Who hasn't seen this? Cure for this oil spill shit..

[Jakez]

I feel like we live in a time where they would never try a solution like this just because it's a solution posted by some random citizen on Youtube.. they would rather leave this catastrophe than be embarrassed by something so simple, like they won't do anything unless there's some kind of 'beyond-the-average-persons-knowledge' kind of fix. Or a profitable one of course..

This [almost] natural problem can apparently be easily solved with a natural solution.. but why isn't this video all over TV?

[kane]

I saw that before. It is a great idea, but first they need to stop it from leaking into the ocean or all the cleaning solutions in the world will do no good.

[Jakez]

Originally Posted by kane

I saw that before. It is a great idea, but first they need to stop it from leaking into the ocean or all the cleaning solutions in the world will do no good.

It's far too late for that. What is it again, 10,000 barrels or gallons or tons or wtfever daily? C'mon now, this fucking DEAD GRASS just removed all that oil in SECONDS. Give us all a God damn break already. There are faaaaaaar too many other things to be worrying about.

[Coup]

great idea. now all you have to do is round up all the hay in america and you might just have enough.

but then you end up with a shitload of dead livestock because they have nothing to eat.

[Rochard]

So what are they gong to do? Take 10 zillion tons of dead grass and drop it in the gulf?

That would do more damage than the oil. And they still won't be able to fucking fish.

[Deej]

Originally Posted by Coup

great idea. now all you have to do is round up all the hay in america and you might just have enough.

but then you end up with a shitload of dead livestock because they have nothing to eat.

seriously?

[Jakez]

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! People here actually think a fuckload of oil in the ocean is less harmful than dead grass. God please kill me right now.

[ottopottomouse]

It's easy to apply something like that to a tiny amount of water+oil in a small contained space but saying you could clear up an oil slick the same way you can clear up a bowl of water is overly simplistic.

Now scale it up to being in the sea with currents moving the oil about plus the amount of hay you would need - which is needed for winter livestock food - plus what are you going to do with all the oily hay if you manage to get it back out of the sea again.

[Raf1]

Originally Posted by ottopottomouse

It's easy to apply something like that to a tiny amount of water+oil in a small contained space but saying you could clear up an oil slick the same way you can clear up a bowl of water is overly simplistic.

Now scale it up to being in the sea with currents moving the oil about plus the amount of hay you would need - which is needed for winter livestock food - plus what are you going to do with all the oily hay if you manage to get it back out of the sea again.

applying that in this situation would be impossible, but they have to figure out something. This is one of the biggest natural disasters yet.

[dyna mo]

it would take 10,000 of the world's largest cargo vessels to get enough hay to the spill zone to sop it up, then you have to get all the hay sopped with oil out of the water and then back to an area to unload it.

just because it's on youtube, doesn't mean you don't have to research a bit to see it's a stupid idea that won't work.

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

it would take 10,000 of the world's largest cargo vessels to get enough hay to the spill zone to sop it up,.

I want to see your math please . -2 points

but seriously, yes its hard to take a tiny example and scale it up. Doesn't mean it isn't workable , just that it's easier said than done.

Most of the oil won't make it onshore, but it might be possible to stop some of the onshore oil by coating inlets that have onshore oil with hay

[Naechy]

a great idea

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

I want to see your math please . -2 points

sure thing. +10 points

Hay absorbs water just as readily as oil. There are EPA-approved products that absorb only oil, even in water, for example HTP. But for this discussion we'll assume hay will absorb only the oil.

The area of the spill now exceeds 6,000 sq. miles and more than 11 million gallons of oil are in the sea.

That means that the weight of the oil in the water is just over 40,000 tons (7.29 lbs/gallon).

Let's assume it takes only 2 ounces of hay per sq. ft. of oil, which seems reasonable, requiring one pound of hay per eight sq. ft.

Six thousand sq. miles of oil is 172,232,755,200 square feet. That will require 21,529,094,400 pounds of hay to absorb. Note that these are billions figures. That amount of hay is 10,764,547 tons.

So you're going to transport almost eleven million tons of hay to sea to absorb 40,000 tons of oil.

Then, after the hay has absorbed the oil, the oil is still in the water. Only instead of having to deal with (a mere) 40,000 tons of oil alone, you've got to scoop up 10,804,619 tons of oil-sodden hay.



