Oil spill area coming back to life

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Area Life Oil
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the environmental recovery of areas affected by the Gulf oil spill, particularly focusing on the regrowth of marshlands and the implications for local ecosystems and industries. Participants explore various factors influencing the recovery process, comparisons with past oil spills, and the role of media in shaping public perception of the disaster.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express optimism about the recovery of marshlands in Louisiana, citing observations of regrowth and the potential positive impact on local fisheries.
  • Others question the accuracy of media portrayals of the disaster, suggesting that exaggeration may have influenced public perception and response.
  • Concerns are raised about the long-term environmental impact of the spill, particularly regarding marine life and the presence of oil in deeper waters.
  • Participants discuss the differences between the Gulf oil spill and the Exxon Valdez spill, noting factors such as the depth of the spill and the type of oil released.
  • Some suggest that warmer water and the presence of bacteria may have contributed to a more favorable outcome for the Gulf spill compared to previous incidents.
  • There is mention of the use of dispersants and their role in mitigating the effects of the oil spill, although the long-term consequences remain uncertain.
  • One participant highlights a study indicating that a significant percentage of the oil remains in the Gulf waters, raising concerns about the potential for future ecological impacts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a mix of optimism regarding the recovery of certain ecosystems and skepticism about the overall environmental impact of the spill. There is no consensus on the long-term effects or the accuracy of media representations, indicating ongoing debate and uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include varying assumptions about the recovery process, the impact of dispersants, and the health of marine ecosystems. The discussion reflects differing perspectives on the implications of the spill and the complexities involved in assessing environmental recovery.

  • #31
Spreading it out evenly in the whole gulf? Seriously? Obviously the oil is much less dispersed than that. Mexico isn't seeing any oil wash up on their shores because there isn't any oil over there
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #32
And now back to the topic.

I was down in New Orleans for a wedding a few years back and noticed that no one went near the river. I thought it was very peculiar, as it was the middle of June, and about 100'F outside. It seems the Mississippi is very polluted.

I just found the following article, which is somewhat related to the spill:

http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/08/mississippi_river_pours_as_muc.html"
Mark Schleifstein, The Times-Picayune
Thursday, August 05, 2010

Every day during the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster, contractors sprayed an average 140,000 pounds of Corexit dispersant onto oil slicks on the surface of the Gulf of Mexico and into the oil being released a mile below.

But what few in the public understood was that an equivalent amount of similar surfactant chemicals -- the active ingredient in Corexit and in household soaps and industrial solvents -- enters the Gulf each day from the Mississippi River, with more flowing in from other rivers and streams along the coast.

...

As the river suffers, so do the people. The Mississippi River provides 23% of the nation's public surface water supplies. Eighteen million people depend on the Mississippi and its tributaries for drinking water.

But it's not just the water we drink that is of concern. What we do to the rivers show up in other ways as well. One example is the area in Louisiana called "Cancer Alley". Between Baton Rouge and New Orleans is said to have one of the highest incidence rates of cancer in the country. Residents also suffer from high numbers of respiratory problems, birth defects and immune system disorders.

Perhaps 40 years of dumping dispersant into the Gulf prepared it for this spill, or perhaps not.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #33
Thread open.
 
  • #34
Evo said:
Thread open.

Is there some news related to the topic? Other than that old report about underwater plumes, it really seems as though anaerobic bacteria are doing their job on the oil. I'm a bit starved for news on the topic however, so if anyone has anything, pro or con so to speak, I'd love to read it.
 
  • #35
nismaratwork said:
Is there some news related to the topic? Other than that old report about underwater plumes, it really seems as though anaerobic bacteria are doing their job on the oil. I'm a bit starved for news on the topic however, so if anyone has anything, pro or con so to speak, I'd love to read it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100907/ap_on_sc/us_sci_gulf_spill_where_s_the_oil" . :)

I'm interested in hearing news about how much oil total was spilled vs the amounts that were contained, reclaimed, dispersed, evaporated, and eaten. The situation is a bit complex, as some of those are either required or desired stages for the others.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36
mugaliens said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100907/ap_on_sc/us_sci_gulf_spill_where_s_the_oil" . :)

I'm interested in hearing news about how much oil total was spilled vs the amounts that were contained, reclaimed, dispersed, evaporated, and eaten. The situation is a bit complex, as some of those are either required or desired stages for the others.

Thanks, I'll read that and some related articles. You're right about the complexity of the situation... I wonder if as much as we'd like to make predictions, this is a wait-and-see situation by default?
 
Last edited by a moderator: