How about 350,000 barrels or more per day?

This I think is a great image to use for surface analysis. This is 28 days.


Edit: link url

Edit: I've calculate the square miles in the image below and I come up with about 15,000 sq/mi.

[edit on 6/11/2010 by Morpheas]



[edit on 6/11/2010 by Morpheas]

Hmm...

Glancing over this thread I see lots of issues. For instance, the idea of the gushing growing EXPONENTIALLY every month (meaning doubling in rate) is WAAAYYY off.


reply to post by loam


First, you cite the "slick" being 3 miles x 15 miles... but then it's bigger than 2 states? Delaware alone is 30 miles x 96 miles.

Ok, so it does look huge according to ifitwamyhome... aren't they using a NOAA / NASA graphical overlay image of oil affected areas?

Does that overlay indicate an actual oil SLICK is covering that ENTIRE area? Or is that area affected by oil?

Your first link, saying "the surface oil slick covered an area greater than the size of Delaware and Rhode Island combined", is obviously flawed to death because it repeats and screams that the oil there is "heavy crude", which is false. The oil is sweet light crude. And that article doesn't cite any experts or officials, it just SCREAMS.

C'mon Loam, I know we have some philosophical differences, but I hold you in higher esteem than this.

So in this assessment you have emotioneering qualitative conceptual descriptions, and 'official' numbers. For your analysis you appear to go for the qualitative fear-monger news media report for your math....

I'm not even sure where you're going with your math, as painting a wall leaves a layer maybe a small handful of mils thick: WET. I'm not even claiming to be some math prodigy, but clearly you're not using volumetric math at all in this, while basing it totally on conceptual models that don't even account for differences between sheens and slicks.

[edit on 11-6-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by Jim Scott
Let's take your number of 350,469 barrels per day.
We know from the news that the pipe is 19 inches in inside diameter.
How fast would it be flowing to escape at the 350K barrel rate?
Well, 350,469 barrels/day is 4.056 barrels per second.
That's 170.37 gallons per second.
There are 231 cubic inches per gallon.
That is a flow rate of 39,355.47 cu in per second.
There are 283.53 cu in in the first inch of pipe exit space for a 19 in diam pipe.
One cubic inch of surface of the exit pipe would have to move at 138.8 inches per sec,
or 11.567 ft/sec. That's 694 ft/min or 41641 ft/hr, which is 7.89 miles/hr.

I suggest to you that it is moving at least 15 to 30 ft/sec out of that pipe based
on the videos. If I am right, you can double or triple your dump number.

Looks like to me that there has been over a million barrels lost into the gulf PER DAY.

I thought that was impossible.. but I just calculated based on the image above and the 1 gallon of paint figure and got just over a million also!

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss


This image clearly show where the oil is and I calculated 1 million bbl/day.

And what is worst is that is just the surface oil used in the calculations.

4.bp.blogspot.com...

Edit: How about others try using this image?? It is very clear where the oil is! I calculated about 15,000 sq/mi of oil and it is 28 days into the spill.

Also 38px = 10mi



[edit on 6/11/2010 by Morpheas]

[edit on 6/11/2010 by Morpheas]

Elsewhere I have read that one quart of oil will "pollute" one million gallons of seawater. I think that number is a little high, but let's use it for a moment.

At 1 million barrels per day, or 168 million quarts per day, we would pollute 168 trillion gallons of seawater. In 55 days, that pollutes 9240 trillion gallons of seawater. How much is that, you ask? Let's look at the size of the Gulf of Mexico: 5.3 X 10 E 17 US Gallons. That means the leak has polluted 1.6% of the entire Gulf of Mexico. That's not good, but it's not Armageddon.

By comparison, the Mississippi River discharges 3.3 million gallons of water into the Gulf every second. The leak would only need to put out three quarts of oil per second to pollute the mighty Mississippi River. Obviously, 3 quarts per second is not the output of the well. There is enough oil coming out of that well to pollute 56.7 Mississippi River outputs.

[edit on 6/11/2010 by Jim Scott]

well if your assertation is accurate disaster will be over in 50 days since Macondo ony has 100,000,000 barrels.


also it is day 46 into volcano correct?



[edit on 11-6-2010 by jeffrybinladen]

If the oil is being recreated in the depths of the Earth, the event must be stopped or it could be a long, long time (if ever) before it stops spewing oil. One can hope that the pressure will slow.

