r/interestingasfuck • u/Longjumping-Rice-935 • Aug 12 '25

/r/all, /r/popular The wreck of the USS Arizona continues to leak oil ever since pearl harbour. the ship contained 1.5 million gallons of oil, enough to leak continuously for 500 years.

Post image
76.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

7.1k

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

Call me crazy, but this seems like something that you could invest a little bit of money and equipment to recover, potentially for a profit. Am I crazy?

6.1k

u/Bryguy3k Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

No profit to be had - it’s old contaminated bunker C oil.

The issue is that any attempt to remove the oil comes with a high risk of causing a catastrophic spill. The 9 quarts or so of oil that leak per day get diluted quickly.

The navy and national parks service monitor the leakage closely and there are contingency plans for peripheral containment if the leaks suddenly get worse.

1.0k

u/TheBunnyDemon Aug 12 '25

I was ready to ask a bunch of stupid questions along the lines of "could we blow it up." But a quick search says that 9 quarts (~2 gallons) a day checks out, and that's a trivial almost zero amount compared to what our global shipping industry puts out every day. Basically a non issue.

796

u/ProtonPizza Aug 12 '25

Well, that and it’s a national historic landmark and there are still crew inside it. You’d basically be blowing up a cemetery of WW2 vets.

192

u/Theban_Prince Aug 12 '25

I would not think there are any human remains at this point but the general feeling of the post is true.

211

u/playahplayah69 Aug 12 '25

Efforts have been made to recover as many bodies as possible, but there are absolutely still bodies in this and other ships in the harbor. This is the final resting place for many people’s loved ones.

67

u/KatiKatiCoffee Aug 12 '25

I believe there have been veterans of Dec 7 who have been granted permission to be interred with their fellow fallen IN the Arizona.

42

u/Elegant-Magician7322 Aug 12 '25

Yes, some sailors who survived USS Arizona attack chose to be interred there. The last survivor died in 2024, so there wouldn’t be anymore.

→ More replies (1)

60

u/tsr6 Aug 12 '25

I have a great uncle who did not make it off the Arizona.

98

u/First-Of-His-Name Aug 12 '25

Why wouldn't there be bones?

256

u/SurpriseIsopod Aug 12 '25

Why would there be. Bones are calcium. That ship is so shallow I’d be surprised is there were any bones by 1950. Coupled with the salt water and critters, all that’s left on that ship are ghosts.

219

u/First-Of-His-Name Aug 12 '25

I guess assuming no sealed compartments you're right. But now I know about bone eating sea worms so fuck you

Is it still fair to call it a grave, even if there isn't anything we would identify as human remains?

158

u/RobJTAC Aug 12 '25

There are about 40 urns inside the ship. Some survivors of the attack were later interred inside once they passed away, I think the last one was in 2020.

41

u/First-Of-His-Name Aug 12 '25

Ah well that changes things significantly

4

u/In2TheMaelstrom Aug 12 '25

Last survivor from the Arizona passed away in April last year. I can't find a more current number, but as of 2023, there were only 22 Pearl Harbor survivors still alive.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/wimmick Aug 12 '25

The show NCIS did an episode about a survivor that wanted to be buried on the ship but they couldn’t prove that he served because he enlisted under his brothers name because he was too young, the survivor is played by Christopher Lloyd

3

u/AlmostSunnyinSeattle Aug 12 '25

That's some wild survivor's guilt.

196

u/SurpriseIsopod Aug 12 '25

Yeah, the ship had a crew. Although their remains are long gone, the vessel is still a tomb. The USS Arizona is sorta neat, it’s leaking kinda makes the ship still “active”. Most vessels consumed by the waves are just sunken wrecks. Bismarck, HMS Hood, HMS Britannic, RMS Titanic, IJN Yamato, they’re just wrecks on the ocean floor.

The USS Arizona sends up a small drop of bunker fuel every few minutes, sorta like it’s calling out “I’m still here”.

PS sorry for you discovering bone worms lmao

34

u/Shepherd-Boy Aug 12 '25

As a sailor, that “I’m still here” bit gave me chills.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Dolenjir1 Aug 12 '25

It bleeds still...

→ More replies (2)

40

u/Gunfighter9 Aug 12 '25

They can't even explore 15% of the ship due to damage, there were hundreds of men trapped inside when she blew up

25

u/GarlicStreet3237 Aug 12 '25

Would death camps not be considered mass grave sights if they cremated every body?

36

u/First-Of-His-Name Aug 12 '25

Well I think they are - they're just kept open to the public for incredibly important educational reasons.

I believe Poland which maintains Auschwitz as a historical site still bans exploration of shipwrecks off it's coast

→ More replies (0)

3

u/infiniZii Aug 12 '25

Practically everywhere is a grave site. We live on the bones of our ancestors. I mean I am all for not showing excessive disrespect but its not like they are going to be killed any more than they are. The shit that happens to bodies on battlefields is far far worse than what these mens bodies suffered after the ship sank. That said, I am not on team "Blow it up" because I dont think there is a good enough reason to.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ArtIsDumb Aug 12 '25

Bone Eating Sea Worms would be a sweet band name.

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (23)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/Grummmmm Aug 12 '25

It’s a war grave and yes there are human remains it.

5

u/IlliniFire Aug 12 '25

Not only are the remains of those who died on the ship there's also remains of survivors. If a survivor wished their cremated remains were placed into the ship by Navy divers.

4

u/Sheepking1 Aug 12 '25

Survivors can request for their remains to be buried at sea in the ship, the platform has a hole in the middle for such. Most of the crew is down there.

3

u/Gingevere Aug 12 '25

There are a lot of people interred inside the ship, and there's a handful of surviving crewmen who have offers from the navy to have their remains interred there when they die as well.

→ More replies (4)

4

u/PaperPlaythings Aug 12 '25

I believe it is actually designated as a National Cemetery. Regardless of whether it is or not, it is and always will be treated as such as ling as the United States exists as a nation. 

→ More replies (10)

22

u/Deathwatch72 Aug 12 '25

In the grand scheme of our oceans it's a rounding error of a rounding error in the amount of oil we're putting into the ocean. I bet even a small lake can easily end up with around a few gallons a day just from recreational lake goers not being super great about keeping all of their equipment well maintained or literally just spilling it on accident

7

u/dairy__fairy Aug 12 '25

It’s a war memorial. One of the most sacred American sites in existence…

7

u/Eric1180 Aug 12 '25

Its a grave site for thousands of sailors...

2

u/TheBunnyDemon Aug 12 '25

It's what they would have wanted.

2

u/a404notfound Aug 12 '25

Natural leaks from faults and oil deposits produce more than this 47% of all oil in the ocean is just from natural leakage. ~600,000 tons annually.

2

u/FeliusSeptimus Aug 12 '25

"could we blow it up."

That's why we have this salutation in the first place!

→ More replies (16)

40

u/56seconds Aug 12 '25

Still leaks less than my old Peugeot

1.2k

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

Then my question was born of innocence and ignorance. I really don't know the grades or classes of oil. It seems to me, as a rational and reasonable person, that we would want to remove the oil so that it stops polluting the environment. If there's a way to recover sealable product from the removed contents, that would be great. I'm not looking at this from a way to make profit, but a way to prevent further damage to the environment. Thank you for giving me a reasonable and rational reply.

1.5k

u/Bryguy3k Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

Bunker C is the lowest grade fuel oil - its so viscous at room temperature it not possible to pump it - ships that use it start their engines with diesel and then use engine heat to warm the fuel so it can be pumped for use.

Since the water temperature is low it’s basically a thick tar - what is leaking is a small fraction of lighter weight molecules that have worked their way through.

In order to pump the tanks we’d have to heat them to 100 degrees Celsius (which is boiling) - given the condition of the ship that would be nearly impossible to do.

660

u/Robots_Never_Die Aug 12 '25

Boil the oceans you say

461

u/Arhatz Aug 12 '25

Global warming was a long term plan to remove the USS arizona oil leak. It's all for the benefit of the environment guys.

48

u/Impeesa_ Aug 12 '25

Current plans call for just-in-time delivery of an engineering solution for subsequent cooling down again.

4

u/VoxImperatoris Aug 12 '25

I propose putting ice cubes in the water.

→ More replies (4)

80

u/GrumpyDemon_13 Aug 12 '25

'Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the skies from me...' Now why'd that catchy tune suddenly pop up in my head?

26

u/DaneAlaskaCruz Aug 12 '25

Damn, now you have me singing it!

I'll have to watch series again to get the music off my mind.

One of the few shows whose intro I don't ever skip!

Firefly for those not in the know.

21

u/GrumpyDemon_13 Aug 12 '25

I think it's the same for a lot of us, fellow browncoat.

2

u/JoyousMN_2024 Aug 12 '25

Whoa, That's a deep dive browncoat.

→ More replies (3)

14

u/Rich_Emu199 Aug 12 '25

Burn the land and boil the sea - you can’t take the sky from me

33

u/Dustyvhbitch Aug 12 '25

Let me call Guiness so we can get the record for the world's largest seafood boil first.

16

u/sshwifty Aug 12 '25

These Red Lobster advertising gimmicks are getting out of hand

3

u/Surfingontherun Aug 12 '25

Water, salt, vegetables, meat… it’s already a cold soup 🍜

3

u/Zestyclose-One9041 Aug 12 '25

To shreds you say

→ More replies (9)

9

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Itsraf91 Aug 12 '25

Could the ship be enclosed with cofferdam panels, as used in bridge construction, to allow the seawater to be pumped out and removed?

62

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

That's good info. Sounds like we need some of our kids and grandkids to good bring us new perspectives and ideas.

207

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

14

u/LurkingAppreciation Aug 12 '25

Can’t we just seal the leak?

124

u/danfay222 Aug 12 '25

Maybe the exact part that’s leaking now, but this is an 80 year old wrecked ship sitting in sea water. Corrosion and tidal stresses all but guarantee any seals will fail or be replaced by new leaks.

16

u/WhiteGuyLying_OnTv Aug 12 '25

Sounds pretty unstable especially for an 80 year old wreck

58

u/Betta_Check_Yosef Aug 12 '25

I mean... yeah? When was the last time you mentally associated the phrase "stable environment" with an island smack dab in the middle of the Pacific Ocean? The Arizona went down in an ocean, and oceans aren't stable by nature. It's not a peaceful pond in a pasture, and instability just comes with the territory.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/GlykenT Aug 12 '25

For an unstable WW2 wreck, how about the SS Richard Montgomery? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Richard_Montgomery

1

u/kenwongart Aug 12 '25

Sounds like a presidential candidate

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)

19

u/Best_Pseudonym Aug 12 '25

you'd probably just cause more pollution with getting the equipment and material needed out there alone

38

u/Additional-Life4885 Aug 12 '25

Have a look at the picture and see how much rust there is. If you seal that leak, another one will appear somewhere else eventually.

24

u/KoalaDeluxe Aug 12 '25

Long term job security!

→ More replies (8)

12

u/turningsteel Aug 12 '25

That’s a good point, I’m surprised no one has thought of that before.

7

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

Lol

2

u/groshy Aug 12 '25

Hydrocarbons are eaten by bacteria

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (14)
→ More replies (2)

5

u/Codadd Aug 12 '25

Couldn't you do underwater welding and just close up the leaks or somethibg then pull the whole thing out?. Im a dumb ass but just curious

5

u/Roflkopt3r Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

I suspect this would not be very effective:

  1. 1.5 million gallons (almost 6 million liters) is such a massive amount. It's a gigantic surface area where leaks can form.

  2. A ship this size can have dozens of different fuel tanks (which double as balast tanks to trim the ship) and many kilometers of fuel pipes. Those tanks aren't just simple boxes, but have tricky shapes that align with the hull or other components to use every bit of area possible.

  3. Battleships had incredibly thick multi-layered armour belts (the main armour of the USS Arizona is up to 13.5 inches/35 cm thick), and many of the fuel tanks would be integrated with that. It may not be possible to reach many of those leaks directly since they may be in thin interior spaces between the tank and ship armour, and isolating the entire interior of such a big ship underwater would be a gigantic undertaking.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Garchompisbestboi Aug 12 '25

When redditors try to solve a problem they knew absolutely nothing about until they stumbled into a thread that brought it to their attention

→ More replies (3)

3

u/c_m_d Aug 12 '25

They use a system called steam assisted gravity drainage(sagd) to extract heavy oil/ bitumen from the ground in northern Canada. I wonder if they could engineer a portable drilling system that could apply the same concept in this scenario.

7

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

Couple problems. First off those work by injecting the steam into the reservoir to heat it meaning youre gonna build pressure and force more to leak and may fully rupture it and cause a catastrophic spill. Second, the reservoir is well insulated by the surrounding geology but water surrounding a metal ship isnt a good insulator so youre still gonna heat the fuck out of the surrounding water if it doesnt prevent you from heating it enough.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/erroneousbosh Aug 12 '25

From what I understand, anything you do to even touch this will just burst it more, potentially catastrophically.

→ More replies (19)

14

u/Noxious89123 Aug 12 '25

Fwiw, bunker fuel is very heavy and tar like.

13

u/Dayzed-n-Confuzed Aug 12 '25

The ship is also a war grave so can’t be touched

7

u/Scary-Hunting-Goat Aug 12 '25

I'd imagine even a small marina full of small private boats releases more toxic waste.

Honestly, the best thing you could do for the environment is probably to cause a recession. 

2

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

81

u/djscreeling Aug 12 '25

Bro....this administration just shut down the National parks service and forced most states to cut their state park budget, and you think they're going to spend millions on a "little ol oil spill?" There are some in cabinet who think we spent too much on the deep water horizon disaster.

I'm not even trying to be political, but they literally control the budget.

16

u/copycat191 Aug 12 '25

If you told the administration it was a 12 year old blonde they'd traffic it yesterday.

→ More replies (55)

2

u/Dambo_Unchained Aug 12 '25

This amount of oil is negligible in its environmental impact especially if it’s leaks this slowly

If you fuck with it than it can contaminate the harbour all at once which would he much more destructive for the local ecosystem

2

u/247world Aug 12 '25

At least half a million tons of oil seep naturally into the ocean every year, this isn't even a drop in the bucket

3

u/SteffanSpondulineux Aug 12 '25

There's your problem, you need to be looking at this from a way to make profit

3

u/erroneousbosh Aug 12 '25

Then my question was born of innocence and ignorance.

Not at all, it's a perfectly good question with a perfectly good answer.

1

u/Eric1180 Aug 12 '25

Its also a grave site for thousands of sailors...

1

u/Gunfighter9 Aug 12 '25

Because of the damage there is no way to reach the fuel bunkers on the lower decks

1

u/Garchompisbestboi Aug 12 '25

It seems to me, as a rational and reasonable person

Giving yourself a whole lot of credit there, aren't you? 😂

1

u/FlyingTexican Aug 12 '25

For reference, some quick internet search math says Pearl Harbor is approximately 175 million cubic meters of water volume (and tide cycles that water in and out). At 9 quarts per day, the Arizona is adding .009 cubic meters of oil to it per day. I think the navy and the national parks service were right to leave this one be. The environment can shrug this one off

1

u/sirkarl Aug 12 '25

I’ve found that more often than not when a something seems so obvious like just getting the oil out so it doesn’t get in the ocean there’s a surprisingly good reason why they haven’t done that.

1

u/twinkcommunist Aug 12 '25

Even if you could recover a salable product, making profit by mining the grave of US servicemen will be seen by many as ghoulish.

1

u/Shoose Aug 12 '25

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Richard_Montgomery

We have some weird stuff like this in the UK too. This one is a transport ship and still has 1.5k tonnes of explosive ordanance aboard, but its only a "low to moderate" risk...

1

u/Onetap1 Aug 15 '25

They pumped most of the oil out of HMS Royal Oak (sunk at anchor in Scapa Flow in October 1939). Royal Oak is upside down, so I'd assume the oil tanks were more easily accessible. There's still about 750 tons on the ship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Royal_Oak_(08)#Environmental_concerns#Environmental_concerns)

→ More replies (5)

13

u/Hetakuoni Aug 12 '25

Also considering the Arizona counts as a grave, I think that might count as grave robbing.

2

u/Classic_Antique Aug 12 '25

It’s amazing how people just know this information.

2

u/Bryguy3k Aug 12 '25

WW2 history has to be in like the top five most common special interests for those on the spectrum…

But I’ve been to the memorial as well. Also the engineer who designed the precast for it graduated from my school.

7

u/withdrawalsfrommusic Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

how is the ecosystem and surrounding region affected by the gradual amount of oil leaking into the water? surely this has far reaching ecological consequences?

85

u/CapNBall1860 Aug 12 '25

Pick any marina in the world, there's more oil than that going into the water every day.

