View Full Version : Oil Rig Explosion...Cause?
What killed it is it never was practical, safe or economical. That is why the nuclear energy industry demanded and the Federal Government gave them Price–Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_Indemnit y_Act) That is why the February 11, 1985 edition of Forbes Magazine (not to be confused with Mother Jones or The Nation), declared US nuclear power "the largest managerial disaster in business history". And now with (and I am going from memory) $18B in federal loan subsidies and a proposed $36B more to be made available by the current administration the industry still can not find private money willing to take the risk, and that is after 60 years of the technology being developed.
Yes, and of course Forbes circa 1985 represents all the latest thinking on nuclear energy. In any case, even if you don't believe that it was ever safe or economical, you've ignored my original comment about "development of."
Investment in nuclear energy faces the same challenges as every other alternative energy source: a recession and competition against cheap fossil fuels. And then on top of that, add twenty five years of unfavorable energy policy.
peak oil theory has nothing to do with consumption of all hydrocarbons on earth, but the economics of cheap oil funding modern industrial society.
want to ban fossil fuels? get rid of your computer, your tv, cell, car, etc.
we find efficiency through regulation & economics. the latter is great, but the former is necessary. CA may go overboard half the time, but no one can argue with the results of CA's population growth over 30 years and the steep decline in consumption per capita during that period despite the proliferation of consumer electronics. regulation still shouldn't be the first step, and it certainly shouldn't be used to push through asinine policies that will never be sustainable.
aside: nuclear, breeder reactors, safe, cheap, reliable.
next issue you boomers completely failed to solve during your 30 years in charge of the world and need us millenial brats to fix for you finally? :gomer:
What is practical or economical about buying that black crack and shipping it here from overseas? The nation IS in a decline due to the criminal amount of money being sent to furriners every, single day for their oil. If we didn't have to buy it, we'd have the money for other things...like, oh I don't know, free health care, better education, the Sarah Palin channel..
Why don't we ban consumer electronics while we're at it?
I'm not advocating that we maintain a reliance on foreign oil. I'm saying that a suggestion like "ban oil" is either overly simplistic or just irrational.
Nope, the fact that we could all wind up glowing in the dark or growing extra limbs if things went pear-shaped up at the old built-by-the-lowest-bidder nukular power plant killed development..and a bloody good thing too, imho...
Fear-mongering is not a good basis for energy policy. Many countries around the world have embraced nuclear energy as an important part of their energy production. Obviously there are risks, but they are manageable. If nuclear energy hadn't been black balled for a quarter century it would be safer and cheaper than it is today.
next issue you boomers completely failed to solve during your 30 years in charge of the world and need us millenial brats to fix for you finally? :gomer:
None of them will care until Mom and Dad kick them out and they have no place to charge their iPads. :)
Except for not having much hope for a solution, I agree with you.
Up close and personal:
WYFYVNvgg-A
datachicane
05-12-10, 07:44 PM
Fear-mongering is not a good basis for energy policy. Many countries around the world have embraced nuclear energy as an important part of their energy production. Obviously there are risks, but they are manageable. If nuclear energy hadn't been black balled for a quarter century it would be safer and cheaper than it is today.
I'd respectfully disagree. Whether you find Forbes ca. 1985 convincing or not, the fact of the matter is that, worldwide, not a single nuclear power plant has ever produced a watt of power without massive and direct government subsidization. Even in the countries that have embraced it, it's public funds rather than private capital that's footing the bill, and not a single plant has come close to recouping the costs of construction and operation. Were the matter at hand one where folks didn't have such an emotional investment, that would be regarded as a clear indication of a failed business model.
If you like socialism, you'll love nuclear power.
oddlycalm
05-12-10, 08:43 PM
Jim Hightower- "The water won't clear up until we get the hogs out of the creek."
The practical issues with nuclear are the same as with oil; good ol' boy operating companies that are solely focused on cost and revenue and consequences be damned. Our local reactor didn't shut down because of environmentalists, cost or anything complicated, it was shut down early in it's service life due to shoddy construction and equipment like ladders being left behind in system critical pipes. :gomer: We got to pay for it all the same. :shakehead Three Mile Island was down to the same kind of incompetence and complacency.
By contrast after 50yrs of nuclear operations when was the last serious nuclear incident by the US Navy? Right, there hasn't been one because there are regulations and inspections and the regs are either met or there are real consequences. No hiding behind the corporate veil or pointing fingers at others when the wheels come off.
Rather than ideological positioning over for vs against offshore drilling, nuclear, etc. our best interests would be better served by making certain it's being done safely to a set of intelligent regs by people that know what they are doing and that there are serious consequences for those that willfully don't comply. Dragging people before congressional committees isn't a meaningful consequence. Negligence should mean job loss and falsification of test records and inspections should mean serious jail time. For companies it should mean loss of contracts, loss of drilling right, etc.
Small widely distributed gravel bed nukes are being advocated by practical environmentalists but between the emotional environmentalists and industry incompetence I don't hold out much hope.
oc
The practical issues with nuclear are the same as with oil; good ol' boy operating companies that are solely focused on cost and revenue and consequences be damned.
Make it mandatory in licensing a new plant that the suits all must live within a 5 mile radius of the plant.
Methanolandbrats
05-12-10, 09:26 PM
[QUOTE=nrc;275875]None of them will care until Mom and Dad kick them out and they have no place to charge their iPads. :)
QUOTE]:rofl: very, very true. Lazy ****ers don't know how to do anything because everything has been handed to them. A really bad day is when the internet goes down for five minutes or they run out of Red Bull.
Opposite Lock
05-12-10, 11:20 PM
Up close and personal:
WYFYVNvgg-A
^So does the white plume mean they appointed a new Undersea Pope?
:\
:gomer:
...
By contrast after 50yrs of nuclear operations when was the last serious nuclear incident by the US Navy? Right, there hasn't been one because there are regulations and inspections and the regs are either met or there are real consequences. No hiding behind the corporate veil or pointing fingers at others when the wheels come off.
Rather than ideological positioning over for vs against offshore drilling, nuclear, etc. our best interests would be better served by making certain it's being done safely to a set of intelligent regs by people that know what they are doing and that there are serious consequences for those that willfully don't comply. Dragging people before congressional committees isn't a meaningful consequence. Negligence should mean job loss and falsification of test records and inspections should mean serious jail time. For companies it should mean loss of contracts, loss of drilling right, etc.
Small widely distributed gravel bed nukes are being advocated by practical environmentalists but between the emotional environmentalists and industry incompetence I don't hold out much hope.
oc
Great post. :thumbup:
Sean Malone
05-13-10, 09:37 AM
...
By contrast after 50yrs of nuclear operations when was the last serious nuclear incident by the US Navy? Right, there hasn't been one because there are regulations and inspections and the regs are either met or there are real consequences. No hiding behind the corporate veil or pointing fingers at others when the wheels come off.
...
oc
But what if an accident did occur? Would the Navy point the finger at themselves, or the privately owned ship builders or corporate reactor designers? Point being, there would be plenty of finger pointing.
In the case of the Deepwater Horizon, it was owned by Transocean (headquartered in Switzerland), built by Hyundai in South Korea, leased to BP (a British company) and flown under a Majuran flag, drilling in a US sector of the Gulf... so who does the inspections? The US Coast Guard had issued 18 citations for supposed 'common' fires.
Wheel-Nut
05-13-10, 10:06 AM
This one went more off course than a Russian space capsule returning from the ISS.
BP officials suggested cautiously on Wednesday that they were closer to a potential solution that could halt the seemingly uncontrollable oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in weeks rather than months.
The officials said their plans, developed by engineers and scientists at BP’s command center in Houston, would involve work on and around a safety device called a blowout preventer, a massive machine designed to seal the well off in an emergency. The device failed to shut off the flow of oil from the well after an explosion three weeks ago.
The oil giant has “increasing confidence that we can intervene directly in the B.O.P. at acceptably low risk,” a BP spokesman, Andrew Gowers, said.
...Dispatched by President Obama to Houston, Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar met with top engineers and scientists at the BP command center for several hours.
“Things are looking up,” Mr. Chu told reporters after the meeting. “Progress is being made.”
He cautioned that the situation was still not under control and declined to detail the reasons for his optimism. But when pressed, he said, “I’m feeling more comfortable than I was a week ago.”
...A company official familiar with the efforts to contain the leak said equipment was being put in place on the seabed for three other intervention options that potentially could stop the spill within weeks.
He said a decision would be made, most likely by Sunday, on whether to proceed with any of them. Work would begin a few days later, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the subject.
