The Secret, 700-Million-Gallon Oil Fix That Worked — and Might Save the Gulf

[Duppers]

The Secret, 700-Million-Gallon Oil Fix That Worked — and Might Save the Gulf


Workers on the Arabian Gulf overlook a supertanker owned by Saudi Aramco, the oil company that used a suck-and-salvage American technology to recover 85 percent of its previously unreported spill in 1993 and '94.


There's a potential solution to the Gulf oil spill that neither BP, nor the federal government, nor anyone — save a couple intuitive engineers — seems willing to try. As The Politics Blog reported on Tuesday in an interview with former Shell Oil president John Hofmeister, the untapped solution involves using empty supertankers to suck the spill off the surface, treat and discharge the contaminated water, and either salvage or destroy the slick.

Hofmeister had been briefed on the strategy by a Houston-based environmental disaster expert named Nick Pozzi, who has used the same solution on several large spills during almost two decades of experience in the Middle East — who says that it could be deployed easily and should be, immediately, to protect the Gulf Coast. That it hasn't even been considered yet is, Pozzi thinks, owing to cost considerations, or because there's no clear chain of authority by which to get valuable ideas in the right hands. But with BP's latest four-pronged plan remaining unproven, and estimates of company liability already reaching the tens of billions of dollars (and counting), supertankers start to look like a bargain.

The suck-and-salvage technique was developed in desperation across the Arabian Gulf following a spill of mammoth proportions — 700 million gallons — that has until now gone unreported, as Saudi Arabia is a closed society, and its oil company, Saudi Aramco, remains owned by the House of Saud. But in 1993 and into '94, with four leaking tankers and two gushing wells, the royal family had an environmental disaster nearly sixty-five times the size of Exxon Valdez on its hands, and it desperately needed a solution.


Read more: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/gulf-oil-spill-supertankers-051310#ixzz0oD2jJEvZ


Perhaps they can have their cake and eat it too with this method? Thoughts?

[sakabatou]

1. This is a possibility.

[Webster Green]

2. "There's no clear chain of authority by which to get valuable ideas in the right hands."

Why? :shrug:

[Duppers]

6. Why Obama Must Stop Blogging & Start Leading on the Gulf

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/obama-response-to-gulf-oil-spill-051110

This is a National disaster, a National emergency, and should be treated as such.

[loudsue]

9. Absolutely. Actually, it's an international emergency.

There are many countries whose fishing/food supply will be devastated by this oil spill.

I can't believe Obama hasn't jailed those executives and had his EPA / FEMA / Homeland Security take over this mess.

It didn't start out as "his Katrina" as the wingnuts hoped, but it could well turn out to be just that.

[Duppers]

10. Indeed!

A friend just wrote on my FB page (yeah, I'm still using FB):

"He doesn't seem to "do" controversy, and he certainly can't be seen to be attacking his corporate masters. But he's going to take the blame if he doesn't, when the beaches are all covered in oil blobs and dead dolphins and turtles. And no one should think people like Brit Hume and Haley Barbour won't pivot seamlessly from claiming there's no problem to claiming that B. Hussein Obama has single-handedly destroyed the environment."

My friend is soooo right on.

[truedelphi]

21. Oh, please, the man is a spokesperson for the CorpoRATe Elite and

He will take on such an emergency when they tell him to, and according to how they tell him to.

He's certainly not there to stop emergencies, as emergencies seem to benefit the CorpoRATe elite.
(remember his appointee, Henry Kissinger, saying that we need to pare the earth's population down to around 600 million? Emergencies are part of the cleansing process the New World Order requires.)

He's there to help us feel better about ourselves, as in, "Boy ain't this a great country because all that nasty racist past is sure behind us now."

[FreshRocket]

27. Agree 100%.

[polichick]

3. That would be great for oil on the surface, but those toxic dispersants...

...caused huge rivers of oil to stay far below the surface, actually coating coral reefs. Don't know what they're going to do about that.

[Duppers]

12. dumbasses shouldn't have used the 400,000+ gals of toxic dispersant

BP chose more toxic, less effective oil dispersant manufactured by company with ‘close ties’ to oil giant.

So far, BP has told federal agencies that it has applied more than 400,000 gallons of a dispersant sold under the trade name Corexit and manufactured by Nalco Co., a company that was once part of Exxon Mobil Corp. and whose current leadership includes executives at both BP and Exxon. And another 805,000 gallons of Corexit are on order, the company said, with the possibility that hundreds of thousands of more gallons may be needed if the well continues spewing oil for weeks or months.

But according to EPA data, Corexit ranks far above dispersants made by competitors in toxicity and far below them in effectiveness in handling southern Louisiana crude.

Of 18 dispersants whose use EPA has approved, 12 were found to be more effective on southern Louisiana crude than Corexit, EPA data show. Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on Gulf of Mexico crude, while the two Corexit products rated 56 percent and 63 percent effective, respectively. The toxicity of the 12 was shown to be either comparable to the Corexit line or, in some cases, 10 or 20 times less, according to EPA.


http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/17/bp-dispersant-toxic/

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[polichick]

13. They were more interested in keeping it out of sight than in protecting the Gulf. nt

[Greyhound]

16. +01

[glitch]

19. +1,000,000/day nt

[paparush]

28. DING! . . . DING! . . . F_CKING DING!!!!!

[liberal N proud]

4. They are unwilling to try these things because of GREED

Someone close to the decision makers have to make huge profits or BP will not consider doing anything.

The question begs, why doesn't the federal government step in and order BP to take steps other than those futile attempts taken to date?

Someone needs to move beyond the greed and see the real need to resolve this situation as quickly as possible.

[Duppers]

7. "why doesn't the federal government step in and order BP to take steps..."

Exactly!

But, as the article says, the dumbasses haven't thought that THEY indeed can have either cake & eat it too! I.e., they CAN SAVE their precious oil, as the article says, IF they siphon it up, from the surface and below.

[liberal N proud]

11. That is exactly why they have not just sealed the well off

They want to collect all the oil they can.

[zipplewrath]

5. This well is extemely deep

Unlike the situations referenced, this leak is VERY deep. By the time the oil reaches the surface, it has spread around over a very large area. I mean, I suppose to some extent it couldn't hurt, heck if ya got 30% of the oil, it'd help right? I just don't know what kind of area they could hope to salvage.

[Duppers]

8. filter systems

Filter systems can filter the oil from the water as they siphon it.

There are those big blobs underwater too, especially the 10 mile X 1 mile X 300' one.

Perhaps there's some good news:

BP: Mile-long tube sucking oil away from Gulf well

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100516/ap_on_hi_te/us_gulf_oil_spill

[Gin]

14. who is paying for the dispersant's? I hope its not the US

[Duppers]

15. "a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself." A write-off, basically.

“It’s a chemical that the oil industry makes to sell to itself, basically,” said Defenders of Wildlife’s Richard Charter.

While use of dispersants helps keep oil off beaches and out of wetlands, “Scientists warn that the dispersed oil, as well as the dispersants themselves, might cause long-term harm to marine life.” Even Nalco admits the chemicals pose “moderate” environmental hazard, but Pro Publica noted that dispersant ingredients are kept secret under trade laws, so it’s difficult to know the potential fallout from using them. A Corexit product was used to cleanup the Exxon Valdez spill, and workers suffered health problems “including blood in their urine and assorted kidney and liver disorder.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/17/bp-dispersant-toxic

[lonestarnot]

22. and no doubt earnings off investment in the poison.

[Rex]

17. Great, so no one is going to take responsibility as the Titanic sinks?

Wow did Bush/Cheney leave a legacy to follow or what? Hey people, GEORGE BUSH IS GONE! Time to start adulting up to the situations! I know in the past all warmonger/oil tycoons could kill their secretaries and just throw them overboard...but we have a real ADULT in office now. Right? Am I wrong?

[walldude]

18. I saw this posted the other day.. It's gaining some traction..

It seems to have worked on the Saudi spill. Which I can't believe they managed to keep hidden. 700 million gallons... the Valdez was 11 million.

K&R

[Duppers]

20. thanks, walldude!

I DU googled it and found nothing, so I posted.

:hi:

[dragonlady]

23. How many empty supertankers are available and where are they? n/t

[tavalon]

24. Sounds like we might want to import some Saudi know how

[20score]

25. Important find, Duppers! K&R

[MilesColtrane]

26. "Suck and Salvage"

Sounds like the career strategy of former Disney pop stars.

[paparush]

29. What is, "Describe the years during and after the Bush administration."

[MilesColtrane]

31. Hiyyyyyo!!

[Brother Buzz]

30. The Dutch delivered two kinda big ones but US regs prevent them from doing their job

Two Dutch companies are on stand-by to help the Americans tackle an oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico. The two companies use huge booms to sweep and suck the oil from the surface of the sea. The US authorities, however, have difficulties with the method they use.

What do the Dutch have that the Americans don’t when it comes to tackling oil spills at sea? “Skimmers,” answers Wierd Koops, chairman of the Dutch organisation for combating oil spills, Spill Response Group Holland.

The Americans don’t have spill response vessels with skimmers because their environment regulations do not allow it. With the Dutch method seawater is sucked up with the oil by the skimmer. The oil is stored in the tanker and the superfluous water is pumped overboard. But the water does contain some oil residue, and that is too much according to US environment regulations.

Wierd Koops thinks the US approach is nonsense, because otherwise you would have to store the surplus seawater in the tanks as well.

“We say no, you have to get as much oil as possible into the storage tanks and as little water as possible. So we pump the water, which contains drops of oil, back overboard.”

US regulations are contradictory, Mr Knoops stresses. Pumping water back into the sea with oil residue is not allowed. But you are allowed to combat the spill with chemicals so that the oil dissolves in the seawater. In both cases, the dissolved oil is naturally broken down quite quickly.

It is possible the Americans will opt for the Dutch method as the damage the oil spill could cause to the mud flats and salt marshes along the coast is much worse, warns Wetland expert Hans Revier.

“You have to make sure you clear up the oil at sea. As soon as the oil reaches the mud flats and salt marshes, it is too late. The only thing you can do then is dig it up. But then the solution is worse than the problem.”

<more>

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-oil-spill-response-team-standby-us-oil-disaster

[Duppers]

33. Excellent find, Brother Buzz - Your post needs its own thread!

Thanks!

edited to add: YOUR post NEEDS its own thread.

I fear the concern for this disaster is waning and we cannot afford for it to.

[Brother Buzz]

34. It was posted as an OP two weeks ago

[lonestarnot]

35. Yes, I was appalled two weeks ago.

:cry:

[Duppers]

37. dang sorry I missed it.

nt

[Brother Buzz]

38. We should hook-up Kevin Costner with the Dutch boys and let them get to work

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4387898

[SidDithers]

32. That's a more realistic solution than hair and hay...nt

Sid

[Blue_Tires]

36. ttt

[Juneboarder]

39. Really?

We've been at this for close to one month now and finally it pops up, a quick-easy fix?

I try and remain positive, but I'm highly skeptical here...