Posted on 06/18/2010 5:41:00 AM PDT by numberonepal
OK, assuming the premise that microbes that are “eating” the oil and gas are depleting isolated areas of the ocean of oxygen is true, I have an idea. Sure, this may sound like it belongs on half-baked.com but here goes. Why not drop electrodes down into these submerged plumes and run a current though them. This would create oxygen bubbles that could be absorbed back into the water and replenish the depleted supply. Essentially, we would be using the energy from the electricity, through electrolysis, to supply organic life with the fuel it needs to break down the oil.
Good point about methane being a greenhouse gas. IIRC, it is about 20 times “worse” than CO2.. We’re cooked...
Two things —
(1) the damage is NOT irreparable, but it’ll take a variable ‘while’ for nature to right itself. So if we do nothing about these dead zones (MOST ALREADY THERE FROM FERTILIZER RUNOFF) caused by the spill, nature will work it out over time. Keep in mind that many areas of the ocean naturally have very low levels of O2, and others do not. The problem in the Gulf is that areas that should have O2 are losing it.
(2) In theory your idea is sound, but in practice you’d have a hard time getting enough O2 dissolved in the right places. But a clever idea. IT’d be like spitting into the whirlwind. It might be easier to add chemical oxygenation or just send big hoses below for ‘bubblers’. But the idea of physically augmenting the levels of O2 is a good one in theory, but the scale needed would make it hard in practice.
The nuke would go off at least couple of miles under the seabed, next to the pipeline. The blast would crush the pipeline shut and fuse the entire area, sealing it off. Done right, no blast effects or radiation would reach the water.
At tleast that's how the Russians did it.
“....time to quit fooling around and nuke the well.”
I’ve seen this mentioned a couple of times. For those of us slow to this, what would that do? Is the theory that the blast would eliminate the leak by eliminating the source?
The Cherokee and related tribes were quite rapidly being assimilated by Euro-American society in the early 1800s.
Many people who are actually Creek, Choctaw and Chickasaw tell you they are Cherokee just so they don't have to answer so many questions.
This reminds me of a couple things: The move "Payback" where the crime boss Carter is deciding what to do with problem of Porter "if you don't understand something, get rid of it". Then we have the icon gun show bumper sticker "There is no problem that can't be solved with the use of high explosives"
I submit that those who don't understand the problem, just want to "get rid of it"; how is just a trivial detail. Since it is a big problem, they need a bigger explosive, aka: "nuclear bomb".
The bottom of the GOM is like a bowl of pudding, and the pressure is greater than anything the Russians ever experienced. Furthermore, the best evidence they care to reveal to us to date is that the pipe is/has deteriorated and we are looking at the equivalent of an undersea oil dam break. The Soviets allegedly did this on land (since when did we start trust Soviet propaganda movie shorts?) to crimp a pipe. In the GOM there isn't much of pipe to crimp shut, its more of matter of not creating new openings for the oil to come out. What is your solution when all the nuke does is destroy whatever stability in the sea floor there might be holding back this oil and instead create hundreds of larger faults for the oil to gush through?
There are only two things I see in common here: Oil and Communists. We can continue to talk about nukes, but I would change the discussion only on where the nuke is to be applied.
Gee, the ap just figured out that there is a pressurized gas boosting all that oil out of the ground. Isn’t methane the same thing that cows emit?
That makes me feel better. I understand it’s a gas and it’s naturally occuring, but I just could not see how the gas wouldn’t penetrate the food chain.
So you don’t think the methane (NOTE: exessive methane) would hurt the sea life?
I am not a marine biologist or scientist, just trying to research as much as I can. Fumbling around at that.
Thanks Blueflag, Freepers have so many from so many different areas... just about a guarantee SOMEONE will know something about everything.
...based on the sucessful Russian esperiance it broke the flow...they were working on a land based well however...nobody wants a nuke, but after all else fails, there will be no choice I expect.
http://www.ngoilgas.com/news/a-nuke-to-stop-the-gulf-oil-spill/
OK, dumb question, but please be nice to me:
Is there a possibility that this collected methane could blow up? Like in a mother-of-all underwater explosion with shockwaves and seawaves for miles?
