Ant Sinclair Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) Below are two links to the Gulf Oil Spill, the National Geographical Article describes How the Oil Spill and the dispersants used aftetwards have killed phytoplankton. The second link says it could be decades for the phytoplankton to recover. How much Oxygen being produced into the Earths' Atmosphere could have been lost due to this Incident? ??? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/09/100916-sea-snot-gulf-bp-oil-spill-marine-snow-science-environment/ Edited March 11, 2015 by Ant Sinclair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 The area of the Gulf of Mexico is 1,600,000 km2, while to total area of ocean is about 360,000,000 km2. Which suggest that the worst case (the entire Gulf's phytoplankton is wiped out) is that it could reduce oxygen production by less than 0.5%. However, as it is probably a small part of the Gulf that is partially affected, the effect is probably much smaller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 11, 2015 Author Share Posted March 11, 2015 Thanks for Your reply Strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overtone Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 The area of the Gulf of Mexico is 1,600,000 km2, while to total area of ocean is about 360,000,000 km2. Which suggest that the worst case (the entire Gulf's phytoplankton is wiped out) is that it could reduce oxygen production by less than 0.5% The Gulf is far more productive than the average equivalent area of ocean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 11, 2015 Author Share Posted March 11, 2015 The Gulf is far more productive than the average equivalent area of ocean. Thanks for Your reply overtone, would that higher than average productivity be due It's higher temperature? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavelcherepan Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) Actually, if you check any map with phytoplankton distribution and primary productivity you'll see that the highest productivity is observed in polar regions and Gulf has very low productivity. I'm not 100% sure of the reasons but it could be due to better solubility of carbon dioxide in water at lower temperatures. So you would expect some very small drop in oxygen generation. Edited March 12, 2015 by pavelcherepan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) Actually, if you check any map with phytoplankton distribution and primary productivity you'll see that the highest productivity is observed in polar regions and Gulf has very low productivity. I'm not 100% sure of the reasons but it could be due to better solubility of carbon dioxide in water at lower temperatures. Partly that, but mostly the amount of upwelling of the nutrients from lower down into the upper layers, where the phytoplankton inhabit and feed, determines its population size and density. In waters like the Pacific, there is a short Spring bloom but dies off as the water goes above about 11oC because part of the mechanism that causes one type of upwelling, necessary for the phytoplankton to be sustained, is temperature-dependent. When the upper layer gets too warm a thermocline is created, which stops the nutrient-rich water column moving upwards. Apart from turbulent coastlines, if the ocean is above that approximate temperature, it is also relatively barren, in relative terms, of marine life, because the phytoplankton is the first level in the marine food chain. As you can see in the first map, from the relative scarcity of red, yellow and green areas The Pacific is not as important as you might think given its vast area on an area-to-area basis relative to the northerly seas... it's mostly too warm and deep. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=4097 Notice how closely the red areas in this map of oceanic upwelling distribution geographically correlates with phytoplankton distribution in the first map.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upwelling How much Oxygen being produced into the Earths' Atmosphere could have been lost due to this Incident? ??? Not much. It's a relatively dead place in terms of phytoplankton. It's way too warm - in the 20s oC except on the coastline where it's shallower and more turbulent. Gulf of Mexico phytplankon distribution Edited March 12, 2015 by StringJunky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 12, 2015 Author Share Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) Thanks for Your replies StringJunky & pavelcherepan. I read yesterday that nearly one and a quarter million gallons of dispersant was used on the resulting slick from the Deepwater incident and that the dispersant was even more toxic to the phytoplankton than the crude and BP was ordered to stop using it because of its' enviromental impact! As You will probably appreciate this slick and dispersants would have spread north with the gulf stream into colder and more productive areas phytoplankton wise!!! ! Deepwater Rig There were several safety systems on the Blow-Out-Preventer(B.O.P.). The CBS investigation said that in the BOP were separate donut shaped rubber seals called Annular Preventers, Annular Rams(of metalic construction) and Blind-Shear-Rams. When a problem was first detected the operations staff closed the upper annular preventer which failed to stop the flow of gas & oil up the riser towards the rig, next the operators closed a metal annular pipe ram which appeared to work but only lasted temporarily as