Skip to comments.Texas A&M: Methane Levels in Gulf of Mexico Up to 100,000 X Normal
Posted on 07/14/2010 2:37:29 AM PDT by combat_boots
Last week, scientists from a University of Georgia weighed in with their findings on methane gas in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Yesterday, more opinions from other experts were published. Texas A&M University has also had a team on the Gulf and also finds exceptionally high methane levels in the water. Reuters: Texas A&M University oceanography professor John Kessler, just back from a 10-day research expedition near the BP Plc oil spill in the gulf, says methane gas levels in some areas are astonishingly high.
Kesslers crew took measurements of both surface and deep water within a 5-mile (8 kilometer) radius of BPs broken wellhead.
There is an incredible amount of methane in there, Kessler told reporters in a telephone briefing.
In some areas, the crew of 12 scientists found concentrations that were 100,000 times higher than normal.
(Excerpt) Read more at uncoverage.net ...
“There has always been oil globs on the beaches up there.”
Natural leakage? what a crock
Natural accounts for a few small tar balls, it does not account for beaches coated with the stuff. It does not account for being able to turn rocks over and find the bottoms completely coated.
I’m still waiting for you to point out where I used ‘Concentrated ‘ and ‘depleted uranium shells ‘.
Sheesh, you couldn’t be a liar could you?
Not sure about cows, but my 3 Labs could probably give it a serious challenge......
I know of no problems we are or have had with uranium as it sits in the ground. WE also have radon in various places but when id’d in a hpme the remedy is easy and inexpensive.
“I know of no problems we are or have had with uranium as it sits in the ground. “
Right, and oil that sits in its natural place causes no problems. Take it out, throw it on the beach or on a bunch of dolphins and the situation is different.
“WE also have radon in various places but when idd in a hpme the remedy is easy and inexpensive.”
Radon has been shown to cause serous health issues. I have a friend who has spent over $6000 to fix a serious radon issue. Hardly easy or inexpensive.
None of which goes to explain your argument that the massive amount of spilled oil will be cleaned up by nature and the inference we shouldn’t worry about it.
"And Charlie! Light a match!"
.......How long will it take for those populations to return back to previous levels......
You have made an unwarranted assumption. You have assumed the previous level was normal or perhaps correct. You did not state the time considered previous.....preKatrina, post Katrina, precivil war, pre DDT abolition, post
Since levels are continuously variable, it doesn’t matter any way. An absence will be quickly filled by individuals looking for a better plce.
I bought a home with a radon problem and the fix was under $500 and consisted of nothing more than adequate ventilation in the basement, which was accomplished by drawing air from several points in the basement and forcing it outside via exhaust fan.
As for the oil problem in the Gulf. I’m not saying we shouldn’t so what we can but I do stand by my claim that nature will eventually take car of the problem.
“You have made an unwarranted assumption. You have assumed the previous level was normal or perhaps correct”
Pre-oil spill, pretty obvious from the context of the thread.
“An absence will be quickly filled by individuals looking for a better plce.”
Filled with what? Millions of people are being impacted by the oil and by the economic damage. Nobody really knows the impact to the wildlife or ecosystem of the gulf. The various dead carcasses on the beach are most likely only a fraction of the real numbers.
“I do stand by my claim that nature will eventually take car of the problem.”
Sure in 50 to 100 years.
Not. The fact that you can dig down and find some oil under rocks in PWS is not indicative of the status of recovery. Dr. Ed Overton (LSU environmental chemist) who has studied the PWS spill says that after five years, the ecology was largely recovered, despite the presence of subsurface oil. Ixtoc spill showed the same pattern, but the recovery was quicker. The BP spill effects will be largely gone in 2-3 years.
No, but it is a good indication. However, we have LOTS of data that says that the "nature can clean itself" DOES happen, and quite rapidly.
You been swimming in the Gulf?
‘The BP spill effects will be largely gone in 2-3 years. “
Perhaps the surface spill will be gone in 2-3 years. The wildlife and fish stock will not be. Nor will the economies of the gulf states be returned to normal. Heck the drilling platforms are just now starting to move out. With the long term contracts there is no way they’ll be back in that short of a time.
Considering it takes 2-3 years to build a drilling platform an entire industry is at risk. That industry has a whole lot of very powerful people who want to see it gone.
It wasn't cows but rather thousands of years of buffalo crap washing down the Platte to the Missouri and down the Missouri to the Mississippi and down the Mississippi to the Gulf.
You copied and wrote: “Oil is a naturally occurring substance and in time will dissipate. Uranium is also a naturally occurring substance.”
So I shouldn’t have read between the words and assumed you were being caustic about naturally occurring substances by pointing out a naturally occurring dangerous (but only when concentrated) substance?
PS: Much of our soil contains the naturally occurring poison Arsenic....should we put soil on the EPA hazardous substance list?
Yes, they will. There is PLENTY of data from multiple incidents that shows that ecological recovery is rapid.
After the Ixtoc spill, in the affected shoreline areas of Texas, NO difference could be detected after two years. I've posted the link to the Texas Bureau of Land Management studies elsewhere, but here's the URL once again :
"Nor will the economies of the gulf states be returned to normal. Heck the drilling platforms are just now starting to move out. With the long term contracts there is no way theyll be back in that short of a time. Considering it takes 2-3 years to build a drilling platform an entire industry is at risk. That industry has a whole lot of very powerful people who want to see it gone."
Yes, that's all true, but those aren't ecological effects, which is what I was referring to. Those are political effects, instituted by socialists to increase the power of government.
“So I shouldnt have read between the words “
No, making assumptions is dangerous just as naturally occurring uranium can be. Not as dangerous as refined uranium but still dangerous.
None of which changes the original context. This oil is not where it would normally be or in the concentrations it would be at if it occurred naturally (on the beach).
Minimizing the damage which is being done by this spill is naive at best.
“Yes, they will. There is PLENTY of data from multiple incidents that shows that ecological recovery is rapid.”
really, a 100 year old turtle is going to be born and grow old in the next 2 years? A 10 year old dolphin will suddenly be replaced?
Shellfish populations have been decimated. The oil has contaminated the sand surroudning their habitat. How will that subsurface oil evaporate or be cleaned out of the shellfish that have survived?
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.