BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Jun 10 - 10:16 PM

Nalco is the manufacturer of the Corexit dispersants.
If Corexit is so safe, why did Exxon Biomedical Services describe its "Acute Toxicity" in a peer-reviewed journal?
See my post of 17 June, 2:59pm, for a link to the article.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Jun 10 - 08:53 PM

From
http://www.nalco.com/news-and-events/4348.htm


INACCURACY: COREXIT dispersant will evaporate into clouds and come back down in the rain
FACT: COREXIT dispersants are made to disperse oil into the water column and not to evaporate. They biodegrade into the water and are not released back into the atmosphere. In fact, Admiral Thad Allen noted at a June 11 press conference that the primary surface use of Corexit is to protect worker safety.
http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doctype/2931/54095/

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 Jun 10 - 05:15 PM

My apologies for coming in late, but I didn't want to start another thread, so thought this one might be the best suited for the following about far right candidates in Colorado and BP:

So that's what right wing politicians are "begging the energy industry" for--campaign cash.
First, it was the candidate for Colorado Governor who vowed he would "beg the energy industry for forgiveness" for daring to protect our state from irresponsible drilling. Then a spokesman for Jane Norton claimed the President "forced" oil giant BP into a "slush fund" to compensate people along the Gulf coast.

Now, Rep. Cory Gardner, a Republican running for Marilyn Musgrave's former House seat, is holding a fundraiser in Washington D.C.--hosted by one of BP's chief lobbyists! (Ft. Collins Coloradoan, 6/23/2010) The kind of arrogance we're seeing today from the right wing is truly stunning to behold.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Jun 10 - 03:04 PM

Okey dokey.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Jun 10 - 02:31 AM

Don: "Since I haven't put on my scuba gear, swum down, and measured it personally, I'm waiting to hear something definitive.

Don Firth"

You can use mine!....I haven't in a few years!

Don: "No sweat, GfS. I do support what you say when you're right."

Well, at least THIS time..(wink).

As to the figures that I posted, I'm still sticking with them, including the toxins in the air. Until I hear anything definitive otherwise...IF I do, I shall immediately post an amendment. So far, everything that I'm getting, since, supports my source....including some on here.
Don's posted link, was a surprise to me, that SOMEONE, on national 'news' covered that same figure.

Anyway, I've gotta check to see if anything newer has come in. If I get something, I'll pass it to you.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 07:49 PM

Just follow the advice of the advs. on TV, stick with clean coal.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spil
From: Stringsinger
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 06:38 PM

"Three Mile Island and Chernobyl come to mind.

& Hanford and Vermont Yankee and............"

Savannah River Plant. Dead zones around the area.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 04:09 PM

Thanks, Q.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 03:39 PM

Don, the reporters are confusing several points. I think I posted bad info on depth as a result.
The drilling ability of the Transocean rig at Macondo is roughly 30,000 feet. Its maximum drilling capability is 8000-10,000 feet of water.

Quoting from "Offshore Technology" - "The initial exploration for the project was submitted bu BP to MMS in march 2009. The plan included drilling and temporary abandonment of two exploration wells over the prospect. ........
"The rig started drilling a well at water depth of 5000ft in MC Block 252 in February 2010, but exploded during drilling in April 2010.
"The well was planned to be drilled to 18,000 feet, and was to be plugged and abandoned for later completion as a subsea producer."

Now in more detail from "O&G" - "According to the oil drum, the drilling depth at the Macondo well had reached a total depth of 18,360 feet, with the previous casing shoe at 17,168 feet. The annulus or drill hole was eight and one-half inches in diameter, with the Rotary Kelly Bushing (RKB) to mud line 5067 feet. .........
A casing was run the entire length of the drill pipe, at seven inches by nine 7/8 inches from the total depth up to the wellhead. The casing had beeb cemented using ca. 100 bbls slurry. There were no losses and the plug was bumped. No back flow was observed after displacement. Top of cement is est. at 16,200 feet.
The casing was tested to 2650 psi, with the blind shear rams closed."
The rest of the article details the sequence of events leading to the explosion, including removal of the oil-based mud.
"Some problems with the inflow-draw down test, but it was deemed satisfactory" "As a result the annular or dril pipe, would have been opened up to seawater, which meant that the oil-based mud was transferred to a supply boat...."
"........pressure from the annulus had dropped and increased, presumably due to escaping gas, which eventually led to the explosion.
The rest details the pressures, the explosion, etc.
http://www.ngoilgas.com/article/why-the-macondo-well-exploded

