you people have protected the rights of child raping murderers on the train many times when it comes to the death penalty. But it's ok for an oil company? You people are wacked and have your wires crossed. Every fucking one of you use oil in your daily lives.....fucking hypocrites!
you really need to read the replies in this thread again because you don't know what you are talking about. who is the "you people" you are referring to? who are the "people" here saying the death penalty is ok in this case"?
it's probably not a good idea to call people hypocrites just because you can't read, because unless Brad Pitt is posting here, which i highly doubt, i can only see one other person who has said they might agree with his views on the death penalty.
Holy shit people. We kill thousands of fish every day for food. Get the fuck over it. The Gulf cleaned itself up and took care of itself just like I always said it was going to. This planet is resiliant. Yes, it's sad that we lost some birds, and 3 mammals, but you people have protected the rights of child raping murderers on the train many times when it comes to the death penalty. But it's ok for an oil company? You people are wacked and have your wires crossed. Every fucking one of you use oil in your daily lives.....fucking hypocrites!
The only ones that put people in the gulf out of work is this administration of ours. Not allowing people to go back to work on the rigs.
FUCKING DRILL BABY FUCKING DRILL!!!!!
this is how shit like this happens again and again ... people who only listen to things they want to hear instead of the truth ... some birds and 3 mammals?? ... the gulf cleaned itself up? ... this is absurd ...
11 people died and your only concern is to put the workers back out there? ... do you know of the countless people who have died from exposure to the cleanup in the exxon valdez spill? ... people who were not compensated for cleaning up some corporations mess?? ...
i get it ... conservatives have a genetic disposition to oppose anything that a democrat gov't does and that they've been told environmentalists are hypocrites and a burden to the economy ... i get the fact that those on the right are obligated to spew myths and non-truths as part of their movement ... but for all that is pure and sacred - at the very least say something that is at least semi-factual because all you are showing here is that you have not a clue of what this disaster is ...
Holy shit people. We kill thousands of fish every day for food. Get the fuck over it. The Gulf cleaned itself up and took care of itself just like I always said it was going to. This planet is resiliant. Yes, it's sad that we lost some birds, and 3 mammals, but you people have protected the rights of child raping murderers on the train many times when it comes to the death penalty. But it's ok for an oil company? You people are wacked and have your wires crossed. Every fucking one of you use oil in your daily lives.....fucking hypocrites!
The only ones that put people in the gulf out of work is this administration of ours. Not allowing people to go back to work on the rigs.
FUCKING DRILL BABY FUCKING DRILL!!!!!
i am not really sure where you are getting YOUR news, but i am guessing you did not hear about the 22 mile long oil slick they found under the surface about 6 or 7 days ago, so yea, it cleaned itself up :roll: :roll:
drill baby drill? sinc you are in such favor of drilling, why don't you volunteer to go help clean it up and report back to us how great everything is down there and how everything is fine...
Massive oil plume found underwater by scientists
Published: Friday, August 20, 2010, 11:58 AM
A massive, 22-mile-long underwater plume of oil droplets flowed to the southwest of the BP's failed Macondo well at the end of June, and the threat it poses to natural resources of the Gulf of Mexico remains uncertain, scientists who mapped the plume said Thursday.
The finding confirms that plumes of oil from the failed well have existed deep beneath the surface, and that the oil is not seeping from natural fissures on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, according to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute scientists who authored the peer-reviewed article published Thursday in the online research magazine ScienceXpress.
30
0
129
Share The question of whether there are large oil plumes in the Gulf, hidden underwater, has been hotly debated.
And the release of the new plume study comes as a debate rages over the rosy picture painted by an Aug. 4 federal interagency report on the fate of the vast majority of the 4.9 million barrels of oil spilled from the well. That report, released in a White House ceremony, concluded that only 26 percent of the oil remained on or near the surface of the Gulf or onshore, and that much of the rest of the oil had dissolved or was dispersed and is degrading naturally.
But on Tuesday, Bill Lehr of NOAA, the lead scientist on the White House report, backtracked from those estimates, telling a congressional committee that only about 10 percent of the spilled oil had been skimmed or burned off and between 60 and 90 percent is still in the Gulf in some form.
The new plume study uses the concentration of four toxic chemicals found in the plume that are ingredients of crude oil to estimate that twice as much oil was supplied by the wellhead to the plume during the time of the study than was released by all natural petroleum seeps in the northern Gulf of Mexico during the same time.
