Slashdot Mirror


Quantifying, and Dealing With, the Deepwater Spill

Gooseygoose writes with a link to this analysis by Boston University professor Cutler Cleveland. "Some reports in the media attempt to downplay the significance of the release of oil from the Deepwater Horizon accident by arguing that natural oil seeps release large volumes of oil to the ocean, so why worry? Let's look at the numbers." Read on for a few more stories on the topic of the Deepwater Horizon spill. theodp writes with some information on the remote-controlled efforts to stanch the oil's flow: "The work Tito Collasius does sounds a little like science fiction: Men on ships flicking joysticks that control robots the size of trucks as they rove miles beneath the sea in near-freezing depths no man could hope to reach. But BP's spill efforts rest in the hands of underwater remote-operated vehicle (ROV) pilots, who 'fly' the ROVs from command centers aboard ships, joysticks in hand and large banks of screens in front of them offering a view of the challenges they confront in the waters below. ROVs are typically used for commercial (as in the oil industry), oceanographic (science research and exploration), and military (mine reconnaissance and recovery) missions. If you're interested in joining Tito, training's available." Even if BP were to effect a perfect block for the oil, though, there's still quite a bit of it swirling in the Gulf — you've probably seen some gut-wrenching pictures of the affected wildlife. Reader grrlscientist writes "Some people claim that we should euthanize all oiled birds immediately upon recovering them. But I argue it is our ethical responsibility to protect, clean, and save these birds, even after they've been oiled, just as we should preserve and clean their habitats."

45 of 343 comments (clear)

  1. All natural by Veggiesama · · Score: 5, Funny

    See? The oil spill is all natural. Nothing to see here, folks. The catastrophe was all in your minds. You can go back to driving SUVs, voting Republican, and burning rubber tires for fun again.

    1. Re:All natural by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I first heard this line of reasoning on Fox News and my first reaction was "scale, people." What's funny is that our local Fox affiliate keeps sending reporters up to the beaches of Santa Barbara where there's a fairly large natural oil seep as if to say, "See? It's no big deal..."

    2. Re:All natural by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The reasons we are probably seeing things like this is to undo or mitigate the damage to the coastal tourism that is already being seen in the gulf area as a reaction to the spill. This will go more common as more and more industries away from the spill are hit with less and less business from the consumers on the beaches.

      This will hit hard around election time if something can't be done to curb the expected negative growth in the economy caused by this. Expect the idea to get really popular in the next couple months.

    3. Re:All natural by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not THAT hard to understand if anyone tries to present it. Quick, everyone in the world drip one drop of oil wherever they may be. Tiny problem, no big deal.

      Now, drip 6 billion drops of oil where you're standing right now (about 300,000 Liters) and see how much trouble it is!

    4. Re: All natural by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Boo hoo. Let me know when its any more unfair than having your livelihood wrecked because some BP fuckheads couldn't keep control of their oil wells. When you shit in the sandbox you should face some extraordinary rules. It isn't a game when you're fucking up my world. If BP ever played by 'fair' rules instead of bribing... I mean, lobbying politicians, drilling and ignoring safety standards, etc we could judge them by fair rules. But they didn't. They broke the rules, they hit below the belt, they rigged the odds and they fucked up. So screw the marquis of queensbury rules, the gloves come off now.

    5. Re: All natural by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The game is not the US government the game is a corrupted version the Lobbyist US Government, a government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations (well at least the corporate executives, the investors quite often get it in the neck at golden parachute time). Of course the lobbyists can get kicked out on any issue or all together, the public just has to demonstrate the collective will to do so.

      Criminal negligence should never be allowed, prosecution for the crimes committed by BP, Halliburton and Transocean should be pursued. The executives responsible for those decisions should have their assets seized and spend the rest of their lives in jail. Can't find a way to do it, well, simply claim that some components of the oil are drugs and the companies involved are illegally distributing and dealing it (so seized under drug dealer laws).

      A for proof of their criminal negligence, well hey, you would have to be blind, deaf and dumb not to be aware of the evidence of it or a Republican politician to be able to shamelessly publicly lie about what is blatantly obvious or a Fox News presenter/reporter for whom the truth is nothing but a tool by which to extort advertising dollars and lies are what they really sell.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    6. Re: All natural by Mr2001 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think we can all agree that the liability caps were a stupid, stupid idea by now and if we retroactively enforce them, we essentially give the government to take down whatever business they don't really like. [...] it is simply unfair to change the rules of a game in progress.

