| Author | Message | ||
     Road_thing |
At 2,000' below the sea bottom, there are multiple strings of steel pipe with cement in each annulus. I don't know the specifics of the casing program on the BP well but, given the depth, I expect the largest (conductor) string is probably at least 24" or so. The smallest (production) string is probably something like 13-3/8". This is pretty heavy pipe, probably nothing less than 3/8" wall thickness. If you were to try your "sci-fi" solution, and it didn't work, you'd have a leak 2,000' underground, in 5,000' of water. Not an attractive scenario. rt | ||
| Road_thing |
Plan B: Continue to try to activate the existing BOP. Plan C: Drill a relief well. Plan D: Install another BOP on top of the existing one, and shut the well in. Plan E: Containment structures above the leaks to keep the oil from reaching the surface and dispersing. BP is working on all of these right now. rt (Message edited by road_thing on May 04, 2010) | ||
| Hex |
Ok, you can call mine Plan Z if you like. Don't think they/us/we aren't talking about it, and any other potential solution. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Exactly what type of warhead are you talking about? | ||
| Hex |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W54 | ||
| Road_thing |
Agreed, I'm sure any and all possible solutions are on the table. But you've got to try previously proven solutions first. rt | ||
| Hex |
Agreed. | ||
| Hex |
However, how do you think Hurricane season is going to be on Plan C? Less than one month away. | ||
| Hootowl |
Bird deaths: http://science.howstuffworks.com/wind-turbine-kill -birds.htm As the article points out, it is a relatively small number compared to other causes. However, none of the other causes listed are oil spills or other oil industry activity. Oil spills kill a very small percentage of the overall number of birds killed each year, and wind turbines kill more than oil. I am not against wind power. If a bird isn't smart enough to not fly into the damn thing, we shouldn't be worried about killing it, it'll probably fly into a building or something anyway. Who knows, perhaps we're Darwining ourselves some smarter birds? | ||
| Hootowl |
The big ones usually happen later in the season. June is not a big month for storms. Not to say it can't happen. | ||
| Hex |
Even by July or August, the relief pipe effort may not be successful. | ||
| Reindog |
Great, now you are bringing zombies into this mess. This actually happened in World War Z. | ||
| Road_thing |
Drilling doesn't stop for hurricane season, even in normal years. If there's a storm in the Gulf, operators temporarily abandon their actively drilling wells (by setting drillable cement plugs) and secure their rigs off location until the threat passes. Crews go ashore until it's safe. rt | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Nuclear war head? Really? That's better for the environment than oil? | ||
| Blake |
Blowing up the well is not a viable plan. Might be fun, but not a reliable solution and you'd still need to drill down to place the charge, so likely little to no time savings versus drilling relief well(s). The scale of this spill is far from worst case. As referenced above, in 1976 the Gulf endured a 10,000 to 20,000 barrel a day blowout that resulted in over 150,000,000 gallons of crude oil being released into the gulf before the well was brought under control. The environmental impact of this blowout will likely not be anywhere near as significant. The more it disperses, the lesser the impact. The slick looks to currently cover an area of roughly 2,000 square miles and growing. At a flow rate of 5,000 bbl/day, if all the oil were to suddenly sink to the sea floor, it would result on average in 0.00048 fluid ounces per square foot per day of oil deposition. That's less than 1/3,000th of a shot glass per square foot. Louisiana has 7,721 miles of tidal shoreline. If all the oil ends up on that shoreline then it will accumulate on average at the rate of 27 gallons per mile per day. Some of the oil is being burned off, leaving only the heavier tarry stuff to sink to the ocean floor, hopefully far from shore. Some is being neutralized via chemical dispersants, basically detergents. Some is being collected and/or sequestered, hopefully a greater percentage every day. Much, much different from Exxon Valdez... http://alaskadispatch.com/projects/gulf-spill/5189 -comparing-gulf-spill-to-exxon-valdez-might-not-be -sound | ||
| Reindog |
The Governator is now against offshore oil drilling in California. Its amazing how these people's stands bend with the wind. Arnold is now against oil exploration | ||
| Blake |
He should have instead mandated development and implementation of rapid response containment systems that are capable of addressing the worst case scenario and protecting the coast. Easier to be reactive follower instead of pro-active leader. | ||
| Reindog |
Well stated....thanks, Blake. Arnold spent too much time with Uncle Teddy and became a RINO. | ||
| Hex |
...you'd still need to drill down to place the charge, so likely little to no time savings versus drilling relief well(s)... Which is more difficult and would take more time especially if the situation at the wellhead worsens? Drilling 2000+ ft vertical shaft, or an 18,000+ ft horizontal one that needs to bisect the 2 ft diameter well? I say start both. Set the charge. Fill the column with concrete, and wait to see if necessary. | ||
| Throttlepansy |
