Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Unleash The Mississippi River To Stop Gulf Oil Invasion

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:02 PM
Original message
Unleash The Mississippi River To Stop Gulf Oil Invasion
Edited on Fri Jun-18-10 03:03 PM by Robbien
Now that human technology has failed to keep oil out of Gulf coast wetlands, some scientists think the solution lies with one of nature's most ancient techniques—flooding of the Mississippi River.

The scientists have concluded that powerful river flows kept oil from the BP/Gulf spill from invading large areas of wetlands. But as winter runoff diminished, so too did the river flow, and now oil is making a destructive invasion. The strong flow could be restored, however, by simply adjusting dams upstream that are diverting water out of the river bed.

It almost seems too simple, but as a report in Popular Mechanics points out, the Army Corps of Engineers is considering the idea and no one seems to oppose it. PM magazine says the idea was first presented last week to the EPA by Paul Kemp, a former professor of marine science at Louisiana State University and current vice president of the National Audubon Society's Louisiana Coastal Initiative.

Here is how the magazine writes about the idea:



http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/infrastructure/mississippi-bp-oil-coastal-protection?src=rss

Kemp says the river is "the biggest tool in the toolbox" when it comes to keeping oil out Louisiana's swamps and marshes, which make up nearly 40 percent of the nation's wetlands.

For the most part, the winds have kept the oil plume from moving toward the Louisiana coast, Kemp says, instead pushing it toward Florida and Alabama. Last month, the winds shifted to the northwest. Even then, when the oil seemed as though it should have been blowing towards the mouth of the river, it didn't, says Denise Reed, a proponent of Kemp's plan and professor of earth and environmental sciences at the University of New Orleans. "That seems to be because there's been enough water coming out of the mouth of the river to have a little bit of a push out into the Gulf of Mexico," Reed says.

Since then, however, the water level in the Mississippi has dropped off drastically, due to seasonal changes in climate. "Time is of the essence. Every day we are losing another 40,000 to 50,000 cubic feet per second out of the river. I'm very concerned that all we need is a shift in the winds offshore, and when the oil comes in this time there won't be enough to keep it from coming into the interior of the marshes," Kemp says.

The water level can be raised using large concrete dams, called the Old River Control Structure, which sit 315 miles upstream from the river's mouth. These dams, which are maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, control flow between the Mississippi and a smaller tributary to the west called the Atchafalaya River. Usually, they direct about 70 percent of the water down the Mississippi, with the remaining 30 percent diverted to the Atchafalaya. Kemp's plan calls for a gradual daily increase in the amount directed to the Mississippi, so that over the course of 10 days the river's proportion would increase to about 81 percent—maintaining the approximate level of the river in May. He is also looking into manipulating additional dams even further upstream.

An additional benefit of the plan, according to Kemp and Reed, is that a higher river could help clean off the oil that has already collected on the fringes of the marshes. This effect, called gentle flushing, is one of the few methods that can remove oil from the wetlands while minimizing ecosystem damage.



http://unearthed.earthjustice.org/blog/2010-june/unleash-mississippi-river-stop-gulf-oil-invasion

Interesting idea.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. very good idea but it would lower the river at new orleans..
if they can balance the two it would be great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The neat thing about this

Is if for some reason it doesn't help or they see it might be leading to cause harm, they can reverse it and set it back to previous flow levels. No harm no foul.



I like these kind of solutions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scuba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
3. I like this also, but...
...lowering the river upstream has impact on migrating waterfowl, fish, turtles and other reptiles and the economies of upstream states that rely on the river for tourism, fishing and transit of grain, iron ore, etc.


But I really like the idea of mother nature being the saviour. It could raise appreciation of our environment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. I live up here in the Great Lakes area
and for the last week or two we've have tons of rain. Tons and tons of it which feeds into the Mississippi flowing down that way.

Again today it is raining and hailing like crazy. The seven day forecast says we are going to get seven more days of rain.

Just doing our part to help the cause.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
4. I am proud of my River, the ol' Mississip. A multi-pronged
approach on all fronts including rescuing creatures please!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
5. Please do it if it helps
The thought of the whole area covered in oil is just too horrible to imagine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberty Belle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
6. wouldn't this just be pushing the oil into deep sea areas,
moving the problem elsewhere? There could be more deep sea animal deaths or the flow could wind up on beaches in more distant places.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. It is not powerful enough to push oil out to sea

the force would be just strong enough to keep the oil several miles off the marshes so that skimmers can scoop it up easier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freethinker2 Donating Member (96 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. WRONG!
Please have some FACTS for your assertions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Going around shouting

just makes what you say sound even more bizarre.

Why should anyone listen to you and your bizarre random shouts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freethinker2 Donating Member (96 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Bizarre?
I'm not shouting at any particular person here, and I'm so sorry if I came off that way.
I'm just so frustrated about the whole thing! I'm soon to be 45yrs.old and have worked
in the petrochemical industry for 26yrs. I have been witness to so many unreported and
covered up spills that its really hard for me to keep my cool in times like these.
I know how the E.P.A, O.S.H.A and M.M.S work. Its truly about one thing,, MONEY!
It hurts my heart to see the way the BIG OIL companies and the news reports purposely
twisting and fabricating information to misinform the people.
So whats bizarre to me is, If now isn't the time for anger when is?
Haven't the people of reason been cool calm and collected long enough?
I don't think this is the time for complacency! Do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scuba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Early on I challenged dispersants as just making it hard to collect...
...turns out there is no significant "collection" so it's going to go where the currents take it. In fact, "pushing it out to sea" may be the best thing for the gulf. On the other hand, it could be better to keep it in the Gulf and not despoil any more of the planet's oceans than can be helped.

What a disaster!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. Interesting
Certainly something that should be considered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freethinker2 Donating Member (96 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 07:44 AM
Response to Original message
11. NO! Bad idea.
Think about it. The harm is done in the gulf and its just going to get worse, why would you want to push the oil into the open ocean to contaminate other places? It will be easier to clean up if its concentrated in one location "Gulf" rather than Central/South America, Cuba, Virgin Islands and so on. The southern Republican states that chanted "Drill baby drill" asked for the oil now they have it. It would be just like the Republicans to push the problem on to someone some place that didn't want it or have anything to do with it. The oil has to go somewhere so just keep it concentrated in the smallest footprint for better cleanup.
I think this idea should be stopped NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. The current out of the Gulf takes the water into the Atlantic via the Loop Current and the Gulf
Stream. The oil could easily foul Atlantic beaches from the Keys to Hatteras, and on to Eastern Long Island and Cape Cod. Ireland, the UK and Norway could also be affected if the oil gets into the North Atlantic Drift, which is the continuation of the Gulf Stream. Cuba is the only Caribbean nation that may be affected, and then only on its north side.

It is also easier to skim the oil off the water at sea with equipment than it is to hand-clean those marshes, which protect the coast and serve as nurseries for creatures in and about the sea. Wetlands, and particularly coastal wetlands, are an incredibly important part of the earth's ecosystem and are endangered everywhere.

Please read up on the science before you make purely political assumptions about what's going on here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
15. So we send the oil out to sea and points east?
If we flush this oil away from coast it has to go somewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
16. Impossible because of the barge traffic
It would be as practical as shutting down an interstate highway for an indefinite period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC