How oil might affect a hurricane
There's no major changes to the forecast for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. As I discussed in yesterday's post, on Sunday, the winds will begin increasing and shifting to the southeast. The latest run of the GFS model shows that this will be a week-long period of southeast winds, with wind speeds at times reaching 20 - 25 knots. These winds will threaten to bring oil to a large portion of the Louisiana coast, including regions of the central Louisiana coast west of the mouth of the Mississippi River. The Mississippi and Alabama coasts will also be at risk next week, but the risk to the Florida Panhandle is lower. Yesterday's post also has the long-range outlook for oil to get into the Loop Current and spread to the Florida Keys and beyond.
What will oil in the Gulf of Mexico do to a hurricane?
With hurricane season fast approaching and the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico likely to still be around once hurricane season starts in June, we need to ask, how will oil affect any hurricanes that might traverse over the spill? And how might a hurricane's wind and storm surge affect the spill? Let's consider the first of those questions today.
From the time of the ancient Greeks to the days of the wooden ships and iron men, mariners dumped barrels of oil onto raging seas to calm them during critical moments of violent storms (Wyckoff, 1886.) Oil does indeed calm wind-driven waves, thanks to the reduction in surface tension of the water that oil causes. Ripples with a wavelength shorter than 17 mm are affected by surface tension, and these ripples then cause a feedback that reduces the height of larger waves with longer wavelengths (Scott, 1986.) The reduction of surface tension also impacts the flow of air above the water, and reduces the amount of sea spray thrown into the air, both of which could affect the wind speed. Oil also damps waves by forming a thick, viscous film at the top of the water that resists water motion (Scott, 1999.) Oil also helps calm raging seas by switching off of the wind energy input needed by the wave to break. This occurs because the surface film of oil prevents the generation of ripples on the exposed crests of the waves, and this smoother surface makes the wind less able to grab onto the wave and force it to break.
So, what would happen to a hurricane that encounters a large region of oily waters? A 2005 paper by Barenblatt et al. theorize that spray droplets hurled into the air by a hurricane's violent winds form a layer intermediate between air and sea made up of a cloud of droplets that can be viewed as a "third fluid". The large droplets in the air suppress turbulence in this "third fluid", decrease the frictional drag over the ocean surface, and accelerate the winds. According to this theory of turbulence, oil dumped on the surface of the ocean would reduce the formation of wind-whipped spray droplets, potentially calming the winds. The authors propose spraying oil on the surface of the ocean to reduce the winds of a hurricane. However, the turbulence theory championed by Barenblatt et al. has been challenged by other scientists. In a 2005 interview with Newscientist magazine, turbulence expect Julian Hunt at University College London, UK, remarks, "I am very doubtful about this approach." Hunt studies turbulence both theoretically and in the laboratory, and believes that the high wind speeds in a hurricane are not caused by sea spray. In an article he wrote for the Journal of Fluid Dynamics, Hunt suggests that variations in the turbulence between different regions of the hurricane cause sharp jumps in wind speed, which are responsible for the hurricane's strongest winds.
Oil reduces evaporation
Hurricanes are sustained by the heat liberated when water vapor that has evaporated from warm ocean waters condenses into rain. If one can reduce the amount of water evaporating from the ocean, a decrease in the hurricane's strength will result. Oil on the surface of the ocean will act to limit evaporation, and could potentially decrease the strength of a hurricane. However, if the oil is mixed away from the surface by the strong winds of a hurricane, the oil will have a very limited ability to reduce evaporation. According to a 2005 article in Popular Science magazine, Dr. Kerry Emanuel of MIT performed some tests in 2002 to see if oil on the surface of water could significantly reduce evaporation into a hurricane. He found that the slick quickly dissipated under high wind conditions that generated rough seas.
Figure 1. A comparison of the size of 2008's Hurricane Gustav with the size of the Gulf oil spill. The spill is only about 60 miles in diameter, while a hurricane like Gustav is typically 400+ miles in diameter.
Conclusion
A tropical cyclone in its formative stage--as either a tropical depression or a tropical storm with 40 mph winds--might be adversely affected if it encountered the Gulf of Mexico oil slick, due to the reduction of evaporation into the storm. However, a full-fledged hurricane would mix the oil into the ocean to such a degree that the storm would probably not see any significant reduction in evaporation. It remains unknown how the reduction of sea spray by oil might affect a hurricane. If the oil slick expands to a much larger size, there might be a significant reduction in strength of the hurricane, if theory of how a reduction of sea spray will decrease a hurricane's winds is correct. However, the oil slick is currently Delaware-sized, while a hurricane tends to be Texas-sized, and I doubt that the oil slick at its current size is large enough to have a significant impact on a hurricane's intensity. The slick is about 60 miles across, and it would take a hurricane about four hours to traverse the spill at a typical hurricane forward speed of 15 mph. Furthermore, the slick is within 50 miles land, and interactions with land will dominate the behavior of a hurricane that gets that close to the coast. Unfortunately, there is a decent chance that we'll get a real-world opportunity to see what will happen. June tropical storms tend to form in the Gulf of Mexico, and we've been averaging one June storm every two years since 1995. This year, the odds of a June Gulf of Mexico storm are probably a little lower than usual, shear from our lingering El Niño may bring wind shear levels a bit above average. I expect there is a 20% chance that we'll see a June tropical storm in the Gulf of Mexico that would interact with the oil spill.
References
Barenblatt, G.I, A.J. Chorin, and V.M. Prostokishin, 2005, A note concerning the Lighthill sandwich model of tropical cyclones, PNAS August 9, 2005 vol. 102 no. 32 11148-11150 doi: 10.1073/pnas.0505209102.
Hunt, J.C.R, and I. Eames, 2006, Mechanics of inhomogeneous turbulence and interfacial layers,, Journal of Fluid Dynamics, vol. 554, pp. 499519 doi:10.1017/S002211200600944X.
Scott, J.C., 1986, "The Effect of Organic Films on Water Surface Motions," in Oceanic Whitecaps, edited by E. C. Monohan and G. Mac Niocaill, D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Scott, J.C., 1999, Ocean Surface Slicks - "Pollution, Productivity, Climate and Life-saving", IEEE Proceedings of the International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symp. IGARSS99, Hamburg, Germany, 28 June-2 July 1999, vol. 3, pp 1463-1468, 1999.
Wyckoff, A.B., 1886, The Use of Oil in Storms at Sea, American Philosophical Society, April 2, 1886.
http://www.archive.org/stream/proceedingsofamep23 amer/proceedingsofamep23amer_djvu.txt
First tropical wave of the season leaves the coast of Africa
Yesterday, the National Hurricane Center noted the first tropical wave of the year coming off the coast of Africa in their Tropical Weather Discussion. The first half of May is the typical time when the first tropical wave comes off the coast of Africa. The wave is currently positioned in the far eastern Atlantic near 5N 45W, and I don't expect it to develop, since it is too close to the Equator to leverage the Earth's spin to gain the rotation needed. The wave has quickly been joined by two new ones today, located at 15W and 36W off the African coast. Tropical waves serve as the seed that form most Atlantic and Eastern Pacific hurricanes.
Portlight delivers major aid shipment to Haiti
Portlight continues to focus its energy and funds on the situation in Haiti, where the rainy season is fast approaching the needs for shelter, medical supplies, food and water remain urgent. Their latest effort was a shipment of several thousand pounds of Durable Medical Equipment and 30,000 pounds of rice that arrived this week via the schooner Halie and Mathew.
Portlight.org is also preparing to respond the the Gulf Coast oil spill by deploying one of more mobile kitchens to feed the hundreds of volunteers likely to flood the coast when the oil finally comes ashore. Please visit the Portlight.org web site or the Portlight blog to learn more and to donate to Portlight's efforts in Haiti and the Gulf Coast.
Figure 2. Relief supplies from the schooner Halie and Mathew sitting at the Portlight Haiti warehouse, ready for distribution.
Next Post
I'm on my way to Tucson today for the American Meteorological Society's 29th Conference on Hurricanes and Tropical Meteorology, which will be held in Tucson next week. My next post will probably be on Monday night, when I plan to discuss the record SSTs observed last month in the tropical Atlantic. I'm excited to be catching up on and blogging about all the latest advancements in hurricane research!
Jeff Masters
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 — Blog Index
i think without public outcry the only reason at all bp would have to try and fix it is they are losing money. so to say people should be quiet and not say anything and wait to point fingers til it is over, is not gonna help toward holding them accountable. they already tried to screw over the fishermen by mak8ing them sign a hold harmless release.
Chances of being in the warmest 20%, lowest 20% of pressure, and wettest 20% for the July-August-September time period when compared to climatology, which are good indicators of an upcoming active season.
PS: I wanted that comment. It's in my name. :P
It was a similar situation where a BOP failed because the shear rams were over a joint in the pipe and thus lacked the force needed to seal the well.
If Ixtoc was that difficult to seal in 50 meters of water, I can't imagine how much more difficult the task is at 5,000 ft.
Armageddon...LOL
There's ridging in the mid Atlantic all the way back to the east coast of the CONUS. As storms tend to bump along the bottom of ridges and move more or less along the bottom edge, trace the route a system would take, moving along the bottom of the ridging...see where it ends up?
Now, that having been said, the configuration will change over time, and may change radically, but the graphics there show the MJO on an uptick, in conjunction with the a pretty consistent high all the way to central Florida...anything that does form (and an upward MJO motion makes it very favorable to do so) will tend to travel into south Florida. Bear in mind that the graphic only shows 5 days out...
Well hopefully, they learned something in the 31 years ...
Ooops....looks like I was looking at the wrong graphic...LOL
You'd think they would have learned how to make a more effective BOP.
Haha, no prob!
True!! Will be interesting to find out what went wrong with the installed one. Noboddy has said....
Nice to see you around... I don't like your analysis for personal reasons though.
It failed yes,..but the pressure that made it fail..it wasnt designed for.
Thus the blowout.
Thus the investigation.
Well,,its sticky wicky one could say.
And if Haliburton knew they were past 18K,,without permit.
They are just as guilty.
They've considered it. The problem is that unless the BOP is providing some measure of resistance to flow, when they cut off the riser in preparation for lowering a new BOP onto it, they will cause a full open condition of 2000 gallons per minute or more. Imagine trying to place a new BOP over that using only ROVs. Then there is the same issue as the "junk shot" aka "kill shot" aka "top kill" ... will stopping the flow increase internal pressures to the point where there is a catastrophic failure at the existing BOP or wellhead. This is where the "we don't want to make things worse while trying to make them better" comment seems to be coming from.
BP needs to be seen as doing "something" - the new containment dome is a good plan that may succeed without putting additional pressure on the situation. My own sense is that they are not going to move on the "contraption" to plug up the BOP due to the risk of worsening the situation ... that moving equipment for this on site etc. is more for PR purposes than anything. If they DO decide to try for the top kill, we should all be praying that it works. If it doesn't, the situation could sharply deteriorate.
South Pole Has Warmest Year on Record
Buzz up!40 votes Send
Email IM .Share
Facebook Twitter Delicious Digg Fark Newsvine Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks .Print ..LiveScience Staff
LiveScience.com livescience Staff
livescience.com – 2 hrs 4 mins ago
The South Pole experienced its warmest year on record in 2009, according to newly released data from the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station.
The average temperature at the South Pole last year was still a bone-chilling minus 54.2 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 47.9 degrees Celsius) in 2009, making it the warmest year on record since 1957, when temperature records began at the South Pole, as was reported by Peter Rejcek, an editor for The Antarctic Sun, a part of the U.S. Antarctic Program funded by the National Science Foundation.
The previous record high was minus 54.4 F (minus 48 C), recorded in 2002, according to Tim Markle, senior meteorologist at the South Pole Station in Antarctica.
Last year was also the second warmest year on record for the planet, according to NASA measurements of global surface temperatures released earlier this year. The global record warm year, in the period of near-global instrumental measurements since the late 1800s, was 2005.
Until 2010, the South Pole has actually gone two straight winters without dipping below the minus 100 F (minus 73 C) barrier - especially worrisome for those looking to join the exclusive South Pole 300 Club (to gain admission," Polies" pile into a 200 F (93 C) sauna and then run outside in the minus 100 F cold to the geographic pole wearing their boots and little else). The mercury dropped to minus 99.9 F (minus 73.3 C) and minus 98.0 F (minus 72.2 C) in 2009. That second temperature also represents the warmest minimum temperature recorded for a calendar year, Markle told The Antarctic Sun.
In 2007, the temperature plunged below minus 100 F for only about a minute on Sept. 2, Markle added, meaning that the last three calendar years didn't significantly reach minus 100 F.
However, this April, the South Pole Station recorded an unseasonably early 22 minute dip below 100 F.
"Again, not really all that long," Markle said. "However, it was certainly the coldest temperature since Sept. 2, 2007, and a long enough duration for one group of Polies to achieve membership status into the 300 Club."
Current Conditions
Vostok, Antarctica (Airport)
Updated: 6 hr 20 min 46 sec ago
Vostok, Antarctica
Temperature: -90 °F
Humidity: 27%
Dew Point: -98 °F
Wind: 9 mph from the SSW
Wind Gust: -
Pressure: in (Falling)
Visibility: 12.0 miles
Elevation: 11220 ft
Rapid Fire Updates:
Thats a fine assessment and the top Kill is a shot in the Dark,,but as you mention...,Options are limited.
Everyone should be rooting for the 2 Drill Shifts on the Relief Rig.
DD-3
D
A full open condition would likely end in the well being stopped up with the hydrate crystals or sand. Wells in production are never allowed to flow as fast as the pressure below wants to push for just this reason. Strange unknown angle to making this worse as you correctly state, might actually be a good thing. But no one can really predict when or if the well might clog itself up...man, that sure would be nice.
Hi Levi32, Do you have the Pacific only graphic to see more closer how it is cooling?
The required piece of equipment does not exist, although it may be possible to fabricate it. But we're talking 20" riser pipe with 1" walls, and a drill pipe in the middle of that. Then, provided something can be engineered and built, you've got the "what happens if we cut off the flow?" situation all over again. But ... no doubt there is a team exploring this approach as well.
I expect they will remediate with a dome of some type over the main leak (or fashion a new hole in the riser in the same area to take the fluid off) and hope that other upstream restrictions (kink in riser pipe, any flow restriction from partial action of the BOP) don't get sandblasted away before they manage to hit the hole with a relief well.
Pressure/Depth/temperature had to do with why it failed. Methane at that pressure turns to crystals. Methane crystals formed on the inside of the dome and caused to to become buoyant. They did have an idea that at that depth it would not work, though
Halliburton: work on oil rig finished before blast
by Matthew Daly / The Associated Press
wwltv.com
Posted on May 10, 2010 at 12:09 PM
WASHINGTON -- Oil services contractor Halliburton Inc. says it safely finished a cementing operation 20 hours before a Gulf of Mexico rig went up in flames.
In testimony prepared for a congressional hearing Tuesday, Halliburton says it completed work on the well according to accepted industry practice and federal regulators.
Halliburton executive Tim Probert says a pressure test was conducted after the work was finished, and the well owner decided to continue. A copy of the testimony was obtained by The Associated Press.
The cause of the April 20 explosion is under investigation, but lawsuits filed after the disaster claim it was caused when Halliburton workers improperly capped the well a process known as cementing. Halliburton denies wrongdoing.
(Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
TORNADO WATCH PROBABILITIES FOR WT 0147
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0127 PM CDT MON MAY 10 2010
WT 0147 PDS
PROBABILITY TABLE:
PROB OF 2 OR MORE TORNADOES : >95%
PROB OF 1 OR MORE STRONG /F2-F5/ TORNADOES : 80%
PROB OF 10 OR MORE SEVERE WIND EVENTS : 80%
PROB OF 1 OR MORE WIND EVENTS >= 65 KNOTS : 70%
PROB OF 10 OR MORE SEVERE HAIL EVENTS : >95%
PROB OF 1 OR MORE HAIL EVENTS >= 2 INCHES : 90%
PROB OF 6 OR MORE COMBINED SEVERE HAIL/WIND EVENTS : >95%
&&
ATTRIBUTE TABLE:
MAX HAIL /INCHES/ : 4.0
MAX WIND GUSTS SURFACE /KNOTS/ : 70
MAX TOPS /X 100 FEET/ : 500
MEAN STORM MOTION VECTOR /DEGREES AND KNOTS/ : 25045
PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS SITUATION : YES
I was privy to that document last night,early am from a NOLA.com source.
So a lot is under board on the root cause.
Many BP honchos were on board The Deep Horizon Vessel at the time,and a lot is being squelched as per the lawyers.
so it begins
From what I read, ( I do not neccesarily believe everything I read) there was indeed a methane bubble that came up the drill-pipe, under very high pressure, and building pressure (expanding) enormously as it got to atmospheric pressure (it was somewhere around 20,000 feet down when it started, under about 15,000 psi pressure). Not a lot you can do about that, if you were not aware that the methane was there under that kind of pressure.
Seismic surveys are often wrong, which is why some wells are dry holes.
TW no 146 was issued at 12:35 CDT and the follow on,147 is a PDS.
Everyone in the watch areas should stay alert thru the event
Viewing: 1901 - 1951
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 — Blog Index