Gulf Proves Resilient to Oil Spills -- Where's the Disaster? -- A Call for More Drilling in the Gulf...

polifrog



Polifrog suggested two weeks after the BP explosion that the Gulf was perhaps a uniquely resilient environment to oil spills or in this case an oil gusher.

Now it appears that Polifrog may be proven correct in his hope that this would be the disaster that never was. From the NYTimes:

The oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico appears to be dissolving far more rapidly than anyone expected, a piece of good news that raises tricky new questions about how fast the government should scale back its response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

This knowledge should open the gulf to 'Drill Baby Drill' and fear mongering environmentalists should loose face over the unknown cost to society they bring.

Reposted below is Polifrog's May 3rd piece on the BP oil spill:

First off, this is a developing story.
But, secondly, where is, at least, some of the predicted devastation?

Nearly two weeks ago one of BP's oil drilling platform suffered an accident. BP’s estimate is that the well produces some 5,000 barrels of crude oil per day and currently covers around 7500 sq/miles.

Images of the Valdez spill in 89 (250,000 barrels spilled over 11,000 sq/miles) immediately spring to mind. But is it accurate to compare the current spill to Valdez?

I don't think so. There is too much that is different.

For instance,

Viscosity. The oil being spilled in the Gulf is less viscous than the oil spilled by the Valdez. Not only is it less viscous due to its nature, but also due to the higher temperatures in the gulf. This is why we will not likely see the same type of sludge we saw associated with Valdez.

Latitude and resulting albeto. The interaction between sunlight and water changes based on latitude. In lower latitudes the sun hits the surface of the water at a very steep angle which means that the light penetrates the water more than it does at higher latitudes.

These two above combine to thin the oil and help aid its evaporation to a greater degree in the gulf than in Prince William Sound Bay.

Environment. The Gulf is known to naturally leak oil due to natural underground seepage. The natural leakage is of similar volume to the BP tragedy currently unfolding. Of course, doubling the amount of oil leaking into the Gulf and dumping it all in one place is not a good thing, but it is also obvious that the Gulf is capable of absorbing oil to a large degree. Oil is incorporated in the Gulf's ecosystem whereas it is a foreign substance in Price William Sound.

What if it turns out that the Gulf is a uniquely resilient ecosystem to oil spills?

We can only hope that this will be a disaster that never was.

out

(NC-13) Runoff Prediction - Bill Randall , Bernie Reeves

polifrog


Bill Randall and Bernie Reeves have been pitted against one another due to NC election rules that trigger a runoff between the top two vote receivers if no candidate clears the required 40% minimum.

There have been two debates. One attended by the public and one televised. Both were reviewed by Polifrog here and here. The first was quite cordial while the second was significantly more contentious due to Reeves' series of attacks, a tactic the Reeves Campaign began to employ after the first debate. As a result the past month has seen a series of fair criticisms punctuated by character attacks on Bill Randall by Bernie Reeves. In both debates Reeves showed either flashes of anger (to guffaws in the crowd) or moments of clear frustration.

By contrast, there have been no attacks on Reeves by Randall and no anger or frustration expressed by Randall. Polifrog, though, has become concerned with Randall's over reliance on pat, seemingly memorized answers to questions, while at the same time often stumbling through answers to questions that are outside the normal pap candidates endure. A perfect example of this was Randall's recent flap over what the press characterized as an accusation of collusion between BP and the Government to cause the Gulf oil spill. Of course, Randall made no such accusation. His fumbling through his answer, though, allowed for an easy twisting of his words into something he did not intend.

Reeves has many traditional strengths. Money (as compared to Randall), old establishment experience in Carter Wrenn, and what Polifrog believes is an often overlooked support in the local press due to Reeves' long history as a part of the journalism business in Raleigh. This strength was best employed by Biesecker in his spin on the Randall BP/Government collusion statements as pointed out by Polifrog here.

Randall's strengths are fewer but perhaps more influential. He seems to have the excitement of the people at his back. Polifrog has watched this excitement daily through google alerts which admittedly became biased after Randall's BP statements, but prior to which Randall dominated in terms of hits. Not only does he have the excitement of the people, but he has history at his back as well. It seems a new type of republican is sweeping into office due to the disappointment that was the republican congress during the Bush years and the shock of the Obama agenda. Reeves seems, fairly or unfairly, tied to that disappointing congress under Bush while Randall has successfully tied himself to the energized Tea Party movement.

For these reasons Polifrog calls it, and not without reservation, for Bill Randall.


Related posts by Polifrog

• Debate 1 -- NC-13 -- Impressions
• Video of Runoff Debate Between Bill Randall and Bernie Reeves
• Bill Randall -- Plagiarism?
• A Response to Carter Wrenn's Fair Tax Attack on Bill Randall
• Debate 2 - Bernie Reeves vs. Bill Randall Impressions 1
  
• Debate 2 - Bernie Reeves vs. Bill Randall Impressions 2
  
• NC-13 - Bernie Reeves' Friends in the Press Have His Back - Dump on Randall
  
• Bernie Reeves and His Fickle Friends in the Press
• ***Carter Wrenn and Bernie Reeves Skirting Privacy Law on Randall's MBA***
  
• Randall's MBA Confirmed -- Reeves' Sullied Campaign Confirmed
• Bernie Reeves and the Press -- The Only Conclusion is Collusion
• Bill Randall, Bernie Reeves and the Gulf Oil Spill
• Bill Randall Responds to the Biesecker Spin on his BP Comments
• Gulf Oil, Bill Randall, Bernie Reeves, BP, and a Quickly Nearing Election

out

Gulf Oil, Bill Randall, Bernie Reeves, BP, and a Quickly Nearing Election...

polifrog


Reeves' fair criticism.

Polifrog has found the Bernie Reeves, Bill Randall primary disappointing. It may seem pollyannish but Polifrog believes the sort of character attacks Bernie Reeves has engaged in has no place in a primary. Bernie Reeves has not only weakened Bill Randall, but himself while attempting to secure the Republican nomination. This has unfortunately forced Polifrog to attempt to blunt Reeves' more unfair attacks on Bill Randall as Polifrog feels that such attacks ultimately only serve to strengthen Brad Miller.

Bill Randall, in contrast, has run a clean, although more recently, gaffe prone campaign. Currently Bill Randall has been under national fire for comments made in reference to the BP oil spill in which he questioned whether collusion between BP and the government may have caused the spill. Bernie Reeves by way of NBC17 responded to Randall's comments thusly;

"I don't think this conspiracy theory is doing the country any good, it's not doing the cleanup or the investigation of the spill any good. And it's certainly not doing any good for our campaign. And I just don't think it helps Bill," he said.

With a few quibbles in reference to Reeves' needless characterization of Randalls comments as something akin to an accusation as mentioned here, Polifrog feels that Reeves' response to Randall's comments in total has not risen to the level of an accusation and is in the realm of fair criticism.

This has been a misstep only Bill Randall can repair, unfortunately for Randall the runoff election is only days away.




out

Bill Randall Responds to the Biesecker Spin on his BP Comments

polifrog



The press is characterizing this as a back-down. It is only a back-down in the sense that Randall did not reaffirm the press spin of his previous statements regarding the Gulf Spill.

The press (read Michael Biesecker of the NewsObserver.com whose story the AP ran with) spun the statements as an accusation rather than the ruminations they were.

Another piece by Michael Biesecker on the Randall/BP statements that hints at Biesecker's biases on Bill Randall's statements can be found here and is titled the less than honest: In video, Randall says Feds and BP spilled oil on purpose. Randall never said what the title suggests, but it helps Bernie Reeves if people think he did.

