/sci/ - Science & Math

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/06/what-happens-when-bp-spills-coffee-video-funny-ucbcomedy.php

On a scale of "just a quick blowjob" to "surprise buttsex"?

Let's just say there'll be some bleeding involved.

>>1168742
I'm imagining a solid urethral sounding in the near future. Try not to google "urethral sounding".

Uhm, well, either way we're pretty fucked, but whether or not we're REALLY fucked depends on A) if they're able to properly defend the coasts and B) whether reports of oil seeping up through the seabed around the leak is true, as this would suggest the piping below the seabed is compromised.

And, you know, however bad the hurricane season is gonna be this year.

>>1168753
If you are on 4chan and don't know what urethal sounding means, you deserve to google it.

>>1168757
Official estimates are like 40,000 barrels leaking each day.

>hurricane season

Like raining burnable oil all over the fucking mainland.

>>1168773
I have a metal, vibrating, urethral sound. It makes me cum like a fucking TANK.

>>1168790
Well, that takes care of the Deep South!

Seriously, what are the chances of a hurricane causing oil all over the mainland and it lighting on fire?

>>1168802
>the South catching on fire due in part to the policies it supported

>>1168805
so small that actually asking the question makes us a little dumber. Even most of /x/ realizes it's retarded.

>>1168805
>>1168805
>>1168805
>>1168805
>>1168805
>>1168805
>>1168805
>>1168805

>>1168848
Actually, it does really depend on how much oil there is on the surface of the ocean when a hurricane does hit. If there is enough then it is actually possible so long as there's a flame source or 50

>>1168880
em, no. while spot fires on the surface are possible, atomized crude oil isn't going to be pulled up into a hurricane in any concentration nearly high enough to burn.

GOD'S HOLY VENGEANCE ON THE HEATHEN SOUTH FOR NOT OBEYING HIS COMMANDS

oh wait

Can that stuff actually be lit on fire, is it even flammable enough to hold a flame? I doubt it, since some idiot southerner hasn't tried to light a tar ball on fire

>>1168906
>Implying that the top liquid won't be pulled to the top
Who said anything about atomized whatevers? It's hurricane season now bitch, and it's all of those gallons of oil, thats gonna be picked up, in its current form.

>>1168906
When the oil lands on land the water will evaporate leaving only oil.

>>1168937
You do know how this all started right? With a massive fiery explosion.

>>1168935
>implying crude oil has a lower vapor point than water.
hurricanes absorb water through evaporation, it's not some pump pulling it up.

>>1168961
yes and it would burn, very slowly, on the shore, its going to be a pain to clean either way, but no fire hurricanes

what if they came to the strange idea to just burn the oil...

>>1169052
>Thus killing all animals in the Gulf
WE SHOULD DO THIS

>>1169063
not all the animals, just the ones on the surface

>>1169102
Won't that heat up alot of the water too?
Plus, who wants to kill the birds?

>>1169052
Probably a better idea than nuking it from orbit.

>>1168737

I think these treehungers didn't realize that the video more that ridicule the BP, make the problem seem much less serious and almost laughable.

>>1168921

Actually, Christianity advocates for the protection of creation. It's the Bible Belt who do what they want and then blame it on the Bible, not the other way round. That's a difference. It shows a little less Southern idiocy and a little more Southern evil.

We don't know how much oil there may be coming out.

But It haven't slown down at all. We might be facing the first oceanic mass-extinction of biological diversity. This might effect us for the next 10 million years if enough species get extinct. Thanks to BP. The epic of the epic failures of mankind.

>>1169138
>I think these treehungers didn't realize that the video more that ridicule the BP, make the problem seem much less serious and almost laughable.

>>1168961

Who's actually the one at fault here. Obviously they will all blame each other and shit but it would be nice to know who is actually at fault?

>>1169138
>I think these treehungers didn't realize that the video more that ridicule the BP, make the problem seem much less serious and almost laughable.

>>1168730

For all the "largest spill in US history" talk, this isn't even the largest spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The Ixtoc I gusher in 1979 spewed for ten months at rates between 10,000 and 30,000 barrels per day (and Pemex utterly refused to pay for cleanup in the US when oil reached Texas, 2 months after the spill began, citing sovereign immunity). The gulf survived that and plenty more. It's ugly and a kick in the pants for people just getting things back together after Katrina, but in the long run it'll go away in time.

Also, the gulf has a *natural* oil seepage on the lines of 5000 barrels a day.

>>1168969

I think you forget to take the high wind speeds into consideration.

I would hate to live in any of the coastal towns that rely on fishing to support the economy.

>>1169174
>>1169195

What? Despite the horrid sentence structure of which I wasn't aware, I still believe it's quite comprehensible, no?

>>1169220

OMG

inbdynamitefishinglol

>>1169168
>implying that oil releases of this magnitude don't happen every few thousand years.
There will be repercussions but this kind hysterical batshitary undermines getting and keeping the public on board, there have been other well breaches farther south and you know what? with minimal clean up you can't tell it happened 3 years after.

anyone live near there? any truth to the rumors conspiracy nuts are spreading?

Is it possible for a company to cause damages so high that it has to be liquidated to pay off debts? I am sure this is doing billions of dollars in damages to fishing and other industries.

>>1169244

They won't pay a penny. I assure you. And no. They have enough money to pay surely.

>>1169209
Crude oil is pretty viscous. I don't think we'll see a fiery hurricane any time soon.

sadfrog.jpg

>>1169244

Not legally, I remember something about Bush putting a limit to the maximum amount of damages an oil company will have to pay. Something like 700 million, BP said they would pay as much as they can though.

>>1169223
It's really not.

>>1169209
nope, a viscus light but high vapor point fluid isn't going to get magicly sucked up, it will cluster more, so you'd get more discreat piles floating up on the beach but they wouldnt get inland.

>>1169267

Make that a maximum of 75 million.

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/05/03/will-bp-weasel-out-of-its-cleanup-debt/

>>1169283
BUSH WAS THE MOST AWESOME PRESIDENT EVER. HE TOTALLY DOESN'T HAVE A BIASE WITH OIL COMPANIES

>>1169203
>Also, the gulf has a *natural* oil seepage on the lines of 5000 barrels a day.

Whoa, whoa hold up. That's a pretty useless statistic. Sure, if the spill was completely evenly distributed throughout the entire gulf it probably wouldn't cause any harm.

>>1169263
>implying BP isnt paying most of the costs right now.
The real funny is that BP is offering settlement payments to fisherman right now based on last year's reported income, the problem is that almost all of the fishing industry down there don't report their income hehe.

>>1169283
>a maximum of 75 million.
That's fucking amazing! BP profited billions just last quarter. 75 million is such a piddly-shit number.

>>1169203
Except that the revised estimates up the flow at 50-90k barrels a day since the start.

>>1169269

What I wanted to convey, is my disagree with treehugger.com, on making and uploading of this video, on grounds that it belittles the natural disaster itself more than it ridicules BP. To add insult to injury, it (the video) gives the impression that BP acted ignorantly (and therefore innocently) rather than inappropriately (to put it nice).

>>1169306
>(citation needed)

The track record of oil companies paying for the shit they wrecked is that anyone actually making a claim for damages won't see dime 1 for years.

>>1169324
you really think it wasn't a combination of the two?

>>1169244
Debt doesn't really work like that for corporations. If the corporation works well already and is making a profit, it doesn't make sense to liquidate it. If a corporation owes more money than it can pay, it will likely just jump through some financial hoops, and there might be some transfer of ownership, but it won't just go away because it owes money.

>>1169329

Well, I wouldn't think treehunger.com would purposely belittle the natural disaster if that's what you are asking?!

This oil leak will continue to 2012.

More oil is coming out as the seabed floor gives way.

Watch as billions of gallons fill your ocean and you all choke on your stupidity, laziness, and complacency to your unnatural government.

>>1169203
>>1169203
>>1169203
One of the few voices of reason ITT. Fishing in parts of the Gulf will be disrupted for a while. Sucks for fishermen, but that's how it is. You and me will just get our maritime delicacies from other parts of the world and perhaps pay a bit more. Most beaches will remain open on the Gulf Coast. The oceanic food chain? Localized marshlands are/will be the worst affected. In open water MOST of the oil will float to the surface, and sea life will be fine. Within the oil plumes, a good portion of the animals will be able to escape since are fairly isolated. The spill is way bigger than we first thought, but when you look at satellite pics it's obvious how it's just a drop in the bucket compared to the size of the Gulf.

>>1169414
BP spy

>>1169414
You'd be right if it wasn't for the 700k gallons of Corexit that have been dispensed.

>it's all good

This won't just go away over night, especially considering THEY CAN"T STOP IT.

All of the marine life around there is fucked.

very

A lot of sawsharks will hopefully die.

Oil Spill is good

/thread

>>1169533
that thing is terrifying