“Since hydrogen sulfide occurs naturally in the body, the environment and the gut, enzymes exist in the body capable of detoxifying it by oxidation to (harmless) sulfate.[6] Hence, low levels of sulfide may be tolerated indefinitely.”
REALLY?????
Oh my Gosh! So this means that what could have caused an extinction of the dinosaurs, (which left mammals in place, obviously) really is the hydrogen sulfide. But mammals, like humans, would not be as effected by the gas...
I love Free Republic, seriously. You guys are awesome!
This gushing post is not sarcasm, but relief!
Well, they really kind of did get around. Since they are originally from the southeast, were marched to Oklahoma and then migrated back to the southeast mountains. But you are right, people want to belong to a ‘culture’ and Native American seems nobel to many. Cherokee is the most well known tribe I think and so that’s the one they claim!
By the way, my grandmother was half Cherokee, LOL! But being from the southeast, it’s really no surprise or big deal. I have so many more races crammed into my DNA, that is probably a blip in my whole genetic makeup.
That's a pretty bad generalization based on a few irrational posts.
I had considered chemical and air bubbling methods. However, I think electrolysis would be the best solution. It does occur to me that any physical changes to the oxygen concentrations may result in adverse effects after the fact.
If a chemical was to be used it would need to be dispersed at the right depth. Perhaps it could be encapsulated is such a way as it would be released in the right place at the right time. I am unaware of what chemical could be used and what methods of distribution would be effective.
As for bubbling air, this would be the least efficient, if for no other reason than all the energy lost during compression. Assuming it was somehow pumped down to those depths it would require a lot of pressure. The ideal gas law shows just how much energy would be lost given the pressure and temperature changes. Even if pure oxygen was delivered, it still needs to be refined and pressurized. All of this requires lots of energy.
As for the electrolysis idea, a sled fitted with an anode and cathode could be weighted to float at the appropriate depth and towed behind a ship. Electricity generated on the ship would be used to power it. I feel this would be the most direct, and perhaps easiest, way to deliver the needed oxygen to the depleted areas.
All ideas aside, scale is probably the most important factor. Even our best efforts may be essentially futile given the vast amount of oil and gas that needs to be metabolized.
Lastly, assuming any success with increasing oxygen concentration, there will be a bloom of microbes. This bloom will flourish so long as there is ample O2, but will quickly die after it uses it up. So, perhaps trying to “fix” a “dead zone” would in fact create a worse dead zone after the microbe bloom collapses.
Maybe so, but its gone somewhat past a “few” irrational posts. i.e. the sky is falling post about “they are going to manditory evac everyone within 500 miles of the Gulf coast”.
autumn —
I actually WAS a marine scientist, but that was last century, when ABBA was still singing.
Methane in the food chain is not an issue to concern yourself with.
Depleted oxygen in parts of the Gulf that OUGHT to have sufficient oxygen is a problem, but the Gulf will naturally repair itself, over time, once the pollution stops. The damage is not permanent.
Don’t fall for any “excessive methane” discussions.
p.s. enteric fermentation ( i.e. biological anaerobic digestion of plant material in organisms of various sizes) such as from termites, ruminants, old-growth forests & landfills and littoral zones/estuaries are just about the largest emitters of methane on the planet. There are huge deposits of methane as gas and hydrates in various geological formation around the globe. Methane is being ‘formed’ under our feet as we speak. Methane is a natural part of God’s creation.
“Last... I have posted a comment on several threads about the fear that methane was leaking from the gulf floor. Beyond the methane being the cause of the explosion, methane is scarier in a bigger way.
Methane is a carrier of hydrogen sulfides. Hydrogen sulfides is believed to be the cause of the dinosaur extinction as geological layering shows a layer of hydrogen sulfides at the time the dinosaurs became extinct. Scary scary stuff.”
Don`t tell that to some in here. They prefer to keep their heads buried in the sand and believing everything is A-ok.
BTW the methane that is flared results in carbon dioxide and water vapor also greenhouse gases
These are the Obamas of the right. “Just plug the hole.” It would be easy in the movies or a novel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.