyptic scenario than a killer asteroid — what do we do about it?" Other readers have sent some interesting pictures of the spill. One set shows the Deepwater Horizon rig as it collapsed into the ocean. Others, from NASA, indicate that the spill's surface area now rivals that of Florida. The US government has indicated that it intends to require BP to foot the bill for the cleanup. And the Governator has just withdrawn support for drilling off the California coast.

12 of 913 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Bad, but please don't overreact by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Informative

    That said, it's good this happened in the Gulf, which is relatively contained. Good for the oceans as a whole, bad for the Gulf sea and shoreline ecosystems.

    That's providing it stays contained. There seems to be a growing consensus that the Gulf Stream may pick some of this up, so anyone sitting on the Atlantic coast whistling with relief may not be happy in a few days.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  2. Re:Worse than nuclear fallout? by Falconhell · · Score: 5, Informative
  3. Re:Well the governator is capable of learning by rrohbeck · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't think Kathleen Blanco sponsored a bill that asked for a hurricane to hit Louisiana, while Jindal sponsored the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act.
    He asked for it.

  4. Re:It's not really that bad by Sollord · · Score: 4, Informative

    They will be forced to pay the legal max of $75 million then there is a special $1-2billion fund for oil spill clean up that is part of the gas tax we all pay. As for safety they had a blow out protector/shut off but it's was either damaged or defective as it failed to activate. Right now there not much they can do to contain the spill on the surface because of bad weather. They are doing all they can to get the shut off activated with ROVs but they can only do so much given how complicated it is to do anything 5,000' below of the surface in bad weather. Sadly the vast majority of people are naive idiots who want BP and the Feds to snap there fingers and make it all better instantly. This is a very complicated and complex operation in deep water then again this is /. which is full of "elites" who know they can do it better and fully grasp all the problems and would have no problem getting it done instantly.

  5. Re:Oil Gusher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
  6. Transocean drilling contractor by ls671 · · Score: 4, Informative

    With more than 150 replies so far, only one poster mentions the Transocean drilling contractor.

    Drilling contractors drill wells for oil companies like a house building contractor will build your house.

    Mass media almost exclusively talk about BP but the drilling contractor is the real specialist is oil well drilling. So, it is just like the media were mentioning exclusively yourself because the house you had a contractor building blew up and killed people.

    Of course the client (BP) might very well have some part of responsibility, especially if they pressured the contractor to cut costs in a way impacting security. I wander how this thing will settle in courts, how the responsibilities will be split.

    Anyway, I though that it was good to mention the above in contrast to the over simplistic view usually depicted in mass media.

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  7. Re:Commodities... by Skal+Tura · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ever heard of OPEC? It's a legalized cartel controlling the prices .... more likely to oil company favor than anyone elses.

    Time to do some reading up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEC
    "According to its statutes, one of the principal goals is the determination of the best means for safeguarding the cartel's interests, individually and collectively. It also pursues ways and means of ensuring the stabilization of prices in international oil markets with a view to eliminating harmful and unnecessary fluctuations; giving due regard at all times to the interests of the producing nations and to the necessity of securing a steady income to the producing countries; an efficient and regular supply of petroleum to consuming nations, and a fair return on their capital to those investing in the petroleum industry.[4]"

    Fair return has always been maximal profit.

  8. Re:Worse than nuclear fallout? by roystgnr · · Score: 4, Informative

    Business doesn't like regulation, and

    this is false because:

    they often have more influence on lawmaking than "we" do.

    It's called Regulatory capture. You don't have the time to study every effect of every regulation proposed by someone who was appointed by someone who was elected within a district where you can vote. But business-paid lobbyists do have that time. So you demand that something must be done, and when a new thousand pages of laws and regulations are created you're appeased, because what voter has time to hunt through those laws for corporate giveaways like $75 million liability limits?

    Yeah, businesses hate regulation. "We'll write a bunch of lawyerese that acts as a barrier to entry for would-be new competitors, and we'll promise to bail you out at the expense of your victims if your risk-taking backfires - but watch out if it does backfire, because then the furious voters will demand that we do the same thing again!"

  9. Re:Don't worry BP ... by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 4, Informative

    Halliburton was responsible for cementing the deepwater drill hole that evidently failed, triggering the explosion that toppled the huge offshore rig and unleashed the gusher.
    from Gulf disaster spurs questions on drilling, Halliburton

    also this more detailed article from the L.A. Times:

    Investigators delving into the possible cause of the massive gulf oil spill are focusing on the role of Houston-based Halliburton Co., the giant energy services company, which was responsible for cementing the drill into place below the water. The company acknowledged Friday that it had completed the final cementing of the oil well and pipe just 20 hours before the blowout last week.

    <here be snippage>

    Cementing a deep-water drilling operation is a process fraught with danger. A 2007 study by the U.S. Minerals Management Service found that cementing was the single most important factor in 18 of 39 well blowouts in the Gulf of Mexico over a 14-year period -- more than equipment malfunction. Halliburton has been accused of a poor cement job in the case of a major blowout in the Timor Sea off Australia last August. An investigation is underway.

    According to experts cited in Friday's Wall St. Journal, the timing of last week's cement job in relation to the explosion -- only 20 hours beforehand, and the history of cement problems in other blowouts "point to it as a possible culprit." Robert MacKenzie, managing director of energy and natural resources at FBR Capital Markets and a former cementing engineer, told the Journal, "The initial likely cause of gas coming to the surface had something to do with the cement."
    from Gulf oil spill: The Halliburton connection

    So it does seem premature to lay this at the feet of British Petroleum. From what I've been reading, BP has done quite a bit of late to reduce their accident rates and otherwise improve their business model.

    --
    Will
  10. Problems down at the wellhead by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's not clear that an acoustic data link to the blowout protector would have helped. The model installed was supposed to close if the connection to the surface was lost. If it didn't close on that, a secondary data link probably wouldn't help.

    As for things that go wrong, here's a marlin with its spear caught in a blowout preventer. An underwater ROV with robot arms is brought into position, grabs onto the tail of the marlin, pulls it out, and releases the tail. The marlin then charges forward, and jams itself into the same place. The ROV moves back into position, grabs the dumb fish, pulls it out again, and drags it a short distance away before releasing it. The fish again tries to attack the blowout preventer, but finally gives up.

  11. Re:What job? What calculations by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

    You seem to think that the environment can't cope with oil. Natural oil seepage in the Gulf of Mexico amounts to about 500,000 barrels/yr. (You didn't think those oil fields we're tapping were static, did you? They leak oil by themselves all the time.)

    The big difference in this case is that the oil is concentrated to the point where it can gum up birds' feathers and kill off shellfish. With natural seeps, the oil is spread out where microbes can break it down before it adversely affects larger life forms. Over time the same microbes will deal with this spill. A lot of damage will happen before then, but they will deal with it. It happened before in 1979 (estimated 10k-30k barrels/day for 10 months) and it didn't kill off the ecosystem in the Gulf then. This one won't kill off the ecosystem in the Gulf either. It will be bad for a time, but it's not the end of the Gulf as you seem to think it will be.

  12. Re:Don't worry BP ... by Eunuchswear · · Score: 3, Informative

    Some people in the US wanted to make acoustic triggers mandatory in the US.

    A certain Mr Richard Bruce Cheney had a chat with some of his pals and that idea was abandoned.

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video