Meditations On All Things Solar – Let us start with the big guy himself

That is right the Sun creates all the energy on the Earth. Well, the Sun or its cousins because the heavy metals that we use for our version of “nuclear power” were created in Suns of the past that blew up. The oil, natural gas and the coal we burn are nothing but dead congealed plants and animals nurtured by the sun. Really think about it what is “natural gas”. The stink of the dead from the past. So why do we do that? We can get all the energy we need directly from the Sun? The point is that if the capitalist system can sell you bottled water then it surely can sell you petroleum products.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

Sun

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the star. For other uses, see Sun (disambiguation).
This article is  semi-protected.
The Sun Sun symbol.svg
The Sun seen through X-ray
Observation data
Mean distance
from Earth
1.496×108 km
8 min 19 s at light speed
Visual brightness (V) ?26.74 [1]
Absolute magnitude 4.83 [1]
Spectral classification G2V
Metallicity Z = 0.0177 [2]
Angular size 31.6? – 32.7? [3]
Adjectives solar
Orbital characteristics
Mean distance
from Milky Way core
~2.5×1017 km
26,000 light-years
Galactic period (2.25–2.50) × 108 a
Velocity ~220 km/s (orbit around the center of the Galaxy)
~20 km/s (relative to average velocity of other stars in stellar neighborhood)
396.5±3.0 km/s[4] (relative to the cosmic microwave background)
Physical characteristics
Mean diameter 1.392×106 km [1]
109 × Earth
Equatorial radius 6.955×105 km [5]
109 × Earth[5]
Equatorial circumference 4.379×106 km [5]
109 × Earth[5]
Flattening 9×10?6
Surface area 6.0877×1012 km2 [5]
11,990 × Earth[5]
Volume 1.412×1018 km3 [5]
1,300,000 × Earth
Mass 1.9891×1030 kg [1]
332,900 × Earth[5]
Average density 1.408×103 kg/m3 [1][5][6]
Different Densities Core: 1.5×105 kg/m3
lower Photosphere: 2×10?4 kg/m3
lower Chromosphere: 5×10?6 kg/m3
Avg. Corona: 1×10?12 kg/m3 [7]
Equatorial surface gravity 274.0 m/s2 [1]
27.94 g
28 × Earth[5]
Escape velocity
(from the surface)
617.7 km/s [5]
55 × Earth[5]
Temperature
of core
~15.7×106 K [1]
Temperature
of surface (effective)
5,778 K [1]
Temperature
of corona
~5×106 K
Luminosity (Lsol) 3.846×1026 W [1]
~3.75×1028 lm
~98 lm/W efficacy
Mean Intensity (Isol) 2.009×107 W·m?2·sr?1
Rotation characteristics
Obliquity 7.25° [1]
(to the ecliptic)
67.23°
(to the galactic plane)
Right ascension
of North pole[8]
286.13°
19h 4min 30s
Declination
of North pole
+63.87°
63°52′ North
Sidereal rotation period
(at equator)
25.05 days [1]
(at 16° latitude) 25.38 days [1]
25d 9h 7min 13s [8]
(at poles) 34.3 days [1]
Rotation velocity
(at equator)
7.189×103 km/h [5]
Photospheric composition (by mass)
Hydrogen 73.46%[9]
Helium 24.85%
Oxygen 0.77%
Carbon 0.29%
Iron 0.16%
Sulfur 0.12%
Neon 0.12%
Nitrogen 0.09%
Silicon 0.07%
Magnesium 0.05%
This box: view • talk • edit

The Sun is the star at the center of the Solar System. It has a diameter of about 1,392,000 kilometers (865,000 mi), about 109 times that of Earth, and its mass (about 2 × 1030 kilograms, 330,000 times that of Earth) accounts for about 99.86% of the total mass of the Solar System.[10] About three quarters of the Sun’s mass consists of hydrogen, while the rest is mostly helium. Less than 2% consists of heavier elements, including iron, oxygen, carbon, neon, and others.[11]

The Sun’s color is white, although from the surface of the Earth it may appear yellow because of atmospheric scattering.[12] Its stellar classification, based on spectral class, is G2V, and is informally designated a yellow star, because the majority of its radiation is in the yellow-green portion of the visible spectrum.[13] In this spectral class label, G2 indicates its surface temperature of approximately 5,778 K (5,505 °C; 9,941 °F), and V (Roman five) indicates that the Sun, like most stars, is a main sequence star, and thus generates its energy by nuclear fusion of hydrogen nuclei into helium. In its core, the Sun fuses 430–600 million tons of hydrogen each second. Once regarded by astronomers as a small and relatively insignificant star, the Sun is now presumed to be brighter than about 85% of the stars in the Milky Way galaxy, most of which are red dwarfs.[14][15] The absolute magnitude of the Sun is +4.83; however, as the star closest to Earth, the Sun is the brightest object in the sky with an apparent magnitude of ?26.74.[16][17] The Sun’s hot corona continuously expands in space creating the solar wind, a hypersonic stream of charged particles that extends to the heliopause at roughly 100 astronomical units. The bubble in the interstellar medium formed by the solar wind, the heliosphere, is the largest continuous structure in the Solar System.[18][19]

The Sun is currently traveling through the Local Interstellar Cloud in the Local Bubble zone, within the inner rim of the Orion Arm of the Milky Way galaxy. Of the 50 nearest stellar systems within 17 light-years from Earth, the Sun ranks 4th in mass.[20] The Sun orbits the center of the Milky Way at a distance of approximately 24,000–26,000 light years from the galactic center, completing one clockwise orbit, as viewed from the galactic north pole, in about 225–250 million years.

:}

The sun will come out tomorrow tomorrow tomorrow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Jdpc7aaAlQ&feature=related

:}

Global Warming – Why it must be happening and why Humans must be causing it

The Sun is cooling and shrinking. Scientists have predicted that this was going to happen and in addition they predicted that a little ice age might occur. There was much positing that there were longer solar cycles then just the moderately well understood 11 year cycle. The thought was that the Sun waxed and waned every 300 or 400 years. No one was sure. Then an amazing thing happened. As the solar flares died down the Earth heated up. That was when scientists turned to man and the atmosphere to try to get some answers. The answer appeared to be that all of the GASES (not just co2 but every gas we throw off – there are 20 or more) we dump into the air are heating the planet up. This could lead to climate destabilization. Well the Sun is still quiet. For 2 1/2 years the Sun has been quiet. That is unprecedented in the 150 years at least that we have been observing the solar cycles. For much more on this subject please see one of the best articles I have ever read on the subject.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627640.800-whats-wrong-with-the-sun.html

What’s wrong with the sun?

Video: Sun spots

SUNSPOTS come and go, but recently they have mostly gone. For centuries, astronomers have recorded when these dark blemishes on the solar surface emerge, only for them to fade away again after a few days, weeks or months. Thanks to their efforts, we know that sunspot numbers ebb and flow in cycles lasting about 11 years.

But for the past two years, the sunspots have mostly been missing. Their absence, the most prolonged for nearly a hundred years, has taken even seasoned sun watchers by surprise. “This is solar behaviour we haven’t seen in living memory,” says David Hathaway, a physicist at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

The sun is under scrutiny as never before thanks to an armada of space telescopes. The results they beam back are portraying our nearest star, and its influence on Earth, in a new light. Sunspots and other clues indicate that the sun’s magnetic activity is diminishing, and that the sun may even be shrinking. Together the results hint that something profound is happening inside the sun. The big question is what?

The stakes have never been higher. Groups of sunspots forewarn of gigantic solar storms that can unleash a billion times more energy than an atomic bomb. Fears that these giant solar eruptions could create havoc on EarthMovie  Camera, and disputes over the sun’s role in climate change, are adding urgency to these studies. When NASA and the European Space Agency launched the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory almost 15 years ago, “understanding the solar cycle was not one of its scientific objectives”, says Bernhard Fleck, the mission’s project scientist. “Now it is one of the key questions.”

Sun behaving badly

Sunspots are windows into the sun’s magnetic soul. They form where giant loops of magnetism, generated deep inside the sun, well up and burst through the surface, leading to a localised drop in temperature which we see as a dark patch. Any changes in sunspot numbers reflect changes inside the sun. “During this transition, the sun is giving us a real glimpse into its interior,” says Hathaway.

When sunspot numbers drop at the end of each 11-year cycle, solar storms die down and all becomes much calmer. This “solar minimum” doesn’t last long. Within a year, the spots and storms begin to build towards a new crescendo, the next solar maximum.

What’s special about this latest dip is that the sun is having trouble starting the next solar cycle. The sun began to calm down in late 2007, so no one expected many sunspots in 2008. But computer models predicted that when the spots did return, they would do so in force. Hathaway was reported as thinking the next solar cycle would be a “doozy”: more sunspots, more solar storms and more energy blasted into space. Others predicted that it would be the most active solar cycle on record. The trouble was, no one told the sun.

:}

Please finish the article. It is very long and there is a scholarly debate in the comments section about where the center of the Earth’s gravity is. This is kindofa hoot if you understand it. It is true our jokes are different from other peoples.

:}

Bill Nye, HAPPY Memorial Day and the Oil Spew – Something for everyone

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1QmeEdFOSc

OK so Happy Memorial Day. Good to get that in.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2010/05/28/DI2010052802315.html

Gulf oil spill: Bill Nye discusses top kill

Bill Nye

The Science Guy
Friday, May 28, 2010; 1:00 PM

Bill Nye, the Science Guy, was online Friday, May 28, at 1 p.m. ET to discuss the Gulf oil spill and the latest efforts to cap the well, including the “top kill” maneuver.

Chantilly, Va.: Why is the oil still gushing out after more than a month? I always assumed they need pumps and other equipment to get the oil to the surface. Where is the pressure coming from to continue to let the oil out of the well?

Bill Nye: The pressure driving the huge flow came or comes from ancient bacteria that fed on ancient sea plants or plankton. The bacteria gave off natural gas, also called methane. It’s trapped in a cavity under the seafloor. This gas is under about 460 atmospheres (6,800 psi) of pressure. That’s plenty to spew oil for years, or even decades.

_______________________

Sarasota, Fla.: BP has not been clear about the quantity of mud versus oil coming out of their gushing pipe. There seems to be uncertainly interpreting the video. But couldn’t they determine the relative quantities from a quick, simple analysis of the fluid they are pumping to the surface? —

Bill Nye: The head BP guy this morning made the extraordinary, and probably not quite accurate, claim that no oil has been coming out, while the mud is flowing. He probably just meant the flow of oil is way down. Such an estimate is very hard, because most of the oil doesn’t make it to the surface. It becomes neutrally buoyant goo. Yikes.

:}

Please follow the link for the rest of the Q&A. It is pretty basic.

http://www.leanweb.org/

The Top Kill Has Failed
During a press conference on May 29, 2010 at 5:10 p.m. BP Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles announced that the Top Kill will no longer be continued.
ROV video feed screen capture from May 29, 2010 at 4:10 p.m.
ROV Screen Capture form May 29 at  4:10p.m.
As can be seen in this Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) video feed screen capture taken at 4:10 p.m. today, May 29, 2010, a large plume of material continues to billow out of the end of the riser pipe.
U.S. Coast Guard Rear Adm. Mary Landry praised the cleanup effort and BP and the Coast Guard’s success at “fighting the oil offshore.”

BP’s next move is to cut off the bent Riser Pipe and replace it with a “Lower Marine Riser Package Cap” (LMRP Cap).

Mr. Suttles stated that he believes that the LMRP Cap will capture “a great majority” of the flow but not all of it.

Adm. Landry stated that the ultimate solution remains the relief well. The relief well appears to be weeks away from completion.


SaveOurGulf.orgVisit SaveOurGulf.org to get more information about the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster from Waterkeeper organizations across the Gulf Coast and donate to Save Our Gulf!

For More About LEAN:

LEAN logo

:}

This is so disturbing…It is looking like August.

:}

Boycott BP – But is that possible? They own Arcoa

PB Has huge holdings in Aluminum, Lubricants, and Financial Services it would take the whole world to make it work..Go to:
http://www.bp.com

and click on Products and Services. You will be amazed at the things that they own and the things that they sell. These folks really are too big to fail. So:

How Big is the Spill?

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 10:46 AM
From:
“Maggie L. Fox, Repower America” <info@repoweramerica.org>
To:
“doug nicodemus” <dougnic55@yahoo.com>

Repower America


Dear doug,

It’s now been over a month since the Deepwater Oil Disaster began — and not only has BP failed to stop the flow of oil so far, but we still don’t even know how big the spill is — because BP won’t allow anyone else to investigate the extent of the problem.

The secrecy must stop.

BP is refusing to share information — data it’s already tracking — that would assist in the response and public understanding of the scope and severity of the Deepwater Oil Disaster. And they have every incentive in the world to keep doing so — news reports say that the smaller the official estimates of the spill, the lower BP’s liability could be in court.1

We don’t let criminals investigate their own crimes, and this shouldn’t be any different. It’s time for BP to get out of the way and allow access for independent scientists and engineers to determine the real size of this catastrophe.

Sign the petition today calling on BP to provide full access to all their data to the government and independent scientists.

Independent reviews by scientists across the country are suggesting that the oil leak may be as much as 19 times worse than the original estimates — but BP refuses to provide them with the data required to make their estimates more precise. All we know for sure is that the oil just keeps on gushing.

BP is extremely sensitive right now to public pressure — so let’s tell them that we won’t stand for them hiding the truth. We’ll deliver copies of the petitions and any comments you submit to the CEO of BP, as well as the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Demand full access to BP’s data and real answers about the Deepwater disaster.

Thanks for joining this fight,

Maggie L. Fox
Chief Executive Officer
Climate Protection Action Fund

P.S. This disaster is a painful reminder of how dangerous our addiction to oil really is – and how critical it is that our elected officials in Washington pass strong climate and clean energy legislation that weans us off of dirty fossil fuels as soon as possible. We must make sure that Americans and our leaders understand the true cost of oil. We simply can’t afford a BP coverup. Sign the petition now demanding full transparency.

___________
1. Marisa Taylor, Renee Schoof and Erika Bolstad, “Low oil spill estimate could save BP millions in court,” McClatchy Newspapers, May 20, 2010. http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20100521/pl_mcclatchy/3511770

 

Paid for by the Climate Protection Action Fund

:}

Maybe this is the best we can do.

:}

Gulf Of Mexico Oil Crisis Ends – The Oil Spew is over because BP is sucking on a straw.

That’s right besides the 40 million gallons of oil lurking in mats 1,500 feet above the ocean floor trapped by dispersants and getting ready to wash into the Atlantic and the continued wash of 40, 000 barrels of oil per day, the crisis is over and we here at CES are going to celebrate Norwegian Independence Day. Why? Because it is neither the day of the actual Norwegian Independence nor is it celebrated for the actual year of their Independence. We feel this is fitting.

http://open.salon.com/blog/norwonk/2009/05/17/independence_day_in_norway

Like Americans, Norwegians love to celebrate what is normally translated as Independence Day. Actually, though the day commemorates the events of May 17, 1814, Norway didn’t really achieve independence until 1905. In Norwegian it is sometimes called Constitution Day, which is more accurate – although there is a problem with that as well.
These confusing facts require some explanation. From 1380 to 1814, Norway was united with Denmark. However, as Denmark was an ally of Napoleon, the great powers of Europe decided that her punishment would be to lose Norway to Sweden (slippery as ever, the Swedes had joined the allies at the opportune moment). When the Norwegians were informed that they were now Swedes, they decided they didn’t like that one little bit. Rather than accepting the news, they elected a national assembly to work out a constitution for an independent Norway (at least, it was supposed to be national; the representatives from the northernmost province had such a long way to travel that they came too late to participate). On May 17, 1814 this first Norwegian parliament elected the Danish Crown Prince, Christian Frederick, as their king.

Unfortunately, that didn’t work out at all. The Swedes had the support of Russia, Britain, Austria and Prussia, and no one cared much for the opinion of the Norwegian people. Long story short: the Swedes invaded, and after a short campaign Christian Frederick renounced his throne and went back to Denmark, leaving Charles XIII the new king of Norway and Sweden. That union would last until the Norwegian parliament declared independence (again) in 1905.
All this made Christian Frederick a rather unpopular man in Norway, but in time it was realized that he had actually made a pretty good deal. In return for giving up the crown, he had convinced the Swedes to accept the new Norwegian constitution which parliament had adopted (confusingly enough on May 16, which really ought to have been our national day, but never mind). That was a huge bonus. The constitution, which is still in place, was among the most democratic in Europe at that time.

:}

So basically like the oil companies, these folks have 2 or 3 Independence Days (Yaaa we are free) every year and the first one lasts a month. It involves children with flags, students dressed in funny costumes according to their profession, and reenactors dressing up in very old clothes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Norway

The young king and Norwegian officials tried to find international backing for their bid for Norway as a sovereign state throughout spring and early summer of 1814. After failing to secure the support of Great Britain, war with Sweden became unavoidable. The Swedish Campaign against Norway was short and decisive. However, while badly trained and equipped, the Norwegian Army put up a determined fight, holding the Swedes back at Kongsvinger and securing a tactical victory at the battle of Langnes. This enabled the King to avoid an unconditional surrender as he was forced into negotiations with the Swedes, leading to the Convention of Moss.

Putting the strategic situation and his own abdication to good use, he persuaded the Swedish crown prince Carl Johan (the former Marshal Bernadotte of France) to let the Norwegians keep their constitution. The Swedish crown prince wanted to appease the Norwegians and avoid a bloody continuation of the war. Realizing that a forced union with himself as ruler of a conquered and hostile country would be very uneasy, he accepted the Norwegian proposition. Norway then entered into a personal union with Sweden with only such amendments to its constitution as were necessary to form the Union between Sweden and Norway. On October 7, an extraordinary session of the Storting convened, and king Christian Frederik delegated his powers to the parliament and abdicated on October 10. The Storting adopted the constitutional amendments on November 4 and on the same day unanimously elected Charles XIII king of Norway, rather than acknowledging him as such, thus reinforcing the concept a King by the will of the people.

Dissolution and the second King

The union amendments were revoked after the dissolution of the ninety-one-year-old union in 1905. The question of a King was again considered, and the Storting elected to offer the throne to the 33-year-old Prince Carl of Denmark, married to Maud of Wales, the daughter of King Edward VII. By bringing in a king with British royal ties, it was hoped that Norway could court Britain’s support. Prince Carl was however well aware of a surge of republicanism in Norway and of the constitutional situation of the Norwegian throne. He insisted that he would accept the crown only if the Norwegian people expressed their will for monarchy by referendum and if the parliament then elected him king. On November 13, the Norwegian votes decided on monarchy with a 74 percent majority, and Carl was elected King by the Storting, taking the name Haakon VII of Norway.

Several other amendments have been adopted since 1814, the most recent on February 20, 2006. After World War II and the restoration of peace and constitutional rule, there was much debate on how to handle the events of the previous five years. None of this led to any changes in the constitution; it had withstood the test of hard times.

