Thread: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Originally Posted by DDT

They drill this deep because they are smart enough to KNOW that oil is NOT a fossil fuel! It is ABIOTC! There are no hydrocarbons at these depths so oil can not be and organic substance. Because of this Russia has MORE oil than the Middle East.

Here's what I've found in the Pedivikia:

Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

Most popular in the Soviet Union between the 1950s and 1980s, the abiogenic hypothesis has little support among contemporary petroleum geologists, who argue that abiogenic petroleum does not exist in significant amounts on earth and that there is no indication that an application of the hypothesis is or has ever been of commercial value.

[...]

Although the abiogenic hypothesis was accepted by some geologists in the former Soviet Union, most geologists now consider the biogenic formation of petroleum scientifically supported. Although evidence exists for abiogenic formation of methane and hydrocarbon gases within the Earth, studies indicate they are not produced in commercially significant quantities [...]

What do you think of that?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by DDT

They drill this deep because they are smart enough to KNOW that oil is NOT a fossil fuel! It is ABIOTC! There are no hydrocarbons at these depths so oil can not be and organic substance. Because of this Russia has MORE oil than the Middle East.

Here's what I've found in the Pedivikia:

Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

Most popular in the Soviet Union between the 1950s and 1980s, the abiogenic hypothesis has little support among contemporary petroleum geologists, who argue that abiogenic petroleum does not exist in significant amounts on earth and that there is no indication that an application of the hypothesis is or has ever been of commercial value.

[...]

Although the abiogenic hypothesis was accepted by some geologists in the former Soviet Union, most geologists now consider the biogenic formation of petroleum scientifically supported. Although evidence exists for abiogenic formation of methane and hydrocarbon gases within the Earth, studies indicate they are not produced in commercially significant quantities [...]

What do you think of that?

Great info, Crocodile! Putting this in the same file as Lysenko

Originally Posted by DDT

Obama is not doing anything!

I saw him complaining about "these talkin' heads" and planning to "kick a certain part of people's body". Has he executed that threat yet?

Apparently Obama said that this is the worst tragedy to the USA since 9-11. Does that mean that the USA will now start a

Global "War on POLLUTION" ?

or a

Global "War on Multinational Corporations"?

...or will it make it even more determine to continue fighting the "War against Terrorism" in oil rich countries in the Middle East, far from the beaches of American voters....?

Originally Posted by Hanna

Apparently Obama said that this is the worst tragedy to the USA since 9-11. Does that mean that the USA will now start a

Global "War on POLLUTION" ?

or a

Global "War on Multinational Corporations"?

...or will it make it even more determine to continue fighting the "War against Terrorism" in oil rich countries in the Middle East, far from the beaches of American voters....?

If they still had Bush in the White House this spill would have been a result of a terrorist attack led personally by Bin Laden.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by DDT

They drill this deep because they are smart enough to KNOW that oil is NOT a fossil fuel! It is ABIOTC! There are no hydrocarbons at these depths so oil can not be and organic substance. Because of this Russia has MORE oil than the Middle East.

Here's what I've found in the Pedivikia:

Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

Most popular in the Soviet Union between the 1950s and 1980s, the abiogenic hypothesis has little support among contemporary petroleum geologists, who argue that abiogenic petroleum does not exist in significant amounts on earth and that there is no indication that an application of the hypothesis is or has ever been of commercial value.

[...]

Although the abiogenic hypothesis was accepted by some geologists in the former Soviet Union, most geologists now consider the biogenic formation of petroleum scientifically supported. Although evidence exists for abiogenic formation of methane and hydrocarbon gases within the Earth, studies indicate they are not produced in commercially significant quantities [...]

What do you think of that?

I am well aware that the old school is denying the new! But the old school can not explain how "fossil" fuel (from dead and decayed organic life) can be found at depths that far exceed the depths of the strata in which fossils are actually found. There is no evidence that dinosaurs and vegetation ever existed 40 thousand feet below the surface of the earth's crust, so how did this supposed "fossil" fuel form there if it is made from dinosaurs and trees?

And it’ll be a great relief for you to know that the bullet you’ve been killed by is of pure gold and not just of ordinary over the counter lead, right?

Originally Posted by Hanna

It's a terrible tragedy.. I read that this spill may be worse than the "ExxonValdez" spill in Alaska, back in.... 1990s (or earlier?) Anyway that was a terrible spill that still has an impact on the environment there.

Oh. Its much... Much worse. I'm no expert (though I should be since I worked with oil for 3 years in the military) on oil But I'm assuming that wikipedia is pretty close to being right .

Exxon Valdez spilled a total of 40,900 m³ (10.8 million U.S. gallons, 257,000 barrels of oil)

This was spilled on the surface of cold, relatively slow moving, shallow water in the arctic (or north pacific) ocean.

The BP oil spill is and has been leaking at least 66,000 barrels at more than 5,000 feet under water in a strong current (1 barrel of oil is = 50 or more gallons where 1 gallon = 6.7 pounds) every 24 hours for the last 60 days.

I'm no math wizard but I guess it didn't take more than 3 or 4 days to be a whole lot worse than the exxonvaldez.

And, DDT, you know I love you man but your argument is pretty retarded. Sure crude oil is natural but so is fire ( and flooding for that sake). I don't suppose you want to do away with fire departments or dams do you? What about people who lose their homes to or die in house fires.

Its just all their fault and that should teach them!!!

For what? hiring a bad electrician? For wanting a pop tart at 5 a.m. ? Or when catastrophic floods happen (like they happen in Australia every spring) we should just say "Well f**k those stupid people... the shouldn't have been living in Australia anyway!

How is a bird who nests in the spot every year supposed to magically know that one day it can't land there because it will be covered in toxic ooz and die.

Sure, oil does leak in places sometimes naturally and in these cases the ocean can and does deal with it. But you can't set fire to a 20 floor apartment building and call the people pussies who are trying to get out for calling 911 "because fire happens all the time in forests... and around volcanoes".

Btw things to live in and around volcanoes all the time (even underwater) so you can't really teach animals not to live in volcanoes. - http://www.livescience.com/environment/ ... lcano.html

Anyways, you know I got nothing but love for you but BILLIONS of gallons of oil soaking millions of square miles is... kind of a big deal.

Ok I need another liter of JD.

Originally Posted by quartz

Putting this in the same file as Lysenko

You seem to be well-versed with Russian history.

...

Originally Posted by Ramil

Originally Posted by Hanna

Apparently Obama said that this is the worst tragedy to the USA since 9-11. Does that mean that the USA will now start a

Global "War on POLLUTION" ?

or a

Global "War on Multinational Corporations"?

...or will it make it even more determine to continue fighting the "War against Terrorism" in oil rich countries in the Middle East, far from the beaches of American voters....?

If they still had Bush in the White House this spill would have been a result of a terrorist attack led personally by Bin Laden.

Maybe that's how Bin Laden has been avoiding capture all this time..... He's been secretly working for BP on an oil rig in the gulf of Mexico all along! The best place to hide was right under their nose... In fact, Bin Laden was some kind of engineer by trade, I think.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Bin Laden was some kind of engineer by trade, I think.

Originally he is a creature of CIA himself. He was "good guy", remember how John Rambo helped him in "Rambo III" ? I don't quite remember wich American pesident said (about Dominicana dictator Trujillo I believe or maybe Chiang Kai-shek ) "His is son of a b!tch indeed, but he is our son of a b!tch". And later when Bin Laden lost support from his former masters (after the fall of SU) he got angry on themselves...

Really are you serious! I can't remember the plot of Rambo III.
They really said that about Osama bin Laden himself?
This is very, very twisted.......

And the whole "War on terrorism" feels like an invention that was created after 9-11. Apparently there is no actual "al-Qaeda" as media is always describing (making it seem a bit like the "Spectre" organisation from James Bond...) Al-Qaeda is just a name to refer to lose groups of extremists that exist in various places, that sometimes contact other like-minded groups. But it's not an organised entity per-se.

It's almost like all of this fills the void that was previously filled with the anti communism paranoia in some countries. It's like there has to be some kind of "official" enemy... If the islamists ever "give up", then who/what will be the next enemy?

Don't know about others here, but the war on terror is with me EVERY day, with constant security messages on the Underground, daily stories about the "war on terror" in media, airport security is insane (good reason to avoid flying). Britain has tons of moslems living here, who previously were not extremist but lately had to choose a side in the "war on terror" and unfortunately joined "the enemy" despite having grown up in the UK.

The reason that Britain got attacked on 7/7 was because of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, so that is a result of the war, not a reason for it.

