Tags

, , , , ,

CERCLA also enabled the revision of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP).[9] The NCP provided the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. The NCP also established the NPL. The NPL, which appears as Appendix B to the NCP, primarily serves as an information and management tool for EPA, and helps the Agency prioritize sites for cleanup. The NPL is updated periodically.

(from – )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfund

***

My Note –

Aside from taking some notes as news stories were reporting early this morning about the oil spill and recovery efforts in the Gulf (and getting some sleep), I looked up several things in my Encyclopedia Britannica – volume 5, about the

Continental Shelf and Slope on pp. 117 – includes the term is “turbidity currents.”,

Coordination Compounds – which is a chemistry thing on pp. 135 – which has potential for cleaning up the oil spill from the beaches and maybe elsewhere,

Crystallization and Crystal Growth (marked it for later and took very brief look) on pp. 337, and

Theory of Distribution – particularly the Neoclassical Theory of Distribution on pp. 905 which I read through nearly all of it and tried to understand how it compares to other ways to overview real wages distribution models for comparing to the national income and national output / functional distribution modeling conceptual wage ratios.

I found a term from the entry about the Continental Shelf and Slope that I want to look up online concerning the Gulf of Mexico oil spill drafts of crude oil distributing throughout the area – the term is “turbidity currents.” I’m looking up that one. Also want to find some of the CNN stories that I saw yesterday about the $75 million dollar cap on the cleanup bill to the corporation responsible – answer the question of, how is it that TransOcean and Halliburton and Cameron that made the defective blow-out preventer aren’t having to pay for the cleanup and aren’t out there doing any of it? (Although knowing how Halliburton caused the deaths of those soldiers in Iraq that were electrocuted in showers built by the Halliburton group – maybe its best if they aren’t “helping”.)

Then, I checked the wikipedia entry on Superfund. Here are the quickie notes I made from that – and I grabbed two contact points from a public policy links list from the last post – below that is the Clean Water Act info on wikipedia that I’m looking up right now with the notes I’m getting from it. Then, I’m going to transfer a few notes from the news broadcasts that I made on 3×5 cards onto this post –

– cricketdiane

***

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Gulf_of_Mexico_offshore_gas.jpg

# Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies

http://www.fishwildlife.org/
The organization represents the fish and wildlife professionals in the 56 states and territories, and the federal agencies of the United States. The Association also represents many provinces of Canada and Mexico. It promotes sound management and conservation.

(and)
# Center for Environmental Innovation
http://www.enviro-innovate.org/

CEI is an alliance of university faculty members that focuses on environmental, health and safety issues requiring a multidisciplinary approach.

(from)
http://www.stateline.org/live/resources/Public+Policy+Links

***

. Retrieved April 24, 2010 with last update reported as March 31, 2010.”]Map of Superfund extreme pollution officially indentified sites in the contiguous United States. Red indicates currently on final National Priority List, yellow is proposed, green is deleted (usually meaning having been cleaned up). Data from United States Environmental Protection Agency CERCLIS database available at [1]. Retrieved April 24, 2010 with last update reported as March 31, 2010.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Superfund_sites.svg

Superfund sites.svg
English: Map of Superfund sites in the contiguous United States. Red indicates currently on final National Priority List, yellow is proposed, green is deleted (usually meaning having been cleaned up). Data from United States Environmental Protection Agency CERCLIS database available at [1]. Retrieved April 24, 2010 with last update reported as March 31, 2010.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfund

Main article: List of Superfund sites in the United States

As of January 14, 2010, there are currently 1,270 sites listed on the National Priority List, an additional 340 have been delisted, and 63 new sites have been proposed.[14]

Approximately 70 percent of Superfund cleanup activities historically have been paid for by parties responsible (PRPs) for the cleanup of contamination. The only time cleanup costs are not borne by the responsible party is when that party either cannot be found or is unable to pay for the cleanup. For those sites, the Superfund law originally paid for toxic waste cleanups through a tax on petroleum and chemical industries.

The chemical and petroleum fees were intended to provide incentives to use less toxic substances. Over five years, $1.6 billion was collected, and the tax went to a trust fund for cleaning up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.

The last full fiscal year in which the Department of the Treasury collected the tax was FY1995. At the end of FY1996, the invested trust fund balance was $6.0 billion. This fund was exhausted by the end of FY2003; since that time funding for these orphan shares has been appropriated by Congress out of general revenues.[15]

Accessing Superfund data

The data in the Superfund Program is available to the public.

Reform

Several attempts have been made to reform the Superfund legislation. In 1986, such an attempt was successful, resulting in the 1986 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), which increased Superfund appropriations and provided for studies and new technologies to be used. In 1994, the Clinton administration proposed a new Superfund reform bill, which was seen as an improvement to existing legislation by some environmentalists and industry lobbyists. However, the effort was blocked by Republican opponents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfund

***

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Conservation_and_Recovery_Act

  1. ^ “Introduction to the Hazard Ranking System”. EPA. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/npl_hrs/hrsint.htm. Retrieved 2007-02-03.
  2. ^ “National Priority List Site Totals by Status and Milestone”. EPA. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/query/queryhtm/npltotal.htm. Retrieved 2010-01-14.
  3. ^ “Superfund Program: Updated Appropriation and Expenditure Data”. U.S. Government Accountability Office. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04475r.pdf. Retrieved 2008-04-02.

External links

***

And now I am here –

– cricketdiane

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Water_Pollution_Control_Act

In 2006 the Supreme Court clarified that the term “waters of the United States”:

…includes only those relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water “forming geographic features” that are described in ordinary parlance as “streams[,] … oceans, rivers, [and] lakes.” [7]

Pollution control strategy in the CWA

Point sources

The 1972 act introduced a permit system for regulating point sources of pollution. Point sources include:

Point sources may not discharge pollutants to surface waters without a permit from the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). This system is managed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in partnership with state environmental agencies. EPA has authorized 46 states to issue permits directly to the discharging facilities. The CWA also allows tribes to issue permits, but no tribes have been authorized by EPA. In the remaining states and territories, the permits are issued by an EPA regional office.[8] (See Titles III and IV.)

In previous legislation, Congress had authorized states to develop water quality standards, which would limit discharges from facilities based on the characteristics of individual water bodies. However, these standards were only to be developed for interstate waters, and the science to support this process (i.e. data, methodology) was in the early stages of development. This system was not effective and there was no permit system in place to enforce the requirements. In the 1972 CWA Congress added the permit system and a requirement for technology-based effluent limitations.[9]

Technology-based standards

The 1972 CWA created a new requirement for technology-based standards for point source discharges. EPA develops these standards for categories of dischargers, based on the performance of pollution control technologies without regard to the conditions of a particular receiving water body. The intent of Congress was to create a “level playing field” by establishing a basic national discharge standard for all facilities within a category, using a “Best Available Technology.” The standard becomes the minimum regulatory requirement in a permit. If the national standard is not sufficiently protective at a particular location, then water quality standards may be employed.[10]

Water quality standards

The 1972 act authorized continued use of the water quality-based approach, but in coordination with the technology-based standards. After application of technology-based standards to a permit, if water quality is still impaired for the particular water body, then the permit agency (state or EPA) may add water quality-based limitations to that permit. The additional limitations are to be more stringent than the technology-based limitations and would require the permittee to install additional controls.

(then this part – )

Water Quality Standards Program

Water quality standards (WQS) are risk-based (also called hazard-based) requirements which set site-specific allowable pollutant levels for individual water bodies, such as rivers, lakes, streams and wetlands. States set WQS by designating uses for the water body (e.g., recreation, water supply, aquatic life, agriculture) and applying water quality criteria (numeric pollutant concentrations and narrative requirements) to protect the designated uses. An antidegradation policy is also issued by each state to maintain and protect existing uses and high quality waters.[20]

Water bodies that do not meet applicable water quality standards with technology-based controls alone are placed on the section 303(d) list of water bodies not meeting standards. Water bodies on the 303(d) list require development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). A TMDL is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still meet WQS. The TMDL is determined after study of the specific properties of the water body and the pollutant sources that contribute to the non-compliant status. Generally, the TMDL determines load based on a Waste Load Allocation (WLA), Load Allocation (LA), and Margin of Safety (MOS) Once the TMDL assessment is completed and the maximum pollutant loading capacity defined, an implementation plan is developed that outlines the measures needed to reduce pollutant loading to the non-compliant water body, and bring it into compliance. Over 60,000 TMDLs are proposed or in development for U.S. waters in the next decade and a half.

Following the issuance of a TMDL for a water body, implementation of the requirements involves modification to NPDES permits for facilities discharging to the water body to meet the WLA allocated to the water body (see Title IV).

As of 2007, approximately half of the rivers, lakes, and bays under EPA oversight were not safe enough for fishing and swimming. [21] The development of WQS and TMDL is a complex process, both scientifically and legally, and it is a resource-intensive process for state agencies.

National Water Quality Inventory

Section 305(b) requires EPA and the states to compile a biennial Report to Congress on the nation’s water quality.[22]

***

My Note –

These are from my hand-written notes about news stories I watched earlier today (some of them) –

cnbc – DOW dropped a full 2% today, -228.09 right now at 12.48 pm

(and)

Eudo drops to $1.30 vs dollar – is among a number of things dropping incluiding precious metals and resource based commodities

bloomberg – had a story about Senators and Congressmen and their spouses that have been engaging in short selling, etc. (earlier)

CNN – coffee goes through the port of New Orleans, bananas – ships covered with oil can’t go up into the Mississippi River or into the ports where they will contaminate the areas – the ships may be sprayed down and the oil cleaned off – which will back up all the shipping going through the area – 250,000 tons of rubber for tires, grains, chicken – shipping lanes are open right now – they may have said the ships are going around the oil slick – will check later – that story 12.44 pm

speculators and Memorial Day use of gasoline will drive up the price of gasoline – said by somebody on the news

Science Channel – note from the other day about the Corps of Engineers project to protect from storm surge and the machine they designed to do it – which is absolutely tremendous and amazing – from Sci Channel or NatGeo several days ago – show included homes (21 homes designed by architects using hurricane and flood resistant strategies and new methods) and “pervious concrete” for sidewalks to allow water to drip down through rather than fill storm drains – called “Make It Right” program

made a note of this above info – to check what that surge protection wall will do in the midst of this oil spill to keep it out and where they are in the construction process – it was projected to be completed by the 2011 hurricane season and to take a full 18 months to finish construction.

bloomberg – there was a segment early (6.41 am) about the plan to cap off / drill to divert the oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico from this spill – which will take 3 months to essentially accomplish the whole thing for the spill to be stopped – there was a Financial Times guy reporting on the oil spill – caught the end of the story – not good

Somewhere – don’t know which broadcaster – probably can find it – maybe CNNI or bloomberg – maybe cnbc – don’t know – but there was a story about the oil spill which included the Montara spill in Australia last September – there was a square area of coverage number that I want to find – and it was over ten weeks or something for the oil spill to be stopped with drilling into it to divert the oil – and they missed hitting it several times in the process – I have just looked it up on a google search and found these –

– cricketdiane

***

Relief Well Was Used to Halt Australian Spill‎ –

1 day ago

The Australian accident, known as the Montara spill, began Aug. The Montara oil spill last year was Australia’s third worst, after tanker spills in 1975

New York Times10 related articles »

Australia’s Montara Oil Spill Commission Inquiry Documents Focus

May 3, 2010 Much of the loads of documents found at the Montara Commission Inquiry site seem to be concerned mainly with the shortfalls of regulators,
seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/44917 – 20 hours ago

Montara oil spill – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WWF-Australia also claimed that the spill was worse than originally expected. ….. Montara oil spill, Australian Government · PTTEP Australasia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montara_oil_spill

***

My Note –

Other notes I made today from the news – briefly –

bloomberg – 6.03 am

$75 million dollar cap on petrol co. drill accidents & for cleanup, etc. (currently) there are some Congressional members wanting to increase that cap into the billion dollar neighborhood

John Amos, SkyTruth pres. non-profit – (on phone interview) using radar satellite images has determines over 1 million gallons a day are leaking into the Gulf – earlier estimations were grossly incorrect – used satellite images along with Coast Guard maps and visual determinations of scale and size to make the analysis. He said that 20,000 – 26,500 barrels per day would be required to make an oil slick of that size increasing in size at that rate –

apparently the calculations of SkyTruth president and team based on visual overview +Coast Guard maps and NASA satellite images – noted that the radar images from satellites were more effective to use than other sat images because of cloud cover

Also on other subjects –

I had grabbed a 3×5 note about a show on CSPAN called Q&A that I watched on 05-02-10 (11.42 pm) with Ahmed Rashad author with 30 years of experience and research about the Taliban – the book is called “Taliban Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia” and he answered questions by informative, knowledgeable insight with common sense – might be a source of information about the current bombing attempt by terrorist in New York that was just arrested (around midnight last night – news covering it this morning – and press meetings about it happening today)

And, a note about the new show on cnbc Monday – called “American Titans” – want to see that if I remember to find it – might look it up onlin

earlier on bloomberg (before 6.24 am) there was a story with Pepsico at the USA Pavilion interview with Bernie Lo about Pepsico in China – didn’t make extensive notes but want to find the interview clip later, if I can because the Pepsico assets in China and extended plans for the immediate future were outlined by the whoever he was interviewing – probably a chairman or president or CEO of some variety of Pepsico – and noted that Pepsico is one of six anchor sponsors of the US pavilion –

the day before yesterday, an older lady in China said they waited in line for the US pavilion to find nothing there – she was very disappointed. So far, haven’t seen any views or explanations about the US pavilion at the Shanghai World Expo – don’t know why – it does have a waterfall sculpture as part of the front on the building where the Bernie Lo interview with Pepsico was occurring and over 530,000 people have already visited the World Expo

some notes from the bloomberg Inside Track show about Goldman having six suits filed against them last week by Louisiana police pension fund, electrical workers union pension funds and others

noted that UBS had $57 Billion in writedowns during credit crunch with $15 Billion in withdrawals from wealth management last quarter and $45 billion before that – need to look it up and make sure that was UBS

Inside Track on bloomberg had a really nifty video shot of their building as a lead-in to the show – nice building art and architecture

and the best one –

“Peoples of Europe Rise Up” banner dropped from the side of the Acropolic mount at the Acropolis where protesters are protesting against the Greek IMF bailout loan of $147 Billion with forced austerity measures (like they forced on Argentina which ended up toppling the government – which I need to look up somewhere also because it was on a note from another news show recently and it had an interesting knowledge base in the way it was covered.)

also noted – it takes 7.5 million pounds of thrust to escape earth’s gravity from the Secrets of the Moon Landing on NatGeo – and it only took 4 minutes to get 30,000 feet up from the moon’s surface when the lander took off

And – the CNNI story that the oil slick is bigger than expected (6.22 am), flooding in Tennessee is still covering huge areas and that Tennessee had more rain in one day than ever recorded in the entire history of keeping records from 13″ – 20″ and there were pictures of whole neighborhoods covered in floodwaters – and pictures from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia with flooding right now halfway up the car doors with more rain expected today.