The ties between and Bernie Reeves and Michael Biesecker have been explored before by Polifrog here and in The Only Conclusion Is Collusion. Without Bill Randall's most recent BP statements, though, the suspected Bernie Reeves and Michael Biesecker collusion has been only mildly effectual. Politicians should never ruminate, but fortunately for Bernie Reeves, Bill Randall, being a political rookie, did just that. And fortunately for Reeves, he had a Biesecker megaphone.






out

Bill Randall, Bernie Reeves and the Gulf Oil Spill...

polifrog


Wow! Polifrog hits the road for a few days and the oil hits the fan!

It appears that Bill Randall has pulled the tail of the BP cat one too far. The first half of his statement seemed rational enough. The second half, during which Randall pondered the possibility that collusion between BP and the government lead to a deliberate small leak that got out of hand, was, as far as Polifrog is concerned, out of hand.

Here is a complete video of Bill Randall's statement.


Unfortunately, Bernie Reeves being Bernie Reeves seems unable to stand aside, hold back on attacks, and let Randall inflict damage upon himself. Bernie Reeves appears to hope for some of that damage to spin his way and in that end has distorted Randall's words nearly to the point of lying about what Randall has said. Below is Bernie Reeves distorting what Randall said with a highly edited video of Randall's statements from the Reeves Campaign website:

Of course video distortion was not mischaracterization enough for Reeves. Bernie Reeves' blog entry on the topic on his campaign website is entitled:

Randall’s Conspiracy Theory: Says BP Officials and Federal Government Colluded on Oil Spill Caused The Accident In The Gulf

And Reeves' buddy in the press, mbieseck, posted an equally dishonestly titled entry on newsobserver.com (blogs) titled

In video, Randall says Feds and BP spilled oil on purpose

How are either of these similarly misleading titles true considering the unedited video above? Of course, neither are true. Evidence of this is in the body of mbieseck's piece as Randall is quoted as saying:

...Is there a cover up going on? I'm not saying there necessarily is. But I think there's enough facts on the table for people that (they) really need to do some investigative research and find out what went on with that and get a subpoena of records and everything else."

This sounds like a question to Polifrog and unless Reeves believes some questions should not be asked Reeves should remember his own words,

...it was a fair question...

out

BP Gulf Spill - Exxon Valdez - Ixtoc Spills and Narrative

polifrog


Via Fabius Maximus:


Sometimes a simple chart can enlighten one to the vast unenlightened creature we call media.

For instance, the Valdez spill was 10.8 million gallons while the largest spill was 284 million gallons (Highest and Lowest estimates averaged). That is 26.25 times more than the Valdez spill!

There are 34 oil spills larger than Valdez.  

How's that for not fitting the narrative?

Why is it not common knowledge that the largest spill recorded occurred in the Gulf, the very same place that is so much in the news today? And occurred as a deep water spill rather than the often referenced  Veldez surface spill?

The press is counter productive in its reporting of the current spill and the fact that the national narrative in oil spills repeatedly starts with Valdez is more a testament to the press feeding frenzy that was the Valdez incident than reality based reporting.


The Chart:

It would seem that looking into the ecological effects of the largest spill in history (IXTOC 1) rather than the most publicised spill (Valdez) would be far more productive considering that it also occurred in the Gulf and was also a deep water spill rather than a surface spill.

There is much more info on the ecological effects of the Ixtoc spill at the link. The report is surprising to the extreme in the lack of impact on the environment found.



From IXTOC I Oil Spill Economic Impact Study

(Excerpts  below lifted from fabiusmaximus)

From the Executive Summary

• “None of the indirect economic effects exceed $1 million . These estimates, based upon the available data, support a statement of no significant indirect economic impact in the study region that can be attributed to the oil spills .”
• “Although the study has its limitations, such as inherent variability in the biological and environmental factors and the lack of previous examinations of the relationships between the various environmental and economic variables, the main conclusion of the oil impact assessment is that the oil spills had a limited effect on the biological activity on the important commercial species as measured by the ex-vessel value .”

