Free Markets, Free People

About that oil spill (update)

If you’ve tried to imagine its size, there’s a site out there that will help you. And if that doesn’t put it in context enough for you, you can drop it on a map anywhere you’d like.

I dropped it on Washington DC.

Imagine something of that size in that area. Why there’d be a mobilizing of everything that could be mobilized trying to fight this thing and control it.

And of course there’s the “what will it do” question as in, once it gets into those loop currents around the keys, then what?

That particular test was run with dye within 20m of the surface. Don’t forget there’s a huge plume of oil well below the surface that is going to move as well.

Yes, some will disperse with time. Some will evaporate. But there’s still questions about that which is moving below the surface and how much of that will remain concentrated enough to have an effect. After all, the dye made it.

UPDATE: OK, my bad – the YouTube vid above is that of a model showing how the current flows and approximate time in days, for it to disperse. ScottH in comments brought it up and asked me to make it clear. Not sure how I ended up thinking it was real (oh, yeah, the dye reference). I sound like a global warmist. Anyway, this at least has some real data and some science behind it, however it is a model.



Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

14 Responses to About that oil spill (update)

  • That first graphic did it for me.  One look and … pin with bunkers  … golf.
    No wonder Obama has been golfing so much with BP sending subliminal messages to the POTUS.
    And who said the “Jedi Mind Trick” doesn’t really work ?

  • Holy sh*t!  From the looks of the second map, Bagman Holder and the DoJ may be the least of BP’s worries!  Every country bordering the Atlantic basin, ESPECIALLY those with large fishing fleets, will want a piece of their hide.

  • Please, please, please relabel the YouTube FUD.  That is a MODEL, not a test.  That is the exact same BS that the world is coming to an end Global Warming alarmists use.

    • Yeow, you’re right. Updated. Not sure how I missed that. Thanks.

      • 🙂  I kinda figured that had just escaped your notice.
        It is one of my biggest pet peeves with the AGW argument and, it seems like, the scientific community and the media’s portrayal of the work lately.  A lot of the stuff that is being reported is simply models, which are inherently inferior to real world tests and data.  Media does a real poor job (whether purposeful or out of subject matter ignorance) of informing and making sure their consumers understand that what is being referenced is only a computer model/simulation and not a real test or even a reasonable approximation.
        Now to be fair to this simulation, I believe that we have a much firmer understanding of oceanic currents and most of the variables that are in play than we do of the solar, atmospheric, surface, sea, etc conditions and variables that drive our climatic system… But I do think it is a “if all else remains unchanged” model/simulation, meaning that it does not appear to take into account surface conditions (I am of the opinion that hurricane season will actually help the clean-up) or that the oil as it is now is unprocessed and biodegradable.
        The oil spill is only dangerous where it is concentrated, as it becomes more dispersed it becomes less of a danger to ecological system.

  • The Navy’s loop current forecast looks to me like a big loop is about to disconnect from the Gulfstream. The previous 30 days gif shows the loop forming.

    I would think that if things go by forecast, most of the oil would tend to stay in the Gulf.

  • As I waited for his citation, two shoes were dropped: Not only are they using the same people that brought us AGW but they are using the same models, running on the same computers.
    Not that this isn’t an unprecedented disaster, mind you, but it is starting to smell like another crisis ripe for exploitation and abuse. How do you spell: Cap & Trade?

    • Well, as ScottH points out we know a heck of a lot about currents, have pretty good data sets and they’ve actually been tested, and there aren’t at all the number of variables found in tracking a current than are found in tracking global climate or temperature.

      So while it should be viewed with caution, I don’ tthink it warrants the same level of caution that the AGW models do.

  • “I dropped it on Washington DC.”
    If you actually DID drop it on DC, it would be win-win.

  • Help Save Our Wetlands and Animals

  • I am very curious how much these keywords cost for BP:)Blame Obama?