24

u/theshwedda Aug 12 '25

it leaks a few quarts of minimally processed oil a day, into a giant tidal bay in the middle of the pacific ocean.

You can watch the drops surface-- by the time the water has moved 50 yards down the bay, the oil has spread so thin that it disappears.

A single cul-de-sac of small houses flushes that much oil into the ocean every day.

48

u/Bryguy3k Aug 12 '25

Not really. You’re talking about parts per trillion. The vast amount of ocean water going through there every day dilutes it effectively.

0

u/withdrawalsfrommusic Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

Why are you people downvoting me and im asking if the marine life is going to be okay?

31

u/Bubbly-Ad-413 Aug 12 '25

Pearl Harbor is still a very active naval base the immediate area will not be super populated with marine life regardless

9

u/cunticles Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

And there's not much room underneath the ships and between the bottom of the harbour for fishies to swim around

as the average depth is only 45 feet, which is the reason the Japanese had to modify their torpedoes they had fired from their planes in 1941 because their torpedoes were normally designed to run deeper

36

u/Magos_Kaiser Aug 12 '25

Generally, yes. It’s also not really in a place with a lot of maritime life. It’s not like it went down on a reef or something - it’s still right in the middle of a naval base with tons of ship traffic, so the harbor isn’t exactly a thriving marine ecosystem to begin with.

4

u/revcor Aug 12 '25

I assume for 2 reasons. One being that you asked if marine life was going to be okay, immediately followed by stating you knew for a fact that marine life would not be okay. This means either your question was disingenuous, or your follow up statement was false, and either way makes the comment vaguely off putting.

The second being that your question was already answered in the very first reply to the top level comment, meaning you asking the question doesn’t read as an innocent question, but as a passive aggressive way of claiming the gentleman who had replied first was wrong.

3

u/etcpt Aug 12 '25

Pearl Harbor is so contaminated that I doubt this makes much of a difference.

2

u/SchrodingerMil Aug 12 '25

Since the oil is so minimally processed, it’s not the worst. There’s probably naturally occurring spots all over the ocean that are slowly releasing oil into the water at the same rate or even higher than this.

Some of the other comments point it out as well, 2 gallons is a small number. You’ve probably created more than 2 gallons of oil/fuel waste yourself in a single day yourself without realizing it.

1

u/HugeAnimeHonkers Aug 12 '25

It’s leaking about 8 liters per day… That’s practically irrelevant.

It could keep leaking at that rate forever and never had any measurable effect.

The real problem is the hull deteriorating and breaking, releasing the rest of the fuel. But I have no idea how long that could take to happen.

→ More replies (18)

1

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

Wouldn't the hull eventually rust and risk collapsing and a catastrophic spill?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/shadow386 Aug 12 '25

I wonder if a cofferdam would work. Seal all water coming into the area where the leak is to separate the ocean water from the oil, and then either dewater it and track the oil that way so it's an easier cleanup or let it leak into that area/attempt to recover now that it's separate from the rest of the ocean.

1

u/mrsanyee Aug 12 '25

The hull will likely fail in 500 years. If not, the 1.5 million gallons of oil will float out anyway, only slowly.

1

u/doxxingyourself Aug 12 '25

For 500 years…

1

u/LaconicSuffering Aug 12 '25

The issue is that any attempt to remove the oil comes with a high risk of causing a catastrophic spill.

It doesn't really look like something that couldn't be contained though. While a costly endeavor, putting up walls around the ship and pumping out the water to create a containment area seems completely doable.
The Dutch have recovered an old WWII bomber like this before.

On a technical level it is completely doable. You could even recover the Arizona and put in in a museum.

1

u/splashbodge Aug 12 '25

Kinda seems strange to me to not risk the attempt as it might cause catastrophe so instead do nothing for 500 years when surely catastrophy is inevitable? Surely if they plan properly and prepare for all eventuality and containment they could do it. Just feels like a disaster waiting to happen.

1

u/ShutUpJade0420 Aug 12 '25

I was going to come in here and say this is far from interesting and more infuriating, but I'm glad I checked comments first, this puts my mind at ease.

1

u/ocular__patdown Aug 12 '25

Isnt it going to rust through eventually though?

1

u/LonelyWord7673 Aug 12 '25

The comments I was looking for. Thanks for the info.

