Oil Rig Explodes off LA Coast

Superfreak said:
No dipshit... that is not the actual report. THAT is the report from 2003. Amazing how YOU cherry picked a report that was done PRIOR to the the STUDY being done that is referenced in the two links I provided.

The ACTUAL REPORT is here (had you bothered to follow the links provided you would have known this)

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1225/#content

The complete pdf is linked on the right side of the page.


No Cypress, what is dishonest is YOU proclaiming that they are some industry front group. You have not provided ONE shred of evidence to back up that assertion. You just WANT it to be true. Look at the back ground of the people in this group. Nothing suggests that any of them are fronts for the oil industry.

Again, you are a dishonest hack. Pretending once again that this is some 'rightwing' website. It is not. This site actually linked to the report from the US geological survey done in 2009. You tried to find a quote to support you in a report issued in 2003. Then you pretend my sites are rightwing, so that you can run away after being embarrassed.

Translation: "yes, I am going to go back to simply proclaiming myself to be 'right' and proclaiming all websites that contradict me 'rightwing sites'.

Bottom line Cypress.... as stated... you are a complete dishonest hack. You are also a coward who cannot stand to actually LEARN about a topic you clearly have no comprehension of... despite your proclamations to the contrary.

You are wrong... and yet you will continue to wallow in your own ignorance because this goes against your preconceived notion of what 'should be'.
Click to expand...


You’re either providing links to obscure industry front groups, or you are just tossing out links to MMS and USGS in the hopes of looking credible.

I gave a cursory look at your MMS and USGS sites. You didn’t bother to give any quotes from them, you just tossed the links out. I didn’t see a single quote in your USGS or MMS site that stated and concluded that oil seeps are a systematic and significant environmental threat. Scientists study natural seeps all the time for a variety of reasons. That's not evidence that they have concluded that natural seeps are a systematic and significant threat to ecosystems.

The NRC report I gave was referenced at one of your rightwing websites.

So, what the National Research Council, and the County of Santa Barbara both say are exactly what I said:

Posted by Cypress:

The broader ecosystem can function normally in the presence of natural seeps. Seeps do not cause any systematic, measurable, or significant environmental impacts
Click to expand...

”Natural seeps are purely natural phenomena that occur when crude oil seeps from the geologic strata beneath the seafloor to the overlying water column. Recognized by geologists for decades as indicating the existence of potentially economic reserves of petroleum, these seeps release vast amounts of crude oil annually.Yet these large volumes are released at a rate low enough that the surrounding ecosystem can adapt and even thrive in their presence.”

-NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES of SCIENCES
Click to expand...

”Natural seeps occur extensively in offshore waters along Santa Barbara County’s south coast, and to a lesser extent north of Point Conception. Seep hydrocarbons are released gradually throughout the marine environment, including sea floor, water column, sea surface, and shoreline. Seeps are a potential source of chronic, low-level stress to many organisms, including invertebrates, fish, marine mammals, and birds.Yet, the environment is able to keep pace with the influx of oil at the rate it enters the environment via seeps. Seeps do not result in major mortality of marine animals, nor do they lead to massive accumulations of tar along the shore, though to be sure seeps are responsible for some fatalities of birds and do leave weathered tar residue on rocks in some areas and intermittent tarring of beaches.”

-County of Santa Barbara
http://www.countyofsb.org/energy/information/seepspaper.asp#naturalSeeps
Click to expand...


This has been a massive waste of my time. Can a few fish eggs, or plankton be destroyed by a natural oil seep? Yes, I never said that couldn’t happen. But what I actually did say is supported by the very organizations you and your rightwing links have been citing: National Research Council and County of Santa Barbara.

My take away lesson is that unless you provide me with a link, and the actual quotes from a reputable and internationally recognized scientific organization, I am no longer clicking on your rightwng links, nor am I going to waste time trying to read through some USGS or MMS links that you just tossed out there without directing me to that actual quotes the supports your assertions and speculations.


So please stop begging me to look at your links. I’m so done wasting my time on that.
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
You’re either providing links to obscure industry front groups, or you are just tossing out links to MMS and USGS in the hopes of looking credible.
Again.... you are simply stating they are 'industry front groups'

Please show us just ONE piece of evidence to support your absurdity.

JUST ONE.

I gave a link to the fucking entire report. It is a pdf... 119 pages that you can read that supports what they stated.

I gave a cursory look at your MMS and USGS sites. You didn’t bother to give any quotes from them, you just tossed the links out. I didn’t see a single quote in your USGS or MMS site that stated and concluded that oil seeps are a systematic and significant environmental threat. Scientists study natural seeps all the time for a variety of reasons. That's not evidence that they have concluded that natural seeps are a systematic and significant threat to ecosystems.
Click to expand...

Oh yes... another of your 'cursory looks'... which means you didn't bother looking. This is your MO Cypress... you are a completely dishonest hack who refuses to look at anything that might be contrary to your preconceived notions.


The NRC report I gave was referenced at one of your rightwing websites.
Click to expand...

As usual, the above simply makes you look absolutely pathetic. They are not right wing sites.


This has been a massive waste of my time. Can a few fish eggs, or plankton be destroyed by a natural oil seep? Yes, I never said that couldn’t happen. But what I actually did say is supported by the very organizations you and your rightwing links have been citing: National Research Council and County of Santa Barbara.
Click to expand...

How could it possibly have wasted your time Cypress. You didn't bother reading anything. All you did was proclaim, without any evidence, that they were 'rightwing' sites'

My take away lesson is that unless you provide me with a link, and the actual quotes from a reputable and internationally recognized scientific organization, I am no longer clicking on your rightwng links, nor am I going to waste time trying to read through some USGS or MMS links that you just tossed out there without directing me to that actual quotes the supports your assertions and speculations.


So please stop begging me to look at your links. I’m so done wasting my time on that.
Click to expand...

I am not begging you to do anything Cypress. I am showing you that you are a fucking idiot for proclaiming those sites 'right wing' and for suggesting that they must be 'industry front groups'.

I am also showing you that you are WRONG.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Also Cypress... I note again..... YOUR links are to articles written in 2002 and 2003... the USGS report that I linked you to (a credible governmental report) is 119 pages. It is in pdf format and I walked you through exactly how to get there. Given that you JUST got done bitching about my pulling one quote, I linked you to the entire fucking report. NOW you bitch that I didn't quote one particular piece of the report. Once again showing what an idiot you are.
 
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=10388

Where oil seeps naturally into the ocean, local marine ecosystems have been significantly altered, the report says. For example, in seepage areas in the Santa Barbara Channel off California, there is little diversity among organisms, which consist mainly of bacteria and a few invertebrate species.
Click to expand...

yeah... Cypress says damages are no big deal. The fact that marine life had to evacuate the area... that is nothing. So obviously it won't be a big deal to Cypress if marine life leaves the gulf areas for this spill.
 
Onceler said:
Probably huge? You're calling the economic impact of that "probably huge," based on that cut & paste?

Got any large-scale evidence of planes crashing & ships sinking because of that hypothetical?

Or do you just want to "drill, baby, drill" cuz Palin thinks it's bitchin'?
Click to expand...

“Sonar surveys of the ocean floor in the North Sea (between Britain and continental Europe) have revealed large quantities of methane hydrates and eruption sites,” May and Monaghan wrote in their report, published in the American Journal of Physics.

“A recent survey revealed the presence of a sunken vessel within the center of one particularly large eruption site, now known as the Witches Hole.”
Click to expand...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3226787

Methane hydrate can only form naturally in sediments at reasonably high pressures and low temperatures. Deposits can escape spontaneously from the ocean bed and their plumes of effervescent bubbles, perhaps up to 20-30 feet in diameter, have been blamed for otherwise unexplained disappearances of ships and rising methane might even stall aircraft by disturbing oceanic or atmospheric density.

Every now and then, chunks of these erupting clouds of methane hydrates break free and rise rapidly to the surface and into the atmosphere. Submarine gas releases from the sea floor could, in theory, sink ships with giant bubbles which change the bouyancy of some vessels. Whether or not the ship sinks depends of its relative position to the bubbles. The methane plume is basically a low-density foam that creates turbulence.

But this is not the only global threat they pose. Methane has a much greater capacity to trap heat in the atmosphere than carbon. When it converts from a solid or ice state to a gaseous state a methane blow-out occurs as a natural phenomenon.

METHANE TRIGGER: Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas which, despite its atmospheric lifetime of around 12 years, none the less has a global warming potential of 62 over 20 years and 21 over 100 years (IPCC, 1996; Berner and Berner, 1996; vanLoon and Duffy, 2000). The sudden release of large amounts of natural gas from methane clathrate deposits is suggested as a cause of past and possibly future climate changes. Events possibly linked in this way are the Permian-Triassic extinction event, the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.
Click to expand...
http://climate2012.50megs.com/whats_new_4.html

Drill baby drill.:good4u:
 
The utter disingenuousness of the claims being made does nothing to help the cause of offshore drilling.

How can either of you (SM or SF) honestly say that the economic & ecological effects of seepage are even worthy of discussing in light of the damage of an actual spill? Are you reading about LA right now?

Bad link, btw, SM. Methane release "might" sink some ships? So that makes the effect "probably huge"?

This is a pathetic display. I was a proponent of offshore drilling, but this incident should give anyone pause. What are the benefits vs. the cost? How much does offshore really offset foreign imports?
 
i think the question we need to ask is:

what is the overall pollution for natural seepage compared to oil production leaks over a long period of time....

i've seen studies that show natural seepage is far greater, but i'm sure cypress will immediately pounce that they are not peer reviewed...

so, since you guys are making the claim, please provide a study that you approve that shows overall pollution from natural seepage as compared to oil production includeing leaks....
 
Yurt said:
i think the question we need to ask is:

what is the overall pollution for natural seepage compared to oil production leaks over a long period of time....

i've seen studies that show natural seepage is far greater, but i'm sure cypress will immediately pounce that they are not peer reviewed...

so, since you guys are making the claim, please provide a study that you approve that shows overall pollution from natural seepage as compared to oil production includeing leaks....
Click to expand...


Basically, you're arguing that it oil spills caused by humans are OK since oil seeps are a naturally occurring phenomenon. That's fucking stupid.
 
Yurt said:
i think the question we need to ask is:

what is the overall pollution for natural seepage compared to oil production leaks over a long period of time....

i've seen studies that show natural seepage is far greater, but i'm sure cypress will immediately pounce that they are not peer reviewed...

so, since you guys are making the claim, please provide a study that you approve that shows overall pollution from natural seepage as compared to oil production includeing leaks....
Click to expand...

I don't know if a study like that exists. However, we do NOT drill to prevent seepage, and it is disingenuous to make that claim. Seepage does NOT have the devastating economic effects of a spill like this - that is indisputable. Seepage does NOT shock an ecosystem in the way that a spill like this does - that is indisputable.

THE question we need to ask is whether the benefits that we reap from offshore drilling offset the costs & risks, as exemplified by this incident. How much does offshore really offset our foreign needs, as a %? Do you know? How many people does it employ, compared to how many are losing their livelihoods right now?
 
Onceler said:
I don't know if a study like that exists. However, we do NOT drill to prevent seepage, and it is disingenuous to make that claim. Seepage does NOT have the devastating economic effects of a spill like this - that is indisputable. Seepage does NOT shock an ecosystem in the way that a spill like this does - that is indisputable.

THE question we need to ask is whether the benefits that we reap from offshore drilling offset the costs & risks, as exemplified by this incident. How much does offshore really offset our foreign needs, as a %? Do you know? How many people does it employ, compared to how many are losing their livelihoods right now?
Click to expand...

so only the short term pollution and affect on the ecosystem matter...not the long term effect? and there are studies, but i want you guys to pick one because the minute i produce one, you will claim it is from an oil company or some other rightwing site....its real easy...google is your friend

i think it is important to look at overall damage instead of just looking at a relatively short period
 
NigelTufnel said:
Basically, you're arguing that it oil spills caused by humans are OK since oil seeps are a naturally occurring phenomenon. That's fucking stupid.
Click to expand...

no i am not you fucking moron, this is a tragedy and i've never said otherwise

i'm simply trying to get an honest picture of pollution and the overall damage, human vs. natural....to ignore that is to willfully blind yourself
 
Yurt said:
so only the short term pollution and affect on the ecosystem matter...not the long term effect? and there are studies, but i want you guys to pick one because the minute i produce one, you will claim it is from an oil company or some other rightwing site....its real easy...google is your friend

i think it is important to look at overall damage instead of just looking at a relatively short period
Click to expand...

