http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2011/01/05/science.1199697.ab= stract?sa_campaign=3DEmail/pap/6-January-2011/10.1126/science.1199697 A Persistent Oxygen Anomaly Reveals the Fate of Spilled Methane in the Deep Gulf of Mexico It has previously suggested, with substantial disbelief expressed in some quarters, that the major part of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill was eaten by 'Methane loving' bacteria which already exist in the area and which feed on the extremely considerable amount of natural oil seepage which always occurs in the area. This paper in Nature agrees with and formalises the claim. The 3E10 - 3.9E10 + moles of Oxygen which they say were released is about 1+ million tonnes of oxygen. It would be interesting to see the results of a spill of similar magnitude where most of the spilt material was NOT eaten en situ by local entrepreneurs. ________ The ability of "nature" to provide in-place substantial protective negative feedback mechanisms and the frequency and consistency with which it does this, gives pause for thought (or should) in new or immature scientific disciplines where details and mechanisms are relatively unknown. Despite this, zero or strong positive feedback mechanisms are often enthusiastically proposed by "researchers" when reality is as yet still unknown. Nature is not obliged to provide negative feedback loops to cover every contingency, and in some cases it may not do so. But assuming that it hasn't or cannot or demanding that it shouldn't in any given and unknown case should, you'd think, upset Occam. The above observation about how nature very usually is found to work, which sounds entirely reasonable to me, of course, is guaranteed to upset people who wish to demand that "it isn't so" in their favourite but as yet lightly explored scientific field. That's life. Russell McMahon _____________________________ http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2011/01/05/science.119969= 7.abstract?sa_campaign=3DEmail/pap/6-January-2011/10.1126/science.1199697 A Persistent Oxygen Anomaly Reveals the Fate of Spilled Methane in the Deep Gulf of Mexico John D. Kessler1,*, David L. Valentine2,*, Molly C. Redmond2, Mengran Du1, Eric W. Chan1, Stephanie D. Mendes2, Erik W. Quiroz3, Christie J. Villanueva2, Stephani S. Shusta2, Lindsay M. Werra2, Shari A. Yvon-Lewis1=A0and Thomas C. Weber4 +Author Affiliations 1Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843=963146, USA. 2Department of Earth Science and Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA. 3Geochemical and Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA. 4Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA. *To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jkessler@ocean.tamu.edu=A0(J.D.K.);=A0valentine@geol.ucsb.edu(D.L.V.) ABSTRACT Methane was the most abundant hydrocarbon released during the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Beyond relevancy to this anthropogenic event, this methane release simulates a rapid and relatively short-term natural release from hydrates into deepwater. Based on methane and oxygen distributions measured at 207 stations throughout the affected region, we find that within ~120 days from the onset of release ~3.0 =D7 1010=A0to 3.9 =D7 1010=A0moles of oxygen were respired, primarily by methanotrophs, and left behind a residual microbial community containing methanotrophic bacteria. We suggest that a vigorous deepwater bacterial bloom respired nearly all the released methane within this time and that by analogy, large-scale releases of methane from hydrate in the deep ocean are likely to be met by a similarly rapid methanotrophic response. --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .