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.

 

Matt Simmons : only 1% of deadly crude is on the surface

page: 2
30
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 12:22 PM
link   
I really hate ruining a great disaster hand wringing by applying physics but I looked up that the Gulf Stream flows .6 million cubic meters per second.

The flow rate from the blow out using Darcy's equation that is used to calculate flow rate from porous media( oil flows from the microscopic spaces between sand grains not from vast oil filled caverns) results in a rate of flow of 40,000 to 80,000 bopd, using available data and resonable estimates of unknowns from 30 years of experience.

Ignoring this is the name of hysteria and using 120,000 bopd, converting the Gulf Stream to barrels/day the flow rate is 8.254 billion barrels per day. Therefore the ratio of oil to water from the blow out is .00001454 parts oil to 1 part of water assuming every barrel went into the gulf stream and none of it evaporated, was skimmed or biodegraded. I really don't see how a microscopic oil contamination could affect the flow of the Gulf Stream. This would be like stopping the forward momentum of the Titanic with a flyswatter.

As far as Matt Simmons(rest his soul), he was a banker at best & a journalist at worst. Not one of his hysterical claims has been accurate or physically possible to date. The idea of 25,000,0000,000 barrels from the blowout is ludicrous based upon true science and Darcy's equation.

The idea that the Carbon Dioxide release in Africa has any relationship to methane dispersed in the seawater also has real physics problems. First CO2 is heavier than air and a trapped bubble was released in a confined area, a lake. Methane is lighter than air and therefore goes up and does not stay on the ground as in the Africa release. Having done radius of exposure calculation for hydrogen sulfide escapes at concentrations far more disasterous and toxic than the methane and finding out that it disperses to acceptable levels outside of 2000 feet from the source, then I suggest that methane being dispersed by hurricane strength winds will not pose a problem, I'd be more concerned about flying Volvos than methane gas or minor amounts of oil.

Despite Mr. Simmons hysterical rants, I still haven't ever seen water run uphill.




posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by GaryN
 

natural seepage/abandoned well cannot give so extremal gushing like new well, moreover, natural seepage doesn't carry different toxic chemical elements as so much as deep well does.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by billyjack
I really hate ruining a great disaster hand wringing by applying physics but I looked up that the Gulf Stream flows .6 million cubic meters per second.


Oh, come now. You love it.

And so do I!



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by L.HAMILTON
Matt Simmons in what I believe was his final interview prior to his questionable
death was trying to send out a warning .


I don’t understand the logic behind this. Obviously Simmons was being fed information from a source or sources. He doesn’t look like the type to have his own private sub that could routinely evade Special Forces. So it wasn’t Matt Simmons that was sending out the warning but his source or sources that were sending out the warning.

So now Matt’s dead… say murdered… but did they also murder his source(s)? Should not this doom and gloom info (that BP and the government do not want us to hear that the “independent” MSM keeps trying to uncover) still be coming out through others from the same source(s)?

Here’s another possibility… I mean any speculation as to what happen to Simmons is considerable seeing where the current speculations are coming from….

Suppose Simmons discovered that his sources were feeding him a bunch of bunk and that there really was no oil spill disaster and that 11 men were deliberately murdered to advance an agenda…. and that he was planning on going public with this information about this hoax and the serial murderers behind it. That would be a good reason to bump him off. I know he was a CFR member but not all CFR members are a bunch of evil sick freaks like the criminals and their army of co-conspirators who are daily trying to cover this crime up.

Anyways… back to the BP/government/MSM fantasy land called “Deepwater Disaster”.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 01:29 PM
link   
In this recent report CNN seems to support what Matt Simmons is saying
oil is resting near the bottom of the Gulf being pulled up by storms.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by L.HAMILTON
 


99% of what comes out of CNN is pure propaganda.... Nothing that comes out of CNN is "Above Top Secret".... You might as well just tell people to tune in to "The Most Trusted Name in News"



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by L.HAMILTON
There is a deadly mixture of methane laden crude laying below the surface .
If this crude oil mixture makes its way to the coastline via a hurricane , the result would be similar to what happened in Africa's tragic Cameroon "death lake " that took a thousand lives in 1986 en.wikipedia.org...

So far the hurricane season has been quiet or has dissipated lately.
This is supposed to be a very active hurricane season.
Matt also says the Gulf is 40 % a dead zone and spreading.



OMG CRUDE!!!!

OMFG METHANE!!! AHHH!!! NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!


Wait a minute.... don't we fart methane out of our butts?

Yeah, that's right. Methane is a GAS. Not gasoline, but it's physical properties are of gas.

Illustration showing a “natural oil seep“.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

So about half of the methane evaporates into the atmosphere, and the other half dissolves... but note that at that depth some of it recrystalized back into hydrates.
en.wikipedia.org...

NOTE: About 40% of the gushing was methane.

The other 60% was sweet light crude...

