Gulf Coast oil spill could eclipse Exxon Valdez

Isn't this special?

Gulf Coast oil spill could eclipse Exxon Valdez

Quote :

The oil slick could become the nation's worst environmental disaster in decades, threatening hundreds of species of fish, birds and other wildlife along the Gulf Coast, one of the world's richest seafood grounds, teeming with shrimp, oysters and other marine life. Thicker oil was in waters south and east of the Mississippi delta about five miles offshore.

This is shaping up to be an utter environmental disaster of epic proportions. One thing is certain. This is the beginning of the end of oil exploration off our nation's coasts.

Think I'll go buy some frozen shrimp this weekend - probably won't be able to afford them in the future!

The Limbecile wasted no time pushing back with his theory
Rush Limbaugh blames ‘environmentalist wackos’ for massive oil spill

Thought this was interesting...

Climate bill could be harmed by Gulf spill

Quote :

The bill, supported by President Barack Obama, calls for new offshore drilling — a concession by environmentalists. But with the tragedy off the Gulf Coast growing daily, even conservationists who have waited a decade for the legislation are now saying it will fail if offshore drilling remains in the bill.

"When you're trying to resurrect a climate bill that's face-down in the mud and you want to bring it back to life and get it breathing again, I don't think you can have offshore drilling against the backdrop of what's transpiring in the Louisiana wetlands," said Richard Charter, energy adviser to Defenders of Wildlife. "I think it's flat-lined."

Some Democrats, including two of New Jersey's congressmen and both of its senators, threatened Friday to pull their support if offshore drilling is included in the bill designed to curb emissions of pollution-causing gases blamed for global warming.

Personally, I think that this incident will totally kill the "drill baby drill" mentality, perhaps permanently. I see it as an opportunity to get a climate bill passed without any more offshore drilling.

IMHO, that would be a very good thing. Who in their right mind is going to support expanding offshore drilling after this?

Scorpion wrote:

Who in their right mind is going to support expanding offshore drilling after this?

Probably a whole lot of Republicans if Obama decides to put an end to it or institutes a long term moratorium on it. You know the drill...Obama for it...GOP against it!
My immediate instinct was to post a picture of Sarah Palin but instead I found this idiotic comment from yesterday by Sen Kay Bailey Hutchinson R-Texas Texas Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison says Gulf drilling is not as bad as some people are now making it out to be. HUTCHISON -

Quote :

“The safety record and the spill record in the Gulf of Mexico has been very very good. And it’s a great source of energy for our country.”

If a moderate Republican like her is already keeping the door open despite knowing what the eventual over consequences are going to end up being,I can only assume she'll have plenty of company on the right.

Never underestimate the lunacy of the right.

Just found this gem from the half-governor...Sarah Palin Still Supports "Drill, Baby, Drill"
Writing on Facebook - increasingly her medium of communication - she defends offshore drilling and writes that the oil spill is a price worth paying for the greater "human endeavor" of procuring domestic oil:

Quote :

No human endeavor is ever without risk – whether it’s sending a man to the moon or extracting the necessary resources to fuel our civilization. I repeat the slogan “drill here, drill now” not out of naiveté or disregard for the tragic consequences of oil spills – my family and my state and I know firsthand those consequences. How could I still believe in drilling America’s domestic supply of energy after having seen the devastation of the Exxon-Valdez spill? I continue to believe in it because increased domestic oil production will make us a more secure, prosperous, and peaceful nation.

To make a statement like this,even though I'm sure someone else wrote it for her, before we even know how bad this spill is going to affect the environment is mind-boggling.

Artie60438 wrote:

If a moderate Republican like her is already keeping the door open despite knowing what the eventual over consequences are going to end up being,I can only assume she'll have plenty of company on the right.

Never underestimate the lunacy of the right.

Yeah, well I'm basing my opinion on the "worse case scenario" that looks increasingly likely.

Gulf oil spill swiftly balloons, could move east

Quote :

The oil slick over the water's surface appeared to triple in size over the past two days, which could indicate an increase in the rate that oil is spewing from the well, according to one analysis of images collected from satellites and reviewed by the University of Miami. While it's hard to judge the volume of oil by satellite because of depth, it does show an indication of change in growth, experts said.

"The spill and the spreading is getting so much faster and expanding much quicker than they estimated," said Hans Graber, executive director of the university's Center for Southeastern Tropical Advanced Remote Sensing. "Clearly, in the last couple of days, there was a big change in the size."

Doug Suttles, BP's chief operating officer for exploration and production, said it was impossible to know just how much oil was gushing from the well, but said the company and federal officials were preparing for the worst-case scenario.

In an exploration plan and environmental impact analysis filed with the federal government in February 2009, BP said it had the capability to handle a "worst-case scenario" at the Deepwater Horizon site, which the document described as a leak of 162,000 barrels per day from an uncontrolled blowout — 6.8 million gallons each day.

Oil industry experts and officials are reluctant to describe what, exactly, a worst-case scenario would look like — but if the oil gets into the Gulf Stream and carries it to the beaches of Florida, it stands to be an environmental and economic disaster of epic proportions.

If the worst happens, and I truly pray that it doesn't, then all bets are off. It will be the end to further offshore drilling for decades, at least. Hell, it's even possible that some of the current wells could get shut down.

IMHO, an "epic" disaster will galvanize public opinion to the point that it will be virtually impossible to even consider opening up new areas for drilling. I think that it would be difficult even now. But if we continue to experience an ever increasing release of oil, it will make it impossible for any politician to support the expansion of drilling.

Hopefully, I'm being a pessimist, and this will turn out better than expected. I'm pessimistic because it's become obvious to me that BP has either been lying from the start about how bad this was going to be, or they don't have a frickin' clue about how to deal with this disaster. They've constantly told us that "they have everything under control," "it will never reach shore" and on and on ad nauseum. I'm bloody sick of their excuses and assurances and frankly, I no longer believe anything that this frickin' oil company says.

Quote :

It may be time to stop referring to the Deepwater Horizon rig accident in the Gulf of Mexico as an oil spill. A spill sounds like something temporary, a glass of milk overturned, which empties and then can be cleaned up. But what is unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico, not far from the sensitive shorelines of Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida, isn't a spill. It's an unchecked gush of crude oil from beneath the bottom of the ocean into the water — and no one can say for sure when it will finally stop.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1986323,00.html#ixzz0mkYhYpnV

Scorpion wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

If a moderate Republican like her is already keeping the door open despite knowing what the eventual over consequences are going to end up being,I can only assume she'll have plenty of company on the right.

Never underestimate the lunacy of the right.

Yeah, well I'm basing my opinion on the "worse case scenario" that looks increasingly likely.

If the worst happens, and I truly pray that it doesn't, then all bets are off. It will be the end to further offshore drilling for decades, at least. Hell, it's even possible that some of the current wells could get shut down.

IMHO, an "epic" disaster will galvanize public opinion to the point that it will be virtually impossible to even consider opening up new areas for drilling. I think that it would be difficult even now. But if we continue to experience an ever increasing release of oil, it will make it impossible for any politician to support the expansion of drilling.

I firmly believe there is still going to be that 23-30% of the right that will support drill,baby,drill no matter what the consequences. These are the same people who thought Bush was doing a great job right up and through to the bitter end of his presidency. Palin's comment yesterday was a perfect example. Basicly she said "shit happens" but let's move on.

It may be the end of expansion of off-shore drilling for a while,but no wells will be shut down unless they are proven to be threats to leak.
Sooner or later the drum will start beating again from those on the right.

Artie60438 wrote:

I firmly believe there is still going to be that 23-30% of the right that will support drill,baby,drill no matter what the consequences. These are the same people who thought Bush was doing a great job right up and through to the bitter end of his presidency. Palin's comment yesterday was a perfect example. Basicly she said "shit happens" but let's move on.

It may be the end of expansion of off-shore drilling for a while,but no wells will be shut down unless they are proven to be threats to leak.
Sooner or later the drum will start beating again from those on the right.

Yeah. Well I didn't mean to imply that everyone in the country will turn against drilling offshore.

I just don't think that the "rewards" of expanded drilling are worth the risks. And I'm firmly convinced that millions more voters will share that opinion by the time this crisis plays out. I believe that opponents of expanded offshore drilling will be energized and ready to fight for years to come, and will successfully derail any further expansion.

BTW - Two rigs have already been shut down near the "spill."

2 offshore platforms shut down near Gulf oil sheen

Quote :

Federal authorities have shut down two offshore platforms and evacuated one of them near a massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

The Coast Guard said Saturday that the shutdowns were a safety precaution.

Here's the first image of a dead sea turtle

Dead Fish, Sea Turtle Wash Ashore In Gulf (PHOTOS)



Man this sucks.

Bill Maher wrote:

Every asshole who ever chanted 'Drill baby drill' should have to report to the Gulf coast today for cleanup duty.

Quote :

Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Endangers Birds Throughout the Americas

Bird conservationists fear the spreading Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico will affect not only local birds but migratory bird populations as far north as Canada and Alaska, and as far south as South America.

The oil spill, now 100 miles long by 48 miles wide, is being pushed onshore by the prevailing southeast winds and is expected to hit the Louisiana's Chandeleur Islands on Saturday.

Quote :

Gulf Oil Spill - New Spill Calculation - Exxon Valdez Surpassed Today

Dr. Ian MacDonald at FSU just produced a new spill-size estimate based on the US Coast Guard aerial overflight map of the oil slick on April 28, 2010. The bottom line: that map implies that on April 28, there was a total of 8.9 million gallons floating on the surface of the Gulf.

That implies a minimum average flow rate of slightly more than 1 million gallons of oil (26,000 barrels) per day from the leaking well on the seafloor. Since we're now in Day 11 of the spill, which began with a blowout and explosion on April 20, we estimate that by the end of the today 12.2 million gallons of oil, at a minimum, have been spilled into the Gulf of Mexico.

The oft-quoted official estimate for the Exxon Valdez spill is 11 million gallons, although some think that is the lower limit of the likely range. It appears that we've just set a very sad new record.

My father-in-law, a Beck worshipping, Fox News watching Republican, went on an absolute tirade about this the other day, wondering why this could happen; why there weren't more safety measures installed. It was a brief moment of clarity. I told him it was easy - the conservative media and their industry paid politicians, the Sarah Palins of our country, mock any discussion of the environment, especially the science, as useless conspiratorial hippie horseshit. And the majority of the voting public is too ignorant to know better.

Heretic wrote:

My father-in-law, a Beck worshipping, Fox News watching Republican, went on an absolute tirade about this the other day, wondering why this could happen; why there weren't more safety measures installed. It was a brief moment of clarity. I told him it was easy - the conservative media and their industry paid politicians, the Sarah Palins of our country, mock any discussion of the environment, especially the science, as useless conspiratorial hippie horseshit. And the majority of the voting public is too ignorant to know better.

So how was your comment received?

I haven't looked into all of this yet, but what I garnered from all the news outlets, this particular oil rig was not equipped with a remote "shut-off" valve.

Think of it as being "behind" in technology.
Why does this not happen to other countries where we depend on their oil?
On another note, have you noticed gas prices are now up to $3.09? I found a gas station with $3.01. Right at the border/State-Line Road.
I feel like Freetime sometimes. They predicted oil prices were going to hit the $4.00 mark this summer.
But then again, 11 people would not have died for that theory.
Yes, it's a disaster, but they didn't have the required, remote shut-off valve.
By the way, we just helped Greece out with $40 billion. How do you justify that when California is sinking in the ocean with billions in debt due to illegals.
Always depending on other countries; everyone depending on us.
No Demobrat or Repobrats mean anything behind their names. It's what they stand up for. Both parties suck.

How safe are the beaches in Miller - with all that dumping the mills are doing? All about money, no one's health. The pollution is terrible here. And we worry about mammals and fish? How about people and what those mills are dumping into Lake Michigan?

UrRight wrote:

I haven't looked into all of this yet, but what I garnered from all the news outlets, this particular oil rig was not equipped with a remote "shut-off" valve.

UrRight wrote:

I Yes, it's a disaster, but they didn't have the required, remote shut-off valve.

No, the remote shut-off was not required because the previous administration decided not to require it.

Oil industry reps begin to reveal cause of Gulf oil blowout

Quote :

The US considered requiring the remote-controlled shut-off mechanism several years ago, but drilling companies questioned their cost and effectiveness, according to the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, which oversees offshore drilling.

The agency says it decided the remote device wasn't needed because rigs had other back-up plans to cut off a well. The UK, where BP is headquartered, doesn't require the use of acoustic triggers.

Mike Papantonio, an environmental lawyer said on the popular American radio programme, the Ed Schultz show, that former Vice-President Dick Cheney’s shadowy group decided that the switches, which cost $500,000, were too much a burden on the industry.

“(The acoustic switch) is a failsafe that shuts the flow of oil off at the source,” said Papantonio in the April 30 broadcast.

“They cost only about half a million dollars each, and are required in off-shore drilling platforms in most of the world...except for the United States. This was one of the new deregulations devised by Dick Cheney,” he said.

This is what happens when you allow the oil industry to make its own rules and police itself. The bottom line is that we can never allow a catastrophe like this to occur. Any American with a conscience should be appalled by this spectacle and steadfastly oppose any further expansion of drilling off our coasts.

Man, the news isn't getting any better, is it?

Oil Spill To Hit Florida Keys: Will Hit Loop Current Within 24 Hours

Quote :

Scientists say the Gulf oil spill could get into the what's called the Loop Current within a day, eventually carrying oil south along the Florida coast and into the Florida Keys.

Nick Shay, a physical oceanographer at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, said Monday once the oil enters the Loop Current, it likely will end up in the Keys and continue east into the Gulf Stream.

Shay says the oil could affect Florida's beaches, coral reefs, fisheries and ecosystem within a week.

He described the Loop Current as similar to a "conveyor belt," sweeping around the Gulf, through the Keys and right up the East Coast.

If this crap hits the Keys, it will be absolutely devastating.

Thanks for informing me, Scorps.
The question I ask of you...if why is this all based on politics and not on people, the environment, etc.

I still can't understand why no matter who you vote in office, you can't trust that they put the environment first, the people first. Why does this occur?

My only thoughts and feelings are still the same. The Republicans sucked, and now the Democrats suck. I read it a lot in the posts from all the newspapers. People are weary and sick. They are tired of trusting anyone in the political field. It just doesn't make sense: profit over people and wild life.
But, the point is, why hasn't this occured in Iran, Iraq, etc. The oil spill in San Franscico, caused by a barge, that I recall. This oil spill is simply neglectable with OSHA standards. Why was there not a remote shut off valve when it was the "NORM" for others? I just don't understand how they can make laws for some things, and overlook others.
Florida Keys I have been there. I can't imagine what this is going to do to the fish industry, the tourism and people that actually live there and take the beach for granted. It was among the most beautiful places I ever went to and spent quite a bit of time there, along with coastal places in Florida.
I guess I want to ask, "How can this happen in 2010? Not to mention the floods, tornados, and people killed because levees were leaking in Tennesse and other states.

It makes me scratch my head wondering if we will ever be ahead of mother nature. Too many things don't make sense...I was always aware of the Mississippi River without levees actually flooding every year, 52 years straight, my grammaw told me. The last was '93 when you just saw the top of her house, but all furniture gone. Finally they built a levee. I haven't heard if the river is up or not, but they sandbagged along the river...for many years before it dawned on the state to build a levee.
Perhaps that is why I get the impression that it takes a disaster to fix and avoid a future disaster, and I feel like our country is so busy taking care of other countries, they neglect our own. R or D, doesn't matter. Why was there not a damn remote shut-off valve where every other one required one?
Something doesn't seem right. OSHA...where is OSHA? From what I read, all the others have one. So if that is the case, why insist on no drilling? All it would take is present scientific enactments to avoid any type of disaster that happened like this one.
Just because one went down, doesn't mean we are so stupid not to build more with safety valves, remote shut-down valves and tell the rest of the world to go to hell. It doesn't take a shit-load of brains if Iraq and Iran never had this problem...why are we so "behind"? Oh, they're making the money while we're "rebuilding their infrastrature.." so, we can't invest in the same technology cuz all we have are illegals that can't read, and gang-bangers that can shoot, but not in Iraq or Iran...that's why.
All our money is going for other countries while we neglect our own.

Scorpion wrote:

UrRight wrote:

I haven't looked into all of this yet, but what I garnered from all the news outlets, this particular oil rig was not equipped with a remote "shut-off" valve.

UrRight wrote:

I Yes, it's a disaster, but they didn't have the required, remote shut-off valve.

No, the remote shut-off was not required because the previous administration decided not to require it.

Oil industry reps begin to reveal cause of Gulf oil blowout

Quote :

The US considered requiring the remote-controlled shut-off mechanism several years ago, but drilling companies questioned their cost and effectiveness, according to the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, which oversees offshore drilling.

