Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Wellhead Release

page: 1
5

log in

join

posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Wellhead Release


www.incidentnews.gov

Wellhead Release
East Bay, LA 2012-Nov-05

At 0640 on 5NOV12, USCG Sector New Orleans contacted NOAA SSC about a report of a wellhead releasing unknown product into the water. The location was described as "Northern East Bay" without precise coordinates. The release began early in the morning, exact time unknown and the rate of discharge is unknown. The release is unsecured and overflight is scheduled. There is limited information at this time and further investigation is required.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.youtube.com




posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   
Folks we may have another Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill on our hands. I haven't seen any other news on it but I will keep digging. If this turns out to be true, it's gonna be bad news for the oil industry. Not to mention gas prices ...

Incident Details
Spill, potential spill, or other: Oil Spill
Cause of incident: Well Blowout

Latitude (approximate): 29° 5.00' North
Longitude (approximate): 89° 15.00' West

www.incidentnews.gov
(visit the link for the full news article)

ETA:

edit on 6-11-2012 by SWCCFAN because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 07:05 AM
link   
East Bay appears to be in the effluent of the Mississippi delta region into the Gulf.



So I'm assuming it "northern east bay" would put it up closer to the Mississippi itself.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


Yeah it would appear so...
The position is approximate and it hasn't been confirmed.

Most of the wells in this area are older and been shutdown.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by SWCCFAN
 


Good spot OP.

Any idea whose wellhead yet? Or who operates in that specific area? Asking as you seem to be in that location.
edit on 6-11-2012 by Flavian because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
Great catch SWCCFAN! The thing that worries me: "DISCHARGE IS UNKNOWN"

I will do some digging as time permits.

JT

*EDIT* It seems that everything I am finding points back to the OP's source. I can't seem to find anything more
edit on 6-11-2012 by Greenblaz because: More info



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   
To hell with the effects oil industry, I am more worried about the ecosystem impacts. Oil industry will not matter much if we destroy the ocean



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   
I wonder if it has anything to do with this? If so, it's been known about since September!!!!!!!

theadvocate.com... ource-of


New Orleans — Remote-operated vehicles were deployed this week to the underwater site of the Macondo well to determine the source of a surface oil sheen that was first reported September 16. Tests on the sheen concluded that the oil found matched the fingerprint of oil from the Macondo 252 well, the same oil that spewed into the Gulf of Mexico for approximately 90 days after the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded April 20, 2010, killing 11 men.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Sissel
 


I don't think so East bay is in the Mississippi River Delta...

The BP spill was out in deep water approximately South of the MS/AL border.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Discharge unknown? I am very suprised that these well heads are not named by number, and known to some centralised authority whos purpose is to keep track of what is being drilled for, and where. Without such What is the position of the EPA on this matter?

www.epa.gov...

I find it strange that the EPA would be able to have such a wide ranging mission statement, and yet there be so little information about an incident of this nature, or indeed its location. This should surely be the sort of thing that sends a huge team of people in plastic slacks and overcoats into the area to examine the nature of the emegergancy.

Surely the EPA know what is being drilled for here, and surely they should have made a statement of reassurance at least by now, or a warning?? Its been twenty four hours already! Everything I have ever been told by people, about the EPA leads me to believe that there is no way they dont know what is happening out there at this well head, and no way in hell that theres a well head they do not have a name and location for.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   
I have heard for many years that the sea floor in the Gulf of Mexico is extremely unstable and full of leaks (by many years, i was taught this at school decades ago). This was also confirmed by a school friends father who was a geologist with Shell. At the time, he had a success strike rate of 1 in 7 drills (1 in 11 was the average at the time) so he certainly knew his stuff. If this was that widely known back then, it is inconceivable that every US administration since hasn't also known this.

Perhaps this is the final nudge needed to prevent drilling in such an unstable area?



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueBrit


I find it strange that the EPA would be able to have such a wide ranging mission statement, and yet there be so little information about an incident of this nature, or indeed its location. This should surely be the sort of thing that sends a huge team of people in plastic slacks and overcoats into the area to examine the nature of the emegergancy.


That would be because the EPA isn't actually for protecting the environment. It is more worried about the interests of big business than our ecosystem.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by SWCCFAN
I haven't seen any other news on it but I will keep digging.


How about right here on ATS, posted yesterday afternoon.
www.abovetopsecret.com...





new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join