BP oil leaked so far wouldn't fill Superdome

[DarrinS]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100621/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_how_big


By the numbers: Oil leak wouldn't fill Superdome





WASHINGTON – Overwhelmed and saddened by the gargantuan size of the Gulf oil spill?

A little mathematical context to the spill size can put the environmental catastrophe in perspective. Viewing it through some lenses, it isn't that huge. The Mississippi River pours as much water into the Gulf of Mexico in 38 seconds as the BP oil leak has done in two months.

On a more human scale, the spill seems more daunting. Take the average-sized living room. The amount of oil spilled would fill 9,200 of them.

Since the BP oil rig exploded on April 20, about 126.3 million gallons of oil has gushed into the Gulf. That calculation is based on the higher end of the government's range of barrels leaked per day and the oil company BP's calculations for the amount of oil siphoned off as of Monday morning. Using the more optimistic end of calculations, the total spill figure is just shy of 68 million gallons.

For this by-the-numbers exercise, The Associated Press is using the higher figure.

For every gallon of oil that BP's well has gushed into the Gulf of Mexico, there is more than 5 billion gallons of water already in it. And the mighty Mississippi adds another billion gallons every five minutes or so, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

So BP chief executive officer Tony Hayward was factually correct last month when he said the spill was "relatively tiny" compared to what he mischaracterized as a "very big ocean."

But another big number that Hayward provided on Thursday also offers some troubling news. He said the reservoir of oil under the sea that is the source for the leak is believed to hold about 2.1 billion gallons of oil. That leaves about 2 billion gallons left to spew. So there are about 16 gallons of oil underneath the sea floor yet to gush for every gallon that has already fouled the Gulf. If the problem were never fixed, that would mean another two years of oil spilling based on the current flow rate.

More not-so-dreadful context: The amount of oil spilled so far could only fill the cavernous New Orleans Superdome about one-seventh of the way up. On the other hand, it could fill 15 Washington Monuments and two-thirds of the way up a 16th. If the oil were poured on a football field — complete with endzones — it would measure nearly 100 yards high.

If you put the oil in gallon milk jugs and lined them up, they would stretch about 11,000 miles. That's a roundtrip from the Gulf to London, BP's headquarters, and a side trip from New Orleans to Washington for Hayward to testify.

BP has spent more than $54.8 million lobbying federal officials in Washington since 2000; that's about 43 cents for every gallon of oil it has spilled. Since 2000, the oil and gas industry — along with their employees — has contributed $154.2 million to candidates for federal office. That's $1.22 for each gallon of oil spilled. Of that money, 78 percent went to Republicans and the rest to Democrats.

Take the 126.3 million gallons of oil spilled in the Gulf and convert it to gasoline, which is what Americans mostly use it for. That produces 58.6 million gallons of gas — the amount American drivers burn every three hours and 43 minutes. It's enough to fill up the gas tanks in nearly 3.7 million cars — more than those in Louisiana and Mississippi combined.

At $2.75 a gallon for gas — the national average — that's more than $161 million worth spilled into the Gulf.

Want your own piece of this spill? If all the oil spilled were divided up and equal amounts given to every American, we would all get about four soda cans full of crude oil that no one really wants.

[word]

While I agree with the overall point that yeah, it's a big ocean, it's still a lot of oil. Oddly, it's a curse and a blessing. ANWR was thought to hold 3 billion barrels and they just found 2/3rds of an ANWR ?

I want to get it plugged so we can start celebrating. That's a hell of a find and there's more where that came from. The GoM has a shitload of oil. Deep water drilling, if done right, is safe. The Brazillians are drilling in deeper water than that and producing oil. This was a human error and apparently, an error in method used specifically by BP to contain costs. Fix that, and move on. Our trade imbalance is waaay to high to just sit on this.

[InRareForm]

I should've used this reasoning whenever my room was dirty when I was younger!

[RandomGuy]

Why, compared to the mass of the sun this is just miniscule.

That must mean the pollution won't cause any property damage, and you will be first in line to eat fish out of the area's waters every day for a year right, Darrin?

:rolleyes

[word]

I was in New Orleans just last week. Plenty of oysters and shrimp to eat. Hotels are cheap. Good time to go. I got back and people are asking about 'the oil spill'. No, I tell them, I was in New Orleans. There is no oil spill in New Orleans. I just want to add, fuck Harrahs.

[DarrinS]

While I agree with the overall point that yeah, it's a big ocean, it's still a lot of oil. Oddly, it's a curse and a blessing. ANWR was thought to hold 3 billion barrels and they just found 2/3rds of an ANWR ?

I want to get it plugged so we can start celebrating. That's a hell of a find and there's more where that came from. The GoM has a shitload of oil. Deep water drilling, if done right, is safe. The Brazillians are drilling in deeper water than that and producing oil. This was a human error and apparently, an error in method used specifically by BP to contain costs. Fix that, and move on. Our trade imbalance is waaay to high to just sit on this.

:toast

[ChumpDumper]

So it's not a big deal this thread but it will be a big deal in another thread if it is politically expedient.

:toast

[Winehole23]

By the numbers: Oil leak wouldn't fill SuperdomeSo what? How do you gloss the significance of this factoid, Darrin?

[LnGrrrR]

I was in New Orleans just last week. Plenty of oysters and shrimp to eat. Hotels are cheap. Good time to go. I got back and people are asking about 'the oil spill'. No, I tell them, I was in New Orleans. There is no oil spill in New Orleans. I just want to add, fuck Harrahs.

Why were you in Harrahs? What'd you visit? Bourbon, Canal, Magazin St?

