Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Does anyone remember the Ixtoc 1 oil rig spill?...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 10:46 AM
Original message
Does anyone remember the Ixtoc 1 oil rig spill?...
Ixtoc 1 was a deep drilling rig leased to PEMEX, Mexico's state oil company. It had a blowout in June of 1979, and began leaking oil into the Gulf, between 420,000 gallons and 1.2 million gallons daily.

It continued to leak that much oil for almost 10 months, before a second well could be drilled to relieve the pressure and cap the leak. In total, more than 100,000,000 gallons of oil were spilled, almost 10 times as much as the Exxon Valdez.

Right now, the Deepwater horizon is leaking ~42,000 gallons per day. It will have to continue to leak at that rate for 8 months to be as bad as the Valdez. It will have to leak for 6 1/2 years to be as bad as Ixtoc.

In no way am I trying to minimize the Deepwater Horizon situation. The spill from the Deepwater horizon is an unmitigated disaster, and will negatively impact the Gulf environment for years to come. I am simply trying to add perspective about the scale of this spill compared to other spills.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
1. Yes, but this spill was not near the pristine beaches and wildlife of the Florida Coastline.
:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. True. And Florida doesn't have the time to respond...
the way Texas did when Ixtoc oil was headed their way.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Let's hope they can plug those leaks or whatever they must do to at least stop the damage?
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robdogbucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
4. Maybe so, but
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 11:55 AM by robdogbucky
We were initially misled on this one, as ShortnFiery has pointed out. Who knows what will happen? Can we rely on the CG's representations? Didn't they mislead, as well as the drilling company? Sid, yours is a containment perspective, hoping that all goes according to most positive scenarios.

I am just saying we are all flying on a wing and a prayer with this one, no one knows what will be the ultimate outcome. I do not have much faith in the company or companies now trying desperately to use technology they have never before used at that depth, etc. After you said yesterday that this was no where near the scope of Exxon Valdez, that this one would have to leak like this for 8 months before it approached the scope of that spill, I read later in the day yesterday, according to a quoted expert, that this one could exceed Valdez, easily, if they cannot stop the flow.

So now you want to compare it to yet another massive spill of the past? Now that one of the experts has indeed said it could exceed Exxon Valdez, how can we interpret this new comparison?

When will these comparisons end? Where will the goalposts be at the end of this week?

I'm not a doomsayer but cripes, we have been misinformed almost every step of the way in the Drill Baby Drill campaign and this disaster is more of the same.




Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Which expert was quoted as saying this could exceed Valdez?...
I didn't see that post.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. There are other factors that affect severity of impact other than just gallons per day...
1. Underwater environments are as different as above water environments. Marine life distributions are not uniform, and ocean currents are different.

2. Density of accumulated oil may not be as important as displacement over area. Huge amounts of oil contained in a smaller area will be devastating, but easier to clean up than a spill that covers 1800 sq miles that continues to expand.

3. Depth of oil flow (here almost a mile deep) make access for repair much more difficult, and could lengthen the time needed to stop the flow.

4. Overall weather can inhibit clean up operations, as here.

5. Wildlife and marine life have migratory and reproductive cycles that are more adversely impacted depending upon the calendar date of the incident. This is particularly true where oysters are involved, and it is entirely possible to wipe out present and future oyster harvests depending upon the timing of the incident.

6. Some areas require a higher level of 'clean' than others. Beaches like those in Alaska after the Exxon Valdese spill still hold huge amounts of oil today, and that would not be acceptable as 'clean' to a tourist beach.

Just a few of the facts that affect the 'severity' and difficulty in 'cleaning up' an oil spill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yes. I worked in oil spill cleanup for several years...
We used C-14ds and a C-29d oil skimmer made by Crucial, as well as both harbour and absorbent containment boom.

Density is a huge factor. Oil sheen is tremendously different than mousse.

