Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Gulf Watchers ROV #391 - BP's Gulf Catastrophe - Talking about Change (262 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  So, did the Corexit make the oil sink to the (12+ / 0-)


    That does sound like guaranteed disater for the oysters.

    I still say, we need to reduce our population,

    and we need to mass produce insect larvae, and package it and season it, so we can eat it in the same way I am eating ground turkey right now.

    I dump a pound of it, pre-seasoned, priced at $1.18 per pound at Walmart, I dump it in my skillet, and smash it up, and mix in sour cream and generic Velveeta cheese.

    We cannot feed everyone beef, and we cannot feed everyone oysters, in this situation.

    But, above all we need to reduce our population to less than one billion, within the next 2 or 3 hundred years.

    •  It's not that simple (9+ / 0-)

      Even if they hadn't used dispersant, as the oil fractions dissociated, the heavier components would have sunk.

      The Corexit probably affected where the oil ended up. There's probably more on the sea bed because of dispersant use - without it, more oil would have reached the beaches and marshes. But a higher proportion of the oil on the sea bed is probably in the relatively lifeless deep because of dispersant - without it, there'd probably be a higher fraction of a smaller total of seabed oil in the more densely populated shallows.

      So, on the specific question of whether Corexit caused more or less oil to end up in the oyster beds, I don't know. I'd lean towards more, but acknowledge there's a decent chance the opposite is true.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site