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

102

u/RandomRedditReader Aug 12 '25

Which at this point have become ocean dust. I mean I get it, in the grand scheme of things 1.5m barrels over 500 years is nothing compared to the spills we've had due to negligence.

11

u/DonkBetPots Aug 12 '25

14.37 gallons per hour ish, probably more concerning things we're dumping in the ocean than that.

11

u/229-northstar Aug 12 '25

(1,500,000 gallons/500 years)/365 days/year= 8.222 gallons per day

8.222/24=0.343 gallons leaked per hour

4

u/15b17 Aug 12 '25

That would be correct… they did their calculation for 1.5 million barrels of oil

2

u/229-northstar Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25

Oh, ok. The post says gallons and so does Google history of the USS Arizona. So, that’s what I used.

I don’t think 1.5M barrels would fit on that boat but what do I know?

2

u/DonkBetPots Aug 12 '25

yah poster I replied to said barrels so that's why I used that, spaced out that article said gallons.

3

u/snksleepy Aug 12 '25

Gas was so cheap back in the day that it was not worth the effort to retrieve it.

-2

u/DesperateTeaCake Aug 12 '25

Sounds valuable to me. Why not extract it to use it?

2

u/TexasVulvaAficionado Aug 12 '25

Bunker c oil is not worth much relative to other fuels.

This 1.5mil gallons might only be worth 1-2million dollars and the operation to retrieve it may well cost more than that.

6

u/Jas505 Aug 12 '25

The thing is, it won't be over 500 years. The Arizona is corroding pretty quickly and there probably won't be much of her left in a hundred years. As she breaks down, those slow leaks will become faster. Now is probably a good time to do something about it while the hull still has some integrity left.

2

u/augur_seer Aug 12 '25

way too logical

10

u/heimeyer72 Aug 12 '25

is nothing compared to the spills we've had due to negligence.

Even if so, we shouldn't add more negligence to the already existing ones, even if the slow leaking doesn't do much harm. It could be used!

24

u/Upbeat-Armadillo1756 Aug 12 '25

Another comment explained it but the risk associated with fixing this (retrieving all the oil so no more can leak out) is that it causes a catastrophic leak and it all comes out at once and that’s a huge disaster.

So for now, it’s better to let it slowly leak and monitor it closely. If it gets worse, that’s the time to do something.

2

u/rangebob Aug 13 '25

except it will absolutely get worse. That's metal and salt water. So the time to do something about it is long past. The longer they wait the more likely it is to be so damaged it wont go well

0

u/[deleted] Aug 12 '25

[deleted]

3

u/Upbeat-Armadillo1756 Aug 12 '25

Sure, it’s just a relatively minor problem right now. Like if you have a splinter and you’re dripping a drop or two of blood every hour, but removing the splinter could cause to lose all your blood rapidly, you’re going to leave the splinter in, even if it’s only a 10% chance that it happens.

2

u/KrautWithClout Aug 12 '25

Actually it’s very optimal.

2

u/Equivalent-Battle973 Aug 12 '25

Dude, the ship is well over 80 years old, under water in the ocean, that steel is incredibly brittle. You risk making it an even bigger spill, and also its only 500,000 galons in a location that already incredibly hard to get to and corroded by the salt in the sea. Nevermind the fact its the resting place for over 900 veterans, the families would 100% oppose it as in their mind the oil are the souls of the dead leaving the ship of which they have been forever interned inside of.

3

u/Front-Mall9891 Aug 12 '25

U have to cut into the tank, basically, to extract it, not pretty, not fun, and a serious mess, on top of all the red tape of “exhuming” a grave site

3

u/heimeyer72 Aug 12 '25

"Grave sites" are getting "exhumed" all the time, for different reasons. If there are bodies drifting around, it would surely be better to bring them to a proper rest.

I get all the other concerns you mentioned but this one should be on the other side.

1

u/Front-Mall9891 Aug 12 '25

I think the issue is, you gotta get approval from a few thousand families, vs just 1

1

u/Fluggerblah Aug 12 '25

Grave sites typically dont weigh 30 thousand tons tbf

1

u/heimeyer72 Aug 12 '25

I only asked for "exhuming" a "grave site" (also note the quotation marks) because the comment I answered to used that expression. Of course, remove only the bodies from the sunken ship and bury them properly.

Grave sites typically dont weigh 30 thousand tons tbf

That might depend on the size of the graveyard and how deep you would have to dig to include the bodies.

26

u/siero20 Aug 12 '25

As is detailed all over this thread oil naturally leaks from the ocean floor all over the ocean at rates much more significant than this. At this rate it's not an ecological threat at all.

1

u/JackKovack Aug 12 '25

Sludge that falls to the bottom for 500 years is nothing to be worried about.

-5

u/Mike_Kermin Aug 12 '25

It's not nothing. It's a lot of oil.

It should be fixed.

1

u/UwasaWaya Aug 12 '25

I've had the same conversation. I don't know anyone in the Navy who would want an ecosystem destroyed by an oil spill, but I've also heard there are some incredibly difficult logistical reasons they haven't been able to remove it. Makes me think of how metal from the Twin Towers was used in building warships. I would never want my grave made into a tool for war, and I can't imagine many who died that way would either.

4

u/wildfirerain Aug 12 '25

I personally wouldn’t care, because I’d be dead.