Replies

I think what you had with this spill was a synergistic effect between this previously unknown bacteria, and the sea-floor use of dispersant. The use of dispersant breaks oil down into minute (mostly microscopic) droplets (micelles) of oil. The HUGE increase of available surface area resulting from the decrease in average droplet size made far more oil easily available to the bacteria, such that their population increased far more rapidly than usual.

This lays out an interesting option for future spills, which is to deliberately introduce both dispersant and cultured bacteria, even further accelerating the process. I doubt that the bacteria would survive if mixed directly with the dispersant, but introducing them as a second flow-stream is certainly possible.

I actually wrote a short story (fiction) about that WAY back in high school — using surfactants and chelating agents to emulsify oil and also creating genetically engineering bacteria to be facultative oil-eaters which form spores after eating in order to be NATURALLY available for the next oil spill.

In my short story however, the EVIL envirowhackos broke into the lab and stole a culture of the bacteria before they were ‘ready’ (ie the mutagen was still acting on the DNA) and when these aberrant bacteria were released into the environment to fight a small spill in Charleston harbour (near a “sensitive” area of course) they did in fact metabolize the oil. BUT!!! due to their incomplete genetic transformation the excreted a powerful carcinogen as they PARTIALLY metabolized the crude oil. The effect was that of a DEMON BUG released into the biome. The hero of the story had to rescue the world by continuing his genetic engineering work on a super bacteria to ‘fix’ what the envirowhackos had released — despite a firestorm of protest and opposition. Fun. This was back in 1973. I guess I was ahead of my time.

"This lays out an interesting option for future spills, which is to deliberately introduce both dispersant and cultured bacteria, even further accelerating the process. I doubt that the bacteria would survive if mixed directly with the dispersant, but introducing them as a second flow-stream is certainly possible.

That is certainly an interesting option, but one that I hope will be approached with the greatest caution. Time and again, I believe, we are seeing that nature has ways of healing itself. An intelligence far greater than our own has created an environment which responds to challenges, as we have seen in this case. With all due respect to those who study the subject, I believe we understand the inter-action of nature's forces very imperfectly and we should approach any effort to accelerate her processes with the greatest caution. What would be the unitended consequences of cultivating and dispersing this bacteria? I think there is one being who probably knows - and God has not been very prolific in writing it up for scientific journals!

Of course God gave mankind the gift of intelligence and learning and we should use God's gifts to understand his creation as well as we can. But we need the humility to accept we understand imperfectly and should proceed with great caution only after careful study and experimentation.

That's my opinion anyway ...