Next, 75% of the crude actual was VOC's... which evaporate into thin air. VOC's (gasoline, paint thinners) is acutely toxic (immediately), the tar itself is bad if you get it on you but as the VOC's separate from it it becomes persistent but relatively non-toxic.

So how much "heavy crude" was in the crude? 3%. 3% of the 60% of the gushing was asphaltenes (tar, asphalt). The other 20+% was WAX. That's right, wax (candles, etc).

Guess what: candles float.

Remember all of that "sheen"? That was all VOC's, and all of it is gone into the atmosphere.

I really doubt Mr. Assassinated here died for saying all of that, as he didn't seem to know WTH he was talking about.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by bigbomb456

perhaps Haarp is being used to prevent major systems from forming and raining core-exit on the south

 


From what transpired from a government website here are the capabilities of HAARP in relation with warfare :


a man made modification of the ionosphere which has the potential of extending over-the-horizon surveillance and improving communications to the warfighter.

Source: web.archive.org...

[edit on 15-8-2010 by gagol]



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
I forgot: this nonsense that hurricanes are going to destroy everything with oil is totally baseless. Remember the Ixtoc:
www.oil-spill-info.com...


Spill conditions: It is estimated that more than 500,000 tons of crude oil was spilled into the Gulf of Mexico from blowout of the Ixtoc I well offshore in the Bay of Campeche. It occurred in early 1979, and several months later impacted the Texas shoreline, primarily along Padre Island. An early storm in September, reversed the currents and self-cleansed most of the shoreline, leaving only (relatively unusual) tarmats.
...
Storm surge across Padre Island associated with 'norther' storm. 13 September 1979. Most oil was removed from the shoreline during the storm.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by CAELENIUM
[Hello, I would like to point out what I believe to be a misstatement in your post. You stated, "there are already dangerous levels of VOC [volatile oil compounds]", The correct terminology for "VOC" is Volatile Organic Compunds. nonetheless it is still BAD, VERY VERY BAD. Thank you for posting.]



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 

perfectly rubbish
why did they sink oil so wrathfully, if there might've not been problem?
& little remark: there're so clear water, that leader of nation, olobama, takes so long swimming
brave resting
maybe, you can take fresh breathe & cool swimming in the GoM for own vocation?
there're everything OK, dostn't thou?



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ringht_n_wrong
 


ringht_n_wrong
The thread I was referring too regarding animals, fishes etc being washed up dead in Brazilian rivers is below.....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you are from that region then can you shed any light on this info
Regards

PurpleDOG UK



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ringht_n_wrong
 



I think he was talking about this but unsure:
Dead Fish on Amazon due to extreme cold

All i could find, anyway, that might relate.

[edit on 15-8-2010 by mhinsey]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by billyjack
I really hate ruining a great disaster hand wringing by applying physics but I looked up that the Gulf Stream flows .6 million cubic meters per second.

The flow rate from the blow out using Darcy's equation that is used to calculate flow rate from porous media( oil flows from the microscopic spaces between sand grains not from vast oil filled caverns) results in a rate of flow of 40,000 to 80,000 bopd, using available data and resonable estimates of unknowns from 30 years of experience.

Ignoring this is the name of hysteria and using 120,000 bopd, converting the Gulf Stream to barrels/day the flow rate is 8.254 billion barrels per day. Therefore the ratio of oil to water from the blow out is .00001454 parts oil to 1 part of water assuming every barrel went into the gulf stream and none of it evaporated, was skimmed or biodegraded. I really don't see how a microscopic oil contamination could affect the flow of the Gulf Stream. This would be like stopping the forward momentum of the Titanic with a flyswatter.


Using the volume of the flow of the entire the gulf stream is absurd much like saying a toxic spill up the mississippi won't cause much damage because of the massive amount of water the entire mississippie moves each day.



As far as Matt Simmons(rest his soul), he was a banker at best & a journalist at worst. Not one of his hysterical claims has been accurate or physically possible to date. The idea of 25,000,0000,000 barrels from the blowout is ludicrous based upon true science and Darcy's equation.


None of what you claim here is true. While some of Matt's statements have led people to question his sanity many of his claims where proven.

When the feds where saying this is only 1-5k per day Matt said BS and this must be more like 120k bpd and guess what WHOI measured as a raw flow rate .23 cubic meters per second or 120k BPD.

He also said the TJ was mapping a huge underwater plume at depths of 1100 meters at a time BP and the Government denied they existed... which was proven true when the Thomas Jefferson report was released.

He also said that the TJ found leaks 5-7 miles away and guess what they did.

Many of the things he claimed panned out and most of the rest are still up for debate.





The idea that the Carbon Dioxide release in Africa has any relationship to methane dispersed in the seawater also has real physics problems. First CO2 is heavier than air and a trapped bubble was released in a confined area, a lake. Methane is lighter than air and therefore goes up and does not stay on the ground as in the Africa release. Having done radius of exposure calculation for hydrogen sulfide escapes at concentrations far more disasterous and toxic than the methane and finding out that it disperses to acceptable levels outside of 2000 feet from the source, then I suggest that methane being dispersed by hurricane strength winds will not pose a problem, I'd be more concerned about flying Volvos than methane gas or minor amounts of oil.

