This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Matt Simmons Says Gulf Clean Up Will Cost Over $1 Trillion, Sees BP At $1, Says "We Have Now Killed The GoM"
Matt Simmons shares some startling revelations in his latest Bloomberg TV interview, in which he says none of the propaganda matters on TV 24/7 (photoshopped or not) as the ultimate clean up cost will likely be well over $1 trillion, and a result he is unconcerned about his BP short. He ultimately see the stock going down to $1. What Simmons alleges however is far more startling and audacious: that this is a joint cover up effort between the administration and BP, in which both entities keep throwing sand in the eyes of observers while distracting everyone from the matter at hand: "What we don’t know anything about is the open hole which is caused by
the drill bit when it tossed the blow-out preventer way out of the
hole…and 120,000/day minimum of toxic poison has now covered the floor of
the Gulf of Mexico. So what they’re talking about is the biggest
environmental cover-up ever. And they knew that that well, that riser,
would finally deplete. And then they could say it’s over." On blaming the catastrophe on Transocean: "For two days they kept saying it’s a rig fire. When the rig sank they
could no longer call it a rig fire. It’s a riser leak…Because if they
said the truth they would all go to jail." The conclusion: "Unfortunately, we now have killed the Gulf of Mexico."
On whether the well pressure should be a concern:
“No, it’s a total diversion - that’s the gas condensation that was trapped in the drilling riser which blew off the wellhead at 10:01 PM CT on April 20th, it's a mile-long compressed natural gas."
"What we don’t know anything about is the open hole which is caused by the drill bit when it tossed the blow-out preventer way out of the hole…and 120,000 minimum of toxic poison has now covered the floor of the Gulf of Mexico. So what they’re talking about is the biggest environmental cover-up ever. And they knew that that well, that riser, would finally deplete. And then they could say it’s over. And unfortunately, we now have killed the Gulf of Mexico.”
“Some 5-10 miles away is what the NOIA research vessels have now proved is a deep oil lake that is growing by the day and it’s very toxic oil and its gases are very lethal. Basically if we have a hurricane now, we would have to evacuate the Gulf Coast.”
On the financial implications for BP:
“When people find out the magnitude of the story, I don’t know if we can technically clean up the Gulf but it would cost at least a trillion dollars.”
Simmons on his reaction to the rig explosion:
“First of all when I woke up, when my wife turned on the television at 7:00 AM on the 21st and I saw this shocking news, that one of the greatest deepwater rigs ever built by one of the great companies in the industry, Transocean, was in the middle of this terrible fire, and then they said this was a rig fire, this is fuel on the rig, I know that there was 700 gallons of diesel on the rig, I said ‘This is a lie, the Gulf of Mexico is on fire. Why are they saying this?’ For two days they kept saying it’s a rig fire. When the rig sank they could no longer call it a rig fire. It’s a riser leak…Because if they said the truth they would all go to jail.”
On whether the blame lies squarely with BP:
"I think Transocean need Congressional Medals of Hero for this…I am really disgusted. Other than John Hofmeister, the retired president of Shell America, he's the only other person in the industry who I've seen to speak out."
Simmons on why he is shorting BP stock:
“You bet I did. Because I thought BP was going to go under. I’ve been saying that for months and months and when I read that 20 of the 24 Wall Street analysts had a ‘buys,’ I said ‘ That’s ridiculous, I’m going to short them.’ I’ve never shorted a stock in my life before.
"I have patience. The stock will go to one."
“They promised to clean up the Gulf, is that right? Do you know how much it will cost if they can technically do it? Well over a trillion dollars.”
On whether there is hope for a permanent solution now that the oil has stopped leaking:
“No, because that’s not the gusher. That was a little bit of condensation that would have ended anyways. There’s no way to fix the gusher because there’s no casing left in the hole other than doing a small diameter nuclear bomb…It's the only way. With no casing left in the hole, the odds of the relief well working are zero. What the relief wells do-- if they can find the casing, they then cut a 4 inch hole--and then they have something to capture the mud with. With no casing there, it's like pouring oatmeal down a fire hydrant…The casing is not there. It's scattered over the ocean floor. The government now has gamma ray images of the actual blow-out preventer, which is five stories high, weighs 325 tons and it has two sections of casing that pierced through five stories of metal."
»
- 42696 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I don't know why I should believe the White House Press release when it seems evident they have been cooperating with the BP press blackout and going back to the bogus 5000 barrell per day estimate the pattern of deception was established firmly for me.
repeat after me: bush, katrina, bush, katrina. oh, that is right, obama has been the man for 21 months. but it's nola, so it must be bush. Oh, where of where is out mainstream media, oh, where oh where has it gone. That's right, we voted for pravda and we got it.
I simply refuse to debate this issue at the risk of getting junked.
In Switzerland we don't junk the ideological opponent. In fact, I don't think we really have any opposing views. We remain neutral.
All I can say is that, Thank God we are land locked. There are no coastal areas that could ever get destroyed.
I've said this before; If I never get junked, then I'm not doing something right.
Also said before; If you're completely neutral, then you're not passionate about the topic and probably don't even care to push yourself to understand it further. So I really don't care to hear from people who don't care about what they're talking about.
Also, this is Fight Club. If you don't plan to fight...
I think we have reached Peak Simmons.
If not today, it certainly has only a few days left.
Nana nana naaa nahhh...I got more junks than you by the trolls...your gonna have to step it up a little...ROTFL.
The drugs in his water should start kicking in.
What? That's what I would do!
Start??? ;-)
Each interview, he sounds more and more... maybe the stress? To be saying what he's saying on national tv, live, and with no one backing him, man, even some of my most brilliant professors had a horrible lecture voice that kind of quivered, you know, and they were permitted to pause frequently without someone saying, okay, in the last 15 seconds can you sum up world history in a nutshell. But, really, I don't care how nutty some people seem. You look a little wacky, and that's probably a good thing.
That was funny.
