This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Presenting A Dutch Proposal To Stop GoM Oil Spill "Within Days"

Tyler Durden's picture




 

The Netherlands has experience with controlling water: 2,000 miles of dykes preventing the sea from flooding the country's nether regions have taught the Dutch a thing or two about hydroisolation and spillover control. Unfortunately, as the last 40 days or so demonstrate so amply, neither the US nor the UK have the faintest clue how to stop the GoM oil spill which is now entering into the realm of the surreal. Which is why it may be time to learn from those who do know something about the matter. Zero Hedge has received the following proposal from Van Den Noort Innovations BV, which asserts it can get the GoM oil spill under control within days, and it doesn't even involve nuking the continental shelf.

From Johann H.R. van den Noort:

Please, be informed that we from our Dutch background water related inventions have found a most effective solution to stop the oil spill in the Mexican Gulf within a few days!

Just yesterday we have publicized this news on the front page of our website, see www.noort-innovations.nl

For the sake of all people concerned, we would appreciate that you could bring out this news on your website at your earliest convenience as so much time has already been lost. We have tried to reach president Obama but did not succeed on Memorial Day.

We are the first to admit we know nothing about the feasibility or practicality of the attached proposal, which is why we post it here and hopefully those who are experts on the topic can voice in. As the situation is indeed hopeless and getting worse, it may be time to consider every proposal, no matter how far-fetched it sounds.

Stop the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico:

 

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:36 | 385171 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

They tried something like this.

Because of the depth and temperature solid hydrates formed and essentially blocked the tube where the oil was supposed travel up to the ship. Creating for all intents and purposes a heart attack.

The hydrates are also very light and turned a multi-ton "dome" into a light weight feather.

The hydrate issue is why they haven't tried this again. If you can solve that than this sounds like a solid plan.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:40 | 385192 jkruffin
jkruffin's picture

Maybe they can take the box and attach a long heating tube to it and force heat into the box to counteract the ice crystal/slush formation??  It would have to be some serious heat from the top though to make it to that depth and still be hot, but if they used a forced draft fan technique to push the heat faster down the tube.  Who knows.  The box may not have sealed the hole completely, but it probably slowed down what was spewing out as fast.  At least they could recover as much as they could in the meantime, which was the idea to begin with I believe. 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:45 | 385198 Matto
Matto's picture

2 pipe valves go on top of ship/container without pipe attached and both left open.

 

Once in place turn one off and attach pipe, then open, turn other off.

 

yada yada. seems like a pretty simplistc analysis to me.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:01 | 385485 Bankster T Cubed
Bankster T Cubed's picture

What about this guy's idea? :  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVsmhH70580

Capture the spewing oil until that second hole is drilled and they can cement the bore.  why not? 

Makes more sense than any of the shit the experts have tried thus far.

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:13 | 385511 merehuman
merehuman's picture

once the well is closed a new problem may arise. They drilled so deep, past so many layers that there exists the possibility of a break far below. The oil under pressure may come up in unexpected places.

One needs to know the geology and  the condition of the pipe which has been getting sandblasted all this time.

Not as simple as our European friends make out.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:07 | 385584 Howard_Beale
Howard_Beale's picture

Thus the concerns of GW and the possibly unreported gusher 6 miles away creating these 22 mile long, 6 feet deep tubes of oil. They just can't be explained (in my mind, I could well be wrong) from the pumping BP mess on camera. I feel uninformed on the truth of this matter as I think we all do.

But since I am not feeling well at the moment my mind wanders to Austin Powers. Goldmember. The Dutch!  :)

For anyone who missed it, this article on the Nigerian Delta, which provides the US with 40% of our oil is a must read from the UK Guardian yesterday.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/30/oil-spills-nigeria-niger-delta-shell

 

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 02:31 | 385788 Escapeclaws
Escapeclaws's picture

Thanks for posting this article,HB. In the Niger delta, it's Shell Oil and in the GOM it's BP. I recently read that these oil companies and EXXON are dwarfed by the large state-owned oil companies of China and Saudi Arabia, as well as Petrobas. I wonder, therefore, whether, as this article suggests, these oil spills are the norm. Perhaps, the state-owned companies are also engaged in cover-ups, especially in distant areas where it's easier to ignore the fallout.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:22 | 385527 G-R-U-N-T
G-R-U-N-T's picture

Sounds like a great idea! May I suggest a crew to carry out this idea...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jocRd-aajW0

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:28 | 385540 Bankster T Cubed
Bankster T Cubed's picture

that's who's been on the job thus far

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:36 | 385559 G-R-U-N-T
G-R-U-N-T's picture

Indeed!

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:11 | 385638 Howard_Beale
Howard_Beale's picture

I was certain your youtube link would be this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWCk83FDTIw

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 01:08 | 385698 G-R-U-N-T
G-R-U-N-T's picture

That Gourd is a nice touch!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyXgTHvO1MA

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:49 | 385204 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

They would need very, very hot water, and they would need alot of it. I would think that would be an engineering feat of it's own seeing as it would be done in the middle of the Gulf Of Mexico.

I guess it's worth a shot...better than golf balls

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:55 | 385218 jkruffin
jkruffin's picture

The exhaust temps from a large high pressure boiler would probably be hot enough or a gas turbine unit like the Navy uses on its aircraft APU's.  That is enough heat to boil water that gets into the box if they keep it funneled down an isulated piping. 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:22 | 385268 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Use a nuke, not for detonation, but as a heating source, just like in a reactor.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:35 | 385422 Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

That's not how nukes work. You "tailor" the way they impact the environment by varying the explosive casing. A thick heavy strong casing results in a large blast. A thinner casing results in the nuke taking on stronger incendiary properties and less "explosive" properties. So you just use a small nuke which I'm guessing here but none are likely designed with anything other than maxium transportability and incindierary action.

Just guessing. I'm not a nuclear engineer but I'm pretty sure you can do quite a bit with getting the neutrons to slow their roll with the casing versus getting them to take off and interact at large distances unincumbered by the casing.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 07:01 | 386012 saulysw
saulysw's picture

Guys, please. This is a bad enough disaster without making everything radioactive as well. Forget anything nulcear. It's just NOT AN OPTION.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:51 | 385210 Noah Vail
Noah Vail's picture

Dablina is correct, this has already been done and can't work. This is amazing, people who don't know squat about deep sea wells are now all suddenly experts with easy solutions when they already got some of the tops minds in the world working on this.

This is not a damn dike at sea level in the Zider Zee fer chrissakes, its a fricking mile deep in the ocean. Nitwits.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:58 | 385223 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Zuiderzee... dank u wel :)

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:12 | 385248 Monkey Craig
Monkey Craig's picture

I agree that some of the smartest minds are now working on the issue. Unfortunately, an ineffective and  corrupt government was  supposed to regulate this fragile resource and collect revenues for the people of this country. Of course, the taxpayer is of no concern to the idiots in DC.

 

Why was BP not drilling a relief well at the same time as drilling the primary well? Why was the top hat being built after the blowout?

 

Don't bother telling your congressman. He or she is already scheming to bail the perpetrator out! This was a systemic problem of a government too fat and lazy (maybe they were paid to look the other way) to care about the middle class who make their living in the casinos, waterways and real estate markets of Alabama, Florida and Louisiana. The same was true with Madoff and the lazy regulators at the SEC.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WINDtlPXmmE

Yes I am mad as hell

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:03 | 385620 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

The entire system is broken, corrupt, compromised, defunct.  It is only operating on inertia at this point.  When it finally reaches terminal velocity (i.e. it slows below a certain level) then things will just fall apart quickly at that point.

The trick is to be able to wait it out while maintaining your sanity.  Days like these are really trying.

I am Chumbawamba.

 

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 09:59 | 386317 WilliamC
WilliamC's picture

"The entire system is broken, corrupt, compromised, defunct.  It is only operating on inertia at this point.  When it finally reaches terminal velocity (i.e. it slows below a certain level) then things will just fall apart quickly at that point."

Now here I have to agree with you.

Some sort of social/cultural inertia is exactly what seems to me to be carrying the entire US population at this point.

But it could still take years before the system unglues, or it could be this summer.

I just don't know...

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:08 | 385363 Jeff Lebowski
Jeff Lebowski's picture

I can only junk a post, not give it accolades, so here it is verbal format.

Well done.

As a mechanical engineer, I hear some well-meaning, but incredibly flawed rationale.  Thanks for the laugh.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 05:18 | 385931 cossack55
cossack55's picture

Are these the same top minds that are working on the economy?

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:38 | 385299 hbjork1
hbjork1's picture

bob_d....:

IMO, your answer is completely correct.

The pressure at a depth of 5,000+ft(slightly) is approximately 1,780 PSI.  The conversion is 0.145 PSI per kPa.  That converts to ~12,270 kPa

Wikipedia posts the following chart for the decomposition temperature of methane hydrate. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Methane_Hydrate_phase_diagram.jpg

It appears that the methane hydrate should form spontaneously and be stable up to a temperature 15 C. to 16 C. (Around 60 F.)

I have no information of temperatire at the bottom in that part of the gulf but I would guess it is cooler than that. 

So to make the dutch proposal work, they would probably have to establish a steady statecsurface water flush.

 

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:52 | 385326 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

2,190 PSI at the bottom and the temps there are around freezing. Contain the flow and the 8,000 PSI behind the BOP will do the rest. (It's gotta go somewhere right? :)

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:27 | 385400 Reductio ad Absurdum
Reductio ad Absurdum's picture

Pressure under water increases by 44.45 psi / 100 feet giving

5280 feet/mile * 44.45 psi / 100 feet = 2346.96 psi at 1 mile depth

(Crush depth for nuclear submarine Thresher was 2000 feet.)

Temperature at 1 mile down is about 3 degrees Celsius = 37.4 degrees Fahrenheit

Problem is the oil reservoir is 5 miles under the bottom of the ocean. So the oil is being squeezed by 5 miles of rock and 1 mile of water. It's also being heated by the earth's interior (increasing pressure further) and who knows if something like a magma chamber is pushing on it from below. So the oil is under enormous pressure.

Apparently however, that pressure can be capped with the right cement. The "top kill" idea was to put mud down the hole to temporary stop the oil, then pour concrete over that to permanently plug the leak. This attempt was stopped by the US government for reasons unknown (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aBFPCwr4B9b4):

U.S. engineers, led by Energy Secretary Steven Chu, yesterday told BP of “grave concerns” about drilling mud, and the company halted the process, White House energy and climate adviser Carol Browner said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” broadcast. “At the end of the day, the government tells BP what to do,” Browner said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

The government's control over BP is getting surprisingly little press coverage.

My guess is that the problem is not methane hydrate freezing in the containment dome (or upside down barge) since the hot oil should melt it; rather, it freezes in the narrow tube on the way up. This would happen with any narrow tube used to "vacuum up" the oil. Answer? somehow insulate and warm the tube?

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:37 | 385416 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Na... just don't let too much water in and use a large diameter 'riser'... those remaining hydrate flakes will rise!

Guys... the real question is what will happen when the pressure decreases as the oil/gas rises to the surface and causes the methane to suddenly come out of the oil? (Remember the natural gas is currently being dissolved into the seawater!)

That's the one to think about! Ha ha ha!

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:37 | 385427 Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

Umm. A million pull my finger jokes?

Ok what happens what happens? LOL

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 13:08 | 386936 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Well they tell us that half the flow is natural gas remember... and since that is by weight it would appear that there is going to be a lot of "Smoke on the water... a fire in the sky! "

It should be fine unless someone lights up a cigarette!

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:56 | 385477 Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

How much does 5,000 feet of riser pipe weight Zero?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GkOa5C5Jfw

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 13:40 | 386929 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Smokin' Jehosophats!

Not the way to do things apparently!

No real need to use 'pipe' actually... a high strength low weight polymer extruded film 'sleeve' should do the trick! Plus you can make 'em cheap and as long as you wish in one piece!

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:44 | 385439 Hillbillyfreak
Hillbillyfreak's picture

I heard someone from BP, the COO I think, talking about the tubes that go from the surface to the well.  I think it was a discussion of how they got/get the mud down to the well.  The "tubes" are actually tubes within tubes, conduit so to speak.  Whatever is being delivered is in the center tube.  They pump hot water in the outer tube to keep the delivery/center tube from freezing up.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:17 | 385520 gridlocked
gridlocked's picture

Too much pressure would have blown the well head

and that was the 'reasons unknown'. 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:24 | 385530 Bazza McKenzie
Bazza McKenzie's picture

Reductio, thanks for the quote: U.S. engineers, led by Energy Secretary Steven Chu, yesterday told BP of “grave concerns” about drilling mud, and the company halted the process, White House energy and climate adviser Carol Browner said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” broadcast. “At the end of the day, the government tells BP what to do,” Browner said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

It explains a lot of what is happening.