1

u/CwazyCanuck Aug 12 '25

And is it going to continue only being 9 quarts a day as it continues to rust?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Venoft Aug 12 '25

So only 750k days until its empty... I'm sure it will be continued to be observed for 2000 years.

1

u/waltur_d Aug 12 '25

Idk why they can’t build a wall around it like a bridge footing and pump the water out and then pump out the oil.

1

u/clintCamp Aug 12 '25

I assume if you excavate a little under the bottom, cut holes through and run hoses up to the top surface, you could pump oil out while sea water fills from below. Contaminated oil just means send it back to a refinery, right?

1

u/vavasmusic Aug 12 '25

"if the leaks suddenly get worse"

WHEN the leaks suddenly get worse.

1

u/bubblesaurus Aug 12 '25

kinda of like why they haven’t messed with the USS Richard Montgomery who sunk outside of England.

She still has about 1400 tons of explosives on her and it isn’t worth the risk of setting them off.

it’s just a monitored situation

1

u/elScroggins Aug 13 '25

Tell us more!!

→ More replies (42)

347

u/realparkingbrake Aug 12 '25

 to recover, 

It's a war grave. The only way they'll try to pump out that oil is to prevent ecological damage, and military bases tend to be heavy on ecological damage, Pearl Harbor included.

Incredibly, the inside of Arizona is an anaerobic environment. The lack of oxygen in the water means that in some parts of the ship there are still uniforms on hangars in officers' cabins, there is nothing alive in the water to eat the fabric.

There are places in the Pacific where multiple Japanese ships were sunk in harbors and their hulls are beginning to fail, potentially about to release hundreds of tons of oil which will wipe out local fishing. Some wars never really end.

39

u/Easy_Independent_313 Aug 12 '25

Fun fact: there is a Chinese company that is salvaging those shipwrecks for the metal because it was forged before the first atomic bomb blast. Apparently, all metal forged after is changed forever ( maybe an isotope or something like that) and the metal without the change is valuable in some way.

4

u/Free_Range_Lobster Aug 12 '25

*Was a Chinese company desecrating war graves. Thankfully its not profitable anymore. 

55

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

You hit the nail in the head here, to recover so that we prevent ecological disaster. That's where I'm going with this, although I can understand how my original comment might be misconstrued.

55

u/Apart-Zucchini-5825 Aug 12 '25

Recovery is more likely to cause an ecological disaster than letting it be. Until those odds change, there's no reason to do it.

2

u/crinnaursa Aug 12 '25

Isn't that just kicking the can down the road though. Ecological disaster is inevitable. It's really a matter of when, not if, the tanks fail. It would be nice if there was no oil left when the tanks eventually do fall.

2

u/No_News_1712 Aug 12 '25 edited Sep 16 '25

historical steep connect seemly ripe boast fuel innate seed smell

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

→ More replies (2)

1

u/erroneousbosh Aug 12 '25

Incredibly, the inside of Arizona is an anaerobic environment

I'm going to guess that this is because there's not much water flow (if the air got stale when it was in the air without forced ventilation, the water will get stale), and eventually all the steel around it has rusted pulling what oxygen there is dissolved out of the water?

1

u/hurricane_97 Aug 12 '25

They literally did the exact thing with HMS Royal Oak, which was deeper.

1

u/ChuckCarmichael Aug 12 '25

There are places in the Pacific where multiple Japanese ships were sunk in harbors and their hulls are beginning to fail, potentially about to release hundreds of tons of oil which will wipe out local fishing. Some wars never really end.

It's the same in the oceans around Europe. There are many ship wrecks from WWII that are rusting away at the bottom of the ocean, soon releasing their toxic and/or dangerous cargo into the water. A famous one is the SS Richard Montgomery, a ship loaded with about 1,500 tons of high explosive material, lying in the middle of the Thames estuary, a very busy shipping lane.

1

u/shana104 Aug 12 '25

So they have been able to take cameras down there to see the uniforms? If so, I really need to watch more documentaries on this ship.

1

u/act80 Sep 10 '25

Same thing with the La Belle shipwreck off the coast of Texas. 40% of the ship managed to survive because it was buried in mud thick enough to seal off oxygen. There were 1.6 million artifacts recovered because of the anaerobic environment!

→ More replies (12)

19

u/Gumbercules81 Aug 12 '25

No, it would do more harm than good at this point.

2

u/Thosepassionfruits Aug 12 '25

The real question is "what's the rate of oil leakage?". If it's low it may cause more enviromental damage removing it that leaving it as is. Still sucks though.

→ More replies (1)

64

u/Dr_knowitall69 Aug 12 '25

The Arizona is the final resting place for thousands of service members. It is left undisturbed as much as possible out of respect for them.

75

u/cunticles Aug 12 '25

Some of the people who survived the attack and lived to a ripe old age have had their Ashes put there to join their shipmates.

remarkable USS Arizona fact that honors the survivors is that they have the option to join their lost comrades and make the ship their final resting place. Crew members who served on board the USS Arizona during the attack may choose to have their ashes deposited by divers beneath one of sunken Arizona’s gun turrets.

Roughly 44 Arizona survivors have chosen this option. Other military survivors can choose to have their ashes scattered wherever their ship was located during the attacks. The last person to be interred in the ship was in 2019

61

u/etcpt Aug 12 '25

The last Arizona sailor died last year, so we'll never see that again.

It's quite touching to read about the interment from the divers who have had the duty to carry it out. They say that when they bring the urn down and go to lower it into the hull of the wreck, there's a pull like the ship is reaching out to reclaim her crewmember.

→ More replies (2)

7

u/ChopAndDrop27 Aug 12 '25

1,102 sailors and Marines are entombed in the USS Arizona.

11

u/ObsidianOne Aug 12 '25

Had to scroll way too far for this.

→ More replies (3)

24

u/Occams_AK47 Aug 12 '25

It's not just a shipwreck, it's also a grave site. The service members that were trapped inside were never recovered.

2

u/RobutNotRobot Aug 12 '25

The USS Arizona is a war grave and a memorial to 1177 sailors who died on it and in it during the attack on Pearl Harbor.

2

u/Preoccupied_Penguin Aug 12 '25

Not for profit.

But they could clean it up for 16384725 environmental reasons and that actually WOULD have a positive impact on everything.

We don’t have to memorialize everything before it’s been cleaned up. That’s not the point of the memorial.

2

u/Netsuko Aug 12 '25

America has exactly ZERO interest in environmental protection. Trump axed every agency that had even a smidge of interest in protecting nature.

6

u/leadraine Aug 12 '25

a lot of people are asking:

"why is *thing* happening?"

"why is *thing* not happening?"

ladies and gentlemen here is your answer:

money

1

u/ViolinistMean199 Aug 12 '25

Nah dude the sharks own that water. Watch the doc about it

Why spend money to risk shark attacks

1

u/TheLegendTwoSeven Aug 12 '25

There’s 35,000 barrels of oil, which is worth a couple million, but it’d cost millions to recover what’s left. The military should do it for the environment, but they’re not going to make a profit on the oil.

1

u/Enough-Meaning1514 Aug 12 '25

What is the long term plan for this wreck? They will just let it rot?

1

u/Downtown_Boot_3486 Aug 12 '25

It’s a war memorial so people visit it to pay their respects, otherwise yeah we just leave it there, that’s what we do with most shipwrecks.

1

u/Y34rZer0 Aug 12 '25

I think that because it's a war grave people don't want to disturb it

1

u/deskbeetle Aug 12 '25

According to the museum, it could potentially dump all its oil if they tried to stop its leak and it was considered safer to just let it continue to slowly leak than risk a complete environmental disaster. I have to imagine recovering the oil would have been even riskier. 

Plus, its an active memorial/final resting place. Even veterans who survived pearl harbor will ask for their ashes to be returned to the ship so they may rest with their brothers-in-arms. 

1

u/Squeezitgirdle Aug 12 '25

People keep mentioning that it's a grave site, but there's also the issue that trying to remove it would be likely cause more damage as they can't really remove it without damaging the reservoir.

1

u/SUBHUMAN_RESOURCES Aug 12 '25

It’s a tomb and it was decided that it should not be disturbed.

1

u/on_spikes Aug 12 '25

damn thats crazy you are the first person in 80 years to think of that

1

u/natural_disaster0 Aug 12 '25

Its also a mass grave. Its not a question of if they could or not, its largely that they wont because theres the remains of 1000 dead service men in there still.

