Options

[Gulf Coast Oil]: Spill, Baby Spill. Volunteer Info at the top of OP

15759616263

Posts

  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    You're not really in a position to call anyone retarded when you're only trick seems to be to post something and then ignore the fact that everyone points out how stunningly wrong you are.

    Just because I don't have a obsession-compulsion to prove myself right one very single point I make doesn't mean I am ignoring anything. I post from work, and only from work, so it's not like I have that luxury either. So lay off the crack, please, and let's go back to discussing the incident.

    You don't even know what Ad Hominem means.

    :?

    Arch on
  • Options
    MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    What sort of complications could spawn from this top fill thing? Could the pressure of the stuff coming out of the well be too high to get the stuff to stay down?

    MKR on
  • Options
    PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Obviously the solution is to dump Lindsey Lohan in the Gulf

    No, she's a moderately effective dispersant but far too toxic to be allowed by the EPA.

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • Options
    RustRust __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    MKR wrote: »
    What sort of complications could spawn from this top fill thing? Could the pressure of the stuff coming out of the well be too high to get the stuff to stay down?

    like all other solutions proposed by BP besides the relief well, this top fill thing is almost guaranteed to fail

    they're just throwing out solutions to the media like dog biscuits to a pack of terriers, to keep them distracted

    no one at the top probably expects any of them to work

    Rust on
  • Options
    Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    MKR wrote: »
    What sort of complications could spawn from this top fill thing? Could the pressure of the stuff coming out of the well be too high to get the stuff to stay down?

    This explains it pretty well. There's a link to a technical brief there.

    Protein Shakes on
  • Options
    tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    MKR wrote: »
    What sort of complications could spawn from this top fill thing? Could the pressure of the stuff coming out of the well be too high to get the stuff to stay down?

    The big worry is that the back-pressure cause by the mud could cause a crack in the casing something like 5000 feet below the seafloor. Then the oil starts working its way up through the seabed, which would erode an ever widening channel to the surface. Ever see a sink-hole caused by a water-main breaking? Same idea.

    tinwhiskers on
    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • Options
    MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    It does make sense that this is the least likely to succeed. If it were the top option, they would have done it first (unless they had to delay using it for some other reason).

    MKR on
  • Options
    Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    MKR wrote: »
    It does make sense that this is the least likely to succeed. If it were the top option, they would have done it first (unless they had to delay using it for some other reason).

    The reason it took so long is because this sort of operation has never been tried at those depths before, so it took lots of planning and getting the necessary personnel together and training them and then getting the equipment together etc.

    I was reading the comments on that oil drum site and that's what the engineers were saying.

    Protein Shakes on
  • Options
    Best AmericaBest America __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    MKR wrote: »
    It does make sense that this is the least likely to succeed. If it were the top option, they would have done it first (unless they had to delay using it for some other reason).

    The reason it took so long is because this sort of operation has never been tried at those depths before, so it took lots of planning and getting the necessary personnel together and training them and then getting the equipment together etc.

    I was reading the comments on that oil drum site and that's what the engineers were saying.
    Actually, it's never been tried in a live situation underwater to begin with -- "at these depths" has become the shorthand for that, though, as the issues of being a mile underwater eclipse those of being underwater to begin with.

    The Oil Drum article you linked was a tad informative but the confidence seems misplaced. It's gotten to the point I can't really read any 'official' journalism about the spill without rolling my eyes because they seem obligated to use numbers like 5,000 bbl/d or 10,000psi which have been debunked by anyone that isn't obligated (expected? paid to?) simply repeat whatever BP says...

    Best America on
    right you got it
  • Options
    Xenogear_0001Xenogear_0001 Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    nstf wrote: »
    All industries are full of fuck ups and criminals, you just described every group of people on the planet. Most oil spills are relatively minor events and wouldn't make the news. However, due to the oil catastrophe (this is far larger then a spill) even relatively minor spills become news worthy.

    While I agree that there are crooks and fuck-ups in just about every line of work, there are certain fields that draw in more of them. And painting everyone with the same brush is frequently done to tar and feather the competition/opponent. In other words, it lowers everyone's expectations to where they're more likely to accept that things are just this way--ie: Everyone's an asshole, so what's the problem?
    nstf wrote: »
    Is it responsible journalism to whip people up over minor events just because of a massive one? This is a yes or no answer. I thought it was pretty much decided that playing off peoples fears was bad after 9/11. Where there was one really bad act of terrorism but every time a minor one cropped up it was reported and people lost their minds.

    I can see some relation here, but again, CONTEXT. An oil spill is not an attack. The reason for all of this damage is based more on malfeasance, negligence, and greed. Keep in mind who the bad guy always turned out to be when reporting on small scale terror attacks: terrorists. Who's the target now? BP and other oil companies by extension. Oh, well, then it's okay that we not report on that, I guess. Also, false dichotomies are a no-no.
    nstf wrote: »
    I'd say it's irresponsible. I'd also say it detracts from the true disaster and cheapens it. Unless oil spills are your pet cause it cheapens it and takes a lot of the gravity out of the real problems.

    This sort of irresponsible reporting does nothing but fear monger for a bit, and then dull everybody to the issue. It helps the news sell news, and it helps BP when people get over it quicker and by cheapening the damage of their spill.

    Again, to some extent, I see your point. Over-saturation is a risk when reporting on these things, and ratings certainly play their expected role. I will say, however, that the more attention this particular issue gets, the better. BP should not be allowed to slink off into the dark this time, and lack of coverage would effectively allow them to do just that.

    Xenogear_0001 on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    MKR wrote: »
    It does make sense that this is the least likely to succeed. If it were the top option, they would have done it first (unless they had to delay using it for some other reason).

    The reason it took so long is because this sort of operation has never been tried at those depths before, so it took lots of planning and getting the necessary personnel together and training them and then getting the equipment together etc.

    I was reading the comments on that oil drum site and that's what the engineers were saying.
    Actually, it's never been tried in a live situation underwater to begin with -- "at these depths" has become the shorthand for that, though, as the issues of being a mile underwater eclipse those of being underwater to begin with.

    The Oil Drum article you linked was a tad informative but the confidence seems misplaced. It's gotten to the point I can't really read any 'official' journalism about the spill without rolling my eyes because they seem obligated to use numbers like 5,000 bbl/d or 10,000psi which have been debunked by anyone that isn't obligated (expected? paid to?) simply repeat whatever BP says...

    The oil drum is just a place for geologists and engineers to get together. It's more of a blog than an official newspaper of any sort. And, just like any collective blog, it has people with differing opinions.

    Protein Shakes on
  • Options
    PhyphorPhyphor Building Planet Busters Tasting FruitRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Because I'm lazy, is there some number for oil spilled / per barrels gone to market.

    Oh the percentage is incredibly tiny. Worldwide consumption appears to be about 29 billion per year assuming I multiplied correctly (according to http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption) so we seem to be spilling 1 barrel for every 58000 or so consumed or about 0.0017%.

    Phyphor on
  • Options
    hippofanthippofant ティンク Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I find it funny that anybody would hold the American news media in such high esteem that obviously things that they don't normally report on, like minor oil spills or the war in Afghanistan or the economic bubble being built up around sub-prime mortgages that's due to collapse soon, are minor inconsequential things.

    And obviously, the priorities of the public and the media cannot change, and thus that which was previously not reported on must remain forever not reported on, because otherwise it's just irresponsibly whipping the public up into unnecessary frenzies. It is impossible because the initial lack of reporting could not possibly be a mistake, because the American media is infallible and correct in all the things it doesn't report on.

    hippofant on
  • Options
    SchrodingerSchrodinger Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I'd almost be happy if they started making domes out of depleted uranium at this point.

    Schrodinger on
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    MMS, somehow more scandal plagued than previously believed.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    AegisAegis Fear My Dance Overshot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    There's a live feed of the top-kill currently in place (they started at 2 pm EST), as well as live feeds of the Oil Spill Oversight Hearings.

    Aegis on
    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
  • Options
    iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Cornfield? Cornfield.Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    What's the top kill solution involve again? Is it the one where they're using knotted rope and golf balls?

    iTunesIsEvil on
  • Options
    AegisAegis Fear My Dance Overshot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    What's the top kill solution involve again? Is it the one where they're using knotted rope and golf balls?

    That's the Junk Shot, to be used if the top kill (pouring the 'cement mud' to close the hole) doesn't work.

    Aegis on
    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
  • Options
    tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Aegis wrote: »
    There's a live feed of the top-kill currently in place (they started at 2 pm EST), as well as live feeds of the Oil Spill Oversight Hearings.

    Links if you don't mind.

    tinwhiskers on
    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • Options
    AegisAegis Fear My Dance Overshot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Aegis wrote: »
    There's a live feed of the top-kill currently in place (they started at 2 pm EST), as well as live feeds of the Oil Spill Oversight Hearings.

    Links if you don't mind.

    CNN's front page.

    Aegis on
    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
  • Options
    MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Aegis wrote: »
    There's a live feed of the top-kill currently in place (they started at 2 pm EST), as well as live feeds of the Oil Spill Oversight Hearings.

    Links if you don't mind.

    http://mfile.akamai.com/97892/live/reflector:46245.asx?bkup=46260

    MKR on
  • Options
    deadonthestreetdeadonthestreet Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Does anyone know what drilling mud is made of?

    deadonthestreet on
  • Options
    AegisAegis Fear My Dance Overshot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Does anyone know what drilling mud is made of?

    CNN had Bill Nye on the other day talking about the Top Kill procedure and he talked about the drilling mud briefly:

    http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bestoftv/2010/05/25/jk.bill.nye.science.of.oil.cnn

    Aegis on
    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
  • Options
    tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    some steel and hydraulic lines...this movie sucks get Michael Bay

    tinwhiskers on
    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • Options
    lsukalellsukalel Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    some steel and hydraulic lines...this movie sucks get Michael Bay

    I agree we need Harry Stamper and AJ!

    lsukalel on
  • Options
    AegisAegis Fear My Dance Overshot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Oil Spill Oversight hearing grilling one of the Admirals (MMS staff is also there) about why the government hasn't just ordered BP (which the Admiral mentioned is well within their purvey) to use their alternative dispersant they have 100,000 gallons on hand, which is both more effective and less toxic (still potentially toxic).

    Aegis on
    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
  • Options
    DrakeDrake Edgelord Trash Below the ecliptic plane.Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
  • Options
    SchrodingerSchrodinger Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Aegis wrote: »
    Does anyone know what drilling mud is made of?

    CNN had Bill Nye on the other day talking about the Top Kill procedure and he talked about the drilling mud briefly:

    http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bestoftv/2010/05/25/jk.bill.nye.science.of.oil.cnn

    Bill Nye is an engineer.

    He can do math.

    Schrodinger on
  • Options
    BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    nstf wrote: »
    No. Poor taste in the media is reporting on whatever Lindsey Lohan is up to these days. Not the fact that the worlds most powerful industry is full of fuck-ups and criminals.

    All industries are full of fuck ups and criminals, you just described every group of people on the planet. Most oil spills are relatively minor events and wouldn't make the news. However, due to the oil catastrophe (this is far larger then a spill) even relatively minor spills become news worthy.

    Is it responsible journalism to whip people up over minor events just because of a massive one? This is a yes or no answer. I thought it was pretty much decided that playing off peoples fears was bad after 9/11. Where there was one really bad act of terrorism but every time a minor one cropped up it was reported and people lost their minds.

    I'd say it's irresponsible. I'd also say it detracts from the true disaster and cheapens it. Unless oil spills are your pet cause it cheapens it and takes a lot of the gravity out of the real problems.

    This sort of irresponsible reporting does nothing but fear monger for a bit, and then dull everybody to the issue. It helps the news sell news, and it helps BP when people get over it quicker and by cheapening the damage of their spill.

