Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A massive oil spill in the Pacific Ocean reached the Southern California coast

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 66 posts

Re: A massive oil spill in the Pacific Ocean reached the Southern California coast

#21

Post by gruez »

burkaman wrote: post #8
gruez wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But oil spills have been trending down over the past few decades, even as oil shipments have increased: https://ourworldindata.org/oil-spills . You're right it won't go to zero, in the same sense that airplane crashes won't ever go to zero. however that's because it's really hard to prevent all airplane crashes/oil spills, not because people are "too indifferent".

This spill was from an oil rig, not a tanker. Do rig and pipeline spills follow the same trend? Haven't found data on rigs yet, but pipeline spills do not. Pipeline incidents have been roughly constant over time: https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/analytics/saw.dll?Portalpages&P... Edit: Also, the data you referenced comes from an organization that's run by oil companies and tanker operators ( https://www.itopf.org/about-u…

>Pipeline incidents have been roughly constant over time: https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/analytics/saw.dll?Portalpages&P...

I couldn't get the link to work. If it's flat, but the amount of oil being transported is up, isn't that still a decline?

>Edit 2: NOAA data of all spills does not show a downward trend: https://incidentnews.noaa.gov/raw/index

I fed the chart into excel and generated a graph: https://i.imgur.com/QKu2Yly.png

looks like even though incidents (orange line) is up, the amount spilled (blue) is down.

Re: A massive oil spill in the Pacific Ocean reached the Southern California coast

#23

Post by burkaman »

gruez wrote: post #21
burkaman wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This spill was from an oil rig, not a tanker. Do rig and pipeline spills follow the same trend? Haven't found data on rigs yet, but pipeline spills do not. Pipeline incidents have been roughly constant over time: https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/analytics/saw.dll?Portalpages&P... Edit: Also, the data you referenced comes from an organization that's run by oil companies and tanker operators ( https://www.itopf.org/about-u…

>Pipeline incidents have been roughly constant over time: https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/analytics/saw.dll?Portalpages&P ... I couldn't get the link to work. If it's flat, but the amount of oil being transported is up, isn't that still a decline? >Edit 2: NOAA data of all spills does not show a downward trend: https://incidentnews.noaa.gov/raw/index I fed the chart into excel and generated a graph: https://i.imgur.com/…

Sorry about the pipeline link, it's ALL REPORTED INCIDENT 20 YEAR TREND on this page: https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/data-and-statistics/pipeline/pipel.... I don't know if amount transported by pipeline is going up.

I appreciate your optimism. The downward trend in amount spilled is nice to see, but that value is unknown for nearly half the entries, so I wouldn't read too much into it. I'm not saying it's impossible that things are getting better, I even think it's likely, but it's certainly not at the same level as airplane safety, where everything that can be done is being done and crashes are incredibly rare. It is trivial to find examples of the oil industry failing to do the bare minimum (here's one recent report, the first thing I found: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-293). I'm very comfortable stepping on a plane, but I would not be comfortable living next to a pipeline or making a living fishing next to an oil rig, and I think the statistics back up my feelings.

Re: A massive oil spill in the Pacific Ocean reached the Southern California coast

#25

Post by joshuahaglund »

cptskippy wrote: post #7
anoplus wrote: post #4

It is deemed to be repeated, as long as most people are too indifferent to push this kind of unjustified environmental damage to the headlines

Southern California has considerable oil and natural gas seepage off shore. Many of the oil rigs aren't drilling but simply harvesting the seeps. They passively collect 100-150 barrels a day from the Coal Oil Point Seep Field. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_Oil_Point_seep_field The oil in question was not from a seep however. It came from the processing platform Elly that supports two other drilling rigs in the…

Just because it happens in nature doesn't mean it's OK for us to make it happen in more places. If you've ever been to the beach around that oil seep you'd know it sucks to get the tar on you or your surfboard. We don't need more.

Re: A massive oil spill in the Pacific Ocean reached the Southern California coast

#26

Post by worstestes »

userbinator wrote: post #15

It'll just slowly go back into the ground where it came... I find it funny that a lot of self-proclaimed "environmentalists" who love to espouse the benefits of using "natural" stuff get outraged by things like this, as if oil wasn't a naturally occurring substance.

Isn't there a frequency difference between natural "leakage" and man-made disasters like this? Naturally occurring events made be damaging but happen at less frequency.

Re: A massive oil spill in the Pacific Ocean reached the Southern California coast

#27

Post by gedy »

rcpt wrote: post #24

Oil derricks right in the middle of neighborhoods? Great idea! Apartments? Not in my backyard!!1 Oil platforms a few miles offshore a busy public beach? Sure why not? Offshore wind farms? Illegal!!

In all fairness, these rigs probably predate the great increase in population in OC. I doubt NIMBYs would go for this nowadays.

Re: A massive oil spill in the Pacific Ocean reached the Southern California coast

#28

Post by jaycroft »

rcpt wrote: post #24

Oil derricks right in the middle of neighborhoods? Great idea! Apartments? Not in my backyard!!1 Oil platforms a few miles offshore a busy public beach? Sure why not? Offshore wind farms? Illegal!!

I understand the sentiment, but in this case it's more like, neighborhoods built around oil derricks. Go look up pictures of HB from the early 20's. It was all farmland until oil was discovered, the city came later, with the first developments being built in the 50's. Just about every house in the city along the coast sits atop a capped well.

Re: A massive oil spill in the Pacific Ocean reached the Southern California coast

#29

Post by jaycroft »

xyzzyz wrote: post #9
cptskippy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Southern California has considerable oil and natural gas seepage off shore. Many of the oil rigs aren't drilling but simply harvesting the seeps. They passively collect 100-150 barrels a day from the Coal Oil Point Seep Field. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_Oil_Point_seep_field The oil in question was not from a seep however. It came from the processing platform Elly that supports two other drilling rigs in the…

Seems like the "massive oil spill" from the link is equivalent to half a year of natural seepage from this single seep field.

It would also be very interesting to see seepage from say, 1910, predating the 10,000 wells that were built in the area, 1925, at the height of the oil boom, and today, but I doubt this information exists.

Edited to say "area" instead of "city" - there was no city at that time.

Re: A massive oil spill in the Pacific Ocean reached the Southern California coast

#30

Post by tkgally »

jaycroft wrote: post #29
xyzzyz wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like the "massive oil spill" from the link is equivalent to half a year of natural seepage from this single seep field.

It would also be very interesting to see seepage from say, 1910, predating the 10,000 wells that were built in the area, 1925, at the height of the oil boom, and today, but I doubt this information exists. Edited to say "area" instead of "city" - there was no city at that time.

Histories of California contain many descriptions of extensive oil seepage both on shore and off. Here’s an example from further up the coast, from a book published in 1883:

“The flowing springs of petroleum early attracted the attention of the settlers. The oil was flowing from the earth in hundreds of places, sometimes forming large pools into which cattle, sheep, and horses, as well as wild animals, would venture and get caught, leaving their bones as a warning of danger for future visitors. Sometimes it flowed into the streams and would float away for miles before it evaporated. There were hundreds of acres, perhaps thousands, covered with the residuum left after the evaporation of the lighter parts. Springs of it also occur in the Santa Barbara Channel, and the first navigators had fears of the near vicinity of a hot place, from the villainous smell that pervaded the atmosphere where the oil was floating on the ocean.”

History of Santa Barbara County, California, with Illustrations and Biographical Sketches of Its Prominent Men and Pioneers

https://archive.org/details/historyofsantaba00maso/page/n189...

Post reply on HN