TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Comments on other issues: 'Drilling caused Sidoarjo mud volcano'
Online, June 29Geologists reignited the debate on Monday about whether to blame nature or humans for the devastating eruption nine years ago of an Indonesian mud volcano that is still oozing its all-consuming sludge today
Change Size
O
strong>Online, June 29
Geologists reignited the debate on Monday about whether to blame nature or humans for the devastating eruption nine years ago of an Indonesian mud volcano that is still oozing its all-consuming sludge today.
New analysis of underground gas levels measured at the time of the outburst point the finger at gas exploration ' not an earthquake ' as the trigger, a research team from the United States, Britain and Australia wrote in the journal Nature Geoscience.
'Taken together, our data strongly supports a man-made trigger,' study co-author Mark Tingay from the University of Adelaide said in a statement.
The Lusi mud volcano erupted out of the blue on May 29, 2006, in the middle of a rice field in the Sidoarjo district, East Java. (AFP)
Your comments:
I read elsewhere that 98 percent of geologists at one forum said that the drillings were to blame. Then there was the fact that police wouldn't allow victims to make court claims against Lapindo.
The drill was 400 meters away from where the mud volcano exploded. I think it's bloody obvious that the drill caused it. There was also another very similar case 25 years or so ago, again in Sabah in Malaysia where drilling caused a minor mud explosion.
Lasem Benny
What can the government do? Nothing! What can Golkar do? Nothing! What can the police do? Nothing.
Gregdaru
While this is all nice and exciting for scientists (they, of course, like to argue endlessly about who is more right), the results are useless in court. Arguments like 'according to my model blablabla' are exactly that: If we accept that the model is right. Well, it is a model.
Sudarshana Chakra
This study is not proposing a model. It is the first to use actual hard data measured before and after the earthquake to show that the earthquake could not have caused the disaster. Direct measurements can disprove a model and this data really could be used in court if the government wanted.
Stingray11
Wikileaks has an independent investigation that states that the drillers and engineers made serious errors in design and implementation. They even ran away when they hit the mud instead of trying to control it.
Testing123456