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 02:29 PM

No sweat, GfS. I do support what you say when you're right.

But the big question I have is just how deep IS that well? I've heard several reports from people in authority who all agree that the sea floor at that point is a mile down. But they can't seem to agree on the depth from there. I've heard everything from "1,300 feet" to "13,000 feet" to "30,000 feet" to "a total of three miles" (from surface to bottom of drill hole) to "seven miles."

And all of these figures come from persons who claim to be in the know.

So—?

Since I haven't put on my scuba gear, swum down, and measured it personally, I'm waiting to hear something definitive.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 01:57 PM

I've a mind to start a thread, "British oil company attacks US coastal waters"

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 01:37 PM

Three Mile Island and Chernobyl come to mind.

& Hanford and Vermont Yankee and............

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: SINSULL
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 12:55 PM

OOPS!
Adm. Thad Allen said Wednesday that an accident triggered the removal of a containment cap on the oil geyser. Officials are examining the cap to look for hydrate formation and hope to replace it on the gushing well.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 11:17 AM

Three Mile Island and Chernobyl come to mind. I can't help wonder if there weren't other, lesser accidents that were covered up, if you know what I mean. Not exactly an "accident" but the ground in and around the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in eastern Washington State will be radioactive until further notice. This can't be the only place in the world where this is the case. Nuclear energy is mostly safe. It's the unsafe bits papered over by that mostly that worry me.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 11:05 AM

Donuel-
re "just as nuclear power electricity is low since we do not include the cost of the waste, accidents and global consequences in our energy bill'

What waste, accidents and global consequences are you referring to?

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 09:53 AM

The destruction of generations of birds, dolphin, turtles, blue fin tuna and smaller fish due to the spill, are the LEAST of my concerns.

My concern is the microscopic life we can not see such as phytoplancton, diatoms and tiny animals that comprise the very foundation of life in the waters and shores of the sea.

This invisible life determines all the rest of animal and plant life.
The big life forms we sea dying in agony is but the outer skin of onion.

The story of the invisible foundation of life will take about a year before it is openly discussed.

------------------------

As for BP we all owe an apology to all of its billionaire owners right down to the most modest workers because we all undoubtedly enjoy and consume the benefits of the energy they produce. The price of oil is artificially low just as nuclear power electricity is low since we do not include the cost of the waste, accidents and global consequences in our energy bill.

We are all both the victims and the perpetators.
When we are blinded by the buck it is exquisitly easy to make horrendous choices.

When BP goes to drill in the slushy frozen methane depths in the Artic I am certain there will be more enormous spill, albeit those spills will be easier to hide disguise and lie about.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 03:17 AM

Q and Don, In your video, they just said that Mike Williams, chief engineer(pick this up, at 1:32 minutes into the video), had just dug the deepest well, in history, at 35,000 feet!..the same number that I came up with, on my first post here!!!5,000 to the bottom, and 30,000 more. I just wanted to point that out, because as I've previously posted, and maintained, that they have been falsely reporting a lot of stuff. Thank you Don(shit, did I SAY THAT??--wink), for your link.

As soon as they fess up to the real pressure numbers, and the amount REALLY coming up, as well, then us 'peons' will have a better grasp, on the REAL dilemma facing capping it...and how little time they have, before it wears larger!   

Also, I posted the bit about the radius area around the 'spill', and new .....wait a minute, Here's my original post...:

From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 02:23 PM

Anyway, we're getting 'warmer'!

Also, my advice to Mudcatters that have friends and relatives in or around the area, tell them to leave calmly NOW, before it gets to be a region in chaos, sickness and death!

Still doing homework on it!

Thank you all for your co-operation!

Regards!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Jun 10 - 06:02 PM

That 60 Minutes report describes the early damage to the annulus of the blowout preventer, and continuing poor decisions. A good piece of reporting.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Jun 10 - 04:31 PM

I put a link in my post of 21 Jun 10 - 07:28 p.m. and when I checked yesterday, it was there and working. Today it seems to have disappeared. Dunno what happened!

Anyway, here it is again:    CLICKY.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Jun 10 - 01:38 PM

The problem with centrifuges, etc., is that they have to be manufactured to fit the situation and each one can handle only a small amount. Not practicable. Lots of procedures work in the lab, with small quantities, but engineering and making the devices to fit large volume situations is time-comsuming and very expensive.

Skimmers and burning handle larger quantities but do nothing with the underwater plumes that seem to be forming. Skimmed product can be sent to refineries to remove water and make a usable product. Burning leaves behind the heaviest crude fractions (By heavy I mean the hydrocarbon compounds with large carbon molecules).

The main hope is that the relief wells can intersect the well.

An Op-Ed writer with the NY Times suggested today that the Navy should take over and "demolish" the well. Earlier, it was suggested that a bomb be sent down and detonated to do the same thing- but experts have cautioned that this might just split the flow into multiple channels, making control impossible.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Jun 10 - 04:18 AM

Thank you 'Ed' and 'Q'...I'll add it to the 'data banks' and compared notes with which I've been getting. I know, I have to consider the sources, but even if something is underplayed, or falsely represented, it comes out. Sometimes when you spot a lie, it actually points the direction, as whereto look...Then ask yourselves, "Why?". (Sorta like counseling)...it's best to start out, with NO preconceptions, political, or commercial. Let's just get everything! Also, I noted in the article, that they have notched up the amount to 800,000 Barrels a day. Well that figure is still rising toward mine, by leaps and bounds! I think I posted the 800,000 number earlier, but only as info, as to how it was going up, toward what I got earlier. My first number I got was 4 million. If that turns out to be the case, I'll post my sources, for you all to check out...ok? That way, the more scouring the data, and their sources, that might turn up something, that points the way to capping it!
Shit,, if this turns out, we might even start a band!(wink)

I think that for the time being, I was considering how the oil could be gathered for use! Kevin Costner, testified before a Congressional hearing, about the use of centrifuges....which I heard about, a few years back, because my son was looking into investing in one. So, I familiar with these things, and the DO work,(Separating the oil from the water). Apparently they are using them, in quite a few locations, on the globe..... So when I heard of Costner promoting them, my ears perked up.
That doesn't help cap anything, but I thought, that if anyone wanted to check in on it, you might. I don't have tons of time(that's why I was so late in responding)

Thanks for the links, again! I'll be doing homework...in the woodshed!

Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 08:53 PM

BP-induced? Indubitably!

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 07:28 PM

Sorry, Teribus, I've been neglecting you. I do have a life away from Mudcat.

Give this a look. Sorry about the commercials, but I can't do much about that.

GfS, you might take a good look at this, too.

Plenty more out there, so:

"I'll be back!"
          —The Terminator

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 05:42 PM

Pssst Don, where is all this documentation you were going to bury me in?

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 05:40 PM

Were those failures "BP induced" too Q??

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 02:04 PM

A long article in the NY Times today, "Regulators Failed to Address Risks in Oil Fail-Safe Device," details concerns about shear rams and blowout preventers.

Rather than extracts, the article is worth reading as a whole.
"Single-point failure," such as the leakage or failure of one of the small shuttle valves in the blowout stack, could cause failure of the blind shear rams. The device is "temperamental" according to experts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/21/us/21blowout.html?th&emc=th

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Ed T
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 09:57 AM

Give this article a read:
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/88/8824cover.html

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Ed T
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 09:30 AM

"Now the problem with dispersant is this; When you think of 'dispersants', you think it just breaks it apart, and sort of 'dissolves' the oil, and it merely washes away, but not in an oil form. But that is not the case. The dispersant that has been used, that is most effective, also breaks it down, but hugely into a gaseous material, which of course, goes into the atmosphere, and is HIGHLY toxic. Coupled with the other gasses coming up from the well, this is not able to be done safely. It's not just the sludge, that washes up on the beaches, with the dispersant in it that is toxic, which has been reported...though that PART, is also accurate"

My understanding is the purpose of all dispersants is to break oil down into tiny droplets....(and each one has its best conditions for use). This dillutes the oil, takes the oil from the sea surface (sinks it down), and enables bacteria to act on it better (increases the surface area that bacterial can act on).

Most compounds are toxic to a different degree to different forms and stages of sea life at high concentrations. This is also the case for oil and all dispersants. However, my understanding is the scientific assessment (of the any scientists involved) is that the use of dispersants on this oil spill(considering the amounts and the potential impacts on surfaces sepecies and coastal areas)... is a better option than just leaving the oil reach the surface untreated, where it would stay there or move onshore in big amounts.But, didpersing oil is definately not 100 percent effective, especially in these conditions. So, some oil reaches the surface, and the shorelines...but not at the levels that would occur if not used...(and if not used at source).

Oil at the surface gives off considerable toxic fumes....especially at these levels (and, I understand this oil is lighter, which could give off more toxic compouunds to the air) Oil that is dispersed deeper into the vast ocean, would gives off much less toxic fumes into the atmosphere...and would provide a safer working environment at the sea surface site.

While dispersed oil (aka, a plume) can be detected by scientific instruments, I doubt that well-dispersed oil would look much different than regular seawater to the naked eye.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:46 AM

GfS: "Seriously doubt if pipe will 'fall' against the tremendous pressure, into the well!!!"

Not only is that highly unlikely, what is probable, or eventual, is the pipe eroding, and then the gusher eroding the concrete even faster than the pipe. Pipe is said to be eroded half way, already!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:39 AM

Seriously doubt if pipe will 'fall' against the tremendous pressure, into the well!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:13 AM

BP induced problems??

1) Your first regarding the pipe used for the casing is irrelevant, the casing still holds good to this day.

2) The second relating to the cement job. What cement job were they talking about? the one to initially set the casing? Or the one to temporarily cap the well? The first calls for the outer casing sections to be perforated, the last does not as the cement is used to form a plug. Again the blow-out has got nothing whatsoever to do with the cement

3) Gas "kicks" and gas build up in the reservoir are exactly what the BOP is intended to cope with. The BOP failed, the BOP is designed and fitted out with 100% redundancy as far as operating systems go. One pod was leaking and no information as yet has been given as to exactly what the source of that leak was and how that leak would affect the operating capability of that pod. The other pod was functioning normally and was not subject to any leakage. Had either Government Agency or BP personnel ordered a shut down then exactly the same operations would have been undertaken to enable recovery of the leaking pod or BOP to surface.

4) "Pipe falling into the well" Q? All that does is that it indicates carelessness on the drill floor by Transocean personnel, nothing to do with BP at all.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:02 AM

Oh, and 400!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:01 AM

Both Ebbie, and Mouser: "And what will stop the oil from rising through the water, GfS?"

Sorry I seemed to have taken so long to respond, but I had to go to a reliable source, for info.

Great question! A musical, sound engineering question or psych question would be easier. Now the problem with dispersant is this; When you think of 'dispersants', you think it just breaks it apart, and sort of 'dissolves' the oil, and it merely washes away, but not in an oil form. But that is not the case. The dispersant that has been used, that is most effective, also breaks it down, but hugely into a gaseous material, which of course, goes into the atmosphere, and is HIGHLY toxic. Coupled with the other gasses coming up from the well, this is not able to be done safely. It's not just the sludge, that washes up on the beaches, with the dispersant in it that is toxic, which has been reported...though that PART, is also accurate.

As to your question, if the pressure, was as I posted before, 1500psi, this may have already been able to have been accomplished...MAYBE. But the pressures are far, FAR greater than being reported, as to not panic people. Frankly, those in the 'know' also know they are in DEEP shit!

As I've posted before, the nuke option, would only be a matter of guesswork, as to the size nuke, because of the reasons previously posted..PLUS..it would take weeks, if not months to slant drill, as to the placement of it...being as it would have to be placed below 'ground'.

I thought 'Q's' post was very informative, however, only as to lay where the fault lays, and why..to a point.

Man, if I could figure out a way, I'd do everything in my power to get it to them...but as you've seen, BP, (as reported), has done 9 attempts, with no success.(And I don't know all the methods, that they've tried).

Perhaps a series of powerful, but non nuke, could do it..but at this point, as far as I know, (or what I don't know), I don't think they'd want to run the risk of being unsuccessful, and weakening the ocean floor there, making it bigger. Man, let's brainstorm it. I've always thought that this forum had a lot more potential, than the degree of how we can insult each other!

Ebbie, and Mouser, Thanks for your thought provoking question! I Have thought about it, but now, because I was asked, I'm going to 'brainstorm' it!

Regards to All,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 12:23 AM

Thanks for the link to the Bhopal Gas Leak incident, it does indeed put things into perspective.

Barack Obama in his grandstanding performances recently has compared the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico as as serious an attack on the US as 9/11, utterly ridiculous of course as the former was an accident and 9/11 was a deliberate action of intent.

With regard to 9/11 around 3,000 people lost their lives. The culprits were known and their extradition to answer for their crimes was sought. Those sheltering Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda refused to hand him over, the US intervened in the ongoing civil war in Afghanistan and drove the Taleban from power forcing the Al-Qaeda leadership to flee Afghanistan. Since October 2001 43 countries have been engaged in the conflict in Afghanistan all because of 3000 lives lost in the 9/11 attacks.

The Bhopal incident killed 15,000, the culprits were known and their extradition was sought. Those sheltering the culprits refused to hand them over. Anybody see any double standard in operation here?

Q, as for this:

On June 22, 2009, e. g., "BP engineers expressed concerns that the metal well casing the company wanted to use might collapse under high pressure. "This would certainly be a worst case scenario," warned Mark E. Hafle, a senior drilling engineer at BP in an internal report. "However, I have seen it happen, so know it can occur."

I would like to know the full context of this cherry-picked "concern". Look at the date, June 22, 2009 one year ago. Has the "casing collapsed under pressure"? No it has not. Once installed and cemented in place the casing sections are like an extended telescope inserted into the seabed. The well casing only supports the top end of the hole that has been drilled, it does not extend the full length of the well. Knowing how casing is assembled and constructed, I find the language incongruous particularly the use of word collapse. At the time were they talking about shallow gas pockets? On what has been "presented" by Q we have no idea.


Function and operation of the BOP would be the responsibility of Transocean subsea engineers and Cameron as equipment supplier. Again I would like to know exactly what was leaking - another piece of half information presented without context.

It would appear that at all points MMS were kept in the loop the reduction in test pressure for the BOP could only have come about with MMS sanction and a case would have been presented to them for review, comment and verification before that decision was made.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 10:28 PM

Just a little review of BP-induced problems, background for the attack by their partner, Anadarko.
New York Times, Ian Urbina, "Documents show Earlier Worries for Rig's Safety," first published on front page, April 30.
Preliminary findings presented to Congress April 23.
"The problems involved the well casing and the blowout preventer, which are considered key pieces in the chain of events....."
In March, after several weeks of problems, BP was struggling with a loss of "well control."
On June 22, 2009, e. g., "BP engineers expressed concerns that the metal well casing the company wanted to use might collapse under high pressure. "This would certainly be a worst case scenario," warned Mark E. Hafle, a senior drilling engineer at BP in an internal report. "However, I have seen it happen, so know it can occur."
The company went ahead with the casing, but only after getting special permission from BP colleagues because the casing violated the company's wn safety policies and design standards."
Mr. Hafle later backed off and told a MMS and Coast Guard panel that "Nobody believed there was going to be a safety issue." Later, he refused to answer questions.
In April this year, BP engineers concluded that the casing was "unlikely to be a successful cement job," - a document referring to how the casing would be sealed to prevent gases from escaping up the well. A later document said it "is possible to fulfill MMS regulations."
A memorandum with preliminary BP findings indicated that gas was bubbling into the well (April 20), a potential sign of impending blowout.
A parade of witnesses at hearings told about bad decisions and cut corners in the days and hours before the explosion.

In March, reports or problems including "gas Kicks" and a pipe falling into the well; BP officials informed federal regulators that they were struggling with a loss of "well control.
BP reported on three occasions that the blowout preventer was leaking fluid, which the manufacturer of the device limits its ability to function properly.
Greg McCormack, Director Petroleum Extension Service, Univ. Texas, said he was surprised regulators and company officials did not halt the drilling operation at that point.
Permission was requested to delay the federally mandated test of the blowout preventer until problems were resolved; MMS at first declined but lated acquiesced.
Tests on the blowout preventer were at 6000 lb/sq. in. rather that the 10,000 psi mandated and used before the delay.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Sugarfoot Jack who's cookie has gone west
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 12:56 PM

"Bullshit in five years time you will not even know that this has happened."

complete and utter rubbish Tezza, which I suspect you know. This is the arrogant attitude to nature and the environment that caused this tragedy in the first place.

This report from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council (this link opens a 17mb pdf file) provides a comprehensive overview of the cleanup and the impact on the ecosystem of Prince William Sound. Twenty years on many species are not recovered to pre-spill levels, with cetaceans, other mammals and fish being particularly affected. As the trustees state: "Because complete recovery from the oil spill may not occur for decades, and because healthy habitats are essential to the permanent recovery of the spill region, the Trustee Council has taken steps to extend its efforts to protect key habitats."

The amount of oil leaking into the Gulf, along with the use of chemical dispersants which are themselves toxic to the environment means the impact of the spill will still be with the
Gulf for decades.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: mousethief
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 12:07 PM

Delicate ecosystems in the marshes destroyed by this aren't going to return in five years, or fifty. It's not like the critters and plants can just hold their breath and then come back out after the oil is gone (as if the oil is going to be gone in 5 years).

And what will stop the oil from rising through the water, GfS?

Dispersant.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Greg F.
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 11:50 AM

Bullshit in five years time you will not even know that this has happened.

You are absolutely correct that your statement IS bullshit, Teezer.

The shit from the Exxon Valdez(1989) is still smeared all over the coast of Alaska, and will likely be there forever.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Ed T
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 10:29 AM

Some perspectives on Bhophal:

Bhopal Gas tragedy: A chronology of events, Bhopal/New Delhi:

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article448771.ece


Warren Anderson


Read more at: http://www.ndtv.com/news/india/bhopal-tragedy-who-is-warren-anderson-30302.php?cp

http://www.ndtv.com/news/india/bhopal-tragedy-who-is-warren-anderson-30302.php

Were future USA-India "business interests" a Major Factor in the matter of no Anderson extradition?
http://www.thehindu.com/2010/06/12/stories/2010061265471600.htm

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 09:48 AM

Not 180 degrees out when it came to identifying who was responsible for operating the drill floor though eh Greg F??

The only business as usual going on here Greg is that I am dealing with fact most others are dealing in gossip, rumour and speculation.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 09:06 AM

Please do Don.

What operation was ongoing at the time of the blow-out?

Was the well being temporarily capped to allow the Deepwater Horizon to move and allow another rig to come in and replace the drilling BOP with a Production Manifold?

If the answer to that last question is yes, then there is no way on God's earth that the rig was still drilling. To allow the temporary capping of the well the drilling would have stopped and the bit removed and have been retrieved a long time previous (any personal experience of how long it takes to run in and out of a hole that deep? have you got any clue at all?)

As the rig could not have been drilling then how fast a hole was drilled is highly irrelevant.

When you first start drilling you do so via a thing called a Temporary Guide Base, through this guide base you place and set your casing depending on the design of the well it starts out a 30" then gradually reduces the spaces between casings and between the outer casing and the formation through which it passes is filled with cement. As there is no oil leaking from the seabed it is obvious that that cement job has held good.

What caused the blow-out was the failure of the Cameron supplied BOP. At the moment Don NOBODY KNOWS why or how it failed, NOT EVEN YOU. So how much of that is 180 degrees out?

Very pleased to hear that Q has revisited his ridiculous contention that BP supplied the drilling crew. Now go back to my 180 degrees post Don and get some factual information regarding who onboard Deepwater Horizon were responsible for what.

When will the relief wells be completed Q? In a far faster time than for the blow-out in shallow water in the Gulf of Campeche? Who is directing the drilling those relief wells Q? BP right?

Destroying the coastline of America - Bullshit in five years time you will not even know that this has happened.

If however you do want to talk about lives ruined and major harm and damaged caused start looking to the collapse of the US Sub-Prime mortgage market and what the effects of that were world-wide. How and why did that come about? Because idiot US Politicians dictated to the two major mortgage brokers in the US that they must lend money to people (US citizens) who were bad risks. The incentive and inferred reassurance having been hinted at that the Fed would guarantee those loans - The Fed did not, now start unlimited compensation discussions for that fiasco caused by US politicians, want to have a stab at the size of fund that would have to be set up?

Pleased to hear that Indian Government is going to revisit the Bhopal incident, and the amount and extent of compensation paid there. Maybe some of Barack Obama's rhetoric might be rammed down Union Carbide's throat.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Greg F.
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 08:38 AM

Teribus, the information you have posted is 180 degrees out from all the evidence...

Business as usual, then.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 03:09 AM

And what will stop the oil from rising through the water, GfS?

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 12:42 AM

TIA: "And, I just cannot let this slide:

GfS says:
"When they drill for oil, they often pump water into the void, as not to cause a collapse, from the umbrage. This is not being done, of course, which is going to be of another concern."

I thought you said you knew something....what I posted is true. They pump water back into the void.

You probably just had to contradict that FACT, and couldn't hold back, ..like a fat person who just ate two gallons of navy bean soup!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 09:56 PM

So much talk and so few facts. OK, I twist off too, but I try to correct; mostly I just post news releases, trying to put information into the thread.

Deepwater Gulf wells suspended by Obama are 33, most belonging to Chevron, Shell, Hess, Exxon and BP. Not having a subscription to the Oil and Gas journal, I can't list them.

Bloomberg Business Week says BHP Billiton (Australia) has $10 billion to spend, and may buy out BP share of Gulf wells that they partner. These include Atlantis, Mad Dog and Gunflint.

TIA, valid point. And give the Queen a buss for me!

I hold no brief for Tony Hayward- I don't like cost cutters- but his critics want to hang him before a guilty verdict can be assessed. There are worse things than being a yachtsman.
And it is equally silly to condemn Svanberg for his failure to understand that in the US some word usage has become politically incorrect that is taught in English language courses elsewhere in the world. Remember, in Amsterdam if a Dutch friend says he is going to take a douche, he means a shower.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 09:34 PM

Sorry, one more, but this dealio hits close to home for me...

Q is **way** on top of this one:

"Industry experts" (unnamed) "pointed out that if all attempts to contain the leak fail, oil will keep on flowing into the Gulf of Mexico for the next two years or more,...." The reservoir is estimated to contain some 50 million bbl. of oil."

end quote, now back to TIA...

The "Industry Expert" that I have spoken to is Matt Simmons. Never believe TIA's word. Go Google, "Matt Simmons". Read his credentials, his history of predictions related to the oil industry (as well as specific details related to this event), and weep for the Gulf of Mexico, Planet Earth, and your (and my) kids' future. If this guy's expertise holds, we are fooked.

Got no dog in this fight. I make no money being right or wrong about this. Accuse me of whatever bias you wish, but please argue with Matt Simmons if you wish to argue.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 09:23 PM

And, just to feed your favorite subject...
Perhaps I *am* the Queen!

Mwoohahaha!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 09:21 PM

Crap, wrong key...

Odd parallel between BP Spill and the Birther threads. It is not really about the Constitution, and not really about stopping the environmental devastation. It is really about finding fault **any fault** with a "librul" President who is non-white.

Wow. Now I shall duck because all the reverse racism, and "you are projecting", and "I am a counselor so I understand your true problem" arguments come flying. But; the foo shits, so wear it. Tell your problems to lansing (lots of commas and no caps please).

And, post all the indignant replies you want. I promise you, I won't see them for a month...I am meeting the Queen this week. No shit. Believe or not at your pleasure. Buh-bye.

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 09:12 PM

GfS,
I largely avoid the threads you post to; to avoid friction in my life and yours; but you just stepped into a place where I promise you, I know plenty. Sorry to copy from another thread, but here it is (quoting TIA):

I've heard a lot of this "Obama should have done something right away" nonsense spewing from Faux and its followers.

As a frequent contractor to the Federal government, I have some experience on which to base a quick thought experiment.

Here it is:
The federal government does not actually "do" much of anything. They hire contractors, and provide oversight. When the Corps of Engineers (for instance) is fixing a dam (for instance), they hire contractors to do the drilling and grouting, or whatever. This is largely because they do not have the necessary specialized equipment.

So,
Obama steps in and has the Fed fix the spill. They will hire contractors. Who would be the contractors? Who has the specialized equipment? Yup, you guessed it - BP!

So,
What Faux is really saying is: "let's *pay* BP to stop the leak instead of pushing them to do it on their own dime."

But,
The Fed gets its money from whom? Yup, you got it - YOU!

So,
Faux is really saying: "You citizens of the USA should be paying BP to stop the leak"

Brilliant. Doesn't sound quite like that when Hannity and Limbaugh say it, does it?

Some people really need to learn to **think**"



And, I just cannot let this slide:

GfS says:
"When they drill for oil, they often pump water into the void, as not to cause a collapse, from the umbrage. This is not being done, of course, which is going to be of another concern."

Dude or dudette - oil is less dense than water. Pump all the water you want into any oil well as deep as you want, and it won't stop the flow of oil. But, don't believe me. Just try to stop a helium ballon from rising by putting air on it okay? And, get back to me with those results.

This event has produced more "experts" talking out their asses than any news event I have ever seen. The Dunning-Kroger effect is in full blossom (JFGI).

Odd parallel between BP Spill and the Birther threads. It is not really about the constitution and not really abo

Subject: RE: BS: US bigots attack British Company (oil spill)
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 08:45 PM

Times Newsline, 19 June, 2010:

Anadarko CEO Jim Hackett said today that BP actions probably amounted to "gross negligence or wilful misconduct."
Anadarko, 25% partner in the deepwater gusher, is trying to keep the blame squarely on BP shoulders.
Tony Hayward "strongly disagreed" with the allegations and said that he expected the firm's partners to "live up to their obligations."

Meanwhile, Hayward's yacht competed in the J. P. Morgan race around the Isle of Wight, coming in 4th in its class. He had the boat built by Farr, Annapolis, Maryland.

"Industry experts" (unnamed) "pointed out that if all attempts to contain the leak fail, oil will keep on flowing into the Gulf of Mexico for the next two years or more,...." The reservoir is estimated to contain some 50 million bbl. of oil.

http://www.timesnewsline.com, "Gulf Oil Spill Result of Negligence & Misconduct, says Drilling Partner."