They are setting the oil on fire now.

[Initech]

Saw it today on CNN. They're solving one problem by creating another. Are these the most fucking clueless people on the planet in charge or what? :wtf:

[WeDidIt]

1. Uh, dude. They've been doing that for almost two months now. n/t

[HughMoran]

2. I was gonna say

Hardly news...

[Mimosa]

3. Burning the oil is far safer than using the dispersant.

It's all a disaster. But the effect of the burning will not ruin the environment. The dispersants will.

[htuttle]

5. Well, burning it will eventually ruin the environment too, just slower than the dispersants

The only way to handle oil without causing damage to the environment is to leave it in the ground.

[jwirr]

6. Doesn't burning fossil fuels contribute to global warming?

[izquierdista]

4. That's the best thing to do

Given the current situation. The only thing that would be better is to be able to vacuum it up into some oil/water separators.

The only way to detoxify the oil is to oxidize it completely to CO2. There are bacteria in the water that can do it, so does burning. It takes 15 cubic feet of air to oxidize one ounce of crude oil (extra credit problem for those with high school chemistry to do the calculation). If there is not enough oxygen in the water column, every ounce of oil is going to spread far and wide looking for those 15 cubic feet.

Sure, there are problems with incomplete combustion and soot, but burning is at least a step in the right direction.