why are we drilling so deep anyways

[TennTradition]

Just tells me they had no business drilling in the first place. No back up plan if anything went wrong, epic fail.

That's not entirely accurate. They had backup plans in place if something went wrong. The problem is that almost everything went wrong. As is customary with large-scale accidents, the biggest failure was a failure of imagination.

 

[BigPapaVol]

That's not entirely accurate. They had backup plans in place if something went wrong. The problem is that almost everything went wrong. As is customary with large-scale accidents, the biggest failure was a failure of imagination.

Agreed, but BP had been more reckless than they should ever be. They are going to get hammered over this forever while their CEO keeps saying "I want my life back."
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[TennTradition]

Agreed, but BP had been more reckless than they should ever be. They are going to get hammered over this forever while their CEO keeps saying "I want my life back."
Posted via VolNation Mobile

The situation should have never been allowed to get to the point that it did pre-explosion. However, the seemingly horrible response to the accident is a direct result of the previously unimaginable magnitude of the accident and failure of the safety systems.

 

[DC Vol]

Agreed, but BP had been more reckless than they should ever be. They are going to get hammered over this forever while their CEO keeps saying "I want my life back."
Posted via VolNation Mobile

What he means to say is this:

"I was supposed to be on the French Riviera right now, but now I have to answer all these stupid questions from these stupid idiots. Have you been to Louisiana in the Summer? No wonder the French sold it for so little."

And yes, I know this was taken out of context, but as the CEO of one of the world's largest companies... and with a salary pushing $4mil/year you better know that every word you say and how you present yourself in the time of a PR disaster is going to be picked with a fine-toothed comb.

 

[BigPapaVol]

The situation should have never been allowed to get to the point that it did pre-explosion. However, the seemingly horrible response to the accident is a direct result of the previously unimaginable magnitude of the accident and failure of the safety systems.

And that's what I agreed with. The response is steeped in arrogance to boot.

The spill itself is going to prove out to be BPs willingness to play as fast and loose with the rules as they could.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[BigPapaVol]

What he means to say is this:

"I was supposed to be on the French Riviera right now, but now I have to answer all these stupid questions from these stupid idiots. Have you been to Louisiana in the Summer? No wonder the French sold it for so little."

And yes, I know this was taken out of context, but as the CEO of one of the world's largest companies... and with a salary pushing $4mil/year you better know that every word you say and how you present yourself in the time of a PR disaster is going to be picked with a fine-toothed comb.

Absolute PR disaster.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[TennTradition]

And that's what I agreed with. The response is steeped in arrogance to boot.

The spill itself is going to prove out to be BPs willingness to play as fast and loose with the rules as they could.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

I am honestly surprised by the record that is coming out and by what happened on this rig. The oil industry has always struck me as extremely safety-conscious....and that is coming from a guy who worked in the nuclear realm for a bit. However, it really does seem like BP was "fast and loose" as you say. That's why I added my first sentence - to agree with you - because it seems they pushed the edge in a bad way.

I'm not as upset with their response to the spill as I am with what apparently led to it. This thing failed in an incredible way.

 

[gsvol]

See bold above...

Man that makes it difficult to respond.

Are you referring to the large Saudi oil spill that was largely on land?

I don't know how much if any was on land but a Houston engineer that was lead for Aramco recovered every bit of oil from the sea surface and it was successfully refined.

It was my understanding that the amount was 800,000 gallons which is considerably more than the current gulf leak has produced.

The method is that oil and water are siphoned from the surface, sent through a centerfuge, oil and water are seperated, water is filtered and put back in the ocean, the oil is pumped into tankers.

If we had acted soon with this method we wouldn't have the ecologica disaster we now have.

So the managing LLC of Argonne national labs adds an executive from a successful company in the backyard and from the state department of education, and now they are organizing a conspiracy to force an oil well to continue leaking...nice.

Anyone with prior knowledge would reap great monetary rewards if positioned well in the market.

Bombshell expose'. The real reason the oil still flows into the Gulf of Mexico. - JoAnneMor's Blog - Blogster

"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."
J Edgar Hoover

Today on NBC evening news they featured an interview with the widow of one of the eleven killed on the Deep Water Horizon, she said her husband aged 35 had been totally occupied with getting everything in order on his last visit home. He made out a will, showed how to operate everything around the house she didn't already know and asked her on the way to the airport if she and the kids would still live at the same place if he didn't come home.

With that and other facts in mind, this evidently was preventable and actually criminal homicide on someone's part.

Sounds like I may want to consider investing in them....

Too bad you weren't in the know beforehand.

Their stock just jumped 18%.

BP took a 15% dive losing $75 billion in market value.

Obama has announced he will grant $50m to academia to research the environmental impact of the spill, don't miss out on that, it should be right down your alley.

No doubt, no matter how accurate and articulate the studies are, they will be used for the next thirty years to prevent further drilling of American oil.

What are your sentences about the dispersant behavior of Corexit supposed to do? Educate, imply something? They seem odd and out of place to me. The dispersant does break up the oil into smaller droplets, which does cause it to sink - but not necessarily all the way to the bottom of the ocean. This is done to disperse the oil in the water column in hopes that natural microbes will go to work on them, just as they do on the natural leaks from the gulf floor. Of course, this may have negative consequences - but negative consequences of some sort are next to impossible to avoid for a spill/leak of this magnitude in the ocean.

In scanning through roughly a thousand quotes to come up with those quotedin another thread, I cam across one that said; "Never underestimate the capacity for evil of evil men."

In an even worse spill off the coast of the Yucatan some years ago, albeit in shallower waters, the oil was allowed to stay on the surface and the clean up was better than what would have happened if dispersants had been used.

You're a big boy, you can reach your own conclusions, you don't need me to do your thinking.

As for the toxicity of Corexit, it meets US safety standards. It is not considered toxic by the tests performed in the US. There are dispersants that are approved for use in Europe that fail US safety/toxicity tests. These are not uniform tests. Are you suggesting we adopt the European standards?

No but I am suggesting using dispersants isn't the best known solution to the problem.

 

[DC Vol]

And that's what I agreed with. The response is steeped in arrogance to boot.

The spill itself is going to prove out to be BPs willingness to play as fast and loose with the rules as they could.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

The bitter irony is this Hayward guy edged himself in with scathing quotes about BP's handling of another explosion at a BP refinery at Texas City... which was due to BP playing fast and loose with safety regs.

EDIT for links:

http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7037819

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/26/60minutes/main2126509.shtml

 

[TennTradition]

Man that makes it difficult to respond.

Yeah, you're right. I'll try to avoid it.

It was my understanding that the amount was 800,000 gallons which is considerably more than the current gulf leak has produced.

The method is that oil and water are siphoned from the surface, sent through a centerfuge, oil and water are seperated, water is filtered and put back in the ocean, the oil is pumped into tankers.

I think that you must have that number wrong. This well is leaking up to 800,000 gallons a day. Even if you meant barrels, this leak will likely pass that mark over the next week.

The process you are describing sounds an awful lot like the skimmers they are currently using. Is that accurate? I think that one major issue here is the open water allows the oil to spread in a lot of directions. If we weren't worried about the oil reaching the coast, a bay would be better because it would hold the oil in and we could skim it off the top. However, oil reaching the coast is obviously a huge problem. With the huge area of the spill, we need a ton of skimmers to collect the oil. I do agree that we should be able to do more in this area, though.

Today on NBC evening news they featured an interview with the widow of one of the eleven killed on the Deep Water Horizon, she said her husband aged 35 had been totally occupied with getting everything in order on his last visit home. He made out a will, showed how to operate everything around the house she didn't already know and asked her on the way to the airport if she and the kids would still live at the same place if he didn't come home.

The well had been acting oddly for some time it seems, and it still wasn't shut down. Seems like this reaction could be a result of that...

Obama has announced he will grant $50m to academia to research the environmental impact of the spill, don't miss out on that, it should be right down your alley.

Unfortunately, my research would be much more down the alley of turning the oil into something useful rather than assessing its environmental impact....

You're a big boy, you can reach your own conclusions, you don't need me to do your thinking.

I said some time back in this thread that I was worried about the effects of dispersing the oil and sending it into the water column (though I incorrectly thought at that time that a lot ended up on the ocean floor). Ideally, we would keep all the oil on the surface and off the coast. This would be the safest situation. However, there is little chance that we could keep all of the oil of the coast if we kept it all on the surface...that's when we have to start playing the trade-off game (and no one is going to win that one).

No but I am suggesting using dispersants isn't the best known solution to the problem.

I don't know, though...it seems that this part of your post was supposed to make it seem insane that we would be using this particular dispersant - and in effect, support your previous statements about the dispersant conspiracy. This dispersant is approved for use by the US and the fact that Europe says it is toxic isn't all that relevant because they approve dispersants that we say are toxic. The standards by which we measure are just different. If you wanted to be super careful, then perhaps you would ban all materials considered toxic anywhere, but good luck finding one that will even disperse that would be on that list.

 

[gsvol]

That's not entirely accurate. They had backup plans in place if something went wrong. The problem is that almost everything went wrong. As is customary with large-scale accidents, the biggest failure was a failure of imagination.

The seven Ps; "Piss poor planning precedes piss poor performance."

It's my understanding that the required environmental impact study was waived in this case.

It's my understanding that the safety cut off device was not tested as is usually done in this case.

It's my understanding that pipe used was less than what is usually the case and that what was used wasn't the guage necessary to withstand the pressures encountered.

This whole affair has been an accident waiting to happen from day one.

Now we have a crisis to be taken advantage of politically and no doubt some have planned well on the goals to be achieved in response.

First off the lame stream media is searing into the minds of the public the downsides of drilling oil offshore.

When any authority in America invokes draconian measures, they feel the need to have public support.

 

[gsvol]

Yeah, you're right. I'll try to avoid it.

Thanks.

Are you referring to the large Saudi oil spill that was largely on land?

No.

Obama - "Trying everything" except vacuuming oil spill from sea like Saudis did

Could Cleanup Fix for Gulf Oil Spill Lie in Secret Saudi Disaster? - AOL News

I think that you must have that number wrong. This well is leaking up to 800,000 gallons a day. Even if you meant barrels, this leak will likely pass that mark over the next week.

Here is more on the solution that should have been being used for over a month now, but then I guess the evening newscasters couldn't be peeing all over themselves about what a disaster this is.

Kevin Costner?s $24M Dollar Oil Centrifuge | Product Design and Development

BP Approves Oil Separation Device Test - News - Hydro International

The process you are describing sounds an awful lot like the skimmers they are currently using. Is that accurate? I think that one major issue here is the open water allows the oil to spread in a lot of directions. If we weren't worried about the oil reaching the coast, a bay would be better because it would hold the oil in and we could skim it off the top. However, oil reaching the coast is obviously a huge problem. With the huge area of the spill, we need a ton of skimmers to collect the oil. I do agree that we should be able to do more in this area, though.

See links above. I don't think BP is currently using the equipment and methods that are available.

Dispersants should have been the very last resort imo.

The well had been acting oddly for some time it seems, and it still wasn't shut down. Seems like this reaction could be a result of that...

I didn't realize what they were dealing with as to the type and size of the deposit until recently.

Obviously more caution and oversight should have used from the very start right up until the 'accident.'

Unfortunately, my research would be much more down the alley of turning the oil into something useful rather than assessing its environmental impact....

That's good.

I said some time back in this thread that I was worried about the effects of dispersing the oil and sending it into the water column (though I incorrectly thought at that time that a lot ended up on the ocean floor). Ideally, we would keep all the oil on the surface and off the coast. This would be the safest situation. However, there is little chance that we could keep all of the oil of the coast if we kept it all on the surface...that's when we have to start playing the trade-off game (and no one is going to win that one).

Imo they could and should have recovered the vast majority of the oil, then perhaps use dispersants on any they missed.

I don't claim to know everything about that or even very much at all, I'll just have to believe what I'm told.

However let's say the dispersant becomes suspended at various levels in the water column, will currents not eventually carry that into shallower waters where it will coat the bottom???

I have heard that in some people's indictment of dispersant use, and in the shallower coastal waters is where much of the marine life uses to reproduce, and particularly sea life that we use for food.

I don't know, though...it seems that this part of your post was supposed to make it seem insane that we would be using this particular dispersant - and in effect, support your previous statements about the dispersant conspiracy. This dispersant is approved for use by the US and the fact that Europe says it is toxic isn't all that relevant because they approve dispersants that we say are toxic. The standards by which we measure are just different. If you wanted to be super careful, then perhaps you would ban all materials considered toxic anywhere, but good luck finding one that will even disperse that would be on that list.

You're the chemist, what is the chemical formula for that particular dispersant??

What was the quote by John D. Rockefeller (aka Rogenfelder)?: "The way to make money is buy when blood is running in the streets."

I suppose today you might substitute; "when oil is in the water."

Whether you want to say 'conspiracy' or 'agenda motivated', there has to be something to such ineptness on such a grand scale.

It has to be that or massive incompetence from the top, including BP top management and white house authority all the way down.

What I really believe is that those entities are just puppets on their strings operated by the real power brokers you never see, and people line up at the TV and watch the marinettes do their show and say wow, it's like reality TV only most everyone really thinks it's real life instead of a soap opera with the script written months or even years ago.

Did you catch the show put on by Obama in NO just before he went to California to a fundraiser at the oil baron Getty mansion??

They used school busses to bring in about 400 oil workers for him to have a crowd????

Well I guess at least the oil workers were getting paid better than the average group of movie extras.

 

[lawgator1]

I nominate this thread for the coveted "Circle Jerk Thread Of The Year" award.

 

[MG1968]

I nominate this thread for the coveted "Circle Jerk Thread Of The Year" award.

impossible, your "taking my ball and going home" thread is the permanent recipient of that award.

 

[gsvol]

I nominate this thread for the coveted "Circle Jerk Thread Of The Year" award.

Every thread becomes a circle jerk when you post in it.

 

[BeecherVol]

impossible, your "taking my ball and going home" thread is the permanent recipient of that award.

Solid reply