Oil in Lake Pontchartrain now. First reports of oil in Lake Pontchartrain | New Orleans News, Local News, Breaking News, Weather | wwltv.com | Gulf Oil Spill State closes more fishing areas around Lake Pontchartrain due to Gulf oil spill | NOLA.com No sand berms...no rock jetties...tens of thousands of phantom cleanup workers....actual cleanup workers who are required to take 45 minute breaks every half hour...constant use of dispersants that make the oil submerged and render booms ineffective. Couple all this with the administration's (Salazar's) moratorium/war on the oil industry and you get to see that the federal government's strategy is to just let the oil get everywhere, depend on oil eating microbes to munch all the oil, and make political hay out of it's action plan... ....instead of using real hay to clean up actual oil !!! :dis:
It really is a silly idea....why spend money on hay when dead marsh grass does the same thing...and it's already there for free !!:lol:.
Well, the stupid part of the demostration was when they compared used motor oil to the crude seeping from the floor of the gulf. Just a couple of rednecks trying to sell some hay they grew too much of. I can't blame them for trying to turn a buck, but they must think BP and the Government are some real dumbasses. I still can't beleive that they called a press conference for that ****.
I know it is a month old but I haven't seen the video until yesterday. I got a kick out of seeing these two rednecks proving their point. I found the demonstration humorous for a couple of reasons. The first one is they had this demonstration, the way they did it and their demeanor was quite funny although they didn't intend it to be. The second point is that BP is spending Billions of dollars and all or this high tech equipment and everything else and these good ole boys showed a cheaper way to absorb some of the oil. This is a massive spill, I may disagree with some here but I think its going to take many things to clean this up. Skimmers, hay, anything we can get our hands on to do the job. I do think BP and the government are dumbasses. BP for bribing government officials that lead to this disaster. The government for not taking it seriously or not doing anything until day 70 and then for holding up progress.
Here's a link to an article to a guest editorial by Len Bahr in the Times Picayune detailing his opposition to the sand berm project. Sand berms a dubious solution: A guest column by Len Bahr | NOLA.com His intro basically blames Jindal for the concept of the sand berm and implies that it is knee jerk political grandstanding. Yet this accusation itself reveals that his opposition to the project is political and knee jerk despite his claims that it is based on his vast experience in marine sciences and policy formation. He is not above the "highly charged political climate"....he is square in the middle of it and his introductory comments sound a lot like political axe grinding. He obviously places more importance on the fact that it is a plan that Jindal favors rather than the fact that it was a plan that originated from berm and levee experts in Holland (which he dismisses out of hand because it was "hasty" and foreign). He bases his opposition on nine points which I will address one by one. 1) Absence of science: The worlds greatest flood control experts are in Holland yet Bahr claims that there is an absence of science because no coastal Louisiana scientists came up with this idea. He also claims that the berm idea has been "universally panned" by these Louisiana scientists. This claim is absurd because it would then be the first time in the history of science that all scientists agree on something. The process of peer review, in itself, is a very cannabalistic process that promotes opposition. I don't believe that peer review of the berm concept produced "universal" opposition. This statement, by itself should be dismissed out of hand for its untruthfulness and underlying political agenda. It seems that because he and his clique were not consulted, he is grinding political axe here. 2) Questionable justification: Bahr is saying that the plan is a political conspiracy promulgated by the vague "dredging interests" and implies some equally vague "conflicting interest". He's saying that because dredging companies charge for their services...the justification for the project is questionable. In debate, attacking justification is a good tactic...it goes straight for the throat...but when you attack without specifics and are just trying to paint a picture of corruption and greed...it becomes hollow and the tactic turns into a cheap trick. 3) Opportunity cost: He claims opposition on the basis of "opportunity cost". I don't even think that's an official buzzword. What he's trying to say is that money is wasted on this project that could be better spent on another sand berm project...probably one of his own projects that he could make money on. In this talking point he again implies that this project is not credible...again...painting a picture without any explanation to back it up....cheap tactic designed to tar image and not a genuine attack on credibility. 4) Environmental cost: The environmental cost is irrational. A point that reveals that his opposition to the project is not based on reason. He claims that the dredging project is irrational because it's "digging a hole in the very delta we're trying to restore". Once again an untruth that's being passed on as a truth. First of all, he's implying that all the sand dredged to form an 80 mile berm is going to come from the same spot thus forming a hole somewhere in the delta. Len, this is such a ridiculous argument that the only hole would be the one in your own head. In reality, the sand would have been dredged from areas originally one mile and now two miles away from the location of the proposed berm in a linear fashion along those 80 miles. Besides since the islands are eroding naturally, where do you think much of those sands came from originally? There is nothing irrational about taking some sand that came from the islands and putting it back where it belongs. 5) Changes to the natural flow regime: He has a valid point here. Attempting to block tidal passes would change water velocity and cause erosion....but the erosion potential would be greatest around the edges of the berm where water would be flowing around the edge of the berm to get behind the barrier as the tides change...a barrier that essentially is now 80 miles long. This is different from direct wave action against the berm. Currents along the berm (rip currents) could also be greater. I haven't read the berm plan, but I do know that it's temporary in nature and is designed to block the submerged oil (due to the dispersants) and inhibit the oil from reaching the marsh grasses and effectively killing them. In either case, I'd bet that the oil that would be sucked into the marshes by the berm's presence would be much less than by the berms absence....just allowing the oil to have free access to the marshes would be "ab sense". 6) Lengthy construction time: He's saying that it's a bad project because the project because of the nine months it would take to complete the project....so I guess it's better to do nothing???...that we just admit defeat and become spectators to the destruction of our fragile coast??? Again, an ineffective debate tactic that tries to define success as all or none in order to make your point. 7) Sand berm fragility: He claims that the berm would be fragile and subject to erosion by citing an example of Hesco baskets that eroded. It's completely unclear what the Hesko baskets were trying to accomplish and whether their application was correct or not. But citing an example of erosion to give the idea that the whole berm project will erode is what Bahr is trying to achieve here. He's further implying that success of the project is determined by whether or not erosion of the berm happens to any degree. Once again, the ridiculous assumption that less than 100% effectiveness indicates failure. 8) Dubious benefits: Bahr claims that since a "huge volume" of oil has already drifted into the marsh, building a berm in front of it would entrap oil behind the berm rather than repel it. This is juvenile, immature thought designed to justify his position. The fact is that the well is still a blowout and half a million barrels/day are being spewed forth into the gulf. The fact that there is some oil behind the berm doesn't indicate failure of the project. The fact that a berm will repel more oil in front of it indicates just the opposite...success. A high school debater from Mandeville High School would have a field day with this point in a debate. That's why I characterize this point as juvenile, immature and certainly not befitting a person with Bahr's credentials and experience. 9)Alternative response: Is Bahr really suggesting that dispersing hay and retrieving it later is a better alternative? MLU already characterized that idea as retarded and dumba$$ in his posts above. I'll give Len Bahr the benefit of different characterization. In conclusion, Dr. Bahr claims to be not alone and that is probably true, but implying that none of his colleagues can speak out because Jindal will have their heads reveals his true motive in his opposition....I wonder if he lost his job when Jindal came into office?? Look, I'm all for cost benefit analysis and conservative fiscal and fiduciary policy, but even a cook can't stand by and watch someone grind axe and promote political agenda by untruth and mis-characterization. A very fragile marsh is at stake here...along with our very culture. The wetlands of Louisiana are too important to the ecology of the whole Gulf of Mexico and by extension the Nearctic and Neotropical regions to do nothing...paralysis by analysis. Any project that closely imitates natural processes (Barrier Island formation and maintenance) needs to be done immediately under these emergency circumstances. This is an emergency. I know Len Bahr has credentials that I don't have, but I think that I can understand marsh hydrology and ecology better than he can cook.
since the oil spill is killing so much sea life, can we possibly be lucky enough that sponge bob square pants is one of the victims?
What I have heard is that all the hay will result in is a ****load of oil-covered hay in the marsh. What I find most dubious about Jindal's plans to build the berms are that: 1) They will be completed after the bulk of the oil has hit the marsh, 2) They are building berms out of sand which makes as much sense and building a house out of sand on the beach, 3) No scientists are coming out in support of little project. I would really like to know more about the Dutch engineers who suggested the berms. Surely there is more to it than that. We all want barrier islands, but dredging up sand is simply not an effective way to build them. The biggest aspect of successfully building them lies in channeling the Mississippi River more towards it's natural course. The natural build up of sediment is detrimental to constantly supplying the marshes as they slowly wash out to sea. If I recall, basically the barrier islands occur because the sediment accrues faster than it washes out to sea. The way to build artificial barrier islands requires driving a series of piles in the shape of the island, attaching a number of wire mesh sections to form a fence around the piles, connecting the tops of the piles with cables and then filling the formed enclosure with rock material. Once the rock has reached the water surface, it is covered with soil and vegetation to create the island. A project similar to what we are doing with the berms right now was done for the beaches at Upham Beach, Florida and all of the replenished sand was washed out to sea within a year. Even the USCG File Report 2010–1108 (Effects of Building a Sand Barrier Berm to Mitigate the Effects of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill on Louisiana Marshes) agrees that the berms will "rapidly erode through natural processes". As someone with infinitely more bitching and posting than I, you are quite accomplished. Not likely. The "skin" of Pineapples consists of a rough, fibrous material that naturally repels oil. It's one of the plant's defense mechanisms. Sponge Bob could not have chosen and more hardy and suitable habitat for undersea life in the Gulf it seems. Unfortunately, Squidward is ****ed...