I've been following this very closely since the beginning and decided back in June to put a bet on. I'll just disclose it - I own the way-out-of-the-money Jan 2011 2.5 Puts from when they were first listed.
It isn't a lot of money, but from listening to all the experts and 'outlier' theorists, I have to say even the middle road shows nothing but pain for BP. I believe that BP is approaching zero credibility, no matter how the 'capping' scenario plays out.
One trend I've noticed in the open interest way out on the Put deep end is that it seems to be increasing lately. Makes me wonder if that forecasts anything for the future.
Guess I'll find out.
Just in, BP is shutting down relief operations due to storm.
Simmons is a horses ass. Period. Exclamation mark.
mirror...
Its funny hearing main stream reporters hear the stuff I've been hearing and reading for two months. Their idiots.
We have a target. Repeat we have a target: UK/(BP)
...Limited 4 and 2 are missing..1.12..13...14
We need to evacuate now. Please spread the word. I know that speech is not doing, but we can not physically remove anybody. But people need to know, they have the right to know. This is an extinction level event, one that may disrupt life for a major portion of the planet for an extended period of time.
Anybody on this thread old enough to remember Ixtoc? I know it was smaller, but the Gulf did recover. It was also in shallow water, much easier to deal with. Simmons is not credible. He's too shrill. Some of his numbers are the stuff of fantasy. I'm having a tough time figuring out what his motivation is, but I get a real uneasy feeling listening to this guy that I am being gamed. I'm not saying BPs telling the truth. I don't believe they are. The government is clueless. I agree. Just saying, what little I know about oils suggests that Macondo isn't the only thing blowing gas in the Gulf.
Any way it goes he is making the case for a massive deflationary event (liquidation of BP) and a massive inflationary event (cleanup). He may not be right in number, but this event will do a job to the economy. The numbers matter little; liquidation of BP is X amount of deflation, combined with X amount of cleanup (inflation). I agree that his information should be taken with a grain of salt, but what info shouldn't be now a days?
All I know is there is a massive change happening in every physical area of the world, and all considerations aside, we are in the midst of a massive change for real.
Consider if you will that a major oil field in the Gulf suddenly changes the geopolitical picture overnight from one eternal conflict in the middle east to one of energy self sufficiency in the United States, as it had once been.
I can see why Simmons is scare mongering.
A very deep discussion. If I were a trader - which I am not - I would take my very young children on vacation at GoM and simply test the sea water. And depending if they stay healthy or not- I mean Corexit 950? I would then decide if I go long or short, very short, maybe short of life?
NY Times has a decent explanation of the planned "Static Kill."
Of course now it has been delayed due to weather...
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/05/25/us/20100525-topkill-diagram.html
Banner add at top of page.
Info about the Gulf of Mexico Spill Learn More about How BP is Helping. www.BP.com/GulfOfMexicoResponse
I believe Simmons more than I believe BP and the Government. Simmons is speculating "blind" as he is not privy to the facts. BP & the Gov't are privy to the facts and they are not telling the truth. Doug R's description of what may be happening is more credible than anything I've read or heard from anyone else.
DougR's description was cut to pieces in excruciating detail on TOD. The only reason to cut & paste the whole thing here is to put it back out without all the critiques there.
Simmons said the BOP was blown away from the well, and he continues to maintain that there is an open hole. At one point, he said the hole was literally on fire (with no explanation as to where the needed oxygen would come from).
He has obviously not spent any time looking at the ROV feeds. They clearly show the intact BOP, not the long-removed riser he speaks of. The ROVs have also shown the intact wellhead itself, below the BOP. The pipe in the BOP isn't well casing; it's drill pipe.
There is so much happening down there, it's just not reasonable that the feeds are being faked.
Accurate flow calculations at the BOP are impossible, since the oil is mixed with large amounts of gas that distort the measurements; the oil needs to be collected before it can be accurately measured.
Simmons is clearly talking his book. I suppose it's possible that someone behind the scenes is feeding him bad info. Either way, he's lost credibility, and should just be ignored--and Bloomberg et al should be ashamed for giving him any air time.
There is so much happening down there, it's just not reasonable that the feeds are being faked.
The only way you know that anything is happening down there is through the feeds. If the feeds are fake ...?
This is a call to logic. So many here have claimed that Simmons must be wrong because, look, you can see that the BOP is right there, we can see it on the feeds. That sort of begs the question. If Simmons is correct, by necessity, the feeds have to be fakes. So we can't argue that Simmons is wrong by pointing to the feeds. We have to demonstrate that he is wrong through the use of other means - like the logic of oilfield math and science. Such as, how could the psi that was factually recorded in the drilling of the well be powerful enough to blow the casing completely out of the well? And if somehow it was blown out, where is it? And, if the original well is still gushing unrestricted, where is that crude (not enough Corexit left for BP to have been spraying that gusher also)? Other questions about gas coming out of the riser for 90 days have been addressed elsewhere. They are also part of this group of questions.
If use 120bbl per day of toxic crap, then I get roughly the cubic equiv of half the Superdome still floating in the Gulf.
Those people in white hazmat on the beaches is nice show.
Certainly the cost will exceed $150 billion all around, nwo that we know the flow numbers.
What is going to happen is that BP will be effectively funding the Palin campaign. When she gets in, they walk. Period. It will be the Bush admin ^ 10 in terms of how nasty they will be all around.
So once again the taxpayer picks up the toxic bill. Superfund sites, GM, AIG, GS, the pesticide business, the cigarette business... bait and switch, bait and switch, bait and switch...
Matt was a classmate of mine many years ago and I have worked with him on several projects over the years. He was a keynote speaker at a recent Offshore technology conference in Houston. If he is crazy then its a recent event. None of us have anyway to know the truth unless the Govt/BP wants us to know....now that's the truth. The coastguard today reported much less oil on the surface. Where is it? Maybe the corexit has combined with the oil and coated large areas of the GoM seabed as Matt indicates. A near perfect way to hide the oil. We also know the most weathy families in world are involved with BP and the UK/US relationship is deep and wided (likes wars and buying our Treasury auctions). So a coverup is not impossible. You know Tadd Allen may have the most difficult and dangerous job in the world if this is a coverup. Who is in charge? BP, Coast Guard or another unannounced entity.
