What Happened to the Oil?
Recent reports from the Coast Guard and others marvel at the fact that apparently the oil from the BP Deepwater Horizon explosion-induced blowout has all but disappeared. They're running all over the place looking for it, mostly in vain. A miracle? Nope. Just Nature taking care of things.
The Gulf of Mexico sits atop a pile of oil. For eons, oil has leaked through fissures and vents into the waters above. The reason the Gulf is not an oil-polluted mess is a tiny organism called alcanivorax borkumensis and a few of his brothers and sisters, the popularly-named oil-eating bacteria. The Gulf is teeming with them due to the abundance of his favorite food, oil, or more accurately, alkanes. Alkanes are the family of complex hydrocarbons that make up petroleum.
Alcanivorax borkumensis is a rod-shaped bacteria that consumes oil to provide it with energy. It is quickly attracted to areas polluted by an oil spill, rapidly increasing in number to dominate. It can be found in varying numbers throughout the world's oceans. The bacteria work together as a team. Some digest the big hydrocarbon molecules of oil, generating much shorter HC chains. Others then consume these shorter chains. At the end of this collaboration, the oil has completely disappeared. Only byproduct residues of water and carbon dioxide are left.
Simply, alcanivorax, let's call him "Al" for short, consumes petroleum for energy and reproduction, leaving only CO2 and H2O, and baby bacteria, as residue.
So, that's what happened to the BP oil. As is the case throughout our Creation, or Mother Nature if you prefer, there are built-in repair and balancing mechanisms to correct dangerous disturbances of the equilibrium. Left alone, the ecosystem will repair itself, within reason. All things considered and contrary to my previous dire predictions, the BP oil spill has turned out to be little more than a boon for boom and suction equipment suppliers, but basically only a blip on the Gulf ecosystem except for the oil that washed ashore.
Just a word about certain "scientist" naysayers. A couple of university types have disagreed with the alleged disappearance of the oil, claiming it's all just hiding under the surface. I'm afraid this may be an example of what's wrong with science these days. Their statements ignore the presence and efficacy of "Al" in cleaning up the mess. I'm sure they are well familiar with the little critters, so why neglect to mention their effect in the press releases? Cynic that I am, I suspect some grant-fishing going on, perhaps hoping the government will shovel a few million bucks their way to "research the problem." *Sigh*.
So, be at peace folks. God is in his Heaven and all is right with the world, at least the Gulf of Mexico part.
We encourage your comments but will strive to remove discussion that contains personal attacks, racial slurs, profanity or other inappropriate material as outlined in our guidelines. We post-moderate comments on most content, but may choose to pre-moderate some comments so please be patient if you don't see yours appear right way. We also ask for your help by reporting comments you think are inappropriate.






19 Comments
reformed trucker - Aug 22, 2010 10:13 PM
Great, once the government hears of this, they will probably seek to impose emission restrictions on Al.
jhayett - Aug 23, 2010 7:42 AM
Carl Hicks - Aug 23, 2010 4:07 PM
Even as the microbes do their work, however, they leave behind the most toxic of the oil's components, so-called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, the researchers say. Neither estimate takes into account this residual pollutant.
aneuhauser - Aug 23, 2010 5:23 PM
"Just like your automobile, these marine-dwelling bacteria and fungi use the hydrocarbons as fuel—and emit the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) as a result. In essence, the microbes break down the ring structures of the hydrocarbons in seaborne oil using enzymes and oxygen in the seawater."
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-microbes-clean-up-oil-spills
Carl Hicks - Aug 23, 2010 5:58 PM
"Just like your automobile,"
Sounds like flawed logic to me.
Carl Hicks - Aug 23, 2010 6:13 PM
Such anaerobic environments can develop locally in the seawater itself, thanks to a ready supply of oil and blooming microbes eager to devour it. In deepwater, where there's less mixing with the surface waters to provide fresh supplies of oxygen, a dead zone may result. "It's not exchanging with the atmosphere," Joye notes. "Once the oxygen is gone, how are you going to replace it? It's not going to get mixed up by winter storms." That's bad news for the speedy breakdown of oil as well as for the Lophelia coral and other sessile deepwater life.
Regardless, the oil will linger in the environment for a long time. The microbes break down hydrocarbons in "weeks to months to years, depending on the compounds and concentrations—not hours or days," Atlas notes. "Much of the real tar or asphalt compounds are not readily subject to microbial attack…. Tar tends to persist. Asphalt tends to persist."
Adds Valentine: "We wouldn't make roads out of them if the bacteria ate them."
Tami Klink - Aug 23, 2010 7:17 PM
And yes, Al, I think you are correct in the conclusion on the money/grant opportunities. If you look at the number of grants given out and what they are for, it borders on the ridiculous.
Have a great week!
aneuhauser - Aug 24, 2010 12:59 AM
What seems to be lost in all this is that although there are several oil-consuming bacteria, alcanivorex borkumensis is the most effective. I don't know what the others leave behind, but Al leaves mainly carbon dioxide (boooo!) and water (plus babies), with a only a small trace of a few other harmless byproducts. (I could not find a listing of the latter by name.)
Concerning the "flawed logic" referencing the automobile, we're talking carbon dioxide, not VOC's. If you're all clutched up over .04% carbon dioxide in the atmosphere threatening the planet, I suppose you could consider alcanivorax's excreta dangerous. I'm not breaking a sweat.
Carl Hicks - Aug 24, 2010 2:24 AM
And flawed logic is this ..."leaves nothing nasty." "Just like your automobile,"
"sink to the bottom to join a whole lot of other junk."
Having been a sailor I know there is alot of junk down there since man considers the oceans to be a garbage dump.
Is coral just junk?
jhayett - Aug 24, 2010 9:09 AM
aneuhauser - Aug 24, 2010 5:16 PM
I think we're into a last word game here. So, here's my last word. Alcanivorex is genetically configured to break apart the carbon-hydrogen (CH) rings that constitute the petroleum molecule. It usually does this in two steps. It then oxidizes the carbon and hydrogen, much as in human metabolism, to obtain energy. The byproducts are carbon dioxide and dihydrogen oxide--water. It appears to be able to do this with practically any carbon-hydrogen bond (organic) molecules, although oil appears to be its favorite..
aneuhauser - Aug 25, 2010 12:15 AM
Carl Hicks - Aug 25, 2010 1:45 PM
And I wonder what Jims point is about naturally oil in the oceans. Does he feel we can spill at will because momma nature can contain natural occurences. Anyone with a brain realizes that the earths natural defenses can be overcome by mans actions.
Compridious - Aug 25, 2010 2:27 PM
aneuhauser - Aug 26, 2010 12:27 AM
My impression from a number of other sources of information is that the tar and asphalt that results from the action of sea water and certain other bacteria, that sinks thousands of feet to the bottom and is quickly covered with sediment, can remain there indefinitely without any significant impact on the marine ecosystem. I frankly can't get excited about some sea-bottom oxygen depletion except where there is live coral, which doesn't live thousands of feet down and is not present in the Gulf of Mexico so far as I know.
I was limiting my discussion to the clearing of surface and near-surface oil before it balls and sinks. Alcanivorex borkumensis, according to numerous references that I Googled including the SA article, consumes most of that oil with no risidual harm to the ecosystem. I found that fact rather exciting, frankly. If there is some remaining oil that "Al" missed that balls and sinks, I am not convinced that's a major problem. In fact, your quotes do not make a convincing case for an environmental disaster. Valentine's comment about road asphalt is just plain stupid.
Sorry you're disappointed that my post was narrowly focused on the "disappearance" of the Gulf oil slick. Sometimes I actually try to be concise.
aneuhauser - Aug 27, 2010 12:47 AM
Both Corexit formulations contain nasty stuff like propylene glycol--antifreeze--and butyl alcohol compounds. Alcanivorex and most likely the other oil-eating bacteria won't touch this stuff. Also, the dispersant effect breaks the oil into small globules which sink. Alcanivorex has to work near the surface to obtain sufficient oxygen, so dispersants will actually inhibit the effectiveness of the oil-eaters. Idiots.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
Carthamus - Aug 27, 2010 1:04 PM
Looks like some do.
http://newscenter.lbl.gov/news-releases/2010/08/24/deepwater-oil-plume-microbes/
The only potential negative from the report is that it is "... funded by a $500 million, 10-year grant from BP."
aneuhauser: "Alcanivorex has to work near the surface to obtain sufficient oxygen, so dispersants will actually inhibit the effectiveness of the oil-eaters. Idiots."
Don't be too harsh! There are many other microbes that, after being put under selective pressure, will be able to handle the compounds.
Onlyoneme - Sep 14, 2010 6:10 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100913/ap_on_sc/us_sci_gulf_oil_spill_sea_floor;_ylt=AuqrQ0vNVNjJyRp_uM2EJDms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTFlcXY4dWdmBHBvcwMxMTUEc2VjA2FjY29yZGlvbl9zY2llbmNlBHNsawN3aGVyZXN0aGVvaWw-?om_rid=DVZGYU&om_mid=_BMj2aGB8UsTIeC&ref=nf
Onlyoneme - Sep 14, 2010 10:33 PM
http://www.flyrodreel.com/magazine/2010/under-bps-sheen