      If Congress can retroactively extend the length of copyrights that were granted half a century ago, then apparently changing the rules of a game in progress is A-OK.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    7. Re: All natural by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If they are forced to pay $50 billion, they got screwed by the government.

      And if they aren't, real human beings get screwed over by them.

      You can't change the rules while the game is in progress.

      Yes, you can. And in fact they regularly are, in more complex games, such as D&D. Humans are imperfect and the rules they make sometimes have holes which let some players screw other players.

      This is especially true of games where a huge disparity of power exists between players, such as the game of BP vs. real human beings.

      No matter how much we like to hate BP, you have to realize they were just playing the game as it was presented by the US government. I think we can all agree that the liability caps were a stupid, stupid idea by now and if we retroactively enforce them, we essentially give the government to take down whatever business they don't really like.

      And that's a great idea. Businesses aren't holy cows, they are the workhorses of economy; if one acts all uppity, why shouldn't it be put down and shipped to the glue factory?

      In fact I say we start the slaughter right now. I, for one, am tired of carrying horses on my back.

      Should BP pay for the spill? Absolutely, but we missed our chance in 1990, it is simply unfair to change the rules of a game in progress.

      Whenever there's a story about some company doing something technically legal but horribly unfair, we get a hundred posts defending their right to do so, saying that the "world is not fair; deal with it". The second someone dares to suggest dealing with it by treating a company the same way, we get cries of "wah! unfair!".

      Either fairness is important or it isn't. Either you can do anything you can get away with, or you can't. You can't have it both ways depending on whichever suits you best at the moment. Corporate America, which way do you want it?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    8. Re:All natural by FTWinston · · Score: 4, Insightful

      seeing how [Obama's] superior executive response has been to let BP fumble around forever?

      That's because BP are the ones with the greatest expertise here. Frankly, Obama would be acting very irresponsibly if he kicked them out of the cleanup altogether and just made them foot the bill. And with so much at stake, I really wouldn't want the president to act irresponsibly for the sake of making himself look better in the short term.

    9. Re: All natural by jbengt · · Score: 4, Informative

      BP's individual company liability for civil damages is limited to $75 million because the oil companies contribute to a fund that is to pay the rest. Who knows what happens if the liability fund is depleted before all the liabilities are met?

      Also, liability for breaking laws, rules, and regulations are not limited. They are breaking a lot of laws, and could be fined a lot, including up to $4,300 per barrel spilled (that could be a couple of $billion) the killing of wildlife (that could cost at least a $billion), and more.

      IANAL, YMMV, etc.

    10. Re: All natural by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you shit in the sandbox you should face some extraordinary rules.

      Lets be realistic here, soon this will become a world wide catastrophe taking it beyond Just America as oil starts to get into the international currents and finds itself all over the world. Yeah it's a game, with more pawns than kings and guess what you and I are. Once it's there BP has won the game.

      Why? Because realistically no one here cares as long as you can drive and get your groceries. Slowly it will become a blip on the world media and it just doesn't affect you. After a while it will be the whole 'residents lives were destroyed and thats really bad but it's not me' and 'Gee the government really ought to do sumthing about it' kind of apathy will arise and our complacent little lives will once again be complete. Then it will become;

      Gee what about that oil spill - yeah terrible, tsk tsk.

      And ask yourself when the last time you felt strongly about something you actually wrote a letter to your pollycritter saying how you wanted the matter treated or regulations increased or laws or criminal charges pressed instead of just feeling angry and shouting at the TV before you call this flamebait.

      We asked for this shit because we just love it when the PR crew goes down on us and makes us feel like it's all right, it'll be alright, see, just an image change away and some funky 'we've learned our lesson now' ads from BP, maybe a name change or a buy out and we will all throw our money at them again. Heaps cheaper than doing it right.

      Here's a fun thing to think about, it's not just global warming but every biological support system that sustains life on this planet is in decline.

      There I said it, and we will all go on singing and dancing with full bellys until the next disaster.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  2. Heh, by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reader grrlscientist writes...it is our ethical responsibility to protect, clean and save these birds, even after they've been oiled, just as we should preserve and clean their habitats

    I love it. The BP executives should themselves be forced to help clean birds and other wildlife. It's the grown-up equivalent of writing "I will not pollute the ocean" ten million times on the blackboard.

    1. Re:Heh, by caseih · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But of course we all share the blame for this disaster. The root cause, after all, is our collective demand that BP drill for oil and sell it to us. Of course it's likely there were specific things that specific individuals did or did not do that precipitated this disaster, and yes they will have pay for their errors. But I worry about vilifying BP too much. It is almost as if we're trying to assuage our own consciences by mistakenly thinking that if we can just get BP to take the blame then everything will be alright and we can keep on living the consumption lifestyle.

    2. Re:Heh, by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, the root cause was that the government decided to put liability caps in the 1990s on oil drilling thus allowing BP to take a gamble and not have to worry about any real liability. There are safe ways to drill, the other oil platforms that aren't gushing barrels of oil left and right into the ocean are proof of that.

      We can place the root of the blame on our congress for failing to allow for the free market to have prevented this.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    3. Re:Heh, by camperdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't remember ever asking BP to drill for oil. I don't remember ever asking anyone to drill in an unsafe manner. No, BP has to take the blame for this themselves. They tried to take a short-cut and failed. There are plenty of other oil rigs that are chugging away just fine.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    4. Re:Heh, by MadUndergrad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Screw that. I've told anyone who will listen that we need to get off oil and tried to do so myself. I resent being lumped in with all the "drill baby drill" yahoos as part of the problem. Some of us are at least trying to be part of the solution.

    5. Re:Heh, by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Informative

      For the umpteenth time, only economic liability is capped to 75 million dollars. And that is only if BP cannot be found to be at fault for the spill. Even if it is found to be completely faultless though (rabid dolphins sabotaging the BOP, for example), BP is responsible for every cost associated with the clean-up.

      We can place the root of the blame on our congress for failing to allow for the free market to have prevented this.

      What? "failing to allow for the free market to have prevented this"? Ohhhh.... I get it. Even if the government regulation is a net positive, it's all because it's actually the free market at work. So if it's good, it's the free market working, and if it's bad, it's the government interfering. Got it.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    6. Re:Heh, by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Making a good impression" would sort of imply Obama would have to retroactively cease being the single politician who has received the largest financial contributions from BP, though, wouldn't you think??

    7. Re:Heh, by Mspangler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I don't remember ever asking BP to drill for oil."
      Actually you did, unless you live a life without using oil, plastics, non-organic food, paper, a good many medicines, and no metals or lumber. Oil is everywhere.

      "I don't remember ever asking anyone to drill in an unsafe manner."

      Now that statement is entirely reasonable.

  3. The Usual Suspects by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slashdotters are better than the general public at understanding that this BP rupture's quantity of spewing oil is very serious and damaging, even where it isn't obvious on Gulf Coast beaches.

    So you should look at who is downplaying it. And then remember next time they tell you something how seriously low their credibility is. That they cannot be trusted. Their usual lying isn't usually as obvious as it is here.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:The Usual Suspects by slick7 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So you should look at who is downplaying it. And then remember next time they tell you something how seriously low their credibility is. That they cannot be trusted. Their usual lying isn't usually as obvious as it is here.

      Let's start with all the D.C. politicians who conveniently remain quiet. Why? I hear more clamoring from the governors of the states being affected than from the voter elected senators and representatives. Why?
      How many of the voter elected politicians are on the oil industry payroll? Why? What happened to safety administrator who abruptly "retired" when this whole fiasco blew up (no pun intended). How many oil executives and oil lobby politicians switch roles when things get dicey?
      If there ever was a call to separate Business and State, this is it.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    2. Re:The Usual Suspects by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But I'm not sure how helpful it is to actually quantify it. The amount of oil spewing into the Gulf doesn't really have any impact on the efforts to stop it; it simply must be stopped at all costs and BP is doing everything they can to try to make that happen. If the leak were twice as big, or half as big, the appropriate response would be precisely the same.

      So next we have the issue of cleanup of beaches. The amount of oil reaching the beaches is good to know, but not necessarily directly correlated with the amount of oil gushing out of the well - there's a lot of coastline, and the amount of oil hitting each spot will vary.

      As for the amount of oil that remains in the gulf itself, it seems to me there's not a whole lot we can do about that at this point. So while there's certainly value in understanding the nature and scope of the problem, in purely practical terms I don't really see how it matters.

      When you say "you should look at who is downplaying it," do you mean people who are saying this isn't really that big a deal, and it's not really that much oil? Or do you mean people who are saying the exact amount of oil isn't relevant to the task at hand? If the former, I agree with you, but if you mean the latter, you may want to reconsider.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    3. Re:The Usual Suspects by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If there ever was a call to separate Business and State, this is it.

      I'm undoing a lot of mod points to say this, but separation caused this mess: A lack of regulatory oversight and trusting that the private industry was putting in adequate safeguards. Business and State need to be working in a partnership -- it's a necessity. There was a disconnect; The people making the laws and doing the regulatory oversight didn't have the training or knowledge to know what measures would be effective (and what was just window-dressing). What we need to look at right now is how that relationship can be structured to best serve the public interest, rather than private interests as it has until now.

      I would start by putting people who design and work with these systems in front of Congress and coming up with effective measures the government can take to prevent private interests from causing this amount of damage again.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    4. Re:The Usual Suspects by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm undoing a lot of mod points to say this, but separation caused this mess: A lack of regulatory oversight and trusting that the private industry was putting in adequate safeguards. Business and State need to be working in a partnership -- it's a necessity. There was a disconnect; The people making the laws and doing the regulatory oversight didn't have the training or knowledge to know what measures would be effective (and what was just window-dressing).

      I think the two of you are saying the same thing in the opposite way. There were lots of experts working on the regulations. Unfortunately, they were all experts working for businesses. They knew they were putting in loop holes. Government and business worked together to screw the people in a manner that looked like they were working together for the betterment of everyone.

      What we need to look at right now is how that relationship can be structured to best serve the public interest, rather than private interests as it has until now.

      See, there was an involvement between the two. They just worked really hard to make it look like they were being helpful while harming the people. Whether it's the banks, the oil companies, or the automotive cartel shooting themselves (and the American people) in the foot in the long term to try to get next quarter's profits up, they work really hard to pretend to be helpful while giving the expert advice and guidance to make some of the worst legislation possible.

  4. The Exon Valdez by b4upoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Take a look at the site of the Exon spill in Alaska. Although it has been about 30 years the beaches are still a total wreck and the area still can not be fished.
                  Coral reefs may be the worst injuries as they kill easily and may take hundreds of years to rekindle. It is obvious that financially damaged parties will continue to be damaged for decades.
                  And the large view is even worse. Human population is exploding and we are now absolutely confronted with the fact that oil driven technologies are a horror story. And we are jumping to adopt newer technologies with no way to estimate the great harm that they may generate. After all, only the lunatic fringe believed that oil driven advances were aproblem until the 1970 era.

    1. Re: The Exon Valdez by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      The heavy fraction does stick around.

      Some fishing has recovered at Valdez; others haven't. There is no exposed oil, but there is buried oil. Burial slows degradation.

      A good lesson can come from natural seeps. Life isn't adapted to intense releases of oil concentrated in a given location. It is adapted to oil coming into an ecosystem in small quantities. Hence, the oil will be devastating to the Mississippi River Delta, and to a lesser extent, regions adjacent (if winds and currents hit it just right, it could cause some problems in the Keys as well). But at the same time, the talk of heavy oil slicks covering the US east coast, or even more extreme, turning all of the world's oceans to poison (yes, I've heard people make that claim) are pure hyperbole.

      If the Mississippi River Delta responds in the same way that the BOC responded to Ixtoc 1, it could be largely back to normal in two years. But there are definitely differences this time (namely, the depth, the extensive use of dispersants, and the low-oxygen waters of the delta). How that will change the picture, who knows. I suspect they'll slow the recovery.

    2. Re: The Exon Valdez by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, NOT stop everything until it's all perfect but how about not being cheap fucks and skimping on safety?!

      So far we've heard that BP was pushing for a faster and faster schedule, using only two plugs instead of three, forgoing a final check on the cement, and (think this might have been Transocean) ignoring CLEAR FUCKING EVIDENCE that the seal of the BOP was damaged (clear as in chunks of in the hands of workers that they brought to the manager).

      Oh, and stuff like the BOP had low batteries and one of the redundant systems was shot.

      And fuck MMS for being a bunch of corporate whores and letting BP FILL OUT THE INSPECTION REPORTS. WHAT. THE. FUCK. IS WRONG WITH THESE ASSHOLES?

      That's the problem and THAT is what makes me so furious. Maybe we need more regulation. Maybe we don't. It's kinda hard to tell when it appears that absolutely NONE of it was followed.

      I can only wish that some asses get nailed to the wall over this.

    3. Re: The Exon Valdez by rrohbeck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We're past Peak Oil, so oil use will drop as oil becomes more expensive. In a few more decades large scale oil use will be a thing of the past.
      Until then ever more difficult, risky and expensive oil production methods will be used, so this will not be the last major accident.

    4. Re: The Exon Valdez by adolf · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's been a lot closer to 20 years since the Valdez spill, which happened in early 1989.

      I otherwise have nothing of value to add to this discussion. :)

    5. Re: The Exon Valdez by MadUndergrad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Regulation doesn't work so well when the people at the top are actively opposed to effective regulation. You don't think all that "drown the government in a bathtub" talk was just for show, do you? This is the "ad absurdem" part of the small government movement.

    6. Re: The Exon Valdez by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 4, Informative

      Certainly. I'll try my best.

      Info on two plugs instead of three, damage to BOP seal, pushing for work to be completed sooner, and partial control loss of BOP: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6490348n&tag=related;photovideo
      Key findings from that are here: http://www.hillmanfoundation.org/blog/fcp-embeds

      Dead battery and other problems with BOP: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/j/d/jdf15/2010/05/oil-spill-stunner-bop-had-dead.php

      Skipping test of cement linings: http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/05/costly_time-consuming_test_of.html

      MMS letting BP fill out inspection reports: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/25/eveningnews/main6518694.shtml

      Did I miss anything?

  5. Re:Yeah, right. by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People are cruel, shallow, and small minded.

    All of us are some of the time.

    All a misanthrope needs to do is sit back with a beer and watch humanity destroy themselves with their shallowness and stupidity.

    Stupidity often burns me out too, but if we just sit back and do nothing we will run out of beer (and food, and clean air, etc.) and suffer greatly long before the end. So heave a sigh, shed a bitter tear, and roll up your sleeves for another tortuous round of cleanup and rebuild.

  6. Re:Raises the Question Where Does Oil Come From? by goodmanj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    from long dead organisms

    You answered your own question. If you don't believe the answer the geologists give you, feel free to read up on petroleum geology, and do some basic back-of-the-envelope calculations yourself.

    There are four ways to answer a question. From best to worst:

    1) Figure it out yourself
    2) Trust the experts
    3) Proclaim it an unanswerable mystery
    4) Make up something

    You're one rung off the bottom. Climb on up!

  7. Re:Raises the Question Where Does Oil Come From? by tnok85 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Isn't it obvious? The Gulf of Mexico is the site of an ancient volcano (roughly 75 million years old) where billions of organisms were deposited from spacecraft strongly resembling DC-8's, then nuked from orbit.

  8. Re:I sure if they say it enough... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Informative

    OK, all you armchair generals and Monday morning drilling engineers:

    Before you post your wonderfully insightful method for stopping the spill, read up on the several thousand other suggestions here.

    The rest of you just read the various threads anyway. More signal to noise than anything I've seen so far. Even think of donating to help the servers keep afloat.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  9. Re:Raises the Question Where Does Oil Come From? by Eryq · · Score: 4, Informative

    Millions of years of dead plant and animal life, plus shifting tectonic plates (and ever-changing coastlines), can give rise to vast undersea reservoirs of oil. Even the oil industry geologists know it: how do you think they find these reservoirs?

    But we all see what you're trying to do there. Hmm, maybe oil isn't from dead plant life after all! Maybe it occurs naturally in the Earth's crust, where God put it! Gosh, maybe there's a practically infinite supply! Maybe it's even naturally renewed! Why, that would mean that all this talk about needing to find alternate energy sources is just a load of hooey! Ha ha, those environmentalist whackos sure are stupid, just like Rush said!"

    It's a story being advanced by people who either (1) have a vested interest in the continued profits of oil companies, (2) refuse to believe that the earth is more than 6000 years old, or (3) have a political axe to grind against environmentalists.

    And at this point, I've pretty much lost my patience with all of those camps.

    --
    I'm a bloodsucking fiend! Look at my outfit!
  10. Re:Raises the Question Where Does Oil Come From? by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seems like there's far more oil than can be accounted for by dead organisms alone.

    The total global biomass has been estimated to be 2000 billion tonnes with 1600 billion of those tonnes in forests.[13][14]

    Net primary production is the rate at which biomass is generated in a given area, mainly due to photosynthesis. Some global producers of biomass in order of productivity rates are

            * swamps and marshes: 2,500 g/m/yr of biomass[15]
            * tropical rain forests: 2,000 g/m/yr of biomass[16]
            * algal beds and reefs: 2000 g/m/yr of biomass[15]
            * river estuaries: 1,800 g/m/yr of biomass[15]
            * temperate forests: 1,250 g/m/yr of biomass[15]
            * cultivated lands: 650 g/m/yr of biomass[15][17]
            * deserts: 3 g/m/yr of biomass[17]
            * open ocean: 125 g/m/yr of biomass[15][17]
            * tundras: 140 g/m/yr[15][17]

    (Multiply by millions of years...)

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  11. Re:Blowout preventer failsafes by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Informative

    My understanding is that a rubber bushing essential to the operation of the BOP was damaged a few days before during a test of it (or something related) and this damage contributed to the massive failure of the BOP.

  12. Feeds from the ROVs by Auto_Lykos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    BP has been providing live feeds of all the ROV missions to the wellhead for the last few days. For those who are curious, here's a pretty decent site hosting all the feeds from the ROVs. Pretty fascinating to watch all the work going on around the BOP, occasionally you can follow a few of the ROVs as they wander off to find old pipelines or prepare the Q4000 direct connection. In a tragic way it almost feels like watching the Titanic discovery all over again.

  13. Re:Silver Lining? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 4, Funny

    Believe it or not, I actually used to receive lots of mod points back in the day when I meta-modded(correctly) everyday, made every post a high-scoring one, and didn't post anything offensive.

    Then CmdrTaco posted something like "testing, testing" in the seemingly redundant beta.slashdot.org introductory discussion. When I saw that he was already modded "troll", I followed suit and modded him troll for laughs. For mysterious reasons, the discussion no longer exists.

    I never got mod points after that.

  14. so NIMBYs by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    you won't have nuclear reactors with modern technology. france and japan have been relying on reactors for decades. but not in your backyard, no. you know, electric cars, less air pollution, no more funding of geopolitical nightmares, etc.

    so instead you'll have thousands of acres of your shoreline turned into a befouled environmental calamity, you'll fund wahhabi madrasas in pakistan through all the money you're giving saudis to drive your SUVs, you'll send your sons, daughters, fathers, mothers to die in pointless wars, you'll fuel global warming, you'll make your cities unbreathable...

    but remember, its nuclear power we should be afraid of

    read NIMBY's, and reverse your idiotic mental block:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  15. Re:Sarah Palin knows the reason for the spill....p by FooAtWFU · · Score: 4, Interesting

    While Palin's pretty shamelessly rent-seeking (drill in Alaska? why, how convenient!) the idea that we've been avoiding one ecologically sensitive area (pristine Alaska wilderness) in favor of drilling in another, potentially more sensitive area which is also much much riskier to drill in (the Gulf) for whatever reason (perhaps it's easier for people to conceive of the former as wilderness-y?)... that part of her idea is not without merit. Regardless of our ultimate course of action, we should be sure that we are weighing the potential environmental impact a bit more dispassionately, and with an eye to overall impact - including the impact of the risks, so elusive and difficult to grasp until disaster strikes.

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  16. Re:Don't try and blow it up by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't try and blow it up it may never burn out, like this fire that has been burning for 35+ years: The Door to Hell

    Hint #1: Oil/NG needs oxygen to burn.
    Hint #2: There is a serious lack of free oxygen 5,000 ft underwater.

    I'm pretty sure we don't have to worry about an underwater wellhead catching fire and never burning out.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  17. abiogenesis of petroleum was a mainstream theory by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Informative
  18. Re:Wow! by copponex · · Score: 3, Informative

    A University of Illinois research team is working on turning pig manure into a form of crude oil that could be refined to heat homes or generate electricity... Years of research and fine-tuning are ahead before the idea could be commercially viable -MSNBC

    circumstantial evidence strongly favors a [biogenic] origin for almost all found to date. -The Straight Dope

    Our findings illustrate that the abiotic synthesis of hydrocarbons in nature may occur in the presence of ultramafic rocks, water, and moderate amounts of heat. -WorldNetDaily

    Skeptics say that while traces of abiotic hydrocarbons may exist, little data support the idea of economically meaningful deposits. "Companies have been looking for oil for 100 years. If all this abiogenic stuff is there, why haven't they found it?" asks geochemist Geoffrey Glasby, who spent nine months investigating the matter for a 2006 review paper in Resource Geology. He concluded the totality of the evidence did not support the concept. -Forbes (my link)

    You may want to read the articles before you cite them.

    PS: WorldNetDaily? Really? What's next, Mad Magazine and Star?