Remember the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico?
Me neither. But some say it was pretty bad.
“There’s just no data to suggest this is an environmental disaster, “said Marine Scientist and former LSU professor Ivor Van Heerden who also works as a BP spill-response contractor. “I have no interest in making BP look good — I think they lied about the size of the spill — but we’re not seeing catastrophic impacts. There’s a lot of hype, but no evidence to justify it.”
In fact these observations came– not a year after the Deepwater Horizon blew-up — but a mere three months afterwards, making them all the more blasphemous at the time. By now they’ve been amply vindicated, making the Obama team’s “moratorium” and more recent stonewalling on Gulf of Mexico drilling permits all the more preposterous.
The reasons for this “disasters’” fizzling out are many and were apparent to non-hack scientists from the get-go. To wit:
“People don’t comprehend how so much oil could break down in such a short time period,” explains Dr. LuAnn White, a toxicologist with the Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, who also serves as Director of the Center for Applied Environmental Health. “But we have natural oil seeps in the Gulf, and over 200 genera of microbes that break down oil already exist there.”
“It cannot be repeated often enough,” says Louisiana Marine Biologist Jerald Horst , Crude oil is a natural substance, its biodegradable. It’s a feast for microbes. And these consumed most of it from the BP spill.”
“Non-hack scientists.” I love that. We used to just call them scientists, but now we have to make the distinction.
I’d rather not waste the oil in a spill, but it turns out spilling it may be cleaner in the long run than burning it.