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.

 

Underwater oil rig blowout from 1977 shows how to properly fix it and contain oil.

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   
I am attaching images from a book printed in 1977 (Hvem Hva Hvor) covering all the news and innovations of the year. Here you will find the procedure for dealing with a blown out underwater oil rig which was developed to contain an oil spill in Norway in which a thousand tons of oil was leaked. If anyone wants these in higher resolution I will scan again and repost. Could Bp have adapted something similar for deeper underwater or used better steps for oil containment? I think so. But that's my opinion. I just came across this by accident thumbing through a book at home and figured it was worth posting cuz the diagrams are eerily similar to what we've been seeing now. *note: the entry starts on the 2nd page of first image.





[edit on 10-7-2010 by eyeofthetiger]




posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   
I don't think that these techniques were meant to be used 5000 ft below sea level.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
I understand deepwater horizon is deeper thus the name but I personally believe they could have capped/contained it like that with a pipe going out- yes we have to take into account the undersea pressure and the fact it would have to be done with machinery, not to mention the materials, none the less. Its 2010, we made two types of atom bombs, a particle smasher, space shuttles, we even had a probe land on mars...which we operated from earth.
This is evidence blow outs from undersea oil wells have happened before in lesser depths, why didnt they have a strategy in case of an emergency? Seems pretty irresponsible, like making the Titanic without enough life rafts. But at least the titanic 's excuse was cuz it didn't look pretty. Whats BPs excuse for no worst case emergency plan?

A little off topic but Ive heard people saying that no-one knows what chemicals could be produced from the reaction between the dispersant and the oil
...are you kidding me??? This was made with the intention of being used on oil, how could they not know the chemical reaction it produces with elements found in oil?
No-one does safety tests on anything? We just make things to do stuff and dont think of the next step in progression?

If you make a chemical to be used on oil you should know how it will interact with oil and the chemical processes, dont tell me noone knows this, cuz I dont believe that for a minute, and I also dont believe they simply could not have done this because of the depth. The army can make ice that doesnt melt. We're sitting on computers and you're telling me they couldnt have done something like this?




[edit on 11-7-2010 by eyeofthetiger]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   
That's the very first thing they tried.

Read the links on May 7th and 8th referring to the containment box.

Story roundup of the Gulf of Mexico oil rig explosion and spill



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
That's the very first thing they tried.

Read the links on May 7th and 8th referring to the containment box.

Story roundup of the Gulf of Mexico oil rig explosion and spill


Can you (or anyone) provide any pictures of diagrams of this? Forgive me for my ignorance but I didnt hear about this (Im not living in the United States and sometimes Im late to get news) and im interested in how this failed to work.

edit never mind, I just read some of it.. meh, seems like they should have commissioned scientist to study the blueprint of the operation to detect potential risks before building it or getting the go ahead.

[edit on 11-7-2010 by eyeofthetiger]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyeofthetiger
Can you (or anyone) provide any pictures of diagrams of this? Forgive me for my ignorance but I didnt hear about this (Im not living in the United States and sometimes Im late to get news) and im interested in how this failed to work.

edit never mind, I just read some of it.. meh, seems like they should have commissioned scientist to study the blueprint of the operation to detect potential risks before building it or getting the go ahead.

[edit on 11-7-2010 by eyeofthetiger]


Check the video here.

BP: Crews dealt setback in placing containment dome at oil spill site



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   
look on the BP website they have had pictures of it from when it was first being constructed to the finished product.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   
I wonder why they don't unbolt the flange, remove it, then bolt on a ball valve with the same size flange and shut the ball valve?



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:40 AM
link   
reply to post by sysop317
 


OK. Here's your task, and it'll be a lot easier for you, since you can use your hands and eyes, and water is a lot less viscous than oil.

Get a garden water hose with an open end, connect it to the spigot, turn on the water fully, then try to screw on an attachment to the end.

Now think of doing that 1 mile under water with remotely controlled robots with minimal dexterity and range of motion, on a pipe with pressurized oil and gas spewing out.

Seems easy, doesn't it?



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join