Natural oil spills?

[insane_alien]

So, i was thinking about the oil spill they've got offsore on the states and i started thinking:

 

Surely its possible for an oil resovoir to spring a leak under natural circumstances.

 

for instance, a fault line, erosion(not to sure how much of an effect this has on the sea floor). Okay, I'll admit i'm not to sure on the mechanism, but I do know that oilwells can experience geological activity and there are a couple of exploited resovoirs which are on fault lines.

 

So, are there any known natural oil spills?

 

As in not a direct or indirect result of human activity. no pipes drilling or tanks involved.

[Zolar V]

well if you think back to medieval times, there was natural oil leaks all over (well not all over) the place. In the marshes and such you had gas leaks and also oil's floating on the water's surface.

[Moontanman]

Evidently quite a large amount of oil seeps to the surface naturally

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/01/000127082228.htm

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090513130944.htm

 

http://www.searchanddiscovery.net/documents/abstracts/hedberg2002/kvenvolden01/kvenvolden01.htm

 

http://www.rense.com/general63/refil.htm

[Mr Skeptic]

Pitch and tar pits are an example; in these cases the volatiles have mostly evaporated. I do recall there being natural oil leaks in the middle east, and the oil was used as low quality lamp oil (with the tar still in it of course).

[insane_alien]

cheers. i would have been surprised if this never happened, but it seemed to be quite had to locate it with all the bumf about exxon valdez and the recent bp platform and so on.

 

probably just used the wrong key words.

[SpaceShark]

So, i was thinking about the oil spill they've got offsore on the states and i started thinking:

 

Surely its possible for an oil resovoir to spring a leak under natural circumstances.

 

for instance, a fault line, erosion(not to sure how much of an effect this has on the sea floor). Okay, I'll admit i'm not to sure on the mechanism, but I do know that oilwells can experience geological activity and there are a couple of exploited resovoirs which are on fault lines.

 

So, are there any known natural oil spills?

 

As in not a direct or indirect result of human activity. no pipes drilling or tanks involved.

 

La Brea Tar Pit is the most famous - This oil volcano - as it is being called - leaking 200,000 gallons a day - heading towards our countries most pristine beaches and aquatic wild life refuges - makes me very sad since I live on a Florida beach - If it makes its way into the everglades - I don't even want to imagine the horror

 

I heard there is only 1 years supply of oil to run the United States out there anyways - If only some scientist can find a way to harness the Gulf Stream - There is an endless supply out there that would make the hoover dam look like a LED light

Edited May 3, 2010 by SpaceShark
added additional info

[toastywombel]

The world's largest natural oil seepage is Coal Oil Point in the Santa Barbara Channel, California.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_seep

 

The Coal Oil Point seep field offshore from Santa Barbara, California is a petroleum seep area of about three square kilometers adjacent to the Ellwood Oil Field, and releases about 40 tons per day of methane and about 19 tons of reactive organic gas (ethane, propane, butane and higher hydrocarbons), about twice the hydrocarbon air pollution released by all the cars and trucks in the county in 1990.[1] The liquid petroleum produces a slick that is many kilometers long and when degraded by evaporation and weathering, produces tar balls which wash up on the beaches for miles around.[2]

This seep also releases on the order of 100 to 150 barrels of liquid petroleum per day. The field produces about 9 cubic meters of natural gas per barrel of petroleum.[2]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_Oil_Point_seep_field

 

1 barrel of oil = 42 US gallons

 

So the largest natural oil seep, releases 100-150 barrels which is equal to about 6,300 gallons a day of oil released.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

I heard there is only 1 years supply of oil to run the United States out there anyways - If only some scientist can find a way to harness the Gulf Stream - There is an endless supply out there that would make the hoover dam look like a LED light

 

Well you heard wrong .

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves#Estimated_reserves_by_country

 

Also an LED takes about 30–60 milliwatts to be powered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emitting_diode#Efficiency_and_operational_parameters

 

Hoover Dam has an output of around 2080 megawatts per year

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoover_Dam#Power_plant

 

That means that the Hoover Dam, could power about 34.6 billion LED lights per year. So for something to make the Hoover Dam's output look like an LED consumption, one can use the following ratio, X representing the amount of power you claim could be outputted from the Gulf Stream (in watts). I derived your claim from the analogy you used.

 

2,080,000,000 watts/ 0.060 watts = x watts/ 2,080,000,000

 

So simplify, (2,080,000,000)(2,080,000,000)/ 0.060= X watts

 

X=72,106,666,666,666,666,666 watts

 

Or 72 quintillion watts.

