BP Official Admits to Damage Beneath the Sea Floor

page: 5
17
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   
There ISN'T even a need for nukes!

It's only a 5 ft diameter hole straight all the way down thousands of feet. Conventional explosives to blow layer by layer of the impervious bedrock for a few meters beyond the semi-porus seabed would do the job right and seal the hole.




posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by PayMeh
You guys are missing what this means. The Diamond rig is leaking too. The admittance of this means worst case scenario has happened - the oil pocket depressurized and the atmospheric pressure of the water on the earths mantle has cracked the layer of sea bed above the oil reserve. It's collapsing under the weight of the water since they weren't able to pump sea water into the reserve to maintain the pressure equilibrium.


Their is no huge pond under the sea floor filled with just oil, Its sand and oil. A nuke would fuse it all and stop the whole leak and thats what they must do. Its safer than an underground test that we have done many times. It would be underground that is under a mile of water.

NUKE IT OBAMA!!!



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by PayMeh
You guys are missing what this means. The Diamond rig is leaking too. The admittance of this means worst case scenario has happened - the oil pocket depressurized and the atmospheric pressure of the water on the earths mantle has cracked the layer of sea bed above the oil reserve. It's collapsing under the weight of the water since they weren't able to pump sea water into the reserve to maintain the pressure equilibrium.

I believe you are correct. This explains the additional leak points where there are no wells. The seabed is subsiding, like a sink hole, only instead of a void beneath, there is an effectively unlimited volume of oil.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
There are differences of intellectual capabilities within ATS, as such differences in opinions which offers lively debates.

Nuking the seabed is certainly not an option unless there is a need, a guarantee of success, and the approval of all affected by the sea to live with a radioactive ocean that is subjected to tides and currents which ultimately will flow around the world and affect everyone at latter stages.

Nuking the seabed is clearly an option the bastard BP would want, for it will become the host nation's fault if anything happens. It would gladly wash its hands off, remove its expensive containment vessals and crew away, and saved its bottom line.

Our ocean waters are not just salt water, but consists of several different elements, some of which are nutrients to the sustenance of ecology of life there. Gold, methane, oil, etc are some of those elements. There are quantities but which are not in the league of the damaging oil spill.

The seafloor is not about to collapse, nor will it collapse thousands of feet into the oil cavities under different strata of rocks, unless one causes several nuke explosions over the same area, or an earthquake that will open up the fissure directly on the oil cavity. But the gulf region is not laying on a tectonic plate, so earthquakes of that happening is minimal.

Analyse and rationalyze your fears, and it will only lead you back to the BP being responsible for the horrifying oil spill. Right now, its budget overruns with the cost of containing the spill is close to zero, and may be using profits from other sources to help.

It's shareholders are dismayed, and other partners are shivering with fear at their loss in potential revenues. BP has enough funds to contain the oil spill over time and let Gaia heal its ecological balance, pay out every single individual for its mistake, but it would mean having to sell off some of its assets, and that is what no member of its executive and non-executive board will want.

It had attempted to blame its contractors, use nationalism, hide information, propagandise irrational fear mongering of sea floor collapsing and probably would even sell their own mothers if it could save their own necks and bottomline.

To nuke the seabed would be playing into BP's hand. Think twice and thrice before you would even allow such a thought.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by warpcrafter
Oil is already leaking out through fissures where no hole was drilled. I am not very optimistic about any of their plans to fix this mess anymore.


Yeah, I've heard this through the Navy grapevine as well, before the top kill was tried there were a number of breakthrough leaks nearby from cracks in the well casing, and when they tried the "top kill" it just made the oil come out elsewhere worse, which is why it was stopped.

I bet you a cold beer that over the next few weeks you'll start hearing the news that the bore is totally fubared and there may not be a good way to stop it, they'll try to bore an intersecting well below the break but they're not sanguine about the results.

I'm hoping the story is just scuttlebutt.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

Nuking the seabed is clearly an option the bastard BP would want, for it will become the host nation's fault if anything happens. It would gladly wash its hands off, remove its expensive containment vessals and crew away, and saved its bottom line.


Ugh. I'm really hoping that this never happens. First, I'm not sure that the seabed in the Gulf really lends itself to this technique.

Second, an underwater oceanic detonation was one of those things we were always being told about as a near-apocalyptic technique for destroying an enemy's ports. Instead of popping off a number of small nukes over each port in an airburst, you set a mid-sized one off several hundred feet subsurface out in the ocean. Exactly where and how deep depends on the coastal profile.

When it goes off, you get a radioactive wall of death a hundred feet high that washes over the ports. They're contaminated for months with radioactive iodine, longer with some other elements. It would not be good, even if they try to minimize instead of optimizing the damage.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   
MOD NOTE:
Unsourced, improperly attributed, very large Sorcha Faal "news" quote removed

[edit on 14-6-2010 by burdman30ott6]



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to


It doesnt say how the damage happened in the first place. You know how does a well bore or underground parts become damaged? They just say it was damaged. But thanks.


I've been searching for what the cause could have been, yet unable to find a documented source.

My idea is that when the Horizon sank, it bent the well head and pipe below the surface and this is the underlying cause of the disaster.




sheeze... somebody is out of the loop....
the damage to the well casing came from the sudden (estimated) 12,000 PSI blast to the well column & the BOP the day the rig exploded !

A huge pocket/reservoir of toxic gasses and maiden oil blasted the whole pipeline in all the places where the drillers cut corners by not 'cementing' the pipe joints to the accepted standard... & not having a redundant set of BOPs in line to back up one another...
the whole operation could be characterized as working on-a-wing-and-a-prayer, with their fingers-crossed....


it is theorized that the apparent fissures in the surrounding seabed is the outflow from the damaged well-casings joints that blew...and is injecting most of the gusher into the different layers of strata where the well casing got blown out.
The complete reservoir 'dome' is not likely collapsing (yet)
it just appears so... from the other releases of oil Plumes that are some distance from the well head (that's where most of the velocity of oil is going... into some deeper strata below the well head & BOP)

The BP robo vehicles cameras only show a somewhat benign oil release instead of a jet thrust type of oil release... one would expect from the visual reports of the ammount of oil slicks & plumes in the GOM.


i found no contribution to the communities knowledge in this thred... only the need to educate



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by St Udio
 



i found no contribution to the communities knowledge in this thred... only the need to educate


For a person that is teaching us so much, spell checking sure isn't your knack!






posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Don't know if you guys have read THIS one yet. Enjoy.





new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join