[Drachen]

dang? they are already using stadiums to bring perspective. That is a damn big place. This spill is HUGE.

I just wish we could concentrate it in one enormous place like the superdome. I mean if god is so intent on killing New Orleans, why do the bordering states have to suffer?

[DarrinS]

It's still less than half of the Ixtoc spill, which took place in only 161 feet of water. Pemex, the NATIONAL oil company of Mexico claimed sovereign immunity and only spent $100 million for the cleanup.


Still far less than the Kuwaiti oil fied fires that lost 6 million barrels per day and burned for months -- until AMERICAN contractors (many from Texas) went and capped those suckas.

[Drachen]

So you are saying it ranks up there with the absolute worst in history, right?

Also, how many gallons of dispersant have been dropped into the ocean?

[RandomGuy]

It's still less than half of the Ixtoc spill, which took place in only 161 feet of water. Pemex, the NATIONAL oil company of Mexico claimed sovereign immunity and only spent $100 million for the cleanup.


Still far less than the Kuwaiti oil fied fires that lost 6 million barrels per day and burned for months -- until AMERICAN contractors (many from Texas) went and capped those suckas.

Ixtoc spill 3,000,000 barrels estimated.


Pemex claimed that half of the released oil burned when it reached the surface, a third of it evaporated, and the rest was contained or dispersed.

3,000,000/2= 1,500,000 (burned portion)
3,000,000/3= 1,000,000 (evaporated portion)

1,500,000 + 1,000,000 = 2,500,000 (total burned and evaporated)

3,000,000 - 2,500,000 = 500,000 barrels released into the environment, some portion of which was cleaned up.

Assume: use of dispersants underwater limits evaporation by a factor of 1/2, given massive observed plumes of oil underwater.

126,000,000 gallons / 42 gallons per barrel = 3,000,000 barrels

By the way, 3,000,000 is a *bit* more than half, Darrin, but continuing on...

3,000,000/3/2 = 500,000 (total evaporated)

3,000,000 - 500,000 = 2,500,000 barrels released into the environment, some portion of which is cleaned up at the surface, likely a smaller portion than ixtoc due to aforementioned underwater plumes.

Which is the bigger number, Darrin:
500,000 or 2,500,000 ?

[4>0rings]

Those numbers must be super accurate to end in 0's.

[DarrinS]

Where do you get 2,900,000?


Also "Pemex claimed..."? Ok.

[Sportcamper]

Those numbers are false…I can’t understand the reasoning of defending gross negligence?

[RandomGuy]

Where do you get 2,900,000?


Also "Pemex claimed..."? Ok.


Since the BP oil rig exploded on April 20, about 126.3 million gallons of oil has gushed into the Gulf. That calculation is based on the higher end of the government's range of barrels leaked per day and the oil company BP's calculations for the amount of oil siphoned off as of Monday morning. Using the more optimistic end of calculations, the total spill figure is just shy of 68 million gallons.

As for the number of barrels that makes, just to be solid on my facts and figures, I googled it.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-us%3AIE-SearchBox&q=barrel+of+oil+in+gallons

Seems my memory was faulty. One barrel is NOT 44 gallons, as given in my post. It is 42 gallons.

126,300,000 / 42 = 3,000,000

My apologies for the mistake. I will go and edit my post with the correct figures.

[RandomGuy]

Where do you get 2,900,000?


Also "Pemex claimed..."? Ok.

Some amount of oil was burned for the entire length of the spill. That is not disputed.

So let's re-run our calculation.

IXTOC calculation:
Assume that only 1/6, not one half the oil was burned, i.e. only 1/3 of what they claimed to have burned was burned (they exaggerated by 300%)

Total oil leaked, Wiki figure, generally accepted:
3,000,000 barrels

Minus reported mitigating factors, burning and evaporation

3,000,000/2 *1/3= 500,000 (burned portion)
3,000,000/3= 1,000,000 (evaporated portion)

1,500,000 + 500,000= 1,500,000 (total burned and evaporated)

Equals:

3,000,000 - 1,500,000 = 1,500,000 barrels released into the environment, some portion of which was cleaned up.

Deepwater Horizon Calculation.

Assume: use of dispersants underwater limits evaporation by a factor of 1/2, given massive observed plumes of oil underwater.

Total oil leaked:
126,000,000 gallons (given in the OP) / 42 gallons per barrel = 3,000,000 barrels (total spill volume, as given in the OP)

By the way, 3,000,000 is a *bit* more than half, Darrin, but continuing on...

Minus total oil evaporated:
3,000,000/3/2 = 500,000 (total evaporated)

Equals:
3,000,000 - 500,000 = 2,500,000 barrels released into the environment, some portion of which is cleaned up at the surface, likely a smaller portion than ixtoc due to aforementioned underwater plumes.

Which is the bigger number, Darrin:
1,500,000 or 2,500,000 ?

[fraga]

B7_rPDwSKe8

Yeah...it's not THAT much...

[DarrinS]

Those numbers are false…


Based on what information?




I can’t understand the reasoning of defending gross negligence?



The article is just trying to put the magnitude of the spill in perspective. The average person can't relate to the volume figures that have been presented.
Actually, I thought 4 soda cans of oil for every American seemed like quite a lot.

[Sportcamper]

Figures lie & liars figure…

I say again “this mess will not be completely eradicated in your lifetime”…

[DarrinS]

Which is the bigger number, Darrin:
1,500,000 or 2,500,000 ?

I'm confused. Please clear this up for me with your startlingly sharp insight and analysis.


If the BP spill is at 3 mill barrels (based on high end of leak est.), then it is about the same as Ixtoc.

Why didn't you do all your burn and evap. calcs for the BP numbers?

[DarrinS]

Figures lie & liars figure…

I say again “this mess will not be completely eradicated in your lifetime”…


I've lived a pretty hard life, so this statement might have some validity.

It may take about 20 years, the same amount of time between this and the last major spill in the Gulf.

[Drachen]

If the BP spill is at 3 mill barrels (based on high end of leak est.), then it is about the same as Ixtoc.

Why didn't you do all your burn and evap. calcs for the BP numbers?

He did. The burn portion didn't apply since there was no oil burning as it hit the surface. Then he did the 2.9 million/3/2 to do the evaporation portion minus half to compensate for the fact that much of the oil isn't rising to the surface and is staying under water in plume form. Trust me, it's all there, but he was far less meticulous in describing the BP part and I had to read it a couple of times to get there. Also, I wouldn't have necessarily taken such liberty with knocking half off of the evaporation rate especially since he didn't need to in order to make his point. I would have basically said "evaporation is 2.9 mil/3 ~ 1 mil. 2.9 mil - 1 mil = 1.9 mil. 1.9 mil>500k and that doesn't even take into account the fact that much of the oil can't evaporate since it is in plume form under water." To each his own though.

[RandomGuy]

If the BP spill is at 3 mill barrels (based on high end of leak est.), then it is about the same as Ixtoc.

Why didn't you do all your burn and evap. calcs for the BP numbers?

Oooohkaaay. My bad for not making it a bit clearer.



Assume: use of dispersants underwater limits evaporation by a factor of 1/2, given massive observed plumes of oil underwater.

126,000,000 gallons / 42 gallons per barrel = 3,000,000 barrels

By the way, 3,000,000 is a *bit* more than half, Darrin, but continuing on...

3,000,000/3/2 = 500,000 (total evaporated)

and


Assume: use of dispersants underwater limits evaporation by a factor of 1/2, given massive observed plumes of oil underwater.

126,000,000 gallons / 42 gallons per barrel = 3,000,000 barrels

By the way, 3,000,000 is a *bit* more than half, Darrin, but continuing on...

3,000,000/3/2 = 500,000 (total evaporated)

As for the "burn" factor, how much of the spill was burned at the surface Darrin? Give me a %.

I didn't see any pictures of oil burning at the suface at the spill site, so I assumed it was neglible, and lumped it in with the unkown amount being cleaned up.

Maybe you aren't too lazy to find the most recent picture of the spill site showing the oil being burned off?

[DarrinS]

:bang This would be so much easier if you had a modicum of reading comprehension or weren't too lazy to read the whole thing.



Ok, I see what you did. My bad. And I concede that this spill is as bad, if not worse, than the Ixtoc (regardless of how much we estimate is burned, evaporated, etc.)

[Sportcamper]

It is not 20 years…We don’t even know what month or year the relief station will be completed so the pipe can be shut off…Meanwhile BP has a plan to save the walruses? (Which are not found in the gulf)…Is there any better example of gross incompetence?

[RandomGuy]

He did. The burn portion didn't apply since there was no oil burning as it hit the surface. Then he did the 2.9 million/3/2 to do the evaporation portion minus half to compensate for the fact that much of the oil isn't rising to the surface and is staying under water in plume form. Trust me, it's all there, but he was far less meticulous in describing the BP part and I had to read it a couple of times to get there. Also, I wouldn't have necessarily taken such liberty with knocking half off of the evaporation rate especially since he didn't need to in order to make his point. I would have basically said "evaporation is 2.9 mil/3 ~ 1 mil. 2.9 mil - 1 mil = 1.9 mil. 1.9 mil>500k and that doesn't even take into account the fact that much of the oil can't evaporate since it is in plume form under water." To each his own though.

Sorry. I cleaned up the bit so that the figures and origin were more clear.


Where do you get 2,900,000?


Also "Pemex claimed..."? Ok.

Some amount of oil was burned for the entire length of the spill. That is not disputed.

So let's re-run our calculation.

IXTOC calculation:
Assume that only 1/6, not one half the oil was burned, i.e. only 1/3 of what they claimed to have burned was burned (they exaggerated by 300%)

Total oil leaked, Wiki figure, generally accepted:
3,000,000 barrels

Minus reported mitigating factors, burning and evaporation

3,000,000/2 *1/3= 500,000 (burned portion)
3,000,000/3= 1,000,000 (evaporated portion)

1,500,000 + 500,000= 1,500,000 (total burned and evaporated)

Equals:

3,000,000 - 1,500,000 = 1,500,000 barrels released into the environment, some portion of which was cleaned up.

Deepwater Horizon Calculation.

Assume: use of dispersants underwater limits evaporation by a factor of 1/2, given massive observed plumes of oil underwater.

Total oil leaked:
126,000,000 gallons (given in the OP) / 42 gallons per barrel = 3,000,000 barrels (total spill volume, as given in the OP)

By the way, 3,000,000 is a *bit* more than half, Darrin, but continuing on...

Minus total oil evaporated:
3,000,000/3/2 = 500,000 (total evaporated)

Equals:
3,000,000 - 500,000 = 2,500,000 barrels released into the environment, some portion of which is cleaned up at the surface, likely a smaller portion than ixtoc due to aforementioned underwater plumes.

Which is the bigger number, Darrin:
1,500,000 or 2,500,000 ?

[RandomGuy]

Ok, I see what you did. My bad. And I concede that this spill is as bad, if not worse, than the Ixtoc (regardless of how much we estimate is burned, evaporated, etc.)

Sorry for not being clearer. Looking back on it, it should have been a bit easier to read.

[Drachen]

It is not 20 years…We don’t even know what month or year the relief station will be completed so the pipe can be shut off…Meanwhile BP has a plan to save the walruses? (Which are not found in the gulf)…Is there any better example of gross incompetence?

I don't know why this is being harped on so badly. It is a PR coup for BP. I can see it now. BP CEO: "We have finally capped the runaway oil leak that has been fouling the waters of this fine ocean, the gulf of mexico. I would also like to point out that due to BP's impeccable planning, and disaster response team's excellence that we were able to save every single walrus that has called the Gulf of Mexico home over the last 3 million years."

[DarrinS]

Sorry for not being clearer. Looking back on it, it should have been a bit easier to read.

No problemo. :toast

[The Reckoning]

Still far less than the Kuwaiti oil fied fires that lost 6 million barrels per day and burned for months -- until AMERICAN contractors (many from Texas) went and capped those suckas.


could Texans come to the rescue again?

8VfypUzx1tI


watch the video all the way through.

[RandomGuy]

Ok, I see what you did. My bad. And I concede that this spill is as bad, if not worse, than the Ixtoc (regardless of how much we estimate is burned, evaporated, etc.)

Fair enough. Sorry for the condescension, it was undeserved. That's what I get for talking to Mr. sommerset.

Given that the total spill according to some fair estimates equals the Ixtoc spill NOW, and given:

3,000,000 barrels divided by days since spill equals assumed flow rate (as of date of article in the OP, June 21st):

3,000,000/56 (56 days of spillage) =53,000 barrels per day

Given:
The EARLIEST that BP estimates the relief wells will kick in is August.

We can estimate how much more will spill.

Assuming some of that 53,000 is captured at a rate less than the optimistic 22,000 barrels BP promises at some point in the future, lets split the distance in capture/time and call the reduction 11,000 barrels for the entire period.

This gives us 42,000 barrels for 55 days (assume Aug 15th)

This is approximately another 2,310,000 barrels of oil.

Given:
That this operation is by no means (according to the experts I have heard talking about it) sure to succeed, it is entirely possible that some amount will continue to spill for months further.

If we assume that they can at least cut the flow rate by 3/4, but it takes another 4 months to finally stop it...

42,000 barrels * 1/4 multiplied by 4 months (122 days or Dec 15th)

=1,281,000 barrels.

Total estimate spill = 3,000,000 + 2,310,000 + 1,281,000 = 5.6 Million barrels, well in excess of the Ixtoc spill.

Basically it is likely we are now only about at the halfway point in this spill, and quite possibly most of the oil ultimately spilled is yet to pour into the Gulf.

This will be the largest accidental spill in history by any reasonable estimation, even if you assume that the overall flow rate and/or spill was less than 53,000 barrels/day or 3,000,000 total spill so far.

[RandomGuy]

Still far less than the Kuwaiti oil fied fires that lost 6 million barrels per day and burned for months -- until AMERICAN contractors (many from Texas) went and capped those suckas.

I truly shudder to think about the damage to the Gulf's ecosystem that caused.

[MannyIsGod]

Relativism weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[RandomGuy]

This will be the largest accidental spill in history by any reasonable estimation, even if you assume that the overall flow rate and/or spill was less than 53,000 barrels/day or 3,000,000 total spill so far.

Well shit.

According to wiki, maybe not.

Ok folks: here is the Lakeview Gusher of 1911. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakeview_Gusher)

Spilled oil for well over a year, from 14 March 1910 – September 1911.

For a total spill of 9,000,000 barrels. Yowza.

This was on land, so the damage was fairly contained, and glops of ossified oil are still to be found near the area. Click on the link above to see pictures.

This wasn't listed at the wiki entry before to my memory. Always good to double check sources, and demonstrates the strengths/weaknesses of wiki.

[RandomGuy]

I truly shudder to think about the damage to the Gulf's ecosystem that caused.

Also, for comparison, that spill, according to wiki was 11 million barrels total.

My rough estimate of some 5.6 million barrels for this won't quite come close to that, although there is a good chance that 5.6 is at the low end of the spectrum, if the spill continues for a length of time longer than December 2010.

[RandomGuy]

Gulf war oil spill extract from wiki


Environmental impact
The oil spill, which began on January 23, 1991, caused considerable damage to wildlife in the Persian Gulf especially in areas surrounding Kuwait and Iraq.[2] Estimates on the volume spilled usually range around 11 million barrels (462 million gallons or 1.75 billion liters);[3] the slick reached a maximum size of 101 by 42 miles (4242 square miles or 10860 km²) and was 5 inches (13 cm) thick in some areas. Despite the uncertainty surrounding the size of the spill, figures place it several times [4] the size (in gallons spilled) of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, and almost twice the size of the 1979 Ixtoc I blowout in the Gulf of Mexico.

The New York Times reported that a 1993 study sponsored by UNESCO, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the United States found the spill did "little long-term damage": About half the oil evaporated, a million barrels were recovered and 2 million to 3 million barrels washed ashore, mainly in Saudi Arabia.[5]

More recent scientific studies strongly disagree with this [optimistic] 1993 assessment. Marshlands and mud tidal flats continued to contain large quantities of oil, over ten years later, and full recovery is likely to take decades.

Dr. Jacqueline Michel, US geochemist (2010 interview – transcript of radio broadcast):[6]


The long term effects were very significant. There was no shoreline cleanup, essentially, over the 800 kilometers that the oil – - in Saudi Arabia. And so when we went back in to do quantitative survey in 2002 and 2003, there was a million cubic meters of oil sediment remained then 12 years after the spill.... [T]he oil penetrated much more deeply into the intertidal sediment than normal because those sediments there have a lot of crab burrows, and the oil penetrated deep, sometimes 30, 40 centimeters, you know a couple of feet, into the mud of these tidal flats. There’s no way to get it out now. So it has had long term impact.

Dr. Hans-Jörg Barth, German geographer (2001 research report):[7]


The study demonstrated that, in contrary to previously published reports e.g. already 1993 by UNEP, several coastal areas even in 2001 still show significant oil impact and in some places no recovery at all. The salt marshes which occur at almost 50% of the coastline show the heaviest impact compared to the other ecosystem types after 10 years. Completely recovered are the rocky shores and mangroves. Sand beaches are on the best way to complete recovery.

The main reason for the delayed recovery of the salt marshes is the absence of physical energy (wave action) and the mostly anaerobic milieu of the oiled substrates. The latter is mostly caused by cyanobacteria which forms impermeable mats. In other cases tar crusts are responsible. The availability of oxygen is the most important criteria for oil degradation. Where oil degrades it was obvious that benthic intertidal fauna such as crabs re-colonise the destroyed habitats long before the halophytes. The most important paths of regeneration are the tidal channels and the adjacent areas. Full recovery of the salt marshes will certainly need some more decades.

[Wild Cobra]

B7_rPDwSKe8

Yeah...it's not THAT much...
What is the current estimate of oil?

If it was limited to the 120 yards x 55 yards of a football field, it would take 10,680 barrels of oil per foot in height.

At the low end of estimation, the 68 million gallons, this patch of oil would be
153.03 ft. high. At the high end, 126.3 million gallons, it would be 284.24 ft high.

[DMX7]

See... people were just worried over nothing. Well done, Obama.

[RandomGuy]

What is the current estimate of oil?

If it was limited to the 120 yards x 55 yards of a football field, it would take 10,680 barrels of oil per foot in height.

At the low end of estimation, the 68 million barrels, this patch of oil woild be
153.03 ft. high. At the high end, 126.3 million barrels, it would be 284.24 ft high.

You are confusing barrels and gallons.

The 126.3M figure in the OP was in gallons. 42 gallons per barrel. (126.3M gal/42 gal/bbl = 3Mbbl)

The wiki bit has a fair history on the subject.

Current upper end on the rate, after the riser cut, is 60,000 bbl/day. My calculations assumed 53,000, and it was likely a bit less before they snipped the pipe at the BOP.


On June 15, after taking into account the increased flow rate after the riser was cut, McNutt estimated that the leak spilled between 35,000 and 60,000 barrels (1,500,000 and 2,500,000 US gallons; 5,600 and 9,500 cubic metres) a day.[70][71] The updated estimates are believed to be more accurate because it was no longer necessary to measure multiple leaks, and detailed pressure measurements were available as was more than a week of high-resolution newly-released video by BP.[72]

[DMX7]

You are confusing barrels and gallons.

The 126.3M figure in the OP was in gallons. 42 gallons per barrel. (126.3M gal/42 gal/bbl = 3Mbbl)

The wiki bit has a fair history on the subject.

Current upper end on the rate, after the riser cut, is 60,000 bbl/day. My calculations assumed 53,000, and it was likely a bit less before they snipped the pipe at the BOP.

Barrels, gallons, who cares? It can't fill up the Superdome, so it doesn't matter.

[RandomGuy]

Barrels, gallons, who cares? It can't fill up the Superdome, so it doesn't matter.

:lol

Silly me, I forgot that part.

/thread?

[Wild Cobra]

You are confusing barrels and gallons.

The 126.3M figure in the OP was in gallons. 42 gallons per barrel. (126.3M gal/42 gal/bbl = 3Mbbl)

The wiki bit has a fair history on the subject.

Current upper end on the rate, after the riser cut, is 60,000 bbl/day. My calculations assumed 53,000, and it was likely a bit less before they snipped the pipe at the BOP.
No, I did the math a bit funny, but correct.

42 gallons to the barrel x 231 cubic inches per gallon = 9702 cubic inches per barrel. 120 x 55 yards = 8553600 square inches. One barrel covers this area at a height of 0.001134 inches. It takes 881.6327 barrels for one inch in height. One foot in height would take 10,509.59 barrels. I divided the two gallon estimates by 42 to use barrels. Then, divided the barrels into the 10,509.59 for feet of height.

Don't you ever verify before making a statement of fact?

[RandomGuy]

You are confusing gallons and barrels


No, I did the math a bit funny, but correct.

42 gallons to the barrel x 231 cubic inches per gallon = 9702 cubic inches per barrel. 120 x 55 yards = 8553600 square inches. One barrel covers this area at a height of 0.001134 inches. It takes 881.6327 barrels for one inch in height. One foot in height would take 10,509.59 barrels. I divided the two gallon estimates by 42 to use barrels. Then, divided the barrels into the 10,509.59 for feet of height.

Don't you ever verify before making a statement of fact?


Take the 126.3 million gallons of oil spilled in the Gulf and convert it to gasoline, which is what Americans mostly use it for.



At the high end, 126.3 million barrels, it would be 284.24 ft high.

It was more of a typo than a math error, but your calculations weren't really all that clear to me to be certain of your math/analysis.

[Wild Cobra]

It was more of a typo than a math error, but your calculations weren't really all that clear to me to be certain of your math/analysis.
OK, I'll go back and correct it if I said that. Yes, typo rather than math error if anything.

