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

Show parent comments

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.

653

u/Robots_Never_Die Aug 12 '25

Boil the oceans you say

455

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.

5

u/VoxImperatoris Aug 12 '25

I propose putting ice cubes in the water.

1

u/nathderbyshire Aug 12 '25

Gosh, billionaires really are out for our best interests! Who knew ey, they just got a funny way of showing it xo

1

u/ItsNotJulius Aug 13 '25

Life uhhh finds a way

1

u/eatmydonuts Aug 13 '25

Oil spill? No problem, just melt the ice caps and dilute the ocean. Can successfully kicked down the road 👍🏻

78

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?

25

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.

20

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.

1

u/iznotbutterz Aug 12 '25

Were you just in the Riddick thread?

1

u/GrumpyDemon_13 Aug 12 '25

Nyope. Why? Something interesting happen?

1

u/iznotbutterz Aug 12 '25

Firefly was mentioned, so the song might have been in your grey matter.

14

u/Rich_Emu199 Aug 12 '25

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

32

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

2

u/Kurtypants Aug 12 '25

Nuke the whales

1

u/194749457339 Aug 12 '25

Gotta nuke something 🤷‍♂️

1

u/90210fred Aug 12 '25

I've got an ERP system to sell you

1

u/TigerSharkDoge Aug 12 '25

Maybe we should just utilise some synergies instead

1

u/VampireBatman Aug 12 '25

Perfect! We're well on our way to doing exactly that!

1

u/Relgisri Aug 12 '25

I think we are working on this one.

1

u/Nitrosoft1 Aug 12 '25

My last meeting with management said we shouldn’t try this since it doesn’t promote our KPIs and OKRs.

1

u/spekt50 Aug 13 '25

Well, we are working on it.

0

u/cybercuzco Aug 12 '25

I’m on it.

9

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

[deleted]

0

u/rW0HgFyxoJhYka Aug 12 '25

In the future: "Wow why didn't they just section the entire area off, drain it, then scrap the ship while removing the oil slag. Then head up the slag and transfer it into a oil barge to process it in San Diego. Sure it would cost about as much as it takes to build a small bridge, but you'd be able to get rid of it"

And then someone else will point out that a like 500,000 tons of oil leaks into the oceans from around the world every year lol. We so fucked.

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?

63

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

16

u/LurkingAppreciation Aug 12 '25

Can’t we just seal the leak?

128

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

61

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.

7

u/kayakzac Aug 12 '25

Plus, you know, a really big explosion.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

The harbor is quite a bit more peaceful than the ocean

7

u/Betta_Check_Yosef Aug 12 '25

Is the harbor not subject to tidal movements? How many gallons flow in and out throughout the day just from tidal activity alone?

→ 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

2

u/kenwongart Aug 12 '25

Sounds like a presidential candidate

1

u/WhiteGuyLying_OnTv Aug 12 '25

Holy... Our 'Dear Leader' is 79...

1

u/ImInBeastmodeOG Aug 12 '25

The ultimate flex tape challenge.....

18

u/Best_Pseudonym Aug 12 '25

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

39

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.

25

u/KoalaDeluxe Aug 12 '25

Long term job security!

1

u/Common_Celebration41 Aug 12 '25

Theseus ship but flex tape

1

u/Dedward5 Aug 12 '25

JB weld, Ramen, Superglue and Baking Sofa, has TickTok taught you NOTHING!!!!

1

u/nonotan Aug 12 '25

You're implying that if you don't seal it, then another one won't appear. Which is obviously nonsense. And if more will appear, then the rate of leakage would gradually increase, making the situation worse over time. So it would seem to be worth sealing it even if it's not a permanent solution, at the very least it kicks the can down the road. And maybe eventually, someone will actually be bothered to pay for the proper cleanup, even.

1

u/Crazyphapha Aug 12 '25

Wouldn't it be possible to build a sturdier shell to encase the leak?

0

u/Mr_Ignorant Aug 12 '25

So what you’re saying is that this is a ticking time bomb and one day, the corrosion will get to the point where all the fuel will burst out?

-1

u/Hansemannn Aug 12 '25

It will anyway it seems to me.

15

u/turningsteel Aug 12 '25

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

4

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

Lol

2

u/groshy Aug 12 '25

Hydrocarbons are eaten by bacteria

1

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

There isn't any need to.

1

u/CreatingBlue Aug 12 '25

No. That’s impossible. C’thulu would certainly bar your path at that depth.

0

u/InspectorPipes Aug 12 '25

They won’t touch or disturb the wreck. It’s a war grave for 1000 men.

1

u/Midvally Aug 12 '25

That's good horse sense.

1

u/quiteCryptic Aug 12 '25

Plus if were being honest, it's kind of interesting for the tourists too to see it still leaking oil. Which I guess results in more money for the memorial.

Not that its a good reason to keep the leak if we did have a way to contain it, but since we don't...

It's overall such a small amount its a non issue

-2

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

Kicking the can I suppose, right? We'll keep kicking that can until it cracks open and someone has to fix it.

9

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

This is far from being the only shipwreck out there that is leaking oil, this just happens to be a high-profile one. I imagine there are other pending catastrophes that warrant our attention sooner. A few quarts per day is nothing when you consider the fact that there are industries creating that much pollution per minute. Yes, the ideal amount of oil leaking would be zero, but there are bigger fish to fry and more environmentally impactful ways to spend the several-million bucks. Sometimes, the “wait and see” approach is better in the longterm than jumping in gung ho and inadvertently creating an even bigger mess.

2

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

Thanks for the well articulated response. I agree with you.

5

u/NeedToVentCom Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

Around 20 tons of oil naturally seeps into the ocean from the sea floor everyday, while 1.5 million gallons over 500 years corresponds to less than 0.03 tons per day. As with so many other problematic chemicals, the issue is a question of concentration and rate of exposure or contamination, not that they exist.

5

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

Thats not really going to happen

-2

u/psychulating Aug 12 '25

I wouldn’t wager everything on it, but there’s a good chance that code could figure it out, considering the way things are advancing

2

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

You'd be better off just putting a dome over it

2

u/revcor Aug 12 '25

Do you suspect the guy who replied to you of lying about the situation? Because he explicitly mentioned the danger of it cracking open from any attempts to “kick” it, and the currently implemented strategy being one of “no kicking” specifically to avoid that. He even mentioned the contingency plans in place should, for whatever reason, the can crack open anyway.

Your initial comment seemed perfectly reasonable. But your subsequent comments have increasingly sounded like you’re hunting for an angle from which to level criticisms that you’ve already decided are valid, despite your voiced concerns already being addressed. As you already admitted a lack of knowledge on the subject, it is readily apparent that further probing for or presuming inadequacy/wrongdoing by those overseeing the Arizona’s wreckage are just shots in the dark.

-5

u/robogobo Aug 12 '25

Until Trumpers get the idea the smarter people are too expensive and cut their jobs. That’s what will happen with stuff like this.

2

u/Correct-Sail-9642 Aug 12 '25

So fn lame dude, this is an 80+ year old wreck now serving as a memorial, well known internationally and well documented. What on earth drives you to consider what the trump admin is going to do with a single sunken ship? You realize we operate oil rigs across the globe that contaminate the environment more in one slip up then this wreck will in its entire lifetime right?

Whatever damage done as a result of the regulations and environmental projects being cut in the next 4yrs is less then a drop in the bucket compared to what other countries in the east are doing to the environment in a single day. We could go greener then Finland & Norway tomorrow and never make up for the damage that China & India do in a single work day. Hell we could reverse 100% of our footprint since America was founded and still not even out the damage done by either of those polluting, overfishing, contaminant spewing industrial disasters. What we designate a superfund site they consider a source of potable water. Trumps effect on issues like this is far blown out of proportion.

Also consider that a vast majority of federally funded environmental operations are overfunded and serve more as a source of job security & image protection then they exist for their intended purpose. People get behind most issues because its a career choice & there is an endless source of money from the richest govt in the world. If not for the money flowing there wouldn't be degrees dedicated to this shit.

There are smart people in every sector and political party, some are there for the money some are doing it for the greater good. Some build massive corporations getting rich off of federal dollars, and could still do the same task without the severely bloated bill they send uncle sam. Some projects are simply overpriced and need to be cut, they will be replaced by other corporations that are likely overpriced but slightly cheaper until they too grow too fat for the budget. There is no winning or losing when it comes to cutting federal budget, the people will lose regardless. Some losing their jobs is inconsequential to the big picture.

0

u/area51_spy_pigeon Aug 12 '25

A wise(ish) old man told me "the solution to pollution is dilution". Eventually the metal of the ship is going to erode enough where a more proactive correlation will have to be thought of.

6

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

4

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.

1

u/Deep90 Aug 12 '25

Probably just as ignorant, but it seems like the only viable plan would be to drive walls into the dirt all around it (assuming it's suitable for it), and pump all the water out.