+1000.
It is a curiosity to me that a Coast Guard Admiral was put in charge of this mess. He knows marine vessels, rescue ops, and perhaps some hazmat/environmental diasaster support ops. But he has zero knowledge of the oil and gas E&P business. From a sleazy oil company exec's perspective he is a perfect candidate to play the know-nothing Gov't Front Man.
He is in charge to handle the logistics of all those ships and boats maneuvering in a small area on the water surface. That is the Coast Guard's area of expertise. And he is a leader. He is not making decisions in a vacuum.
Having said that, I think it is comical mental image, the Federal government giving orders to BP about what to do. The press portrays it that way, to make Obama look firmly in charge. I think the reality is that the Admiral is coordinating the decision-making process. That is one of the major functions of any leader - to coordinate the decision-making process. Unless you have a leader who is expected to know everthing about everything, which is an unrealistic expectation. Most leaders have access to folks who know more than they do. One can have knowledge about how to coordinate the decision-making process without knowing how to drill a well.
We are never going to bother cleaning it up.
on Wed, 07/21/2010 - 16:54
#482226
You think the third largest drilling platform in the world was parked over a well producing a paltry 1000 bpd?...try 200 k+
It's permanently parked there now.
The third largest drilling platform in the world wasn't parked over a well producing ANYTHING moron. It was DRILLING the well and temporarily abandoning it. Production was a couple years away and the size of the drilling rig has NOTHING to do with the ultimate well potential.
u might as well be talking to fruit flies. my condolences.
LOL +1
... the size of the drilling rig has NOTHING to do with the ultimate well potential.
When they actually produce the well, what do they call the contraption above the well. I'm guessing it's not called a drilling platform, because the drilling has been finished?
It this situation it would have likely been called a subsea wellhead and tieback. That tieback would have then gone to a production facility. I am not certain that would have been the plan but it is likely given the relatively small size of the discovery for deepwater facilities.
Time will determine if there is any validity to his comments. If millions of gallons continue to spew into the GOM it will increasingly become harder to hide
Did anyone actually see them capping the well head? I recall going to BP site while new cap was being put into place and all the public facing ROV cameras were paned away from well head. Did they simply cap a leak that had nearly bled dry and the more significant leak is elsewhere?
The level of scientific and mathematical illiteracy displayed here is astounding. For some reason I can never get over the fact that perhaps more than half the people on the planet can not add subtract multiply and divide and have no more grasp of elementry science than Neanderthals wandering around 100,000 years ago. It's really depressing.
You're preaching to the choir brother. Amen.
You too. Here, what are you specifically agreeing to, if not agreeing to slander a thread of persons' thoughts and ideas.
I'm specifically agreeing to the observation that our country is full of idiots incapable of critical thinking skills based on a fundamental comprehension of math, science, and logic (among other things).
Go read the BP technical update briefing transcript. It should make you feel better. Lindsay went to jail today you know.
"I'm specifically agreeing to the observation that our country is full of idiots incapable of critical thinking skills based on a fundamental comprehension of math, science, and logic (among other things)."
So you choose to spend your time locked up in an ivory tower or what?
About the amazingly gorgeous and heartbroken woman with the red hair. No, didn't know that "Lindsay went to jail today you know.". Thanks for the tip. I feel so much better that I am not; thank you democracy and god bless what this country has become.
<Sarcasm off>
No, I choose to spend my time being irreverent and abrasive in a target rich environment... obviously so that I won't be mistaken for a highly paid BP shill.
Sachs' twin brother the oil expert I presume! Please lead the way! Tell us what everything is, becuase you know everything, alright?
I only claim to be abrasive and irreverent. You must have me confused with someone else. I don't have a twin brother.
Why does it matter who I am? Are you not content to tear my ideas to shreds with your superb intellect?
This coming from one of the blathering fools who hasn't demonstrated in any grand fashion [read: in any way, shape or fashion] the qualities he decries as lacking in others. C'mon - put on a show of mental prowess for us, Jimbo.
I haven't seen anything particularly enthralling or enlightening from you or any of the other self-proclaimed scientific/mathematical savants who look down their noses without actually demonstrating why they're superior to all us troglodytes. Sorry, I'm calling bullshit, and I can smell it across the internets.
What can I do to impress you, breathe through my nose, or divide a 3 digit number by ten maybe?
Your slander is unmerited if not directed approprieately, so please approprieate your slander to something instead of trying to slander a group of persons thought's and ideas in masse.
my slander is directed towards anyone that thinks matt simmons is someone who hasn't completely lost his marbles.
So you are judging opinion based on your own opinion of Matt's credibility? Fair enough, just wanted to show that that was the case.
LH - please remember that any comment that does not conform to the math and science of the oil patch is wrong as soon as it is uttered. Since most of the folks commenting on the gulf gusher (here and elsewhere) don't know the math and science of the oilfield, most of what is presented on this subject is wrong as soon as it is uttered. If you think that is slander, it is the slander of every math and science teacher who dares tell a student that he got the wrong answer.
People's feelings are not the standard against which we are measuring whether an answer is correct or not. Known facts, based on proven math and science principles, are the standard.
Actually I've been following this thread and I think some of you Matt believers are starting to make sense. What if Matt's $200/oil prediction and BP shorts have hammered his fund and he needs a little "help". Wouldn't it make sense that BP could be paying him? I mean what better way to discredit the critics than to have the most vocal be extremely over the top and ridiculous? That could be why all the press keeps inviting him back because BP is paying for it.....or the government could be threatening to pull FCC licenses if they don't keep featuring him?
Remember we have been told here previously that criticizing BP is how the stealth commentors set up their "bona fide's" Matt is also smart enough to know that arguing logically will tip people off to the fact he's secretly in BP pay - so he acts like a loon to keep the game going. IT ALL FITS PEOPLE. It even explains why such a nice, data & fact driven guy would be trashing his reputation by spouting utter nonsense - IT'S A FALSE FLAG OP!
Hey, please specify to the non "sense" of Simmons. If you do not tell me what you think how can I begin to understand your view point? Question everything/everyone, agreed. So what is it that you are alluding to?
@ Lennon: Here's an easy one for you. What is the deepest depth in the Gulf of Mexico? It's an open book test, feel free to use www.google.com
Now, compare it to how deep Matt Simmons says it is: http://blogs.barrons.com/stockstowatchtoday/2010/06/15/bp-simmons-still-sees-bankruptcy-massive-hole-at-the-well-bore/
If you want more, write back. As I said, this is an easy one.
What is your point? If he gave a wrong number of sea depth why does this matter? I ask earnestly, please tell me why his saying a incorrect sea depth would matter?
My point is, I am answering your question, to wit:
Now, knowing that he has spouted non-sense in this instance, you want to know why it matters. If you don't know why it matters that an "oil industry expert" who is claiming that there are deep lakes of oil on the bottom of the GOM, doesn't even COME CLOSE to knowing the real depth of the GOM ... then you sustantiate the point you asked me to clarify in the thread just above this one.
Why did they have to put Lindsay in jail?
You are building a strawman....
And then you claim knowledge....
You have not done a proof, to wit, or not.
Building a straw man? I answered your question you moron.
You answer no such question.
Now you are using a childish act of name calling. Get a life!
I thought you asked for an example of the non "sense" of Simmons. No?
Calling you a moron is not name calling. It is proper taxonomy with a order of magnitude greater accuracy than Simmons' understanding of how deep the Gulf Of Mexico is.
You say he misquotes the depth of the GOM (if he did, as I do not have an encyclopedia of knowledge, and even though you treated me as a subordinant, I did not look up the number as you asked). And how does this error, that you claim he made, matter to the current situation? You have not specified any relovence to your prognostication.
Once again, if he mis quoted the depth of the GOM, so what? You are implying something without stating what it is. If I am to understand your point and its relevance, you must contextualize it for me. What are you implying? Are you saying that because he was wrong in the specified example of sea depth, that he is an uncredible source?
Maybe I am dense? I dunno...
And you are name calling. A child could correct you on that, sir.
Geeves, another martini, muah.
At least you are asking the right questions.
And how does this error, that you claim he made, matter to the current situation?
Knowledge builds on knowledge. That is why we go from K - 12 grade rather than the reverse. If you are serious in asking the question I quoted above, that demonstrates there are some more-fundamental pieces of information that you need to learn. (I'm not being nasty here; nobody knows everything).
They don't know anything when they are too lazy to go to google and look up the real depth of the GOM, instead wanting to be spoon fed "knowledge" without any reference or inclination to acquire knowledge by any of their own acts. I'm sure you understand the implications of this. Hence Simmons' popularity.
Mr Hendrix I have spent the last 2 months listing the statements that Matt Simmons, energy industry expert, has made that are impossible under the basic physical laws here in our world. An incomplete summary is listed above in this thread. Other commentators have alluded to others, all in this thread. I'd list them again here but I've been told my posts are to long and include to many facts - this therefore invalidates my arguments, oops - I've reached my word limit. Ta Ta for now............
You are telling me that you have facts please throw them at me I won't mind, I will consider them. And there is no way I am going to research what you have already posted, you have not peaked my interest to do so. I do not mean that as a slight, for hopefully you care less about my humble opinion.
I just want you to make a point, any point.
It's "piqued" not "peaked".
Muah. And Geeves, another martini.
You're building a straw man.
The spirit molecule is empathy. Remember empathy. Empathy is understanding. Let it be not veiled..
Putting Lindsay in jail was rough on you, I know.
Is it empathy that helps man harvest oil from great depths under the sea? Or is detailed knowledge of math and science? And if you don't know the required math and science, how can you properly evaluate anybody's statements?
what is the specific gravity of crude oil at ocean temps?
does that mean it sinks or floats?
where in the gulf of mexico are they hiding the lake of oil the size of delaware?
Well at least you are asking the right questions!
'Hmmm, there must be a coin slot on this thing somewhere!'
And by the way since you are in charge, please, do something! Or is this not a cataclysmic event? Should we all go back to our sandboxes now?
Yes LH. Those who know the math and science required to harvest oil from great depths under the sea are in charge of this conversation, here and elsewhere. Any statement that does not conform to the math and science principles of the oilfield does not contribute to this conversation in any meaningful way.
However, all are free to comment - no matter how meaningless the comments may be. I would hope at least some folks are learning from those who know what they are talking about on this subject.
I'm not allowed to make points. It irritates people, they feel I'm trying to "control" their minds and they get VERY irate because I'm attempting to "make" them think ......it's really quite worrisome.
A short, very incomplete list that could help you get started is here #482219
You might also follow up on Jim's suggestion above.So you made a point somewhere. Then I will wait to see it amongst the rubble.
YES!!! Faking his own psychosis!! I am begining to see a pattern emerge and I don't like it. I don't like it one bit!!!
Your a paid SHILL and You Know it! You are exposed.....Please leave and try to obtain a conscience as the Gulf waters are now poison. Why don't you dispute that? You know that our water is now poison and unfit for fishing and Killing what is left of Louisiana's way of life.
You make me sick, How you make attempts to confuse any counter issues that may shed a negative light on the oil industry.
Please read carefully. No one is defending the oil industry. Some are defending the math and science that actually makes it possible to harvest oil from great depths under the sea.
I have read the post of these individuals for almost a month now and it is funny how they always appear just to refute the only Clarion in mainstream that is standing up to this.
I know the hubaris that exist in the management engineering petroleum fields and it is what is wrong with what has happened so far.
They are showing up at the critical time when damaging information continues to be exposed because you cannot hide it.
They are not refuting the Clarion. They are refuting his application of math and science. They are pointing out which of his proposals are impossible under the physical laws of this earth. If abiding by what is actually possible according to the physical laws of this earth was important to you, perhaps he wouldn't be such a Clarion to you.
You seem to be swayed by his arguments because he is making himself clear to the media. Others evaluate his arguments and are not swayed by them, because they are not possible, given the physical laws that govern our earth.
But what if BP drilled two wells and both blew and the other one is the one no one is really talking about:
See here:
http://monkeyfister.blogspot.com/2010/07/i-think-i-understand-what-matt-...
In case the link does not work - from another blog following this mess:
I Think I Understand What Matt Simmons Is Talking About... According to THIS(.pdf), BP was to drill two wells on Block 252, designated #A and #B. see map, page 4, in pdf.Locations of the wells, as provided on page four of the map, Here same pdf as above)
WELL #A:
Latitude 28/44/17.277 N
Longitude 88/21/57.340 W
WELL #B:
Latitude 28/44/16.027 N
Longitude 88/21/57.340 W
#A was ~40 miles from the coast, #B was ~50 miles from the coast. This accounts for Simmons' 7-10 mile claim.
According to this Bloomberg Article, BP was having troubles with "the well, about 40-miles off the coast" and battling a problem with seabed cracks.
That, I believe Matt Simmons is trying to tell us, was Well #A. It had begun being drilled in late 2009, but drilling had to stop, as Hurricane Ida damaged the Transocean semi-sub Marianas, and it had to be pulled to port for repairs. Transocean semi-sub Deepwater Horizon was called in to finish, and they ran into the above problems.
Simmons, who in all his recent interviews keeps omitting this point, keeps saying that there is a big hole, and an oil lake, and the BOP was blown away, without giving the dates, or mentioning DWH was doing the drilling at Well #A. It seems to square easily that DWH was able to disconnect from drilling before the main #A blowout event on 13FEN2010. THAT BOP worked. If Simmons' is correct, the BOP was sealed, providing DWH time to disconnect. The pent-up pressure blew the BOP.
It would follow that DHW then moved to or near Site #B, and commenced drilling a Relief Well.
The DWH "Well #B" location is ~7-10 miles west south west of Site #A.
It blew-out on 20APR2010.
When we read the reports of workers calling this "The well from hell," I am thinking that they were not necessarily talking about site #B, they were referring to the entire Block 252, or perhaps Site #A.
Simmons spoke with Bloomberg just today... Based on this knitting together of events, please tell me if his whole story suddenly seems to make more sense, or if it still sounds nutty. He continues to call this the "the biggest environmental cover-up of our lifetimes." He continues to assert that there is a certain "confusion" involved, and believes it to be purposeful. I think, perhaps, that Matt Simmons is under a gag order of some sort regarding the events at Site #A, as he keeps blowing past the REASON for the seabed cracks, blown-off BOP, and oil lake, where Site #A happens to be. I think he's very cleverly provided plenty of clues that led me and others to bridge the gaps. OR-- we've been staring at the Bots too long.
See, here's the thing, when you drill 100 million dollar wells it is not a SECRET...lot's of people are involved. Other oil and gas companies track your activity VERY carefully because your results may impact their efforts. Supply boats must go back & forth, supplies are used, how to you wipe ALL those minds so no one wakes up one morning and says "hey - wasn't there another well..........."
You are an obvious BP troll.
Read all your shitty posts.
Are you dick cheney, in disguise?
You only trash simmons, with no backing of your own.
FOAD
Have you checked the news lately?
Clearly every signficant claim made by Matt Simmons was bullshit. If you read all my posts you know there was lot's of backing. An attempt to explain the technical reasons why Matt Simmons oil industry expert was a total crock of shit.
The Gulf is not dead, the well is plugged, there is not "other" secret leak with a lake of oil........................it was complete utter bullshit.
Either insanity is contagious, even through the internet (or rather, ESPECIALLY), or perhaps people (at least 3 to date) reviewing the evidence in complete isolation came to very, very similar conclusions as to possibilities that have not been discussed. Pls. see my comments further up in the thread.
I think that, while what he is saying may seem far fetched, that everyone should probably at least temper themselves a bit. He left his firm and immediatly went to work for a high level think tank, for goodness sakes. Those joints dont hire people that have lost their shit or have dementia.
There is at least a small chance that he could be a lone voice in the wilderness here. Given the gravity of what has happened, I personally would not want to be on record calling someone "full of shit" or "demented", when their background clearly puts them in a better position to make suppositions than my own. Anyone here that says he is "full of shit" has as much evidence for or to the contrary as anyone else that is defending him.
Chew on that and chill the fug out.
Since when did the propostion: "Water flows downhill" involve probabilites?
farfetched and violating basic physics are two different things.
one is possible. the other not.
getting back to the basics of zerohedge why don't i make you a market on the truth of matt's conjectures. i am a size seller. what do you say?
The headline story would be "high volume of calls bought today".
i wish.
it would be a hell of a lot easier than trying to make a living trading in this environment.
nowhere did i say i agree with him. im just saying everyone should leave a bit of room in their conjecture. I highly doubt this site is crawling with folks that have a better understanding of deepwater drilling than Matt Simmons.
That being said, I would not take the other side of your trade.
on this i agree with you. it seems that this site is littered with folks who have about the same basic understanding of physics and math as does matt and that appears to asymptotically approach zero.
Ah but you haven't been around and listening and your background clearly puts you in a poorer position to make suppositions than my own.
He is full of shit and the continued need to show it does make one wonder about dementia (I am not trying to be cruel, I'm serious).
Full of shit #1 - he claimed the flowing wellhead pressure was 60,000 psi (then later 70,000, then 100,000 depending on how worked up he was). I have posted here before an explanation of how one calculates the max pore pressure in this area, it took less than 45 seconds to calculate while waiting for my workstation screen to refresh. It is physically impossible for the wellhead pressure to have exceeded 15,000 psi so he's not even close and an energy industry expert would know it.
Full of shit #2 - the well is blowing out much deeper than 'they' are telling you, it's really over 23,000 ft deep. The Sigsbee deep, the deepest point in the Gulf is 12-13,000 ft depending on who you ask.
Full of shit #3 - the casing is GONE! If the casing had blown out the riser it would have been painfully obvious. The final string was 13,000 feet long. We have pictures of drillpipe in the riser - the casing would have had to blow AROUND that drillpipe while leaving it there (13,000' remember). Remember we watched them cut the riser, we know there was no casing IN it - so not only did you have to move the casing out of the entire hole, you had to clear another MILE of riser and blow it all out the top and into the dreaded Macondo Zone where steel disappears in the blink of an eye. An energy industry expert would know this.
Full of shit #4 - a lake of oil the size of Delaware on the bottom of the ocean. OIL FLOATS. An energy industry expert would know this. And just an aside for several comments above - DISPERSANT actually causes the oil to DISPERSE, there's a clue there somewhere. It does not dissolve it. It still floats but if forms an emulsion and rises much more slowly while dispersing into lower concentrations.
There are in fact many others, you could probably figure some out yourself - for instance, the BOP is GONE! An energy industry expert might click on one of the dozens of links to the ROV which are currently monitoring the BOP. Hell I bet even you might do that and form a supposition or two regarding Mr Simmons expertise.
Mr. Simmons,
Unfortunately has been correct and you have not! We know who he is and we know not who you are, Paid Shill is my guess...and this goes for Rockford and Augustus. You obviously are not from this area that is now dying and do not have a skin in the game.
Coastal Fishing and soon freshwater inland fishing will soon be dead and you will still be spewing how normal this all is and all will be well in several weeks when it will in fact be worse. I want the truth and Matt Simmons is the closest thing to it now and guess what from the inside of this hell hole industry it is also confirming his assertions so please you Judas Goat get back in the hole you crawled out of.
I have never claimed that anything is "normal" but please explain to me how a Matt Simmons PANIC-ATTACK solves any problems that need solving or result in any net good. Things are fucked up in the Gulf and they will be fucked up in the future and people will need to DO THINGS to clean it up and make it a less fucked up place to live and work. How should they do it? With a ouiji board and a magic-8-ball?
Answer me this are you in an Engineering field?
I asked you first. You answer me, and then I'll answer you.
you already have answered the question.....as an engineer, hubris is something you fight on a daily basis. I work with and have known your type before, and hubris is very dangerous if left unchecked,.....as you know we have an industry full of such hubris.
Cool, only one problem. I am not an engineer. I think the fact that you assume to know my profession is an example of the hubris that you would seem to detest. You need to check that hubris. I agree with you, it can be dangerous if left unchecked. It can lead to false assumptions even.
So, what does the Matt Simmons panic mode achieve for the people in the Gulf States and for the Gulf of Mexico itself. Please tell me. Does it make you feel like you are doing something, or are there actually some measurable results?
no it does not....We should be beginning to evacuate the Gulf within 200 miles of the coast in LA. Miss. and Ala.
You ask about Measurable results, by that you mean the documented gov or Bp results...the answer is no!
Okay, and will you renounce me as an engineer now please?
Should we evacuate the gulf coast because the well casing has blown out of the hole and the BOP has blown up with it and the relief wells don't have any chance of working because there is no casing in the hole?
See you are applying what you have read and observed in the past and what I am saying is this is a game changer in the sense that, there is not a known model for for this type of situation and clinging to data that also can be photoshopped does not necessarily entail true science as you know an error multiplied by and error increases such an error.
once again I am telling you that inside major oil patch companies, it is becomming known that much of what Matt Simmons is saying is common knowledge and already accepted.
Did you hear what I just said? Please grasp my words, this is no Joke.
If you really care about your fellow man and especially the families that are now destroyed in south Louisiana you will be honest with the data that is already known to us in the major oil field patch.
Pray tell what Mr Simmons has been correct about? And please don't tell me as has been stated here so often "Matt was right about the rate when BP was claiming 5,000". I have a bit of a problem with that when even more posters are constantly claiming that BP is risking the end of the world just to avoid allowing the well to flow BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT ANYONE TO KNOW WHAT THE RATES WERE. Somehow there's a bit of a disconnect. Mr Simmons was screaming 100,000 barrels because it's a nice round number. Kinda like "Dow 10,000"
And FYI I do live on the Gulf Coast and have MANY loved ones in South Louisiana.
Then shut your Pie Hole and do something to help other than your incessant pumping of the mainstream Egg Head mantra with constantly countering the lone mainstream voice that is correct in what is happening. I live and work in this industry and everything he is saying is already confirmed by the likes of Shell and Exxon. You are a bald face liar if you think this out of control situation has a fix or end point.
More inside data mounts that this is a dire situation, and I say again You are Exposed as a SHill! Be gone and please get a conscience!
Who is a shill? Me or Gasmiinder? I have non-shill credentials and "control issues"!
Then shut your Pie Hole and do something to help ...
Those who study problem solving are taught: 1) identify the problem; 2) generate multiple possible solutions; 3) pick a solution; 4) implement the solution. Then they are taught, if you have done #1 incorrectly, anything you do after that does not matter. That is, if you have not identified the correct problem, or define the problem correctly, anything you do after that will not likely solve the problem.
The folks here who know the math and science of the oilfield are helping. They are helping to bring the focus back to what the real problem is. But perhaps a larger point than that is this one: none of us here are playing any part in the solution. The only help that any of us can offer is to help stay focused on what the real problem is. In turn, that helps us better understand which proposed solutions are likely to be useful and which aren't. Not that we can do anything about the solutions anyway.
... we know not who you are ...
You don't need to know who he is. All you need to know is whether his comments conform to the math and science used to harvest oil from deep under the sea. Are you knowledgeable enough to judge his competence in this math a science? If you are, then you know he speaks the truth about Matt Simmons.
"The only help that any of us can offer is to help stay focused on what the real problem is"
you once again confirm what Matt and now many others in this field (myself included) now know, and that is the GOM is an unmitigated disaster....Period... and there is no real solution actually being employed only PR campaigns and Red Herring.
You fail to recognise that the information they disseminate is made for those who ague math facts, BUT THE DATA IS DOCTORED... GET IT YET Richard?
How can a pressure that is controlled with the correct density of mud suddenly increase so violently that it blows the well liner out? It is to these types of comments that the math and science meme is being directed. You keep sidestepping that fact. No one is denying that BP and the Feds are spreading misinformation.
... you once again confirm what Matt and ... (myself included) now know ... there is no real solution actually being employed...
I have confirmed nothing of the sort. But I am curious how you can know this is true. No one but BP and the Fed are allowed anywhere close to the center of activity. So from where does the information come that we are not closer to capping the well now than we were a month ago?
look, most everyone here is completely on board with the idea that the Government is intentionally attempting to snow the entire country. So why am I an idiot for thinking that they would cover this shit up too? Matt may be off base with his facts, but I am not about to disavow the idea that something could be fucked and they are not telling us.
That's not what I'm saying - none of the points I made deal with whether the gov't (and BP) are being deceptive. What I'm telling you is that Matt is not "off base with his facts". Matt is in fact loudly and repeatedly making statements that are FAR outside what is even possible and repeatedly making statements without even the slightest concern with accuracy. I am saying that an energy industry expert, with the knowledge base I am constantly told he has, and in his right mind would KNOW these things are not POSSIBLE. So to summarize - I'm telling you that one of the following is true 1) he does not have the expertise and knowledge people are claiming he does, 2) he is honestly not at full functioning cognitive levels, or 3) he is a liar.
One of those three things is true - or perhaps everything you've seen to date is fake, the "Capricorn" scenario is in effect in a situation that would require far more deception and staging than faking a simple old moon shot.
Hey man, if you truly have industry knowledge then I will respect what you are saying. I dont even really agree with him. I am just leaving room for the fact that there may be some fucked up shit we dont know and he may be closer to the outcome than others.
Yes, listen to Matt Simmons, but UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES should you think for yourself and evaluate statements (from ANY source) from a perspective of science and logic.
read what i wrote, you fucking douchenozzle. nowhere did I say that I a taking his words as fact. you are a troll.
I did read what you wrote, that is what prompted my reply. Why do you think I am a troll? Why does what I am or who I am matter to you? Why don't you argue at the "idea" level?
It simply does not follow that because I do not trust the government and what they tell me, I must suspend science, mathematics, and logic (ie. contemplate that maybe Matt Simmons is telling "the truth"). It's illogical as hell. Do you disagree with that, regardless of who/what I am?
DAMMIT JIM - you're trying to make them think again....med time, med time...........
No boilermakers? Cog Dis said she was sending in the nurse with my meds, but she never showed up. I think she took them herself. She has issues.
I am not going to discount anything entirely yet.
So you are not going to discount the idea that water naturally flows up-hill. You are not going to discount the proclamation that the gulf is 23,000 feet deep? You are not going to discount claims that the well pressure is signifantly higher than is suggested by the mud density required to drill the well?
And oil does not float to the surface when it is covered in dispersants - it sinks to the bottom. That is well documented and Texas Tech and other scientists have noted that there is oil floating "frozen" in the water column and they do not know what it will do.
but wait, i thought the 'real' leak was from a gusher miles away where there are no boats no rov's and no dispersants. i'm confused.
We all are.
Uhmmm - it sinks to the bottom but it's floating "frozen" in the water column? Which is it? From the Wikipedia entry:
To be fair we actually agree on this point - I've been telling people on this site for weeks that the REAL worry is the lack of knowledge about how the injection of dispersant at great depths and low temperatures effects the oil. How that oil is distributed and the impact on fish and ocean anoxia (dead zones) is real and VERY serious. Unfortunately those kinds of comments are quickly drowned out by the noise from underwater volcanoes and secret wells and methane tsunamis that will destroy life on earth. You can thank the credibility that is given to Matt Simmons energy industry expert for a great deal of that diversion. I'm telling you - IT'S ALL A SECRET BP PROPAGANDA OPERATION.
Gasmiinder: Have you ever checked out that Scientific American article I have referenced a couple of times? It links to a few interesting sources too.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-microbes-clean-up-oil-spills
referring SA confirms it. shill. thanks.
Pearls before Swine. Confirmed. Swine. thanks.
JR - I haven't read the whole thing because it locks up my Safari but the lede looks interesting. That whole area of research is intriguing, I knew a guy back in grad school who was working for a co in Austin testing some of this concept in the spill during Gulf War I. It has enormous potential. The bacteria require oxygen (in essence they are very efficient oxidizers of the hydrocarbon) and need to be applied and I'd suspect will work better when warm. What concerns me the most (meaning what I believe is really worth worrying about) is that dispersants have never been applied at these depths/pressures and there is no way to model this system in a laboratory (IMHO). They do effect the buoyancy and dispersal characteristics of the resulting hydrocarbons. There could be long-term serious impacts on a variety of ocean ecosystems and we don't know what those are - I'm not worried about it all coming up poisoning the coast. I'm worried about the damage to the ocean ecosystem, where that goes and for how long. I guess I don't have to worry too much because the "real" blowout from the hole in the ocean floor has no dispersant, good thing is super-duper heavy oil...
Agreed. Most of your concerns are addressed in that article ... action of dispersants, microbial action at extreme depths, etc. See how this one does with Safari ... it the the "print edition" link.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-microbes-clean-up-oil-spills&print=true
That one works. thanks.
Cool. There are some links in that article to supporting research papers, etc. iff you want to drill down.
BP has admitted it "photoshopped" an image of its Gulf Coast oil spill command centre, which indicated that staff were busier than they actually were. 21 July 2010, by Peter Hutchison (Telegraph.UK) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/oil/7902378/BP-blunders-and-bad-news-since-giant-oil-spill.html
**ATTENTION ZH READERS**
Please direct your attention to the self-proclaimed authorities on deep sea blowouts/seepages featured prominently in EVERY SINGLE OIL SPILL THREAD. They are easily identifiable by their haughtiness, condescending nature and bragaddocio, particulary in matters of "math, science and common sense". Of course no one can actually verify what engenders this sense of self-importance, particularly when we have no way of confirming that any of them aren't simply borrowing (cutting and pasting) from others, but do give them your undivided attention so that we might attempt to harness just a smidgen of their genius.
All further BP briefings will now be conducted by ZH's own perspicacious and highly knowledgable group of oil spill experts forthwith known as THE GROUP OF FIVE. Please direct all questions to these savvy gentlemen who obviously combine years of experience in deep sea drilling and petroleum engineering!! It is with great pomp and circumstance that I introduce THE GROUP OF FIVE . . .
RichardP, Augustus, Sheep92, Jim Rockford, Gasminder . . . . you're obviously some of the most gifted human beings to grace the internets. To what do we owe this extraordinary pleasure? Former Nobel Prize winners trying to blend in? Listless MIT professors who widdle away idle hours on ZH? Recently released NASA engineers? Judging by the authority with which you deride the opinions of others, you must moonlight as Petroleum Engineers specializing in deep sea drilling. What brings such an esteemed collection of mathematicians and scientists to this ignorant side of the internet? Well, anyway . . . please feel free to present your best scientific findings in excruciating detail. It's unfortunate that Crayolas cannot be employed towards this end so that the rest of us dummies can at least marvel at the pretty colors, but please do your best to bring it down to our level if you would be so kind.
oh geez, another BP shill trying to get instant street cred by calling us out. Wang foretold this ....
I'm the BP shill? Lol. Nope, just another knuckle-dragging, mathematically and scientifically challenged troglodyte trying to determine why you think (or more to the point, why we should think) you have any street cred at all.
So far . . . . FAIL. Snappy retort though!
Oh sir - why you've only been a member six weeks and 1 day. Immediately criticizing BP! And your writing is both more than 2 sentences, has subtle sarcarsm without actual name calling, and forms coherent statements.
For Gawd's sake - you meet each and every one of the criteria for BP shilling. You are not even a good shill, pay attention - this was covered at the last shill meeting - they're onto us you dipshit, we have to blend in with the morons now. Get your act together or I'll have your bonus checks stopped.
As opposed to your 10 week membership which makes you . . . an old timer? Do you two dipshits actually know what a shill is? A shill generally supports the product/corporation/person in question. So, in summation, if I'm vehemently criticizing BP, in what way am I the shill? You two linguistically challenged turds are, therefore, the shills. Geddit? BTW, has your check been stopped?
That's what a shill would say. Geez you are so transparent. Wang foretold all of this. It is written.
We'll see you 'round, Jimbo. Still waiting for you to blind us with science though. Somehow I suspect we'll see much more of this kind of posturing and much less actual "math and science". Sound about right?? Thought so . . . just another bullshit artist who got called out and gave us the "awww shucks" routine.
Well you haven't impressed me either. I figured BP could do better. You could have at least faked restless leg syndrome. Oh well.
Stop by tomorrow night, I'll make water flow downhill. I am sure you will be amazed.
I guess you never read my original offer, guaranteed to dazzle: #482739
Wake up numbnuts. Pay attention.
It is IMPOSSIBLE for the Macondo reservoir to have 60,000 psi pressures. That is not blinding science.
It is IMPOSSIBLE for the 13,000 ft casing string to have been blown out of the well bore and gone flying across the GoM unobserved. That is not blinding science.
You are heaving around characterizations of "bullshit artist" when you are being dumber than a Cargo Cult believer. I don't know what Crammer and Simmons are paying you, but you sure are a low grade shill so I hope it is not much. Maybe they decided it was only possible to get morons to believe what they spout and it would not cost much to hire them. When you go in on friday to get your cash,, see if you can get them to tell you the coordinates of the 100,000 bopd well. The sooner someone gets on it, the sooner that one can be plugged too. Quite hiding the facts and creating more damage on the Gulf coast.
@ First - you are missing a LOT of context from previous threads here. The post you are replying too was sarcasm based on the fact that each and every argument I made there has been used to accuse myself or others of being in BP's pay. In fact I have been told that criticizing BP means I'm a shill, that clearly written posts mean I'm a shill, that only being a member 10 weeks is evidence, that not being abusive enough is evidence, that presenting data means I'm a shill and so on ad infinitum. The first accusations of shilldom arrived within minutes of the first presentation of real-world science. The fact is that the mindset here - as shown by your instant reaction to our little discussion - is if you disagree with someone you assault their motives rather than go to the effort to engage their points.
A wonderful place to see this in action (and you really ought to read the thread) is here #478424
If you are really interested in where there has been hard science or appeals to reason posted you can try the following
#479925 #476325 #478336 #479796 #480065 #477838 #474671 #476396 #476700
IF you have the intellectual heft of the vast majority of respondents here, having been presented with the examples you asked for, you will reply "I'm not reading that crap" and continue on your merry path of ad hominem attacks.
I wonder how long it will take him to fake his own psychosis .... not that we haven't seen that before! <<<#480132>>>
sorry. no prizes. and not even a degree. just a lowly self employed quant struggling to get by.
Bullshit artist No. 3 . . . . FAIL!
does that mean u want to hit my offer on the great matt's proclamations?
i'll answer in advance for ya.
no. (cause otherwise that would mean u actually had a few cents too lose which seems highly doubtful)
fill in the appropriate blank for your reason ______________
<poof> and there went your get rich quick scheme. Bummer.
Interesting comment though about making a market. intrade.com has nothing on it.