Forum Thread

Exxon creates a new lake in Arkansas....

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 4 Posts
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    .... a lake of oil. Exxon has allegedly been pumping all the spilled oil in to a single area in Mayflower, Arkansas which has created this huge oil lake.

    Here is something really interesting, "Reporters say Exxon has threatened to have them arrested for merely entering the spill site." Which is hindering the news coverage of the massive spill. Local activists are allowed to enter and film but not members of the press. This has led to this article complete with video.

    This is just another example to add to the long list of reasons to get off fossil fuels. Solar, wind, nuclear, hyrdo etc. are far better options the present a much, much lower risk to the environment and people. What will it take?
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Zach F Wrote: .... a lake of oil. Exxon has allegedly been pumping all the spilled oil in to a single area in Mayflower, Arkansas which has created this huge oil lake.

    Here is something really interesting, "Reporters say Exxon has threatened to have them arrested for merely entering the spill site." Which is hindering the news coverage of the massive spill. Local activists are allowed to enter and film but not members of the press. This has led to this article complete with video.

    This is just another example to add to the long list of reasons to get off fossil fuels. Solar, wind, nuclear, hyrdo etc. are far better options the present a much, much lower risk to the environment and people. What will it take?
    I just wonder what is allowed; for instance can this affect "ground" water? Spread underground, affect nature? animals falling in etc? Who controls this EPA? Can it be burned off? Sucked into tankers and or refined? Why this "lake"?
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I'm pretty sure it can still be cleaned, filtered, and refine. I don't know enough about oil spill clean ups to know if this is standard procedure but it doesn't seem like the best idea. I feel it would make more sense to pump it into to storage tanks and not use some wooded area as a natural storage tank for unrefined crude oil. On the surface, it seems to damaging.
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Well Zach looking at the videos provided in the link, it looks rather dismal to me. I was astounded by the clip that showed hundreds of "Exxon's paper towels" covering the surface of one part of the spill. Ha. I said Rachel Maddow will be sure to show that clip, and she sure did...minus the foul language.

    As we have discussed in other posts, this so called bitumen or "dilbit" is unlike regular crude. It is a very heavy thick nasty stuff, and it can only be pumped down pipelines at high pressures by mixing with a much lighter diluent...a very light crude oil, condensate or naptha. Hence when it spills, those lighter hydrocarbon used to help transport the heavy stuff evaporate quickly (hence the smell) leaving the heavier nasty gunk to be cleaned up. And that stuff will sink into the ground or lake or river beds since it is heavier than water. And any clean-up efforts will require removal of considerable top soil.

    The 2010 spill of 20,000 barrels of this stuff into the Kalamazoo river in Michigan is still being cleaned up after three years. Clean-up costs is estimated at $725 million for that spill alone.

    This will also take months to clean-up...and maybe years if it gets into the nearby lake. It will require lots and lots of of paper towels.