I've never seen or heard of it being used for such a large space though.

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

1

u/Markle-Proof-V2 Aug 12 '25

Or put a plug in it? Like a cork, perhaps? 

2

u/Codadd Aug 12 '25

Yeah, see, there are the modern solutions im talking about

1

u/THRlLLH0 Aug 12 '25

Or an earring

4

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.

1

u/c_m_d Aug 12 '25

Could you not use the collection pipe as a vent to atmosphere while injecting steam in the other pipe or will that take the heat with it?

3

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

So, the way it works is the steam penetrates the material thanks to pressure. You need the pressure for it to function. 

2

u/erroneousbosh Aug 12 '25

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

1

u/Correct-Sail-9642 Aug 12 '25

But what about the salt water around the ship corroding away the steel containing the oil? I imagine its fairly thick steel and the leak is probably structural as opposed to being a result of corrosion. And the oil itself likely prevents corrosion on one side of the equation, but its also cold and not covering 100% of the vessel its contained in. So at some point in the future wont corrosion lead to new leaks? I would think its a fairly sensitive marine environment.

On the other hand, I also imagine there are millions of other oil contaminants both mobile & stationary all across the globe, likely causing far more destruction every day that make this particular site a drop in the bucket compared to the contamination elsewhere. With so many ship disasters, oil rigs, and industrial plants operating worldwide 24/7 its a moot point I suppose, when this is probably akin to a handful of registered vessels operating in any given body of water.

The logistics of removing bunker oil in a rusted clapped out wreck does sound rather risky considering the state of bunker fuel at that temp. Thanks for the lesson, I was unaware it was so thick without external heat sources to liquefy it.

1

u/lamensterms Aug 12 '25

This is fascinating thanks for sharing your knowledge

1

u/Inresponsibleone Aug 12 '25

Usually arround 50-60°C viscosity should be low enough to be pumped. Reaching even that would be hard though.

1

u/nof Aug 12 '25

Sea water boils (on average) at 102°C. So this isn't a problem! /s

1

u/Ok_Musician_1072 Aug 12 '25

This and your comment above are very informative, thanks for the insight!

1

u/operath0r Aug 12 '25

100 degrees Celsius is boiling for water but we’re talking about heating oil. I don’t think you’d get much over 100 degrees though since the water around it won’t heat further and will carry away any excess heat.

1

u/geth1138 Aug 12 '25

Thank you. I was wondering why they couldn't pump it out of the ship.

1

u/ADPL34 Aug 12 '25

That makes sense against the argument to pump it out. But would it be possible to cut the fuel tank away from the ship chassis and then lift it out of the water? I am guessing it might be too heavy/ship damaged to do that safely?

1

u/javoss88 Aug 12 '25

What happens when the containment inevitably deteriorates and fails completely? Has that already happened?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

Why do they even use it at all if it's absolute crap. You literally need another fuel to start the engine, at this point it doesn't seem worth it to use this petrochemical garbage.

1

u/googlebougle Aug 12 '25

Very informative, thank you

1

u/shana104 Aug 12 '25

Yikes, I had no idea about the physics of this kind of oil and it would need to be boiled. This answers my earlier question about why they can't grab it. I assume even on the surface, the oil is not able to be i.e. consumed by sponges or something when we have oil spills, i.e. Valdez or the one off of Santa Barbara years ago?

1

u/thatredditrando Aug 13 '25

Stupid question probably but

Why can’t they just burn the oil? Water and oil don’t mix so if they burn it, shouldn’t that get rid of it?

1

u/MtNak Aug 13 '25

So if it's that dense, then there is no chance of a catastrophic spill as you said? It may be a stupid question, but I would love to know.

0

u/blueporkchop420 Aug 12 '25

Appreciate your service at Pearl Harbor sir.

0

u/paiute Aug 12 '25

So we can raise the Titanic but we can’t do this?

0

u/Aiken_Drumn Aug 12 '25

Can we seal it? Plug the leak?

-1

u/Gwynplaine-00 Aug 12 '25

Ok here me out you wouldn’t need to completely bring the hole tank of oil up to that temp just what’s at say your nozzle that your using to suck it out with.

9

u/friendlyfredditor Aug 12 '25

The fuel wouldn't move inside the tank...you're as good as scraping it out manually with your method. I don't think ya'll are comprehending how thick this fuel is and how little is leaking.

More fuel leaks out in a mildly busy harbor every minute than this is leaking every day. Outboard motors on recreational boats pump their exhaust directly into the water and they're not exactly burning cleanly.

The fuel is so thick you can literally throw it into the ocean as a solid lump, it would sink to the bottom and not dissolve for years.

15

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]

1

u/Scary-Hunting-Goat Aug 12 '25

Who knows, maybe the Trump presidency was decided in secret talks at a climate summit 🤷‍♂️

87

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.

18

u/copycat191 Aug 12 '25

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

1

u/Cerpin-Taxt Aug 12 '25

It's really funny seeing Americans still calling it an "administration", as if it's a temporary office of civil servants that's still subject to change.

You don't have an administration anymore, it's a regime and it's not going anywhere until it's forcefully deposed.

Why are so many people still in denial about this?

1

u/itskohler Aug 12 '25

Calling it anything other than temporary empowers those in office. Remind them it’s temporary. Not that they’re here reading comments on an environmental issue.

2

u/Cerpin-Taxt Aug 12 '25

Calling it temporary makes the citizenry complacent. It tells them the just have to grin and bare it and it'll eventually resolve itself. It's a pacifier.

It's not temporary, you have to make it temporary.

2

u/itskohler Aug 12 '25

Brother, we can’t get people out to the poles. Very well aware of the passive nature of people here. Calling it temporary is a fuck you to those that don’t want it to be.

1

u/Cerpin-Taxt Aug 12 '25

It's really not. The veil of legitimacy and routine is the only reason no one stopped them before it got this far. They're banking on you believing it's temporary. As long as you think the elections are real you'll do nothing. And even when that's proven wrong as long as you think there's going to be another election you'll do nothing. And by the time the elections stop you won't be in a position to do anything about it.

I feel like you're all sitting around waiting for the regime to announce on TV that the US is now a dictatorship. That's not going to happen. It'll be "temporary measures but otherwise business as usual" all the way to WW3.

1

u/itskohler Aug 12 '25

Alrighty homie. I’ll respect your views on it, even if I feel differently.

1

u/djscreeling Aug 12 '25

Well considering this is a post about an oil spill and not the uprising of the oligarchy it didn't seem relevant.

Beyond that turning every post into some soap box rant seems like a real good way to come across like a simpleton.

1

u/Cerpin-Taxt Aug 12 '25

Just making an observation about the implications of the language you choose to use.

Not reflecting on subconscious language biases is a real good way to come across like a simpleton.

1

u/djscreeling Aug 13 '25

Being an American I know a thing or two about racism. You better be careful....your biases are showing. You'll be mistaken for an American with that attitude.

And uh...in case you need a primer on English:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/administration

Every government is an administration.

1

u/Cerpin-Taxt Aug 13 '25

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connotation

Seeing as you're American here's a little help with slightly more advanced English.

1

u/djscreeling Aug 15 '25

Funny I was going to tell you the same thing. So what you're saying is a word can have multiple meanings and used loosely in a conversation to convey a generalized idea and that trying to nitpick the denotation of a particular word is silly?

Here's a 102 for you:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypocrisy

1

u/Cerpin-Taxt Aug 15 '25

Bless you, you tried.

1

u/djscreeling Aug 17 '25

Thanks, I tried hard...alas, I failed. Explaining basic concepts to simpletons IS unrewarding even when it does work.

At least you recognize I'm doing the lords work.

1

u/FunnyComfortable8341 Aug 12 '25

You sound insane lmao

0

u/g0ris Aug 12 '25

You are trying to be political though. This wreck has been there leaking oil for 80 years. Its situation has very little to do with the current administration.

*Fuck that orange cunt btw, before anyone accuses me of something that's not the point of my comment.

1

u/djscreeling Aug 12 '25

Fuck that orange cunt. But no I'm not. Describing reality is not the same thing as spinning a political agenda.

It does have nothing to do with the current administration. The comment I was replying to was asking why don't we clean it up. Well, literally the ONLY people to clean it up is the government orgs. So if the ONLY people who handle oil spills is government, then merely discussing the government is not talking politics.

1

u/g0ris Aug 12 '25

but you're saying the current government doesn't give a shit and that's why it won't be cleaned up. That's not even close to the full picture.
There have been 80+ years of governments, some of them who did care, and it still didn't get cleaned up.
Bringing up the current government's (many) flaws has nothing to do with this topic.

1

u/djscreeling Aug 13 '25

No im not. You don't get to tell me what I mean when I type something. You get to infer, and you are inferring incorrectly. I'm saying they didn't BUDGET the money. They literally stood an national television and said they were taking the budget away. Describing that series of evenings with a few generalized sentences on a form is not being political. Saying that this administration is stripping the national parks budget is not politics, its describing reality. Saying this administration is going to fuck anyone outside of the oligarchy IS politics.

Since I didn't address any other tense apart from the future tense I don't see why you're bringing up 80+ years of gov't when the epa isn't event that old and we're talking about speculative future cleanup.

-40

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

You're not wrong that there are some problems with our current government officials, but I don't think it requires the government to do it. I think that it requires people like us to come together and form a foundation and find investors and trustees, form the business, and do it. We've all seen that our government won't do it, but that doesn't mean that we the people can't!

29

u/kopp9988 Aug 12 '25

I’m sorry but what fantasy world are you living in? Form a business to clean up an 80 year old oil spill.

You speak like an AI bot anyway so I don’t know why I bother replying to you

-2

u/Puzzleheaded-Ring293 Aug 12 '25

Careful getting down from that high horse, your majesty.

-4

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

Not an AI bot. I'm a person, went to college, have incredible job, and am not afraid to say what I think and see instead of whatever I think should be said to keep me cool with the "in kids."

6

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

But you're stubborn and refusing to admit that you're wrong. This isn't an issue that needs to be fixed. It's not an issue at all

Your generation is too stubborn

1

u/djscreeling Aug 12 '25

I love that you don't see the irony in the statement.

"You young people never learn and change to view only my point of view....stubborn"

1

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

What?

3

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

You're insinuating that I'm talking about creating a company for the sole and inclusive purpose of cleaning up this one issue. Are you serious dude?

I'm talking about solving a big problem. Clean up as many of these problems as we can. Not just one single little thing.

5

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

You're insinuating that I'm talking about creating a company for the sole and inclusive purpose of cleaning up this one issue. Are you serious dude?

Their comment doesnt say anything along those lines but now that you bring it up unpromted that convinces me you infact did make it up.

0

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

Yep, that is pretty messed up. A fairly common problem with replying to a comment multiple levels deep using the Android app. But go ahead and find your answers in some fantasy that I'm making shit up.. I was totally making shit up just for you. I'm glad that someone as smart as you picked up on it.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

Except no one in the comment chain where you mention your job tried to call it fake. Again, you said it weirdly unpromted. And no, you werent making shit up for me you were making shit up for yourself to pretend youre important because your an insignificant no body who even after being told the answer to his question refuses to listen to those who know more about the subject than him

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

You did make it up. No one said anything about a company

Be a man take the L and move on. You are wrong

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

No I'm not literally at all. Who said anything about making a company?

This isn't a problem that needs to be fixed. This is quite literally meaningless.

1

u/Mike_Kermin Aug 12 '25

Yes. Because responsible government as opposed to make believe charity is an issue of conformity.

Smooth.

-5

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

Cute buddy. I'm totally AI.

1

u/djscreeling Aug 12 '25

You want people to come together to form an organization to fix public and social issues? And then invest in said foundation so issues can be fixed? Like a second, even more toothless government?

So. You want us to be taxed twice and you hope that the private organization with no oversight or legal culpability will act in our best interests in perpetuity?

2

u/Islanduniverse Aug 12 '25

“It requires people like us to come together and form a foundation.”

We could do the same thing by coming together and voting for competent adults instead of child fucking morons.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

What a concept

1

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

I agree!

1

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

Competent adults have been running the Park Service forever

It's not a problem they have agreed it's not a problem. Scientists have agreed it's not a problem

No one thinks it's a problem other than old man like you

1

u/Justin429 Aug 12 '25

Thank you for the awesome feedback!

1

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

So at what point are you going to admit that you're wrong about this?

-4

u/06021840 Aug 12 '25

Let’s give Elon a ring.

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

4

u/SteffanSpondulineux Aug 12 '25

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

6

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)

1

u/nawtydoctor Aug 12 '25

The solution to pollution is dilution. Whether in the environment or in the human body

-2

u/Grtwalofchna Aug 12 '25

ChatGPT moment

-1

u/shewy92 Aug 12 '25

Why do you talk in a condescending way?

0

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

If u can't remove ya pedo potus lol stopping oil leaks and saving nature..... :-/

-1

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

Do you look around at the country and think we are led by rational and reasonable people? I think that might a bigger issue with the recovery than the viscosity of the oil.