Aren't Chu and Browner part of the cap and tax proponents, the ones who think everyone but themselves should depend on windmills?

Do Obama/Chu still have those nuclear scientists down there? No disrespect to nuclear scientists and engineers. If there was a problem with a nuclear power plant, they'd be the people I'd want sorting it out, not some oil well drillers. But when the problem is an oil leak under a mile of water, nuclear scientists are only marginally more relevant than the thousands of geniuses now posting their solutions on ZH and lots of other sites.

The relevant expertise is in BP, and Exxon and Shell, and the drilling companies that serve them. Whether the best of the best are engaged in trying to fix this I don't know. A top flight operations manager would ensure they were. I am pretty confident that none of the best of the best for this job will be coming from Washington, or the Department of Energy, and certainly not from the WH -- and the more Washington and the WH have to do with it, the longer the problem will persist.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 07:14 | 386025 No Hedge
No Hedge's picture

put narrow tube in larger tube...then make vacuum in larger tube...this will isolate narrow tube...if that doesn't help..just nuke it :D

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:40 | 385302 LiquidBrick
LiquidBrick's picture

The hydrate issue is why they haven't tried this again. If you can solve that than this sounds like a solid plan.

Dry Ice might have a neutralizing effect on the hydrates, preventing them from occuring at that depth and pressure. Not a scientist or anything, just a crazy idea.  Anyone know if dry ice can maintain its potency for long durations 5,000 feet below sea level while creating a protective "shield".

Or maybe instead of pumping mud into the well, pump dry ice into it - fight hydrates with hydrates - freeze the focker.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:40 | 385306 LiquidBrick
LiquidBrick's picture

The hydrate issue is why they haven't tried this again. If you can solve that than this sounds like a solid plan.

Dry Ice might have a neutralizing effect on the hydrates, preventing them from occuring at that depth and pressure. Not a scientist or anything, just a crazy idea.  Anyone know if dry ice can maintain its potency for long durations 5,000 feet below sea level while creating a protective "shield".

Or maybe instead of pumping mud into the well, pump dry ice into it - fight hydrates with hydrates - freeze the focker.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:40 | 385308 LiquidBrick
LiquidBrick's picture

The hydrate issue is why they haven't tried this again. If you can solve that than this sounds like a solid plan.

Dry Ice might have a neutralizing effect on the hydrates, preventing them from occuring at that depth and pressure. Not a scientist or anything, just a crazy idea.  Anyone know if dry ice can maintain its potency for long durations 5,000 feet below sea level while creating a protective "shield".

Or maybe instead of pumping mud into the well, pump dry ice into it - fight hydrates with hydrates - freeze the focker.

If this works can I get a ZH T-shirt signed by TD?

 

 

 

 

 

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:13 | 385642 Howard_Beale
Howard_Beale's picture

Wow..a quad...haven't seen one of those in a while.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:05 | 385355 Thorny Xi
Thorny Xi's picture

There's also the problem that the seabed around the well, and in the Gulf in generally, is not solid - it is mud, hundreds of feet deep, but mud.  With the lower formation static  pressure at 13,000 psi (and the flowing pressure at 9,000 psi, 6700 psi more than the water pressure), there's no way to seal the container.  Piling rocks on it will simply push it down in mud.  Flow restriction will build pressure and the oil will quickly blow out the mud bottom of the containment vessel, no matter how big.

This is a volcano.  Opened in error, but there's no other term for it.  Mexico had a VERY similar experience off their shores in 1979, when they drilled to 11,000 feet and lost the drilling mud into a cavern full of hot oil.  (BP pumped the mud out to save money.)  Pemex's  luck was better - it wasn't as big a volcano - but I remember tar balls on Florida's north coast for years after that one.

 

 

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:55 | 385607 DeeDeeTwo
DeeDeeTwo's picture

Exactly, baby. Ya got 100s of feet of loose material = "mud" down there before ya hit rock formations. Even a nuke may not seal it off. The crude would just start bubbling up in 1000 different places.

These idiots are drilling two (2) relief wells thru 13,000 feet of rock. Takes months. The furthur down... the slower the drilling. The 2nd in case the 1st fails. They have to hit a spot a few meters across. What if both fail? Why are they not drilling 10-20 relief wells? To stay within a corporate budget, of course. The "top kill" fiasco convinced me to buy puts betting on the "black gold" still a-spewing on election day in November, baby.

It may not be the Golfer-In-Chief's fault, but Katrina changed the rules forever... bye bye Bambi.

Only one man on this earth can stop this catastrophe, one man... Richard Bruce Cheney. Pick up that phone, Barry.

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:57 | 385611 Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

thank you for posting the differential pressure.  I know a little about hydraulics and i was wondering how they kept the first dome in place.  Large domes would have an even harder time staying out since there would be larger forces acting to displace it.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:45 | 385175 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

I like it! Heck I like anything that might control the leak. Problems may of course arise when hurricanes pass through... to alleviate the bouyancy of the hydrates (above) just utilize a very a small part of the vessel for flow through channel (increases pressure on oil to flow upwards) and the topside ballast should take care of the rest...

The only huge problems I see is getting it down in the proper position... and if it doesn't work how do you remove it?

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:33 | 385176 Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

Looks like an improved version of the cofferdam.  Perhaps the only reason to continue with spewing oil everywhere is because the crisis is not quite big enough at 1 Exxon-Valdiz's every 4 days.  I was just thinking, "You know, things just are just not fucked up enough."

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:42 | 385668 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

Yeah I think they did it to take our mind off the bankers. One big withdrawal to forget about all those little deposits

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:33 | 385178 taraxias
taraxias's picture

One word: NONSENSE.

 

As I posted long before the failed "top kill"/"junk fill" attempts, the leak will stop when the reservoir empties. BP and the USG have known that all along, everything else is nothing but kabuki theater.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:02 | 385228 knukles
knukles's picture

And don't forget! 
It's the US Government and Scientists Worldwide who'd like to get into the Weather Modification Business!  
Rectify that bad Old Man Made Global Warming! 

Not Nice to Fuck with Mother Nature.

WTF, Genetically Re-engineering Cellular Life, too!
Oh, the Fun We Will Have.  And this is Just A Leak.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:25 | 385273 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Who cares if genetic engineering can keep millions from starving or make medicine for people cheaply enough that even the 3rd world can be cured.

Ignorant moron, Zippy is a perfect avatar for your kind.

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:55 | 385335 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

snowball777

I always find this logic confusing.
We should feed the worlds poor.We should offer free medicine to the poor to extend their lives. Yet the world is overpopulated.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:15 | 385379 Conrad Murray
Conrad Murray's picture

Or is it underresourced?  Maybe we just need to focus our efforts on Star Trek style replicators.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 01:34 | 385730 Mark_BC
Mark_BC's picture

"We should feed the worlds poor.We should offer free medicine to the poor to extend their lives. Yet the world is overpopulated."

Birth rates drop when people are lifted out of poverty. That's why the western world has a huge demographic of babyboomers soon to be demanding retirement income, with a smaller younger population of their offspring to pay the bills.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 07:25 | 386043 No Hedge
No Hedge's picture

it is clearly overpopulated...but only China is trying to do something about it...with questionable success

future of mankind is gloom....in nature only fittest survive...but humans think they are top of it...we are sponsoring poor, sick...and guess what...we only make possible for poor and sick to breed...and tomorrow we will have more of poor and sick...so, world will look even more overpopulated...

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:18 | 385383 nmewn
nmewn's picture

It's all hunky dorey until they genetically engineer seed corn that is sterile when mature...like Monsato attempted to do...corner the seed market at the risk of...???

Be careful what you wish for.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:48 | 385676 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

Took the words out of my mouth. Always a good idea to have a poison company take over the food business

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 05:30 | 385943 nmewn
nmewn's picture

I meant no disrespect to snowball...she probably didn't know Monsanto tried that.

The larger point is corporations & governments are run by humans, who have all the same vices & virtues of us all...my approach to both organizations is with a cynical eye and my hand on my wallet until proven otherwise.

Regards.

Thu, 06/03/2010 - 03:59 | 391259 thisandthat
thisandthat's picture

If you think an oil spill is bad, imagine an organism that can reproduce itself going wrong...

Happy dreams.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:35 | 385183 jkruffin
jkruffin's picture

The first problem I see with this proposal, is the same problem as the stupid "Top hat" containment box attempt.  The temperature of the water began forming ice crystals/chunks.  Maybe with a larger size "box" like a ship may be better, but I highly doubt it, and I would think it would cause more ice to form.  Not an expert by any means, but JMO.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:32 | 385195 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Yes but remember the oil temps down in the reservoir are around 180 degrees so most of that heat will remain... it's the reaction with the cold water at high pressure that causes the probs...

I'm still in favor of the Quicksilversilver Bullet... if you can slowly test inject 100 gallons of extremely dense liquid mercury into the 18 inch diameter riser below the BOP through the mud injector ports and it doesn't blow out... it will work. 102,000 Kgs will be required  to settle into a 1,000 foot column in the 7 inch tapered riser 17,000 feet down which will cost just over $3 million... Oh... and if the casings or pipes are cracked? Mercury flows! unfortunately BP doesn't like to spend that kind of money when drilling mud is so cheap!

Just in case someone wishes to remind me how dangerous elemental mercury is remember to check your mouth out first... dental amalgam contains guess what?

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:02 | 385618 Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

now that is a hellava idea...golden star for you....seriously

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 14:01 | 386989 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

It's all dependant on flow velocities in the lower pipes and risers... and to make those calculations we require the REAL numbers!... but it's not quite as simple as I am making it out. It will immediately reduce the flow from the moment it is injected but there are big challenges once the pool of mercury builds up above the 7 inch tapered riser. (Think of a cylindrical 'tube' of mercury building up on the inside surface of the pipe... where flows are slower due to frictional resistance and eddies at the taper... while the crude moves through the center)

While the oil gushes through the centre until that 'structure' becomes unstable due to the increasing weight of injected mercury... The velocity/pressure of the  oil will initially prevent the mercury from descending further until the accumulted mass approaches 100K Kg. At that point it will suddenly descend down the 7 inch tapered riser and literally slam into the reservoir rock inducing severe fracing. If it holds (which it won't since much of the mercury like previous drilling mud will 'dissappear' into the porous reservoir rock) then you are OK. The way around this problem is actually two-fold and while lengthy it's very simple... but I'm not sure anyone here wishes to hear how it can be done.

If they did I would tell them to inject only half of the mercury at first which will remain suspended by oil pressure/flow while placing pressure downward slowing the oil.... then with the pressure at the BOP reduced by over half actually... try a modified junk shot again... if it works the mercury will settle to the bottom of the string since the flow will be yet again reduced. If the junbk doesn't plug just add more mercury reducing pressure until it does. If the mercury accelerates too fast it can be controlled by opening a valve on the second mudport to let the flow of escaping oil to briefly increase thus taking the Ooomph out of the hit when it descending column of mercury reaches the reservoir formation. Then just slowly inject the remaining mercury and once things stabilize send down a small amout of concrete to make a plug. Once it cures make a larger plug on top... rinse and repeat presto-chango no leak!

Oh well... I'm just an idiot kitty but thanks for the vote of confidence Dr. No!

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:17 | 385647 Howard_Beale
Howard_Beale's picture

I had all my amalgams removed due to health issues. And remember that swordfish has been a serious mercury infuser into the human body for years.

But you are a creative kitty and I always like your ideas. Doesn't mean I would ever eat anything from the Gulf in this lifetime, though.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 13:28 | 387004 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

I'd love to have my amalgams removed but I'm terrified of the dentist!

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:03 | 385230 knukles
knukles's picture

How about sinking a battleship on it?

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:08 | 385240 jkruffin
jkruffin's picture

So we call North Korea?  You know how bad they want to be welcomed by the world community and they are dying to sink another ship. LOL

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:46 | 385262 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

But did they sink the ship?... better check this letter to Shrillary out!

The first recorded distress call from the Chenoan was "Grounded". I think only an idiot Captain could confuse a torpedo blast that blew your ship into two with being grounded Mr. Mysteryjunkerperson!

Course that's only the opinion of the Civil Investigator of the Korean National Assembly... that's South Korean my friend!

http://www.seoprise.com/~bu/dk/Letter_to_Hillary_Clinton_US_Secretary_of...

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:16 | 385380 ZerOhead
Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:20 | 385526 dark pools of soros
dark pools of soros's picture

it smelled of that since day one

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:06 | 385625 Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

The shit marines will do to keep from getting evicted.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:38 | 385187 John McCloy
John McCloy's picture

  That works however you would think that someone over at BP would have already thought up just creating a large steel compartment similar to the skeleton of ship. Since this would basically be a large containment dome the question would be how feasible it is to strategically sink/lower a ship of this size and would not the ice crystals still pose the same problem?

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:38 | 385188 berated
berated's picture

I think the solution is cheese, and lots of it.

Cheese has always stopped me up if I eat too much of it.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:54 | 385205 knukles
knukles's picture

Charades.
Guess Who?

Scene 1.
(Stern visage, narrowed eyes, business like demeanor)
"I'm in charge!"
(Slams hand on Bully Pulpit.) 
"Have been Since Day One!"
(Thrusts big finger upwards, wrenching shoulder and tearing suit coat seam.)
"We're doing everything we can."
(Stare Down TV Camera, shout out to reporter from pool representing Times-Picayune.)
"I am in Charge, Control!  Make No Mistake About It"

Scene 2.
(Shaking with rage, veins on neck and forehead bulging, forgetting Colin Powell's homily, "Never Let 'Em See You Sweat") 
(Arms Akimbo, Tapping Foot) 
"I'm Enraged" 

Whose got the Venn Diagram with the No Solution Set?  Cognitive Dissonance, anyone?

 

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:40 | 385194 Dirtt
Dirtt's picture

Disclaimer: Not an expert

But that being said common sense has repeatedly 'outperformed' expertise since 2007.  And the solution put forth by Van Der Noort is pure genius in it's simplicity.

And if there is anything we have learned about our government it's that they prefer complexity over simplicity.  How else can the sinister %$#^%#'s rob the country blind or hide perplexing incompetence and corruption.

BP & The Feds?  Sounds like Kid Creole and the Coconuts have competition.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:54 | 385213 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Right on the money Dirtt!

That said...

Disclaimer... I am not a Harvard or Yale graduate!

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:06 | 385236 knukles
knukles's picture

Which is preferable?
"I'm not a Harvard or Yale graduate.", or "I'm not a graduate."?

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:27 | 385275 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

I grudgingly admit you may be correct that it's the former... unless you are graduating in economics or finance and wish to work in Washington or New York in which case it's clearly the latter!

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:30 | 385548 merehuman
merehuman's picture

yea. i got a GED at 17. I was so much smarter then.

So somebody please tell me what happens when the oil comes out and nothing gets put back in? Wont the seafloor sink lower yet? Wont that imply earthquakes or sink holes in our future?

Is there worse to come is the real question embedded here.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:46 | 385199 jkruffin
jkruffin's picture

An idea I thought about, is to use the underwater putty that hardens underwater like they use on cooling towers or some JB Weld.  That stuff hardens like a rock even under water.  Pump enough of that stuff down in the hole and it could buy them some time to build something over the hole like the idea in the article.  Problem would be getting enough of putty in a huge quantity like they would need.

Or get one huge ass rubber ball gasket and use a robot to stuff it in the hole and keep pressure on it.  LOL

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:46 | 385200 Trimmed Hedge
Trimmed Hedge's picture

The Dutch think they're a bunch of know-it-alls.

 

My industrial-sized tampon idea is much, much better.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:53 | 385464 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

ShamWowpon, capped off with a 1000 lbs of JB Weld and have Chuck Norris push down on the whole thing until the relief wells are completed.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 03:26 | 385840 Slewburger
Slewburger's picture

Sorry I didn't hear you earlier I was doing push downs on my Total Gym.

Steven Seagal suggested I should spike a whale like a football over the top of the stack.

I oppose animal cruelty so I think our best bet is to just have me roundhouse the top of the riser like a North Vietnamese soldier.

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:48 | 385203 Diogenes
Diogenes's picture

Why don't hydrates block the leaking pipe?

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:50 | 385207 Trimmed Hedge
Trimmed Hedge's picture

Because in MakeBelieveLand, just about everything has this funny way of working out just fine in the end....

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:10 | 385241 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

Like peace in the Middle East?

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:17 | 385378 hbjork1
hbjork1's picture

dio...:

Sufficient water must be present to form the hydrate with the gas (methane =C-H4). 

Did you ever wonder why ice floats? 

As you cool water, density increases until it gets to 4deg C. Then, fortunately, it decreases slightly until it has formed solid ice crystal. Under Mother Nature's rules the water molecules H2O are arrange in a structure that has "cages" or cavities that can contain a molecule of gas in the cages if the ambient pressure is high enough.  The gas, due to what are called Van der Walls forces,  actually makes the crystal stable at temperatures higher than the normal formation temperature.  

A number of gases form hydrates with water but methane is what is mixed with the oil.

The best people we have will be offering suggestions on this problem and I am wishing them good luck.  But it is whale of a problem.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:52 | 385211 mogul rider
mogul rider's picture

I had a brain fart or brain waveI'm not sure which.

 

What if we stuffed it with politicians? If they all farted down there the oil wouldn;t freeze would it? I mean we could keep them down there for like a week or two just long enough for them to get the oil out.

hmmm. I'm on to something - I'm sure hwat but I'm on to something here.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:54 | 385215 Anarchist
Anarchist's picture

The work entailed to do this would take many months of preparation. The two relief wells will be done by then. 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:57 | 385221 grunk
grunk's picture

Dutch Boy wants to stick his finger into the leak, let him.

If it works, he gets a Nobel Prize next year, not Obama.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:58 | 385224 glenlloyd
glenlloyd's picture

Well with BP's exceptional track record so far why not give someone else a shot, couldn't be any worse than what we've got now.

Past attempts at "top hat" or what ever they called it used a smaller vessel than what's being proposed here, and although hydrates could form just inject a whole bunch of Plavix in there to break it up. Let's get big pharma in there to do their part.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:58 | 385225 John McCloy
John McCloy's picture

P.S.- The futures just found their cement Nikes.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:19 | 385265 Trimmed Hedge
Trimmed Hedge's picture

Gotta love how all the sizeable moves occur during overnight futures trading....

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:04 | 385233 jdrose1985
jdrose1985's picture

They need to stop fucking around and at least get some type of real damage control going on.

Why not make a pipe collar to slip over the (sheared off??) pipe and connect that to a new downpipe hooked to a supertanker??

Or position some hoses directly in the plume to siphon as much crude as possible away from the leak and centrifuge the water out?

Sorry not familiar with oil patch lingo.

 

 

 

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 07:46 | 386079 GBruenetti
GBruenetti's picture

They tried that first. Didn't work.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:14 | 385234 Mercury
Mercury's picture

This seems to be a variant of the "drop something big and heavy over the hole" idea that keeps coming to my mind - except that there is a built in pipe on this plug to better facilitate the removal and containment of the oil afterwards.

Forget about the subsequent recovery of the oil for a minute - why exactly is the "drop something big and heavy over it" idea such a non starter?

The hole's a mile under water and the oil is obviously under tremendous pressure to be spewing out in the first place against that water pressure but it is still, at the end of the day at three fucking foot wide hole in the ground...and I'm sorry but someone is going to have to explain how a three foot wide oil spout is suddenly the strongest force in the universe.

Are we to understand that if you took some giant, flat-bottomed cement barge the size of a football field and sank it on top of this thing that the oil would somehow leak out the sides or blow right through the barge like a chainsaw through butter? Really? I don't believe it.

Worry about recovering the oil some other day for Krissakes.  Find something gigantic and dense and flat and drop it over the the damn thing like a thumb over a nicked artery. Then you've bought some time to worry about repairing the plumbing.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:16 | 385252 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

The oil pressure from the leaking riser is enough to balance 2.5 fully loaded 747's (this doesn't even take into account the ultra-light hyrdrates that form at those pressures/temperatures)

I'm not a rocket scientist (they have several working on this issue) but dropping something "big and heavy" of that size accurately enough to not cause more harm than good might be something that can't be done.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:20 | 385260 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

The oil pressure from the leaking riser is enough to balance 2.5 fully loaded 747's (this doesn't even take into account the ultra-light hyrdrates that form at those pressures/temperatures)

Well if that's true, there's no way they're going to be able to cap it, like they're planning.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:29 | 385283 New World Chaos
New World Chaos's picture

Yup.  Sinking this ship cannot seal the leak because the pressure is just too high, and it will be distributed over the entire belly of the ship.  Think about a hydraulic press, where a tiny input hose can create enormous force over a large area.   The ship will float off the muddy bottom like an air hockey puck and the oil will ooze out all around the edge.  If this method is to work, they will need to keep the oil flowing up to the tanker until the reservoir runs dry.  That will require a stirrer inside the sunken ship to keep methane hydrate crystals from forming.

Something like this might be necessary to capture oil from the distant second leak.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:27 | 385402 Frank Owen
Frank Owen's picture

Pressure = force/area. So, they are basically increasing the area to decrease the amount of PSI because it is distributed over more inches of area.

Operation Enorme Sombrero.

The whole thing makes sense hydraulically - but the hydrates are another matter.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:45 | 385441 New World Chaos
New World Chaos's picture

If this thing is supposed to stay put, then the pressure in the entire cargo-hold full of oil would equalize to be the pressure inside the well.  So, force/area ~ constant (if you ignore buoyancy effects, which are relatively small in this case). 

Increase the area, increase the force.  Same as in hydraulics, and the area of the belly of the cargo-hold is friggin huge.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:36 | 385468 Frank Owen
Frank Owen's picture

edit: my comment above is totally wrong. Sorry, been outside drinking beer most of the night. lol

What messed me up (apart from the beer) is when they are sucking the mixture up to the top it is no longer a closed system.

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:31 | 385288 Mercury
Mercury's picture

An airplane, even a 747, doesn't weigh very much...by definition in fact.  I mean, there's a reason cement is transported by barge and not airplane. A floating cement rectangle gets into the millions of pounds range pretty quickly.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:45 | 385312 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

2.25 million pounds is quite heavy.

Hydrates will also make it much, much lighter.

So let's assume 4-4.5 million pounds. How do you accurately drop something of that size down 5,000 feet under the surface without making a mistake and damaging the riser even more?

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:41 | 385576 merehuman
merehuman's picture

make the geology public so we all know what we are up against! BP says we cant see that info. But it is extremely pertinent in this case.

There is a place near jakarta that has a mud vulcano where none was before in the middle of a city. All caused by an off shore well.  Switzerland developed earthquakes once they tapped the geothermal. I dont think the oil companys care about the consequences, do you?

Do oilwells have anything to do with earthquakes?

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:47 | 385320 Glenjo
Glenjo's picture

A fully loaded and gassed 747-8 weights a bit short of one million pounds.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:50 | 385325 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

Right...about 900,000 pounds.

 

2.5 x 900,000 = 2.25 million pounds

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:53 | 385324 Mercury
Mercury's picture

An airplane, even a 747, doesn't weigh very much...by definition in fact.  I mean, there's a reason cement is transported by barge and not airplane. A floating cement/steel rectangle gets into the millions of pounds range pretty quickly.

The newer 747-400 has a max takeoff weight of 910,000 lbs. 2.5 of those equals 2.275 million lbs. or 1137 tons.  Well here's a cement barge (for sale right now!) that can be loaded to 45,000 tons. http://www.maritimesales.com/DD10.htm

I don't thing I'd put my money on the 3 ft. hole in the ground.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:57 | 385332 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

Is this hole that you're putting your money on 5,000 feet below the surface of the sea?

The pressure of liquid acting on a container or other body increases at the rate of 1 atmosphere or about 14.7 lbs. per square inch for every increase of 33 feet in depth. So doing the math results in: 400ft./33ft. = 12.121. Multiplying that by 14.7 lbs. per square inch yields about 178 lbs. per square inch at 400 feet deep.

We still not have resolved the issue of hydrates which equates to pumping hyrdrogen gas into the structure you will like to drop on the hole [it makes the object more bouyant and thus much lighter]

The game changes 5,000 feet under. We aren't talkin' about your backyard here.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:11 | 385342 Mercury
Mercury's picture

Well the "container", my barge,  would be filled solid, not like a hollow submarine but like a brick.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:56 | 385688 UncleFurker
UncleFurker's picture

 

>Are we to understand that if you took some giant, flat-bottomed cement barge the size of a football field and sank it on top of this thing that the oil would somehow leak out the sides

Yes. you are correct.

The bottom of the ocean there is NOT ROCK, it is metres and metres of mud, sand and fish crap.

 You could drop the friggin deathstar on top of the wellhead, and the oil would just find another exit.

 

 

 


Tue, 06/01/2010 - 07:29 | 386045 saulysw
saulysw's picture

"You could drop the friggin deathstar on top of the wellhead, and the oil would just find another exit."

I wondering if this can be true. If so, then no form of cap could ever work. Clearly there are caps on other wells that do work, so..??

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 07:44 | 386075 GBruenetti
GBruenetti's picture

It is absolutely possible (not sure, but possible) that capping this well won't work or even make it worse.

That's why they are drilling relief wells. A proper relief well may be the only possible way to stop this thing (apart from letting it run dry).

In the meantime they try some other ideas to at least reduce the spill.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:11 | 385244 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

Why the f*** does it have to be a nuke anyway?  Can't they just drop a high explosive torpedo down the tube and detonate it when it reaches the bottom???

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:59 | 385690 UncleFurker
UncleFurker's picture

 

Get someone to open up a high pressure fire house on you and if you can swim up the water jet to the firehose, you can post your suggestion again and it will be taken seriously.

 

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:13 | 385246 Willzyx
Willzyx's picture

Again, not an expert, but this sounds too simple.  I was expecting more from the Dutch.  From what I understand the leak is too deep, too cold, and the oil is under too much pressure compared to what anyone is capable of handling.  Are nuclear weapons the only possible solution?  Otherwise, the leak will stop when the reserves run dry.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:17 | 385250 Platypus
Platypus's picture

I'm really starting to believe that BP does not want that spill to stop. All over the net you can find some bright ideas about how to stop or at least contain this thing until they finish the relieve drill.

I don't know what they are up to, but I'm smelling a rat somewhere.

Maybe the leak is not that bad and they are blowing the thing out of proportion so they can pay for the platform sinking through tax gimmicks. Since Wall Street gave the exemple now everybody wants a little piece of public money.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:47 | 385321 primus
primus's picture

Everyone is a fucking expert in Idiot America. Which is to say, when everyone is an expert, nobody is.

Think what you want, BP, industry and the government have 1000's of years of combined experience working on this issue around the clock. And then we have millions of crackpot internet gambits. 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:38 | 385411 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

[duplicate]

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:37 | 385425 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

[duplicate]

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:36 | 385426 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

Experience != Intelligence

Which is why this happened in the first place.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:51 | 385462 primus
primus's picture

BP didn't do this.

Individuals working for BP and Transocean fucked up. Likely US citizens that were doing their best to provide for their families and dropped the ball. And lets not forget, if the glutton US didn't burn up 20 mn bbls of the stuff Every. Single. Day. BP wouldn't have been drilling for oil in the gulf. Don't lose sight of that.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 05:29 | 385941 cossack55
cossack55's picture

What one should not lose sight of is the oxygen/CO2 transference of phytoplankten in the oceans, as in "Where the fuck are the dinosaurs?" kind of action.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:47 | 385447 OldTrooper
OldTrooper's picture

You may be right.

But then I haven't heard a single idea that would work worse than what these BP-Govt wizards have done.

If we took your advice on everything our country would be insolvent, our military would be spread out fighting all over the world, half of GDP would be consumed by governments and ... never mind.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:56 | 385473 primus
primus's picture

If you really think they couldn't have done worse, you don't have much of an imagination. So far, they are spending millions everyday trying to fix it, I don't know what you would have them do?

If you took MY advice, we would have forced ourselves off oil 35 years ago when Jimmy Carter told us too instead of laughing him out of office and continue on building our suburban utopia, happy motoring economy, a living arrangement with no future if their ever was one.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:13 | 385507 John McCloy
John McCloy's picture

  Carter was a fucking clownshoe. Anyone who carries empty luggage to give the appearance of being a man of the people and treated his secret service agents with disdain can keep their opinions to themselves. It is no great calculus to uncover that finding an alternative swiftly to something that is costly, toxic and that we have a finite amount of would be a good idea. 

     No worries Primus in 107 years we went from the Orville brothers to planes capable of flying 6000 mph. Trust me when I tell you that aviation and our sources of energy will be unrecognizable in the next 100 years.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:34 | 385554 primus
primus's picture

No worries Primus in 107 years we went from the Orville brothers to planes capable of flying 6000 mph. Trust me when I tell you that aviation and our sources of energy will be unrecognizable in the next 100 years.

Another technological fundamentalist.

That is because there won't be anymore airplanes, which all are built, maintained and run off fossil fuels. Unless you believe in the shaman scientists that think a never ending series of magic tricks can defeat the second law of thermo-dynamics which rules the universe. They are not alone, there are plenty of shaman economists that think run-way over-indebtedness can be 'solved' solved with more debt. 

The foundations of modern advancement of technology is built on liberal supplies of fossil fuels, and when they run dry, so will the technology.

It is no coincidence that that modern aviation came to be in the infancy of the oil age and if you haven't noticed the 'diminished returns' on our technology investments since American oil production peaked, sorry.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 09:09 | 386228 Canoe Driver
Canoe Driver's picture

We went from Kitty Hawk to 2 or 3,000 miles per hour (not 6000, smart guy) in a few decades because of oil.  Without it, you can believe we will be burning trash in steel drums to keep from freezing.  And it's now inevitable.  Also inevitable is that TPTB will take the last of it for themselves, their military, and their police state.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 15:23 | 387398 OldTrooper
OldTrooper's picture

The point being that nothing the 'experts' did worked worth a damn.

 

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:58 | 385689 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

If government and major industry are the only experts to listen to why are you on this site

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 04:26 | 385879 Slewburger
Slewburger's picture

Primus go easy on some of these guys. There are tons of competent people out there that are trying to help or just understand.

I may or may not be skilled in the art of, but apparently everyone IS an expert now:

http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/techsolution.html

http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9033654&contentId=7062002

This is a design exercise where the most extreme ideas stick, and that's what they're looking for. Sensationalism.

The Dutch idea got press for that reason. The typical idea does not apply, so the domes, top kills, and any other regular old bullshit won't cut it. Sorry.

Historical wisdom is a terrible reason justify an action because it shows little understanding of the problem let alone the solution.

When I sit in design reviews and I hear "combined experience" I snicker because its a comment a parrot makes. Like; efficiency, documentation, work flow or my favorite, communication.

Remember 1000's of years of combined experience is how we got here in the first place.

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 15:33 | 387433 OldTrooper
OldTrooper's picture

Screw going easy on us.  I don't need that.  Any one else that is that easily offended shouldn't be here.

 

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 07:34 | 386052 saulysw
saulysw's picture

"Think what you want, BP, industry and the government have 1000's of years of combined experience"

I hear you, but I would like to counter that with these two words : Golf Balls. They tried Golf Balls. Next to that, some of our ideas sound pretty good!!

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:14 | 385251 Korbin Dallas
Korbin Dallas's picture

Land an old Nork sub on it.  Pref full o' dem.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:19 | 385258 Yes We Can. But...
Yes We Can. But Lets Not.'s picture

If I'm Obama, I send Napolitano down to the sea floor in a bikini, snorkle, goggles.  When her bug-eyed hotness floats by the leak, it'll shrivel right up pronto and stop spurting, permanently.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:19 | 385259 Reductio ad Absurdum
Reductio ad Absurdum's picture

The Netherlands? Surely Royal Dutch Shell has already been consulted.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:21 | 385263 MyKillK
MyKillK's picture

Matt Simmons was right!!

There IS another leak 5-7 miles away, spewing a far larger amount of tar-like oil. This NASA MODIS satellite picture from May 25th proves it:

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/44000/44076/USA7_AM...

 

About 7 miles to the West, there is a massive black blob. NASA said that "the cause of the dark patch of water in the middle of the slick just west of the well is not known"

I think it is known. Just not admitted. BP has a huge problem on their hands, and capping the wellhead is not going to fix it...

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:36 | 385296 Trimmed Hedge
Trimmed Hedge's picture

Just a greasy fingerprint on the lens.

 

Nothing to see here, move along....

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:38 | 385300 berated
berated's picture

Slight correction: WE have a big problem on our hands....

Tue, 06/01/2010 - 07:38 | 386063 GBruenetti
GBruenetti's picture

Learn to read: "... the dark patch of water ...". It's water, not oil. They are just curious why there is water at all.

Wed, 06/02/2010 - 23:12 | 391036 MyKillK
MyKillK's picture

Yes, we all know water is black. Such an obvious explanation. Thanks for clearing that up, genius.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:25 | 385272 Matto
Matto's picture

This from Australia's SMH on BP's latest plan:

 

BP's new plan carries the risk of making the torrent worse, top government officials warned on Sunday.

The British oil giant's next containment effort involves an assortment of undersea robot manoeuvres that would redirect the oil up and out of the water it is poisoning.

The first step is the intricate removal of a damaged riser that brought oil to the surface of the Deepwater Horizon rig. The riser will be cut at the top of the crippled blowout preventer, creating a flat surface that a new containment valve can seal against.

The valve would force the oil into a new pipe that would bring it up to a ship. The seal, however, would not prevent all oil from escaping. Browner said the effort could result in a temporary 20 per cent increase in the flow. BP has said it didn't expect a significant increase in flow from the cutting and capping plan.

If the containment valve fails, BP may try installing a new blowout preventer on top of the existing one.

In the end, however, a relief well would ease the pressure on the runaway gusher in favour of a controlled pumping - essentially what the Deepwater Horizon was trying to do in the first place. But that will take at least two months.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:59 | 385344 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

"temporary 20 per cent increase in the flow"

Temporary until when? August? :)

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:18 | 385384 Matto
Matto's picture

2011

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:26 | 385274 pros
pros's picture

 

Looks good,

but we know that Obama and BP are in full cover-up mode

and could care less about stopping it.

BP will win their case as Exxon and Union Carbide did-

the judges are down with the program of the corrupt elite

 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:37 | 385298 Aaron Burr
Aaron Burr's picture

Just have to say ZH is ON THIS OIL SPILL like fly's on honey and YOU GUYS ROCK BABY!!! Sending this and every other idea we come across to Bobby J! We are gonna fucking SMOKE this market someday but in the meantime (waiting for Geithner and Bennayyyy to self destruct) we would really like to save the fucking Republic as we know it AND NOT DESTROY MOTHER FUCKING EARTH!!!! 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:39 | 385301 primus
primus's picture

What the fuck, Tyler?

Did he draw that plan with crayon?

Alright, I work 'in the business' and this will never work. The pressure coming out of that well is at least 3500 psi overbalanced at the sea floor. Even if the upside ship or dome did direct the flow, the pressure would wash out the sea floor and continue to blow out. But let's assume they do get a decent seal. How are they supposed to dump the needed rock and sand through 5000' of ocean current to the sea floor? Underwater front-end loaders and bulldozers or a Chinese fire line?

And finally, purely from a risk management standpoint, even if you could do all that, what if it doesn't stop the leak at the end of the day? Now you have tons of sand and rock piled up around the blowout.

BP is getting somewhere if they can cut off the riser. If it were my well, that is what I would have done in the first place. My guess is the diamond wire saw and LMRP needed to be built, so in the mean-time, they played fuck-fuck with 'top-kill' and 'junk-shot' (AKA Pissing into the wind) mostly to keep up the circus appearance of 'doing something' for the TV cameras. After all, we Americans love our instant gratification. Plus, they have now confirmed that the BOP's are choking the well and not the kinks in the riser, which makes them more comfortable cutting it away. 

My bet is the LMRP stops 80% - 90% of the leak if they get a good cut, it all depends on how well that riser comes off the stack up. purely speculation here, but they might even be able to get coiled tubing into the well with the LMRP in place and kill it that way. If not, we're going to have to wait until the relief wells are drilled.

http://www.adn.com/cgi-bin/apps/assetDisplay/?ref=http://media.adn.com/smedia/2010/05/30/16/Containment_Contingency_Option_LMRP.564231.graphic_large.prod_affiliate.7.gif&summ=Drawing%20shows%20how%20BP%20hopes%20to%20attach%20a%20pipe%20to%20the%20top%20of%20the%20blowout%20preventer%20to%20at%20least%20contain%20some%20of%20the%20oil.&sec=3692&width=800&height=533

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 21:46 | 385317 reading
reading's picture

Well, I do appreciate your perspective the only issue I have with your statement would be the "instant gratification"  -- its been 42+ days of oil spewing like freaking mad I would not call that instant gratification.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 22:27 | 385408 primus
primus's picture

As far as instant gratification is concerned, they have the first part down. I meant BP has simply been 'looking busy' and trying various hail Mary passes to give us all something to watch. 

I could go on for days about this. There is enormous risk in straight 'capping' the well. There is about 10000 other places below the BOP's that could be already compromised from the original leak.

You think this is bad?

Let's say they cap the well and then blow-out the casing a couple thousand feet below the sea floor that migrates up to the surface? Now you've just lost your casing, still have a blow-out and reduced the hydrostatic pressure you are counting on to ultimately kill the well using a relief well. I am very interested to know what kind of condition that cemented casing is in since they essentially sunk a multi-million lbs drill rig over the top of it. The forces exerted on that equipment right before the rig fell into the bottom of the ocean must have been fantastic. 

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 23:12 | 385509 NorthenSoul
NorthenSoul's picture

Good post primus,

 

One question if I may: What is you take on this technique the Soviets have used in the past? That is, drill alongside the leaking well, say in our case, 1,000 feet beneath the sea floor, and then angle it to get close enough, insert a nuclear device, detonate it so the compression pushes the soil/rock and shut off the well way below the sea floor?

Here's an old video from the USSR showing the technique on a gas leak well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpPNQoTlacU&feature=player_embedded

 

Thank you

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!