| Author | Message | ||
     Hex |
• Nuke it Russia has an old-fashioned and highly effective option for sealing oil leaks. Alexander Moskalenko, head of GCE, a Russian oil consultancy, tells the Moscow Times an underwater nuclear explosion could be used to bury the leaking oil well. The suggestion is not as bonkers as it sounds. According to the Russian newspaper Komsomol Pravda, the Soviet Union used the method five times to seal off hydrocarbon spillages. The first time was in 1966, near Bukhara in Uzbekistan, when a 30-kiloton atom bomb was used to blow out and seal a burning gas well. (The bomb used in Hiroshima was 20 kilotons.) The idea is simple: the explosion buries the problem under tonnes of rock, sealing off the flow of oil. According to Pravda, some of these nuclear bomb civil engineers are still alive: perhaps BP should give them a call. http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/62992,news-comment,n ews-politics,deepwater-horizon-gulf-mexico-oil-spi ll-should-bp-nuke-the-leak-like-the-russians | ||
| Sifo |
If one makes a theory and it is wrong, how can one claim competence at theory making? I've been asking that question regarding global warming for well over a decade now.  | ||
| Cowboy |
I dont know how many here have worked with the Ruskie's I did a lot of work for them in the 80's also built a lot of thier down hole equipment. sorry to have to say this but I found thier equipment and tecknolegy to be 50yrs behind us. The only thing I found they were good at was propaganda and B.S. | ||
| Hex |
Well the Ruskies I used to fly International Free Flight Model Airplanes with revolutionized our three events F1A, F1B, and F1C. Our best aeronautical engineers who competed in the hobby (my NASA, JPL, and Lockheed friends) paled in comparison. They would come over here, or invite us over there, and kick our butts every time, three event sweep. Victor Stamov F1A, Alexander Andriukov F1B, Eugene Verbitski F1C. Look them and the events up on Google if you like. Guess what? They are all now US citizens granted special visas for their extraordinary expertise. Russian and Ukrainian engineers are very competent from what I have experienced. | ||
| Sifo |
Engineering and execution are very different things. It's one thing when the execution involves a few dollars worth of balsa wood and tissue paper, quite another when the Russian government is involved. | ||
| Cowboy |
Well I guess we know what we know--I was never able to explain the working of a ball valve vrs flapper valve . and working down hole we work to with in 1' of correct measurement they work with a 10 meter tollerance. O by the way I bought a new tractor from them (very cheap) every part can be replaced with a 1952 model massy.(damn that is ultra modern) | ||
| Hex |
few dollars worth of balsa wood and tissue paper... yeah, that's what we brought at first, theirs were kevlar, carbon fiber, boron, .001" anodized aluminum skin, aluminized milar, d-box, truss work, revolutionary airfoil design, etc. We basically bought up what they had each time they came over, and dissected and reverse engineered everything, and they still kicked our butts the next year with even newer technology. I was just the 'kid'. The American aeronautical engineers I hung out with got schooled time and time again. How do you think I came to build my own autoclave/ramp oven, and got into building the best carbon fiber/s-glass flyrods in the world. It started for me at age 9 with a Junior national record in F1B. I thank my Ukrainian mentors. Props. | ||
| Sifo |
LOL! I was thinking that would get you when I typed it. I pretty much know what goes into those things. They are still very small scale endeavors compared to getting the government involved in anything. I used to be into the whole modeling thing too. Have had my picture in RCM for my involvement in a project back in the late '80s. Played with stuff from big RC planes to the super fragile indoor rubber powered stuff. Got to see this thing fired up for it's first run too.  http://www.robart.com/R780/r780construct.aspx Lot's of cool stuff going on in miniature! | ||
| Hex |
Yeah, like mini nukes.  | ||
| Blake |
Eric, "BP released it to the surface with human incompetence." You made the above assertion, a highly irresponsible and dishonest one in my view. First, it was not BP's job to prevent a blowout; that responsibility is job#1 of the drilling contractor, Transocean. Second, as yet there is zero evidence of incompetence that I've seen. Lacking any substantive evidence to support such an accusation, an honorable man would recant. Neither mankind nor our electro-mechanical devices have ever been perfect. Sometimes stuff breaks or fails in a fashion that defies imagination. In such cases the blame is not incompetence. And then there is the question that begs, why the @#$! would people living on an offshore oil rig ever subject themselves to incompetence that could result in a blowout? Eleven men are dead. How about you ditch the arrogant know-it-all pose and show a little respect. Your attitude as expressed here is highly offensive. | ||
| Hex |
As offensive as the crude lapping the Louisianian coastline? Power, corruption, lies. | ||
| Blake |
Much more so. I'm not offended by an oil slick, especially before the extent of its impact is known. Some are way to eager to pronounce world's worst environmental disaster. I am offended by poor accountability and poor behavior of our leaders. If it turns out that the blowout was due to negligence and/or incompetence, then I will be disappointed by those responsible. In my experience those who are quickest to malign and accuse others despite a lack of substantive evidence are most often reflecting their own personal deficiencies. Thoughtful people wait for facts. Others jump at the chance to malign and demonize. "lies" What corruption? What lies? Finally, if you are unwilling to engage in respectful discussion, meaning if you refuse to answer questions challenging your bold assertions, then you really ought to avoid participating. So I ask again, upon what evidence do you base your assertion that BP behaved incompetently? | ||
| Hex |
Oh the arrogance and pretense of off-shore drilling--incompetence in taming mother nature. Just like this one, remember:  Now, November. Call it a hunch. | ||
| Cowboy |
Again you are correct(Blake) I am just lazy and dont like to do re serch so blake would you be so kind as to find out the amound of oil that is produced on the gulf cost. and give us a estimate of $$$$$ impact it would have on the us econeny if we were to stop all production on wells in inland water and off shore.you are realy good at this sort of thing.(brag brag) remember a great deal of this crude comes in on tankers this would have to cease also. I realy like to put the load on your back you are so good at this. | ||
| Sifo |
I'm no expert on off shore drilling, but I'm confused by a few things. BO and others are blaming BP for the failure. This is obviously premature until the cause has been identified. That much is clear. I understand that the actual drilling was being done by Transocean under contract by BP. This could lay blame with either depending on many specifics. The failure of the BOP seems like a whole different animal though. As I understand it neither BP or Transocean designed or built the BOP. Also the BOP has to be tested periodically, and if it fails testing all other activity stops until corrected and testing is passed. If BP and Transocean have done all that is required and a third party BOP failed through no fault of their own, how does one blame either BP or Transocean? The whole blame thing is just political posturing at this point and demonizing BP because they are a big oil company. Why don't we blame the government agency that is in charge of verifying the testing of the BOP? If anyone wants to discuss corruption and lies that seems a likely place to start looking. | ||
| Hex |
The exact circumstances aren't likely to be known for months, though it's clear that pressurized natural gas was able to infiltrate upward, meaning the seal was imperfect. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_20 /b4178048176411_page_3.htm Great article, I'm not done reading, but would like to share. | ||
| Hex |
oh, here's the first page. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_20 /b4178048176411.htm | ||
| Aesquire |
You could get into the oil containment booms that were supposed to be ready for use, ordered ready in 1994, as a govt. failure....and while I'm at it, the failure to go metric after it became law in 1895, etc. etc. All B.S. The pointing of fingers without knowledge is the act of evil or foolish men. Glad that Hex agrees that the taming of Mother Nature is not a simple or easy thing. There may indeed have been a failure to follow all the rules, ( but we don't KNOW that yet ) but even if every "T" was crossed, and "i" dotted, Nature does what it will. The forces involved are immense. To think we can tame Nature is as silly as thinking that taxing us will change the weather. | ||
| Sifo |
I don't think this fits the normal can't tame mother nature scenario. That usually fits where nature just overwhelms what man has done to control it, such as the levies in NO during Katrina. As far as we know nature did nothing unusual to cause the oil blow out. Almost certainly it will be shown to be a chain of human/mechanical failures, not nature flexing it's muscle. That's not to say that it's wise to think we can tame mother nature. I just don't see this fitting that case. | ||
| Hex |
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/oil-creep.html  | ||
| Cowboy |
I just finished reading a report on the dome being lowerd over one of the leaks. I assume it has some type of a latch to atach itto the well head. as you may or may not know the well has ben tested to 2million lbs of pull. how ever the returns must be monatord very close to alow enough sea water to enter the collum comeing to the sur face to maintane a safe hadrosstaatic head. as the cross section area of this dome is so great if the rlief pipe is alowed to unload it could have a 4 to 5 million lb lift it could play all kinds of hell. The people doing this know this and will be extra careful.this is just to explain how crital this orp. isI pray all will be pulled of with a hitch. I wish all good luck. | ||
| Hex |
Don't take me wrong. I really do care about those who are in danger. I hope it works. | ||
| Cowboy |
I just got another report only 2 things happened with the well as they were having lost circulation problems they cemented with nitrogen base cement it is very light and had set a bridge plug so eather the cement job went to hell or the bridgeplug gave way. the explocion was when the motors in the motor room got a whif of gass and blew the side of the ship a way. it is a lot more compecated but this is a simple explanation | ||
| Road_thing |
Cowboy: I'm hearing pretty much the same thing from my contacts here in Houston. Time will tell.. rt | ||
| Cowboy |
One odd thing is they were having a party in the living quaters at the time this ocured---celebrating 7 yr's with out a loss time accident. | ||
| Hex |
"It appears to be going exactly as we hoped," BP spokesman Bill Salvin told The Associated Press on Friday afternoon, shortly after the four-story device hit the seafloor. "Still lots of challenges ahead, but this is very good progress." http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5 gIXWYBTpLtSayJtg41LKXpxSxVPAD9FI95881 | ||
| Hex |
| ||
| Hex |
| ||
| Glitch |
* In 1974 with 36.1% of oil from foreign sources, President Richard Nixon said, “At the end of this decade, in the year 1980, the United States will not be dependent on any other country for the energy we need.” * In 1975 with 36.1% of oil from foreign sources, President Gerald Ford said, “We must reduce oil imports by one million barrels per day by the end of this year and by two million barrels per day by the end of 1977.” * In 1979 with 40.5% of oil from foreign sources, President Jimmy Carter said, “Beginning this moment, this nation will never use more foreign oil than we did in 1977 – never.” * In 1981 with 43.6% of oil from foreign sources, President Ronald Reagan said, “While conservation is worthy in itself, the best answer is to try to make us independent of outside sources to the greatest extent possible for our energy.” * In 1992 with 47.2% of oil from foreign sources, President George Bush said, “When our administration developed our national energy strategy, three principles guided our policy: reducing our dependence on foreign oil…” * In 1995 with 49.8% of oil from foreign sources, President Bill Clinton said, “The nation’s growing reliance on imports of oil…threatens the nation’s security…[we] will continue efforts to…enhance domestic energy production.” * In 2006 with 65.5% of oil from foreign sources, President George W. Bush said, “Breakthroughs…will help us reach another great goal: to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025.” * In 2009 with 66.2% of oil from foreign sources, President Barack Obama said, “It will be the policy of my administration to reverse our dependence on foreign oil while building a new energy economy that will create millions of jobs.” Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/Money/The-Daily-Reckoning /2010/0430/A-history-of-false-starts-for-US-energy -independence | ||
| Glitch |
Obama biggest recipient of BP cash http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.ht ml The Interior Department exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis last year http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html?hpid=topnews |