Let's do the cube, too. A bale of hay is compacted by a hay baling machine and can weigh between 60-130 pounds, depending on the machine's settings. Let's use the high figure. This hay bale measures 48 inches by 18 by 18, giving a volume of 15,552 cubic inches, or 9 cubic feet.

So: the volume of cargo capacity to transport the hay to the spill is 1,490,475,766 cubic feet. For planning purposes, cargo vessels use 100 cubic feet of volume to equal one metric ton of weight. Confusingly, this measure mixes English and metric systems and also uses the word "ton" to refer to the 100 cubic feet. In merchant-vessel terminology, a metric ton, or tonne, is referred to as a deadweight tonne (DWT) and equals 1,000 kilograms, hence one metric ton. ("Tonne" means 1,000 KG so "metric tonne" is redundant; in the US the term, "metric ton" is usually used instead of "tonne.")

It takes 11.11 bales of hay to fill 100 cubic feet, and the bales do not weigh a tonne, they weigh 1,444.44 pounds, or 655 kg. In other words, any vessel carrying hay would "cube out" before it would "weight out" - it would run out of space for the hay before it met its weight limit.

To carry all 165,608,418 bales of hay for the job would require 14,904,758 tons of volume (14,904,758 units of 100 cubic feet). A single modern Handymax bulk-cargo vessel has a capacity of about 55,000 DWT, but would cube out with hay at 4,950,000 bales. Hence, transporting 165.6 million hay bales to the spill area would require 33 Handymax ships. That's a tiny fraction of the number of Handymax ships in the world, of course, and certainly well within the harbor capacity of Gulf ports to handle. So simply carrying the hay to the spill appears to pose little logistic problem, but recovering it from the sea is an enormous problem since cargo vessels are entirely unequipped to do so.

[The Duck]

It would take A LOT of grass though. Somebody call Amsterdam.

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

sure thing. +10 points

Hay absorbs water just as readily as oil. There are EPA-approved products that absorb only oil, even in water, for example HTP. But for this discussion we'll assume hay will absorb only the oil.

The area of the spill now exceeds 6,000 sq. miles and more than 11 million gallons of oil are in the sea.

That means that the weight of the oil in the water is just over 40,000 tons (7.29 lbs/gallon).

Let's assume it takes only 2 ounces of hay per sq. ft. of oil, which seems reasonable, requiring one pound of hay per eight sq. ft.

Six thousand sq. miles of oil is 172,232,755,200 square feet. That will require 21,529,094,400 pounds of hay to absorb. Note that these are billions figures. That amount of hay is 10,764,547 tons.

So you're going to transport almost eleven million tons of hay to sea to absorb 40,000 tons of oil.

Then, after the hay has absorbed the oil, the oil is still in the water. Only instead of having to deal with (a mere) 40,000 tons of oil alone, you've got to scoop up 10,804,619 tons of oil-sodden hay.



Let's do the cube, too. A bale of hay is compacted by a hay baling machine and can weigh between 60-130 pounds, depending on the machine's settings. Let's use the high figure. This hay bale measures 48 inches by 18 by 18, giving a volume of 15,552 cubic inches, or 9 cubic feet.

So: the volume of cargo capacity to transport the hay to the spill is 1,490,475,766 cubic feet. For planning purposes, cargo vessels use 100 cubic feet of volume to equal one metric ton of weight. Confusingly, this measure mixes English and metric systems and also uses the word "ton" to refer to the 100 cubic feet. In merchant-vessel terminology, a metric ton, or tonne, is referred to as a deadweight tonne (DWT) and equals 1,000 kilograms, hence one metric ton. ("Tonne" means 1,000 KG so "metric tonne" is redundant; in the US the term, "metric ton" is usually used instead of "tonne.")

It takes 11.11 bales of hay to fill 100 cubic feet, and the bales do not weigh a tonne, they weigh 1,444.44 pounds, or 655 kg. In other words, any vessel carrying hay would "cube out" before it would "weight out" - it would run out of space for the hay before it met its weight limit.

To carry all 165,608,418 bales of hay for the job would require 14,904,758 tons of volume (14,904,758 units of 100 cubic feet). A single modern Handymax bulk-cargo vessel has a capacity of about 55,000 DWT, but would cube out with hay at 4,950,000 bales. Hence, transporting 165.6 million hay bales to the spill area would require 33 Handymax ships. That's a tiny fraction of the number of Handymax ships in the world, of course, and certainly well within the harbor capacity of Gulf ports to handle. So simply carrying the hay to the spill appears to pose little logistic problem, but recovering it from the sea is an enormous problem since cargo vessels are entirely unequipped to do so.

Okay, the "hay solution" is out the window.

[TheDoc]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

sure thing. +10 points

Hay absorbs water just as readily as oil. There are EPA-approved products that absorb only oil, even in water, for example HTP. But for this discussion we'll assume hay will absorb only the oil.

The area of the spill now exceeds 6,000 sq. miles and more than 11 million gallons of oil are in the sea.

That means that the weight of the oil in the water is just over 40,000 tons (7.29 lbs/gallon).

Let's assume it takes only 2 ounces of hay per sq. ft. of oil, which seems reasonable, requiring one pound of hay per eight sq. ft.

Six thousand sq. miles of oil is 172,232,755,200 square feet. That will require 21,529,094,400 pounds of hay to absorb. Note that these are billions figures. That amount of hay is 10,764,547 tons.

So you're going to transport almost eleven million tons of hay to sea to absorb 40,000 tons of oil.

Then, after the hay has absorbed the oil, the oil is still in the water. Only instead of having to deal with (a mere) 40,000 tons of oil alone, you've got to scoop up 10,804,619 tons of oil-sodden hay.



Let's do the cube, too. A bale of hay is compacted by a hay baling machine and can weigh between 60-130 pounds, depending on the machine's settings. Let's use the high figure. This hay bale measures 48 inches by 18 by 18, giving a volume of 15,552 cubic inches, or 9 cubic feet.

So: the volume of cargo capacity to transport the hay to the spill is 1,490,475,766 cubic feet. For planning purposes, cargo vessels use 100 cubic feet of volume to equal one metric ton of weight. Confusingly, this measure mixes English and metric systems and also uses the word "ton" to refer to the 100 cubic feet. In merchant-vessel terminology, a metric ton, or tonne, is referred to as a deadweight tonne (DWT) and equals 1,000 kilograms, hence one metric ton. ("Tonne" means 1,000 KG so "metric tonne" is redundant; in the US the term, "metric ton" is usually used instead of "tonne.")

It takes 11.11 bales of hay to fill 100 cubic feet, and the bales do not weigh a tonne, they weigh 1,444.44 pounds, or 655 kg. In other words, any vessel carrying hay would "cube out" before it would "weight out" - it would run out of space for the hay before it met its weight limit.

To carry all 165,608,418 bales of hay for the job would require 14,904,758 tons of volume (14,904,758 units of 100 cubic feet). A single modern Handymax bulk-cargo vessel has a capacity of about 55,000 DWT, but would cube out with hay at 4,950,000 bales. Hence, transporting 165.6 million hay bales to the spill area would require 33 Handymax ships. That's a tiny fraction of the number of Handymax ships in the world, of course, and certainly well within the harbor capacity of Gulf ports to handle. So simply carrying the hay to the spill appears to pose little logistic problem, but recovering it from the sea is an enormous problem since cargo vessels are entirely unequipped to do so.

Great post...

Originally Posted by Robbie

Okay, the "hay solution" is out the window.

By the sounds of it, it would take something very special to deal with the oil this way.

[will76]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

I want to see your math please . -2 points

but seriously, yes its hard to take a tiny example and scale it up. Doesn't mean it isn't workable , just that it's easier said than done.

Most of the oil won't make it onshore, but it might be possible to stop some of the onshore oil by coating inlets that have onshore oil with hay

Hay isn't a solution for the miles and miles of oil out in the gulf but it could help along the marsh shore line.

If hay was placed along the shoreline where the marsh is at it would be a lot easier to remove the hay then it is to fucking hand wipe each blade of grass with a paper towel.... http://www.wwltv.com/video?id=95162179&sec=554827

On the beach (which LA doesn't have much of) it is a lot easier to clean up oil vs the marsh and doing it from along side a boat. IF they placed hay there they could just scoop it up.

[ottopottomouse]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

stuff about hay and oil and ships

Nice post Makes my 400 word replies to simple email questions look short

[Jakez]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

sure thing. +10 points

Hay absorbs water just as readily as oil. There are EPA-approved products that absorb only oil, even in water, for example HTP. But for this discussion we'll assume hay will absorb only the oil.

The area of the spill now exceeds 6,000 sq. miles and more than 11 million gallons of oil are in the sea.

That means that the weight of the oil in the water is just over 40,000 tons (7.29 lbs/gallon).

Let's assume it takes only 2 ounces of hay per sq. ft. of oil, which seems reasonable, requiring one pound of hay per eight sq. ft.

Six thousand sq. miles of oil is 172,232,755,200 square feet. That will require 21,529,094,400 pounds of hay to absorb. Note that these are billions figures. That amount of hay is 10,764,547 tons.

So you're going to transport almost eleven million tons of hay to sea to absorb 40,000 tons of oil.

Then, after the hay has absorbed the oil, the oil is still in the water. Only instead of having to deal with (a mere) 40,000 tons of oil alone, you've got to scoop up 10,804,619 tons of oil-sodden hay.



Let's do the cube, too. A bale of hay is compacted by a hay baling machine and can weigh between 60-130 pounds, depending on the machine's settings. Let's use the high figure. This hay bale measures 48 inches by 18 by 18, giving a volume of 15,552 cubic inches, or 9 cubic feet.

So: the volume of cargo capacity to transport the hay to the spill is 1,490,475,766 cubic feet. For planning purposes, cargo vessels use 100 cubic feet of volume to equal one metric ton of weight. Confusingly, this measure mixes English and metric systems and also uses the word "ton" to refer to the 100 cubic feet. In merchant-vessel terminology, a metric ton, or tonne, is referred to as a deadweight tonne (DWT) and equals 1,000 kilograms, hence one metric ton. ("Tonne" means 1,000 KG so "metric tonne" is redundant; in the US the term, "metric ton" is usually used instead of "tonne.")

It takes 11.11 bales of hay to fill 100 cubic feet, and the bales do not weigh a tonne, they weigh 1,444.44 pounds, or 655 kg. In other words, any vessel carrying hay would "cube out" before it would "weight out" - it would run out of space for the hay before it met its weight limit.

To carry all 165,608,418 bales of hay for the job would require 14,904,758 tons of volume (14,904,758 units of 100 cubic feet). A single modern Handymax bulk-cargo vessel has a capacity of about 55,000 DWT, but would cube out with hay at 4,950,000 bales. Hence, transporting 165.6 million hay bales to the spill area would require 33 Handymax ships. That's a tiny fraction of the number of Handymax ships in the world, of course, and certainly well within the harbor capacity of Gulf ports to handle. So simply carrying the hay to the spill appears to pose little logistic problem, but recovering it from the sea is an enormous problem since cargo vessels are entirely unequipped to do so.

You sonnn of aaa BIIITCHH!!!

I'm sure there's some kind of gigantic fisher net thing they could use to round up all the hay.. or at least create something. It looks like they are running out of options but will never run out of money so why not give it a try and at least get SOME of the oil out. And I'd still say scooping up any absurd amount of hay with oil stuck to it would be easier than scooping out oil alone. And you say they have plenty of ships for the job, so the only real problem would be gathering the oily hay, AND at least the animals MIGHT be able to visualize and avoid a gigantic amount of hay or at least land on it or run into it and then move away as opposed to swimming or landing into oil/water.

[TurboAngel]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

sure thing. +10 points

Hay absorbs water just as readily as oil. There are EPA-approved products that absorb only oil, even in water, for example HTP. But for this discussion we'll assume hay will absorb only the oil.

The area of the spill now exceeds 6,000 sq. miles and more than 11 million gallons of oil are in the sea.

That means that the weight of the oil in the water is just over 40,000 tons (7.29 lbs/gallon).

Let's assume it takes only 2 ounces of hay per sq. ft. of oil, which seems reasonable, requiring one pound of hay per eight sq. ft.

Six thousand sq. miles of oil is 172,232,755,200 square feet. That will require 21,529,094,400 pounds of hay to absorb. Note that these are billions figures. That amount of hay is 10,764,547 tons.

