[Blueflag]

From the article:

” but the rest of it probably lurks below the surface and will remain there for a long while.”

Here we go again. Plenty of stats elsewhere in the article about how many millions of gallons spilled, but only conjecture about an unknown amount of oil “lurking” below the surface.

What magic chemical property of these Gulf hydrocarbons causes them to ‘lurk’?

I recognize that with the use of dispersants (ie chelating agent and detergents) the chemicals are suspended, emulsified or dissolved in the water ... but they are still bio-available to the microbes.

I guess the author is trying to maintain a fear-factor.

I’ll stick with the beer can in a football stadium comparison. (the amount of oil spilled versus the volume of water in the Gulf)

[Smokin' Joe]

What they haven't allowed for is the erosion of the cement plug that failed. The initial estimates weren't lowballed so much as the flow of the well increased as the plug eroded away. Of course, the merchants of disaster are going to project the highest numbers back to day one, but that is like saying the river was flowing at the same rate as the day the dam burst and on the day the first cracks appeared.

If they 'can't find the oil', it's probably still in the reservoir.

[norraad]

“gross negligence,” only begins to describe BP’s operational psychi, just think old B&W Capt. Bligh , etc..

[edcoil]

Sorry I don’t believe the numbers - gov just wants more money.

[bert]

When all else fails, make up a number, then call and ask several buddies and at least one academic from Harvard if it seems about right and then publish the story.

The amount of oil from the gusher, there was no spill, is now and will forever be unknown

[Ingtar]

Now that they have a number, I wonder how long before the Zero administration hits BP with the $23.5 billion fine this calls for. Not wanting to provide a number is the biggest reason BP wants to shut the well down instead of trying to fix it as a productive one.

[Don W]

I was of the impression that a barrel of product was 45 imperial gallons, or 55 US gallons, or 208 litres. The bbl used in this report is 42 gallons: 190 litres if imperial gallons, or 147 litres if US gallons.

Is that some caribbean bbl, or am I mistaken here?

These are very significant differences, and the urinalist responsible should be held to account for the irresponsible and innumerate figures thrown out without any attempt to fact check.

[BerryDingle]

Apparatchiks (media) just can’t let this go. Still need that fear factor, the money, and the flakey no drilling excuse.

[deport]

The total of that spillage would fill a 300’ X 300’ X 300’ cube. That is a football field in length cubed.

[SunkenCiv]

Impossible! Everyone knows that 85 trillion barrels leaked out and ended all life in the waters of the Gulf, and it has spread out and murdered all plant and animal species in the Gaia's oceans. ;') Thanks SeekAndFind.

• Harry Reid pulls a fast one to sabotage shale gas development
• Greed and secrecy mark nation's first, biggest cap-and-trade program
• Obama: GOP 'Betting On Amnesia' in The November Elections
  (the rookie Hussein bashes Bush -- again)
• Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner: Unemployment Could Go Up Before It Comes Down
• Desperation Grows as Unemployment Benefits End
• Small Business Optimism PLUNGES: Firms See Lower Spending And More Layoffs Ahead
• US Stock Futures Fall After 2.4% Rise In 2Q GDP; DJIA Off 70 (less than EXPECTED 2Q growth)
• ABC: Pelosi should be "nervous" about November (Even though she says she's "not nervous")
• Nancy Pelosi wants pre-election tax cut vote (Idiot Alert)
• Daily Presidential Tracking Poll {-20}
• Voters want supersized government to crash diet (based on Rasmussen polling)
• USA Today poll puts Obama approval at 41%