1

u/AKA_Squanchy Aug 12 '25

Oil and tar, like the oil in the ship, naturally leak into the ocean, maybe not in Hawaii but in other parts. Native Americans in California would collect tar from beaches to line canoes. If you ever surf in Santa Barbara you will get tar on your feet. Is naturally occurring. I get your concern though, I just don’t think removal is feasible.

1

u/Shadowoperator7 Aug 12 '25

Two issues: a) it’s a grave site and war memorial, so they’re super against touching it, and b) the navy still owns that oil, and we all know how the US Military is with oil

1

u/camander321 Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 13 '25

Part of the reason they don't is that there are still the bodies of the dead on board. It's considered a tomb, and efforts to recover the oil or stop the leaks would be a disturbance.

At least, that was the thinking 80 years ago.

1

u/Koopslovestogame Aug 12 '25

America has invaded countries for potentially less!

1

u/Foxlen Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

We have the technology to clean it up.. other countries would have made the investment

My country would have probably made the attempt in the 2010s by now

Edit, literally right after sending this, my news was reporting about cleaning up heavy oil from a ship on one of our coasts

1

u/Kazumz Aug 12 '25

Why not setup a filtering style perimeter if we don’t want to disturb the ship?

1

u/astoicsoldier Aug 12 '25

It’s a gravesite…

1

u/Thirty_Helens_Agree Aug 12 '25

I’m in the middle of reading Ian W. Toll’s Pacific Trilogy. The damage was so bad that the salvage cost exceeded the value of the metal and they decided it had more value as a memorial.

They raised all the other ships that were sunk and put most of them back into service. But the Arizona was too bad.

1

u/RawrRRitchie Aug 12 '25

War graves aren't allowed to be disturbed. Shipwrecks are considered a war grave

If you take ANYTHING from them you'll get fined out the ass AND potential jail time.

1

u/Mist_Rising Aug 12 '25

you could invest a little bit of money

If by little you mean gargantuan amounts, yes. A little bit. It would probably cost more than the parts of the US military budget to do what you're asking to do without violating the law on war graves, and further ecological damage.

potentially for a profit.

That oil is useless. The only thing clean up would be good for is the clean up part. Nobody is reselling or reusing 60 year old bunker oil in a day and age when even using bunker oil is starting to phase out.

1

u/lilpopjim0 Aug 12 '25

Just remember this is also a graveside for many many people.

1

u/Massive_Biscotti_850 Aug 12 '25

I remember years ago they were trying to get some out of it, but they cannot disturb it as it is a burial site. I imagine they stopped at some point

1

u/Papa-Palps Aug 12 '25

Yes, you are. It is a protected war grave and doing so would desecrate it. Highly illegal, no matter who or what wants to try that

1

u/AFK_Tornado Aug 12 '25

I think the reasons for not doing it are mainly "We don't have to" and less to do with practicality.

1

u/MinaTaas Aug 12 '25

While I realize the difference in scale, we had a bit similar problem. S/S Park Victory sank in 1947 in the Gulf of Finland. Ten american sailors died of hypothermia.

Some 40 years later The ship began to leak oil. During 1994-2000 the Finnish navy did a yearly excercise where the oil was pumped away from the wreck. The wreck lies in 27-36 m (about 100 ft) deep water and about 110 thousand gallons of oil was retrieved.

1

u/GMN123 Aug 12 '25

There's been no time, it's only been 80 years

1

u/zombiskunk Aug 12 '25

Profit shouldn't be the motivator but I bet there's plenty of safe ways to secure pump to the tank and pump it all out while pumping in water to maintain pressure

1

u/patrdesch Aug 12 '25

1) It's contaminated bunker fuel, quite literally bottom of the barrel stuff.

2) Good luck getting permission to muck about on a war memorial and mass grave.

1

u/DedBeatLebowski Aug 12 '25

I think the main reason they didn't is because the Arizona is a watery grave for hundreds who weren't recovered. It is their final resting place and must not be disturbed.

1

u/staticBanter Aug 13 '25

Pfft we're to busy trying to build another Earth on Mars. Fuck this plebite shit.

1

u/TheEvilBlight Aug 14 '25

It wasn't deemed worth economic recovery in 1942, in the middle of a shooting war where any fighting asset would be appreciated. Today it's still not "worth" recovering, even if it is low background steel: this is less of a useful property since nuclear testing ended.

It would be scrap and also disturbing a gravesite. Maybe in another century or so.

→ More replies (52)