To me, the "real" enemy ought to be pollution, starvation, poverty and the reasons behind that. That's what we should spend our resources fighting.

Originally Posted by Dogboy182

Originally Posted by Hanna

It's a terrible tragedy.. I read that this spill may be worse than the "ExxonValdez" spill in Alaska, back in.... 1990s (or earlier?) Anyway that was a terrible spill that still has an impact on the environment there.

Oh. Its much... Much worse. I'm no expert (though I should be since I worked with oil for 3 years in the military) on oil But I'm assuming that wikipedia is pretty close to being right .

Exxon Valdez spilled a total of 40,900 m³ (10.8 million U.S. gallons, 257,000 barrels of oil)

This was spilled on the surface of cold, relatively slow moving, shallow water in the arctic (or north pacific) ocean.

The BP oil spill is and has been leaking at least 66,000 barrels at more than 5,000 feet under water in a strong current (1 barrel of oil is = 50 or more gallons where 1 gallon = 6.7 pounds) every 24 hours for the last 60 days.

I'm no math wizard but I guess it didn't take more than 3 or 4 days to be a whole lot worse than the exxonvaldez.

And, DDT, you know I love you man but your argument is pretty retarded. Sure crude oil is natural but so is fire ( and flooding for that sake). I don't suppose you want to do away with fire departments or dams do you? What about people who lose their homes to or die in house fires.

Its just all their fault and that should teach them!!!

For what? hiring a bad electrician? For wanting a pop tart at 5 a.m. ? Or when catastrophic floods happen (like they happen in Australia every spring) we should just say "Well f**k those stupid people... the shouldn't have been living in Australia anyway!

How is a bird who nests in the spot every year supposed to magically know that one day it can't land there because it will be covered in toxic ooz and die.

Sure, oil does leak in places sometimes naturally and in these cases the ocean can and does deal with it. But you can't set fire to a 20 floor apartment building and call the people pussies who are trying to get out for calling 911 "because fire happens all the time in forests... and around volcanoes".

Btw things to live in and around volcanoes all the time (even underwater) so you can't really teach animals not to live in volcanoes. - http://www.livescience.com/environment/ ... lcano.html

Anyways, you know I got nothing but love for you but BILLIONS of gallons of oil soaking millions of square miles is... kind of a big deal.

Ok I need another liter of JD.

It was my tongue in cheek humor Dog! ...lol !!!
Although I do believe that to go after the oil companies is a bit like the towns people getting mad at the gunfighter they hired to rid the town of bad guys, after the job was done. We all use oil so we all hold some responsibility. Also, we wouldn't let them drill on land where this couldn't happen!

You're right! It's very serious. Further, no one is talking about the OTHER LEAKS! There are fissures which opened up in the ocean floor when the pressure forced the oil to seek further relief. I didn't know how they are going to stop those holes.

Also I heard that the Russian oilmen thought BP was crazy to drill in such deep water. Don't know if that is true....just heard it that's all.

Oil gets scarcer so in order to get it you should drill deeper and find other places. Arctic has rich deposits but the cost of extraction is too high for any commercial success. Nevertheless we will go and drill there sooner or later. There's nothing particularly wrong with the fact that BP drills there, nobody would stop drilling the ocean bed because of this, simply some additional safety precautions will be observed in the future.

We MUST stop using oil.... It corrupts so many governments and people. and it pollutes. There was life before petrol/oil and there ARE alternatives...

Originally Posted by Hanna

We MUST stop using oil.... It corrupts so many governments and people. and it pollutes. There was life before petrol/oil and there ARE alternatives...

How would you like electricity prices going up tenfold or even hundredfold? How would you like coal or wood heating? How would you like a world with no cars, no planes, no plastic, no synthetic fabrics, no cosmetics, no paints etc? You are probably not aware of the whole spectre of things that are made of oil or its components. Oil is not merely a fuel, it's a main component of many materials. Have a look around you right now, what do you see? You wouldn't probably believe it but 90% of things you see is made of oil or oil was used in the process of making them.

Originally Posted by Ramil

How would you like electricity prices going up tenfold or even hundredfold? How would you like coal or wood heating? How would you like a world with no cars, no planes, no plastic, no synthetic fabrics, no cosmetics, no paints etc? You are probably not aware of the whole spectre of things that are made of oil or its components. Oil is not merely a fuel, it's a main component of many materials. Have a look around you right now, what do you see? You wouldn't probably believe it but 90% of things you see is made of oil or oil was used in the process of making them.