Why did you ignore the other questions I presented?

Are you really suggesting that, if we didn't need oil tomorrow, we would still drill to prevent seepage?
 
Onceler said:
Why did you ignore the other questions I presented?

Are you really suggesting that, if we didn't need oil tomorrow, we would still drill to prevent seepage?
Click to expand...

you LIED, i never said we need to drill to prevent seepage, you LIED

yours truly,

dunceler

wow, that was easy to imitate you

now i'll go back and see what questions you're talking about...btw...have you even tried to find a study?
 
Onceler said:
I don't know if a study like that exists. However, we do NOT drill to prevent seepage, and it is disingenuous to make that claim. Seepage does NOT have the devastating economic effects of a spill like this - that is indisputable. Seepage does NOT shock an ecosystem in the way that a spill like this does - that is indisputable.

THE question we need to ask is whether the benefits that we reap from offshore drilling offset the costs & risks, as exemplified by this incident. How much does offshore really offset our foreign needs, as a %? Do you know? How many people does it employ, compared to how many are losing their livelihoods right now?
Click to expand...

valid questions to be asked.

However, as you noted earlier... it could have been avoided. While the auto shut off valve is not 100% going to work, it very likely would have prevented this incident.

That said, you are incorrect, they do drill sites with natural seepage (not all). It is not necessarily done with the primary intent of just stopping the seepage, but rather the seepage is obviously an indicator that oil could be abundant enough at that site to merit drilling. The side effect is that the drilling reduces pressure that limits the natural seepage.

That said, you are correct, natural seepage does not have the impact as a spill like Horizon, the pace of the spill is too fast.
 
Yurt said:
you LIED, i never said we need to drill to prevent seepage, you LIED

yours truly,

dunceler

wow, that was easy to imitate you

now i'll go back and see what questions you're talking about...btw...have you even tried to find a study?
Click to expand...

I did a basic search for some studies. I found one where the goal was to study effects on the climate over time, but it was inconclusive, and didn't talk about pollution.

I'm not inclined to go bananas looking for a study. I know that oystermen & shrimp harvesters, and the businesses that rely upon them, aren't worried about natural seepage.
 
Superfreak said:
valid questions to be asked.

However, as you noted earlier... it could have been avoided. While the auto shut off valve is not 100% going to work, it very likely would have prevented this incident.

That said, you are incorrect, they do drill sites with natural seepage (not all). It is not necessarily done with the primary intent of just stopping the seepage, but rather the seepage is obviously an indicator that oil could be abundant enough at that site to merit drilling. The side effect is that the drilling reduces pressure that limits the natural seepage.

That said, you are correct, natural seepage does not have the impact as a spill like Horizon, the pace of the spill is too fast.
Click to expand...

You'll know this without me having to look all over the place for a reliable #: how much does offshore drilling reduce our need for foreign? (roughly)
 
Onceler said:
I don't know if a study like that exists. However, we do NOT drill to prevent seepage, and it is disingenuous to make that claim. Seepage does NOT have the devastating economic effects of a spill like this - that is indisputable. Seepage does NOT shock an ecosystem in the way that a spill like this does - that is indisputable.

THE question we need to ask is whether the benefits that we reap from offshore drilling offset the costs & risks, as exemplified by this incident. How much does offshore really offset our foreign needs, as a %? Do you know? How many people does it employ, compared to how many are losing their livelihoods right now?
Click to expand...

right now, i believe it offsets it by about 10%...that is just off the top of my head, and it is estimated there are billions more, it is a fact that rigs are far safer now than they were decades ago...

as to employ and livelihood, again, i would look at the long view...its like looking at an auto accident and saying you're never driving again
 
Onceler said:
You'll know this without me having to look all over the place for a reliable #: how much does offshore drilling reduce our need for foreign? (roughly)
Click to expand...

It depends... are you talking about how much could it 'potentially' or how much does it 'currently'?

I assume by the second question you are also referring to just OUR offshore?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top