It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ATS: Do you have a Novel Solution to the Gulf Oil Spill?

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Common Good
reply to post by Silcone Synapse
 


Thats what Im trying to figure out.
Although, I dont think it would take as much pressure as it would if we werejust trying to "plug" the hole itself.
It takes a lot of pressure off by using thecone. Once the oil comes out of the ground and into the water, the pressure is not as much as if you tried to plug it from the inside.
Does that make sense?



Yeah,I see what you mean,although during the time you are trying to seat the cone on the seabed,the cone will be getting thrown all over the place by the jet,making it darned tricky to secure.

Use the bucket analogy I mentioned(high presure jet through the bottom,fill with water,turn on jet)

Then using a funnel connected to a hose,try to manually lower the funnel over the jet.

Kind of reminds me of that old saying "pissing in the wind."

You need higher pressures of downforce in order to beat the upforce of the oil jet.

I do not know what is cabable of generating such pressures,except maybe a rocket or 10 connected to your cone.

No good trying to use rockets under water though sadly.




posted on May, 3 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Then hook up a thousand anchors (or a million whatever) to the sides of the "cone" thing you are talking about.

Won't that weigh it down good enough?



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Rocks. Seriously? ROCKS?

The well will be capped.

An explosive in a pressured petroleum resevoir. Well, if you were needing to SET THE DAMN THING ON FIRE that might be interesting.

And yes, you can set a downhole borehole on fire.

And you have almost no chance that it would seal the borehole.

The real problem isn't that it is pouring oil now. That will be fixed in short order.

The problem is the petroleum already in the water. How to contain it, how to sop it up, or break it down. Fast.

Rocks. Oy.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Boys, the borehole you are planning to put rocks on top of is a hole about maybe 5" wide or so.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   
There are only 4 rigs left that can drill that deep in the world. Only one is in the gulf, “if” they started today it would take months just to try to slow the flow.
And you don’t drop anchor in a MILE+ deep water, so I’m sorry a rock or rocks will just waste resources.
I don’t think anyone can really conceive how bad this will get.
If you gave anyone a trillion dollars today, there is no real technology to stop this in time, money doesn’t even matter.
A cone eventually will probably be used to help, but it is no fix. And there is no cone even built yet….



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Seriously, I heard the 5 foot diameter figure thrown around.


5 inches... sheesh. Way easier.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 
Red Adair used explosives to put out petroleum well fires. Ones that were not under the ocean and had an open supply of atmospheric oxygen to allow combustion to occur.
en.wikipedia.org...

Drilling companies are now injecting propane mixed with air into boreholes of natural gas wells and igniting the mixture to explosively fracture the rock to allow more natural gas to be removed.



[edit on 3-5-2010 by butcherguy]



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Aeons
 
Red Adair used explosives to put out petroleum well fires. Ones the were not under the ocean and had an open supply of atmospheric oxygen to allow combustion to occur.
en.wikipedia.org...

Drilling companies are now injecting propane mixed with air into boreholes of natural gas wells and igniting the mixture to explosively fracture the rock to allow more natural gas to be removed.



That's right. Its good for frac-ing.

Frac-ing with water pressure to hold the fracs open is the opposite effect of what you would want.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse

Originally posted by Common Good
reply to post by Silcone Synapse
 


Thats what Im trying to figure out.
Although, I dont think it would take as much pressure as it would if we werejust trying to "plug" the hole itself.
It takes a lot of pressure off by using thecone. Once the oil comes out of the ground and into the water, the pressure is not as much as if you tried to plug it from the inside.
Does that make sense?



Yeah,I see what you mean,although during the time you are trying to seat the cone on the seabed,the cone will be getting thrown all over the place by the jet,making it darned tricky to secure.

Use the bucket analogy I mentioned(high presure jet through the bottom,fill with water,turn on jet)

Then using a funnel connected to a hose,try to manually lower the funnel over the jet.

Kind of reminds me of that old saying "pissing in the wind."

You need higher pressures of downforce in order to beat the upforce of the oil jet.

I do not know what is cabable of generating such pressures,except maybe a rocket or 10 connected to your cone.

No good trying to use rockets under water though sadly.


Thats the biggest problem right there, the pressure.

And I dont think sending explosves down there to 'fuse' it would be a wise either, what if that does nothing except make the hole bigger?
That is a lot of pressure comming from underneath, so I do not think that the whole explosive theory would work anyways because of the rate the oil is comming out, it simply wouldnt have enough time to "fuse" the ground underneath.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 
I was referring to your statement that it would be stupid to use explosives a mile underwater, that you might start a fire!

I dare you to ignite the 5" spewing borehole, a mile underwater.

Crude oil, not so volatile as many would think.

Where is the oxygen going to come from to support your blaze?

[edit on 3-5-2010 by butcherguy]



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Steve8511

If you gave anyone a trillion dollars today, there is no real technology to stop this in time, money doesn’t even matter.



This is the main problem-no one has developed the tech to deal with this kind of event.

Well someone had better bloody hurry up,or there will be no need to fix the hole after a certain point,because the world will be screwed,the gulf stream will see to that.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by elusive1
reply to post by Aeons
 


Seriously, I heard the 5 foot diameter figure thrown around.


5 inches... sheesh. Way easier.


Even if the original drill is wider, the holes tend to get smaller throughout drilling (at least on land) for deep wells. Then they are cased and cemented with multiple casing sizes with cement inbetween the casing.

the final hole is likely to be 5 inches maybe a foot in diameter. I doubt that it is a foot in diameter at the end. I'm looking at tubular specs right now for ocean drilling.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Okay, one more...and I'll go away....

SHAM-WOW. I think about 500,000 of them will do the job.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Remember,the cementing could have been the cause of the accident-reports are sayingf the cement could have been washed away by the pressure by now,making the hole wider than intended.

It was Halliburton who did the cementing BTW...

Thanks Dick,at least you make a fat check whatever happens


Speaking of which-maybe we could use Cheney as the weighty plug to fill the hole?
Seen as he claims to love serving his country an all...(sarc,IMO etc)



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Aeons
 
I was referring to your statement that it would be stupid to use explosives a mile underwater, that you might start a fire!

I dare you to ignite the 5" spewing borehole, a mile underwater.

Crude oil, not so volatile as many would think.

Where is the oxygen going to come from to support your blaze?

[edit on 3-5-2010 by butcherguy]


www.theoildrum.com...



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
I think that they missed their opportunity to set the slick on fire. Its too widespread now.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   
We could always get a hold of Tampax.
See if they cant make us a supersized tampon.

Sorry, I heard my neighbor bitchin at herhusband as he was leaving for work, and that was the first thing that popped in my ..



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   
* Fire up HAARP and create a hurricane to suck up all the oil. Then, re-direct it to Venezuela or Cuba so they can be Katrina'd.

They'd need FEMA for that.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
My thoughts; drill an angled shaft into the main shaft and pump it full of liquid nitrogen. Only a temporary plug but should give them enough time for a more permanent solution.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Aeons
 
I was referring to your statement that it would be stupid to use explosives a mile underwater, that you might start a fire!

I dare you to ignite the 5" spewing borehole, a mile underwater.

Crude oil, not so volatile as many would think.

Where is the oxygen going to come from to support your blaze?

[edit on 3-5-2010 by butcherguy]


www.theoildrum.com...

From your source that you provided.....

"Which can can be sustained and controlled by the addition of air."

Which means..... You have to pump air down there to support combustion.

I don't believe anyone said anything about pumping air to the ocean floor to get your accidental fire going.

[edit on 3-5-2010 by butcherguy]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join