What I'm saying is that we're less than a week into this incident. Those involved need to do all they can to protect sensitive areas, stem the flow from the leaks, and begin the process of clean-up. This spill is undeniably awful, but similarities to the worst oil spills in history are, at this point, premature.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I'll grant you it is PREMATURE to gauge the ultimate severity of the outcome here...
The truth is we don't know.

We don't know how many gallons will be 'spilled' before the flow of oil is stopped.
We don't know what the extent of the oil spill will be.

We do know that all efforts to stop the flow of oil have been unsuccessful so far. Once that happens we can compare and contrast similar oil spills.

Have YOU ever worked on a spill clean up that exceeded 1800 sq miles?

Seems that would take a very long time, and would be very difficult to control its spread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. No, I've never worked on a spill that big...
We don't have much offshore drilling in Lake Ontario :)

The sad truth is that much of that 1800 sq miles won't be cleaned up. They'll probably apply dispersants by air, to try to break up the slick and let it sink. I'm hoping the ocean experts will at least have the time to set up protection for sensitive coastal areas.

The best case would be if the deep sea robotics are successful in shutting the blowout prevention valves, and that drilling of emergency bypass wells won't be necessary. To the best of my knowledge, that hasn't been attempted and failed yet.

And your point about some beaches needing to be cleaner than others is well taken.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robdogbucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Premature?
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 12:58 PM by robdogbucky
and so are all forecasts of rose petals and candy premature.

Sid, I came back from a fishing trip on Sunday night and when I turned on the news, the first report took about 5 minutes and was all dedicated to the increased scope of the spill. As I mentioned earlier, they interviewed local oceanographers that were monitoring this situation. One of them was quoted as saying if the current never-been tried methods did not work, this could gush enough to exceed the amounts of the Exxon Valdez. Now, which of those experts it was I cannot say and I don't think that news broadcast is still accessible, but I did find these nuggets that variously assert that if these tactics don't stem the flow, then it could go for months which would open the door to its exceeding Valdez. I will continue to search for which expert asserted it, but I think you can agree that the conversation has now turned to that possibility.

These following nuggets don't attribute to any one expert for your satisfaction, but just like the rosy pictures so far proven wrong every step of the way, there is nothing to say what will be the ultimate tally when/if they can shut this leak down. They already cite that if it were not for a 'kink' in one of the undersea arteries, it would already be much worse. What happens if that kink explodes? You are experienced in this field according to your stated history, why do you insist on this damage control when we don't know the extent of it yet? The meme of minimal damage, industry solutions to the rescue, etc., remind eerily of "there is no civil war," or "there is no recession," type of damage control. All too familiar in our modern newspeak reality.

It may take them a month to get the new gizmos in place, in an environment they have never been deployed before. A month is all one estimate gives for this to exceed EV. Others, like you yesteday, assert that it would take 8 months at its present rate. Well, what if that rate increases?


"…The oil will do much less damage at sea than it would if it hits the shore, said Cynthia Sarthou, executive director of the Gulf Restoration Network.

"If it gets landward, it could be a disaster in the making," Sarthou said.
Doug Helton, incident operations coordinator for the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's office of response and restoration, said the spill is not expected to come onshore in the next three to four days. "But if the winds were to change, it could come ashore more rapidly," he said.

At the worst-case figure of 336,000 gallons a day, it would take more than a month for the amount of crude oil spilled to equal the 11 million gallons spilled from the Exxon Valdez in Alaska's Prince William Sound..."

http://www.newser.com/article/d9f8iubo0/burning-oil-rig-sinks-in-gulf-of-mexico-setting-stage-for-big-spill-11-workers-still-missing.html



"...Crews used robot submarines to activate valves in hopes of stopping the leaks, but they may not know until Tuesday if that strategy will work. BP also mobilized two rigs to drill a relief well if needed. Such a well could help redirect the oil, though it could also take weeks to complete, especially at that depth.

BP plans to collect leaking oil on the ocean bottom by lowering a large dome to capture the oil and then pumping it through pipes and hoses into a vessel on the surface, said Doug Suttles, chief operating officer of BP Exploration and Production.

It could take up to a month to get the equipment in place..."

http://www.newser.com/article/d9fb1nu80/oil-leaking-from-sunken-rig-spreads-raising-fear-of-gulf-coast-environmental-disaster.html


And this the most positive spin I have read put on the potential scope of the spill:


Oil spill disaster fears come true

An oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico was one of the greatest fears When the Deepwater Horizon exploded and sank. The New York Times reports that the well is leaking its liquid cash today from the “riser.” The riser is a 5,000-foot-long pipe extending from the wellhead on the ocean bottom that was connected to the drilling platform. Now detached, the riser is kinked like a garden hose. The leaks are at the sea floor, and officials believe the kinks are preventing an even worse gusher of oil from escaping. Before the platform sank, a geyser of oil and gas shot from the riser to create a giant plume of flame and black smoke.

Oil spill cleanup

To contain the oil spill, the Coast Guard aims to have robotic subs activate a 450-ton valve at the wellhead 5,000 feet deep that could possible seal the well. However, it’s possible that this valve, which was designed to prevent sudden pressure releases that led to the explosion that sunk the platform may not work. As a contingency, BP has dispatched two rigs to the area that could drill relief wells. Officials estimated that this strategy, drilling down to the cavity of oil and gas and pumping it full of mud and concrete, could take two months.

At this rate, The New York times said, the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, at a rate of 42,000 gallons of oil a day, would have to continue for 262 days to match the 11-million-gallon spill in Alaska’s Prince William Sound from the Exxon Valdez in 1989, the worst oil spill in United States history.

http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/2010/04/26/oil-spill-gulf-of-mexico/


That looks about like 8 months, no? And those goalposts keep moving.




"Just trying to do my jigsaw puzzle, before it rains any more"

Jagger/Richards (never performed live)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robdogbucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
11. Here we have the most hysterical report
done by BBC Worldnews and then the most positive BP company-generated report:

Video report:

OIL SPILL GULF OF MEXICO !!! WORSE THAN EXXON VALDEZ man DESTROYING NATURE
http://www.twitze.com/2010/04/27/oil-spill-gulf-of-mexico/


BP warning over Gulf of Mexico oil spill
By Sheila McNulty in Houston and Ed Crooks in London
Published: April 26 2010 22:37 | Last updated: April 26 2010 23:59

“…At the present rate, it would take more than 250 days for the leak to be as large as the Exxon Valdez accident in Alaska in 1989, but the damage caused by a spill is not always directly related to the volume of oil released.
BP is using four robot submarines to attempt to stem the oil leak, in water depths of up to 5,000ft.

Company officials say the accident last Tuesday night may have resulted from an unexpected surge of gas in the pipes connecting the rig to the well. The blow-out preventer – a system of rams designed to shut off such surges – failed to activate.

BP is now attempting to trigger the rams to cut off the flow of oil. If this fails, BP has mobilised two drilling rigs, one of which was expected to arrive overnight, to drill relief wells – a process that could take two to three months – to intersect the pipe and pump down a heavy fluid to stop the unrestrained flow…”

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/09bdbdb6-5179-11df-bed9-00144feab49a.html


We further learn from the BP press release that the oil is leaking from 2 locations, that the blow-out preventer – a system of rams designed to shut off such surges – failed to activate, that to drill relief wells – a process that could take two to three months, may or may not work. Finally, that BP shares closed 2 per cent lower on Monday at 626.8p.

It seems we have to keep monitoring the press releases and see just how this proceeds. They seem to be preparing the public for the worst.



Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Thanks for posting those...
I'm trying to find the (un)happy medium, somewhere between the daisies and puppies view that everything is going to be alright, and the doom and gloom of the "WORST SPILL EVER" reporting.

Meanwhile, I've got my fingers crossed that those working the submersibles will somehow find a way to close the blowout prevention valves.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robdogbucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Me too
"Meanwhile, I've got my fingers crossed that those working the submersibles will somehow find a way to close the blowout prevention valves."

Me too Sid, me too.



rdb
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC