http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/09/gulf.spill.food.chain/index.html?hpt=T2
...from bacteria to plankton.
...from bacteria to plankton.
oil making its way through Gulf food chain
- Thread starter Sk8r
- Start date
- Status
scubasteve06
Jeeper Reefer
So I guess I should start dosing Mobil One 15w-50 now instead of vodka?
bayoupr
New member
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10388&page=2
What about this naturally occuring spill? Oil has been in our water for who knows how long.
What about this naturally occuring spill? Oil has been in our water for who knows how long.
clownfreak
New member
Bill is correct, the article says that animals can adapt to survive or maybe even thrive in the petroleum rich water. That would be like acclimating a fish. If you take a freshwater tetra, so can slowly acclimate it to saltwater. This may, over the long term, negatively effect the fish's health (but sometimes not). If you take the tetra from freshwater and drop it straight into your reef it will most likely be dead by morning. And that is taking two relatively similar enviroments (both composed primarly of water).
jeff@zina.com
New member
This article is slightly slanted, but pretty decent. Most of the data isn't in or analyzed, but the very initial data is showing that the oil is being taken care of naturally, processed by the natural bacteria in the sea.
This article, and the study results so far, does NOT indicate that any contamination of the food chain or higher organisms exists. If you read the data, it's rather encouraging and points to no long term ill effects. Basically, nature adapts very well.
In the late 1970's, scientists at General Electric synthesized a bacteria that consumes crude oil. The basic idea was that these bacteria could "eat" an oil spill. The economics didn't pan out and it's cheaper to use the methods BP used, dispersants and collection, but the idea is the same as what happens in nature. The bacteria consume the crude oil, and when consumed by organisms further up the food chain do not concentrate any crude oil in the higher organisms.
But the real issue is that most studies of this are long term, and results won't be in for years.
Jeff
This article, and the study results so far, does NOT indicate that any contamination of the food chain or higher organisms exists. If you read the data, it's rather encouraging and points to no long term ill effects. Basically, nature adapts very well.
In the late 1970's, scientists at General Electric synthesized a bacteria that consumes crude oil. The basic idea was that these bacteria could "eat" an oil spill. The economics didn't pan out and it's cheaper to use the methods BP used, dispersants and collection, but the idea is the same as what happens in nature. The bacteria consume the crude oil, and when consumed by organisms further up the food chain do not concentrate any crude oil in the higher organisms.
But the real issue is that most studies of this are long term, and results won't be in for years.
Jeff
I agree that more than likely this horrible event will be taken care of by nature. Do we know how much oil naturally seeps from the bottom of the ocean annually? Is it more/less than the amount spilled into the gulf? Given the information we were by the media I am truly surprised that more oil didn't end up on the beachs across the gulf. I don't hear anyone screaming now about the damage that this might have done. Where are all the environmentalists now? I'm really curious and amazed at how quickly this whole thing has just gone away.
Most estimates have the total spill around 185 million gallons. From the link bayoupr provided on natural seeps, the global total for natural seeps is around 180 million gallons per year. So in about 3 months more than the yearly global total natural seeps was released into a fairly small offshore area. Pretty substantial adjustment to expect nature to make in any reasonable time frame. Much smaller spills are known to decade over a decade or 3 to so show such natural recovery. IMO the main reason it's no longer in the press or on the front burner of media attention getting enviro groups is the "out of sight, out of mind" principal. It's what the dispersants got us. Those dispersants sunk the oil, so much of it sunk or stayed well below the surface out of the notice of the average land based person.
greenbean36191
Premium Member
The National Academies estimates just under a million barrels of oil naturally seeps into the entire Gulf annually over an entire year. The spill was somewhere between 4-4.3 million barrels in 86 days from one spot. That's about 17x the natural seepage rate AND it was a point source rather than dispersed.
If you don't hear people still screaming about the damage, it's only because the media has lost interest. People in the Gulf states are still feeling the effects and scientists are just as concerned as we've always been.
If you don't hear people still screaming about the damage, it's only because the media has lost interest. People in the Gulf states are still feeling the effects and scientists are just as concerned as we've always been.
Kay Tickle
New member
We'll be feeling/seeing the effects here for a long time. But you won't hear much about it. When I've spoken to certain regulatory agency contacts, they paint a really pretty picture. I haven't decided yet if they are simply lying, or are really that stupid. Most likely the latter, since they are far from having any type of scientific background.
Robka
New member
There is no doubt they are lying. The EPA is a joke and is controlled by corporate dollars. Until we stop letting corporations fund political campaigns the lies and earth destruction will not stop. I lived in Baton Rouge and saw first hand how the corrupt government officials rake in the money and let the citizens of Louisiana pay for it. Between paper mills, sugar mills, oil & plastic companies it is no wonder why Louisiana has been leading the way in human cancers.:thumbdown
jeff@zina.com
New member
The oil is less of an issue right now than the dispersants themselves. The dispersants have some known ill effects, where the oil has very few directly attributable effects on humans.
Jeff
jeff@zina.com
New member
The largest research population has been from the Valdeez, Alaska spill. The environment has changed somewhat over the decades, but changes haven't been found as negative in most areas. The complaints that animal populations haven't recovered aren't due to environmental changes, they're due to the initial die-off that occurred.
On the flip side, the Valdeez spill is dramatically different from the Deepwater Horizon. Most damage from the Valdeez occurred in the first few weeks as oil washed up on the shore where the Deepwater Horizon spill was dissipated before doing much of the shoreline damage it could have caused.
Like I said though, nobody can tell what the effects will be until they happen. And it's two decades since the Valdeez and there's still a ton of debate on it. The Gulf spill will likely be debated after I've left this plane of existence...
Jeff
Robka
New member
Kay Tickle
New member
Oh, I definitely agree about the lying. I was just talking about the people I've spoken with (friends of friends, who got their jobs because of other friends). I'm in Florida and believe me, both the stupidity and corruption runs rampant.
- Status
