Community | April 29, 2010 | 39 comments

Gulf of Mexico oil slick said to be five times bigger

Image
bocky10
The US Coast Guard says five times as much oil as previously thought could be leaking from a well beneath where a rig sank in the Gulf of Mexico last week.

Rear Admiral Mary Landry said 5,000 barrels (210,000 gallons) a day were now thought to be gushing into the sea 50 miles (80km) off Louisiana's coast.

A third leak had also been discovered at the site, Adm Landry said.

One fire-fighting expert told the BBC the disaster might become the "biggest oil spill in the world".

"Probably the only thing comparable to this is the Kuwait fires [following the Gulf War in 1991]," Mike Miller, head of Canadian oil well fire-fighting company Safety Boss, told BBC World Service.

"The Exxon Valdez [tanker disaster off Alaska in 1989] is going to pale [into insignificance] in comparison to this as it goes on."

If US Coast Guard estimates are correct, the slick could match the 11m gallons spilt from the Exxon Valdez within less than two months.

Earlier, a coast guard crew set fire to part of the oil slick, in an attempt to save environmentally fragile wetlands.

The "controlled burn" of surface oil took place in an area about 30 miles (50km) east of the Mississippi river delta, officials said.

But Mike Miller warned that burning off leaking oil was not a long-term solution at all.

"The object of this game is to shut off the flow," he said.

Engineers are believed to be working on a dome-like device to cover oil rising to the surface and pump it to container vessels but it may be weeks before this is in place.


ANALYSIS
Andy Gallacher
Andy Gallacher, BBC News, Venice, Louisiana

Despite efforts to burn off the oil, the crews here are now battling against the odds.

The US Coast Guard's discovery of another leak spewing oil from the collapsed rig has many here bracing for an environmental disaster on a huge scale.

An estimated 5,000 barrels of oil a day are now pouring into the Gulf of Mexico and forecasters say a new weather front could push the slick towards this coastline at an even faster rate. The state of Louisiana is now asking for emergency assistance as the oil slick draws closer.

It now seems inevitable that Louisiana's coastline will be hit and at least another two states could be affected.

Weather forecasters have meanwhile warned that changing winds could drive the oil slick ashore by Friday night.

Adm Landry said experts from the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) had increased their estimate for the leak based on aerial surveys, applying dispersants, studying the trajectory of the slick, local weather conditions, and other factors.

"This is not an exact science when we estimate the amount of oil. However, the NOAA is telling me now they'd prefer we use at least 5,000 barrels a day," she told reporters in New Orleans.

Adm Landry also said she had been told of "a new location of an additional breach in the riser of the deep underwater well", about 5,000ft (1,525m) under the surface.

President Barack Obama had been briefed on the new developments, and the government had offered to have the defence department help contain the spill, she added.

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has requested emergency assistance from the federal government.

"Our top priority is to protect our citizens and the environment. These resources are critical to mitigating the impact of the oil spill on our coast," he said in a statement.

BBC map

The oil slick currently has a circumference of about 600 miles (970km) and covers about 28,600 sq miles (74,100 sq km). Its leading edge is now only 20 miles (32km) east of the mouth of the Mississippi.

The first of the leaks causing it were found on Saturday, four days after the Deepwater Horizon platform, to which the pipe was attached, exploded and sank.

Eleven workers are missing and presumed dead after the worst oil rig disaster in almost a decade.

OIL SPILL DISASTERS
1991: 520m gallons were deliberately released from Iraqi oil tankers during the first Gulf War to impede the US invasion
1979: 140m gallons were spilt over nine months after a well blow-out in the Bay of Campeche off Mexico's coast
1979: 90m gallons leaked from a Greek oil tanker after it collided with another ship off the coast of Trinidad
1983: 80m gallons leaked into the Gulf over several months after a tanker collided with a drilling platform
1989: 11m gallons were spilt into Alaska's Prince William Sound in the Exxon Valdez disaster

Richard Black's blog
In pictures: Efforts to contain leak

On Tuesday Adm Landry, who is in charge of the clean-up effort, warned that work on sealing the leaking well using robotic submersibles might take months, and that the coast guard would attempt to set light to much of the oil.

With the spill moving towards Louisiana's coast, which contains some 40% of the nation's wetlands and spawning grounds for countless fish and birds, she said a "controlled burn" of oil contained by special booms could limit the impact.

Environmental experts say animals nearby might be affected by toxic fumes, but perhaps not as much as if they were coated in oil.

On Wednesday afternoon, two vessels dispatched by the coast guard and the British oil company BP - which had hired the sunken rig - swept the thickest concentrations of oil into a fire-resistant boom.

They then towed it to a five-mile "burn zone" set up inside the slick, where it was set alight shortly before nightfall and allowed to burn.

If the test is deemed successful, BP is expected to continue the controlled burns as long as the weather conditions are favourable.

Possible solutions

BP says it has not been able to activate a device known as a blow-out preventer, designed to stop oil flow in an emergency.

HAVE YOUR SAY

People can prevent a number of environmental disasters.

Valeriia
Send us your comments

Doug Suttles, the chief operating officer for exploration and production at BP, said it had not yet given up on engaging the valve, but was considering other possible solutions.

The idea of placing a dome directly over the leaks has only been done in shallow water before and is still two to four weeks from being operational.

BP will also begin drilling a "relief well" intersecting the original well, but it is also experimental and could take two to three months to stop the flow.

Forty-nine vessels - oil skimmers, tugboats barges and special recovery boats that separate oil from water - were working to round up oil, BP said.
  1. groups:
    Community
  2. tags:
    Gulf of Mexico Oil Slick five times bigger
  3.     
    |

39 comments // Gulf of Mexico oil slick said to be five times bigger

  • CarlosBobthe3rd
  • EmperorThan
  • futuregen
  • bailey78
    • 0
      bailey78  
    • Those that are looking for work will find a job on the Gulf Coast. Just wait about four more days. they will be hireing anybody that shows up looking to work on the clean up. This is going to be at least a three or four year job. They will be needing Equipment operaters and people to pressure wash all of the ground that is soaked with oil. They will even be hireing people to clean the rocks on the ground. This so big of a disaster that they will need Thousands of people to work clean-up. So those that need to go to work pack your bag an head that way. This is a gold mine for the unemployed.

    • 2 years ago
  • tubagodd
  • bailey78
    • 0
      bailey78  
    • tubagodd:

      How so? Do you think that the goverment is wanting to get a bunch of illegal aliens down there to work then do a big sweep on them? so as to send them home? Hey thats an idea but don't tell anyone about it it's a secret.

    • 2 years ago
  • glestoler
  • bailey78
    • 0
      bailey78  
    • glestoler:

      Well a hurricane might help breakup the oil. I don't know what it will do to it other than spread it around alot maybe even make it settle to the bottom of the bay's an gulf. I do know that if given a chance the Earth will recover it's going to thirty or fourty years to do so. I just hope that they can containit before it into the shallow bays and estuaries. Nothing kills off a bay like an oil slick.

    • 2 years ago
  • SamJonesSamJones
  • tubagodd
    • +2
      tubagodd  
    • They better get fined soo much for this that they couldn't even afford a toothpick. We must demand punishment for this, even if it was an accident, there are ways to prevent this but they decide not to do it to, just to save an extra buck.

    • 2 years ago
  • SamJonesSamJones
  • artemis6
  • SamJonesSamJones
    • +1
      SamJonesSamJones  
    • Not bummer. A swiss owned, british operated rig is ruining the southern half of the US coastline. This is worse than war. It's time to start asking why the British military isn't out there cleaning it up. One thing is for sure, I will vote for war if they don't pay every pound/swiss franc to every person that loses money due to this spill, not to mention for the entire clean up of the sea.

      Anyone else for holding the UK and The Swiss responsible with military power if this isn't taken care of?

      The swiss and the UK are the two greediest f ing countries in the western world.

      I expect a response from the white house- this should be treated as an act of war with a window of opportunity for the Europeans to fix it.

      And if they don't.....

      This hits America where it hurts the most. We need to demand foreign action.

      And I'm a god damn liberal!

    • 2 years ago
  • derk
  • remanns
  • nicsansone
  • bailey78
    • +2
      bailey78  
    • ya know I have been on rigs where every time they go to flare it then it would bridge over. I wonder why this one is blowing an going so well it must be one hell of a producer for it not to bridge on it's own. I also wonder what they are going to do when all this oil an sludge hits shore. this is going to make the Exxon Valdez look pretty minor . Not to say that it was not a very devastating accident but wait till all the Gulf coast of louisiana is covered in oil. I hope you folks like paying a small fortune for your seafood. plus all the water fowl and little water critters that are going to DIE!. Plus what it's going to do to the migratory water fowl like the Ducks and Geese that spend the winter there? Boy Oh Boy is this going to reach so many in so many diffrent ways yet to be seen. Oh lets not forget about all the other coastal States this is going to effect all those that live an work or make there living on the waters of the Gulf of mexico. I have news for those wanting to work they are going to need people to clean up the Gulf coast as soon as this hits land. every thing from cleaning the rocks on the shore-line to cleaning the dead an dieing birds. May God have Mercy on us all because this is going to get a lot worst than anything we've seen before.

    • 2 years ago
  • bocky10
  • bailey78
    • +1
      bailey78  
    • bocky10:

      yea there's no way to clean all this up before it hits land. I was on a land rig that blew out. Not a pretty sight nor a easy clean up. lots of man hours and lots of dead animals.

    • 2 years ago
  • lifestudentno83
  • Ionstorm2040
  • mitekillem
  • neocongo
    • +3
      neocongo  
    • LMAO

      Anti big government Republican Governor Bobby Jindal on his knees for Federal assistance. Just another case of "I hate big government, except when I need it."

    • 2 years ago
  • Reaper26
  • veronaaa
  • zichi
  • T5vZZ
  • masterzip
    • +1
      masterzip  
    • same exact thing happened in San Francisco a few years back. They reported a small amount of oil to not startle people or get negative news, and then released details later that it was 5 to 10 times larger than expected.

      is everyone following the Vatican's playbook for the press?

    • 2 years ago
  • bocky10
  • SamJonesSamJones
    • +1
      SamJonesSamJones  
    • masterzip:

      This is nothing like what happened in San Francisco. That was one tanker with a scraped hull. This is the earth spewing 210,000 gallons of (crude/sweet?) oil in the gulf of mexico, RIGHT on the coast of Louisiana. The entire shrimping/fishing/oyster will be decimated within days. Another major blow to NO, perhaps just as bad, and maybe in the long run worse than Katrina.

    • 2 years ago
  • Omnomynous
  • jay_ct
    • +2
      jay_ct  
    • So even if you are an idiot and believe we are not effecting global warming let this be a prime example of one of the biggest other reasons to curb our reliance on oil ASAP. There are so many reasons beyond global warming. It's so sad that this administration is just continuing the same tired path.

    • 2 years ago
  • bocky10
  • bailey78
  • Nuevarine
  • bailey78
  • bocky10
    • +1
      bocky10  
    • "The Exxon Valdez [tanker disaster off Alaska in 1989] is going to pale [into insignificance] in comparison to this as it goes on." Great, hey, if you're gonna break a record you might as well go the whole nine yards.

    • 2 years ago
  • bailey78
more from Community:

top videos