[RandomGuy]

OK, I'll go back and correct it if I said that. Yes, typo rather than math error if anything.


What is the current estimate of oil?

If it was limited to the 120 yards x 55 yards of a football field, it would take 10,680 barrels of oil per foot in height.

At the low end of estimation, the 68 million gallons, this patch of oil would be
153.03 ft. high. At the high end, 126.3 million gallons, it would be 284.24 ft high.


No, I did the math a bit funny, but correct.

42 gallons to the barrel x 231 cubic inches per gallon = 9702 cubic inches per barrel. 120 x 55 yards = 8553600 square inches. One barrel covers this area at a height of 0.001134 inches. It takes 881.6327 barrels for one inch in height. One foot in height would take 10,509.59 barrels. I divided the two gallon estimates by 42 to use barrels. Then, divided the barrels into the 10,509.59 for feet of height.

Don't you ever verify before making a statement of fact?

The first figure was correct. (got it, the 10,509 figure would be barrels/foot)

A football-field sized tank of oil would need to be 284.24 feet tall, although my spreadsheet gives it at 283.56, the minor difference is probably rounding.

[MiamiHeat]

While I agree with the overall point that yeah, it's a big ocean, it's still a lot of oil. Oddly, it's a curse and a blessing. ANWR was thought to hold 3 billion barrels and they just found 2/3rds of an ANWR ?

I want to get it plugged so we can start celebrating. That's a hell of a find and there's more where that came from. The GoM has a shitload of oil. Deep water drilling, if done right, is safe. The Brazillians are drilling in deeper water than that and producing oil. This was a human error and apparently, an error in method used specifically by BP to contain costs. Fix that, and move on. Our trade imbalance is waaay to high to just sit on this.

Except that the United States does not benefit in that way from the oil drilled from the Gulf.

All of the oil goes to a "pool" of oil that is sold to the highest bidders.

[word]

It helps your trade 'balance sheet'. I know that the price of oil is set on an open market...funny that the globe uses capitalism but individual countries reject it...neither here nor there in this discussion. American oil means less money we have to spend buying oil overseas. It's a product, like entertainment in the form of movies and music ( pop culture is Americas biggest export in case you didn't know that . This is why there is so much yelping going on with intellectual property in countries that steal it. CHINA being the greatest offender ) or cars or anything else. Either you make it or you buy it from someone else.

[word]

People don't realize this either. Foreigners can own shit in America. We are one of the few countries that doesn't have a lot of limits on that. Foreingers can't hold majority stake in a news orgaization for example. That's why a Saudi owns 49% of Reuters. He can't own the majority. But you can influence with 49%. There is no limit to real estate they can own. An American, for example, can't own property on the Mexican coast. Yet, Mexican citizens can buy homes or business's on the US coast. Or anywhere else. We are the least protectionist nation in the world. The problem with China for example, is you can go over there as a corporation and invest and make money but you can't get your money out. In the US, you can make money in the US if you're a foreigner, and then invest or send your money anywhere you want. You make US dollars in the US, it's yours to do with as you please. That is not true everywhere else.

[ChumpDumper]

It helps your trade 'balance sheet'. I know that the price of oil is set on an open market...funny that the globe uses capitalism but individual countries reject it...neither here nor there in this discussion. American oil means less money we have to spend buying oil overseas. It's a product, like entertainment in the form of movies and music ( pop culture is Americas biggest export in case you didn't know that . This is why there is so much yelping going on with intellectual property in countries that steal it. CHINA being the greatest offender ) or cars or anything else. Either you make it or you buy it from someone else.You act as if the US currently uses all the oil it produces.

[DarrinS]

People don't realize this either. Foreigners can own shit in America. We are one of the few countries that doesn't have a lot of limits on that. Foreingers can't hold majority stake in a news orgaization for example. That's why a Saudi owns 49% of Reuters. He can't own the majority. But you can influence with 49%. There is no limit to real estate they can own. An American, for example, can't own property on the Mexican coast. Yet, Mexican citizens can buy homes or business's on the US coast. Or anywhere else. We are the least protectionist nation in the world. The problem with China for example, is you can go over there as a corporation and invest and make money but you can't get your money out. In the US, you can make money in the US if you're a foreigner, and then invest or send your money anywhere you want. You make US dollars in the US, it's yours to do with as you please. That is not true everywhere else.


Never would've guessed that.

[ChumpDumper]

People don't realize this either. Foreigners can own shit in America. We are one of the few countries that doesn't have a lot of limits on that. Foreingers can't hold majority stake in a news orgaization for example. That's why a Saudi owns 49% of Reuters. He can't own the majority. But you can influence with 49%
Reuters is based in the UK.

A Canadian company controls 53% of it.

[ChumpDumper]

I believe a Saudi owns 7% of Fox News though.

[Sec24Row7]

This spill will be nothing in the long run. Much much worse things were done in the early days of the oil industry... millions of barrels of oil were stored in unlined pits for collection...

When they were drilling the yates field they were skimming 2000 barrels a day off of the Pecos river...

You mentioned the 11 million barrel spill...

You have to look really really hard to find evidence of those.

Fact is... bacteria works on oil pretty darn quickly in hot environments...

That is why Valdez was so bad... and why this isn't going to be if they get this thing over with in August.

Still sucks... a lot... but the sky isn't really falling.

[ChumpDumper]

That's why a Saudi owns 49% of Reuters.Seriously, where did you get this?