Despite Mr. Simmons hysterical rants, I still haven't ever seen water run uphill.


Again you are wrong. There was no "bubble" in either of the african lakes. The concentrations became so high the high concentration of CO2 overcame the ambient pressure and just evaporated into the air all at once... think of a soda bottle with the lid close and dropped on the floor. No massive bubble while the lid is still capped by much pressure inside the bottle.. same basic principle

Your assertions of a 2000 foot radius safe zone for the h2s are wrong as well. NOAA has mapped toxic air plumes traveling all the way from the well to the LA coast much further than 2000 feet.

I just love the baffle them with BS crowd.



[edit on 16-8-2010 by alexhiggins732]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Originally posted by L.HAMILTON
There is a deadly mixture of methane laden crude laying below the surface .
If this crude oil mixture makes its way to the coastline via a hurricane , the result would be similar to what happened in Africa's tragic Cameroon "death lake " that took a thousand lives in 1986 en.wikipedia.org...

So far the hurricane season has been quiet or has dissipated lately.
This is supposed to be a very active hurricane season.
Matt also says the Gulf is 40 % a dead zone and spreading.



OMG CRUDE!!!!

OMFG METHANE!!! AHHH!!! NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!


Wait a minute.... don't we fart methane out of our butts?

Yeah, that's right. Methane is a GAS. Not gasoline, but it's physical properties are of gas.

Illustration showing a “natural oil seep“.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

So about half of the methane evaporates into the atmosphere, and the other half dissolves... but note that at that depth some of it recrystalized back into hydrates.
en.wikipedia.org...

NOTE: About 40% of the gushing was methane.

The other 60% was sweet light crude...

Next, 75% of the crude actual was VOC's... which evaporate into thin air. VOC's (gasoline, paint thinners) is acutely toxic (immediately), the tar itself is bad if you get it on you but as the VOC's separate from it it becomes persistent but relatively non-toxic.

So how much "heavy crude" was in the crude? 3%. 3% of the 60% of the gushing was asphaltenes (tar, asphalt). The other 20+% was WAX. That's right, wax (candles, etc).

Guess what: candles float.

Remember all of that "sheen"? That was all VOC's, and all of it is gone into the atmosphere.

I really doubt Mr. Assassinated here died for saying all of that, as he didn't seem to know WTH he was talking about.


So many of your assertions are wrong.

Here is a little bit of education for you..

http://(nolink)/2010/06/22/bps-lies-about-methane-and-oil-plumes-exposed/


In particular the final report of Project “Deep Spill” (a study conducted by the Federal Government and oil companies including BP) found:

1. Only 2% of the oil released in a deepwater blowout may actually make it to the surface. That’s as little as 2% naturally without the use of dispersants. Add dispersants into the equation and it could be less then one percent of oil that makes it to the surface.
2. None of the methane released from the deepwater blowout made it to the surface. The study found that released natural gas may dissolve completely within the water column if it is released from a deep enough depth relative to the gas flow rate.




That's as little as 2% naturally made it to the surface from an 800 meter (2400 feet) depth. This is twice as deep and when you add in dispersants less than 1% of the oil and none of the methane may have made it to the surface... all remain submerged.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I forgot: this nonsense that hurricanes are going to destroy everything with oil is totally baseless. Remember the Ixtoc:
www.oil-spill-info.com...


Spill conditions: It is estimated that more than 500,000 tons of crude oil was spilled into the Gulf of Mexico from blowout of the Ixtoc I well offshore in the Bay of Campeche. It occurred in early 1979, and several months later impacted the Texas shoreline, primarily along Padre Island. An early storm in September, reversed the currents and self-cleansed most of the shoreline, leaving only (relatively unusual) tarmats.
...
Storm surge across Padre Island associated with 'norther' storm. 13 September 1979. Most oil was removed from the shoreline during the storm.



1) Ixtoc released much less oil over a much longer time leaving way.. way less oil in the water at any given time.

2) While ixtoc was a subsea release it wasn't deep enough to change the physics of hydrocarbons to the point where ambient pressures keep up to 98% of the oil submerged within 200-400 meters of the release like we have here.

3) Mexico is still damaged by IXTOC.

4) What way did the storm go?



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:51 AM
link   
Meant to post this link weeks ago and forgot, sorry.

www.kbtx.com...

The scientist mentioned just happens to be one of the ones on the BP payroll at that! And he STILL says it's not all gone, even though that's not BP's picture they want to present.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 05:30 AM
link   
Exellent points AlexHiggens. edit: i just saw your blogg - great job on that!

Thanks for the link Trexter Ziam. Good information.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by Zorg12]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 07:10 AM
link   
There's a hurricane forming now, it seems, so we'll see.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   
USA = Do as we say or we'll kill you, Great System



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join