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.

 

**Scarey Stuff Here** The Deepwater Horizon-How Deep Was It Drilling ?

page: 5
115
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by babybunnies
 


"fossil fuels" are not made of decayed dinosaur remains:


Generally speaking, oil and gas are formed from the organic remains of marine organisms which become entrained within sea-floor sediments. Coal, by contrast, is typically formed in non-marine settings from the remains of land vegetation.


source




posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by shauny

very cool. thanks for the thought-provoking visual that WASN'T
trying to sell me something.

i dream of the day we lay siege on the bastard elite, and smoke
them out of their million-dollar ratholes, unkempt, wearing only
saggy whitey tighty underware, hands ziptied behind their back,
dazed, squinting for the cameras.

imagine they can only go on for so long w/out some kind of
justice being served



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rigel Kent

Originally posted by Astroved
reply to post by shauny
 


Nevermind that of the 50,000 offshore oil rigs


Where did you get that figure from?
I was under the impression that there are less than 1000 jack-ups and semi-subs. please post your source

FROM WIKI.....

As of June, 2010, there were over 620 mobile offshore drilling rigs (Jackups, semisubs, drillships, barges) available for service in the competitive rig fleet. [5]

Source: Worldwide Offshore Rig Utilization

PEACE,
RK


Hi Rigel Kent, good question. I should have said offshore oil wells drilled, NOT current oil rigs. I've been looking for confirmation of the 50,000 offshore wells and have found round-about confirmation that this figure is NOT crazy. See this link on UK offshore drilling (almost 11,000 offshore wells):

www.oilandgasuk.co.uk...

And more on offshore drilling:

www.accessscience.com...

Underwater oil drilling has been going on since 1891 (Ohio), the first offshore rig in 1896 (California).

My point being that they have been offshore drilling for over a hundred years and nothing of this magnitude has happened before.

Why did ALL fail-safes fail on Deep Water Horizon?

The world's deepest platform is the Perdido in the Gulf (owned by Royal Dutch Shell) at 7,997 feet (2,438 meters) below sea level.

Obama has just promised Petrobras $2 Billion US taxpayers dollars to do their Ultra Deep Water drilling at 14,022 feet below sea level. Why?

The environmentalists have forced US oil companies to drill in riskier, deeper water, instead of drilling in shallower, safer waters or on land. This did NOT need to happen.

I hate the oil companies too, they have killed & buried real alternatives to oil. But this is NOT the time to shut down 33 US rigs with a National Academy of Engineering review that was falsified by Salazar.

Oh, and to answer your question more directly: this 50,000 offshore oil wells figure came from a man with a full-time research staff. However, I do NOT belong to his service, so I cannot research his archives. The figure was announced on a recent June TV show: Glenn Beck.

Astroved



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by SneakAPeek
reply to post by shauny
 


The oil reservoir BP tapped is 26,000FT BSL. Not 15,000.


You are wrong, The schematic which Shauny posted is correct. If you are going to correct someone, please post your source. the following info is from the Transocean drilling plan which I have a copy...

the drilling depth at the Macondo well had reached a total depth of 18,360 feet, with the previous casing shoe at 17,168 feet. The annulus or drill hole was eight and a half inches in diameter, with the Rotary Kelly Bushing (RKB) to Mud line 5,067 feet. The open hole had been logged over a four-day period.

PEACE,
RK



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Astroved
 


Astroved,
when you stated "offshore rigs" I assumed you were talking about offshore drilling rigs of which I am pretty sure there are less than 1000 worldwide.

Production facilities such as platforms, FSO's and FPSO's are not drilling rigs and should not be confused with such. They are specifically for production and are put in place long after the drilling rig has left the location. These installations probably do run into the 10's of 1000's.

I have no idea how many offshore wells have been drilled but would not argue with your figure of 50 000.
thanks for coming back to clarify your original comments, they make more sense to me now.

PEACE,
RK



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by speculativeoptimist
 


they are good grafts



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astroved

Originally posted by Rigel Kent

Originally posted by Astroved
reply to post by shauny
 


Nevermind that of the 50,000 offshore oil rigs


Where did you get that figure from?
I was under the impression that there are less than 1000 jack-ups and semi-subs. please post your source

FROM WIKI.....

As of June, 2010, there were over 620 mobile offshore drilling rigs (Jackups, semisubs, drillships, barges) available for service in the competitive rig fleet. [5]

Source: Worldwide Offshore Rig Utilization

PEACE,
RK


Hi Rigel Kent, good question. I should have said offshore oil wells drilled, NOT current oil rigs. I've been looking for confirmation of the 50,000 offshore wells and have found round-about confirmation that this figure is NOT crazy. See this link on UK offshore drilling (almost 11,000 offshore wells):

www.oilandgasuk.co.uk...

And more on offshore drilling:

www.accessscience.com...

Underwater oil drilling has been going on since 1891 (Ohio), the first offshore rig in 1896 (California).

My point being that they have been offshore drilling for over a hundred years and nothing of this magnitude has happened before.

Why did ALL fail-safes fail on Deep Water Horizon?

The world's deepest platform is the Perdido in the Gulf (owned by Royal Dutch Shell) at 7,997 feet (2,438 meters) below sea level.

Obama has just promised Petrobras $2 Billion US taxpayers dollars to do their Ultra Deep Water drilling at 14,022 feet below sea level. Why?

The environmentalists have forced US oil companies to drill in riskier, deeper water, instead of drilling in shallower, safer waters or on land. This did NOT need to happen.

I hate the oil companies too, they have killed & buried real alternatives to oil. But this is NOT the time to shut down 33 US rigs with a National Academy of Engineering review that was falsified by Salazar.

Oh, and to answer your question more directly: this 50,000 offshore oil wells figure came from a man with a full-time research staff. However, I do NOT belong to his service, so I cannot research his archives. The figure was announced on a recent June TV show: Glenn Beck.

Astroved
where is obama going to get that two billion from since the country is broke? i guess china will let him have it.




posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rigel Kent
reply to post by Astroved
 


Astroved,
when you stated "offshore rigs" I assumed you were talking about offshore drilling rigs of which I am pretty sure there are less than 1000 worldwide.

Production facilities such as platforms, FSO's and FPSO's are not drilling rigs and should not be confused with such. They are specifically for production and are put in place long after the drilling rig has left the location. These installations probably do run into the 10's of 1000's.

I have no idea how many offshore wells have been drilled but would not argue with your figure of 50 000.
thanks for coming back to clarify your original comments, they make more sense to me now.

PEACE,
RK


Rigel Kent, this is just a reminder to me to double-check my info & to clarify my terms before posting. I'm learning a lot from the posts here. Thank you!

Astroved



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:34 AM
link   
S+F for for that excellent diagram.



[edit on 27-6-2010 by KillenfizzenHumboflorator]



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by KillenfizzenHumboflorator
 


Too bad it's wrong. Do your own research. The oil reservoir itself is still 15,000Ft from the oil well head itself where it is leaking, on the bottom of the sea floor. I gave a star to the OP for presenting a very good diagram. It would be better if you showed all the layers that are below the sea floor, including where the oil reservoir resides.



[edit on 27-6-2010 by SneakAPeek]



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


So what are you saying? That oil isn't the byproduct of dinosaurs and giant ferns decomposing under 20,000 feet of rock? Huh, interesting....what possibly could all that oil be doing down there? (just a lil bit o' sarcasm).

I also wonder what kind of biological life could be living in those deep pockets of oil trapped for millenia down there, and are now being exposed to humanity for better or worse...new plague anybody? We would be even more screwed...



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 02:22 AM
link   
Wow, Shauny!!! Amazing illustration! Good work.
It's very sobering to say the least. S+F on this one. Thanks!



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   
Some have opined in oil industry periodicals that BP has drilled into a huge pocket of methane. (Check "life after the oil crash.com") Apparently the pocket is 10' in height X 10-20 miles long. The ocean floor is giving way. When or if this bubble releases, it will sink everything in the Gulf. It will create a Tsunami 100-200' high which will travel at 600-700 mph. Utter devastation, tremendous loss of life will be the result.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Teabags

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
Yep too deep and we kept on drilling all in the name of greed.


I think its more of a case we kept on drilling because the computer you typed that on is not made out of wood....

Get that image of an oil baron greedily wringing his hands together as oil is pumped from the ground out of your head. Oil does more for society than fill the pockets of Earth-wrecking evil-doers.

A change of perspective could do some good.


Thanks for typing what I was thinking. I'm SO tired of reading people on here trying to put all the blame on BP, the big evil capitalists. EVERYONE on here is using a computer, made of petrol products. The VAST MAJORITY of us on here use cars, and buy products brought to us via plane train boat and automobile.

If we're going to blame BP's greed, let's point that finger back at ourselves as well. After all, if we didnt buy oil, thew would go drilling for it.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aaron_Justin
I do not really understand all of these, "oh, I get it now" responses to this thread. What has learning the depth of the well taught you that you didn't already know? Want to see exploratory drilling stop in deep water, then bug your congressmen and women to relax and let us drill more on land where its safer. I know, mean old oil people are gonna get ya while your sleeping sound in your bed, surrounded by products that were made possible with oil.


That is propaganda. They were drilling there because that is where the oil is, NOT because 'environmental regulations' pushed them out there.

mediamatters.org...




CLAIM: BP's deepwater drilling due to environmentalists, federal government "pushed us out there." Several Fox News figures, including Sarah Palin, Charles Krauthammer, Steve Doocy, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly, have claimed that, as Hannity put it, BP "should have been in ANWR and shallower waters, and environmentalists pushed us out there." Similarly, Fox News contributors Andrew Napolitano and Bill Kristol, and Fox guest and BigGovernment.com editor-in-chief Mike Flynn have blamed the federal government for, in Flynn's words, "ma[king] them drill in water that deep."

REALITY: Deep-water regions feature vast oil reserves that make such drilling potentially lucrative. According to the U.S. Department of the Interior's Minerals Management Service, the "best source of new domestic energy resources lies in the deep water." The deepwater region of the Gulf has also been identified as "probably the most promising area in United States-controlled territory."



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by stealthyaroura
I'm no Greene, but why is it in the USA you have cars that are
mostly 3 liters upwards and pickups and suvs that are like 5to
8 liters cubic capacity?

why the need for these thirsty uneconomical vehicles.
in the UK there may be the odd range rover v8 but then
its still only likely to be 4 liters cc if that.

and our cars start at 99 cc and the average is about 1.8cc
and they have all the power to do speeds well over 120 MPH

the US speed limit is 50 MPH in most states ain't it so why
chug all that gas just going 50 MPH?

and the price difference we in the UK pay around £1.20 per
liter and you pay what the same for 4 times the amount.

madness.

yes if i had the money i would love a porsche 3.6 liter turbo
maybe 25 miles to the gallon but that is still good economy compared to
the USA.most my cars have been 1000cc to 2000cc
and given the choice i would go for a 1700 turbo diesel 40 MPG.

can you tell me why the USA has this policy of huge engines
with poor fuel consumption yet it's cheap for you.


Well, for one, the US is about 40 times the size of the UK, and about half the population lives in rural areas that generally require. So obviously the comparison you are making is non-sensical.

Obviously, there are far more factors at play, the the subsidized lower price of gas is a major factor in keeping people driving.

But i tire of seeing people try and compare the US (a HUGE country) to tiny little european nations with wonderful public transit infrastructure.

Have you ever BEEN to the US?



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Freedom_Machine
 


I really dont get this perspective, either. Oh, so your car gets better gas mileage so you arent part of the problem? Please. Blaming the guy in the SUV while you drive a slightly smaller car is just divide-and-conquer. Our cars are a fraction of our oil consumption. the vats majority (after the military) is for transportation of food and consumer goods. Those arrive via plane, boat and truck, which use MASSIVE amounts of petrol to bring you just about everything you buy. Good for you for buying a more fuel-efficient car than a hummer, but unless you grow all your own food and buy NOTHING produced more than a hundred miles away, you are still equally culpable.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by justadood
 

No one is forbidding americans to own cars what we want is vehicles that are more economical, you don't need a 15mpg SUV driving for an office job NO?



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil

Originally posted by airspoon
It seems hard to believe that oil could be found that far below the sea floor, given what we know about the stuff. It just seems a little odd, that's all.

--airspoon



Just what I was thinking... how did all that biomass get down that far to eventually turn to oil? How deep is oil usually found???


I'm not going to weigh in on the 'is-it-a-fossil-fuel debate' but basic geology dictates that due to plate tectonics, things are often burried deep in the earth. You do get that LOTS of life dwells in the ocean, too, right?



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by jeffrybinladen
 


Right, but what I am saying is it doesnt matter if you drive a car that gets 1 mpg or 40 mpg, if you are still buying products that have been delivered with petrol engines. The VAST majority of our petrol useage is not personal transportation. It is the shipping of commercial goods, food, etc (after the military, of course).

The infighting between car drivers about whose car is 'better' is nonsense. In reality, they are more similar than different.

Oh, and I live on a farm and have owned one old truck in the past 15 years. i ride my bike and walk a lot, and I have no problem admitting I am just as much a part of the problem as the guy in the SUV at McDonald's.

It is my personal belief, based on my understanding of the data, that people are programmed to make these petty distinctions between themselves and their neighbors so they dont look to make SYSTEMIC changes that would actually make a REAL difference.


EDIT: maybe we should start a thread? I'd love to have this debate, but i dont have all the numbers in front of me.

What say ye? I'm open to being proven incorrect.


[edit on 27-6-2010 by justadood]



new topics

top topics



 
115
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join