[Nbadan]

surfs Up~

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/179496/thumbs/r-OIL-SPILL-large.jpg

[Winehole23]

This spill will be nothing in the long run. Much much worse things were done in the early days of the oil industry... millions of barrels of oil were stored in unlined pits for collection... If old newspaper archives are online by now try "lagoon fire" as your search terms. That happened too.


When they were drilling the yates field they were skimming 2000 barrels a day off of the Pecos river... I believe it, but the damage, non-earth changing though it was, was probably untold. Did we have influential enviros back then? Were Texans of a scientific bent measuring the impact?


Fact is... bacteria works on oil pretty darn quickly in hot environments...Uncontroversial. Warm climate *results* get eaten faster.

So effing what?

Does that help you sleep better at night or something? :wakeup


That is why Valdez was so bad... and why this isn't going to be if they get this thing over with in August.Appeals to reason, but I fail to see the substrate (http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/substrate) for your hopes that BP will resolve the matter promptly.


Still sucks... a lot... but the sky isn't really falling.Who said it was?

[Winehole23]

You mentioned the 11 million barrel spill...

You have to look really really hard to find evidence of those.Has anyone looked?

[Winehole23]

Seriously, where did you get this?If it's not PFA maybe word just overheard it at a party or something.

[rjv]

While I agree with the overall point that yeah, it's a big ocean, it's still a lot of oil. Oddly, it's a curse and a blessing. ANWR was thought to hold 3 billion barrels and they just found 2/3rds of an ANWR ?

I want to get it plugged so we can start celebrating. That's a hell of a find and there's more where that came from. The GoM has a shitload of oil. Deep water drilling, if done right, is safe. The Brazillians are drilling in deeper water than that and producing oil. This was a human error and apparently, an error in method used specifically by BP to contain costs. Fix that, and move on. Our trade imbalance is waaay to high to just sit on this.

the british government is subsidising that drilling off of the coast of brazil. the UK trade ministers underwrote loans taken out by the Brazilian state-run company petrobras in 2005 in order that rolls royce and other companies could contribute to the building of the giant P-52 platform.

that platform is now operating 125km off the coast in 1,798 metres of water. the 14-page environment report prepared by the UK's credit guarantee department made no mention of blowouts or the equipment needed to prevent them. and the ministers edited out all ECDG's comments assessing the risks involved in deep-sea drilling in the atlantic.

the oil and gas reservoirs of the campos basin are considered some of the most hazardous in the world to access, pushing offshore technology to the limit. the P-52 rig replaced one that exploded and sank due to human error in 2001, killing 11 people.

[Wild Cobra]

This spill will be nothing in the long run. Much much worse things were done in the early days of the oil industry... millions of barrels of oil were stored in unlined pits for collection...

I don't know. There is a slim chance it could get very bad. If something I heard through the grapevine is true, this could be the largest reserve ever tapped, and unstoppable as well.

[RandomGuy]

I don't know. There is a slim chance it could get very bad. If something I heard through the grapevine is true, this could be the largest reserve ever tapped, and unstoppable as well.

The Saudi reserves are larger, to my understanding. I would have to re-find the articles where it talked about that, but that is what I remember reading.

[Wild Cobra]

The Saudi reserves are larger, to my understanding. I would have to re-find the articles where it talked about that, but that is what I remember reading.
No way to know for certain, is there.

[Winehole23]

the british government is subsidising that drilling off of the coast of brazil. the UK trade ministers underwrote loans taken out by the Brazilian state-run company petrobras in 2005 in order that rolls royce and other companies could contribute to the building of the giant P-52 platform.According to BBC overnight, the US is in talks with Petrobras to loan them money. For what I have no idea.

Possibly related?

[Winehole23]

Link:

[Winehole23]

http://www.zacks.com/stock/news/36336/FMC+Tech+Gets+Petrobras+Subsea+Deal

[Winehole23]

http://newsystocks.com/news/3574678

[Winehole23]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574346610120524166.html

[RandomGuy]

No way to know for certain, is there.

Yes, actually the data is fairly easy to find. I can find it again if you want.

Most major discoveries tend to have formal geology papers written, because they form the basis of "proven" reserve calculations that are very important to the accounting for oil companies and countries.

...or you could actually spend the time to support your statement.

[RandomGuy]

It took me less than a minute to find.

Here is a list of oil fields with more than 1bn barrels of proven reserves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_fields
The Ghewar field contained/-s a total of about 80bn barrels of proven reserves.

The Macondo prospect, the field that the Deepwater Horizon was tapping:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macondo_Prospect 50M barrels.

Now if what you "heard through the grapevine" was that it was the "largest reserve in history" that means that the professional geologists that measure these things were off in their estimation by two orders of maginitude.


No way to know for certain, is there.

I guess there is.

Why did you not look?

[Wild Cobra]

Yes, actually the data is fairly easy to find. I can find it again if you want.

Most major discoveries tend to have formal geology papers written, because they form the basis of "proven" reserve calculations that are very important to the accounting for oil companies and countries.

...or you could actually spend the time to support your statement.
I'm aware of that. I'm not sure what to believe, but know this. BP hasn't disclosed all the facts they know about the reserve. You know what proprietary information is, right?

[Wild Cobra]

I guess there is.

Why did you not look?
Because proven and actual or estimated are different.

[RandomGuy]

I'm aware of that. I'm not sure what to believe, but know this. BP hasn't disclosed all the facts they know about the reserve. You know what proprietary information is, right?

This is a publicly traded company.

Reserve data is highly important to an oil companies' net worth.

Since the US subsidiary is traded on a public exchange, the reserve data is likely not quite as secret as all that, since management must discuss, per SEC regulations (HA!), things that materially affect the bottom line.

It may be proprietary, but if the reserve were larger by a factor of 100, and larger than the Saudi field, that would have been disclosed by now for those reasons. It would instantly have made BP, as the discoverer/owner of the field vastly rich, by inflating its assets.

Kind of hard for that to sneak under the radar in mysterious conspiracy land, unknown to the rest of the world, IMO. No offense.

[RandomGuy]

Because proven and actual or estimated are different.

They are indeed.

Proven = what is 90% likely to be actually drilled/used

actual/estimated = no body really knows

In that sense, you are correct.

It is also true that we can get some fair idea as to what is there. We might not ever get the exact numbers, but we can get close enough to make good decisions and draw reasonable conclusions.

[Wild Cobra]

This is a publicly traded company.

Reserve data is highly important to an oil companies' net worth.

Since the US subsidiary is traded on a public exchange, the reserve data is likely not quite as secret as all that, since management must discuss, per SEC regulations (HA!), things that materially affect the bottom line.

It may be proprietary, but if the reserve were larger by a factor of 100, and larger than the Saudi field, that would have been disclosed by now for those reasons. It would instantly have made BP, as the discoverer/owner of the field vastly rich, by inflating its assets.

Kind of hard for that to sneak under the radar in mysterious conspiracy land, unknown to the rest of the world, IMO. No offense.
All they have to do us use terms like "greater than" without really disclosing what they might really know.

I've worked with proprietary information before myself. Trust me. There are ways of wording it, and as long as it isn't fraudulent, they cannot get in trouble once the truth comes out.

[Winehole23]

Everything settles on semantic differences with you. What I wanna know is, who died and made you the dictionary?

[Wild Cobra]

Everything settles on semantic differences with you. What I wanna know is, who died and made you the dictionary?

Nobody.

As time passes, we gain wisdom and knowledge.

[Winehole23]

One would hope so.

[rjv]

According to BBC overnight, the US is in talks with Petrobras to loan them money. For what I have no idea.

Possibly related?

supposedly to encourage exports to brazil, who will purchase a good deal of equipment from the US as a result of the loan.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/bogus-brazilian-oil-claims

[Winehole23]

supposedly to encourage exports to brazil, who will purchase a good deal of equipment from the US as a result of the loan.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/bogus-brazilian-oil-claimsCircumstantial?: http://www.zacks.com/stock/news/36336/FMC+Tech+Gets+Petrobras+Subsea+Deal

[LnGrrrR]

Are we up to the critical "Filled-the-superdome" level?

[Winehole23]

Are we up to the critical "Filled-the-superdome" level?On bs you mean? The Superdome was never gonna be big enough.

[Winehole23]

The problem was that Bazalgette wasn’t thinking big enough. His diversion project was created for a city of 2.5 million – and even that number was almost unthinkable at the time. In 2011 , however, London’s population has swelled to 8 million, and the infrastructure is simply no longer up to the task. About 50 times a year, the sewers overflow and send enough sewage into the Thames to fill up a sporting arena once a month.http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2011/11/30/pro-tip-dont-fall-in-the-thames/

[leemajors]

http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2011/11/30/pro-tip-dont-fall-in-the-thames/

I read the Water Room by Christopher Fowler recently, it has a lot of fascinating stuff in it about the lock systems and all the underwater/lost rivers in and around London, and on top was a great murder mystery. I'm surprised the article didn't mention Dr. John Snow's efforts in tracing the cholera outbreak back to its source.

[Winehole23]

sounds like a good one. thanks for the tip, leemajors. :tu

[MultiTroll]

LoL bump.

[boutons_deux]

10 years later: Scientists learn long-term impact of Deepwater Horizon spill

Oil gushed from the leak for 87 days before it was finally capped.

A total of five million barrels of oil spilled into the gulf.

Polluting the water, killing marine life, and causing America’s largest environmental disaster.

A disaster that still lingers in the gulf more than 10 years later.

“Currently there’s a substantial amount of that oil still in the environment,” said Murawski.

“The oil that’s stranded in the deep bottom of the gulf will not be landfilled by sediment deposition for another 100 years,”

“Even now we see very low reproduction rates for those animals,”

He said of all the fish they’ve studied in the gulf; they still have yet to find one without traces of oil on it.

“We analyzed over 2000 fishes for their contamination with the most toxic components of oil called PAH's,

and every single one that we analyzed had a certain level of PAH's,"

“The Deepwater Horizon oil spill impacted a lot of marine life,”

https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/full-circle/10-years-later-scientists-learn-long-term-impact-of-deepwater-horizon-spill


At the time, the multi-millionaire shitbag running BP was fed up with the disaster "I just want my life back"

[ChumpDumper]

Jesus, Darrin starts some stupid ass threads.

[daboom1]

BREAKING: Fort Huachuca’s Commanding General reports that his post on AZ border is being overrun by illegal migrants

https://trmlx.com/fort-huachucas-commanding-general-reports-that-his-post-is-being-overrun-by-illegal-migrants/ https://truthsocial.com/users/JackPosobiec/statuses/109078696079603011

[ElNono]

BREAKING: Fort Huachuca’s Commanding General reports that his post on AZ border is being overrun by illegal migrants

https://trmlx.com/fort-huachucas-commanding-general-reports-that-his-post-is-being-overrun-by-illegal-migrants/ https://truthsocial.com/users/JackPosobiec/statuses/109078696079603011

P:lols:lolbi:lolc with the fake news

[Isitjustme?]

FrankDrebbinNothingToSeeHere.gif

Sad, sad. I mean I know you a pathetic fucking loser, but sad. So sad