(physical oceanographer) 'No idea' where deep water oil is drifting

[jpak]

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/05/27/thurnherr.oil.ocean/

Those following the news of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico may be surprised at how much is still unknown about the extent and movement of the oil, in particular below the sea surface, as engineers and scientists attempt to stanch the flow.

More than five weeks after the oil rig disaster, and even with today's sophisticated technology, tracking and measuring the spill remains a huge challenge. Understanding fundamental difficulties with measuring in deep water helps explain why.

Because oil is lighter than water, it tends to rise to the surface and form slicks that can be very damaging to the natural ecosystem, and ultimately the regional economy, as we are seeing now. Spraying chemical dispersants on the slick, as BP has, is one way to remove oil from the surface. The dispersants break the slick into small droplets, which are transferred down into the water column by waves and turbulence.

BP has also injected dispersants into the oil plumes rising from the oil rig's broken plumbing on the seabed to try to prevent oil slicks from forming on the surface at all. This appears to have been at least partly successful in reducing the size of the surface slicks.

<more>

[Angry Dragon]

1. Hiding the oil

A new corporate oil game to reduce the blame

[TheWraith]

2. When a scientist uses phrases like "no idea," it's a bad sign.

It means you're only one step away from "oh, crap."

[Nihil]

3. I suspect that the "one step" isn't too far in the future either ...

One thing that has become obvious (though it should have been all along
if I'd thought about it) is how little "the public" knows about ocean
circulation.

If there was any knowledge at all in the 90% then it was largely the
simple "swirly arrows on the globe" type of recognition but very few
indeed understand that there can be different flows (rates, directions)
at different depths and fewer still appreciate the impact of undersea
topology on the overlying layers.

The need for accurate measurements to check/verify the models (even at
a regional level) is something that most of them would have written off
as "wasteful, unnecessary spending" a few months ago.

Now, that knowledge is urgently needed but the data is far too sparse.

This means that people are going to get a hell of a WTF moment when they
see how quickly and how far immiscible pollution can travel from a single
point source.

That's not the sort of science lesson that anyone wanted to learn this Spring.

:-(

[phantom power]

4. What have we done?

What the fuck have we done??

[jpak]

5. ignorance is bliss - don't worry, be happy

n/t