If you believe in God, this would be a good time to pray for BP.

I am.

reply to post by jeffrybinladen


How do you know how much oil is down there?

Originally posted by Morpheas
reply to post by jeffrybinladen

 

How do you know how much oil is down there?

Macondo well

and they have the 50 million wrong according to oil experts 100 mil

reply to post by jeffrybinladen


Thanks! I hope others try calculating bbl/day. If true about the 100 million bbls then maybe it will just run dry soon if it really is coming out at 1 million bbl/day?


[edit on 6/11/2010 by Morpheas]

Originally posted by Morpheas
reply to post by jeffrybinladen

 

Thanks! I hope others try calculating bbl/day. If true about the 100,000 million bbls then maybe it will just run dry soon if it really is coming out at 1 million bbl/day?

I find myself saying WELL all the time now= weird

Hard to say really EXACTLY what the exact estimate on the reserve really is but 100,000,000 is good enough for our purposes.

The well could actually slow once the gas psi drops however all indications would lead me to believe NO ON THAT and BP tapped into a huge methane funnel the only thing I can compare it with on surface land is this thing which as active user here you already know about prolly. But I like it so will post anyway!



So if it is a million bpd disaster should be over by August right around the time BP claims RW1 will make intersect...Interesting what if it really is millionbpd then BP can take credit for stopping the volcano when in reality it all went into gulf!

[edit on 11-6-2010 by jeffrybinladen]

***DOOMSDAY WARNING:

It's very possible that we are in-fact dealing with a month over month exponential increase in blow-out volume, both from the pipes and from the sea floor.

If true, then whether we are NOW dealing with 50,000 or 1 million barrels per day is a mute-point. Why? Because as time marches on, we will hit 2 mil/day, then 4 mil/day, then 10 mil per day, then 25 mil/day, then 120 mil/day, then 500 million barrels per day... till the field and/or migration channel is dry. The whole process could take five years or five months.

To clarify my above post -- I'm not predicting that the above numbers will be hit month after month, but rather that they 'could' be hit over a period of five months to five years. In other words, the post was meant to convey the concept of an exponential increase in blow-out volume.


TO FURTHER EXPLAIN, I believe that [if, and only if] the oil begins to blowout from outside the casing starting some 13,000 feet down the well hole all the way out to the sea floor, [then, and only then] might the following events happen:

First, the relief well(s) fail as they can't intercept all the upward oil flow.

Second, the cross sectional area of the 'uncased cavities' leading from the undersea oil [field and/or migration channel] to the sea floor, grows over time as erosion of the formation proceeds at 'some' unknown exponential rate leading to 'some' unknown exponential rate increase in blowout volume over time.

What could cause all 13,000 feet of casing to fail leading to such a doomsday scenario? The abrasive forces of the bits and pieces of the rock formation that are being blown up the well hole at high speed, due to BP's inability to control the rate of flow due to the blowout. In fact, the top-kill effort may have made matters worse by popping holes in the upper section of casing, causing the velocity of the oil in the lower casing to increase as more oil escapes into the sea floor.

NOTE: Above I talked about 'uncased cavities' and this was meant to convey the concept that once the oil is flowing rapidly outside the casing it will quickly erode multiple cavities up toward the sea floor. Even if the relief well(s) intercept one or two of these cavities, it is unlikely that they will intercept them all.

^^^^^^ABOVE POST NOTICED^^^^^^^^

If my analysis is accurate which I think is true and BP really did tap into a huge methane funnel remember Macondo

"In the narrative of One Hundred Years of Solitude, the town grows from a tiny settlement with almost no contact with the outside world, to eventually become a large and thriving place, before a banana plantation is set up. The establishment of the banana plantation lead to Macondo's downfall, followed by a gigantic windstorm that wipes it from the map. As the town grows and falls, different generations of the Buendía family play important roles, contributing to its development.

The fall of Macondo comes first as a result of a four-year rainfall, which destroyed most of the town's supplies and image. During the years following the rainfall, the town begins to empty, as does the Buendía home. The final stroke is, in fact, presaged in the manuscripts written by Melquíades 100 years before."