the drill pipe was filling with oil & gas at high pressure, this high pressure buckled the pipe causing the annular preventers and annular metal rams to fail. Gas & oil continued up to the rig and caused explosions, these explosions would have cut communications and power to the BOP causing the two AMF Dead-Man systems to operate. The two AMF Dead-Man sytems were called the Yellow Pod and the Blue Pod creating a redundancy system to improve safety in an Emergency Situation. The systems comprised of 9V batteries for the computers and 27V batteries for the solenoids within the Pods, these control the Blind-Shear-Rams. The Blue Pod had been wrongly wired causing the 27V battery to drain and thus preventing Its' Blind-Shear-Ram Solenoid from Operating! The Yellow Pods' Solenoid had been wrongly wired also preventing Its' Blind-Shear-Ram from Operating! Thus preventing the most important and "Last-Chance" system from being able to work! I was recently involved in one of Europes most expensive engineering up-grades at close to a billion euros in cost. The control system for this up-grade was built in eastern europe and a team of about six engineers were sent over to perform Factory-Acceptance-Tests, before this the control system was tested by the manufacturers themselves using simulation software. Once the system had been installed on-site, live tests of all its' functions were carried out again ie inputs and outputs and more importantly alarms, inter-locks and trips! !!! From My knowledge of industrial systems I find the Deepwater list of failures ABSOLUTELY staggering!!! ! Below is the link to the CBS Findings on the Deepwater Incident; http://www.csb.gov/csb-releases-new-computer-animation-of-2010-deepwater-horizon-blowout/ Below is a picture of gulf/atlantic currents and the web page it came from; http://oceancurrents.rsmas.miami.edu/atlantic/gulf-stream.html Edited March 12, 2015 by Ant Sinclair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 I read yesterday that nearly one and a quarter million gallons of dispersant was used on the resulting slick from the Deepwater incident and that the dispersant was even more toxic to the phytoplankton than the crude and BP was ordered to stop using it because of its' enviromental impact! As You will probably appreciate this slick and dispersants would have spread north with the gulf stream into colder and more productive areas phytoplankton wise!!! ! Although it would get diluted and broken down (chemically) so the effect will be greatly reduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 12, 2015 Author Share Posted March 12, 2015 How much would it be reduced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 How much would it be reduced? 1.25 million gallons dispersant diluted in 643 quadrillion gallons of the Gulf - that's a 17 digit number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 12, 2015 Author Share Posted March 12, 2015 Wouldn't that be dependent on its' specific gravity and whether it floated on the surface? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Wouldn't that be dependent on its' specific gravity and whether it floated on the surface? It's an emulsifier, breaking down the oil into smaller droplets that sink throughout the water column and bacteria finish it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 12, 2015 Author Share Posted March 12, 2015 How far would You think the crude/dispersant mix could have travelled north up the atlantic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 How far would You think the crude/dispersant mix could have travelled north up the atlantic? I live on the coast and while my observations are strictly anecdotal if it had a significant effect the local commercial fishermen would be reporting it for sure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 13, 2015 Author Share Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) Strange You're an Engineer yes? What is Your take on Post No.8 of this thread, in particular the CBS findings on the failure of the Blow Out Preventer? Edited March 13, 2015 by Ant Sinclair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Strange Your an Engineer yes? What is Your take on Post No.8 of this thread, in particular the CBS findings on the failure of the Blow Out Preventer? I don't know enough to comment. From the little I have heard (just scraps on the news) it does sound like there were some bad practices. I assume there is some sort of official/independent inquiry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 13, 2015 Author Share Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) I'm trying to point You towards the wiring of the AMF Dead-Man Blue & Yellow Pods in particular. I believe I have transcripted the CBS findings fairly accurately and supplied the link to the same! Sorry for the typo it is the CSB not CBS - CHEMICAL SAFETY BOARD! Edited March 13, 2015 by Ant Sinclair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overtone Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Actually, if you check any map with phytoplankton distribution and primary productivity you'll see that the highest productivity is observed in polar regions and Gulf has very low productivity As the Cartesian maps do not make clear, the high productivity polar areas are fairly small, and most of the expanse of ocean on this planet is in the "low" category. Meanwhile, the other general area of high productivity is along continental shelves and such shallower, river fed, upwelling fostering regions, and this area is fairly large in total compared with the polar regions as well as being productive - more strongly sunlit, etc - for more of the year. The Gulf has a lot of this continental shelf area in proportion to its total area, and for that among other reasons is - or has been - more productive than an equivalent area of average ocean despite being somewhat less productive than the polar hot spots (which are at growing risk of oil spills themselves). I agree that the damage done to the Gulf ecosystem is unlikely to have measurable effects on the atmospheric oxygen balance of the planet. But the severity of that damage and its consequences should not be minimized or dismissed for that reason. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 17, 2015 Author Share Posted March 17, 2015 I'm trying to point You towards the wiring of the AMF Dead-Man Blue & Yellow Pods in particular. I believe I have transcripted the CBS findings fairly accurately and supplied the link to the same!Sorry for the typo it is the CSB not CBS - CHEMICAL SAFETY BOARD! ??? ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 ??? ? Are you expecting me to say something about this? I don't know anything about it, other than the paragraphs you quoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 17, 2015 Author Share Posted March 17, 2015 It is the Chemical Safety Boards FINDINGS, Why Can You Not Comment On What's In Front Of You, You're Not Normally Shy On Passing Comment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 (edited) It is the Chemical Safety Boards FINDINGS, Why Can You Not Comment On What's In Front Of You, You're Not Normally Shy On Passing Comment? I assume you are referring to this: Deepwater Rig There were several safety systems on the Blow-Out-Preventer(B.O.P.). The CBS investigation said that in the BOP were separate donut shaped rubber seals called Annular Preventers, Annular Rams(of metalic construction) and Blind-Shear-Rams. When a problem was first detected the operations staff closed the upper annular preventer which failed to stop the flow of gas & oil up the riser towards the rig, next the operators closed a metal annular pipe ram which appeared to work but only lasted temporarily as the drill pipe was filling with oil & gas at high pressure, this high pressure buckled the pipe causing the annular preventers and annular metal rams to fail. Gas & oil continued up to the rig and caused explosions, these explosions would have cut communications and power to the BOP causing the two AMF Dead-Man systems to operate. The two AMF Dead-Man sytems were called the Yellow Pod and the Blue Pod creating a redundancy system to improve safety in an Emergency Situation. The systems comprised of 9V batteries for the computers and 27V batteries for the solenoids within the Pods, these control the Blind-Shear-Rams. The Blue Pod had been wrongly wired causing the 27V battery to drain and thus preventing Its' Blind-Shear-Ram Solenoid from Operating! The Yellow Pods' Solenoid had been wrongly wired also preventing Its' Blind-Shear-Ram from Operating! Thus preventing the most important and "Last-Chance" system from being able to work! I was recently involved in one of Europes most expensive engineering up-grades at close to a billion euros in cost. The control system for this up-grade was built in eastern europe and a team of about six engineers were sent over to perform Factory-Acceptance-Tests, before this the control system was tested by the manufacturers themselves using simulation software. Once the system had been installed on-site, live tests of all its' functions were carried out again ie inputs and outputs and more importantly alarms, inter-locks and trips! !!! From My knowledge of industrial systems I find the Deepwater list of failures ABSOLUTELY staggering!!! ! Below is the link to the CBS Findings on the Deepwater Incident; http://www.csb.gov/csb-releases-new-computer-animation-of-2010-deepwater-horizon-blowout/ Below is a picture of gulf/atlantic currents and the web page it came from; http://oceancurrents.rsmas.miami.edu/atlantic/gulf-stream.html Is that your description of the CSB findings? (I assume so as you don't give a source for it.) If that description of the CSB findings is correct then it sounds very bad. But I have no idea what the CSB report says, and probably would not have any understanding of the significance if I did see the report. Beyond the obvious: "something very bad happened". I don't know what else you expect me to say about it. (Or why.) Edited March 17, 2015 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted March 17, 2015 Author Share Posted March 17, 2015 If that description of the CSB findings is correct then it sounds very bad. "Very bad" that two safety systems that were so very, very critically Important for protecting the crew on-board the rig and the enviroment, were both wrongly wired, would You not call it "criminal"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 (edited) If that description of the CSB findings is correct then it sounds very bad. "Very bad" that two safety systems that were so very, very critically Important for protecting the crew on-board the rig and the enviroment, were both wrongly wired, would You not call it "criminal"? I have no idea if that is criminal or not. I know nothing about the engineering issues and even less about the legal issues. If you say it is, I am not going to argue. Edited March 17, 2015 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now