Summary and Conclusions
… In terms of potential economic impacts, the most important consideration for Texas is the shrimp fishery, which represents over 95 percent of the value of landings . Evidence does not exist that indicates the oil spills affected the biological activity of shrimp or other important commercial species . Analysis is still underway that may reveal some evidence of potential long-term significance, but to date there is no biological basis for projecting a significant negative impact on commercial landings . Information gathered from industry participants and knowledgeable observers indicates that no measurable impacts occurred on landings or value of landings . While some small impact on fishing patterns was suggested, it was not significant in terms of measurable industry-level effects .
Analysis of secondary data relating to commercial landings supports the direct observations obtained . Data for the study period, where available, indicate that commercial landings have been well within the range of natural variation . Brown shrimp landings, off considerably in 1979, are most plausibly explained by the predictable effects of unusual environmental conditions earlier that year . After considering natural variability, there is no evidence in the secondary data to indicate a decline in landings of any commercial species due to the effects of the oil spills .
There is no significant direct economic effect of the oil spills on the commercial fishing industry of Texas measurable at the regional or major subregional levels . Additionally, there are no measurable indirect economic effects.  that stem from the impact on the commercial fishery sector.
This study clearly indicates that the effects in this case were of such a minor nature (at least in the shortrun) that no assessment using any reasonable amount of resources would have improved the ultimate estimate significantly . It further suggests that the decision not to conduct a large-scale primary data collection, relating to commercial fishing impacts, was appropriate .

Interesting




out

Gulf Oil Spill -- Where is the Disaster?

   polifrog



Update 1 Below: 

Update 2:  Obama Agrees!

 
First off, this is a developing story.
But, secondly, where is, at least, some of the predicted devastation?

Nearly two weeks ago one of BP's oil drilling platform suffered an accident. BP’s estimate is that the well produces some 5,000 barrels of crude oil per day and currently covers around 7500 sq/miles.

Images of the Valdez spill in 89 (250,000 barrels spilled over 11,000 sq/miles) immediately spring to mind. But is it accurate to compare the current spill to Valdez?

I don't think so. There is too much that is different.

For instance,

Viscosity. The oil being spilled in the Gulf is less viscous than the oil spilled by the Valdez. Not only is it less viscous due to its nature, but also due to the higher temperatures in the gulf. This is why we will not likely see the same type of sludge we saw associated with Valdez.

Latitude and resulting albeto. The interaction between sunlight and water changes based on latitude. In lower latitudes the sun hits the surface of the water at a very steep angle which means that the light penetrates the water more than it does at higher latitudes.

These two above combine to thin the oil and help aid its evaporation to a greater degree in the gulf than in Prince William Sound Bay.

Environment. The Gulf is known to naturally leak oil due to natural underground seepage. The natural leakage is of similar volume to the BP tragedy currently unfolding. Of course, doubling the amount of oil leaking into the Gulf and dumping it all in one place is not a good thing, but it is also obvious that the Gulf is capable of absorbing oil to a large degree. Oil is incorporated in the Gulf's ecosystem whereas it is a foreign substance in Price William Sound.

What if it turns out that the Gulf is a uniquely resilient ecosystem to oil spills?

We can only hope that this will be a disaster that never was.



Update

Via Fabius Maximus:


Sometimes a simple chart can enlighten one to the vast unenlightened creature we call media.

For instance, the Valdez spill was 10.8 million gallons while the largest spill was 284 million gallons. That is 26.25 times more than the Valdez spill!

Why is it not common knowledge that the largest spill recorded occurred in the Gulf, the very same place that is so much in the news today? And that the Ixtoc spill was a deep water spill while Valdez was a surface.

How's that for not fitting the narrative?

The better comparison is the Ixtoc spill, yet all we hear are the comparisons to Valdez.  This is counterproductive.

It would seem that looking into the ecological effects of the largest spill in history (IXTOC 1) rather than the most publicised spill (Valdez) would be far more productive considering that it also occurred in the Gulf.






out