It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: 2,000,000 Oil Barrels Spill into the Mississippi River

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Breaking news, it seems as if two tankers appear to be leaking in the Mississippi River downstream from New Orleans. More information to come.
 



www.cnn.com
NEW ORLEANS - A huge oil spill was spotted near two storage tanks on the Mississippi River downstream from New Orleans, state officials said Friday.

The oil was seen in a flyover to the Venice area by the Department of Environmental Quality.

“Two tanks with the capacity of holding 2 million barrels appear to be leaking,” the department said in a statement.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


More info to come...Details are still being worked out. More info located at www.msnbc.msn.com...

[edit on 2-9-2005 by John bull 1]

[edit on 2-9-2005 by Nerdling]




posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Updating as I get it.
2,000,000 barrels of Oil in a river is not a good sign of progression.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 02:06 PM
link   
gas prices will go even higher huh???

thanks for this news...





posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Seems as if the Associated Press is being really 'hush hush' about this entire situation, I dont think its being reported on television yet.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 02:17 PM
link   
I have to look at the positive side of this, at least it's "downstream".

This area of the gulf coast has Halliburton licking it's chops.

Peace



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Isn't the title a bit misleading?
It says the tanks which have a 2 million barrel capacity, are leaking not empty.

I dont' know how they classify "huge oil spill" but it could just as easily be 5 barrels that spilled out. We don't know much until they update. If it was found to not be much, they will be hush hush about it because they aren't going to make a huge deal if nothing happened.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Actually it was on CNN like 30 minutes ago, and Damn more crap we have to clean up!



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   
title is very misleading. thought he meant all those barrells have leaked


things are going to get a lot worse before they get better it seems



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   
double post, please delete

[edit on 2-9-2005 by Conspicuouz]



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Yeah this is great, we dont have oil as it is and they are dumping it into the river? keeps going from bad to worse.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   
You know...it might just happen, as the physical struture of the city of New Orleans disentergrates under the weight of water, pollution and decay caused by katrina, the government could easily decide she just isn't worth the effort and it will become the first city in modern history to simply disappear. We humans like to think are the crown of creation and that our civilization is impervious are just a veneer upon the surface of the planet...some shaking, rising water, ecological collapse, deserts, ice ages, drought...and suddenly what we have wrought becomes so fragile and delicate. And perhaps someday archologists will be digging in the silt near the mouth mississippi and discover the lost American city, the one that vanished at her country's apex.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   


Now they are just saying that out of the 2,000,000 possible barrels, only 160,000 of them are leaking. Which is...well still a major oil spill.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 04:17 PM
link   
yeah, as if the decaying bodies in the water wasnt enough for pollution



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Not sure why it took this[ particular news item to log on for the first time in 8-9 months, but nonetheless:

The tanks (according to the original source article) are 200' in diameter and 20' high.

Thus, if filled to capacity, this would equate (roughly, truncating pi to 3.14) to 628,000 cubic feet of oil.

There are 0.133680556 cubic feet in a U.S. gallon.

As redhat has pointed out, this equates to approx. 4697766 gallons of oil.

As there are 42 gallons in a barrel of crude oil, this equates to just over 111,000 barrels of oil...

Is this still a sad event, an unnecessary addition to the ongoing catastrophy that has taken (and still is taking) place. However, we must remember to not contribute to the current state of confusion and catastrophe by conveniently exagerating the truth.


Thus, it seems imprtant to make the distinction between 112,000 barrels of oil and two million. The real amount spilled (assuming the tanks -- not "tankers" -- were filled to capacity and have drained entirely, i.e. a "wrost case" scenario) is in actuality just over five percent of what is stated in this alert (apparently erroneous numbers from the gov as first reported in the media)...

Now for the greater question -- to quietly slide back behind the "looking glass," or to take off my coat and stay a while?


Edit: Thx to redhat's correction!


[edit on 2-9-2005 by sdrumrunner]



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   
I get the odd feeling some hanky panky is going on. I know many of you are skeptics about the ability to influence weather and all but lets just see how it begins to unfold and see if you can gather some info on where it might be heading. Come on, I dont think many of these so called oil spills are accidents either. Remember the stories of sp black op units in Iraq blowing wells etc? Always ask yourself, who stands to benefit either monitarily, politically , or over all general power grab or even land grabs.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 05:53 PM
link   
I was thinking the same.

It just don't sit right with me. With every bit of info I read, I still keep on thinking something is missing or is this the true picture.

Probably been visiting ATS is the reason for my foil hat underneath my baseball cap as well.

Felling kind of Matrixy.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdrumrunner
Not sure why it took this[ particular news item to log on for the first time in 8-9 months, but nonetheless:

The tanks (according to the original source article) are 200' in diameter and 20' high.

Thus, if filled to capacity, this would equate (roughly, truncating pi to 3.14) to 628,000 cubic feet of oil.

There are 0.133680556 cubic feet in a U.S. gallon.

This equates to 83951.39 gallons of oil.

As there are 42 gallons in a barrel of crude oil, this equates to just under 2,000 barrels of oil...


Your math is off. There is actually about 4,697,766 gallons of oil in the tank if filled to the 20 ft mark.

Volume= 3.14 x radius x radius x depth.
3.14 x 1200" x 1200" x 240" =1085184000 inches.
1085184000 / 231= 4697766 gallons.

[edit on 2-9-2005 by redhat]



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by mfourl
I was thinking the same.

It just don't sit right with me. With every bit of info I read, I still keep on thinking something is missing or is this the true picture.

Probably been visiting ATS is the reason for my foil hat underneath my baseball cap as well.

Felling kind of Matrixy.



Tinfoil hats dont work but if you got a alot of powerful psychokinetic spirtual energy,,,you can actually absorb power whether negative, positive, creative or destructive, multiply it and send it back in the powers of 10. All thats required is a child like belief that you can do it. No cermonial hassels, no mantras, no kabballa, no masonic star charts and decoder rings, no symbols, no blood sacrafices to molach or Lucy or the 4 elemental rights of passage etc



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 06:42 PM
link   
thanks contributers ATS for the on the spot reports and hope for your speedy recovery from down under (Australia )



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by redhatYour math is off. There is actually about 4,697,766 gallons of oil in the tank if filled to the 20 ft mark... 4697766 gallons.

[edit on 2-9-2005 by redhat]


D'oh... I stand corrected. You are absolutely correct.


Nonetheless, this equates to a potential max. spill of slightly more than 111,851 barrels, not the reported two million] barrels (i.e., slightly more than 5% of the originally claimed spill size).

However, as I stated, a sad tragedy nonetheless...



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join