The agency says it decided the remote device wasn't needed because rigs had other back-up plans to cut off a well. The UK, where BP is headquartered, doesn't require the use of acoustic triggers.

Mike Papantonio, an environmental lawyer said on the popular American radio programme, the Ed Schultz show, that former Vice-President Dick Cheney’s shadowy group decided that the switches, which cost $500,000, were too much a burden on the industry.

“(The acoustic switch) is a failsafe that shuts the flow of oil off at the source,” said Papantonio in the April 30 broadcast.

“They cost only about half a million dollars each, and are required in off-shore drilling platforms in most of the world...except for the United States. This was one of the new deregulations devised by Dick Cheney,” he said.

This is what happens when you allow the oil industry to make its own rules and police itself. The bottom line is that we can never allow a catastrophe like this to occur. Any American with a conscience should be appalled by this spectacle and steadfastly oppose any further expansion of drilling off our coasts.

Wow! Good find! I just wish this would get some traction in the media.

UrRight wrote:

Thanks for informing me, Scorps.
The question I ask of you...if why is this all based on politics and not on people, the environment, etc.

I still can't understand why no matter who you vote in office, you can't trust that they put the environment first, the people first. Why does this occur?

I'll take a shot at this. 2 Reasons.....Lobbyists and campaign finance laws.
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=E01

Artie60438 wrote:

Wow! Good find! I just wish this would get some traction in the media.

Yeah. Well the whole story will be known once the hearings and investigations begin. I also found this - it's an article about the abysmal failure rate of the "blowout preventer."

Quote :

Citing a Minerals Management Service report, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said there were 117 failures of blowout preventers during a two-year period in the late 1990s on the outer continental shelf of the United States.

"To find out the ultimate failsafe weapon doesn't work is surprising," said Cantwell, who as chairwoman of the Senate Commerce Committee's oceans, atmosphere, fisheries and Coast Guard subcommittee will play a roll in any congressional investigation of the Gulf oil spill and the drilling rig fire that caused it.

The unclassified version of the 1990 report said the failures involved 83 wells drilled by 26 rigs in depths from 1,300 feet to 6,560 feet.

A similar report released by the agency in 1997 found that between 1992 and 1996 there were 138 failures of blowout preventers on underwater wells being drilled off Brazil, Norway, Italy and Albania.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/30/93250/us-report-found-failure-of-offshore.html#ixzz0mybyl7Ln

It appears that the oil companies have been playing very risky game for a very long time. This was certainly not an "isolated" failure of a blowout preventer. There is not even a guarantee that a remote controlled trigger device would have made a difference in this disaster, although I obviously support requiring one on every existing rig.

Let's all hope that BP successfully installs that "dome" on part of the leak this week. Because if it doesn't work, we are totally screwed. I hate to even think about the consequences if they fail.

Scorpion wrote:

I hate to even think about the consequences if they fail.

It ain't good, that's for sure.

Quote :

The Worst-Case Economic Scenario for the Oil Spill

Over the weekend, David Kotok of Cumberland Investors, a much-watched CNBC market analyst, put out a very gloomy analysis of the economic impact of the BP offshore oil spill. Entitled “Oil Slickonomics,” the note traces out three possible scenarios, depending on how quickly the government and BP contain the spill, but Kotok reminds us, “There is no ‘good’ [scenario] here.”

In the best case, he thinks:

Quote :

Containment chambers are put in place and they catch the outflow from the three ruptures that are currently pouring 200,000 gallons of oil into the Gulf every day. If this works, it will take until June to complete. The chambers are 30-foot-high steel configurations that must be placed on the ocean floor at a depth of one mile. This has never been done before. If early containment is successful, the damages from this accident will be in the tens of billions. The cleanup will take years. The economic impact will be in the five states that have frontal coastline on the Gulf of Mexico: Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

And in the worst, he thinks:

Quote :

This spew stoppage takes longer to reach a full closure; the subsequent cleanup may take a decade. The Gulf becomes a damaged sea for a generation. The oil slick leaks beyond the western Florida coast, enters the Gulfstream and reaches the eastern coast of the United States and beyond. Use your imagination for the rest of the damage. Monetary cost is now measured in the many hundreds of billions of dollars.

. . .