    Perhaps you should read the CNN article about the Alaska spill. There's nothing fear-mongering or sensational about it.
    Alyeska said the incident took place about 10:30 a.m. (2:30 p.m. ET) during a planned pipeline shutdown while the company was conducting fire command and valve leak testing at the pump station.

    The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation said a battery failed to control the valve when power was switched from the main grid during Alyeska's tests. The valve has been closed, shutting off the flow, the department said, but the pipeline remains shut down.

    The department said the next steps would be to clean up the oil in the containment area, determine the cause of the problem and restart oil flowing in the pipeline. No oil has been reported outside the containment area.

    The company was testing for problems with the valve, and they found one. Oil spilled as a result, and now the company is going to fix the problem with the valve. Where's the part where I'm supposed to be afraid?

    Further, a public spotlight is more likely to ensure the company actually fixes the valve problem. Compare that to years of oil rig BOP failures being casually swept under the rug and going unreported.

    This is just bizarre. I've never heard of anyone advocating that the response to a disaster should be to ignore other situations with similar conditions.

    BubbaT on
  • Options
    SpacemilkSpacemilk Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    BubbaT, I'm sorry, but the Alaska spill was in no way something that was OK or justifiable. (side note edit: I'm going to say this later, but let me say it now: I agree with you otherwise! This needs attention!) I know what you're saying, we shouldn't be afraid because the test was a success - but it wasn't. In my opinion, while a couple thousand barrels a day isn't a huge deal comparatively speaking, this NEVER should have happened.

    First off, they didn't realize the battery power would be insufficient? Uh, the amount of power needed to close a valve can be calculated and you should know whether the battery is enough. Unacceptable.

    Second of all, the tank that overflowed has a capacity of over 100k barrels. Were they just sitting there with their thumbs up their asses while the tank filled and filled and the valve didn't close? Unacceptable.

    Thirdly, this was supposed to be a controlled test. How do you fuck up a controlled test when, in theory, you have a bunch of people watching and ready to respond? Unacceptable.

    I think we are arguing the same thing - that this situation needs attention - but you seem to be arguing that there was a proble, and hey, they fixed it. My problem is, the only thing that prevented this from being another Texas City was that it happened out in the middle of nowhere. That's it.

    So I totally, 100% disagree with nstf because highlighting this incident, as "minor" as it might be (because trust me, it could've been worse), is EXACTLY what needs to happen. People need to realize that BP - and most if not all of the oil industry in general - have a fucked up mentality when it comes to this stuff. They don't learn their lesson and they need to start paying big for not learning their lesson. I'm sick of oil companies doing risk management with respect to cost, rather than with respect to the affect on humans, and deciding that the cost of the potential fine is worth not being more careful.

    Spacemilk on
  • Options
    DemiurgeDemiurge Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Spacemilk wrote: »
    Thirdly, this was supposed to be a controlled test. How do you fuck up a controlled test when, in theory, you have a bunch of people watching and ready to respond? Unacceptable.

    Chernobyl? :P

    Demiurge on
    DQ0uv.png 5E984.png
  • Options
    RustRust __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    Demiurge wrote: »
    Spacemilk wrote: »
    Thirdly, this was supposed to be a controlled test. How do you fuck up a controlled test when, in theory, you have a bunch of people watching and ready to respond? Unacceptable.

    Chernobyl? :P

    have you ever read up on the chernobyl incident

    the incompetence there would have been comedic if it hadn't resulted in a geyser of radioactive death

    Rust on
  • Options
    BullheadBullhead Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Is it just me, or does this not look good for the top kill?

    whoops.jpg

    Bullhead on
    96058.png?1619393207
  • Options
    SpacemilkSpacemilk Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Demiurge wrote: »
    Spacemilk wrote: »
    Thirdly, this was supposed to be a controlled test. How do you fuck up a controlled test when, in theory, you have a bunch of people watching and ready to respond? Unacceptable.

    Chernobyl? :P
    I was actually going to make a Chernobyl comment in my original post but thought it might be Godwinning a little :P After all, this incident was a test on how the thing would do when off the grid; wasn't that PRECISELY what they were testing in Chernobyl? (I may be thinking of something else though haha) If that's the case it's even more hilarious...

    Spacemilk on
  • Options
    SpacemilkSpacemilk Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Rust wrote: »
    Demiurge wrote: »
    Spacemilk wrote: »
    Thirdly, this was supposed to be a controlled test. How do you fuck up a controlled test when, in theory, you have a bunch of people watching and ready to respond? Unacceptable.

    Chernobyl? :P

    have you ever read up on the chernobyl incident

    the incompetence there would have been comedic if it hadn't resulted in a geyser of radioactive death
    Read up on the BP-Texas City incident. Not nearly as bad as Chernobyl, but it was a chain of fail for a loooong time before the incident actually happened. Seems like a lot of the really bad incidents are like that, including this oil spill =/ so often, if one of the 10-15 events in the whole chain hadn't happened, the incident never would've happened.

    Spacemilk on
  • Options
    CommunistCowCommunistCow Abstract Metal ThingyRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Bullhead wrote: »
    Is it just me, or does this not look good for the top kill?

    whoops.jpg[IMG][/img]

    I saw this camera angle earlier today before they started the top kill and it looks about the same as it did before.

    CommunistCow on
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • Options
    BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Spacemilk wrote: »
    BubbaT, I'm sorry, but the Alaska spill was in no way something that was OK or justifiable. (side note edit: I'm going to say this later, but let me say it now: I agree with you otherwise! This needs attention!) I know what you're saying, we shouldn't be afraid because the test was a success - but it wasn't. In my opinion, while a couple thousand barrels a day isn't a huge deal comparatively speaking, this NEVER should have happened.

    First off, they didn't realize the battery power would be insufficient? Uh, the amount of power needed to close a valve can be calculated and you should know whether the battery is enough. Unacceptable.

    Second of all, the tank that overflowed has a capacity of over 100k barrels. Were they just sitting there with their thumbs up their asses while the tank filled and filled and the valve didn't close? Unacceptable.

    Thirdly, this was supposed to be a controlled test. How do you fuck up a controlled test when, in theory, you have a bunch of people watching and ready to respond? Unacceptable.

    I think we are arguing the same thing - that this situation needs attention - but you seem to be arguing that there was a proble, and hey, they fixed it. My problem is, the only thing that prevented this from being another Texas City was that it happened out in the middle of nowhere. That's it.

    I didn't say the spill was good. I'm saying the fact that they're testing the valve, and that the media is paying attention to the results of that test, is good. It is bad that the valve didn't pass the test, but it's much better to have the failure occur during testing than during full-scale operation. The test was successful in that it's purpose was to evaluate problems with the valve's performance.

    I don't know if the battery lacked appropriate power, or the problem had something to do with switching power between different grids.
    The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation said a battery failed to control the valve when power was switched from the main grid during Alyeska's tests.
    However, they could have also been testing the performance of the valve during sub-optimal power conditions.

    I didn't see where the tank had a 100k barrel capacity, just the containment area where the oil currently is.
    Ayleska said the lined containment area that took the spill has a capacity of about 104,500 barrels.

    And I didn't say the oil company had already fixed the problem, I said the media putting them in the spotlight would help ensure that they do fix the problem. The media spotlight helps prevent them from simply writing off the possibility of a failure during full-scale operations as "unlikely."

    BubbaT on
  • Options
    Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    Is "Ayleska" a play on the word "Alaska"?

    Because that's really silly.

    Protein Shakes on
  • Options
    BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    In other news, the idiocy of the pro-oil Palin-ers is so blatantly obvious that even Bush can see it these days.
    It's in our economic interests that we diversify away from oil. It's in our environmental interest. And, finally, it's in our national security interest.
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/25/94787/at-energy-conference-bush-suggests.html

    BubbaT on
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    He could hardly be worse, but W has been a surprisingly cogent ex-President.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
This discussion has been closed.