Some 420,000 gallons of fuel oil spilled into the Mississippi River early Wednesday, after a 600-foot chemical tanker collided with a fuel barge. The collision split the barge in half; thick, slow-to-evaporate fuel has traveled at least 12 miles downriver. The Coast Guard closed a 29-mile stretch of the river around New Orleans, and residents have been asked to conserve water as drinking-water intakes are closed or diverted. Cleanup is expected to take days. Full environmental impact is yet unclear, but, notes a spokesperson for the Louisiana environmental agency: "We have a lot of wildlife in the southern delta." To look on the bright side, the spill pales in comparison to the millions of gallons of oil that the Coast Guard estimates were dumped in the river following Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Yes, folks, millions -- not zero.
sources:
Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success
‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science
Comments
View as Threaded
Wolverine Posted 7:23 am
23 Jul 2008
Permalink
Masked Goddess Posted 8:06 am
23 Jul 2008
Permalink
perk Posted 11:20 am
23 Jul 2008
Permalink
perk Posted 11:29 am
23 Jul 2008
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 11:38 am
23 Jul 2008
Permalink
perk Posted 12:40 pm
23 Jul 2008
Source: http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/07/mccain_visit_d ...
Permalink
perk Posted 12:58 pm
23 Jul 2008
The very large south portion of the state contains hundreds of thousands of acres of "swamp" fed by the Mississippi that is the major breeding ground for most of the fish that we enjoy as food in the Gulf of Mexico. If this heavy, number 6 fuel oil is not contained quickly, much damage to that breeding ground will result. Thankfully, the fishing industry in LA is a strong voice and the state has prepared to mobilize significant resources to clean-up such an event as a result.
Let's hope that clean up plan works. From some experience I can say that the "hands" that do the clean-up are from long lines of fishing Cajun families of South LA that understand this well, and they will be most diligent in that effort.
Permalink
Fingers Posted 3:11 am
24 Jul 2008
Permalink
Pathos Posted 3:41 am
24 Jul 2008
On the millions of gallons spilled during Katrina and Rita:
I followed the "not zero" link, and followed the links in the link, checked the Minerals Management Service website, was grossly mislead as was their intention, followed some more links to an actual news source (such as it is), and... Yeah. Katrina and Rita spilled something like 9 million gallons of crude.
Now, when McCain uses the fact that Katrina and Rita didn't cause "significant spillage" as an argument for off-shore drilling, he's not as full of $#@!! as you think. (Which isn't to say he isn't full of $#@!!--getting there.) The fact is, off-shore drilling only contributed to about 700,000 gallons of spills, and it was all in the form of what they call "minor" spills (less than 10,000 gallons) and "moderate" spills (less than 100,000 gallons). All the "major" spills (you know, like the the 3.78-million-gallon one) were actually inland.
So, "No major spills in the Gulf from Katrina and Rita." It's true. If you're looking for a major spill from an offshore oil rig as argument against offshore drilling, you're out of luck. You know... As long as you don't consider spills of 99,999 gallons or less to be "major"... And really, what's a few tens of thousands of gallons of lethal black slime among friends?
It is, of course, a crock of $#@!! to say that there were no major spills at all... They just don't happen to be relevant to arguments about offshore drilling.
Therefore, the real moral of this story is... We shouldn't be drilling inland, either.
Permalink