In short, Cumberland believes that the oil spill has likely increased the chance of a double-dip recession due to the enormous economic damage to the Gulf states (already not faring too well, particularly Florida), financial and energy company exposure to the crisis, the outsize impact on small businesses and the new federal deficit spending required — all of this on top of the tremendous environmental impact.

Heretic wrote:

It ain't good, that's for sure.

Quote :

The Worst-Case Economic Scenario for the Oil Spill

Over the weekend, David Kotok of Cumberland Investors, a much-watched CNBC market analyst, put out a very gloomy analysis of the economic impact of the BP offshore oil spill. Entitled “Oil Slickonomics,” the note traces out three possible scenarios, depending on how quickly the government and BP contain the spill, but Kotok reminds us, “There is no ‘good’ [scenario] here.”

In the best case, he thinks:

Quote :

Containment chambers are put in place and they catch the outflow from the three ruptures that are currently pouring 200,000 gallons of oil into the Gulf every day. If this works, it will take until June to complete. The chambers are 30-foot-high steel configurations that must be placed on the ocean floor at a depth of one mile. This has never been done before. If early containment is successful, the damages from this accident will be in the tens of billions. The cleanup will take years. The economic impact will be in the five states that have frontal coastline on the Gulf of Mexico: Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

And in the worst, he thinks:

Quote :

This spew stoppage takes longer to reach a full closure; the subsequent cleanup may take a decade. The Gulf becomes a damaged sea for a generation. The oil slick leaks beyond the western Florida coast, enters the Gulfstream and reaches the eastern coast of the United States and beyond. Use your imagination for the rest of the damage. Monetary cost is now measured in the many hundreds of billions of dollars.

. . .

In short, Cumberland believes that the oil spill has likely increased the chance of a double-dip recession due to the enormous economic damage to the Gulf states (already not faring too well, particularly Florida), financial and energy company exposure to the crisis, the outsize impact on small businesses and the new federal deficit spending required — all of this on top of the tremendous environmental impact.

Yeah, well even the above grim estimates are based upon the current rate of oil being released.

Gulf Oil Leak Could Be 12 Times More If Not Capped, Markey Says

Quote :

Oil leaking from a BP Plc well in the Gulf of Mexico could increase as much as 12 times to 60,000 barrels a day if the company fails to stem the flow, Representative Edward Markey said after a briefing by industry executives. “The amount of oil per day could actually rise from 5,000 to 60,000 barrels,” Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, told reporters in Washington today.

If the amount of oil being released increases as much as some predict, it could well be an "end of the world as we know it" scenario... So let's all hope that the "domes" work.

Fiore has posted a new cartoon that's a "must see."

If you haven't seen it yet....

Little Green Man!

Move along now....nothing to see here....
Gov. Haley Barbour R-MS on the BP Oil Spill

Quote :

Right now, there's no oil within 50 miles of the Mississippi. Eighty percent of the oil slick, as it's called and appropriately -- 80 percent is literally just sheen or film right on top of -- on top of the water. That is not toxic. It's not particularly damaging.

I mean, we don't want it to come ashore in Mississippi, but it's manageable. It's a manageable problem. Our people on the coast are getting ready.

And I do think a lot of people in the country are being led to believe that this is already some gigantic catastrophe. Well, that's not the case and we're going it try to keep it from ever being the case.

What about the little "oil balls" I've heard about dropping to the bottom and being eaten?

Wow. This is really bad news...



1st attempt to contain oil leak doesn't work

Quote :

Icelike crystals encrusting a 100-ton steel-and-concrete box meant to contain oil gushing from a broken well deep in the Gulf of Mexico forced crews Saturday to back off the long-shot plan, while more than 100 miles away, blobs of tar washed up at an Alabama beach full of swimmers.

The failure in the first attempt to use the specially constructed containment box over the leak 50 miles off the Louisiana coast, coupled with the ominous arrival of the sticky substance at Dauphin Island, Ala., crushed hopes of a short-term solution to what could yet grow into the worst oil spill in the nation's history.

More than 3 million gallons of crude have spewed into the Gulf since a rig exploded April 20, killing 11, and officials said it would be at least Monday before a different solution is found.

Hopefully, BP will find another way to avert a total environmental catastrophe. But I'm starting to lose hope. This is looking more and more like we're going to be facing the "worst case" scenario, which is really depressing.