It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FuGGer
Originally posted by essanance
The truth is BP has lied to us from the moment it happened ,they new it was gonna be bad .Now its damage control for the Federal Government and BP and so sad for all the people of the gulf who will suffer for generations .
[edit on 12-6-2010 by essanance]
when will the federal govt take charge and say enough is enough. bp has proven to be unreliable and incompetent.
this is not a problem mankind is unable to solve. its just that the wrong people are managing and executing it.
tools/equipment? dont tell me the fed govt is unable to seize, force bp to supply whatever is needed to get the job done? lack of tools/equipment should not be an excuse for the feds to not take charge.
Originally posted by GhostR1der
...A nuclear device will create an air bubble that will cause a tsunami, but a tsunami is better than no seafood for 30 years!
However a scalar device would be much better
On one of the sites with a water depth of 1,067 m (3,500 ft), core samples revealed the existence of salt domes.
Oil companies received samples after an agreement to publish their analysis. The potential of oil beneath deep ocean salt domes remains an important avenue for commercial development today.
A batholith (from Greek bathos, depth + lithos, rock) is a large emplacement of igneous intrusive (also called plutonic) rock that forms from cooled magma deep in the earth's crust.
Batholiths are almost always made mostly of felsic or intermediate rock-types, such as granite, quartz monzonite, or diorite (see also granite dome).
Although they may appear uniform, batholiths are in fact structures with complex histories and compositions.
They are composed of multiple masses, or plutons, bodies of igneous rock of irregular dimensions (typically at least several kilometers) that can be distinguished from adjacent igneous rock by some combination of criteria including age, composition, texture, or mappable structures.
Individual plutons are crystallized from magma that traveled toward the surface from a zone of partial melting near the base of the Earth's crust.
Originally posted by SpectrumX
This is indeed a doomsday scenario and I fear that it is all too true. If so, even a nuclear device would probably just make the situation worse.
Gayl suggests using the GBU-43 MOAB — known as the “Massive Ordinance Air Burst” or “Mother of All Bombs” — which has been "proven, safe and ‘green", according to Gayl. If a MOAB is unavailable, Gayl says a Vietnam-era Daisy Cutter would also do quite handsomely.
The USMC genius suggests:
Either one … can be enclosed in a simple pressure shell, that is augmented with several tons of liquid oxygen canisters, and lowered to just a few meters above the leaking well head. An oxygen-enhanced MOAB or Daisy Cutter detonated at a water depth of 5,000 feet will indeed have an interesting effect on all the well-related plumbing and equipment that is above, at, and slightly below the sea floor…. The exploding MOAB or Daisy Cutter would have an incredible implosive-sealing effect on oil plumbing within the immediate vicinity of the detonation.
Smith originally brought on Christopher Brownfield to discuss the potential for using a nuclear bomb to stop the leak, and Brownfield said that yes, it was decided a viable way to stop it -- it has been done four times previously. But he gave many compelling reasons NOT to use a nuclear warhead for the job -- the biggest one being that the same job could be accomplished with conventional explosives.
So why aren't we talking about doing this? Well, Brownfield explained that too:
Brownfield: If we demolish the well using explosives, the investment's gone. They lose hundreds of millions of dollars, from the drilling of the well, plus no lawmaker in his right mind would allow BP to drill again in that same spot. So basically, it's an all-or-nothing thing with BP: They either keep the well alive, or they lose their whole investment and all the oil that they could potentially get from that well.
As Brownfield explains, "We need to seal this thing off." Desperately. But why hasn't anyone been bringing a complete shutdown of the well to the table?
Brownfield: Yes, I think -- stopping the spill immediately. And the reason why we haven't seen that option is because, frankly, BP is still at the helm. I think President Obama needs to take charge of this, bring all the assets of our military to bear, bring the U.S. Army Corps of engineers, bring the U.S. Navy, and bring in all the private-sector organizations that have the equipment for deep-sea operations to make this happen. Let's explode this, collapse the well, and put an end to it.
The Soviets repeated the trick four times between 1966 and 1979, using payloads as large as 60 kilotons to choke hydrocarbon leaks. Now, as the Obama administration stares into the abyss of the Deepwater Horizon spill, and a slicker of sweet, medium crude blankets the Gulf of Mexico, slouching its way toward American beaches and wetlands, Russia’s newspaper of record is calling on the president to consider this literal “nuclear option.”
Originally posted by Faiol
if this is true, well my friends
this is the end of the US as we know it
but, will it be a good or a bad thing for the world?
I dont think this was a COMPLETE accident ... in my opinion they may knew it was a risk or just a matter of time before everything got #ed, but they probably approved that the US needed another 911, but bigger ...