Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

2.9 Million Gallons Per Day + Toxic Rain Say Tehran Based Press TV

page: 3
29
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 29 2010 @ 09:52 AM
link   
I knew there was something up with this. Mask an oil leak by pumping something other than just oil into the water. Well, I don't think they really care that we know. They've been shoving mindlessness down our brains for the longest so we can all just dismiss everything as hogwash, Even as all the CBR attacks, skin diseases, epidemics, soil erosion, and famines plague the nation.




posted on May, 29 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   
I guess the phrase, drill baby drill, has been warn to death already...but meh...I said it again...someone somewhere has to take a drink.

I think Iran of course has an agenda to of course prove some karma thing or whatnot...so their reporting is bound to be skewed beyond any comprehensible understanding of facts...might as well toss in there that God is punishing the US and be done with it.

The truth is somewhere in the middle of course.

What is the alternative? Sounds like we should perhaps just sit it out and wait for the ocean to do its magic verses make a bad situation worse (which is what is going to happen anyhow.) and then make damn sure any new and old drill sites have plenty of failsafes and quick cap procedures in place before taking a single cupful of oil out of the waters...

I would say such an event may be whats needed to force the world into compliance and to drill safely, but this has all happened before, so that shows that we simply never learn...time to start getting some high profile people fired and some charges set up on them.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   
The more I read about this Corexit stuff, the more I think it is a good idea they are spraying the spill with it.

This stuff is mild, according to the MSDS, which tends to over-exaggerate hazards. When you look up the main ingredients, it is mild dish washing detergent. The main ingredients are a light oil, a food addictive, and the main ingredient for most household detergents.

If this successfully breaks down the crude oil coming out of the ground, then it is helping.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Yeah I am going with the middle ground here.

2.9 million a day seems a bit over the top.

While 60,000 a day seems way too small to account for it.

So I am going with 1million barrels a day. This is a nice middle ground area that I feel is the best place to stand right now.

If this were The Price is Right, I would be making a very good bid right now.


um you're confusing barrels and gallons. 2.9 million gallons a day is roughly 65,000 barrels a day.

1 million barrels a day is way too much that's like 4 exxon valdez incidents per day. the entire exxon valdez was roughly 300,000 barrels which is equivalent to about 11 million GALLONS.

so 70,000 BARRELS a day which is what this report is claiming is very likely that's equivalent to an exxon valdez spill every 4 days



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Hi Poet...

I really never knew that about the solution corexit that is being used and i suppose if it helps to break down the oil then it might be a good thing.

I'm still not sure how this will effect the marine life though, I can appreciate its similar to a mild detergent however im sure that marine life are far less tolerant to mild detergents than we (humans) are.

I'm sure if i were to add a little mild detergent to a marine hobbyists aquarium then the fish would all be paying a visit to the great aquarium in the sky within 24/48 hours.

I suppose it comes down to what is the lesser of both evils


Have a cool day



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 11:34 AM
link   
It makes perfect snese that BP would want to use as much of the Corexit as they can. They probably stocked up on the stuff before the Britian banned it and now they are trying to break even by using as much as they can before they get stopped.

MT



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by SubPop79

Originally posted by FearNoEvil
reply to post by SubPop79
 


Well first of all, the Iranian article bases its info on ... "Russian scientists believe". That's it.

How do they know this info?

Now, I do believe the oily rain is possible from hurricanes but I've heard conflicting reports on oil evaporating into the clouds - Do you have a good source for this?

Don't get me wrong, our sources are subject to be inaccurate also. But considering Iran would like to make the USA look bad... I take their info with their bias included. I've seen it many times before.

It's a good topic and I don't doubt the severity of the situation.




Well BP's scientists calculated the spill at 5,000 barrels of oil per day, which we now know is false, considering they first stated they were siphoning off 1,000 barrels from the 5,000 barrel per day spill and then later stated siphoning off exactly 5,000 gallons of oil per day via oil tanker. Obviously the spill is not just 5,000 barrels. If they are willing to tell people they are siphoning a 1/5 of the spill, then later state they were siphoning 5,000, that leads me to believe they are still siphoning a 1/5 of the oil, but the oil spill is at least 5 times greater. So I think that the spill is at 25,000 barrels per day.



if they were doing 5k barrels a day and that's 1/5 which makes 25k barrels a day spill but that was just from one leak remember they were deceiving us and there was a whole 'nother hole there, or a few of them. so if 25k a day is leaking from just one of numerous holes according to even BP (they obviously will always downplay the numbers) that means the 60k+ barrels a day estimate from russian sources and others seems to be a very accurate one. further one when seeing the leak, myself and a few other ATS members calculated that it looked like it could fill at least 1 barrel per second due to the size and intensity of the amount of oil coming out. there's roughly 85-90k seconds in a day. that means 85 to 90k barrels a day. so with all that evidence i'd say a 60-90k barrel a day estimate is very accurate. keep in mind exxon valdez was about 300k barrels spilled (11 mill gallons) so 90k barrels a day from this puppy is basically an exxon spill every 3-4 days and it's been 40 days already so i'd say this spill so far is the size of 10 exxon valdez though probably even more.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skeptic4Sale
Hi Poet...

I really never knew that about the solution corexit that is being used and i suppose if it helps to break down the oil then it might be a good thing.

