All the activity last night appeared to be an attempt to completely separate the piping pieces. To make it easier to insert their top kill solution today?Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Printable View
All the activity last night appeared to be an attempt to completely separate the piping pieces. To make it easier to insert their top kill solution today?Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
I turned on CNN to see General Honore talking about mitigating the spill, command and control stuff. He ended his sentence with "Over". :D
And there's the post hoc rationalization, trying to make sense out of nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
And here is why BP *and anyone else* is justified in wanting to drop any and all public live feeds. Because pretty much none of the people watching them have any idea about what they're seeing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
Thats a pretty stupid way to think about it. Thats like saying people shouldn't be allowed to watch or talk about sitcoms because they don't know the ending yet. Because for most of us, thats all this is at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
I was taking a stab in the dark from all the random robot arms that were pulling at piping while I was watching. The camera was a different position the other day, which altered the way the main riser and yellow pipes were mangled. Then when all the sediment and oil cleared up again the yellow pipes appeared in new locations.
From the other discussions, a regulator that was located near the site failed and they were having a hell of a time dismantling it to bring it back. You could see through the feed at some points how they were stripping nuts.
screen grabs:
*pictures Fuzzy carrying banner "ABOLISH C-SPAN!"*Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Entertainment? I'm aware. News as entertainment, feeding the growing demand for immediate gratification sans knowledge, substance, or context. It's incredibly stupid to view that with disfavor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
Sure am glad we have Fuzzy around, to show up with his analyses of other people. :bored:
Top Kill is a go, live stream is still up. Looks like the stuff of nightmares.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
Responsible political rhetoric, simple as that. If we accept our leaders talking like that, we accept demagoguery of other groups and organizations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Well what happened? Can't be bothered right now.
They are saying there will be no definitive progress for 24-48 hours. Probably part of why they got squeamish about live caming the operation. People would see random stages, not know what's being looked-at and freak/celebrate.
Uh huhQuote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
Which includes, you know, minorities, gays, influential think tanks, corporations, unions, foreigners, etc.
Does that include the rhetoric from right wing pundits? Former vice presidents and administration advisors? Or just democratic presidents? No?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
While Dread goes further off the deep end, interesting stuff has come up from the BP camp; but first a video collection of what their fuck up killed:
Now news.
The ROV hasn't shown a change in behavior yet, but thats to be expected this early.
Plan to sue BP? Get in line. In fact, BP hopes they can get you to line up in front of their hand picked, industry connected, judge.
Spoiler:
The oil rig exploded 2 hours after a decision to ignore a "very large abnormality" in the well.
Employees on Deep Horizon claim the blowout preventer was knowingly damaged before the explosion. Was declared "not a big deal". BP also removed the critical drilling mud that is the "most important and effective way to restrict gasses and fluids held under pressure deep underground."
The 60 minutes article is very damning.
BP is so awesome. Why would why someone publicly attack such a company?
Of course it doesQuote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
Seriously, we can't have any exchange of ideas here since my entire point was that one of these is not like the others while you're insisting it is. Just never mind
The more things change, the more they stay the same? Oh, the Irony.
Quote:
BP's Gulf battle echoes monster '79 Mexico oil spill
Robert Campbell
MEXICO CITY
Mon May 24, 2010 4:56pm EDT
(Reuters) - BP Plc's race to cap its ruptured oil well in the Gulf of Mexico is eerily similar to a 1979 accident off the coast of Mexico that caused the world's worst oil spill.
In both cases natural gas flowed unnoticed into the well being drilled, causing an explosion. In both cases a critical piece of fail-safe equipment -- the blowout preventer -- failed. And in both cases the operators struggled to quickly staunch the flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
BP's shares have been battered in the month since its Macondo well blew up, threatening tourism, fishing and wildlife along the Gulf Coast and landing the British oil giant with a multibillion dollar clean-up tab.
But while Mexico's Ixtoc well was only 150 feet below the sea surface, Macondo lies at the crushing depth of 5,000 feet, forcing the company to use robots to do all undersea work.
Experts have warned that the well may not be capped until relief wells are completed two months from now, by which time the spill could be bigger than the Exxon Valdez disaster, which spilled an estimated 257,000 barrels of oil (10.8 million gallons/(40.9 million liters).
But it would still not surpass the extent of the disaster caused by the Ixtoc spill, which belched crude oil for 297 days, dumping nearly 3 million barrels (126 million gallons/477 million liters) of oil into the southern Gulf of Mexico, some of which eventually washed up on the Texas coast, according to Pemex.
And the experience of Mexico's state oil company Pemex shows that relief wells are no silver bullet.
Ixtoc, off the coast of the southeastern Mexican state of Campeche, continued to leak oil more than three months after Pemex completed its first relief well.
LESSONS "UNKNOWN"
Pemex never revealed the exact cause of the accident and as recently as 2007, Jan Erik Vinnem, an offshore risk management specialist at Norway's University of Stavanger, wrote that the lessons learned from the disaster were "unknown."
Pemex pumped cement and salt water into Ixtoc for months before finally bringing the runaway well under control and sealing it with cement plugs.
Pemex's scramble to come up with other solutions while the relief wells were being drilled will sound familiar to those who have followed BP's efforts to stop the oil gushing out of its ruptured well.
Divers tried to manually operate the blowout preventer but this effort was unsuccessful and over the next several months Pemex tried a variety of solutions, including a plan to force metal spheres into the well to cut the flow of oil and lowering a steel structure over the spill to capture the crude.
BP is trying similar schemes but the huge water depth it is operating at is vastly complicating its efforts.
The robots used by BP have been unable to get the blowout preventer to work and BP abandoned an attempt to cap its well with a steel structure after natural gas hydrates accumulated within the structure.
Executives even mulled shooting golf balls, pieces of tires and other debris into the well to try and stop the flow.
The company now plans to attempt a "top kill" procedure this week in an effort to stop the flow of oil by forcing heavy drilling fluids into the well, but BP only gives the procedure a 60 to 70 percent chance of success.
BP says the spill has already cost it $760 million and it has promised to pay all legitimate claims for compensation, which will likely carry the cost to billions of dollars.
Pemex spent over $100 million on the capping and cleanup operations, but dodged most compensation claims by asserting sovereign immunity against U.S. courts.
Apparently, there's an msnbc video from the Rachel Maddow show, with Ixtoc archive footage from NBC in 1979....but my lame computer wont' let me watch it without crashing. :(
re: the "boot on the neck of BP" comment----isn't that what Salazar said, not Obama?
Probably not the best thing to say by anyone in an administration, but who actually said it?
yeah it was from Salazar.
He has repeated it a couple of times, I think the first time he used it was: "Our job is basically to keep the boot on the neck of British Petroleum to carry out the responsibilities that they have”
Guess the WTF gauge was so far off the charts on Dread's comments no one bothered to check how he interpreted Mr. Paul's remark :haha:
by request:
:D Thanks, I thought it was a very effective ad, ending with calling our senators.
Very timely, especially since we've been doing the same damn things for over 30 years. (see Ixtoc)
I Hope that Frustration and Anger will Fuel action into positive change. It's long over due. :up:
I found out today that was just an exploration well. They were in the process of sealing it. That adds a whole new level of crazy to this.
What's that mean, "just an exploration well"? They set up that whole rig as an experiment in how deep they could go before it exploded? You were listening to NPR on your way home from work and won't share the details? bahQuote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Since when do we allow serving military personnel to engage in political advertising?
I don't know, do we "allow"them but they don't because of some oath they took?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I assumed the main guy was a veteran (not active duty) since the ad was made by votevets.org.
But if SCOTUS has decided corporations have the same free speech rights as individuals, why wouldn't that apply to citizens in the military?
It says that he's a member of the National Guard, and it's strongly implied that he's currently serving. And now you're going to argue against a separation between military and civilian affairs? Do you want to live in a junta as well? Furthermore, no government employee has the right to express a political opinion in their official capacity unless they're explicitly directed to do so.
Hence, my assumption that he's probably a veteran and not active duty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I'm not really "arguing" anything, Loki. You're the one who pranced in here to start an argument, and maybe it's a valid one....so start a damn thread if you care.
Meantime, regarding OIL....this recent debacle may just be the impetus for Americans (via the convenience of the internet) to connect the dots between energy and all other things.
Back in 1979 none of this was possible. When all we had was the front page of a paper, or nightly news that didn't have the benefit of cell phone cameras, let alone social networks capturing every crevice of American life.
EDIT: Correction. If I'm "arguing" anything, it's for a national energy policy that's forward-looking and not based on Drill Baby Drill.