MC4Misfit
Posts: 72
Joined: 3/31/2010 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen The issue is quantity and area. The spill is well over 10,000 tons of crude dispersed over many hundreds of square miles. The demonstration showed that hay would absorb about its own weight in crude. So we'd need some way to gather 10,000+ tons of hay and then some way to spread it across the area of the spill and then to recover most of it. To build on that point, they mentioned that farmers will have crops of it ready to harvest in a few weeks. First, that's weeks more of oil spilling before you can even harvest the hay, then transport it, etc. Also, they planted that hay to feed their animals. You'd be a lot less thrilled with this idea when the price of beef triples...or more. Then as for their idea to burn it for energy, who many incinerators do we have set up to handle it? Then there's the air pollution issue...you're just converting it to a different form of pollution. Also, the hay will be soaking wet, so it's not going to burn well. It's good to see people trying to be innovative, but this idea really isn't practical on this scale.
|