The results of the survey and previous surveys also indicate "that this plume persisted at this depth interval for months, " the report said, and calls into question assumptions used by some federal officials that the oil will be quickly eaten by microbes in the Gulf and disappear.
"The evidence we collected showed conclusively that the plume existed at that depth," said Woods Hole oceanographer Richard Camilli, lead author on the scientific paper, during a Thursday news conference. "Furthermore, it shows fairly clearly that it was created by the Macondo site, the Deepwater Horizon well, and it was not created by naturally occurring seeps."
Camilli said the monitoring indicated the plume stayed at a constant depth, flowing through what amounts to an underwater valley away from the wellhead, instead of floating to the surface.
He said the research cruise had to be cut short at the end of June as Hurricane Alex entered the Gulf.
"The data suggests the plume extended much further than we tracked it," he said.
The scientists found droplets of dispersed oil in a layer between 1,067 meters and 1,300 meters beneath the Gulf's surface, that contained concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons in excess of 50 parts per billion, which they said indicates that at least 12,125 pounds of the oil component entered the plume each day.
They based that conclusion on samples taken from the plume in several locations that were tested for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene, also known as BTEX. Based on those measurements and the assumption that the well released between 53,000 and 62,000 barrels a day, they also concluded that between 6 percent and 7 percent of all BTEX leaking from the well was contained in the plume.
On Thursday, Camilli and Woods Hole marine geochemist Christopher Reddy said more work remains to be done on the samples collected from the plume. Reddy said the researchers are not yet sure how much oil actually was contained in the plume, or its potential effects on biological activity.
"We will know more with time as more data comes out of the pipeline, with the hundreds of samples we collected with NOAA," he said.
Reddy warned that the data represent a snapshot in time, and the fate of the oil that was measured then is unknown. And it likely won't be found in the same location, as the plume was moving at about 4 miles per day, due to currents at that depth.
Photographs taken during the cruise from a remotely operated vehicle about 1,500 feet southwest of the well site, which is about 65 miles south of the mouth of the Mississippi River, show the beginning of brownish cloudy water at 1,065 meters, turning to a deeper brown color at 1,100 meters and 1,200 meters, and lessening in intensity at 1,300 meters. Photos from above and below those levels show purple- or blue-tinged water.
The scientists reported that small oil droplets temporarily collected on the camera lens within the plume.
The scientists also found that oxygen levels near the plume did not seem to be affected by the presence of hydrocarbons, which they said raises questions about the ability of bacteria and other organisms to break down oil in deep water. But that may also be a plus for fisheries, they said.
"This suggests that if the hydrocarbons are indeed susceptible to biodegradation, then it may require many months before microbes significantly attenuate the hydrocarbon plume to the point that oxygen minimum zones develop that are intense enough to threaten Gulf fisheries, " they wrote.
Researchers from the Australian Centre for Field Robotics at the University of Sydney in Australia, and Monitor Instruments Co., LLC, also participated in the cruise aboard the R/V Endeavor between June 19 and June 28. The research was funded by three grants under the National Science Foundation RAPID grant award program, which has already spent $10 million on 90 grants for spill-related science.
The research also was conducted under testing protocols set up by federal officials as part of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment process. Water samples were shared with NOAA and BP.
The scientists collected data using the National Deep Submergence Facility's autonomous underwater vehicle Sentry, which has no physical connection to the surface when lowered into the water, but is controlled by on-board computers. The Sentry carried a mass spectrometer that was able to determine the constituents of the petroleum, and other chemical sensors to analyze the water.
The research on the plume was conducted from June 23-27, during which time the Sentry made three surveys and traveled in a zig-zag pattern totaling 146 miles.
Water samples also were collected with a "rosette" of scientific instruments lowered into the water at different locations.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
obviously, some were only workers. some were just doing their job, and some oddly, were improbably environmentalist oil rig workers. but im talking the big wigs. the ceos. the people who were in charge, the bosses.
what should be done to people like that? I doubt anyone involved in the thing will ever be the same. One would hope that the ceo's and big wigs have nightmares and are haunted until the day they die about the destruction they caused, but maybe thats hoping too much.
what should be done to those who created one of the worst environmental disasters in history? Should they be forced to work at Greenpeace or Sea Shepard for the rest of their life? Or should something more punitive happen to them?
Unless they broke some laws, the punishment should be to the company and the company should deal with the individuals on their own. The government has no business punishing the individuals unless they broke laws on their own.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Holy shit people. We kill thousands of fish every day for food. Get the fuck over it. The Gulf cleaned itself up and took care of itself just like I always said it was going to. This planet is resiliant. Yes, it's sad that we lost some birds, and 3 mammals, but you people have protected the rights of child raping murderers on the train many times when it comes to the death penalty. But it's ok for an oil company? You people are wacked and have your wires crossed. Every fucking one of you use oil in your daily lives.....fucking hypocrites!
The only ones that put people in the gulf out of work is this administration of ours. Not allowing people to go back to work on the rigs.
FUCKING DRILL BABY FUCKING DRILL!!!!!
i am not really sure where you are getting YOUR news, but i am guessing you did not hear about the 22 mile long oil slick they found under the surface about 6 or 7 days ago, so yea, it cleaned itself up :roll: :roll:
drill baby drill? sinc you are in such favor of drilling, why don't you volunteer to go help clean it up and report back to us how great everything is down there and how everything is fine...
Massive oil plume found underwater by scientists
Published: Friday, August 20, 2010, 11:58 AM
A massive, 22-mile-long underwater plume of oil droplets flowed to the southwest of the BP's failed Macondo well at the end of June, and the threat it poses to natural resources of the Gulf of Mexico remains uncertain, scientists who mapped the plume said Thursday.
The finding confirms that plumes of oil from the failed well have existed deep beneath the surface, and that the oil is not seeping from natural fissures on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, according to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute scientists who authored the peer-reviewed article published Thursday in the online research magazine ScienceXpress.
30
0
129
Share The question of whether there are large oil plumes in the Gulf, hidden underwater, has been hotly debated.
And the release of the new plume study comes as a debate rages over the rosy picture painted by an Aug. 4 federal interagency report on the fate of the vast majority of the 4.9 million barrels of oil spilled from the well. That report, released in a White House ceremony, concluded that only 26 percent of the oil remained on or near the surface of the Gulf or onshore, and that much of the rest of the oil had dissolved or was dispersed and is degrading naturally.
But on Tuesday, Bill Lehr of NOAA, the lead scientist on the White House report, backtracked from those estimates, telling a congressional committee that only about 10 percent of the spilled oil had been skimmed or burned off and between 60 and 90 percent is still in the Gulf in some form.
The new plume study uses the concentration of four toxic chemicals found in the plume that are ingredients of crude oil to estimate that twice as much oil was supplied by the wellhead to the plume during the time of the study than was released by all natural petroleum seeps in the northern Gulf of Mexico during the same time.
The results of the survey and previous surveys also indicate "that this plume persisted at this depth interval for months, " the report said, and calls into question assumptions used by some federal officials that the oil will be quickly eaten by microbes in the Gulf and disappear.
"The evidence we collected showed conclusively that the plume existed at that depth," said Woods Hole oceanographer Richard Camilli, lead author on the scientific paper, during a Thursday news conference. "Furthermore, it shows fairly clearly that it was created by the Macondo site, the Deepwater Horizon well, and it was not created by naturally occurring seeps."
Camilli said the monitoring indicated the plume stayed at a constant depth, flowing through what amounts to an underwater valley away from the wellhead, instead of floating to the surface.
He said the research cruise had to be cut short at the end of June as Hurricane Alex entered the Gulf.
"The data suggests the plume extended much further than we tracked it," he said.
The scientists found droplets of dispersed oil in a layer between 1,067 meters and 1,300 meters beneath the Gulf's surface, that contained concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons in excess of 50 parts per billion, which they said indicates that at least 12,125 pounds of the oil component entered the plume each day.
They based that conclusion on samples taken from the plume in several locations that were tested for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene, also known as BTEX. Based on those measurements and the assumption that the well released between 53,000 and 62,000 barrels a day, they also concluded that between 6 percent and 7 percent of all BTEX leaking from the well was contained in the plume.
On Thursday, Camilli and Woods Hole marine geochemist Christopher Reddy said more work remains to be done on the samples collected from the plume. Reddy said the researchers are not yet sure how much oil actually was contained in the plume, or its potential effects on biological activity.
"We will know more with time as more data comes out of the pipeline, with the hundreds of samples we collected with NOAA," he said.
Reddy warned that the data represent a snapshot in time, and the fate of the oil that was measured then is unknown. And it likely won't be found in the same location, as the plume was moving at about 4 miles per day, due to currents at that depth.
Photographs taken during the cruise from a remotely operated vehicle about 1,500 feet southwest of the well site, which is about 65 miles south of the mouth of the Mississippi River, show the beginning of brownish cloudy water at 1,065 meters, turning to a deeper brown color at 1,100 meters and 1,200 meters, and lessening in intensity at 1,300 meters. Photos from above and below those levels show purple- or blue-tinged water.
The scientists reported that small oil droplets temporarily collected on the camera lens within the plume.
The scientists also found that oxygen levels near the plume did not seem to be affected by the presence of hydrocarbons, which they said raises questions about the ability of bacteria and other organisms to break down oil in deep water. But that may also be a plus for fisheries, they said.
"This suggests that if the hydrocarbons are indeed susceptible to biodegradation, then it may require many months before microbes significantly attenuate the hydrocarbon plume to the point that oxygen minimum zones develop that are intense enough to threaten Gulf fisheries, " they wrote.
Researchers from the Australian Centre for Field Robotics at the University of Sydney in Australia, and Monitor Instruments Co., LLC, also participated in the cruise aboard the R/V Endeavor between June 19 and June 28. The research was funded by three grants under the National Science Foundation RAPID grant award program, which has already spent $10 million on 90 grants for spill-related science.
The research also was conducted under testing protocols set up by federal officials as part of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment process. Water samples were shared with NOAA and BP.
The scientists collected data using the National Deep Submergence Facility's autonomous underwater vehicle Sentry, which has no physical connection to the surface when lowered into the water, but is controlled by on-board computers. The Sentry carried a mass spectrometer that was able to determine the constituents of the petroleum, and other chemical sensors to analyze the water.
The research on the plume was conducted from June 23-27, during which time the Sentry made three surveys and traveled in a zig-zag pattern totaling 146 miles.
Water samples also were collected with a "rosette" of scientific instruments lowered into the water at different locations.
No, I didn't know that. Haven't been watching the news lately. But, everything will be fine.
No, I didn't know that. Haven't been watching the news lately. But, everything will be fine.
uhhh ... really? ... that's your response!? ... everything WILL be fine if you don't care about the things that get impacted ... soo, is that what you say to the families of the people that got killed because of gross negligence? ...
Holy shit people. We kill thousands of fish every day for food. Get the fuck over it. The Gulf cleaned itself up and took care of itself just like I always said it was going to. This planet is resiliant. Yes, it's sad that we lost some birds, and 3 mammals, but you people have protected the rights of child raping murderers on the train many times when it comes to the death penalty. But it's ok for an oil company? You people are wacked and have your wires crossed. Every fucking one of you use oil in your daily lives.....fucking hypocrites!
The only ones that put people in the gulf out of work is this administration of ours. Not allowing people to go back to work on the rigs.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Holy shit people. We kill thousands of fish every day for food. Get the fuck over it. The Gulf cleaned itself up and took care of itself just like I always said it was going to. This planet is resiliant. Yes, it's sad that we lost some birds, and 3 mammals, but you people have protected the rights of child raping murderers on the train many times when it comes to the death penalty. But it's ok for an oil company? You people are wacked and have your wires crossed. Every fucking one of you use oil in your daily lives.....fucking hypocrites!
The only ones that put people in the gulf out of work is this administration of ours. Not allowing people to go back to work on the rigs.
FUCKING DRILL BABY FUCKING DRILL!!!!!
i am not really sure where you are getting YOUR news, but i am guessing you did not hear about the 22 mile long oil slick they found under the surface about 6 or 7 days ago, so yea, it cleaned itself up :roll: :roll:
drill baby drill? sinc you are in such favor of drilling, why don't you volunteer to go help clean it up and report back to us how great everything is down there and how everything is fine...
Massive oil plume found underwater by scientists
Published: Friday, August 20, 2010, 11:58 AM
A massive, 22-mile-long underwater plume of oil droplets flowed to the southwest of the BP's failed Macondo well at the end of June, and the threat it poses to natural resources of the Gulf of Mexico remains uncertain, scientists who mapped the plume said Thursday.
The finding confirms that plumes of oil from the failed well have existed deep beneath the surface, and that the oil is not seeping from natural fissures on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, according to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute scientists who authored the peer-reviewed article published Thursday in the online research magazine ScienceXpress.
30
0
129
Share The question of whether there are large oil plumes in the Gulf, hidden underwater, has been hotly debated.
And the release of the new plume study comes as a debate rages over the rosy picture painted by an Aug. 4 federal interagency report on the fate of the vast majority of the 4.9 million barrels of oil spilled from the well. That report, released in a White House ceremony, concluded that only 26 percent of the oil remained on or near the surface of the Gulf or onshore, and that much of the rest of the oil had dissolved or was dispersed and is degrading naturally.
But on Tuesday, Bill Lehr of NOAA, the lead scientist on the White House report, backtracked from those estimates, telling a congressional committee that only about 10 percent of the spilled oil had been skimmed or burned off and between 60 and 90 percent is still in the Gulf in some form.
The new plume study uses the concentration of four toxic chemicals found in the plume that are ingredients of crude oil to estimate that twice as much oil was supplied by the wellhead to the plume during the time of the study than was released by all natural petroleum seeps in the northern Gulf of Mexico during the same time.
The results of the survey and previous surveys also indicate "that this plume persisted at this depth interval for months, " the report said, and calls into question assumptions used by some federal officials that the oil will be quickly eaten by microbes in the Gulf and disappear.
"The evidence we collected showed conclusively that the plume existed at that depth," said Woods Hole oceanographer Richard Camilli, lead author on the scientific paper, during a Thursday news conference. "Furthermore, it shows fairly clearly that it was created by the Macondo site, the Deepwater Horizon well, and it was not created by naturally occurring seeps."
Camilli said the monitoring indicated the plume stayed at a constant depth, flowing through what amounts to an underwater valley away from the wellhead, instead of floating to the surface.
He said the research cruise had to be cut short at the end of June as Hurricane Alex entered the Gulf.
"The data suggests the plume extended much further than we tracked it," he said.
The scientists found droplets of dispersed oil in a layer between 1,067 meters and 1,300 meters beneath the Gulf's surface, that contained concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons in excess of 50 parts per billion, which they said indicates that at least 12,125 pounds of the oil component entered the plume each day.
They based that conclusion on samples taken from the plume in several locations that were tested for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene, also known as BTEX. Based on those measurements and the assumption that the well released between 53,000 and 62,000 barrels a day, they also concluded that between 6 percent and 7 percent of all BTEX leaking from the well was contained in the plume.
On Thursday, Camilli and Woods Hole marine geochemist Christopher Reddy said more work remains to be done on the samples collected from the plume. Reddy said the researchers are not yet sure how much oil actually was contained in the plume, or its potential effects on biological activity.
"We will know more with time as more data comes out of the pipeline, with the hundreds of samples we collected with NOAA," he said.
Reddy warned that the data represent a snapshot in time, and the fate of the oil that was measured then is unknown. And it likely won't be found in the same location, as the plume was moving at about 4 miles per day, due to currents at that depth.
Photographs taken during the cruise from a remotely operated vehicle about 1,500 feet southwest of the well site, which is about 65 miles south of the mouth of the Mississippi River, show the beginning of brownish cloudy water at 1,065 meters, turning to a deeper brown color at 1,100 meters and 1,200 meters, and lessening in intensity at 1,300 meters. Photos from above and below those levels show purple- or blue-tinged water.
The scientists reported that small oil droplets temporarily collected on the camera lens within the plume.
The scientists also found that oxygen levels near the plume did not seem to be affected by the presence of hydrocarbons, which they said raises questions about the ability of bacteria and other organisms to break down oil in deep water. But that may also be a plus for fisheries, they said.
"This suggests that if the hydrocarbons are indeed susceptible to biodegradation, then it may require many months before microbes significantly attenuate the hydrocarbon plume to the point that oxygen minimum zones develop that are intense enough to threaten Gulf fisheries, " they wrote.
Researchers from the Australian Centre for Field Robotics at the University of Sydney in Australia, and Monitor Instruments Co., LLC, also participated in the cruise aboard the R/V Endeavor between June 19 and June 28. The research was funded by three grants under the National Science Foundation RAPID grant award program, which has already spent $10 million on 90 grants for spill-related science.
The research also was conducted under testing protocols set up by federal officials as part of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment process. Water samples were shared with NOAA and BP.
The scientists collected data using the National Deep Submergence Facility's autonomous underwater vehicle Sentry, which has no physical connection to the surface when lowered into the water, but is controlled by on-board computers. The Sentry carried a mass spectrometer that was able to determine the constituents of the petroleum, and other chemical sensors to analyze the water.
The research on the plume was conducted from June 23-27, during which time the Sentry made three surveys and traveled in a zig-zag pattern totaling 146 miles.
Water samples also were collected with a "rosette" of scientific instruments lowered into the water at different locations.
No, I didn't know that. Haven't been watching the news lately. But, everything will be fine.
Yeah, I'm sure the thousands of animals that have washed up dead and covered in oil are just rejoicing. They were tired from swimming all day; BP did them a favor, right?
And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
I don't know what the labour laws are like in the US, but in Canada, if a worksite accident leads to death or serious injury, management in the company responsible can be (and often is) held accountable in criminal court, regardless of direct involvement with the actions that cause the accident....the person in charge of the project/company is ultimately responsible for their employees' actions....this means large personal fines and/or jail time.
Something tells me in the land of celebrity lawyers, it's a bit easier to be found innocent on those charges, have them dropped, or plea bargain/settle out of court....and the fines are probably a little more manageable for a BP exec than your average construction project manager...
Comments
it's probably not a good idea to call people hypocrites just because you can't read, because unless Brad Pitt is posting here, which i highly doubt, i can only see one other person who has said they might agree with his views on the death penalty.
this is how shit like this happens again and again ... people who only listen to things they want to hear instead of the truth ... some birds and 3 mammals?? ... the gulf cleaned itself up? ... this is absurd ...
11 people died and your only concern is to put the workers back out there? ... do you know of the countless people who have died from exposure to the cleanup in the exxon valdez spill? ... people who were not compensated for cleaning up some corporations mess?? ...
i get it ... conservatives have a genetic disposition to oppose anything that a democrat gov't does and that they've been told environmentalists are hypocrites and a burden to the economy ... i get the fact that those on the right are obligated to spew myths and non-truths as part of their movement ... but for all that is pure and sacred - at the very least say something that is at least semi-factual because all you are showing here is that you have not a clue of what this disaster is ...
drill baby drill? sinc you are in such favor of drilling, why don't you volunteer to go help clean it up and report back to us how great everything is down there and how everything is fine...
Massive oil plume found underwater by scientists
Published: Friday, August 20, 2010, 11:58 AM
http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill ... nderw.html
A massive, 22-mile-long underwater plume of oil droplets flowed to the southwest of the BP's failed Macondo well at the end of June, and the threat it poses to natural resources of the Gulf of Mexico remains uncertain, scientists who mapped the plume said Thursday.
The finding confirms that plumes of oil from the failed well have existed deep beneath the surface, and that the oil is not seeping from natural fissures on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, according to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute scientists who authored the peer-reviewed article published Thursday in the online research magazine ScienceXpress.
30
0
129
Share The question of whether there are large oil plumes in the Gulf, hidden underwater, has been hotly debated.
And the release of the new plume study comes as a debate rages over the rosy picture painted by an Aug. 4 federal interagency report on the fate of the vast majority of the 4.9 million barrels of oil spilled from the well. That report, released in a White House ceremony, concluded that only 26 percent of the oil remained on or near the surface of the Gulf or onshore, and that much of the rest of the oil had dissolved or was dispersed and is degrading naturally.
But on Tuesday, Bill Lehr of NOAA, the lead scientist on the White House report, backtracked from those estimates, telling a congressional committee that only about 10 percent of the spilled oil had been skimmed or burned off and between 60 and 90 percent is still in the Gulf in some form.
The new plume study uses the concentration of four toxic chemicals found in the plume that are ingredients of crude oil to estimate that twice as much oil was supplied by the wellhead to the plume during the time of the study than was released by all natural petroleum seeps in the northern Gulf of Mexico during the same time.
The results of the survey and previous surveys also indicate "that this plume persisted at this depth interval for months, " the report said, and calls into question assumptions used by some federal officials that the oil will be quickly eaten by microbes in the Gulf and disappear.