:}

Of Course lots of drinking and eating herring also ensues. This guy gets to celebrate 4 Independence Days the US, Italy and 2 for Norway.

http://www.lawzone.com/half-nor/crispo.htm

First, by way of background, Norway was ruled by the kings of Denmark from the 12th century until early in the 19th century (1814).

In 1814, Denmark was penalized for its support of Napoleon by giving Norway to Sweden. Before the transition was carried out, Norway declared itself independent on May 17, 1814. A degree of independence was retained even after Norway became subject to the Swedish Crown.

In 1905, on May 17, Norway declared its complete independence.

In 1914, World War I began. Norway remained neutral, but many of its ships were sunk.

In 1940-1945: when World War II began, Norway again proclaimed its neutrality. However, on April 9, 1940, Nazi forces invaded the two neutral nations of Norway and Denmark under the guise of protecting them against an “Anglo-French Occupation” and “To Protect Their Freedom and Independence.”

Oslo wired Berlin:

“We will not submit voluntarily; the struggle is already underway.”

At the time of World War II, Norway was just beginning to realize its industrial potential when Germany invaded. Five years of German occupation and a burn-and-retreat strategy in the final weeks of the war, left the nation ravaged. But, after the war, the Norwegians, known for their determination and tenacity, returned to rebuild their homes and villages. Finally the flags of freedom were again flying over Europe and Trygve Lie of Norway was elected as the first secretary general of the United Nations.

It is no surprise that Norwegians eat, drink and make merry during the month of May in celebration of this most significant month in their history.

:}

So we say to BP. Job well done Brownie.

For the real scoop go to:  http://www.leanweb.org/

:}

Gulf Spew Could Be 40 Million Barrels – New estimates and a video are scary

It is Jam Band Friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udEDlOZJmCc

I have said for awhile that this could be the biggest manmade disaster of all time. I never believed the oil flow estimates and I never believed that they would be able to plug the hole. Now is a good time to pray.

So lets start with what the flow really looks like when they tried the the Big Siphon:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brendan-demelle/new-footage-of-bps-failed_b_574350.html

Brendan DeMelle

Brendan DeMelle

Freelance writer and researcher

Posted: May 12, 2010 09:09 PM

New Footage of BP’s Failed Containment Dome Effort (VIDEO)

Update: BP just confirmed to us that the pipe in the 2nd video showing the main leak is 20″ in diameter (almost 2 feet). (Specifically, the outer is 21″; the inner is 20″.)

More footage was released today from the Deepwater Disaster, providing an indication of the powerful streams of oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico.

This video shows the failed attempt over the weekend to lower a 100-ton, 4-story “cofferdam” dome over the top of the main leak. As the dome is lowered onto the leak, you can see the oil gushing out on the sides, offering a better sense of the volume of oil pumping into the Gulf of Mexico.

:}

Please see the article and the 2 videos. So what happens if the natural gas, which looks to be half the spill catches on fire?  BOOM…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BruDTUvBClk&feature=related

:}

Ultimately why did this happen? Deregulation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?hp

U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits

By IAN URBINA
Published: May 13, 2010

WASHINGTON — The federal Minerals Management Service gave permission to BP and dozens of other oil companies to drill in the Gulf of Mexico without first getting required permits from another agency that assesses threats to endangered species — and despite strong warnings from that agency about the impact the drilling was likely to have on the gulf

Those approvals, federal records show, include one for the well drilled by the Deepwater Horizon rig, which exploded on April 20, killing 11 workers and resulting in thousands of barrels of oil spilling into the gulf each day.

The Minerals Management Service, or M.M.S., also routinely overruled its staff biologists and engineers who raised concerns about the safety and the environmental impact of certain drilling proposals in the gulf and in Alaska, according to a half-dozen current and former agency scientists.

Those scientists said they were also regularly pressured by agency officials to change the findings of their internal studies if they predicted that an accident was likely to occur or if wildlife might be harmed.

Under the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Minerals Management Service is required to get permits to allow drilling where it might harm endangered species or marine mammals.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, is partly responsible for protecting endangered species and marine mammals. It has said on repeated occasions that drilling in the gulf affects these animals, but the minerals agency since January 2009 has approved at least three huge lease sales, 103 seismic blasting projects and 346 drilling plans. Agency records also show that permission for those projects and plans was granted without getting the permits required under federal law.

:}

Is there any hope?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6S_OU3EBtRo&feature=related

:}

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/gulf-oil-spill-supertankers-051310

The Secret, 700-Million-Gallon Oil Fix That Worked — and Might Save the Gulf

May 13, 2010 at 6:46AM by Mark Warren


Workers on the Arabian Gulf overlook a supertanker owned by Saudi Aramco, the oil company that used a suck-and-salvage American technology to recover 85 percent of its previously unreported spill in 1993 and ’94.

There’s a potential solution to the Gulf oil spill that neither BP, nor the federal government, nor anyone — save a couple intuitive engineers — seems willing to try. As The Politics Blog reported on Tuesday in an interview with former Shell Oil president John Hofmeister, the untapped solution involves using empty supertankers to suck the spill off the surface, treat and discharge the contaminated water, and either salvage or destroy the slick.

627diggsdigg

Hofmeister had been briefed on the strategy by a Houston-based environmental disaster expert named Nick Pozzi, who has used the same solution on several large spills during almost two decades of experience in the Middle East — who says that it could be deployed easily and should be, immediately, to protect the Gulf Coast. That it hasn’t even been considered yet is, Pozzi thinks, owing to cost considerations, or because there’s no clear chain of authority by which to get valuable ideas in the right hands. But with BP’s latest four-pronged plan remaining unproven, and estimates of company liability already reaching the tens of billions of dollars (and counting), supertankers start to look like a bargain.

The suck-and-salvage technique was developed in desperation across the Arabian Gulf following a spill of mammoth proportions — 700 million gallons — that has until now gone unreported, as Saudi Arabia is a closed society, and its oil company, Saudi Aramco, remains owned by the House of Saud. But in 1993 and into ’94, with four leaking tankers and two gushing wells, the royal family had an environmental disaster nearly sixty-five times the size of Exxon Valdez on its hands, and it desperately needed a solution.

Pozzi, an American engineer then in charge of Saudi Aramco’s east-west pipeline in the technical support and maintenance services division, was part of a team given cart blanche to control the blowout. Pozzi had dealt with numerous spills over the years without using chemicals, and had tried dumping flour into the oil, then scooping the resulting tar balls from the surface. “You ever cooked with flour? Absorbent, right?” Pozzi says. Next, he’d dumped straw into the spills; also highly absorbent, but then you’ve got a lot of straw to clean up. This spill was going to require a much larger, more sustained solution. And fast.

That’s when Pozzi and his team came up with the idea of having empty ships park near the Saudi spill and pull the oil off the water. This part of the operation went on for six months, with the mop-up operations lasting for several years more. Pozzi says that 85 percent of the spilled oil was recovered, and it is precisely this strategy that he wants to see deployed in the Gulf of Mexico.

:}

When they contacted BP

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKQ5jhtFypg&feature=related

JON KING: Well, we went down to the BP headquarters in Houma, Louisiana, and we didn’t have an appointment so they wouldn’t let us in. Then I called the president of BP and I talked to his secretary and she put me in touch with somebody, but the somebody she put me in touch with didn’t know who we should talk to. Nick contacted a gentleman that he used to work with at BP, and he threatened to sue Nick for not going through channels. And I said, “Great. I’d love BP to sue us for trying to help them. That would be wonderful.”

While the Army Plays with itself.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/05/us-army-gulf-spill-oil-asphalt-experimental-chemical-video.php

US Army to Turn Gulf Spill Oil Into Asphalt With Experimental Chemical (Video)

by Brian Merchant, Brooklyn, New York on 05.13.10

Science & Technology

hesco-barrier-oil-asphalt.jpg
Photos by Brian Merchant

In order to protect the coastline at Dauphin Island — a site where tar balls have made landfall and hundreds of fish are washing up dead on the beach — the US Army has launched a highly experimental plan to prevent any oil from reaching its shores. It plans on trapping the oil in Hesco baskets and then applying a chemical called CI Agent, turning the oil into a gelatinous solid. That solid, comprised from oil from the gulf spill, will then be collected and turned into asphalt. Here’s Dan Parker, the CEO of CI Agent Solutions, demonstrating how the chemical solution works:

(Please go to the site and see all the pretty video)

The chemical is contained in the boxes, which will be filled up with gelatin if and when the oil hits Dauphin’s coast.

Questions remain, of course: though both Parker and Captain Kelly affirm the chemical is safe for wildlife, it’s never been used or tested on such a large scale and in this manner. But considering that BP is dropping hundreds of thousands of experimental chemical dispersants in the Gulf as we speak, this is a drop in the bucket by comparison — and if cleaned and contained properly could be an interesting solution to watch for in the future.

I’m traveling around the Gulf of Mexico reporting on the continuing oil crisis. Stay tuned for the latest developments and breaking reports from the scene.

:}

See you Monday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvbA8FBd_Vo&feature=related

:}

What’s New With The Oil Spill Today – The last oil Blow Out in the Gulf lasted 9 months

I for one can tell you that I can not follow this Oil Disaster for 9 months which is how long the Ixtoc Blow Out lasted. So I have promised myself that on Monday I am going to cover something else about the energy and environmental fields.

For today however.

http://leanweb.org/donate/donate/donate-join.html

Louisiana Officials Request Chemical Dispersant Information From BP

Secretary Alan Levine of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality Secretary Peggy Hatch, and Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Secretary Robert Barham sent a letter to British Petroleum today outlining their concerns related to potential dispersant impact on Louisiana’s wildlife and fisheries, environment and public health. Officials are also requesting BP release information on the effects of the dispersants they are using to combat the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

We applaud these Louisiana State officials for taking these steps to protect the health and safety of Gulf Coast communities and the Gulf environment. And we too believe that it is important that BP provide all of the information that they can.

However, the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster is an unprecedented event. Never has this much of this kind of crude oil been spilled into these specific environs and with large quantities of these specific chemical dispersants used. Due to the unprecedented nature of this event we do not believe that BP or any other entity can adequately answers these questions.

The health of our people and the integrity of the Gulf environments are too precious to leave up to guesses or limited scientific knowledge. There must be a coordinated and unified investigation of the environmental impacts of the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster involving all of the appropriate Federal and State agencies in partnership with any relevant members of the private sector including researchers from universities and environmental organizations. It is also imperative that this be a transparent process that incorporates the on-the-ground knowledge and observations of local citizens.

The full text of the letter is below.

May 7, 2010

Mr. Tony Hayward
Chief Executive Officer
British Petroleum

Dear Mr. Hayward:
The BP-Transocean drilling incident and resulting oil spill has created massive challenges for BP, the federal government and for the State of Louisiana. We all agree with the primary goal of protecting our sensitive coastal areas and the health and safety of our people. We encourage you to continue making these issues the priority.

:}

Please read from the rest of the post at www.leanorg.com and DONATE at the link above…they are fighting the good fight.

http://www.physorg.com/news192784973.html

BP relaunches subsea dispersant operations

May 11, 2010Orange colored chemical dispersant is seen in the water as it is  used to help with the massive oil spill Enlarge

Orange colored chemical dispersant is seen in the water as it is used to help with the massive oil spill off the coast of Louisiana on May 5. BP restarted Monday operations to stream dispersants directly into the main Gulf of Mexico oil leak despite fears the chemicals could themselves be harmful to the environment. BP restarted Monday operations to stream dispersants directly into the main Gulf of Mexico oil leak despite fears the chemicals could themselves be harmful to the environment.
A mile-long tube was fed down to the leaking pipe on the sea floor and directly shot the dispersant into the flow, guided by remotely-operated robotic submarines.

State and federal agencies “consented to the third test today of subsea dispersant,” BP spokesman John Curry told AFP.

The test began at 4:30 am (0930 GMT) “and will continue for 24 hours. After the test is concluded, further evaluations will be conducted,” said Curry.

The dispersant is meant to break down the oil so that, over time, the slick is reduced to smaller particles that biodegrade instead of being left as chunky, thick globs that can choke both wildlife and vegetation.

Critics however say the dispersant causes just as many problems as it solves, and affects undersea life from the smallest microorganism on up.

“We are continuing to deploy dispersant at the seabed. It seems to be having a significant impact,” said BP CEO Tony Hayward.

“We have an armada of ships, as you know, on the surface engaged in major skimming activity. That is proving to be pretty effective. We’ve skimmed of the order of 100,000 barrels of oily water,” Hayward said.

“And we have an air force of planes deploying dispersants, and we’re also conducting, as you know, controlled burns, and that — the activity on the surface is going a very long way to containing the spill in the far offshore.”

Louisiana State University scientists will study underwater and surface samples of the dispersant impact on the oily water mixture, Curry said.

Meanwhile, US administrator Lisa Jackson traveled to the gulf region on a two-day visit “to oversee efforts to mitigate the environmental and human health impact of the ongoing BP oil spill,” the EPA said in a statement.

Jackson will be seeking “a thorough scientific assessment” of the spill’s impact on the region, and will meet with scientists, “to discuss the potential impact of the use of dispersants on the spill on and below the surface of the water,” among other things.

:}

The Politicians gnash their teeth:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100512/ap_on_re_us/us_gulf_oil_spill_washington

Rep. Waxman: Oil well’s blowout preventer had leak

REDERIC J. FROMMER, Associated Press Writer Frederic J. Frommer, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 5 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Rep. Henry Waxman says that his committee’s investigation into the Gulf oil spill reveals that a key safety device, the blowout preventer, had a leak in a crucial hydraulic system.

The California Democrat said in a hearing Wednesday that the investigation also discovered that the well had failed a negative pressure test just hours before the April 20 explosion.

He cited BP documents received by the Energy and Commerce Committee that showed there was a breach in the well integrity that allowed methane gas and possibly other hydrocarbons to enter the well.

:}

Then there is this:

http://io9.com/5535851/how-much-oil-will-be-wasted-in-the-deepwater-spill

:}

More tomorrow I am sure…

:}

Oil Spill In The Gulf – Snippets on ALL Fronts

Its Jam Band Friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5big9xw0dw4

What Louisiana Environmental Action Network has to say:

http://leanweb.org/donate/donate/donate-join.html

Louisiana  Environmental Action NetworkLMRK logoLouisiana Environmental Action Network
&
Lower Mississippi RIVERKEEPER©

Helping to Make Louisiana Safe for Future Generations

E-ALERT
May 6, 2010
Oil Spill Dispersants Update
On May 4, 2010 the Materials Safety Data Sheets for the two dispersants that we had heard were being used on the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster were posted to the official DeepwaterHorizonResponse.com website.

The two products are Corexit 9500 (as previously reported) and also Corexit EC9527A

Corexit 9500 MSDS
Corexit EC9527A MSDS

The toxicity of Corexit EC9527A is quite high, here is an extract from the Corexit EC9527A Materials Safety Data Sheet:

SAFETY DATA SHEET
PRODUCT
COREXIT(R) EC9527A

APPLICATION: OIL SPILL DISPERSANT
NFPA 704M/HMIS RATING
HEALTH: 2/ 2 FLAMMABILITY: 1/ 1 INSTABILITY: 0/ 0 OTHER:
0 = Insignificant    1 = Slight    2 = Moderate   3 = High    4 = Extreme

2. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
Our hazard evaluation has identified the following chemical substance(s) as hazardous. Consult Section 15 for the nature of the hazard(s).

Hazardous Substance(s) CAS NO % (w/w)
2-Butoxyethanol 111-76-2 30.0- 60.0
Organic sulfonic acid salt Proprietary 10.0- 30.0
Propylene Glycol 57-55-6 1.0- 5.0

3. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
**EMERGENCY OVERVIEW**
WARNING
Eye and skin irritant.  Repeated or excessive exposure to butoxyethanol may cause injury to red blood cells, (hemolysis), kidney or the liver. Harmful by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed.
Do not get in eyes, on skin, on clothing. Do not take internally. Use with adequate ventilation. Wear suitable protective clothing.  Keep container tightly closed. Flush affected area with water. Keep away from heat. Keep away from sources of ignition -No smoking.
May evolve oxides of carbon (COx) under fire conditions.

:}

Please go to their web site for more info and to DONATE…

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1CRXlG4g2Y )

:}

This from the Huffington Post by way of Yahoo:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20100507/cm_huffpost/566196

Huffington Post - The Internet Newspaper

Gulf Oil Spill: A Symbol Of What Fossil Fuels Do To The Earth Every Day, Say Environmentalists

Dan Froomkin Dan Froomkin Thu May 6, 11:57 pm E

The leading edge of a vast oil slick started to come ashore in Louisiana on Thursday night, a shroud of devastation falling on America’s coastline even as the blown-out BP oil well that produced it continues to belch millions of gallons of thick crude into the Gulf of Mexico for a third straight week.

At moments like this, it’s hard to see any silver lining here at all. But it’s possible there is one. Many environmentalists say that the wrenching and omnipresent images of filth and death are at last providing Americans with visible, visceral and possibly mobilizing evidence of the effects that fossil fuels are having on our environment every day.

Rick Steiner is horrified at the damage. A University of Alaska marine specialist, he’s watched cleanup efforts ever since the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989, and has learned some bitter lessons.

“Government and industry will habitually understate the volume of the spill and the impact, and they will overstate the effectiveness of the cleanup and their response,” he said. “There’s never been an effective response — ever — where more than 10 or 20 percent of the oil is ever recovered from the water. Once the oil is in the water, the damage is done.”

And most of the damage remains invisible deep below the surface, including the wide-scale destruction of essential plankton in the area and the wiping out of an entire generation of fish larvae. “This is real toxic stuff,” Steiner said.

But the damage that is visible — the vast and foul oil slick, the dolphins swimming through sludge, the birds coated in oil, the dead fish and sharks and turtles — is enough to thoroughly disgust anyone paying attention.

And that, Steiner said, makes it a “teachable moment” that “will hopefully serve as a wake-up call that we need to turn to sustainable energy.

:}

Much more there and video as well.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_AjuIWq05w )

Oh sorry:

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXp_sMam-Jc )

:}

Lastly, this from the AP

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100507/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill

Giant box getting closer to oil-spewing Gulf well

By HARRY R. WEBER and TAMARA LUSH, Associated Press Writers Harry R. Weber And Tamara Lush, Associated Press Writers 15 mins ago

ON THE GULF OF MEXICO – A 100-ton concrete-and-steel box plunged toward a blown-out well at the bottom of the sea Friday in a first-of-its-kind attempt to stop most of the gushing crude fouling the Gulf of Mexico.

Douglas Peake, first mate of the supply boat that brought the box to the site, confirmed he had received a radio transmission from the nearby vessel lowering the device that it would be in position over the well soon.

