106
General Discussion / Re: There's a Hole in the Bottom of the Sea
« on: May 18, 2010, 11:17:10 am »If BP's siphon is getting 1000 barrels per day, this is a pretty bad leak.
So it sounds like the estimates range frmo 50,000 gallons / day, to 210,000 gallons / day, and someone else here suggested that it was actually 50,000 barrels per day but I don't know if that was really a thing.
Can anyone link to someplace that has an estimate from BP at least? We can assume that it would be no less than that, in any case, but that it could be much more. And then an estimate from some environmental organization, to give us an unreliable estimate on the high end?
Quote
However, there is a question as to the volume of the leak. BP still maintains an estimate of 5,000 barrels (210,000 gallons) of oil per day, based upon surface observations. Dr. Steven Wereley, an associate professor of mechanical engineering has calculated the flow to be more on the order of 70,000 barrels (2.94 million gallons) of methane and oil per day, based upon direct observations from the larger pipe opening. According to him, though the leak shows methane being released in addition to the oil, the oil by far appears to be the majority of material being ejected. If Wereley is correct, BP is underestimating the leak by a factor of 14, and will actually be containing little of the oil eruption through its siphoning plan.
I am pretty certain it is in the 10s of thousands of barrels a day. The 50,000 was just my conjecture, though others have floated that number.
Upon careful research, I find it's only US Gulf of Mexico rigs that have never had an accident of this kind.That's a very different beast from what you originally said though, sir. Making a delineation between US spills and other spills is rather specious as well. BP is a British company, and Transocean swedish. The same equipment is used in the north sea as that used here. The rig that sank was built in South Korea. The difference is only this: to whom do the tax dollars go? This just happens to be the first gulf spill the US govt. had a regulatory hand in.(which reinforces Aqizzar's earlier argument) It is not the first gulf spill that United States based employees have overseen. It gets to be a rather specious argument.
You just beat me to it by a few seconds

