posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 07:06 PM
Originally posted by loam
reply to post by AwakeinNM
So at best the only distinction you can really point to is one of causation.
Then in this case, the poster's use of the term 'pollution' would still stand, wouldn't it?
edit on 28-8-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)
I wasn't aware the crude oil was supposed to stay inside the earth or it was "pollution". Before BP and Standard Oil went into the middle east to
develop the resource, the stuff was laying around in pools, having oozed from the earth and the people didn't know what it was. Were they
"polluting" too? Was that not "natural"?
In addition to the aquatic environment, which is usually a sea, but might also be a river, lake, coral reef or algal mat, the formation of an oil
or gas reservoir also requires a sedimentary basin that passes through four steps: deep burial under sand and mud, pressure cooking, hydrocarbon
migration from the source to the reservoir rock, and trapping by impermeable rock. Timing is also an important consideration; it is suggested that the
Ohio River Valley could have had as much oil as the Middle East at one time, but that it escaped due to a lack of traps.
Uh oh, ancient oils fields in the Ohio River Valley escaped why?? Because a wellhead ruptured? Nope.
So if it oozes up through a crack in the earth, it's cool, but when the same stuff oozes up through a wellhead, it's "pollution". Got it.
Do you ever notice when there's an oil spill, the environmental nuts will tell you with a straight face that it will ruin the local ecology for
hundreds of years, but that's never the case? It's always more like a year, two at most.