I agree with Hanna, there are alternatives. There is lots of development in biodegradable plastic, hydrogen, renewable and nuclear energy, smart power grids and stuff like that. The oil is a finite resource. So I think we have to upgrade anyways. The sooner the better.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by Ramil

How would you like electricity prices going up tenfold or even hundredfold? How would you like coal or wood heating? How would you like a world with no cars, no planes, no plastic, no synthetic fabrics, no cosmetics, no paints etc? You are probably not aware of the whole spectre of things that are made of oil or its components. Oil is not merely a fuel, it's a main component of many materials. Have a look around you right now, what do you see? You wouldn't probably believe it but 90% of things you see is made of oil or oil was used in the process of making them.

I agree with Hanna, there are alternatives. There is lots of development in biodegradable plastic, hydrogen, renewable and nuclear energy, smart power grids and stuff like that. The oil is a finite resource. So I think we have to upgrade anyways. The sooner the better.

How do you know that oil is a 'finite ' source ? No body does! There is evidence to suggest that it is not made from organic decay but chemical reaction deep in the earth.
It is just plain dumb or even criminal to put into place policies to prevent the use of oil before alternatives to oil have been discovered. Feel free to think "Obama" here. Obama should be imprisoned for the rest of his life for his treason against the USA, may the sob rot there!

This is how it works as far as 'oil' goes.

Obama is an Oligarch. A crime figure. He is connected to George Soros who funded Obama and supports Obama. (Soros - the guy who, when a boy helped the NAZIS take the belongings of Jews off them.)

Obama has used the Gulf oil spill as a reason to stop all US drilling in water deeper than 500 feet for at least the next 6 months. He is forcing the oil drillers to pay restitution to their now out of work employees, but they are only out of work because Obama took away their jobs!
At the same time Obama has given Petrobras a Brazilian oil company 2 BILLION DOLLARS to drill a well even much deeper than the BP well in the gulf!

And guess who is part owner in Petrobras?
George Soros - Petrobras is the largest investment in his portfolio.

Not only that but the Obama administration is being accused of misrepresenting the facts in a report about an offshore drilling pause:

The seven experts who advised President Obama on how to deal with offshore drilling safety after the Deepwater Horizon explosion are accusing his administration of misrepresenting their views to make it appear that they supported a six-month drilling moratorium — something they actually oppose.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by Ramil

How would you like electricity prices going up tenfold or even hundredfold? How would you like coal or wood heating? How would you like a world with no cars, no planes, no plastic, no synthetic fabrics, no cosmetics, no paints etc? You are probably not aware of the whole spectre of things that are made of oil or its components. Oil is not merely a fuel, it's a main component of many materials. Have a look around you right now, what do you see? You wouldn't probably believe it but 90% of things you see is made of oil or oil was used in the process of making them.

I agree with Hanna, there are alternatives. There is lots of development in biodegradable plastic, hydrogen, renewable and nuclear energy, smart power grids and stuff like that. The oil is a finite resource. So I think we have to upgrade anyways. The sooner the better.

I am aware that a lot of products (computers, packaging, kitchen utensils, machines etc) are made from oil-based products. I am aware that it is not possible to fly without fuel derived from oil.

Perhaps I am not fully clear on exactly the scale of change, or how much more expensive things would become. But I would be willing to make quite a lot of sacrifices, how far, I am not sure..

It is NOT a necessity of life to own a car, to regularly travel to other continents or to have endless gadgets, clothes, accessoaries etc. Everything does not need to be in plastic packaging and there ARE other sources of energy and fuel.

Oil is almost like a drug, like heroin to the world; easy to get and does wonders for a very cheap price (at least initially). But then you are hooked, and you just want more and more, and you are prepared to do anything to get it... Not to mention what it does to your health and looks (compare pollution!)

I think the world is like an "oil-junkie" and it needs to wean off the habit.

If we can go to the moon and transplant organs, then surely we can find alternatives to oil! And don't forget that people in the third world do use only a fraction of the oil per person that we in the West do.. It's not even remotely fairly distributed. There are so many different things wrong with how we use oil today.

But I am as guilty as the next person of owning lots of gadgets, flying, having too much clothes and buying things made from plastic...
I feel slightly hypocritical.