- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Getting rid of oil in wetlands
Posted on 5/23/10 at 9:33 am
Posted on 5/23/10 at 9:33 am
Oil Spill Fallout: 'You Can't Pressure-Wash a Marsh'
For Every Method, a Limitation
Scientists cleaning up the marshes from the Deepwater Horizon spill will likely draw from these commonly used strategies:
•Burning oil-coated plants, which removes oil quickly and minimizes trampling.
•Low-pressure flushing, which helps push oil into areas where it can be vacuumed up or absorbed.
•Cutting back vegetation to leave plants intact and prevent oiling of birds.
•Adding nutrients to speed natural degradation of the oil.
•Doing nothing. Oil that degrades over time hardens into a crust similar to asphalt, and letting Mother Nature take her course has the advantage of causing no collateral damage.
But each of these methods has limitations, some of them serious.
For Every Method, a Limitation
Scientists cleaning up the marshes from the Deepwater Horizon spill will likely draw from these commonly used strategies:
•Burning oil-coated plants, which removes oil quickly and minimizes trampling.
•Low-pressure flushing, which helps push oil into areas where it can be vacuumed up or absorbed.
•Cutting back vegetation to leave plants intact and prevent oiling of birds.
•Adding nutrients to speed natural degradation of the oil.
•Doing nothing. Oil that degrades over time hardens into a crust similar to asphalt, and letting Mother Nature take her course has the advantage of causing no collateral damage.
But each of these methods has limitations, some of them serious.
3
Posted on 5/23/10 at 9:38 am to Mudminnow
burn the damn thing. the greenery will be back in a year.
Posted on 5/23/10 at 10:11 am to tigerdup07
quote:
burn the damn thing. the greenery will be back in a year.
More complicated than that. If the grass is too wet the oil won't burn. If it is too dry it will kill the roots and the soil will wash away before something else establishes itself. There is no easy straight forward solution here.
Posted on 5/23/10 at 10:13 am to tigerdup07
The problem I see with burning is 2 fold.
1. Its not like your burning just dead vegetation on top of the root system that supplies a limited fuel source thus minimal heat damage to the subsurface parts of the plant and root system. The oil adds extra heat to the fire and I would suspect greatly increasing the odds of subsurface plant and root damage.
2. Since the oil source is not stopped and plenty of oil left floating around to additionally get into the marshes. When do you burn? Multiple burns? Burn after it is over? Burn with every wave of oil?
I feel it a damned if you do and damned if you dont. Bottom line I dont think you can clean up massive amounts of oil form the marsh and have the marsh survive.
The best way is to prevent the oil from getting there. Which I realize is equally problematic.
1. Its not like your burning just dead vegetation on top of the root system that supplies a limited fuel source thus minimal heat damage to the subsurface parts of the plant and root system. The oil adds extra heat to the fire and I would suspect greatly increasing the odds of subsurface plant and root damage.
2. Since the oil source is not stopped and plenty of oil left floating around to additionally get into the marshes. When do you burn? Multiple burns? Burn after it is over? Burn with every wave of oil?
I feel it a damned if you do and damned if you dont. Bottom line I dont think you can clean up massive amounts of oil form the marsh and have the marsh survive.
The best way is to prevent the oil from getting there. Which I realize is equally problematic.
Posted on 5/23/10 at 10:16 am to Oyster
The main thing is to not harm the root structure.
So burning would have to take place after no more oil is washing up.
Burn a marsh, barren surface, more oil washes up coats the mud and permeates down and kills the root stock.
So burning would have to take place after no more oil is washing up.
Burn a marsh, barren surface, more oil washes up coats the mud and permeates down and kills the root stock.
Posted on 5/23/10 at 10:19 am to Mudminnow
Burning does not sound like a good idea like you said. Low pressure flushing? We have been wanting this for restoration purposes for years-maybe we will get some diversion projects done sooner than the usual snail's pace, but I am not optimistic knowing the speed at which the Corps move.
Posted on 5/23/10 at 12:03 pm to Icansee4miles
It would seem to me, in my none expert opinion, that burning the vegetation would quicken the erosion of our marshland which among other things makes us more susceptible to a potential storm surge.
Posted on 5/27/10 at 10:47 pm to HooDooWitch
bump as oil inhabits more and more wetlands
Posted on 5/28/10 at 8:17 am to Mudminnow
reseeding marshes looks like a good longterm idea, but that's a lot of 'concrete' to cover up before the stuff regrows. Burning sounds like the worst idea ever (to me). It's kind of like contemplating 'mercy killing' of oil soaked animals...don't, because if they can still breed...even once...they can 'reseed' progeny, which will be desperately needed in the coming years.
Just my 2 cents.
Just my 2 cents.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News