I'm still not sure how this will effect the marine life though, I can appreciate its similar to a mild detergent however im sure that marine life are far less tolerant to mild detergents than we (humans) are.

I'm sure if i were to add a little mild detergent to a marine hobbyists aquarium then the fish would all be paying a visit to the great aquarium in the sky within 24/48 hours.

I suppose it comes down to what is the lesser of both evils


Have a cool day

corexit doesn't "break down" the oil. it only breaks it apart into smaller pieces so that it's less visible but it's still there, it doesn't biodegrade the oil or anything like that. so basically BP is just making the oil go underwater and disperse more so that we can't see the extent of the damage



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 11:45 AM
link   
What are we looking at now on the feed? It appears to be the same leak they were showing a few days ago. The ocean floor around it looks depleted though, guess erosion is kicking in.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Karlhungis
I am curious how BP would go about covertly pumping millions of gallons of this dispersant day in and day out without anyone noticing. Seems like something like that would be pretty easy to track and prove.


Unless it was set up in advance, in case this situation ever arose , then they had "their plan" in place to make it not look so bad.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
I seriously think, any ship's that sailed through the goo should be banned from the great lake's region. havent heard a word on this? it takes more than sea water to clean off crude! what in the hell is wrong has everyone in government around the great lakes region lost it mentally?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by rufusdrak
 
On your quote of the amount of oil a day the specialist on cbs this morning said 15,000 to 17,000 barrell's a day that is a lot of oil have you looked at google earth they just show inside the gulf it's all black imagine what it's like in the Atlantic, they wont show us CHILDREN but i for one think it is all of are right's to see how bad they are destroying are planet




posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   
This is, of course, a tragedy... but I'm almost glad this has happened. It is going to take something like this to rid our society of oil.
We don't need it.

But as long as the status quo is met it will never change. Sorry fishes.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by rufusdrak
 


Yeah, this spill is still a horrible ecological disaster.

Your Free Market working for you, as this is the direct result of the GW admin failing to adequately regulate the oil industry. All done on GW's watch.

Who knows how much oil has been released into the Gulf.

I anyone going to review Halliburton's concrete casing process that is responsible not only for this disaster, but numerous other failures?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by tooo many pills
 


You may want to read my thread and see if you feel the same way about
Iran's offer to help us:

B P and the Iran Connection - Was It Sabotage?

www.abovetopsecret.com...






[edit on 29-5-2010 by manta78]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Ok, so there are now huge blobs of oil, oil that is mixed with toxic dispersants. Might it be possible for one of these 'huge blobs' to get drawn to the surface, get picked up as sea spray or a waterspout.. and then.. in a flash of lighting, we might be activating the technology used to produce a FAE Fuel Air Explosive... the Feds cant talk about FAEs they are classified. It may have been an FAE from the fuel oil MIST from the first fertilizer explosion.. a second later that collapsed the front of the Federal Building in OK - the oil soaked fertilizer just broke the windows to let the mist in...BOOM!


Imagine a 'plume' sucked up by a waterspout during a lighting storm...perhaps a math wiz could work out the potential TNT equivalent released during that blast... how far might that shockwave go?

The blob is the gas tank, the hurricane is the carburator, and lighting completes ignition...

BP Oil Plumes + Hurricane = Air Fuel Explosive?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   
I gotta agree with the previous post, that it would take something like this to make a change in an apathetic world of talk.

But as time goes by and this catastrophe grows, I feel even this isn't enough to make that change.

I'm curious as to how many people made a literal change in their day to day habits because of this... and why we humans only see the things that slap us in the face. There have been many, many signs and reasons to stop supporting oil.

This is that slap. Is it enough?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by manta78
 


If Iran has had this problem before and has completely solved it, I don't see how letting them assist us could make it worse. It would be in their best interest to give adequate help because they would be very closely watched, and if they did f*** it up more, then we could just say sabotage to pile on the Iran War effort. However, if we did let Iran help and they did fix the leak, then they would be heroes and possibly hold off the war effort and sanctions.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by seataka



Ok, so there are now huge blobs of oil, oil that is mixed with toxic dispersants. Might it be possible for one of these 'huge blobs' to get drawn to the surface, get picked up as sea spray or a waterspout.. and then.. in a flash of lighting, we might be activating the technology used to produce a FAE Fuel Air Explosive... the Feds cant talk about FAEs they are classified. It may have been an FAE from the fuel oil MIST from the first fertilizer explosion.. a second later that collapsed the front of the Federal Building in OK - the oil soaked fertilizer just broke the windows to let the mist in...BOOM!


Imagine a 'plume' sucked up by a waterspout during a lighting storm...perhaps a math wiz could work out the potential TNT equivalent released during that blast... how far might that shockwave go?

The blob is the gas tank, the hurricane is the carburator, and lighting completes ignition...

BP Oil Plumes + Hurricane = Air Fuel Explosive?


You might be on to something but lets not jump that far to conclusions. What I want to know is what the ratio of natural noxious gases is to oil being released. Even with the oil and the corexit, I still see the damage being done as on scale with a biological weapon as it is. What would large amounts of methane add to the equation?

Also, top kill is now an official failure, and their back up plan to that was the junk shot shot, which they tried three times during the top kill process.





new topics




 
29
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join