It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


MSNBC: Relief wells suspended.

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 01:46 PM


For the really paranoid, consider this newest fact in relationship to this other thread.

Something does really seem to be up.

[edit on 14-7-2010 by loam]

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 01:50 PM
It seems pretty obvious to me. Relief wells are getting close to pipe. They're attempting to shut off a main outlet for this pressure. Doing so will put excess stress on the other outlets, so the already tremendous pressure may become too much for the new holes being drilled to properly contain. Considering the fact that fissures are showing up, I think this is wise. One wrong move and *poof* goes the seafloor and millions of lives.

[edit on 14-7-2010 by unityemissions]

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 01:51 PM
I have nothing but bad feelings about all of this and usually my gut instincts are right on the money. This scares the s&^t outta me.

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 01:56 PM

In Stunning Setback, BP Freezes Oil Spill Work Under Government Pressure

BP's work on capping the Gulf of Mexico gusher was frozen Wednesday after the federal government
raised concerns the operation could put damaging pressure on the busted well that could make the leak worse.

An administration official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the talks with BP, said the government was acting out of "abundance of caution" and didn't want potentially dangerous pressure tests on a tighter containment cap that has been placed over the well to go ahead until BP answers questions about possible risks.

At the same time, BP on its own halted the drilling of two relief wells that are designed to be a more permanent solution to plug the well.


The administration official said Energy Secretary Steven Chu, U.S. Geological Survey chief Marcia McNutt and other government scientists met with BP Tuesday in Houston and had a number of questions about the plan to test the integrity of the well. Chu and other officials want to ensure that putting downward pressure on the well will not cause further leaks, the official said.

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 02:07 PM
... at .07 seconds into the news cast on video... the reporter says it is a 'temporary' suspension of relief well drilling.

probably because the want a 'quiet' set of conditions to 'listen' to the seismic activity to get a benchmark... a standard, to which future ground noises can be judged.
~ this in no way sends a distress signal to the Gulf residents or other oil platforms ~

i'm surprised at the inuendo the thread suggests

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 02:11 PM
reply to post by St Udio

Here is BP's explanation:

BP said it delayed drilling of its first relief well as a precaution, since it's close enough to possible weaken the core of the Macondo well. "We'll commence drilling and setting [of the relief well] when [the] test is over," according to Well.


posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 02:12 PM
Didn't the government know this was planned? Why weren't those questions asked weeks ago?

What happened about warming up the large top hat?

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 02:12 PM
I agree something is definately up. To stop the spill obviously means sealing the well, but whats causing the pressure? The pressure is staggering which brings me to the conclusion that by capping the well the oil will find an alternative route to escape. I dont know how truthful the various stories are regarding the sea floor cracking but unless they find the cause of the pressure then i feel they/we are in a catch 22 situation. Using a nuclear device in my opinion could turn a catastrophic event into an ELE.
I think that we have passed the point of return.

Maybe this thread will give you a different perspective
Biblical event? Quite possibly.

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 02:21 PM
Why cap the well?
Why not just collect all the oil from the new cap?

Why not collect the oil from the relief wells?

Wouldnt that lower the pressure on the main well?

If they cap the whole thing and fill it with cement wont
they just have to drill a new well?

[edit on 14-7-2010 by RRokkyy]

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 02:29 PM
Just seems to my like the government being it usual old, ugly nagging wife self. You know the kind of woman that stands behind you while your fixing the car asking you a bunch of dumbass questions about what you are doing and then giving you advice on something she knows nothing about. You know like the care wont start and she is back there saying..
Did you check the oil?
Did you check the transmission flood?
Did you inflate the tires?
Did you fill up the radiator?

You know how you have to just block it out and proceed before you have to turn around and gouge her eye out with the screw driver you happen to be holding. Then after you blocked out her stupid questions based on no knowledge she then screams at the top of her lungs "ARE YOU LISTENING TO ME?" Then you bite your lip and say "YES DEAR!"

Its like that.

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 02:45 PM
I thought that the psi at the well head was 40,00 psi. How are they talking about 8 or 9,ooo psi under the cap? Does any one know? This may be the reason so many folks have a bad feeling about this.

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:15 PM
This being "news" is the part that scares me. In principle, if they are going to get a datum point for their seismic testing, obviously they need a base reading without active subterranian drilling taking place during the readings. What concerns me is the fact that the various involved parties seem to be spending more effort than needed to explain this "temporary" work stoppage. In my opinion, this is one of those things that they wouldn't even bother to mention (let alone spend as much time defending as they have today) if everything was "normal." They likely would field some questions about it and the anticipated "normal" process answer would be something along the lines of "Yes, the activity down there has been put on hold as a component of the testing we're doing." End of story.

Of course nothing has gone well up to this point, so why would the relief wells go smoothly?

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:38 PM
My thinking has gotten somehow "off" on this topic, and would somebody please, pleeze, explain something to me.

They have been working on a "relief well" to divert the oil to another well, so they can continue to "harvest" the oil. (Please forgive my terminology, this is strictly ladyinwaiting terminology, with no presumptions towards technical correctness).

They've thought about building a pipeline.

But the main thing is, has always been, the relief well, a means of salvaging their prosperous endeavor, and their precious product.

Now, with this capping, are they trying to actually shut it down?
As in walk off and leave it, eat their loses, never to go near it or try to harvest again?

Or is this what they have been trying to do all along? I don't know.

Because....if all this mess is going on because they are still trying to make it a viable/productive well, when they could have Shut It Down, weeks ago, then, you see where I am going with this.

So, could somebody please explain where my thinking is "off"?

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:45 PM
reply to post by ladyinwaiting

I think your thinking is reverse, but understandable because the terms are logically assbackward.

The caps actually hook to a pipe that guide the oil into a boat.

The relief well will actually be used to kill the well by pumping material through the relief well to block the pipe it is currently flowing out of at a point in the pipe further down the well.

It is my understanding that they don't currently plan to do anything to make the well viable anytime soon and that they have said they wont drill into this pocket again from this area, but may at some point hit the pocket from a location in another area.

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:52 PM
At this point I am trying to absorb what has happened and been reported today. I was very concerned this morning when I heard the word sesmic - in reference to testing the seafloor. Now all operations are on hold, is that correct? All that work they just did with that 30 foot tower and now there is a major problem, is that correct? I think I am getting terribly concerned, should I be?

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 04:16 PM
reply to post by ZuluChaka

Okay, good. Thanks for straightening me out. The caps are diverting the oil, but the relief wells have always been the intended method of shutting the whole thing down?

I hope I have it straight now. Thank you.

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 04:25 PM
reply to post by burdman30ott6

I agree, they didn't need to get into the depth they did at the commander's press conference - did thay? It would be interesting to analyse why they let out that info at that time?

To date, they appear to have been very successful at stopping any leaks or whistle-blowing from employees/parties privy to the core operation and site works...and press access is fully regulated...[edit: so no need to worry about leaks even if it is a hairy patch approaching surely]?

I find that accompanying info coming out now about the sensitivity of BP/government negotiations and the government advisors intervening here fascinatng too...someone's covering their *$%*

Perhaps the commander/his bosses felt obliged to get something on record due to concerns about how they may need to deal in the aftermath of something? Otherwise I can't understand why they thought they needed to divulge this?

I'm sure they could have covered the simultaneous shut-down of ROVs for the seismic tests somehow...?

Yes, the language, what we know, it's more un-nerving than I would expect them to need to make it, if you know what I mean?

[edit on 14-7-2010 by curioustype]

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 04:31 PM
reply to post by loam
[At the same time, BP on its own halted the drilling of two relief wells that are designed to be a more permanent solution to plug the well. (from the source) ]

Seems about the right depth for nuke charges, there's a thread that suggests the 'relief wells' are actually nuke chutes.

These 'relief wells' look suspiciously like nuke chutes.

[edit on 14-7-2010 by star in a jar]

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 04:58 PM
reply to post by star in a jar

The only thing is, I understand that this site has it's own particular issues with regards nuking the thing:

1. They may not be able to get where they want to with the two 'relief-wells' either to do what they say or nuke, as they may have hit some kind of volatile gas/oil/geological anomaly that has caused them to halt. Drilling creates heat, and the methane/hydrates may react badly to that...? It may be some other hazard?

2. The site was possibly saturated with naturally built-up deposits of unstable methane hydrates prior to any drilling/explosion/eruption. A nuke could destabilise those deposits, and people have indicated that may hold quite bad consequences...

3. Your diagram shows a nice level seabed, this site is not, it is into the side of a very steep canyon bank. It is also surrounded by significant and complex geological fault lines and features, and due to the depths of sea-floor and drilling, for the munition delivery you suggest would posibly be in closer proximity to those than I would expect would be desireable.

[edit on 14-7-2010 by curioustype]

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 07:46 PM

Originally posted by curioustype
To date, they appear to have been very successful at stopping any leaks or whistle-blowing from employees/parties privy to the core operation and site works.

Agreed. Now if only they could apply whatever strategy they've employed to stop information leaks to stopping the only leak that actually matters here, we wouldn't be sitting here discussing this any more.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in