I've pointed out before where he came up with this. He talks about what a NOAA ship reported and gives the date.
Trouble is, he misunderstood the NOAA ship's report from that day...it was reporting that it noted oil moving from the Deepwater Horizon leak moving away from the leak site horizontally before making it to the surface. The underwater plume had moved 5-7 miles away from where it had originally come out...at the main leak.
I look at the claims he's made and have no idea why anyone would want his opinion on anything. He makes wild, wrong claims about things in fields in which he has no clue. He's pro-regulation and pro-hysteria, though, so I guess the MSM loves him.
Is Matt Simmons Credible?
Here’s a good one attributed to Simmons:
http://www.freepressonline.com/main.asp?SectionID=52&SubSectionID=78&ArticleID=7615
....
Simmons described the real blowout as an open hole gushing 120,000 barrels of toxic crude every day below the surface of the Gulf six or seven miles away from the riser. And BP is ignoring it, he said.
“What you are seeing on television, what BP is saying about relief wells . . . that’s a total ruse,” said Simmons.
That submerged lake of oil has grown larger than the size of Washington state and is approximately 500 feet thick, according to Simmons’ estimate.
“It’s thick oil, flowing like lava . . . covering a large part of the Gulf of Mexico and taking the oxygen out,” said Simmons. When it mixes with the upper layer, the toxicity will be released, and when it comes ashore Simmons predicts it will take a heavy toll in human lives.
......
end snips
500 feet deep covering an area the size of the state of WA?.......... LOL. Anyone can do the math and caculate the cubic feet based upon his flow rate and make their on determination of his credibitlity if the WA indicator is truly his.