On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Stephen Russell <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:31 AM, gerald foote <[email protected]> > wrote: >> "If U.S. officials had followed up on a 1994 response plan for a major Gulf >> oil spill, it is possible that the spill could have been kept under control >> and far from land. > ---------------------------------- > > In-Situ Burns are reaction to a tanker spill. The oil is close to or > at sea level. > > This disaster is nothing like that. We are currently dealing with a > deep water emergency where only robotic vehicles are running. I > thought that this floor was around 1 mile deep. > > On top of that the water conditions there are not quiet. Instead you > have 4-6 foot seas and that makes all the little things much harder to > do even for experienced sailors. Worse is that it is churning the oil > that is gushing upwards to a wider area. Getting booms around this in > rough seas doesn't work like they do in shallow waters. That is > probably the biggest problem that we face.
Nope it's definitely the Kenyan's fault..god-damn A+ jml _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