So you're going to transport almost eleven million tons of hay to sea to absorb 40,000 tons of oil.

Then, after the hay has absorbed the oil, the oil is still in the water. Only instead of having to deal with (a mere) 40,000 tons of oil alone, you've got to scoop up 10,804,619 tons of oil-sodden hay.



Let's do the cube, too. A bale of hay is compacted by a hay baling machine and can weigh between 60-130 pounds, depending on the machine's settings. Let's use the high figure. This hay bale measures 48 inches by 18 by 18, giving a volume of 15,552 cubic inches, or 9 cubic feet.

So: the volume of cargo capacity to transport the hay to the spill is 1,490,475,766 cubic feet. For planning purposes, cargo vessels use 100 cubic feet of volume to equal one metric ton of weight. Confusingly, this measure mixes English and metric systems and also uses the word "ton" to refer to the 100 cubic feet. In merchant-vessel terminology, a metric ton, or tonne, is referred to as a deadweight tonne (DWT) and equals 1,000 kilograms, hence one metric ton. ("Tonne" means 1,000 KG so "metric tonne" is redundant; in the US the term, "metric ton" is usually used instead of "tonne.")

It takes 11.11 bales of hay to fill 100 cubic feet, and the bales do not weigh a tonne, they weigh 1,444.44 pounds, or 655 kg. In other words, any vessel carrying hay would "cube out" before it would "weight out" - it would run out of space for the hay before it met its weight limit.

To carry all 165,608,418 bales of hay for the job would require 14,904,758 tons of volume (14,904,758 units of 100 cubic feet). A single modern Handymax bulk-cargo vessel has a capacity of about 55,000 DWT, but would cube out with hay at 4,950,000 bales. Hence, transporting 165.6 million hay bales to the spill area would require 33 Handymax ships. That's a tiny fraction of the number of Handymax ships in the world, of course, and certainly well within the harbor capacity of Gulf ports to handle. So simply carrying the hay to the spill appears to pose little logistic problem, but recovering it from the sea is an enormous problem since cargo vessels are entirely unequipped to do so.

Dammmmm I wish they could get this whole mess up faster than they are now.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Jakez

You sonnn of aaa BIIITCHH!!!

I'm sure there's some kind of gigantic fisher net thing they could use to round up all the hay.. or at least create something. It looks like they are running out of options but will never run out of money so why not give it a try and at least get SOME of the oil out. And I'd still say scooping up any absurd amount of hay with oil stuck to it would be easier than scooping out oil alone. And you say they have plenty of ships for the job, so the only real problem would be gathering the oily hay, AND at least the animals MIGHT be able to visualize and avoid a gigantic amount of hay or at least land on it or run into it and then move away as opposed to swimming or landing into oil/water.

don't forget, that math was done when there was only 11 million gallons of oil in the gulf.

multiply everything by what, 10x now. more probably.

ugh.

[Zester]

can you extract oil from the hash that has absorbed oil in a similar way ?
if so, time for the average joe to go the beach and start filling tanks for it's own use

[Jakez]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

don't forget, that math was done when there was only 11 million gallons of oil in the gulf.

multiply everything by what, 10x now. more probably.

ugh.

You're right. Let's just let it do it's thing.

[Manowar]

BP are so fucked right now

[Zester]

at the end of the video he explains how to do this in a wide scale:

[Konkan]

The smart engineers for a good money made artificial islands in Dubai for a pleasure. Why not other smart engineers do not find a solution to solve this problem with the oil. Those are heel of a numbers, but never before we had a problem with oil-spilling with this proportions. So give them a time and the problem will be solved. The eyes of the world are turned to BP so their floor is burning. They can`t stand still. There will be a solution -and always will be.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Jakez

You're right. Let's just let it do it's thing.

i never said that.

[Phoenix]

im sure if they used hay..it would clean up some of the mess...at this point many methods should be used..if they all work about 5%..then we need 20 of them...lol

[Amputate Your Head]

Originally Posted by Zester

can you extract oil from the hash that has absorbed oil in a similar way ?
if so, time for the average joe to go the beach and start filling tanks for it's own use

Crude oil is essentially useless to the regular joe. It has to be refined into it's various components.

