Botany
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 07:10 PM
Original message |
|
38 days since the explosion 19,000 barrels per day leaking 40 gallons per barrel
38 x 19,000 x 40 = 28,880,000 gallons of oil into the gulf + or - gallons ?????
:cry:
Exxon Valdez was about 10,000,000 gallons
|
LeftyFingerPop
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 07:18 PM
Response to Original message |
1. 42 gallons per barrel. |
|
30,324,000 gallons. And you can bet that the 19,000 bbls per day is an understatement.
|
JuniperLea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Understated by half... that's my bet... |
Statistical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. 12K to 19K bpd is the Federal government's estimate |
|
Edited on Thu May-27-10 07:59 PM by Statistical
using 3 different methods and a team of 12 independents scientists.
|
LeftyFingerPop
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. I know, but I don't believe it. |
|
I am sure that much higher numbers will be released once it is plugged.
|
Statistical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. So you believe one scientist who briefly analyzed a resolution clip and said UP TO 70K bpd |
|
Edited on Thu May-27-10 08:12 PM by Statistical
However then went on to caution that more study was required and the low resolution and single angle made any definitive evaluation difficult. Now that is taken as gospel, the "70K gospel".
However on the other hand a study ordered by Obama over the course of 2 weeks which independently looked at three different methods to measure flow rate and then published their results is suspect. Why because you don't like their conclusion? Had the federal study said 100K to 200K barrels would you still be claiming the single scientist w/ low resolution video was accurate?
Ever heard of selection bias?
|
LeftyFingerPop
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. I typically do not believe any number published by the Government. |
|
Because they are almost always revised later. Just because they say it is 12 to 19 now does not mean that is what the tests showed. Especially at this point in time, there is a good reason to lowball the number.
I am not questioning the validity of their tests, I am questioning the numbers they decided to report after performing those tests.
|
Statistical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. Despite the fact that it wasn't govt employees doing the test. |
|
It was a dozen well known and respected members of scientific community who have reputation staked on those results.
|
LeftyFingerPop
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. OK, but I still say it will be revised. |
|
I'll buy you a virtual beer if I am wrong.
|
LeftyFingerPop
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Edited on Thu May-27-10 08:17 PM by LeftyFingerPop
considering the particle analysis done by that Purdue professor.
|
Motown_Johnny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 08:00 PM
Response to Original message |
5. there is now a widget, save yourself the effort |
charlie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-27-10 08:29 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Ixtoc gushed for over 9 months |
|
and spilt 140,000,000 gallons before it was capped. We're better equipped and 30 years smarter, but it would still be extraordinary if we got this one under control anytime soon.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 11:21 PM
Response to Original message |