The gulf between press release and reality
Remember the Gulf of Mexico oil spill? Remember we were told it wasn’t as bad as “the environmentalists” were making out? And remember we were told that the well had been capped and the problem solved?
Apparently we weren’t told the whole story.
Dr. Tom Termotto is the National Coordinator for the Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference. He’s been reading and collating the various studies and reports produced about the BP / Deepwater Horizon explosion and subsequent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Last week he released a report that calls into question the notion that this disaster has been successfully contained. Indeed, it appears that even the worst case scenarios being discussed when the disaster was at its most prominent fail to convey the seriousness of the situation.
Now, I’ve just read his report (republished on the Phoenix Rising from the Gulf blog), and have not independently verified any of his facts. I’m stressing this because, while I’ve feared for some time that we are being comprehensively lied to about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill (there were numerous discrepancies in the media reporting of the story that rang alarm-bells for anyone with a knowledge of petroleum geology), the conclusions reached by Dr. Termotto are startlingly extreme.
He alleges that large sections of the seabed beneath the Gulf of Mexico have been destabilised by the extensive oil and gas drilling operations taking place there. Furthermore, the Deepwater Horizon explosion created numerous fractures in the already unstable rock strata and now, in his words, “the Gulf of Mexico is slowly but surely filling up with oil and gas”.
On top of that, because of the depth of the oil and gas deposits, they contain high concentrations of radioactive isotopes. To add to the problems, the chemical dispersants — which he claims are still being used underwater near the well head (see image, below) — are making a very serious problem a lot worse. These chemicals are themselves highly toxic, but even worse… they are reducing the oil droplets to a “micronized or nano-sized state”. This significantly increases the likelihood that large quantities of mildly radioactive crude oil is entering the food chain. As Dr. Termotto says, this is turning “an extremely serious regional disaster into an unmitigated global catastrophe”.
And there’s more. The leaking of gas from beneath the seabed is producing large build-ups of methane hydrates on the floor of the Gulf of Mexico. Given that the area is seismically active, this has the potential to spark a disaster should this build up be dislodged en masse.
The entire Gulf of Mexico has become an environmental timebomb that threatens the health of the world’s oceans. A complete moratorium on drilling in the area is the only sane response to this information, if it is shown to be valid. However I suspect that in the face of peak oil, neither the US government nor the oil companies are interested in examining Dr. Termotto’s findings, let alone acting on them. The rush for short-term profit is killing our world.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by JimBliss, JimBliss. JimBliss said: on The Quiet Road: 'The gulf between press release and reality' – -http://bit.ly/hUsRnc — Has the Gulf spill really been dealt with? […]
December 8th, 2010 | 4:06pm
by Tweets that mention The Quiet Road -- Topsy.com
Read it again Jim.
For it does amuse immensely that you’re taking a technical analysis from someone who flatly denies the possibility of peak oil (insisting, as he does, that oil is abiotic and this explains the (very low in fact) levels of radioactivity).
December 8th, 2010 | 5:33pm
by Tim Worstall
Tim,
the notion that oil is abiotic in nature is absurd. And dismissing peak oil (which the International Energy Agency now suggests occurred about 4 years ago) based on that notion is equally absurd. I’m certainly not standing behind every single thing that Dr. Termotto says.
Nonetheless, there are some very strange discrepancies in the way that the Gulf spill has been reported (not just by the media, but in the official statements from government and corporate sources). I’m not an expert on the logistics of deep water drilling — it’s a seriously specialised field — but I’ve been told by a couple of acquaintances who would have such knowledge that the manner in which the blow out occurred is almost guaranteed to have created numerous fractures in an already unstable rock strata.
These fractures would be impossible to seal and would result in ongoing leakage — mostly of gas, but also of oil.
As I say, Dr. Termotto says some silly things, but it also seems likely that he’s right about some stuff. And what he’s saying about ongoing, potentially serious, seepage tallies with a lot of “informed” speculation.
December 9th, 2010 | 11:58am
by Jim Bliss
That there’s large scale seepage is well known. During the whole thing one number I saw was that the entire Macondo blow out was about 200% of the normal annual seepage into the Gulf.
Which is one of the reasons why the Gulf has those bacteria that feed off oil seepages: evolution to fit the environment stuff.
As to the radioactivity bit: perhaps I didn’t read accurately enough but I didn’t see any numbers on actual amounts or concentrations. Given that seawater is 3 parts per billion uranium anyway, it would be nice to know whether even if he’s all correct we’re talking about something that makes trivial differences to background radiation or something that really makes a difference.
December 9th, 2010 | 1:53pm
by Tim Worstall