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.

 

"A Real Solution to the Oil Spill"

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Dear: ATS Members

BP with the help of the EPA has approved continued use of the chemical dispersant Corexit® 9500, Corexit® 9527, and COREXIT EC9580A for shoreline dispersant of long chain hydrocarbons to short chain hydrocarbons. The Corexit different formulations is a three stage process of breaking long chain hydrocarbons into short chain hydrocarbons; which allows these new smaller hydrocarbons to combine more easily with water. This allows the smaller chain hydrocarbons to decay over a period of time but, does not remove the hydrocarbons in anyway shape or form. In fact it allows all of the oil to be integrated into the Aquatic system which then filters into all Aquatic life; this will cause many unknowns for future generation that rely on the oceans of the this planet for sources of food and their lively hoods. The obvious problem here is the containment of this disaster, and to assure future generation they will not pay the ultimate price for our stupidity in handling this disaster.

The above does nothing to solve the long term problems of this disaster; it only prolongs the inevitable “Out of Sight, Out of Mind!” mentality of both the EPA and BP. The above chemical solutions have many toxic chemicals that have been shown to cause sickness and in some cases death. The American people have been put in the “DARK” about what BP and the EPA is doing to our Eco System.

A real solution to this spill problem is known to be a clean and environmentally safe way of dealing with long chain and short chain hydrocarbons. The real solution of this spill is known to completely eliminate all forms of hydrocarbons both on the surface and below the surface. The real solution of this spill is known to be safe to all forms of life and not to cause future toxins that will pop up in future food chains. The solution is “Geobacter” a genus of proteobacteria; this anaerobic respiration bacteria species; has the ability to turn long chain and short chain hydrocarbons into environmentally safe carbon dioxide; these types of Geobacter can completely eliminate these hydrocarbon chains from both waterborne and ground penetrated hydrocarbon chains. These Geobacter’s can self replicate quickly in a high concentration of hydrocarbons; and use the hydrocarbons as a source of food. As their source of food is eliminated (hydrocarbons) so are they along with the volume of their food source, they simply die off and decay becoming useful sources of organic material. This is a real solution for this problem, why BP scientists are not discussing the use of these Geobacter’s is ridiculous to me as a scientist. The EPA needs to step in and stop this travesty to all life on this planet; and force BP to use these Geobacter’s to clean up this mess.

Respectfully

MolecularPHD




posted on May, 27 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   
At times like these, I just want to bash my head on a concrete wall.




posted on May, 27 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Corexit already relies on bacteria and microbes to finalize the process after the dispersant is used (however long that takes).



Compared to Corexit, Geobactum sounds like a plug for Monsato.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Is Geobacter more expensive? Not available in the quantities needed? Is it harder to disperse, handle or whatever??

I don't know why they wouldn't use something better either, but I'm sure it has to do with 'the bottom line'


Oh, and they are obviously not very intelligent either.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


I agree with you about the bashing my head part but, I am afraid all that would solve is giving myself a bigger headache. I wish more people would become aware of this thread so they may know that there is a real solution to this mess; one that BP and the EPA is not acknowledging.

Respectfully

MolecularPHD



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   
this is a great idea!!!!!! better than the hay ideas...

why don't they use this instead of the dispersants?dispersants are pontentially harmful to aquatic life! and as you said they would harm future gens.

also, with the dispersants, would that still harm the marshes?



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by MolecularPhD
 


To be perfectly honest, I think all they will care about is the cheapest way to look like they've got rid of the oil.
Which is why they're using dodgy stuff, as you've listed.
If it gets into food chains and accumulates, it could end in massive deaths. Which seems crazy in using something toxic, but as you put it 'out of sight, out of mind'
People will go back to what they're doing and not realise.

I agree that they should be Geobacter as it seems much more sensible, but they must have some reason not to. Whatever that is.

It's a right mess though, innit?



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Here's a great idea!
Why don't we stick Kirsty Alley down this thing and feed her donuts until she swells the leak shut


All joking aside, what about an inflatable bladder that we push 10,000 or so feet into the line, then inflate the bladder with water until it blocks the flow?? That would theoretically work, no?

[edit on 27-5-2010 by discl0sur3]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by LocoHombre
 


This is the reason BP only uses Corexit:
BP‘s Ties With Nalco Co.’s Corexit



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by MolecularPhD
I wish more people would become aware of this thread so they may know that there is a real solution to this mess; one that BP and the EPA is not acknowledging.


How is what you suggest any different that what they already have done?

For a better solution, we'll need to know economic data and weather predictions of the affected areas. It may help to reform the situation to its previous carbon neutral state. May also help prevent medical issues, too.

Researchers race to produce 3D solution for BP oil spill: Weather & Economic Simulations

You want to know where to add Geobacter, start with the simulation.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Morpheas
 


That is exactly why they are using those particular chemicals; this whole BP/EPA clean up is a giant scam; and the American People are going right along with it.

To the poster above they are not using Geobacter after the Corexit is done doing its job; they are using an enzyme that helps in the decaying process which can take up to several years to finish its job.

Respectfully

MolecularPHD



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Really interesting specie.

I'm not specialist but I see two major problems:

1. technological - how to manufacture enough "seeds"
2. biological - metabolism of this specie is based on iron oxide. Is there enough iron in ocean water to supply needs of this s...t eater?

Edit to add: in my opinion dispersants are used mainly because BP PR needs. Dissolving crude into ocean is stupid idea.

[edit on 27-5-2010 by zeddissad]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:29 PM
link   
What they need is the largest hydrogen bomb america has, that will solve this.

2nd line.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by zeddissad
I'm not specialist but I see two major problems:


There is a third problem.

How to prevent production of too much methane gas in the process, which is a concern to hurricane watchers.

20 years ago, methane seemed like ideal gas. After Katrina, I doubt people will accept methane unless it gets immediately reformed. To accomplish that, how would they predict the population control of Geobacter...

... as I already pointed out... simulation.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
What they need is the largest hydrogen bomb america has, that will solve this.

2nd line.


to what?
bomb America, itself?

sounds like a good idea, to me!

once again we have proven ourselves (as a country, generally speaking) to be immature in the global sense, self-oriented, self-centered, and materially-focused in the here-and-now.

the good news is that consistency IS a virtue.



on a more serious note, i agree that the most effective measures are not being utilized or even hardly mentioned or discussed by the suits in charge of this fiasco.
i also agree that it certainly has something to do with profit-margins and bottom lines in the big-money world of off-shore oil.

i have another point, too, in regard to the WHY NOT's being discussed in this thread:

it is *our* serious addiction/attachment to fossil fuels that is limiting the efficacy of all efforts toward remedying this tragedy.

this morning, my bf was looking at news on the internet. i heard about a nautical collision in Singapore, on Tuesday, that resulted in a HUGE gash right in the middle of a giant super-tanker...oil spilling into the water.
i also heard about some sort of major leak issue going on with the Alaskan Pipeline, which i believe resulted in cessation of its operation, at least temporarily.

Our Mother is sending us a message:
* the sun's energy is FREE
* the wind gives us another source of non-depleting, environmentally damaging energy
* hydroelectric power is a wonderful never-ending source (although dam and plant engineering still needs to make further improvements and renovations with an eye toward the environment and our fellow creatures)



when a baby refuses to give up the bottle, Mother will see that it's gone when it's time, one way or another.

it's either give up the bottle...or have it taken away.

man (especially so-called technologically advanced developed no-world man) is refusing to wean himself off of crude oil and natural gas...but it's gotta happen if man wants to grow past childhood!



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
What they need is the largest hydrogen bomb america has, that will solve this.

2nd line.


Just one of those "Davey Crockett" nukes inserted into the well head. Pull the pin and it's done. As far as the cleanup is concerned that will take a good long time.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
CORRECTION - i made an error due to unclear reporting - the Alaskan thing happened several years ago.

they didn't make that clear but my bf just informed me.
the Singapore thing, though, did happen this week.

sorry



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by MolecularPhD
 


I have a question for the OP or for anyone else on this post. Can't the drilling "mud" itself be toxic depending on the formulation. Couldn't it just be another petroleum product? Like some petroleum product mixed with clay?



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join