

NASA Captures First Photos of Massive 'Arm' of Oil Slick - MikeCapone
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=44006

======
pierrefar
And yet it isn't anyone's fault, the response went perfectly to plan, and
we'll have another one because we won't learn anything.

------
Bjoern
Seeing this makes me sad.

~~~
BudVVeezer
Seeing this makes me _angry_ because it was avoidable.

~~~
proee
How was it avoidable?

~~~
joegaudet
Changing the batteries in the control panel that caused the blowoff mechanism
(or what ever it was) to mal function.

~~~
MikeCapone
Better testing methods for the equipment and more redundancy would also have
made it a LOT less likely.

------
WestCoastJustin
I honestly think this is a better link:

[http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/05/nasa-satellite-
photo...](http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/05/nasa-satellite-photos-bp-
oil-spill-gulf-mexico-arm-loop.php)

This show that the massive arm is going with the Gulf Loop Current:

[http://news.discovery.com/earth/oil-spill-gulf-loop-
current....](http://news.discovery.com/earth/oil-spill-gulf-loop-current.html)

What is interesting and not in the full photo, is where does the "Gulf Loop
Current" go? A little googleing shows this image:
<http://www.texaspelagics.com/GOMocean.html>

But where do you think it is going to end up after is leaves to the right of
the image.. Further up the coast of Florida I assume?!?

------
pohl
Are they even trying to plug this thing? Or are they really trying to salvage
it and turn it back into a productive rig?

~~~
OliverSmith
I think those are both the same thing. Plugging it would allow them to redrill
later in a different location. Salvaging it immediately would allow them to do
both at the same time.

~~~
pohl
Both would eventually stop the flow of uncaptured oil, but would they both
stop the flow in the same amount of time?

That is the real problem here: the question of which option to pursue should
be driven by getting the leak stopped ASAP. I fear someone has their mind on
revenue.