So this is it BP will set up a rig guard shack if you will preventing any/all access after well is supposedly sealed, and gas will continue to blow for who knows how long. They can't seal it because well casing will be done by August. Therefore what you have is huge dead zone in Mississippi Canyon block 252, probably 3-7 square miles, anything that mistakenly swims in except eels (they like oil and gas imho developed immunity growing up in eel pits exposed all the time with natural oil/gas fissures) so everything else will just die and eventually wash up probably half-eaten carcasses wherever prevailing gulf tides take corpses... Years from now you can be on a beach in Texas and ask a friend "Hey is that a half eaten porpoise" and because of knowledge of JBL's dead zone very simple reply... "Yes that came from block 252 JBL dead zone" NOT KIDDING EITHER....since i figured this out before anyone it should be me who can name the geo local same as a hurricane!!!

"JBL's BLOCK 252"

all this mental exercise of trying to count the number of Angels on the head of a pin is exhausting to read.

my thought is that some contingency planning needs to be done with regard to containing the petroleum product within the Gulf of Mexico itself... because if it gets out into the Gulf Stream current then the whole Atlantic oceans salt water/cold water mixing system ...www.answers.com...
will be altered in some bizarre ways

... the weather patterns will necessarily change because of the distortion in the currents salinity & temperature along with the unknown alteration of the pace/size/velocity of the present current ,
that the presence of so much oil would do.

pandoras' box has been opened...

and it might be best to think of the Gulf as a dead-zone casualty while the larger world can survive.

[edit on 11-6-2010 by St Udio]


ADD: i would propose doing a massive project as Dubai did in creating 'islands' or as the Dutch do with en.wikipedia.org...

build a barrier so that the Gulf loop current is severed from adding into the GulfStream current all its polluted & contaminated water...
a solid land bridge from the tip of Florida all the way past Key West and another mile wide land bridge jutting off that arc... to link with the Island nation of Cuba...

the affect being that the Gulf 'loop' will collapse on itself as only the warm Carribean waters will have a means to enter the Gulf below Cuba & S.A. the Guklf will then collect its own putrified water in a continuous clockwise swirl of water.... only then can a series of oil-waters seperaters be put into decades long use.

sure the Gulf Dies a decades long death, ... Long Live the World

[edit on 11-6-2010 by St Udio]

williams said 70,000 lbs per sq inch
the basic math of a 21 inch pipe at that pressure would account for the revised estimate of the amount of flow
5000 gal a day they said
until the ship was sucking up 5,ooo gal a day and it was 5% of the total
ooopsie

JAY WIEDNER IS SPEAKING on another radio show
Slumbrege asked for a chopper from BP to get them off the rig when they saw what the pressure was so high
bp refused
they got a PRIVATE chopper out there
he says if you live within 50 miles of the coast you might think about taking a vacation
the source for this just had his web site suspended as he speaks

SO LINDSAY WILLIAMS mention of OCCULT appears to be what i said earlier A LIABILITY COVER UP

what does that say about the people who later died?
how much do they care about ANY people
THEY DON'T

that rig will soon wear out then the ONLY thing that will stop it is a NUKE
the oil flow will increase in size from the scouring
the water will flow down after the pressure equalizes
the water will be super heated
she will blow
the tsunami will blow the crap miles in land and that land will be poisoned for ages
a month or less for the well head pipe
(NOT JUST MY OPINION)
DR wickstrom
a scientist said 18 months to spread through all the oceans
most people won't hear this

lindsey williams just said it was OCCULT knowledge that led them to sell off prior to the blow out
THATS an OBVIOUS COVERING UP RIGHT THERE
he gets his info from an OIL EXEC.

when it is OBVIOUS that THEY JUST DID SIMPLE MATH

SO THEY ARE TO BLAME RIGHT THERE

of course the others are to blame
the financial sell off
and the derivitve trade of just before the rig went down
and not regulating the safty
who paid for thier campagns
heavily

there is lots of blame to go around

they knew from the flow and the scouring factor that this was going to blow
this is NOT their first rig and pipe
the russians have done this on land and had to use a nuke ti shut it done when it bluw
this is under a mile of sea water at 9 lb a gal(i think)
that adds to the pressure like sqeezing a zit (they say)

they have invested heavilly in green watch what happens when they start up the CARBON CREDITS trading it/ll be a chicago exchange I bet
MOB which is why chicagOBANA was installed

add to this the sun is emitting nasa scary solar flares
earthquake activity is tied to solar activity
the point in the sun that is emitting will be aimed at earth at solar MAX
in 2012

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Hmm...

Glancing over this thread

Problem number one. You can't just 'glance'. You need to read the actual links provided.

Case and point.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
First, you cite the "slick" being 3 miles x 15 miles... but then it's bigger than 2 states? Delaware alone is 30 miles x 96 miles.

The 3x15 mile dimension is relative to the CONFIRMED underwater plume. It has nothing to do with the dimensions of the surface oil slick mentioned in the two previous articles. I cited the plume to further demonstrate that an additional very significant quantity of oil not accounted for in the surface area exists.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Ok, so it does look huge according to ifitwamyhome... aren't they using a NOAA / NASA graphical overlay image of oil affected areas?

I assume you could read the source to further to determine the answer. But again, it's graphic has nothing to do with the dozens of surface area representations cited by the literature and the corresponding calculations I made.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Your first link, saying "the surface oil slick covered an area greater than the size of Delaware and Rhode Island combined", is obviously flawed to death because it repeats and screams that the oil there is "heavy crude", which is false. The oil is sweet light crude. And that article doesn't cite any experts or officials, it just SCREAMS.

Google the surface area slick size during that time frame and you will find dozens of sources without your perceived infirmity.

Honestly, did you really think that source was the only one? I randomly pulled it from a choice of several dozen.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
C'mon Loam, I know we have some philosophical differences, but I hold you in higher esteem than this.

I'm not really sure what 'philosophical differences' you would be referring to, but I suspect that the principle difference between us is that you have a consistent tendency to 'skim' my threads, leading to an inaccurate understanding of the presented material.

Slow down. Take a deep breath. And try to read at least 90% of it.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
So in this assessment you have emotioneering qualitative conceptual descriptions, and 'official' numbers. For your analysis you appear to go for the qualitative fear-monger news media report for your math....

Huh?

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I'm not even sure where you're going with your math, as painting a wall leaves a layer maybe a small handful of mils thick: WET. I'm not even claiming to be some math prodigy, but clearly you're not using volumetric math at all in this, while basing it totally on conceptual models that don't even account for differences between sheens and slicks.

Well, maybe we're even then. You don't understand my math, and honestly I don't understand your English.

But if I had to guess at what you are saying, I think it is that you dispute the premise that a layer of paint is equivalent to a layer of oil.

I considered this.

But after looking at dozens of sources, and many more images of the consistency of the surface slick, I can assure you ONE layer of paint at MOST is 1mm thick. Pull out a ruler and you will see that is obviously the case. Moreover the 350 square feet number is fairly consistent. Some sources say less...some say more. Regardless, as I originally pointed out, even if I off by 50% the resulting number is still staggering and WAY beyond the 'official' estimates.

In any event, nice try at debunking this. I really do want to read from those who disagree.

You may be convinced I'm full of it, and while I'd like to be there with you on this, nothing you've written even gets me close.



[edit on 11-6-2010 by loam]

reply to post by jeffrybinladen

Originally posted by jeffrybinladen
well if your assertation is accurate disaster will be over in 50 days since Macondo ony has 100,000,000 barrels.

Depending on when you begin the count, we are either at or near in either direction the 50 day mark.

In a disaster where repeated 'official' BP or government estimations have been incorrect, how can you have any confidence in the various estimated sizes of the reservoir?

reply to post by St Udio

Originally posted by St Udio
all this mental exercise of trying to count the number of Angels on the head of a pin is exhausting to read.

Yes, it is.

Originally posted by St Udio
pandoras' box has been opened...

Yes it has.

Forget for the moment the ecological damage. Where does this go politically, socially and economically?

Awesome thread Loam. As someone who doesn't much like math, even I find this a compelling read. The numbers here I think play into the narrative of journalists and others being barred from delivering accurate representations of what's happening visually, as well as the seeming fuzziness from official channels since day one on how much oil is spilling. This thread has raised my conspiracy radar to a new high.

I know it may seem to some to be a dumb question to most of you people, but I am courious and have to ask.

After the crude oil leaks out from the well and into the surrounding ocean, who owns it?

If some enterprising individual had a way to recover a sizable amount of this oil, could they then transport it to a refinery and sell it?

I know this is a simplistic way of putting forth such a question but it is the best way I can express my couriousity on this matter.

As to finding a way to measure the amount of oil within the spill. I can personally verify that one quart of motor oil will cover over an acre of calm water. I did this several years ago in a effoert to kill out a mosquito infestation. This is likely of very little help but it may point someone in a new direction.

[edit on 11-6-2010 by hdutton]