He said 10 robotic submersibles were carrying out the preparations 5,000 feet under the gulf’s surface in the meantime.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/us/13spill.html?hp
Sean Malone
05-13-10, 01:08 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/us/13spill.html?hp
I expect a global sigh of relief when this thing gets capped.:thumbup:
From Reuters; 'So far, 87 sea turtles, 18 birds and six dolphins have been found dead, officials said. Scientists are testing to determine if the oil spill killed them, or if they died of other causes.'
I'd respectfully disagree. Whether you find Forbes ca. 1985 convincing or not, the fact of the matter is that, worldwide, not a single nuclear power plant has ever produced a watt of power without massive and direct government subsidization. Even in the countries that have embraced it, it's public funds rather than private capital that's footing the bill, and not a single plant has come close to recouping the costs of construction and operation.
Interesting, didn't know that.
Any links for that info? We got a bunch of nukes in Illinois.
datachicane
05-13-10, 02:14 PM
Interesting, didn't know that.
Any links for that info? We got a bunch of nukes in Illinois.
MIT produced an interesting report (The Future of Nuclear Power) in 2003, which, to be clear, is generally favorable to the construction of new plants. Chapter 5 deals with economics, and chart 5.1 is instructive.
The Future of Nuclear Power
AN INTERDISCIPLINARY MIT STUDY (http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/pdf/nuclearpower-full.pdf)
MIT updated the report in 2009:
2009 Update (http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/pdf/nuclearpower-update2009.pdf)
Good reading on the subject, sans hyperbole.
another factor is increased cost from certain regs that are excessive from the overreaction of the 60's. which isn't to say all or even most regs are overbearing...
datachicane
05-13-10, 02:28 PM
another factor is increased cost from certain regs that are excessive from the overreaction of the 60's. which isn't to say all or even most regs are overbearing...
That would be a possibility, although there was a noticeable lack of private investment in plants both prior to the '60s here in the States and in other countries up to the present, even in nations with favorable dispositions towards nuclear power (France, for one).
Economics are the key, and it's not rocket science- regulatory environments aside, because of the very high up-front capital costs it's considerably more expensive to produce a watt of electricity from a nuclear source than from gas, oil, or coal. Government subsidies can tilt that somewhat, except you still get to pay the bill in the end.
Worldwide, investors get that and vote with their wallets.
Interesting update on imported oil consumption - it went down!!!
Imported Oil Falls to 69.6% of U.S. Demand for Oil in 2009; First Time Since 2004 Below 70% (http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2010/05/dependence-on-foreign-oil-rises-to-7159.html#links)
Reasons: a) Domestic oil production increased in 2009 by 7.25%, or 131 million barrels, the first annual increase in domestic oil production since 1991, and b) U.S. demand for crude oil fell to the lowest level since 2000, due to the recession.
In other words, we're pumping more out of the Gulf. :gomer:
FWIW - I just noticed after I posted this that the current number cited above differs from the graphic I posted earlier in this thread. Both are from the same source.
:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: for TrueBrit.
If everyone could step back from the problem and look at it objectively, our options would seem quite simple. 1) Allow a free market and watch a perceived lack of scarcity cause the continued gluttony of a finite and critical resource. 2) Monkey with the market mechanism in order to increase perceived scarcity and cause people to be more ardent conservationists. Why monkey with the free market? Because there simply are not alternatives to many of the uses we have for oil. It is the foundation of our modern way of life. When it becomes sufficiently scarce, our society as we know it is over.
Unfortunately the "free market" has become a religion in this country. Free market economists do not harbor the unrealistic and ill-informed views that we hear spouted on television nightly by defenders of that faith. What we should do is to enact sensible regulation to begin to steer this Titanic away from the iceberg, and that is not going to be popular at the Tea Parties.
Golgafrinchams to the very end.
Sean Malone
05-13-10, 08:42 PM
:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: for TrueBrit.
If everyone could step back from the problem and look at it objectively, our options would seem quite simple. 1) Allow a free market and watch a perceived lack of scarcity cause the continued gluttony of a finite and critical resource. 2) Monkey with the market mechanism in order to increase perceived scarcity and cause people to be more ardent conservationists. Why monkey with the free market? Because there simply are not alternatives to many of the uses we have for oil. It is the foundation of our modern way of life. When it becomes sufficiently scarce, our society as we know it is over.