The transmission early Friday said undersea robots were placing buoys around the main oil leak to act as markers to help line up the 40-foot-tall box. But seven hours later, BP spokesman Bill Salvin said the device was still being lowered and had not reached the seafloor.

Once it gets there, underwater robots will secure it over the main leak at the bottom, a process that will take hours. If the delicate procedure works, the device could be collecting as much as 85 percent of the oil spewing into the Gulf and funneling it up to a tanker by Sunday. It’s never been tried so far — 5,000 feet — below the surface, where the water pressure is enough to crush a submarine.

“We haven’t done this before,” David Nicholas, another spokesman for oil giant BP LPC, which is in charge of the Gulf cleanup. “It’s very complex and we can’t guarantee it.”

BP was leasing the drilling rig Deepwater Horizon when it exploded 50 miles offshore April 20, killing 11 workers and blowing open the well. An estimated 200,000 gallons a day have been spewing in the nation’s biggest oil spill since the Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaska in 1989.

The containment device will not solve the problem altogether. Crews are still drilling a relief well and working on other methods to stop the well from leaking.

The quest took on added urgency as oil reached several barrier islands off the Louisiana coast, many of them fragile animal habitats. Several birds were spotted diving into the oily, pinkish-brown water, and dead jellyfish washed up on the uninhabited islands.

“It’s all over the place. We hope to get it cleaned up before it moves up the west side of the river,” said Dustin Chauvin, a 20-year-old shrimp boat captain from Terrebonne Parish, La. “That’s our whole fishing ground. That’s our livelihoo

:}

Sure hope it works

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDSnM2tgAa0

:}

Oil Spill In The Gulf Of Spew Mexico – Are we repeating 1979

What happened when the Ixtoc Drilling Rig Collapsed in the Gulf of Mexico in 1979. They brought in skimmers, booms, remotely operated vehicles, and dispersants. They drilled a second and third wells to take the pressure off. It took 8 months and parts of Texas and Mexico got slimed. Sound familiar?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ixtoc_I

Ixtoc I was an exploratory oil well in the Gulf of Mexico, about 100 km north west from Ciudad del Carmen in Campeche. On June 3, 1979, the well suffered a blowout and is recognized as the second largest oil spill in history.

:}

http://leanweb.org/donate/donate/donate-join.html

Louisiana  Environmental Action NetworkLMRK logoLouisiana Environmental Action Network
&
Lower Mississippi RIVERKEEPER©

Helping to Make Louisiana Safe for Future Generations

E-ALERT
May 4, 2010
Oil Spill Dispersants Are Not A Magic Solution
Dispersants, a mixture of chemicals that break up the oil and send it into the water column, are being used as a remedy on oil that is leaking from the Deepwater Horizon disaster but we and many other environmental groups have serious concerns about their use.
Oil dIspersant being applied  by boat

From:
Oil Spill Dispersants: Efficacy and Effects (2005)
by Ocean Studies Board (OSB)

Dispersants are mixtures of solvents, surfactants, and other additives that are applied to oil slicks to reduce the oil-water interfacial tension (NRC, 1989; Clayton et al., 1993)… Reduction of the interfacial tension between oil and water by addition of a dispersant promotes the formation of a larger number of small oil droplets when surface waves entrain oil into the water column. These small submerged oil droplets are then subject to transport by subsurface currents…

In other words the dispersants act like mustard or egg yolk in salad dressing to break up the oil into little droplets that will mix with the water and allow those little droplets of oil to sink down into the water column and to the sea floor.

So once the oil sinks everything is fine right?

Well, no, not really. The oil is still in the marine environment and can still impact fish and bottom dwelling organisms and potentially allow toxic materials to move up the food chain as bottom dwelling organisms become contaminated and then are preyed upon by large organisms like crabs and shrimp and then the crabs and shrimp are preyed upon by fish, the fish by larger fish etc., this is called bio-accumulation.

More from:
Oil Spill Dispersants: Efficacy and Effects (2005)
by Ocean Studies Board (OSB)

One of the most difficult decisions that oil spill responders and natural resources managers face during a spill is evaluating the environmental trade-offs associated with dispersant use. The objective of dispersant use is to transfer oil from the water surface into the water column. When applied before spills reach the coastline, dispersants will potentially decrease exposure for surface dwelling organisms (e.g., seabirds) and intertidal species (e.g., mangroves, salt marshes), while increasing it for water-column (e.g., fish) and benthic species (e.g., corals, oysters).

In other words the dispersants may help to decrease shoreline impacts but will increase impacts to things that live under the water.

This is obviously a big concern to those of us who enjoy eating oysters, crabs, shrimp, speckle trout, redfish and all of the other wonderful seafood that comes from the Gulf and Louisiana’s coastal estuaries.

Another concern we have about the dispersants is that they themselves are toxic. We have learned from the Natural Resources Defense Council that the dispersant being used in the Deepwater Horizon disaster is Corexit 9500.

From the Corexit 9500 Materials Safety Data Sheet:

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
PRODUCT
COREXIT® 9500
APPLICATION :
OIL SPILL DISPERSANT
NFPA 704M/HMIS RATING
HEALTH : 1 / 1
FLAMMABILITY : 1 / 1
0 = Insignificant 1 = Slight 2 = Moderate 3 = High 4 = Extreme

COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
Our hazard evaluation has identified the following chemical substance(s) as hazardous.

Hazardous Substance(s)
Distillates, petroleum, hydrotreated light
Propylene Glycol
Organic sulfonic acid salt
HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
**EMERGENCY OVERVIEW**
WARNING
Combustible.
Keep away from heat. Keep away from sources of ignition – No smoking. Keep container tightly closed. Do not get in eyes, on skin, on clothing. Do not take internally. Avoid breathing vapor. Use with adequate ventilation. In case
of contact with eyes, rinse immediately with plenty of water and seek medical advice. After contact with skin, wash immediately with plenty of soap and water.
Wear suitable protective clothing.
Clearly any workers handling this product need to be supplied with the proper protective gear.

Corexit 9500 is also known to be toxic to marine life. A report written by Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark for Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc. entitled Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products states that, “Corexit 9500, Corexit 9527,  and Corexit 9580 have moderate toxicity to early life stages of fish, crustaceans and mollusks (LC50 or EC50 – 1.6 to 100 ppm*).”

We hope that the EPA and US Fish and Wildlife Service are closely monitoring the use of these products and monitoring for impacts to the environment.

