This looks to be a viable deal. Why isn't Washington talking about it??
-
Enjoy XS650.com? Consider making a donation to help support the site.
XS650.com receives a small share of sales from some links on this page, but direct donations have a much greater impact on keeping this site going.
The BP oil spill
- Thread starter weekendrider
- Start date
angus67
Welder's penetrate deeper!!
my moneys on Vince and his sham-wow
That was interesting.... until I read this http://senseofevents.blogspot.com/2010/05/hay-for-oil-spill-is-no-plan.html and this http://senseofevents.blogspot.com/2010/05/another-reason-hay-wont-work-to-remove.html
Travis it is interesting the rebuttal articles keep saying the hay will soak up the oil. In the video it is stated and demonstrated that the oil clings to the hay it doesn't soak it up.
The rebuttal states the hay will sink to the bottom. I've never seen oil sink in water, dirty, clean or inbetween. I have seen hay float on water. In your area do they use "hay seeding" for the states reclaimation of construction areas? Have you noticed the hay will float to lower points in rains heavy enough to create run off? I doubt if you mix the two (oil and hay) you will change the fact they will float.
I have used small squares to clear up dirty ponds. When you can get them to the bottom, it takes awhile and some effort to get them to sink. But when you do they can turn a red mud (W. Okla. Caddo county) pond into a relatively clean water source for livestock.
As far as transporting. I stack boxes for a living. You can put an amount of product in small boxes, stack on a pallet then measure to top. Then you can take the same amount and put it in one large box and wala it is shorter and takes less space.
Now to the rebuttal, the "numbers" they present are correct(I assume) but they use small square bales(boxes). They now now can produce bales 3 by 3 by 8 Feet. And can weigh close to 3000lb.s. The rebuttal is correct about "cubing" out. Transportion costs have always been the problem with hay for feed.
The supertanker story got me to laughing. I operated a "suck" truck in the oil field and have "sucked" oil off water. It is time comsuming and NOT efficient. You get a whole bunch of water and a little oil. But pumpers do screw up draining the botoms off the oil tanks and end up with oil in the water tank. So to cover their arse they spend $1000 on trucking for $100 worth of oil. A situation you only want if you are selling the sucking service.
The rebuttals disparage the removal of the oil/hay. They/he/she present alot of numbers as to scale of the problem. I've got to go back to the original videos plan of seaweed removers for the beach(do these really exist?) and if someone can figure out how to pick up hay from the ground it can be done off the top of the water.
Now we've got the recovered oil. Like the rebuttals claim the oil will have picked up contaminants. To "treat" the oil to a useable condition will be costly. If our jets get clogged up from todays gas what would this dirty oil do to an oil heaters metering system? If you take that oily hay and burn it surely it couldn't be dirtyer than coal?
Like the rebuttals say with "all due respects" to the authors.
Common sense trumps an education every day.
The rebuttal states the hay will sink to the bottom. I've never seen oil sink in water, dirty, clean or inbetween. I have seen hay float on water. In your area do they use "hay seeding" for the states reclaimation of construction areas? Have you noticed the hay will float to lower points in rains heavy enough to create run off? I doubt if you mix the two (oil and hay) you will change the fact they will float.
I have used small squares to clear up dirty ponds. When you can get them to the bottom, it takes awhile and some effort to get them to sink. But when you do they can turn a red mud (W. Okla. Caddo county) pond into a relatively clean water source for livestock.
As far as transporting. I stack boxes for a living. You can put an amount of product in small boxes, stack on a pallet then measure to top. Then you can take the same amount and put it in one large box and wala it is shorter and takes less space.
Now to the rebuttal, the "numbers" they present are correct(I assume) but they use small square bales(boxes). They now now can produce bales 3 by 3 by 8 Feet. And can weigh close to 3000lb.s. The rebuttal is correct about "cubing" out. Transportion costs have always been the problem with hay for feed.
The supertanker story got me to laughing. I operated a "suck" truck in the oil field and have "sucked" oil off water. It is time comsuming and NOT efficient. You get a whole bunch of water and a little oil. But pumpers do screw up draining the botoms off the oil tanks and end up with oil in the water tank. So to cover their arse they spend $1000 on trucking for $100 worth of oil. A situation you only want if you are selling the sucking service.
The rebuttals disparage the removal of the oil/hay. They/he/she present alot of numbers as to scale of the problem. I've got to go back to the original videos plan of seaweed removers for the beach(do these really exist?) and if someone can figure out how to pick up hay from the ground it can be done off the top of the water.
Now we've got the recovered oil. Like the rebuttals claim the oil will have picked up contaminants. To "treat" the oil to a useable condition will be costly. If our jets get clogged up from todays gas what would this dirty oil do to an oil heaters metering system? If you take that oily hay and burn it surely it couldn't be dirtyer than coal?
Like the rebuttals say with "all due respects" to the authors.
Common sense trumps an education every day.
I don't know what to tell you. I was pretty impressed by the video so I thought I look into it a little more and see if they were actually going to do it. I couldn't find anything suggesting they were going to use hay for the clean up and figured there had to be good reason not to use hay. That guy's blog was the only thing I could find that argued against using it. 
roadcall
XS650 Addict
Ok I am not a rocket scientist, but I do teach motorcycle mechanics. Why not a huge funnel, turned upside down with a hose on it to a tanker ship?? Seems simple enough to me. With that kind of flow, it there be enough pressure to make it to the surface.
- one problem is the gas, at that depth and pressure it freezes, another that the sheer volume of oil gushing out excludes closing the vents in the cap thats been now put in place
- some sources predict BP voluntarily entering into Chapter 11 within weeks in order to minimize its liability obligations
- some sources predict BP voluntarily entering into Chapter 11 within weeks in order to minimize its liability obligations
I keep hearing things like the pipe this is leaking out of is broken again way under the sea floor, or that there's another leak out of the sea floor 75 miles away, or etc. Also hear that relief wells don't always do the trick, though they're talking about it like it's an ace in the hole.
I heard legally their liability is limited to 75 million by federal law. Probably anything BP does besides sail back to England is out of the goodness of their heart. LOL!
But I heard just a few days of BP profits would cover the true financial damages. It's a huge conglomerate of companies, I understand.
In addition to liability to humans, they need to build animal sanctuaries, and etc., to compensate for all the beautiful creatures they've killed.
I heard legally their liability is limited to 75 million by federal law. Probably anything BP does besides sail back to England is out of the goodness of their heart. LOL!
But I heard just a few days of BP profits would cover the true financial damages. It's a huge conglomerate of companies, I understand.
In addition to liability to humans, they need to build animal sanctuaries, and etc., to compensate for all the beautiful creatures they've killed.
PAhunter
Complete Noob
A good way to stop the spill is just put a wedding ring around the pipe. Then it will stop putting out. 
