Originally Posted By ecdc Eleven people are dead, commercial fishing's been banned for at least 10 days and will probably be extended beyond that. They almost certainly won't stop the spill for at least another week at best, though it could be months, and the environmental impact won't be known for months or years. Of course, people roll their eyes on that last point. "Oh, the environment - big deal. Don't affect me none." Which is an attitude I've never understood and still don't. I mean, we all live here, right? No one's commuting in from Mars, last time I checked. It's a bit like finding mold in the furnace room of your house and saying, "Ah, I never go in there anyway. I spend all my time in the den - don't affect me none." Yikes.
Originally Posted By mousermerf The article you cite says it "could" be worse and that they don't really know. As for the furnace and living room comparison to the earth - that's way too simplistic. As stated, there have been other spills. It's not the end of the world and the earth itself does clean things up pretty tidy in the end. All this wildlife you're concerned about has dealt with this before and came out ok - otherwise there'd be no life wildlife to be concerned about. It's exceptionally short sighted and ignorant of the past to act like this is more then it actually is - which is exactly what you're doing. Even at the increased flow rates they're estimating now, it's still 2 years away from being the biggest spill.
Originally Posted By mousermerf <<<Also, as anxious as I am to hear Sumner, Mississippi's prestigious marine biology community, I think I'll stick with the experts I've already read and posted here.>>> You do realize there are big marine institutes and actual large cities on the gulf coast don't you?
Originally Posted By mousermerf For that matter - you're sitting there with what seems to be a "vague-at-best" comprehension of the region and yet you're claiming to have enough knowledge to make any sort of critical judgment on the conditions. That's ridiculous.
Originally Posted By leobloom I'll guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens. But for what it's worth, I trust merf's knowledge of Epcot more than his knowledge of marine biology.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<Even at the increased flow rates they're estimating now, it's still 2 years away from being the biggest spill.>> You sure about that? See below.. <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gulf_oil_spill" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_...il_spill</a> <<The Coast Guard and BP have said it's nearly impossible to know exactly how much oil has gushed since the blast, though it has been roughly estimated to be at least 200,000 gallons a day. At that rate, it would eclipse the 1989 Exxon Valdez tanker spill — which dumped 11 million gallons off the Alaska coast — as the worst U.S. oil disaster in history in a matter of weeks.>>
Originally Posted By plpeters70 Or maybe you meant some other spill that was larger. Either way, this could potentially be the biggest spill in US history. Not exactly something to sneeze at!
Originally Posted By mousermerf A note - for every loss there is a gain. BP is hiring bird rescue groups from Florida, ones that otherwise wouldn't be working.
Originally Posted By mousermerf Well, that article didn't do its fact checking. 1979 - Ixtoc 1 off the coast of Texas, in the Gulf.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 Merf, why are you going to so much trouble to defend BP? do you own stock in that company or something? I guess I just can't comprehend why someone would go to such lengths to downplay such a major event. Do you want MORE drilling in the Gulf or something?
Originally Posted By mousermerf See - you've already decided that all drilling is bad. No talk of stricter regulations and oversight, instead "no drilling, drilling bad, grunt grunt"
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/05/one_gulf_oil_spill_went_for_ne.html" target="_blank">http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetw..._ne.html</a> From NPR: <<The IXTOC 1 accident is considered the world's second worst oil spill following the Exxon Valdez in Alaska's Prince William Sound. It's estimated that as many as five million gallons of oil were spilled. Nearly 11 million gallons of crude oil was estimated spilled by the Exxon Valdez.>>
Originally Posted By Mr X ***A note - for every loss there is a gain. BP is hiring bird rescue groups from Florida, ones that otherwise wouldn't be working*** What a brilliant bit of twisted logic. Hey, here's an idea! Since we need to create jobs, let's just pour oil on wildlife so we can employ people to clean it off. WTF?
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<you've already decided that all drilling is bad.>> Until someone can show me a good reason why we should be drilling there, yes, I think drilling in our oceans is bad. Especially when we could be investing in renewable energy production instead. And considering the high costs of an accident like this one, I think the costs far outweigh the benefits. Unless you happen to be working for the oil giants, of course.
Originally Posted By mousermerf The IXTOC 1 spilled over 140 million gallons. NPR did not fact check - they just remembered the Valdez.
Originally Posted By mousermerf <<<What a brilliant bit of twisted logic. Hey, here's an idea! Since we need to create jobs, let's just pour oil on wildlife so we can employ people to clean it off. WTF?>>> I never said it was the preferred method, but folks saying it'll ruin jobs and industry are forgetting its creating a new industry.
Originally Posted By mousermerf Btw, the low Ixtoc 1 numbers you're reading are a confusion of the press - that's how much is estimated to have made it on shore. Not the total spill.
Originally Posted By mousermerf <a href="http://invertebrates.si.edu/mms/reports/IXTOC_exec.pdf" target="_blank">http://invertebrates.si.edu/mm...exec.pdf</a> 1-3 million is the impact to beaches. 140 million is the total spill.