A further area of concern is the unprecedented deployment of dispersants into the leaking oil at the site of the leaks almost 5,000 feet below the surface.

The oil spill Unified Command reported on May 1, 2010 that response crews worked through the night using an ROV to dispense 3,000 gallons of sub-surface dispersant at a rate of nine gallons per minute. BP and NOAA are evaluating the results of the test procedure to determine its feasability for continued use.

The Unified Command also reported that, as of May 1, 2010, 142,914 gallons of dispersant have been deployed and an additional 68,300 gallons are available.

If you see anything fishy happening on your waterways don’t hesitate to call the Lower Mississippi Riverkeerp hotline at 1-866-MSRIVER


Support this vital work today!

Yes! I want to help make Louisiana safe for us and for future generations!

LEAN is a 501(c)3 Non-Profit Organization Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) is a non-profit organization working to foster communication and cooperation among citizens and groups to address Louisiana’s environmental problems.

For More About LEAN:

:}

All I can say is this is gona be bad..

:}

Hot Water Blankets – Stop the presses I made a mistake

When I was talking about making a list of your energy consuming equipment and taking actions like cleaning the coils on your refrigerator and your freezer, and  cleaning the filters on your cooling and heating equipment, I forgot the most easy and largest savings step. That would be your hot water heater. Like the other equipment you do need to clean it. So listen to the plumbing guy about cleaning your gas or electric water heater. They are different:

Electric

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GERpIx_QLo

Gas

http://www.ehow.com/video_4872205_clean-out-gas-hot-water.html

So was that fun or what. If you ended up with water allllllll over your basement floor, practice makes perfect. Now it is time to put on another layer of insulation. How much is up to you but R 60 is probably too much.

http://www.stretcher.com/stories/970127c.cfm

First turn your water heater thermostat to 120 no matter what this guy tells you 140 is too high unless you are a family of 5.

Most of us received our first introduction to the hot water heater blanket back in the ’70’s when conserving energy became important. They became a familiar addition to many homes. But how effective are they really? And can a heater blanket actually pay for itself if the hot water heater is in a part of the house that’s not subject to extreme weather? Let’s see if we can find out.

First, a little bit about water heaters and insulating blankets. A hot water heater is just a tank of water that’s heated to a preset temperature (generally about 140 degrees F.). When you use hot water it’s drawn from the tank and new cold water replaces it. Regardless of whether any water is used it takes energy to keep the water hot. Energy is always escaping to the colder air that surrounds the tank.

Almost all heaters have at least some minimal level of insulation to help keep the heat inside the tank. Newer models, especially those built in the last ten years, have more insulation than older models.

A water heater blanket is made of insulation contained in sheet plastic so that it can be attached to the water heater. Blankets are rated based on their ‘R’ value just like other insulation. A blanket with R-11 is recommended.

The blankets are easy to install. The only tools you’ll need are a razor knife and a tape measure. The cost is fairly modest with most running between $10 and $25.

How effective are they at reducing energy costs? The Iowa Energy Center says that a properly installed blanket can reduce energy loss by 25% to 45%. If you consider that Florida Power and Light estimates that the average family of four spends $25 each month for hot water that can be quite some savings. That’s not to say that you’ll save 25% of $25 each month. You’ll still need to heat water to replace the hot water in that shower. But a hot water blanket will pay for itself in short order.

Now let’s try to get specific about Joyce’s question. Does it still pay to install a blanket if your water heater is kept in the garage? How can you tell?

Begin by checking the owner’s manual for your water heater. Some newer models specifically recommend that you do NOT use a heater blanket. If your manual doesn’t mention blankets or you’ve lost the manual (someone please tell me that I’m not the only homeowner who doesn’t have his manual!) there’s a simple test you can do. Just place your hand on the outside of the heater. If it’s warm to your touch a blanket will save you money.

Is it possible to calculate how much money you’ll save? Well, theoretically yes. But unless you’re related to a grad student in advanced mathematics it’s probably not worth the effort. There are quite a few variables that will effect the answer. How much you pay for energy. How quickly your heater loses temperature. How efficient your water heater is in turning energy into hot water. How much hot water your family uses. Are there periods during the day when no water is being used? Remember, we’re only talking about an investment of $25 or less. We really don’t need sophisticated payback analysis here!

But what about Joyce’s question? We still haven’t answered it. Fortunately, there is a simple way to address it. If you can feel the heat with your hand it’s wise to install a blanket no matter what the surrounding air temperature is.

Look at it this way. Suppose you keep the tank in an unheated area that’s exposed to outside temperatures. The water tank is being heated to 140 degrees. It’s 20 degrees outside. That’s a difference of 120 degrees. Unless that tank is properly insulated you’d expect to lose some heat.

What about if you have the heater in a attached garage like Joyce? It’s probably not unreasonable to guess that the temperature drops to 60 degrees in the garage. That means that there’s still a difference of 80 degrees between the tank and the air surrounding it.

So if you saved the 25% with the heater outside, you could expect to still save 2/3 of that with the heater in the garage. (80 degrees divided by 120 degrees = 2/3) Well worth the time and money you’ll spend on installing a heater blanket.

One warning that we do need to pass along. DO NOT insulate the bottom or top of gas hot water heater tanks. You need to leave plenty of room for the pilot light and for the flue draft. Be very careful to follow installation instructions. Failure to do so could be very costly and dangerous!

In addition to water heater blankets, there are other things that you can do to reduce the costs of that hot shower. You can insulate the hot water pipes. Lowering the tank temperature is another option. Many people have installed timers and low flow shower heads. If you have an electric tank and it’s in the basement you might even want to place it on a Styrofoam pad to reduce the heat lost to the cold floor.

The bottom line is that water heater blankets are inexpensive, easy to install and efficient. You don’t need to be that family of four spending $300 each year for hot water the savings can add up. It’s an easy way to stretch a few dollars for something more important!

http://www.energysavers.gov/your_home/water_heating/index.cfm/mytopic=13070

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?hl=en&source=hp&q=water+heater+blanket&oq=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=3885595677729203527&ei=X3d9S_qbDpKSNqDK_N0K&sa=X&oi=product_catalog_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBQQ8wIwAA#ps-sellers

:}

Notice what he said about insulation for the hot water line. They make slit foam cuffs that just slip over your warm water pipes. If you kitchen sink is a long way from your heater, (mine is 40 feet) it can take forever to get hot water and if you turn it off for very long you are back to cold again.

:}