[Poindexterity]

Originally Posted by Coup

great idea. now all you have to do is round up all the hay in america and you might just have enough.

but then you end up with a shitload of dead livestock because they have nothing to eat.

actually, ive heard some farmers say there probably ISNT enough hay in the US.
We'd have to import shit tons of it. and even then, how do you get that volume of hay TO the oil, then back out of the water again, AND THEN where the hell do you put it?

[Amputate Your Head]

Originally Posted by Poindexterity

actually, ive heard some farmers say there probably ISNT enough hay in the US.
We'd have to import shit tons of it. and even then, how do you get that volume of hay TO the oil, then back out of the water again, AND THEN where the hell do you put it?

They'd have to burn it. It's the only thing that makes any sense. But they're not going to drop a gazillion tons of hay in there. It'll never happen.

In case any of you guys forgot, hay costs money too. And then what the fuck you gonna feed the livestock?

[Jakez]

Money is no object to BP.

[Ron Bennett]

Oil is gushing out at a pressure, reportedly, of at least 6,000 PSI. Stopping it is the only answer. Anything else is just for show...

Dropping hay in the ocean may absorb some of the oil that's reached the surface, but not all of it has or even will due to the gusher being a mile under water. Also, the oil is very diluted, spread out over tens of thousands of square miles.

Again, the pressure of the gusher itself (not talking about the water above it) is likely over 6,000 PSI, so dropping rocks, mud, etc over the gusher won't work; pumping mud directly into the well is a different story, but the attempts failed due to the extremely high pressure of the gusher itself - attempting to force the mud down too hard would likely have caused the well casing to fail / opening a crater around the wellhead making the situation even worse.

The relief wells, once completed, will most likely shut the gusher off.

Ron

[$5 submissions]

Works great in small test conditions but probably wont work in the vast open gulf...

[Deputy Chief Command]

Originally Posted by Raf1

applying that in this situation would be impossible, but they have to figure out something. This is one of the biggest natural disasters yet.

it is not a NATURAL disaster , it is a manmade disaster ...

[Black Ops]

My brother-in-law works for (pretty high up the ladder) Qatar Petroleum. He said they could be cleaning this mess up with MANY different solutions but BP and the US government won't allow anyone, from any other nation, company or organization to attempt it. Also said there are other ways to cap the leak, but again, no one will listen. BP and the US government are running the show and those in the oil industry say it is because they have an agenda and will ultimately profit on a large scale over this. He also said the hay method WOULD work to clean up the oil, 100% success rate.

There are several nations waiting to come to the aid of BP, all denied.

Do the math.

[spazlabz]

Originally Posted by ottopottomouse

plus what are you going to do with all the oily hay if you manage to get it back out of the sea again.

You probably know as well as I do that their solution to the oil soaked hay would be to.....yup, burn it. Swapping one ecological disaster for another LOL

[roly]

Originally Posted by Black Ops

My brother-in-law works for (pretty high up the ladder) Qatar Petroleum. He said they could be cleaning this mess up with MANY different solutions but BP and the US government won't allow anyone, from any other nation, company or organization to attempt it. Also said there are other ways to cap the leak, but again, no one will listen. BP and the US government are running the show and those in the oil industry say it is because they have an agenda and will ultimately profit on a large scale over this. He also said the hay method WOULD work to clean up the oil, 100% success rate.

There are several nations waiting to come to the aid of BP, all denied.

Do the math.

considering bp has lost over $30billion off its share price, has spend over $1billion in clean up costs already and compensation payments, which will rise much higher and potentialy billions of dollars in fines. how is bp going to profit on a large scale from this?

and as far as "other ways to cap the leak" they are only other ideas, none of which have been tried before at this depth, just like the potential solutions bp is trying. bp has as much experience in deep sea drilling as anyone.

[Black Ops]

Originally Posted by roly

considering bp has lost over $30billion off its share price, has spend over $1billion in clean up costs already and compensation payments, which will rise much higher and potentialy billions of dollars in fines. how is bp going to profit on a large scale from this?

Brother, I'm just a porno webmaster, I couldn't tell you how. I was just told they can. And I'm sure those who do know are not going to tell those who don't need to know. Could be from a new law passing, could be from an extreme spike in gas, could be from insurance, no telling. I just build crappy websites and repeat what I was told by a true expert in the field.

What I do know is, my brother-in-law has a PhD in geology, is an oceanographer, a hydrologist AND he helps run an entire division at Qatar Petroleum. When I have him telling me there is a way, regardless if he doesn't tell me what way that is, I have to believe him. He said everyone in the oil industry knows how to profit from oil spills and leaks and that this leak was an accident, but now that it is there, it's not being stopped on purpose. Crazy as that sounds to me, he is an expert and I tend to listen to him. He's the smartest guy I've ever met.

Originally Posted by roly

and as far as "other ways to cap the leak" they are only other ideas, none of which have been tried before at this depth, just like the potential solutions bp is trying. bp has as much experience in deep sea drilling as anyone.

Well, what us civilians know is what we're told. He claims several Arab oil companies are on stand-by waiting for the green light to come and cap this, and said it can be done. He also said the media is only letting out part of the facts on this leak and how it can be resolved. This doesn't surprise me. It also doesn't surprise me that there are other companies waiting to step in and stop this but they are not being allowed to even go near it with a team of scientists.

[goodsites]

Who said you need every drop, you see those big ass blue walls of china they put up on the shore lines... line em with hay, and the oil dont get thru as of now, a tiny bit of oil gets thru them to the shores... thus why people are on the beach in florida mopping up chunks of oil, if they was screens in those walls full of hay it mop it up, you dont have to remove the oil, they would have been enclosed in the walls of the wall

Dont think your smart cuz you have a calculater, noone needs every drop picked up and
pumping in 50,000,000 barrels of chemical dispersements aint doing wonders for the eco system either

Hay would be agreat idea for florida coastline

[Jakez]

I fully believe what Black Ops was told about them somehow turning profits from this "mistake". They are in the most profitable business on this planet and they surely have a plan B, C, D, etc.. whatever they lose trying to clean this up (as if they are even trying) they can probably make back within the year not even counting the sneaky other ways they will profit because of this.

The conspiracy theorists will sort out what is really going on.

[ThunderBalls]

They *may* be making some cash on the oil they are getting out of there now but when its all said and done I don't know how in the hell they would profit from this. Between cleanup costs, fines, and lawsuits this could very well bankrupt them. Nobody hates these fucking oil companies more than me but I seriously doubt they think its a good thing to keep this going.

[Agent 488]

theory is flawed as oil will burn the hay and may catch the ocean on fire.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by ThunderBalls

They *may* be making some cash on the oil they are getting out of there now but when its all said and done I don't know how in the hell they would profit from this. Between cleanup costs, fines, and lawsuits this could very well bankrupt them. Nobody hates these fucking oil companies more than me but I seriously doubt they think its a good thing to keep this going.

but wait, someone named black ops says his brainiac bro in law says its a big money grab conspiracy. and with all his fancy PHDs gave the 100% thumbs up to the hay solution.

[papill0n]

Originally Posted by Black Ops

Brother, I'm just a porno webmaster, I couldn't tell you how. I was just told they can. And I'm sure those who do know are not going to tell those who don't need to know. Could be from a new law passing, could be from an extreme spike in gas, could be from insurance, no telling. I just build crappy websites and repeat what I was told by a true expert in the field.

What I do know is, my brother-in-law has a PhD in geology, is an oceanographer, a hydrologist AND he helps run an entire division at Qatar Petroleum. When I have him telling me there is a way, regardless if he doesn't tell me what way that is, I have to believe him. He said everyone in the oil industry knows how to profit from oil spills and leaks and that this leak was an accident, but now that it is there, it's not being stopped on purpose. Crazy as that sounds to me, he is an expert and I tend to listen to him. He's the smartest guy I've ever met.



Well, what us civilians know is what we're told. He claims several Arab oil companies are on stand-by waiting for the green light to come and cap this, and said it can be done. He also said the media is only letting out part of the facts on this leak and how it can be resolved. This doesn't surprise me. It also doesn't surprise me that there are other companies waiting to step in and stop this but they are not being allowed to even go near it with a team of scientists.

congrats - I am positive I won't read anything more retarded than this today

[dynastoned]

Originally Posted by Jakez

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! People here actually think a fuckload of oil in the ocean is less harmful than dead grass. God please kill me right now.

lolol no shit man