Unfortunately the "free market" has become a religion in this country. Free market economists do not harbor the unrealistic and ill-informed views that we hear spouted on television nightly by defenders of that faith. What we should do is to enact sensible regulation to begin to steer this Titanic away from the iceberg, and that is not going to be popular at the Tea Parties.
Golgafrinchams to the very end.
I sincerely hope you don't live in the same country that I do. I'm am honestly frightened by what you just wrote.:shakehead
I stopped reading after "Monkey". If I want to get indoctrinated with the theory of evolution and how socialist monkies will again rule the world, I'll go back to skool. ;)
*Warning* This thread is experiencing significant topic drift. Smackdown imminent.
RaceGrrl
05-13-10, 10:45 PM
Indeed. Get back on topic or this thread will be locked.
I sincerely hope you don't live in the same country that I do. I'm am honestly frightened by what you just wrote.:shakehead
Why, Sean? All I am advocating is sensible regulation to protect our national future instead of clinging to ideologies while everything goes to hell.
For example, reasonable restrictions on off shore drilling and better oversight of the companies who do it. Which is on topic, right? :gomer:
we already have reasonable offshore restrictions. the western gulf, ie: TX & LA is the only region we drill. nothing off AK, nothing off the west coast, nothing off FL which has something like 75% of the gas reserves in the western gulf, which in layman's terms is "metric f***ton," and nothing off the atlantic seaboard either.
But there is that whole "oversight of the companies who do it" thingie.
But environmental law experts say it's just a matter of time until the Justice Department steps in - if it hasn't already - to initiate a criminal inquiry and take punitive action.
"There is no question there'll be an enforcement action," said David M. Uhlmann, who headed the Justice Department's environmental crimes section for seven years during the Clinton and Bush administrations. "And, it's very likely that there will be at least some criminal charges brought."
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/05/12/1626680/federal-laws-point-to-criminal.html#ixzz0nuOsS300
(http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/05/12/1626680/federal-laws-point-to-criminal.html)
It is very early in this whole process, but this sounds like a Love Canal type incident that will significantly change how we do these things.
EDIT - here is the current situation map from the Unified Command:
Status Map 5/14 (http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/posted/2931/20100514_0600_Situation_Status_Map.550151.pdf)
Sean Malone
05-14-10, 09:53 AM
A researcher at Purdue University said BP's estimate on the oil leak was very low. Associate Professor Steve Wereley predicted that about 70,000 barrels of oil per day are gushing into the Gulf after analyzing video of the spill.
Wereley said he arrived at that number after spending two hours Thursday analyzing video of a spill using a technique called particle image velocimetry. He said there is a 20 percent margin of error, which means between 56,000 and 84,000 barrels could be leaking daily.
"You can't say with precision, but you can see there's definitely more coming out of that pipe than people thought. It's definitely not 5,000 barrels a day," he said.
link (http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/14/gulf.oil.spill/index.html?hpt=T2)
TrueBrit
05-14-10, 11:22 AM
link (http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/14/gulf.oil.spill/index.html?hpt=T2)
Bloody hell...
datachicane
05-14-10, 12:05 PM
Wow. :(
cameraman
05-14-10, 08:24 PM
A truly idiotic response to a bad situation.
Sean Malone
05-14-10, 08:25 PM
http://www.seizebp.org/
:rofl:
But there is that whole "oversight of the companies who do it" thingie.
there should be a proper degree of regulation in terms of operational standards, and enforcement and punitive measures for those who don't abide.
but to say that drilling needs "reasonable restrictions" implies that we dont have massive restrictions already in place, which is an outright fallacy.
further, if, as is suspected, the BP eng on-site instructed the rig hands to place the plug after removing all the mud then it's not a matter of regulation or restriction but an eng not following basic procedure. not to mention why the well was even open in the first place when Deepwater Horizon was supposed to be moving on to make room for a production rig. if that's the case, then it has absolutely 0 to do w/ the dangers of the technology and everything to do w/ negligence in executing a simple, basic process
Seems the "Beyond Petroleum" commercials took a vacation.
further, if, as is suspected, the BP eng on-site instructed the rig hands to place the plug after removing all the mud then it's not a matter of regulation or restriction but an eng not following basic procedure.
Did that guy make it off the rig?
Good scary image you got there. Just don't tell anyone the slick is only 2 micrometers thick. Fold that slick over in half a THOUSAND times and it is only 2 mm thick.
I've been to enough spills to know a little oil on the water goes a long way, but this sounds like a vastly different problem.
Giant Plumes of Oil Found Forming Under Gulf of Mexico (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/us/16oil.html?hp)
Scientists are finding enormous oil plumes in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, including one as large as 10 miles long, 3 miles wide and 300 feet thick in spots. The discovery is fresh evidence that the leak from the broken undersea well could be substantially worse than estimates that the government and BP have given.
Methanolandbrats
05-16-10, 01:05 PM
I've been to enough spills to know a little oil on the water goes a long way, but this sounds like a vastly different problem.
Giant Plumes of Oil Found Forming Under Gulf of Mexico (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/us/16oil.html?hp) If those things are slowly rising instead of sinking, it will be interesting when Hurricanes come along and stir them up. Nothing like a giant petro smoothie :eek:
BP could market this similar to a U-pick cherry orchard or black berry field.
Hand out 55 gallon drums and let the boaters in the Gulf scoop up their own supply of light sweet crude. People would come to help the environment and save money on gas. :p
Opposite Lock
05-16-10, 09:13 PM
If those things are slowly rising instead of sinking, it will be interesting when Hurricanes come along and stir them up. Nothing like a giant petro smoothie :eek:
:laugh::cry:
If those things are slowly rising instead of sinking, it will be interesting when Hurricanes come along and stir them up. Nothing like a giant petro smoothie :eek:
that's honestly the best chance for cleanup, with the supposition that there isn't landfall w/ the slick, just mixing...
BP has resisted entreaties from scientists that they be allowed to use sophisticated instruments at the ocean floor that would give a far more accurate picture of how much oil is really gushing from the well.
“The answer is no to that,” a BP spokesman, Tom Mueller, said on Saturday. “We’re not going to take any extra efforts now to calculate flow there at this point. It’s not relevant to the response effort, and it might even detract from the response effort.”
The undersea plumes may go a long way toward explaining the discrepancy between the flow estimates, suggesting that much of the oil emerging from the well could be lingering far below the sea surface.
Sean Malone
05-17-10, 10:11 AM
"We're throwing absolutely everything at this," BP Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles told CNN. The spill threatens to eclipse the 1989 Exxon Valdez accident off Alaska as the worst U.S. ecological disaster.
I can just see the suits screaming at everyone around them they they don't want to be associated with the U.S's worst ecological disaster. Third party verification of an increased flow amount would probably give heart attacks to dozens of BP brass.
TKGAngel
05-17-10, 11:17 AM
The gulf states are now asking BP to help fund tourism campaigns (http://adage.com/article?article_id=143897), fearing that the summer tourism season is in the toilet.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/images/gallery-rigfire1.jpg
The gulf states are now asking BP to help fund tourism campaigns, fearing that the summer tourism season is in the toilet.
They just need to look for a new tourist population. I am sure there are plenty of folks willing to pay to see this! ;)
Methanolandbrats
05-17-10, 11:26 AM
The gulf states are now asking BP to help fund tourism campaigns (http://adage.com/article?article_id=143897), fearing that the summer tourism season is in the toilet.
Interesting article http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0515/Gulf-spill-oil-driven-by-complex-ocean-currents-and-eddies
So anyone been to the coast? Are there little droplets washing up? Can ya smell it? Those are the kinds of events that will end tourism.
BZSetshot
05-17-10, 12:55 PM
- This
- Toyota recalls
- Tylenol recalls
- etc
All this is just further evidence that when a corporation says "Don't worry! It's all under control" it is exactly time to start worrying! :shakehead
oddlycalm
05-17-10, 01:26 PM
Third party verification of an increased flow amount would probably give heart attacks to dozens of BP brass.
Those are a couple of good ingredients for a live televised event. :gomer:
oc
where's Geraldo when you need him? :gomer:
in other news, Tony Hayward is a grad a t*** waffle... "we will pay out all legitimate claims, but sadly this is America so most will be frivolous"
between this and Texas City, Hayward can eat a hot plate of dicks.
good buddy at the other major service's joint says BP knew for fact they had a weak cement plug and the eng's moved on b/c its an exploration rig, time not drilling is no bonus money for them, which is SOP, and just happened to bite them in the ass this time
datachicane
05-17-10, 02:10 PM
in other news, Tony Hayward is a grad a t*** waffle... "we will pay out all legitimate claims, but sadly this is America so most will be frivolous"
Translation:
"we will pay out as little as possible and dump the rest into PR and lobbying, thankfully this is America where not a damn thing matters 'cept the Benjamins."
Methanolandbrats
05-17-10, 02:16 PM
where's Geraldo when you need him? :gomer:
That grandstanding, useless POS will show up a couple days after it's capped. He'll be bobbing around in a small boat talking about the danger and damage and....blah, blah, blah..... A big bolt of lightning on live TV would fix the problem for good.
Lyondell Citgo out past pasadena just blew up too
cameraman
05-17-10, 07:59 PM
At least a <1 hour fire at the Lyondell-Basell crude distillation plant in Houston isn't dumping more crude into the Gulf.
TRANSAM
05-18-10, 09:31 AM
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9021495&contentId=7040021
"Whatever we do, wherever we do it, we always strive to preserve and improve the surrounding environment,....."
datachicane
05-18-10, 02:07 PM
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9021495&contentId=7040021
"Whatever we do, wherever we do it, we always strive to preserve and improve the surrounding environment,....."
I swear, no matter where one looks, the greatest evil done by man comes in the form of a tactic masquerading as a conviction.
PR == industrialized propaganda, and it will be the end of us all.
Sean Malone
05-18-10, 02:25 PM
I swear, no matter where one looks, the greatest evil done by man comes in the form of a tactic masquerading as a conviction.
PR == industrialized propaganda, and it will be the end of us all.
I fear propaganda from any source for any reason.;)
datachicane
05-18-10, 02:30 PM
I fear propaganda from any source for any reason.;)
And you're right to do so.
Opposable thumbs < critical thinking.
datachicane
05-18-10, 02:33 PM
Also can anyone tell me where oil has reached shore?
:(
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/afp/20100518/capt.photo_1274151245790-3-0.jpg
Methanolandbrats
05-18-10, 02:48 PM
:(
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/afp/20100518/capt.photo_1274151245790-3-0.jpg
That looks just like the corner of my back yard where I dump my drain oil :gomer:
I fear propaganda from any source for any reason.;)
No reason to fear it unless it's not responded to for what it is. Most people don't realize that until it's results are in their face or on their beach. ;)
Don Quixote
05-18-10, 03:41 PM
That looks just like the corner of my back yard where I dump my drain oil :gomer:Dude, you have to set it on fire from time to time to keep it clean looking. :gomer:
spoken like a true cleveberger :gomer:
ChampcarShark
05-18-10, 04:29 PM
"Whatever we do, wherever we do it, we always strive to preserve and improve the surrounding environment,....." BP
:(
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/afp/20100518/capt.photo_1274151245790-3-0.jpg
Guess this is their meaning of improvement.
:flame::flame::flame:
I want to believe.
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/1424/fightclub0.jpg
Sean Malone
05-18-10, 04:45 PM
No reason to fear it unless it's not responded to for what it is. Most people don't realize that until it's results are in their face or on their beach. ;)
or taking over their government. :)
Methanolandbrats
05-18-10, 04:48 PM
Dude, you have to set it on fire from time to time to keep it clean looking. :gomer:
I ran out of old tires.
At least a <1 hour fire at the Lyondell-Basell crude distillation plant in Houston isn't dumping more crude into the Gulf.
when one gets a personal report of a cat cracker blowing within the past half hour, one tends to be concerned about possible casualties and affected families, and possible plant shut down further affecting livelihoods
cameraman
05-18-10, 05:20 PM
Mebbe so but your post made it sound like a second off shore platform had just blown up.
or taking over their government. :)
How true again. I personally have been waiting not so quietly for years hoping others might see that as well. Much truth in that follow the money, train of thought. Behind it is what molds and controls the divides. :)
PR == industrialized propaganda, and it will be the end of us all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVZo1Jjfshw
NSFW
extramundane
05-19-10, 09:07 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVZo1Jjfshw
NSFW
The world's a lesser place without Bill Hicks. :(
Michaelhatesfans
05-19-10, 02:02 PM
No reason to fear it unless it's not responded to for what it is.
That's an awful lot of work, though. So much easier to just forward it on as fact to your email distribution list.
Sean Malone
05-19-10, 02:03 PM
That's an awful lot of work, though. So much easier to just forward it on as fact to your email distribution list.
or spam FaceBook with Huffington Post links. :gomer:
Michaelhatesfans
05-19-10, 02:48 PM
or spam FaceBook with Huffington Post links. :gomer:
Oh, if you think only lefties do that, I could share some of the gems that my right wing mother in-law sends to me on a daily basis.;)
Anyway, not looking for a thread closure here - you know that both sides are just as guilty. That's why this country is doomed. Sensationalism and sound bites trump facts every time.
nothing to see here folks
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/05/disaster_unfolds_slowly_in_the.html
Sean Malone
05-19-10, 04:15 PM
nothing to see here folks
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/05/disaster_unfolds_slowly_in_the.html
Thanks for the link Ank. A sobering visual reminder that just because the media may have backed off just a bit...its still a disaster and in critical status.
From the comments of the linked page (I love Innerwebs 2.0 :));
I love life. I love my fellow men, I love my family, and I love my life. However, I would happily trade all human life in this planet, including me, my family, loved ones, all of us, for the complex, wonderful and miraculous biological network that is Earth. I think this is the only way: we have proven incapable of coexistence, I hope we all die, and soon, so the Earth can endure.
Boston Globe always has the best photo galleries. Always. Just amazing.
(I love Innerwebs 2.0 :));
you and me both.
oh wait, you weren't talking about the girls working in web 2.0?
TKGAngel
05-19-10, 06:32 PM
NASA (http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/oilspill/index.html) has some great photos as well.
And WTF is a "cat cracker?" Sounds like a medieval torture device.
devilmaster
05-19-10, 06:37 PM
NASA (http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/oilspill/index.html) has some great photos as well.
And WTF is a "cat cracker?" Sounds like a medieval torture device.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_catalytic_cracking
Opposite Lock
05-20-10, 12:00 AM
Good scary image you got there. Just don't tell anyone the slick is only 2 micrometers thick. Fold that slick over in half a THOUSAND times and it is only 2 mm thick.
Luckily the thing is 50 miles and and 5000 feet down. Plus a lot of that evaporates. This isn't the same type of thick stuff in the Exxon Valdez that was released in a narrow sea channel.
What's in coolhand's lunchbag today?
http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/oilspill_05_12/o09_23315377.jpg
Mmmm - you can almost taste the sea.
:gomer:
Eat up, bud. :thumbup:
cameraman
05-20-10, 12:50 AM
Great, it turns out that the tar balls that washed up on the Florida Keys are not from the Deepwater Horizon. The Coasties tested them and they are the wrong type of crude. Even better, they haven't any idea where they came from, some different spill of unknown provenance:rolleyes:
tar balls occur naturally, they dont have to come from a spill
Sean Malone
05-20-10, 09:05 AM
What's in coolhand's lunchbag today?
http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/oilspill_05_12/o09_23315377.jpg
Mmmm - you can almost taste the sea.
:gomer:
Eat up, bud. :thumbup:
"A blanket of oil about as thick as latex paint has invaded freshwater wetlands at Louisiana's southeastern tip for the first time, prompting a call for emergency action."
Gas Leak 3000 Times Worse Than Oil (http://sitfu.com/2010/05/gas-leak-3000-times-worse-than-oil/) :saywhat:
Wheel-Nut
05-20-10, 10:05 AM
Great, it turns out that the tar balls that washed up on the Florida Keys are not from the Deepwater Horizon. The Coasties tested them and they are the wrong type of crude. Even better, they haven't any idea where they came from, some different spill of unknown provenance:rolleyes:
Oil Seeps are a natural phenom in the gulf.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=36873
natural off of santa barbara/ventura too.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126809525
Steven Wereley, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Purdue University, analyzed videotape of the seafloor gusher using a technique called particle image velocimetry.
A computer program simply tracks particles and calculates how fast they are moving. Wereley put the BP video of the gusher into his computer. He made a few simple calculations and came up with an astonishing value for the rate of the oil spill: 70,000 barrels a day — much higher than the official estimate of 5,000 barrels a day.
The method is accurate to a degree of plus or minus 20 percent.
Given that uncertainty, the amount of material spewing from the pipe could range from 56,000 barrels to 84,000 barrels a day. It is important to note that it's not all oil. The short video BP released starts out with a shot of methane, but at the end it seems to be mostly oil...
Timothy Crone, an associate research scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, used another well-accepted method to calculate fluid flows. Crone arrived at a similar figure, but he said he'd like better video from BP before drawing a firm conclusion.
Eugene Chiang, a professor of astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley, also got a similar answer, using just pencil and paper.
Without even having a sense of scale from the BP video, he correctly deduced that the diameter of the pipe was about 20 inches. And though his calculation is less precise than Wereley's, it is in the same ballpark.
"I would peg it at around 20,000 to 100,000 barrels per day," he said.
Chiang called the current estimate of 5,000 barrels a day "almost certainly incorrect."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126975907
Wereley has now analyzed video of a second leak. At a hearing on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, he said that leak alone appears to be bigger than the official estimate of 5,000 barrels a day.
"What I get is 25,000 barrels a day coming out of that tiny hole — that's a 1.2-inch hole," he said, adding that it seemed "incomprehensible."
Wereley says the oil in this part of the pipe is under tremendous pressure. Add his current figure to last week's estimate of about 70,000 barrels a day, and his total approaches 100,000 barrels a day. And, there's another leak he has yet to analyze.
Tony Hayward should be curbstomped.
datachicane
05-20-10, 01:12 PM
Gas Leak 3000 Times Worse Than Oil (http://sitfu.com/2010/05/gas-leak-3000-times-worse-than-oil/) :saywhat:
In the NW we've seen a dead zone in action. If he's right, this will make some oily wildlife look like a picnic by comparison.
:(
Crony Capitalism in action, only not on Wall St.!
"This wasn't just sheen, we were seeing heavy oil out there," Jindal said. "This wasn't just tar balls. It shows you how quick the oil showed up."
When CBS News tried to reach the beach, covered in oil, a boat of BP contractors with two Coast Guard officers on board told us to turn around under threat of arrest. Coast Guard officials said they are looking into the incident.
The impact on wildlife is unclear. Government officials say that 162 sea turtles have died, about half a dozen bottle nose dolphins have died.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/18/national/main6496846.shtml
Does no one weep for BP's lost profits? All that lovely crude and gas going to waste, it's like watching a lumber yard go up in flames or a strip club shut down for a health violation in the kitchen. :cry:
:p
Updated Situation Map from Unified Command (http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/posted/2931/20100520_0600_Situation_Status_Map.556891.pdf)
Did anyone catch that NASA has reassigned a U-2 to the incident?
Tracking flights here (http://flightaware.com/live/flight/NASA809).
Wheel-Nut
05-20-10, 02:13 PM
Maybe one of you engineers can explain this.
BP is capturing 5000 bbl a day with the siphon but . . . . :laugh:
BP said today it is now siphoning 5,000 barrels of oil a day from a leak in the broken riser pipe lying a mile under the Gulf, yet more continues to flow out.
That indicates that the government and BP are low in their estimate that the flow is 5,000 barrels a day.
http://blogs.chron.com/newswatchenergy/archives/2010/05/bp_siphoning_50.html
Sean Malone
05-20-10, 02:22 PM
I read this morning that they are hoping to attempt the 'top kill' (the infamous golf ball method) this Sunday.
It just keeps getting better - another update from Unified Command:
EPA: BP must use less toxic dispersant (http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doc/2931/557167/)
Reality has met perception - they are really just making things up as they go. No apparent thought to "worst cases scenarios" OR their worst case scenario was wayyyy off. :rolleyes:
AND Live Spill Cam here (though the link was overloaded for me)
http://globalwarming.house.gov/spillcam
Kevin Costner to the rescue (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/05/19/2010-05-19_gulf_oil_spill_bp_oks_tests_of_kevin_costners_i nvention__device_to_clean_oil_fro.html)
I wonder how many of these he has?
datachicane
05-20-10, 04:57 PM
Kevin Costner to the rescue (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/05/19/2010-05-19_gulf_oil_spill_bp_oks_tests_of_kevin_costners_i nvention__device_to_clean_oil_fro.html)
I wonder how many of these he has?
Article sez 300.
Usual celeb-bashing aside, gotta give him credit for dumping his $$$ into something more meaningful than, say, Nicholas Cage has.
Article sez 300.
Yeah, its does! :gomer:
Don Quixote
05-20-10, 06:18 PM
Best case scenario:
Costner's gismos work.
Oil spill cleaned up.
Costner is compensated millions.
Uses money to make Waterworld 2.
Wait... Did you say "best case"?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.