 

So could you clarify how we would go about extracting around 72 quintillion watts per year from the Gulf Stream?

 

Furthermore, the total world power consumption is around 15 terawatts per year.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_resources_and_consumption

 

I think my point is, it isn't good to make misleading, or over-reaching claims with simple analogies.

Edited May 4, 2010 by toastywombel
Consecutive posts merged.

[SpaceShark]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_seep

 

 

Laugh - Why is it when i purpose using the Gulf Stream as an clean renewable energy source I get heckled - - When I said USA only has 1 year supply "Out There" - I was referring to the oil reserves offshore - I thought that would of been a given since that's what we where talking about

 

 

 

Also an LED takes about 30–60 milliwatts to be powered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emitting_diode#Efficiency_and_operational_parameters

 

Hoover Dam has an output of around 2080 megawatts per year

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoover_Dam#Power_plant

 

That means that the Hoover Dam' date=' could power about 34.6 billion LED lights per year. So for something to make the Hoover Dam's output look like an LED consumption, one can use the following ratio, X representing the amount of power you claim could be outputted from the Gulf Stream (in watts). I derived your claim from the analogy you used.

 

2,080,000,000 watts/ 0.060 watts = x watts/ 2,080,000,000

 

So simplify, (2,080,000,000)(2,080,000,000)/ 0.060= X watts

 

X=72,106,666,666,666,666,666 watts

 

Or 72 quintillion watts.

 

So could you clarify how we would go about extracting around 72 quintillion watts per year from the Gulf Stream?

 

Furthermore, the total world power consumption is around 15 terawatts per year.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_resources_and_consumption

 

I think my point is, it isn't good to make misleading, or over-reaching claims with simple analogies.[/quote']

 

Wow man -That LED statement was a joke - It was meant to convey the huge energy potential that the gulf stream is - If you took every river on this planet and multiplied that by 100 - You'd get the energy of the gulf stream - Does that analogy suit you better?

 

I think the point of my post was - What is the point of drilling off shore when the cost and risk are so high - since there is only a 1 year reserve out there - when we have an endless supply of energy floating by in the Gulf Stream

 

I'm sorry you missed it rain man - But I find your purposeful heckling disturbing - I am very passionate about this topic - I fail to see why this isn't the single most important goal in science today

[Moontanman]

Laugh - Why is it when i purpose using the Gulf Stream as an clean renewable energy source I get heckled - - When I said USA only has 1 year supply "Out There" - I was referring to the oil reserves offshore - I thought that would of been a given since that's what we where talking about

 

 

 

 

Wow man -That LED statement was a joke - It was meant to convey the huge energy potential that the gulf stream is - If you took every river on this planet and multiplied that by 100 - You'd get the energy of the gulf stream - Does that analogy suit you better?

 

I think the point of my post was - What is the point of drilling off shore when the cost and risk are so high - since there is only a 1 year reserve out there - when we have an endless supply of energy floating by in the Gulf Stream

 

I'm sorry you missed it rain man - But I find your purposeful heckling disturbing - I am very passionate about this topic - I fail to see why this isn't the single most important goal in science today

 

How would you propose we gather that energy? if we disrupted the flow of the gulf stream it would have very bad consequences for the environment. But if you can see how it could be done with out the bad consequences I'd like to hear it.

[toastywombel]

Laugh - Why is it when i purpose using the Gulf Stream as an clean renewable energy source I get heckled - - When I said USA only has 1 year supply "Out There" - I was referring to the oil reserves offshore - I thought that would of been a given since that's what we where talking about[/Quote]

 

Okay, so let us first define the world Heckle.

Heckle- A heckler is a person who shouts a disparaging comment at a performance or event, or interrupting set-piece speeches, for example at a political meeting, with intent to disturb its performers or participants.

 

The additional meaning, to interrupt speakers with awkward or embarrassing questions, was added in Scotland.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler

 

Now my comments rebutting your statement did not do anything of the sort. You said what you had to say, and I responded. I did not personally insult you or interrupt you. I simply attempted to illustrate to you that your facts were wrong. Telling someone they are incorrect and then showing them how they were incorrect is not heckling. In fact I even added a smiley to the post attempting to convey a friendly attitude.

 

Furthermore, the reserves of oil offshore the Untied States coast only having one year left of oil in them is debatable as well, but I will refrain from getting into that.

 

But please tell me where you made it clear we were talking about the Oil reserves off the coast of the United States from the original post?

 

La Brea Tar Pit is the most famous - This oil volcano - as it is being called - leaking 200,000 gallons a day - heading towards our countries most pristine beaches and aquatic wild life refuges - makes me very sad since I live on a Florida beach - If it makes its way into the everglades - I don't even want to imagine the horror

 

I heard there is only 1 years supply of oil to run the United States out there anyways - If only some scientist can find a way to harness the Gulf Stream - There is an endless supply out there that would make the hoover dam look like a LED light

 

You mentioned two specific places in the above two paragraphs. "One being La Brea Tar Pit", and the other being "Florda Beach".

 

From that point on you used pronouns such as,

La Brea Tar Pit is the most famous - This oil volcano - as it is being called - leaking 200,000 gallons a day - heading towards our countries most pristine beaches and aquatic wild life refuges

and,

I heard there is only 1 years supply of oil to run the United States out there.

 

This oil volcano? Are you talking about La Brea Tar Pit or the 2010 Gulf Oil Spill? It is important on forums to make your thoughts clear, which is something you failed to do, through the heavy use of pronouns.

 

The reason is, if a reader is curious about the La Brea Tar Pits, they might google search it, come to here, and see your post. Because of the confusion they might think you are saying that the La Brea Tar Pit is leaking 200,000 gallons a day, which it is most certainly not.

Wow man -That LED statement was a joke - It was meant to convey the huge energy potential that the gulf stream is - If you took every river on this planet and multiplied that by 100 - You'd get the energy of the gulf stream - Does that analogy suit you better?

 

Again, it may have been a joke, but you failed to convey to the reader that it was a joke. Especially having the "joke" follow such a serious statement as, "I heard there is only 1 years supply of oil to run the United States out there."

 

Yet there was no inclination of the joking manor (through a smiley or "ha ha"), and the analogy really misrepresented reality, and over played our ability to just go to the Gulf Stream and harness an "endless supply of energy".

 

It is better to use facts than analogies to convey your message. If you do use analogies, they can be useful tools, but to summarize facts that have already been stated. Instead you stated no facts about the Gulf Stream, made an analogy, and left it up to the reader to determine the facts from an analogy, which is hard obviously impossible to do.

 

I think the point of my post was - What is the point of drilling off shore when the cost and risk are so high - since there is only a 1 year reserve out there - when we have an endless supply of energy floating by in the Gulf Stream

 

I do agree that we should start moving away from offshore drilling and towards other renewable resources, and that the risks of expanding offshore drilling a greater than the benefits. We are totally in agreement here.

 

However, where did you hear your facts, mind providing a link? I have heard there is only one year of reserve off of the East Coast. It was a talking point stated by a GreenPeace representative last night on PBS. Also it is good to note that no energy supply is truly endless. And as Moon pointed out, Harvesting energy from the Gulf Stream would be a very delicate and complicated process. And I pointed out that harvesting energy from the Gulf Stream most likely would not ever yield the amount of energy that you inferred through the "joke".

 

I'm sorry you missed it rain man - But I find your purposeful heckling disturbing - I am very passionate about this topic - I fail to see why this isn't the single most important goal in science today

 

You may find my corrections to your misleading claims disturbing, but heckle you I did not. I did not even personally attack you. So I don't understand the need for name-calling (rain man).

 

It is good to note, that I am too passionate about this topic, that is why I attempt to get the facts, and attempt to convey the facts to the readers of this forum in an honest, open way, allowing them to make their own, thoughtful conclusions, and also open the door for them to question their current conclusions. Truly, how strong are your beliefs, or thoughts if they have never been questioned?

 

Quite arguably finding a replacement for fossil fuels is one of the most important goals in science today. It is an industry ever gaining steam, and attention.

Edited May 4, 2010 by toastywombel

[Charlatan]

Oil spills can be cleaned up by taking a sieve through the waters where the oils are and then collecting the oil rather quickly.

 

Or, we could produce acids en masse and throw that into the water.

 

Or, we could wait for the oil to go to the bottom of the oceans. Won't take long.

 

Or we could start a chemical fire in those areas and watch it eveporate!

[Monsieur Catt.]

Quote toastywombel "The reason is, if a reader is curious about the La Brea Tar Pits, they might google search it, come to here, and see your post. Because of the confusion they might think you are saying that the La Brea Tar Pit is leaking 200,000 gallons a day, which it is most certainly not." end quote:

 

I have enjoyed quite a few articles on this forum since joining today, and that comment sums up what being here means to me, although I am new to science and this forum, I like to feel that science is all about truth, and deals only with facts, not hearsay or hysteria and pure disinformation for whatever goal/means.

 

nice one.