Bird deaths: http://science.howstuffworks.com/wind-turbine-kill -birds.htm As the article points out, it is a relatively small number compared to other causes. However, none of the other causes listed are oil spills or other oil industry activity. Oil spills kill a very small percentage of the overall number of birds killed each year, and wind turbines kill more than oil. Ahh.. I wondered why there weren't piles of dead birds at the wind-farms I've seen! Unfortunately, that list doesn't list the number of birds killed by oil spills, so there's nothing to compare, but one thing's for sure, all of it adds up to nothing compared to deaths by moggies  } | ||
| Road_thing |
Start both? I'm afraid there would need to be an Environmental Impact Study, a Coastal Zone Management Board approval, and probably an amendment to the Nuclear Test Ban treaty before you'd be allowed to pop a nuke out there. Ain't gonna happen. rt | ||
| Hootowl |
If oil killed more birds than turbines, you can bet it'd be on that list. Why list evil oil if it kills fewer birds than the the good and benign thing you are defending right? Point is, wind companies are given a pass, oil companies are fined per bird. | ||
| Hex |
...plankton, shrimp, oysters, turtles, seals, whales, vegetation, oh yeah and birds and people. | ||
| Hootowl |
Yep. Kills 'em good. Just not as often as other things we don't consider to be a problem. | ||
| Cowboy |
Yep set off a charge at 2000 ft. in well bore is a damn good way to start producing to ocean flour on a 1 acre choke. Witch does the most damage to sea creatures. leave the oil alone as it floats or put a disburstment on it so it can sink to botton and kill off the food supply to sea creatures. | ||
| Cowboy |
By the way does any one have any idea how many rust bucket vessles will be pumping out thier dirty bilges at nite and put the blame on BP I have seen this happeno many times when a spill ocurs. | ||
| Aesquire |
Hex, the tests back in Project Plowshare, and the tests to use nukes to make large, underground oil storage areas ( Quickly ) were a bust. The Glass caves had cracked & leaky walls, and most flooded after a time. Would have been really cool to be one of the few to actually go down and look in one. I understand it was very Hot, both from radiation, and the natural heat that the guys working in the pre-blast chamber had to deal with. Not a bad idea, but probably wouldn't work. Pity. My idea is to take all the lawyers, starting with the ones the admin. sent down to "handle the problem" and use them as a caisson, tie them together with fishing nets & weight them down with rocks to make a barrier so they can deal with the leak in shallow water. How many do we need, do you think? I'm figuring a 3 lawyer thick layer, 5000 feet deep, maybe 75ft diameter? We might have to caulk the leaks with Senators & Congressmen. Hey, even if it doesn't work, It'd be good for the country. | ||
| Whatever |
The environmental damage is not as simple as "birds killed" or "fish dead". The cost has to be evaluated and weighed out in "ecological services" lost. This means what is the total net effect on human health and wild life? And that CAN include economic losses due to hardship from the effects on fisheries... and those people who make their livings from the fisheries... The process is called Natural Resources Damage Assessment, and the feds, states and tribes can be given a settlement that will offset some of the cost of the ecological value lost... unfortunately these settlements are typically only a small fraction of the cost of the damage, but that is the way our system works... Wetlands have a very high VALUE in terms of ecological services... They act as a sponge, soaking up toxins in the water... such as runoff pollutants... they clean the water so to speak... If you have a nasty filthy sponge and you try to clean your dishes with it, it will make your dishes nasty and filthy too... so there may be long term effects to the ecosystem that they will only be able to measure decades from now... For instance, if I dumped one barrel of PCB contaminated oil into a fish spawning habitat, that PCB- which never ever breaks down into less toxic substances- would end up accumulating in the fish and then eventually possibly be eaten by humans... and oh, lets say an immune impaired or a pregnant human would be effected more than your average healthy no prego adult... This is how they design risk based studies of environmental impacts... The good news here is that oil is typically diluted in water (despite what we have been told that oil and water do not mix)... some components of the oil are soluble and will be carried and dispersed by wind and waves... the toxic part of the oil that is toxic by characteristic will be dampened a little bit by the sheer vastness of the ocean... Also the PAH component is BIODEGRADABLE... meaning if the fish eat it, it will get metabolized although it could kill the fish... when the fish dies and it sinks to the bottom of the ocean or estuary it will get eaten up by microbes and these microbes will break down the chemical and it will actually change into something less toxic... Now if there are heavy metals in the oil (or things like PCBs or Dioxins) that do not break down, that is permanent or non-reversible damage... once it enters the food chain there is no turning back. So we will see what happens here. | ||
| Aesquire |
What she said.  Gumbo is at stake. | ||
| Road_thing |
So that's why my dishes are always dingy-looking! Thanks, Char! rt |