"The evidence we collected showed conclusively that the plume existed at that depth," said Woods Hole oceanographer Richard Camilli, lead author on the scientific paper, during a Thursday news conference. "Furthermore, it shows fairly clearly that it was created by the Macondo site, the Deepwater Horizon well, and it was not created by naturally occurring seeps."
Camilli said the monitoring indicated the plume stayed at a constant depth, flowing through what amounts to an underwater valley away from the wellhead, instead of floating to the surface.
He said the research cruise had to be cut short at the end of June as Hurricane Alex entered the Gulf.
"The data suggests the plume extended much further than we tracked it," he said.
The scientists found droplets of dispersed oil in a layer between 1,067 meters and 1,300 meters beneath the Gulf's surface, that contained concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons in excess of 50 parts per billion, which they said indicates that at least 12,125 pounds of the oil component entered the plume each day.
They based that conclusion on samples taken from the plume in several locations that were tested for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene, also known as BTEX. Based on those measurements and the assumption that the well released between 53,000 and 62,000 barrels a day, they also concluded that between 6 percent and 7 percent of all BTEX leaking from the well was contained in the plume.
On Thursday, Camilli and Woods Hole marine geochemist Christopher Reddy said more work remains to be done on the samples collected from the plume. Reddy said the researchers are not yet sure how much oil actually was contained in the plume, or its potential effects on biological activity.
"We will know more with time as more data comes out of the pipeline, with the hundreds of samples we collected with NOAA," he said.
Reddy warned that the data represent a snapshot in time, and the fate of the oil that was measured then is unknown. And it likely won't be found in the same location, as the plume was moving at about 4 miles per day, due to currents at that depth.
Photographs taken during the cruise from a remotely operated vehicle about 1,500 feet southwest of the well site, which is about 65 miles south of the mouth of the Mississippi River, show the beginning of brownish cloudy water at 1,065 meters, turning to a deeper brown color at 1,100 meters and 1,200 meters, and lessening in intensity at 1,300 meters. Photos from above and below those levels show purple- or blue-tinged water.
The scientists reported that small oil droplets temporarily collected on the camera lens within the plume.
The scientists also found that oxygen levels near the plume did not seem to be affected by the presence of hydrocarbons, which they said raises questions about the ability of bacteria and other organisms to break down oil in deep water. But that may also be a plus for fisheries, they said.
"This suggests that if the hydrocarbons are indeed susceptible to biodegradation, then it may require many months before microbes significantly attenuate the hydrocarbon plume to the point that oxygen minimum zones develop that are intense enough to threaten Gulf fisheries, " they wrote.
Researchers from the Australian Centre for Field Robotics at the University of Sydney in Australia, and Monitor Instruments Co., LLC, also participated in the cruise aboard the R/V Endeavor between June 19 and June 28. The research was funded by three grants under the National Science Foundation RAPID grant award program, which has already spent $10 million on 90 grants for spill-related science.
The research also was conducted under testing protocols set up by federal officials as part of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment process. Water samples were shared with NOAA and BP.
The scientists collected data using the National Deep Submergence Facility's autonomous underwater vehicle Sentry, which has no physical connection to the surface when lowered into the water, but is controlled by on-board computers. The Sentry carried a mass spectrometer that was able to determine the constituents of the petroleum, and other chemical sensors to analyze the water.
The research on the plume was conducted from June 23-27, during which time the Sentry made three surveys and traveled in a zig-zag pattern totaling 146 miles.
Water samples also were collected with a "rosette" of scientific instruments lowered into the water at different locations.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Unless they broke some laws, the punishment should be to the company and the company should deal with the individuals on their own. The government has no business punishing the individuals unless they broke laws on their own.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
No, I didn't know that. Haven't been watching the news lately. But, everything will be fine.
uhhh ... really? ... that's your response!? ... everything WILL be fine if you don't care about the things that get impacted ... soo, is that what you say to the families of the people that got killed because of gross negligence? ...
Aren’t you glad you got this little bit of misinformation of your chest? Cue the music http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhlPAj38rHc
Yeah, I'm sure the thousands of animals that have washed up dead and covered in oil are just rejoicing. They were tired from swimming all day; BP did them a favor, right?
Something tells me in the land of celebrity lawyers, it's a bit easier to be found innocent on those charges, have them dropped, or plea bargain/settle out of court....and the fines are probably a little more manageable for a BP exec than your average construction project manager...