Cumberland River crested at 51 feet over flood level – (was that right?)

Watched a quick bit of the local news to see flooding at an elementary school to the overflow of floodwaters and Six Flags plans to open this weekend despite it looking right now like it is sitting in a sea of red mudd waters across the entire park

All good notes for later –

But back to the situation that needs the most critical attention – the oil spilling into the Gulf of Mexico

(from my notes on the news) – written on 3×5 cards earlier today – I have a lot of notes . . .

– cricketdiane

***

Simulation of periodic waves over an underwater shoal with a Boussinesq-type model. The waves propagate over an elliptic-shaped underwater shoal on a plane beach. This example combines several effects of waves and shallow water, including refraction, diffraction, shoaling and weak non-linearity.

Simulation of periodic waves over an underwater shoal with a Boussinesq-type model. The waves propagate over an elliptic-shaped underwater shoal on a plane beach. This example combines several effects of waves and shallow water, including refraction, diffraction, shoaling and weak non-linearity.

(from)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boussinesq_approximation_%28water_waves%29

***

from wikipedia entry – Clean Water Act

Congress first addressed water pollution issues in the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.[44] Portions of this law remain in effect, including the Refuse Act, while others have been superseded by various amendments, including the 1972 CWA.

Other notable predecessor legislation includes the following.

  • Public Health Service Act of 1912. Expanded the mission of the United States Public Health Service to study problems of sanitation, sewage and pollution.[45]
  • Oil Pollution Act of 1924. Prohibited the intentional discharge or fuel oil into coastal waters.[46] Repealed by 1972 CWA.
  • Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948. Created a comprehensive set of water quality programs that also provided some financing for state and local governments. Enforcement was limited to interstate waters. The Public Health Service provided financial and technical assistance.[47]
  • Water Quality Act of 1965. Required states to issue water quality standards for interstate waters, and authorized the newly-created Federal Water Pollution Control Administration to set standards where states failed to do so.[48]

Case law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Water_Pollution_Control_Act

***

(from this site  at lower group of links – bottom of the page)

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Council on Environmental Quality

(and from the group of Supreme Court cases)

Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, 07-984 (2009), is a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in favor of Coeur Alaska‘s permitted right to dump mine waste in a lake.

The discharge of material into waters of the United States is regulated under the Clean Water Act by either the Army Corps or the Environmental Protection Agency, depending on what the material is.

Discharge of “fill material” falls under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps (discharge of other pollutants falls under the jurisdiction of the EPA).[3]

(etc.)

. . . . the basis of a definition of “fill material” which had been revised in 2002 under the administration of George W. Bush. This new definition allowed some contaminants to be included in mine waste, while still allowing the mine waste to be classified as fill.[2] The permit included 4.5 million tons a combination of waste rock and tailings of ten years, and would result in the floor elevation of Lower Slate Lake to rise by 50 ft (15 m).[1]

(etc.)

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin also welcomed the ruling calling it a “green light for responsible resource development”. The environmental groups that originally filed suit against Coeur Alaska were unhappy with the decision. The groups state that the proposed material includes aluminum, lead and mercury (among other metals), and that discharging into Lower Slate Lake will have a detrimental effect on the lake and surrounding waters.[4] Following the court’s decision share prices of Coeur d’Alene Mines rose over 5%.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coeur_Alaska,_Inc._v._Southeast_Alaska_Conservation_Council

***

Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006), was a United States Supreme Court case challenging the Clean Water Act. It was the first major environmental case heard by the newly appointed Chief Justice, John Roberts and Associate Justice, Samuel Alito. The Supreme Court heard the case on February 21, 2006 and issued a decision on June 19, 2006. While five justices agreed to void rulings against the plaintiffs, who wanted to fill their wetlands to build a shopping mall and condos, the court was split over further details, with the four more conservative justices arguing in favor of a more restrictive reading of the term “navigable waters” than the four more liberal justices. Justice Kennedy did not fully join either position.[1]

( . . . )

However, the term “navigable waterway” has been broadly interpreted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to include areas connected to or linked to waters via tributaries or other similar means. Rapanos was convicted of two felonies for filling wetlands in violation of law in 1995.

( . . . )

Eventually, Rapanos appealed the civil case against him, which included millions of dollars of fines, to the Supreme Court of the United States. [3]

Carabell, who was involved in the associated case Carabell v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, did seek a permit to build condominiums on 19 acres (77,000 m2) of wetlands, but the request was denied. Carabell took the issue to the courts, arguing that the federal government did not have jurisdiction. After losing in the Federal District Court and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, Carabell appealed to the United States Supreme Court.[3]

[edit] Holding

The Clean Water Act governs discharges to “navigable waters.” Although the law contains language defining navigable waters as “waters of the United States,” the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the position of the Army Corps of Engineers that its authority over water was essentially limitless under the Clean Water Act.

In Rapanos v. United States, the Supreme Court clarified that the term “waters of the United States” “includes only those relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water ‘forming geographic features’ that are described in ordinary parlance as ‘streams[,] … oceans, rivers, [and] lakes.'”

All waters with a “significant nexus” to “navigable waters” are covered under the CWA; however, the words “significant nexus” remains open to judicial interpretation and considerable controversy. Some regulations included water features such as intermittent streams, playa lakes, prairie potholes, sloughs and wetlands as “waters of the United States” [5]

In Rapanos v. United States, the Army Corps of Engineers applied that broad definition, seeking millions of dollars in fines and penalties from John A. Rapanos in Michigan who drained and filled 22 acres of wetland with sand despite warnings from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), the advice of his own private consultant, a cease-and-desist letter from the MDNR, and finally an administrative compliance order from the EPA. The Army Corps of Engineers claimed that by filling the wetland he had discharged a pollutant into the “waters of the United States.” The US. Supreme Court rejected that position in a 4-1-4 plurality, holding that isolated wetlands could not be considered “waters of the United States” for purposes of the CWA.[6]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapanos_v._United_States

***

My Note – Very confusing. There is protection and recourse for polluting discharges into our national waters but there isn’t – and the imposition of those regulations can take years upon years upon years while the polluting stream or polluting activities and destruction actions continue. Hmmmm.

Where it comes to the estuaries and protected wildlife sanctuaries of the Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama, Florida, Texas and Gulf of Mexico waters generally – by the time any of the legal remedies could help, the whole place would be a desolate wasteland.

I’ll look up something else that might be of more help. CNN a few minutes ago had a “tweet” from Governor Bobby Jindal that demanded the Coast Guard approve a plan and insisted that local leaders know best – along with “and have BP pay for it” – plus the fact that they (in Louisiana) are going to get started now and are not going to wait any longer (my paraphrase.)

It was on Rick’s List (CNN) not long after a really great list of –

The five highest profit makers who make over $25 Billion dollars a year in profits – on the list –

1. Chevron

2. BP

3. Wal-Mart

4. Exxon

5. Royal Dutch Shell

Well, there you go – isn’t that indicative of who is unfazed by the concerns in the Gulf of Mexico by the massive oil spilling across a broad area defined as the “size of New Jersey” by news reporters. (except Wal-Mart who is probably raising money to help fix it, my opinion – I haven’t heard that they were.)

There is a White House Briefing right now where Mr. Gibbs described BP as having the “expertise” to cap the well. Don’t we all wish there were evidence of that – and then he said our focus – is on minimizing the environmental damage. Yeah – that is real evident right now as well – what are they doing – studying it? studying whether there is a problem or not? Surely they know it is and with every moment, the current damage and potential damages are increasing by extraordinary and unimaginable consequences along event horizons of every measure and area of focus.

Personally, I think they are “hunkered down” among those making the decisions in their command center wherever it is (on the implementation of decisions and plans to fix the oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico.) Just like what happened with the FEMA camp that was acting as a command center during hurricane Katrina – if they had even accepted a television and cable run into their bunker – they would’ve known more of what was happening in the real world.

There seems to be an insistence on closing out information from the local communities directly affected by the disaster and to discredit any information, knowledge, intelligence, practical insight, solutions or decision-making input that comes from them when a disaster occurs. The command centers’ decision makers “hunker down” and are either patronizing, at best or totally isolated while discrediting local information sources, at worst. I don’t know why they do that, but battles in wars have been lost fairly well as a direct result of doing the same thing.

– cricketdiane

***

From – Boussinesq approximation – water waves

Just this part –

Thereafter, the Boussinesq approximation is applied to the remaining flow equations, in order to eliminate the dependence on the vertical coordinate. As a result, the resulting partial differential equations are in terms of functions of the horizontal coordinates (and time).

As an example, consider potential flow over a horizontal bed in the (x,z) plane, with x the horizontal and z the vertical coordinate. The bed is located at z = -h, where h is the mean water depth. A Taylor expansion is made of the velocity potential φ(x,z,t) around the bed level z = -h:[2]

  \varphi\, =\,      \varphi_b\,      +\,                z\,   \left[ \frac{\partial   \varphi}{\partial z  } \right]_{z=-h}\,      +\, \frac{1}{2}\,  z^2\, \left[ \frac{\partial^2 \varphi}{\partial z^2} \right]_{z=-h}\,      +\, \frac{1}{6}\,  z^3\, \left[ \frac{\partial^3 \varphi}{\partial z^3} \right]_{z=-h}\,     +\, \frac{1}{24}\, z^4\, \left[ \frac{\partial^4 \varphi}{\partial z^4} \right]_{z=-h}\,     +\, \cdots,

where φb(x,t) is the velocity potential at the bed. Invoking Laplace’s equation for φ, as valid for incompressible flow, gives:

\begin{align}   \varphi\, & =\,     \left\{\,        \varphi_b\,       -\, \frac{1}{2}\,  z^2\, \frac{\partial^2 \varphi_b}{\partial x^2}\,       +\, \frac{1}{24}\, z^4\, \frac{\partial^4 \varphi_b}{\partial x^4}\,       +\, \cdots\,     \right\}\,      +\,     \left\{\,                          z\,                                     \left[ \frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial z} \right]_{z=-h}\,        -\, \frac{1}{6}\,  z^3\, \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}\, \left[ \frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial z} \right]_{z=-h}\,       +\, \cdots\,     \right\}   \\     & =\,     \left\{\,        \varphi_b\,       -\, \frac{1}{2}\,  z^2\, \frac{\partial^2 \varphi_b}{\partial x^2}\,       +\, \frac{1}{24}\, z^4\, \frac{\partial^4 \varphi_b}{\partial x^4}\,       +\, \cdots\,     \right\},  \end{align}

since the vertical velocity ∂φ / ∂z is zero at the — impermeable — horizontal bed z = -h. This series may subsequently be truncated to a finite number of terms.

(etc.)

Extensions

There is an overwhelming amount of mathematical models which are referred to as Boussinesq equations. This may easily lead to confusion, since often they are loosely referenced to as the Boussinesq equations, while in fact a variant thereof is considered. So it is more appropriate to call them Boussinesq-type equations. Strictly speaking, the Boussinesq equations is the above mentioned set B, since it is used in the analysis in the remainder of his 1872 paper.

Some directions, into which the Boussinesq equations have been extended, are:

Further approximations for one-way wave propagation

While the Boussinesq equations allow for waves traveling simultaneously in opposing directions, it is often advantageous to only consider waves traveling in one direction. Under small additional assumptions, the Boussinesq equations reduce to:

Besides solitary wave solutions, the Korteweg–de Vries equation also has periodic and exact solutions, called cnoidal waves. These are approximate solutions of the Boussinesq equation.

References

(etc.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boussinesq_approximation_%28water_waves%29

***

My Note –

This is from 1986, but is still valued and illustrates some very basic principles of dispersal rates – in the marine environment –

I found it by doing a google search using the terms,

water dispersal rates equations

http://www.terrapub.co.jp/journals/JO/JOSJ/pdf/4201/42010022.pdf

Abstract:
Avoiding the subject for fish accumulation, the traditional view in fish population dynamics has ascribed immigration and emigration of fish to dispersal of fish.

The main purpose of this paper is to find a quantity that represents the time rate of accumulation-dispersal of marine organisms, and also has some relation to the horizontal convergence of current velocity of the surrounding water.

For this, the accumulation-dispersal coefficient is introduced not in the form of diffusion, but in the same for as the convergence.

(etc.)

Each factor corresponds to each coefficient appearing in a linearized equation describing the rate of change in the density, averaged over a region or group.

Introduction of Accumulation-Dispersal Coefficient of Marine Organisms

***

My Note – from this statement –

“Each factor corresponds to each coefficient appearing in a linearized equation describing the rate of change in the density, averaged over a region or group”

It looks like it could be used for oil, as well as the crude oil’s impacts on fish and marine wildlife populations through convergent equation forms and time-dependent modeling.

(see pp. 25 of the document)

And – from page 27, starting with this part –

Introduction of Accumulation-Dispersal Coefficient of Marine Organisms
(see pg 25 for equations)

And, from page 27 –
4. Relation to the horizontal convergence of the current –
We first consider the accumulation-dispersal of organisms ranging in a nearly horizontal layer along the sea-surface, a flat thermocline, a level bottom or flat optimum-isotherms. By denoting the swimming velocity (speed of movement, my note) of organisms relative to the surrounding water as VS and the current velocity of the water relative to the land as VC  we can write the organismal velocity relative to the land as V  =  VS + VC    from (20). __ flatline concept, my note, for the point where organisms exist, and from Eq.  (8.2) we have Kr  =  (continued pp. 27)
see document for the rest of the equation until I get on the other computer and get it written out – this pdf will not let me select and copy today for some reason, cricketdiane

***

– cricketdiane

***

Also from my Encyclopedia Britannica, 1978; Vol. 5, pp. 116 – 117

Entry – Continental Shelf and Slope

“The Mississippi Delta is a multiple feature. The present bird-foot set of distributaries has built out onto the shelf and has reached the edge of the continental slope at one point. Similar structures of greater age overlap each other and have disappeared by subsidence and marine attack. thin sediments have contributed to the construction of the continental terrace off Louisiana.”

which means fine silt and crude oil mixed, my note.

Also found this very fascinating – (from pp. 117 of the same entry)

“Since the end of the last glacial interval sea level has risen 100 to 120 metres (330 to 390 feet) in about 12,000 years, or about one centimetre per year. Over the last 5,000 years sea level has fluctuated slightly around its present stand (elevation.)”

(Also – at the beginning of this entry as a basic definition explanation – )

Continental Shelf and Slope –

the most regularly developed major feature of the Earth’s topography is the continental terrace, also known as the continental margin. The upper surface is formed by the continental shelf, a broad shallow strip of seabed that extends from the coast to depths of 100 – 200 metres (330 – 660 feet).

( . . . )

Beyond the shelf is the continental slope, a much steeper zone that merges with the deep-sea floor at a depth of about 4,000 – 5,000 metres (13,000 – 16,000 feet).

In addition to its great variation in steepness and smoothness, the slope is diversified in some areas by terraces or by basins and ridges. The gradient of the continental slope tends to decrease over its lower half.

This part is called the continental rise and is considered to be part of the deep-ocean floor. In some places, the continental slopes extend down to deep-sea trenches that parallel the coast.

The nomenclature associated with the shelf and slope and the general dimensions are given in Figure 1.

(etc.)

The continental shelf and slope each cover approximately 8 percent of the total sea floor. That  surrounding the U.S. has an area that is more than one-third that of the land surface of the country.

(from)

Encyclopedia Britannica, 1978; vol. 5, pp. 114, 116-117 and through pp. 119

***

And from wikipedia –

Ursell number

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Wave characteristics.

In fluid dynamics, the Ursell number indicates the nonlinearity of long surface gravity waves on a fluid layer. This dimensionless parameter is named after Fritz Ursell, who discussed its significance in 1953.[1]

The Ursell number is derived from the Stokesperturbation series for nonlinear periodic waves, in the long-wave limit of shallow water — when the wavelength is much larger than the water depth. Then the Ursell number U is defined as:

U\, =\, \frac{H}{h} \left(\frac{\lambda}{h}\right)^2\, =\, \frac{H\, \lambda^2}{h^3},

which is, apart from a constant 3 / (32 π2), the ratio of the amplitudes of the second-order to the first-order term in the free surface elevation.[2] The used parameters are:

  • H : the wave height, i.e. the difference between the elevations of the wave crest and trough,
  • h : the mean water depth, and
  • λ : the wavelength, which has to be large compared to the depth, λh.

So the Ursell parameter U is the relative wave height H / h times the relative wavelength λ / h squared.

For long waves (λh) with small Ursell number, U ≪ 32 π2 / 3 ≈ 100,[3] linear wave theory is applicable. Otherwise (and most often) a non-linear theory for fairly long waves (λ > 7 h)[4] — like the Korteweg–de Vries equation or Boussinesq equations — has to be used. The parameter, with different normalisation, was already introduced by George Gabriel Stokes in his historical paper on surface gravity waves of 1847.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursell_number

***

Also –

Introduction of Accumulation-Dispersal Coefficient of Marine Organisms
(see pg 25 for equations)

http://www.terrapub.co.jp/journals/JO/JOSJ/pdf/4201/42010022.pdf

and from the list of References –
Haury, L.R., J.A. McGowan and P.H. Wiebe (1978):  Patterns and processes in the time-space scales of plankton distributions, p. 277-327. In:  Spatial Pattern of Plankton Communities, ed. by J.H. Steele, Plenum Press, New York and London.

Kawai, H. (1976):  Convergence, divergence and the physical oceanography of particles. p. 103-155. In:  Physical Oceanography II, ed. by T. Teramoto, Tokyo University Press (in Japanese).

(and others – there are related sources of more current information but not necessarily any more valid than these basic texts – the current additions are an interesting if complex continuation of the same integrated concepts – especially check the Japanese versions, if possible.)

(etc.)

***

Added On May 4, 2010

CNN’s Brian Todd has the latest on the “pollution containment chamber” that may stop the oil spill.

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/05/04/todd.dome.special.access.cnn?hpt=C2

(and)

Marina Owner to Take on Oil Slick

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/05/04/nat.oil.slick.marina.owner.cnn

Added On May 4, 2010

HLN’s Richard Lui talks to one business owner who’s taking action to combat the oil slick and save his marina.

(((
from yesterday –  including offers of help that BP and others in charge are ignoring – (from local “experts” and equipment)

The Residents, The Oil and BP

Added On May 3, 2010

CNN’s Gary Tuchman reports on resentment building between Gulf Coast residents and BP over the oil spill disaster.

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/05/03/ac.tuchman.bp.oil.spill.cnn

***

Added On May 4, 2010

BP has identiied three possible ways to stop the leak caused by the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig.

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/05/03/explainer.stopping.leak.cnn

And Riki Ott explaining that the oil will break down in 50 years or more – in answer to Rush Limbaugh’s expert opinions expressed in his broadcasts along with others in the Republican leadership who think it doesn’t amount to much
(I’ve gone to look for it)
Added On May 3, 2010

CNN’s Brian Todd looks at the tough questions BP is facing as it scrambles to contain the Gulf oil spill.

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/05/03/todd.oil.investigation.cnn


Added On May 2, 2010
CNN Meteorologist Jacqui Jeras explains BP is building a tent to prevent more oil from leaking in the Gulf of Mexico.

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/05/02/jeras.oil.cleanup.explainer.cnn

1st on air interview with Marine Toxicologist Riki Ott
(There was another interview between there and here – that was done yesterday – )
Added On May 2, 2010
CNN speaks with a marine toxicologist who says the chemical dispersant is toxic, much like the oil its intended to clean up.

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/05/01/nr.ott.oil.debate.cnn

(from)

Most of our research focuses on island volcanoes such as in the Hawaiian Islands and in the Galapagos islands, and on volcanoes in the neighborhood of Miami (in Central America and Northern South America) which we are observing using our Satellite downlink station at the Center of Southeastern Tropical Advanced Remote Sensing (CSTARS).  We have an active research program in the Basin and Range Province in the Western U.S. where we use InSAR to measure the accumulation of tectonic strain.

Another research topic is  environmental monitoring using InSAR. We are measuring water levels in South Florida’s Everglades and man-made land subsidence in a number of metropolitan areas such as Las Vegas, Nevada and Mexico City.

(my note – check for information about the Delta area and Gulf of Mexico)

The research of our group is supported by the National Science Foundation, NASA, and the United States Geological Survey

Division of Marine Geology and Geophysics (MGG)  and

Center for Southeastern Advanced Remote Sending (CSTARS)

Rosenstiel School for Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS)

University of Miami

4600 Rickenbacker Causway

Miami, Florida,  33149

Tel: 305 421 4949

E-mail: famelung@rsmas.miami.edu

http://mgg.rsmas.miami.edu/faculty/famelung/

***

This was found through a number of steps so – I won’t go through what all they were – it is this document I wanted –

(from this document – )
Wetland InSAR: A new space-based hydrological monitoring tool of wetlands surface water level changes
Shimon Wdowinski(1), Sang-Wan Kim(1), Falk Amelung(1), and Tim Dixon(1)
(1) Division of Marine Geology and Geophysics, University of Miami, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL 33149-1098, USA; e-mail: shimonw@rsmas.miami.edu, skim@rsmas.miami.edu, famelung@rsmas.miami.edu,
tdixon@rsmas.miami.edu
ABSTRACT
Wetland Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar
(InSAR) is a relatively new application of the InSAR
technique, which detects water level changes in
aquatic environments with emergent vegetation.
It provides high spatial resolution hydrological observations of wetland and floodplains that cannot be obtained by any terrestrial-based method.
However, InSAR observations are relative both in space and time and, hence, depend on terrestrial (stage) observations for calibration and validation. In this study we explore which SAR data type is most suitable for the wetland application, as well as explore the usage of InSAR for detecting water level changes in various wetland environments around the world.
Our analyses indicate that longer wavelength SAR systems (L-band), horizontal (HH) polarization of the radar pulse, and short repeat orbits provide best results.
Wetland InSAR applications include high spatial resolution water level monitoring, detection of flow patterns and flow discontinuities, and constraining high resolution flow models.
**

1 INTRODUCTION
Wetlands are transition zones where the flow of water,
nutrient cycling, and the sun’s energy meet to produce
a unique and very productive ecosystem. They provide
critical habitat for a wide variety of plant and animal
species, including the larval stages of many ocean fish.
Wetlands also have a valuable economical importance,
as they filter nutrients and pollutants from fresh water
used by humans and provide aquatic habitats for
outdoor recreation, tourism, and fishing. Globally,
many such regions are under severe environmental
stress, mainly from urban development, pollution, and
rising sea level. However, there is increasing
recognition of the importance of these habitats, and
mitigation and restoration activities have begun in a
few regions. A key element in wetlands conservation,
management, and restoration involves monitoring its
hydrologic system, as the entire ecosystem depends on
its water supply. Heretofore, hydrologic monitoring of
wetlands are conducted by stage (water level) stations,
which provide good temporal resolution, but suffer
from poor spatial resolution, as stage stations are
typically distributed several, or even tens of kilometers,
from one another.
Wetland InSAR provides the needed high spatial
resolution hydrological observations, complementing
the high temporal resolution terrestrial observations.
Recent studies showed that InSAR observation can
provide high resolution maps of water level changes in
floodplains and wetland environments. Alsdorf et al.
[1] were the first to use this method to study waterlevel
variation in the Amazon floodplain. Wdowinski
et al. [2] applied a similar method to detect water level
changes in the Everglades, south Florida. Their study
shows that InSAR observations can capture dynamic
water level topography, providing the first threedimensional
regional-scale picture of wetland sheet
flow. Lu et al. [3] applied the same technique to
wooded wetlands in Louisiana demonstrating that the
method works with various SAR data types.
In this study we explore the usage of InSAR for
detecting water level changes in various wetland
environments around the world, including the
Everglades (south Florida), Louisiana Coast (southern
US),
Chesapeake Bay (eastern US), Pantanal (Brazil),
Okavango Delta (Botswana), and Lena Delta (Siberia).
Our main study area is the Everglades wetland (south
Florida), which is covered by probably the densest
stage network in the world (more than 200 stations),
located 5-10 km from one another. The stage data is
very important in evaluating the uncertainty of the
InSAR observations.
Stage data also allow us to tie the
relative InSAR observations (water level changes) to
absolute reference frame and to produce high spatial resolution
(10-100 m resolution) maps of absolute
water levels. We also examine the various applications
of wetland InSAR, which provides direct observations
of flow patterns and flow discontinuities and serve as
excellent constraints for high resolution flow models.
**
2 INTERFEROMETRIC SYNTHETIC
APERTURE RADAR (InSAR)
Space-based Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) is a very
reliable technique for monitoring changes of both the
solid and aquatic surfaces of the Earth
. SAR measures
two independent observables, backscatter amplitude
and phase, over a wide swath (50-400 km) with pixel
resolution of 10-100 m depending on the satellite
acquisition parameters. Backscatter amplitude, which
is often presented as gray-scale images of the surface
(Figure 1a), is very sensitive to the surface dielectric
(etc.)
from pp. 1 of the doc.

http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/users/swdowinski/publications/Wdowinski-GlobWetlands-proceedings.pdf

***

Wetland InSAR applications include high spatial resolution water level monitoring, detection of flow patterns and flow discontinuities, and constraining high resolution flow models.

(from above document)
University of Miami,

The research of our group is supported by the National Science Foundation, NASA, and the United States Geological Survey

Division of Marine Geology and Geophysics (MGG)  and

Center for Southeastern Advanced Remote Sending (CSTARS)

Rosenstiel School for Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS)

***

Fishing village still recovering from Valdez impact

http://edition.cnn.com/NATURE/9903/22/valdez.fishermen/index.html?iref=allsearch

March 22, 1999
Web posted at: 7:03 p.m. EST (0003 GMT)

CORDOVA, Alaska (CNN) — As the biggest fishing town on Prince William Sound, Cordova may have suffered the greatest economic loss of any community in the aftermath of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.

Time has not yet healed the wounds in Cordova, nor has it eased the anger many fishermen still feel toward Exxon.

(etc.)

“We were fat and happy going into 1989,” he said.

The decline wasn’t even immediate, said Riki Ott, former fisherman.

“We saw the worst effects of the spill four and five years after the spill, not in 1989,” said Ott, who holds a degree in marine toxicology. “But the oil spill actually detonated ecosystem-wide ripple effects, which just took time as they attenuated through the ecosystem.”

After the 11 million gallon spill, Exxon hired just about every fishing boat and crew on Prince William Sound to help clean up the area. The company spent about $2 billion on the project and another $300 million in compensation for losses.

It wasn’t enough for those who made their living on the Sound.

“I always thought there would be no end to the fishing,” said Robby Maxwell. “Now I see myself looking at other ideas to get into different occupations to support my family.”

Back in 1977, Maxwell earned $75,000 fishing his first year out of high school. At the time of the spill, his parents’ boat and fishing permits were said to be worth nearly a million dollars.

“Ten years later, here we are,” Maxwell said. “We lost our retirement, and we’re living on Social Security.”

(and that’s the truth, my note)

In 1994, a court ordered Exxon to pay $5 billion in compensatory damages to fishermen, native Alaskans and others. Exxon, which argues that they’ve done enough and the Sound’s ecosystem “is healthy, robust and thriving,” has appealed the decision. (the decision was changed on appeal reducing the damages to less than $15,000 per family – look it up on wikipedia – it was nineteen years after the spill for them to see any money from it and then it was nearly nothing my note)

Exxon is also appealing a decision that banned the Exxon Valdez — now overhauled and renamed the SeaRiver Mediterranean — from the Sound.

The scientists who disagree with Exxon’s assessment agree there has been improvement, but say there are still lingering effects.

(etc.)

http://edition.cnn.com/NATURE/9903/22/valdez.fishermen/index.html?iref=allsearch

***

Oil spill lessons offer hope for sea otters

February 18, 1999

Ten years ago, on March 24, 1989, the Exxon Valdez spilled almost 11 million gallons of oil into Price William Sound, killing more than 5,000 sea otters. The spill has been called the largest environmental disaster in recent history — but because of it, the United States is now better equipped to handle such a disaster.

Conference to assess Exxon Valdez oil spill

oil spillMarch 4, 1999

Ten years ago on March 24, 1989, 11.2 million gallons of oil spilt into Alaska’s Prince William Sound after Captain Joseph Hazelwood skippered the Exxon Valdez onto Bligh Reef.

10 years after Valdez spill, Alaskans prepared for the worst


March 23, 1999

Ten years after the biggest oil spill in U.S. history, every tanker departs the terminal at Valdez with a tugboat tethered to its stern and another alongside.

http://edition.cnn.com/NATURE/specials/exxon.valdez/relateds.html

(But this is the best one – )

A hair-raising solution to oil spills

May 28, 1998
Web posted at: 2:25 p.m. EDT (1825 GMT)

HUNTSVILLE, Alabama (CNN) — There’s an old saying that one man’s trash is another man’s treasure. And what could be trashier than hair clippings on the floor of a beauty parlor or barber shop?

The saying proved true when one ingenious hairdresser looked at his hairy floor and didn’t see a growing mess, but a solution to an environmental problem.

NASA hairball
icon 2 min. 10 sec. VXtreme video
Don McCrory, the inventor’s brother
221 K / 17 sec. / 160×120

video icon QuickTime movie

Alabama hairdresser Phil McCrory got his inspiration from watching news coverage of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.

“When I saw an otter in Prince William Sound, that’s when a light went off,” he said. “I decided that human hair should do the same things as an otter’s hair.”

To prove his theory, McCrory did some experiments in his back yard. He took hair cut at his salon and stuffed it into his wife’s panty hose to create a sponge for oil. He then poured some oil into a wading pool, threw in the panty hose filled with hair and waited. A few minutes later he was amazed to find “nice clear water.”

experiment
McCrory performs experiments in his own backyard

Encouraged by his dramatic results, McCrory went to a nearby National Aeronautics and Space Administration facility with his idea. NASA performed more sophisticated tests to see if McCrory’s oil-sucking hairballs really could make the cut.

Rebecca McCaleb of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center said the invention does in fact work. (icon 77K/6 sec. AIFF or WAV sound)

A gallon of oil will adhere to a little more than a pound of hair in just two minutes, McCrory said. Existing products can take up to 48 hours.

As an added bonus, hair can be wrung out and used again, and the oil can be recovered as well.

NASA performs more sophisticated tests
NASA performs more sophisticated tests

McCrory’s brother, Don, who’s in charge of sewing together the bags of hair, said he’d never seen anything like it.

The question is whether or not there’s enough hair to go around.

A spill the size of the Exxon Valdez would require about 14 million pounds of hair.

McCrory said with 200,000 hair salons in the United States, getting that much hair, or more, shouldn’t be a problem.

And as McCrory points out, hair is a renewable resource that grows every day all over the world.

From Correspondent Marsha Walton

http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/science/9805/28/t_t/nasa.hairball/index.html

***

My Note –

Are they using that in the Gulf of Mexico to get up the oil from the spill of crude that is pumping into the waters and killing the wildlife and marine life there? Or is it just plastic vinyl covered booms that are breaking up in the water and not working?

Where are these multitudes of things which are known to work and why aren’t they being used in the disasters of the Gulf of Mexico oil spills which have occurred in smaller quantities apparently with regularity and commonness and is happening right now on a massive scale?

– cricketdiane

***

(and from – )

VENICE, Louisiana – Oil industry representatives gathered here at ground zero for the land fall of the biggest oil spill in US history in decades have told Bellona Web that the most likely cause of the blowout at a British Petroleum operated rig was a gas bubble rising with enormous force from the high pressure well, destroying the well head.

(part of it here – )

Charles Digges, 03/05-2010

They have said further that little could have been done to avoid this: The Deep Water Horizon oil rig that caught fire on April 20 and exploded and sank on April 22, was not equipped with a remote-control shut-off switch – called an acoustic switch – which immediately shuts down wells during blow outs, said Bellona President Frederic Hauge.

This differs from two other major oil-producing nations, Norway and Brazil, which both require an acoustic switch for their offshore rigs. Norway has had acoustic triggers on almost every offshore rig since 1993.

US drilling regulations do not require these acoustic switches.

The revelations come as affects of the spill in began reaching into precious shoreline habitats along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico Monday morning, and BP admitted that its environmental impact study for Deep Horizon downplayed the possibility of disastrous accident.

(etc)

The US considered requiring the remote-controlled shut-off mechanism several years ago, but drilling companies questioned their cost and effectiveness, according to the Interior Department’s Minerals Management Service, which oversees offshore drilling.

The agency says it decided the remote device wasn’t needed because rigs had other back-up plans to cut off a well. The UK, where BP is headquartered, doesn’t require the use of acoustic triggers.

Mike Papantonio, an environmental lawyer, said on the popular American radio programme, the Ed Schultz show, that former Vice-President Dick Cheney’s shadowy energy programme decided that the switches, which cost $500,000, were too much a burden on the industry.

“(The acoustic switch) is a failsafe that shuts the flow of oil off at the source,” said Papantonio in the April 30 broadcast.

“They cost only about half a million dollars each, and are required in off-shore drilling platforms in most of the world…except for the United States. This was one of the new deregulations devised by Dick Cheney,” he said.

Hauge also noted from conversations he has had with oil industry representatives gathered here that booms to corral oil that are being used in the clean-up effort on seas that continue to be stormy are substandard to ones used in Norway.

But Hauge was also quick to point out that even Norwegian booms are not 100 percent effective in rough seas.

Chemical dispersant and skimming problems

Meanwhile, clean up efforts are being hampered by coagulation of oil into hard balls caused by the use of highly toxic chemical dispersants, likely of the Corexit brand, that contain 2-butoxyethanol, or 2-BE, said industry experts.

The coagulation of the oil is making it difficult for skimming ships that are endeavouring to essentially shovel oil off the surface of the Gulf’s waters by causing clogs.

2-BE is also known to cause heath dangers to clean up workers and wild life alike. Chemical dispersants can concentrate leftover oil toxins in the water, where they can kill fish and migrate great distances.

Information sheets on Corexit that have been given to workers indicate that the 2-BE in the dispersant causes headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems at high doses. 2-BE has also been documented to cause the breakdown of red blood cells, leading to blood in the urine and feces, and can damage the kidneys, liver, spleen and bone marrow of humans – effects not included on the information sheet for workers.

“There is a chemical toxicity to the dispersant compound that in many ways is worse than oil,” said Richard Charter, a foremost expert on marine biology and oil spills who is a senior policy advisor for Marine Programmes for Defenders of Wildlife and is chairman of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council.

(etc.)

http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/BP_documents

What BP documents show

In exploration documents and an environmental impact analysis compiled by BP in 2009, the company concluded that an accident leading to a massive spill of that could effect beaches, fish and mammals was unlikely or even impossible.

According to the plan for the Deepwater Horizon well, filed with the federal Minerals Management Service, BP repeatedly said , as quoted by AP, that it was “unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities.”

ingress_image

Debris and oil from the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform float in the Gulf of Mexico after the rig sank April 22, 2010.
wikimedia commons
**
(and)

“I’ve been in Pensacola and I am very, very concerned about this filth in the Gulf of Mexico,” Florida Governor Charlie Crist said at a fundraiser for his US Senate campaign Sunday night, AP reported.

“It’s not a spill, it’s a flow. Envision sort of an underground volcano of oil and it keeps spewing over 200,000 gallons every single day, if not more,” he said.

Official spinning wheels on how to cap flow

Amid increased fingerpointing, efforts sputtered to hold back the spill, while the government desperately cast about for new ideas for dealing with the growing environmental crisis.

(etc.)

The document says “BP will pay all necessary and appropriate clean-up costs.” The company says it will pay compensation for “legitimate and objectively verifiable” claims for property damage, personal injury, and commercial losses.

Yet at the same time, BP has been reprimanded by Alabama Attorney General Troy King to stop sending its representatives into the bayous – some of the most vulnerable wetlands as well as home to some of the states poorest residents – with $5,000 payoff agreements for those who agree to sign documents saying they will abstain from participating in lawsuits against the company.

More than 200 class action lawsuits have been filed against the company.

http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/BP_documents

***

Oil slick: Fishermen waiting for help from BP

1 min 50 sec – 1 day ago
GULF OF MEXICO – OIL SLICK: Louisiana Fishermen waiting for help from BP after the disaster. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, who has been
www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdvioAKa-OA

france24english — May 03, 2010 — GULF OF MEXICO – OIL SLICK: Louisiana Fishermen waiting for help from BP after the disaster. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, who has been scathing of BP’s response, warned on Saturday that his state’s “way of life” is under threat as fishermen and coastal communities struggling back to their feet after 2005’s Hurricane Katrina brace for yet more hardship.

***

Gulf oil spill: Florida braces for impact

Los Angeles Times (blog) – 1 hour ago

The oil could then contaminate the Everglades National Park, along with mangrove swamps, coral reefs, sea grass and the animals and fish that depend on them

***

Gulf oil leakage could worsen if measures to stop the flow fail ‎ – Washington Post

Chance of oil drilling off Calif coast appears dim

The Associated Press – 9 minutes ago

Arnold Schwarzenegger’s decision to pull support for a proposal to expand oil drilling off the coast of Santa Barbara County effectively killed any

***

Shell Is Losing More Oil

Wall Street Journal – James Herron – 1 hour ago

LONDON—Royal Dutch Shell PLC reported Tuesday big increases in the volume of oil spilled in the Niger Delta in 2008 and 2009,

Shell: Almost 14000 tons of oil lost in Nigeria‎ – San Luis Obispo Tribune
Massive oil spill in Nigeria‎ – Herald Sun

***

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0413702520100504?type=marketsNews

By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON, May 4 (Reuters) – The massive, uncontrolled oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is roiling President Barack Obama’s carefully laid plans to open up America’s coasts to drilling again, while rattling Congress to a point where the oil industry’s exploratory plans could face a big shake-up.

U.S. politicians are now in no mood to consider plans to open up new areas for drilling but if the crisis drags on, it could also affect exploration in existing production areas, such as the Gulf.

BP Plc’s (BP.L) ruptured oil well is spewing some 5,000 barrels of oil a day and officials are saying it could take three months or more to cap the gusher. Depending on weather and currents, the oil could hit the coasts of Louisiana, Florida and other coastal states.

“Hopefully this accident is just that: an isolated accident,” Senator Joe Barton, a Texas Republican, said after meeting with BP executives in Washington. “What I don’t want to happen is mass hysteria to take hold and we put a moratorium once again on exploration and a moratorium on new drilling and perhaps even a moratorium on existing production.”

(etc.)

But a top Senate Republican aide did not think anything would save the climate bill after the oil spill.

“This puts the nail (in the coffin) in climate” control legislation, said the aide, who asked asked not to be identified.

That is because the “grand bargain” being crafted for the climate and energy initiatives would unravel without expanded oil drilling, many fear.

It was unclear whether other incentives being tucked into the climate change bill — to help grow the U.S. nuclear power industry and fund “clean coal” research projects — could be enough to entice Republicans and wavering Democrats if the offshore oil incentives were removed.

Reid told reporters the oil spill should expedite alternative energy legislation, which would encourage the use of cleaner power sources, such as wind and solar.

But even that is clouded because of the oil spill, since that Senate bill also contains plans for more offshore oil drilling, congressional sources pointed out.

(etc.)

– from comments –

PLease don’t call the Gulf mess a ’spill’, implying it’s over. It is and continues to be an uncontrolled ‘flow’. It is an uncontrolled oil flow. (May 4, 2010)

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0413702520100504?type=marketsNews

***

Factbox – Chronology of Gulf of Mexico oil spill

(Reuters) – An April 20 drilling rig explosion claimed the lives of 11 workers, and the rig’s subsequent collapse unleashed a major oil spill that threatens U.S. Gulf of Mexico ecosystems and economy.

Also threatened is the heart of the U.S. energy production, both on and offshore as a giant, unprecedented underwater leak spreads oil across the northern Gulf of Mexico between the mouth of the Mississippi River and Florida.

(etc.)

Tue May 4, 2010 8:32am EDT

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6425MV20100504

Brief timeline overview of the oil spill based on the news division’s understanding of it, does not include corrected volumes of crude oil spewing into the Gulf of Mexico that have now been made by expert, scientific and reliable sources – (my note)

***

Also on Reuters –

Gulf spill unlikely to sour Louisiana on oil

*

Yet in Louisiana there were few immediate signs that concern over a catastrophe that could cripple the state’s $1.8 billion a year fishing industry for years was translating into widespread anger against the oil and gas sector.

U.S. officials on Sunday restricted commercial and recreational fishing for a minimum of 10 days in federal waters affected by the spill.

Many fishermen were balancing pessimism about their economic prospects with an acknowledgment of the importance of the oil industry to the state.

Louisiana ranks fourth among the U.S. states in crude oil production, behind Texas, Alaska, and California, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). It is also one of the nation’s top natural gas producers.

( . . . )

The vast network of oil drainage canals and pipes that criss-cross the marshlands at the mouth of the Mississippi Delta are widely thought to have worsened the storm surge that made Katrina so devastating.

John Tesvich, a fourth-generation oyster fisherman, said oil firms routinely damaged oyster beds by dragging dredging equipment up estuaries.

“Louisiana is tied into the oil infrastructure, so the state will never be against the production of oil,” said Tesvich, chairman of the Louisiana Oyster Task Force.

Those views reflect a conservative state where the economy has been dominated by oil and gas and the politics favored Republicans even before Hurricane Katrina in 2005 forced some of New Orleans poorest to seek refuge in other states.

“Public opinion has always been supportive of offshore and other drilling. We are going to wait to see how bad this is but … (Louisiana residents) will be pretty slow to condemn the oil industry … though we might find fault with BP,” he said. (Elliott Stonecipher, a demographer and pollster based in Shreveport.)

In Louisiana, a relatively poor state that is rich in oil and gas reserves, the disaster also could curb public backing for expanded offshore drilling but likely only in the short term, lawmakers, lobbyists and analysts said.

“Everybody’s in shock that this can happen. But is Louisiana now turned off by this? People are irritated by what happened but … the majority of people think that you can drill here safely,” said Bernie Pinsonat of Southern Media and Opinion, a polling firm based in the capital Baton Rouge.

(from – not in its original order, you might want to read the durn thing)

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6412OX20100502

***

My Note –

That is enough looking at the news coverage of it – there are some other things I wanted to look up about the oil spill in the Gulf right now and what they did today about fixing it –

– cricketdiane

***

Nifty dimensional graphic from Reuters

http://www.reuters.com/news/infographic?type=topNews&infographicId=oilSpill

(and a map – of the oil spill – not from today)

Gulf of Mexico Oil Gusher Disaster map on Reuters from any day before May 5, 2010

Gulf of Mexico Oil Gusher Disaster map on Reuters from any day before May 5, 2010

(from)

http://www.reuters.com/news/infographic?type=topNews&infographicId=oilSpill

***

(from NOAA front page)

http://www.noaa.gov/

Mesocyclone tornado - Source - NOAA

Mesocyclone tornado - Source - NOAA

And just suck up the oil from the Gulf of Mexico –

my note, cricketdiane

(It could not be good for that entire oil slick to be that close to the other drilling platforms and other oil industry “toys” out in the Gulf – that may be why they are keeping people away from the area, in part. It is also toxic to people. I meant to look that up on the CDC and EPA sites. I’ve seen that info before this and it is a real winner.)

***

My Note –

Looking for where they design this stuff and how they do it –

Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers

American Society of Naval Engineers

Marine engineering

Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology

***

Marine engineering

Marine Engineering involves the design, construction, installation, operation and support of the systems and equipment which propel and control marine vehicles, and of the systems which make a vehicle or structure habitable for crew, passengers and cargo.[1]

Marine Engineering is allied to mechanical engineering, although the modern marine engineer requires knowledge (and hands-on experience) with electrical, electronic, pneumatic, hydraulic, chemistry, control engineering, naval architecture or ship design, process engineering, steam generation, gas turbines and even nuclear technology on certain military vessels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_engineering

***

Taking a popcorn break – will continue on new post

– cricketdiane

***

http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/science/9805/28/t_t/nasa.hairball/index.html

A gallon of oil will adhere to a little more than a pound of hair in just two minutes, McCrory said. Existing products can take up to 48 hours.

As an added bonus, hair can be wrung out and used again, and the oil can be recovered as well.

To prove his theory, McCrory did some experiments in his back yard. He took hair cut at his salon and stuffed it into his wife’s panty hose to create a sponge for oil. He then poured some oil into a wading pool, threw in the panty hose filled with hair and waited. A few minutes later he was amazed to find “nice clear water.”

(see article earlier in post –  or follow link)

***

Advertisements