Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
That's pretty cool. :)

We're going to try keeping this thread here in community discussion, but that means no political discussion of the oil spill. Eligible members may go to the PRSI for that.
 
We're going to try keeping this thread here in community discussion, but that means no political discussion of the oil spill. Eligible members may go to the PRSI for that.

Mmhhh.....I see what you mean, I guess there's a fine line between being political and environmental?

;)


Here's the option...
 
^+1. Worth a try. May not fully clean it up but if it can slow it from reaching the shore its worth a try.
 
I would like to know how they came across this. (if they said, then I am sorry. I watched without sound)
 
Some problems I could see would be motor oil vs. extracted oil. There is a difference between the two, but I couldn't hear the audio, so it may have been covered.

But I do recall seeing hay being used in past pictures of oil spills, so I think it already is in use.
 
The person who did the demonstration said that each scoop was about a quarter-pound of hay. I estimate he poured about half-quart of oil into each bowl.

So there was a ratio of .25 lb hay to .5 quart used motor oil. A recent estimate is that the oil leak is 5000 barrels per day. 1 barrel is 124 quarts. So that comes up to 62 pounds of hay per barrel. That means you need 310k pounds of hay per day for a 5k barrel leak.

One acre of land can produce 5 tons of hay (or 10k pounds) in a growing season. The 10k pounds means you need just 31 acres, so I think the US should have enough hay to do the job.

About the viscosity, he only said that the motor oil was less viscuous.

I've also heard that human hair is used in the booms (the cloth covered floating 'bags' that surround spills.)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.