Started By
Message

re: why does the media report in gallons?

Posted on 6/9/10 at 9:46 am to
Posted by Tigerpaw123
Louisiana
Member since Mar 2007
17642 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 9:46 am to
quote:

A barrel IS 55 gallons.

Just not a PETROLEUM barrel.



Context clues

Posted by Luke4LSU
Member since Oct 2007
11986 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 9:47 am to
quote:

Context clues


I know, bruh. I'm just combating the idiots that come in here and link google saying a barrel is 55 gal.
Posted by Douboy
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2007
4332 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 9:47 am to
For a while, the media used gallons and barrels interchangeably. They have only recently figured out the difference.

My opinion is that they enjoy reporting the larger number in gallons because it sounds so much worse to the general public who can relate to a gallon. Hundreds of thousands sounds worse than tens of thousands.
Posted by sheek
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Sep 2007
43976 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 9:48 am to
quote:

believe they were old, used liquor barrels. Can't remember, though.


they were. They have some of the original ones at the Oil and Gas Museum in Houston.
Posted by Luke4LSU
Member since Oct 2007
11986 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 9:50 am to
quote:

They have some of the original ones at the Oil and Gas Museum in Houston.


You talkin about the museum of Natural History by Hermann Park? I believe it's the Weiss Energy Exhibit?

If so, that place is BAD arse! Everyone who drives a car should be required to visit that place to decrease the idiocy.
Posted by sheek
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Sep 2007
43976 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 9:54 am to
quote:

You talkin about the museum of Natural History by Hermann Park? I believe it's the Weiss Energy Exhibit?



Yep that place is awesome, it goes over in detail of every step of the process. the capsule you stand in that shows first hand the spud to the fracking of the well is bad arse. All these oil and gas haters should go and educate themselves.
Posted by WNCTiger
Member since Aug 2006
2883 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 11:56 am to

Because most people don't know that a barrel of oil contains 42 US gallons

And because 250,000 gallons sounds more scary than 5,952 barrels.

The better question is why did they under-report the volume of the oil coming out for so long?

And why do they continue to report on the utterances of BP execs as if they were true?

When time and time again, they have been proven wrong.



Posted by Mudminnow
Houston, TX
Member since Aug 2004
34166 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 12:08 pm to
BP and NOAA said 5K barrels/day
govt panel of top scientists estimated 12-19K barrels/day based on grainy imagery

Now they have been given the amount of natural gas amounts and HD imagery we should have a new and pretty accurate estimate in a matter of days.

Thad Allen says 15K barrels is coming out right now and they hope to have 28K barrels by next week when the new ship arrives.
Posted by mylsuhat
Mandeville, LA
Member since Mar 2008
49516 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 12:16 pm to
remember, all of the obstructions have been cut off so the flow has increased
Posted by Mudminnow
Houston, TX
Member since Aug 2004
34166 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 12:19 pm to
from the oil hearings in washington this morning. They said an increase of 6 -20% due to cutting and that will be accounted for when doing the back calculations.

The new HD imagery is amazing.
Posted by ottothewise
Member since Sep 2008
32094 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 2:51 pm to
public has no clue what a barrel is.

Posted by Napoleon
Kenna
Member since Dec 2007
71062 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 3:10 pm to
Didn't you start this sane thread a month ago?

All the wicked media is doing is applying simple conversions. The average person may not know how many gallons are in a barrel.
No different than any other conversion, I mean we could measure voltage in joules and pressure in kilo pascals like scientist do or use volts and psi.

This is a non issue, made an issue by people who think they see a left wing controversy behind everything.
Posted by LSUnowhas2
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2004
21981 posts
Posted on 6/9/10 at 3:28 pm to
The average person understands what a gallon of something is. I don't go to the store and buy a barrel of milk or put a barrel of gas in my car.
Posted by Luke4LSU
Member since Oct 2007
11986 posts
Posted on 6/10/10 at 12:04 pm to
But can the average person fathom what 600,000 gallons is?

Since we all know what a teaspoon is, how many teaspoons would it take to fill up the superdome?

See how that's silly?
Posted by Napoleon
Kenna
Member since Dec 2007
71062 posts
Posted on 6/10/10 at 3:23 pm to
They report both, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, this is seen by many to imply fear. (and hence it's an anti-oil left wing conspiracy) It's a conversion from a little known unit to a well known one. Would you like your weather report in Kelvin?
Posted by Commando
Never Never Land
Member since Jan 2009
2814 posts
Posted on 6/10/10 at 3:44 pm to
quote:

do they just want a bigger number?


The enviros have used that strategy for years, why not the media that sells based on hype?
Posted by tigerpurple84
Baton Rouge
Member since May 2010
971 posts
Posted on 6/10/10 at 3:45 pm to
Will have to find the link but they use gallons because it limits the way people can think about the spill.

A typical person can image 1,2, maybe even 5 or 20 gallons bc it's something in their everyday life. Like buying milk or filling up their truck.

But the amount of oil leaking is in the millions of gallons. Most people wouldn't even understand what a million gallons of milk would look like.

For comparison, basically, it's about the size of Tiger Stadium filling up with oil every day or two (depending on the estimates) and being dumped in the Gulf.

But BP is controlling a lot of the info, so they'll stick to gallons.
Posted by TigerFred
Feeding hamsters
Member since Aug 2003
27678 posts
Posted on 6/10/10 at 3:48 pm to
quote:

But BP is controlling a lot of the info,


False. Obama is in Charge and has been since the beginning. BP is the puppet right now and only talks when the strings are pulled.
Posted by tigerpurple84
Baton Rouge
Member since May 2010
971 posts
Posted on 6/10/10 at 4:11 pm to
quote:

Obama is in Charge and has been since the beginning. BP is the puppet right now and only talks when the strings are pulled.



The US govt has not federalized the response.

BP is in charge bc it is their mess.

If it were federalized, there would be a LOT of money going to help the businesses that are currently going broke from BPs screw ups.

BP is in charge and that's why everything is screwed. THEY - not the President- are screwing it up. Fact.
Posted by TigerFred
Feeding hamsters
Member since Aug 2003
27678 posts
Posted on 6/10/10 at 4:15 pm to
So when Obama gets on TV and says that he is in charge, does it mean he is lying?

quote:

BP is in charge and that's why everything is screwed. THEY - not the President- are screwing it up. Fact.



Not a fact. I wish people from the inside would start leaking the truth out through the media.

Go find out the reason why the Q4000 isn't flaring right now and what is holding up the next phase of capturing more of the leak.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram