Slog
News & ArtsFriday, May 14, 2010
Enviro The Uncertain Future for Gasoline?
Posted by Charles Mudede on Fri, May 14, 2010 at 1:36 PM
At the moment, the spill in the Gulf of Mexico only knows how to get worse:
You've likely seen the heartbreaking pictures of birds covered in oil from the calamitous April 20 rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico. But as the oil threatens coastal marshes, the long-term effect could be more devastating.Two weeks ago, I thought Deepwater Horizon would do to offshore drilling what the Three Mile Island accident did to American commercial nuclear power. At the time, I had no idea that the scales of the accidents (Deepwater Horizon, Three Mile Island) were going to be vastly different. We are in the middle of May and the spill is thriving and threatening to kill a massive body of water. Deepwater Horizon will not just deal a fatal blow to offshore drilling but also a severe blow to the oil industry as a whole. The only good thing about this endless spilling is that it makes the ugliness of oil hard to not to see.
And, sadly, visibility is what it's all about. From Golob's Dear Science:
A large part of the cleanup effort will go into eliminating the appearance of the oil on the surface. The goal with such efforts is more PR—about eliminating the ominous images from our eyes—and less environmental salvage. This is a catastrophe of the lowest order—predictable, inevitable (due to greed and avarice), and fundamentally unfixable.The very sight of the crude oil, and the fact that the American public is daily seeing the very bad things the dead can do to the living, places a considerable cloud over the once-bright future of this form of fuel. Before Deepwater Horizon, the whole idea of alternative fuels was not taken seriously at all; after, the ears and minds of the public might finally open to (and even adopt) new ideas. What Deepwater Horizon more and more looks like from our satellites is the oil industry's Three Mile Island.
2
Very good points - it is only the surface appearance, and the retention of oil from sandy beaches that appears to be the focus.
The only good part is that, in addition to killing off most of the reefs in the Caribbean, the warm climate will help breakdown the oil more quickly than in arctic climes.
The only good part is that, in addition to killing off most of the reefs in the Caribbean, the warm climate will help breakdown the oil more quickly than in arctic climes.
3
What, no mention of the Marxist drilling platform sinking?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37125549/ns/…
Surely there is some arcane fact we "MUST" pay attention to, now that both socialism AND capitalism have failed at deep sea drilling?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37125549/ns/…
Surely there is some arcane fact we "MUST" pay attention to, now that both socialism AND capitalism have failed at deep sea drilling?
4
Charles,
I believe a far better comparison than Three Mile Island (there were no deaths or major injuries at the accident site itself) would be Chernobyl. But, even that horrible accident shouldn't deter us from using nuclear power as an alternative energy source. NP provides France with greater than 70% of its power. It is safe and reliable. Yes, I understand the caveat of "What to do with its waste?" But, that is a high priority research aim in the industry right now. Nuclear power should be considered. Fossil fuels are indeed, endangered and dangerous as the Deepwater Horizon disaster proved.
I believe a far better comparison than Three Mile Island (there were no deaths or major injuries at the accident site itself) would be Chernobyl. But, even that horrible accident shouldn't deter us from using nuclear power as an alternative energy source. NP provides France with greater than 70% of its power. It is safe and reliable. Yes, I understand the caveat of "What to do with its waste?" But, that is a high priority research aim in the industry right now. Nuclear power should be considered. Fossil fuels are indeed, endangered and dangerous as the Deepwater Horizon disaster proved.
5
@4 We know what we want to do with the waste: bury it underground where Someone Else lives, far from us. If we could just get Someone Else to agree to it, we'd be in business.
7
Three Mile Island didn't really open the public's mind. Anti-nuclear organizations simply started suing anybody who wanted to create a new nuclear power plant and the expenses of legal defense dissuaded companies from opening more plants. Now companies are citing the lack of horrible results of Three Mile Island and touting nuclear over oil and coal. And I can't see that "the industry" gives a goddamn about what to do with the waste, so that won't stop them; they build the plants, they don't have to deal with the waste. The wells gushing are another reason for nuclear to be pushed.
9
Before Deepwater Horizon, the whole idea of alternative fuels was not taken seriously at all; after, the ears and minds of the public might finally open to (and even adopt) new ideas.
I'm not holding my breath. I wish I could — the smell of oil was wafting through New Orleans last night.
11
Three-mile island didn't kill the nuclear biz. Nobody died at three-mile, but the hype and praise followingThe China Syndrome did the industry in. This disaster unfortunately will not make a dent in the thousands of rigs churning daily without incident.
12
I'd also like to point out the complete lack of radiation leakage to public from Three Mile Island, and the problems that caused it were corrected in newer plant designs. Additionally, I'd have no problems taking a single mountain in the middle of Nevada and stuffing it full of nuclear waste. Fossil fuel power generates FAR more waste than nuclear power does (1500 times more- http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf04.…).
14
Unfortunately, nuclear isn't practical from a financial standpoint and takes too long to roll out:
http://www.grist.org/article/2009-10-13-…
There are, as ever, some new designs that might change that, but even the best of the current designs are subject to massive cost overruns and delays:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/busine…
http://www.grist.org/article/2009-10-13-…
There are, as ever, some new designs that might change that, but even the best of the current designs are subject to massive cost overruns and delays:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/busine…
15
We're all going to hell for this
I just watched an expert on CNN say that this is no 5,000 barrel gusher, it's more like around 70,000 barrels a day
2,940,000 fucking gallons of oil a day. Exxon Valdez was 10,800,000
I just watched an expert on CNN say that this is no 5,000 barrel gusher, it's more like around 70,000 barrels a day
2,940,000 fucking gallons of oil a day. Exxon Valdez was 10,800,000
16
It was the marxist/environmentalist movement, Charles, that screamed about 3 mile island. Imagine if they had not basically outlawed nuke power after the incident. Every single car in America today would be electric and powered by nuke plants through an outlet in the garage of every home.
How fucking ironic. The left's reactionary response basically eliminates their policies from ever coming to fruition.
How fucking ironic. The left's reactionary response basically eliminates their policies from ever coming to fruition.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (16) RSS