|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Amos Date: 28 Oct 10 - 07:20 PM WASHINGTON Ñ Halliburton knew weeks before the fatal explosion of the Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico that the cement mixture they planned to use to seal the bottom of the well was unstable but still went ahead with the job, the presidential commission investigating the accident said on Thursday. In the first official finding of responsibility for the blowout, which killed 11 workers and led to the largest offshore oil spill in American history, the commission staff determined that Halliburton had conducted three laboratory tests that indicated that the cement mixture did not meet industry standards. The result of at least one of those tests was given on March 8 to BP, which failed to act upon it, the panelÕs lead investigator, Fred H. Bartlit Jr., said in a letter delivered to the commissioners on Thursday. Another Halliburton cement test, carried out about a week before the blowout of the well on April 20, also found the mixture to be unstable, yet those findings were never sent to BP, Mr. Bartlit found. Although Mr. Bartlit does not specifically identify the cement failure as the sole or even primary cause of the blowout, he makes clear in his letter that if the cement had done its job and kept the highly pressured oil and gas out of the well bore, there would not have been an accident. ÒWe have known for some time that the cement used to secure the production casing and isolate the hydrocarbon zone at the bottom of the Macondo well must have failed in some manner,Ó he said in his letter to the seven members of the presidential commission. ÒThe cement should have prevented hydrocarbons from entering the well.Ó The failure of the cement set off a complex and ultimately deadly cascade of events as oil and gas exploded upward from the 18,000-foot-deep well. The blowout preventer, which sits on the ocean floor atop the well and is supposed to contain a well bore blowout, also failed. In an internal investigation, BP identified the faulty cement job as one of the main factors contributing to the accident and blamed Halliburton, the cementing contractor on the Macondo well, as the responsible party. Halliburton has said in public testimony that it tested and used a proper cement formula on the well and that BPÕs flawed well design and poor operations caused the disaster. Jesse Gagliano, a Halliburton technical adviser, told federal investigators in Houston in August that the company was confident in the cement job. He said Halliburton initially recommended that BP use a well design with more devices called Òcentralizers.Ó But even after BP chose to use six centralizers instead of the recommended 21, Halliburton believed the cement would work properly, Mr. Gagliano said. ÒAll indication at the surface was that everything went fine,Ó he said. ÒWe plan for success.Ó The Deepwater Horizon drilling rig was operated by a third company, Transocean. Cathy Mann, a Halliburton spokesperson, said the company was reviewing the panelÕs findings and would provide comment later Thursday. Halliburton, a major oil field services company and one of the nationÕs largest defense contractors, was once led by former Vice President Dick Cheney. Mr. BartlitÕs law firm, Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott, has done legal work for Halliburton in the past but has not represented the company since 2005, the firm said. After the commission report was released at 1:30 p.m. Eastern time, HalliburtonÕs stock price began dropping sharply, and was down more than 10 percent in mid-afternoon trading. BP shares rose slightly. The commission obtained from Halliburton samples of the same cement recipe used on the failed well, including the same proportion of nitrogen used as a leavening agent and a number of chemicals used to stabilize the mixture. The cement slurry was sent to a laboratory owned by Chevron for independent testing. The mixture failed nine separate stability tests designed to reproduce conditions at the BP well and did not pass any, according to ChevronÕs test results, which were returned to the commission this week. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: gnu Date: 16 Jul 10 - 01:41 PM I think all governments should enact whatever legislation is necessary to attempt to prevent such tragedies. "Better safe than sorry" comes to mind. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 16 Jul 10 - 01:32 PM Yes, Richard- I am looking askance at my jar of Robertson's Seville Orange Marmalade. Does BP have an interest in that company (Tony Hayward got his degrees from Edinburgh University)? Maybe its recipe contains some of that gunk from the Gulf gusher. Yes, definitely, the British government should exercise more controls. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 16 Jul 10 - 01:23 PM Gnu, there are no words. We will be living with an ache in our minds for a long time to come. The well is not yet under control, as Adm. Allen points out. Leaks may develop if the containment cap cannot hold the pressure. The relief wells will take at least another month or two to complete. On July 15, the NY Times offered a video, Step by step, Leimkuhler showed Shell's design, with multiple, redundant fail-safe points and blowout-prevention systems, and the BP design with most of the controls and fail-safe points omitted. Of course the Shell presentation is meant to show that deep water drilling can be done safely, but it is unusual in that short-comings of another major company (and sometime partner in exploration) are so sharply exposed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: gnu Date: 16 Jul 10 - 12:53 PM Amos... after I looked at a half dozen pics I tried to FORCE myself to view all the pics but got less than halfway through. Unreal. The extent of this tragedy is difficult to grasp. Along with the video Lizzie posted... I have no words. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Charley Noble Date: 16 Jul 10 - 11:09 AM What a massive clean-up and what a long-term disaster to wildlife in the Gulf and the livelihood of those who work there as well. I'm pleased that the latest attempt to cap the leak appears to be working well. But GP has taken 85 days to do what they should have been prepared to do in a week. Certainly further government regulation is need for this industry, in addition to better enforcement of what rules exist now. Richard, review the images above and explain what you would recommend as an alternative. Maybe we should blame the problem on the wildlife for being in the Gulf??? Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Richard Bridge Date: 16 Jul 10 - 03:35 AM Q - you advocating government control of capitalist ventures? I've heard it all now! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 15 Jul 10 - 01:37 PM BP's blackened reputation is bound to spill over to other UK corporations. Perhaps the UK government needs to exercise better control of corporations operating with UK registry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Richard Bridge Date: 15 Jul 10 - 04:22 AM "14 Jul 2010: President of the Organisation for International Investment tells UK firms to beware anti-British rhetoric in forthcoming US mid-term elections in the wake of the BP oil spill" http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jul/14/british-companies-reputation-threat-us I told you so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 14 Jul 10 - 10:19 PM Very sickening, Amos. I would like to dunk Tony Hayward in that toxic mess. The NY Times ran another article about BP's blatent disregard of regulations, poor safety records, corner-cutting and rush to put the dollar above good business practice, but it has all been said in this and the Bigot threads. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Amos Date: 14 Jul 10 - 06:00 PM IMAGES OF THE CONSEQUENCES not much promoted by media somehow... A |
|
Subject: BS: Apocalypse - Now (Film of the Oil) From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Date: 01 Jul 10 - 03:07 AM FINALLY we now get to know why they've tried so hard to keep us in the dark...... This will upset you, make you cry I've no doubt, but when you've dried your tears, get angrier than you ever have in your life, because The Time is NOW, the time to change is right now..right this moment... BP Apocalypse - Youtube May the Creatures of the Sea forgive us.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 25 Jun 10 - 05:49 PM CNN today- BP shares closed below $27. "Some analysts say that an end to the downward spiral could be far from reach, as investors offload the stock on fears that cleanup, legal and regulatory costs could soar." BP's market capitalization has fallen to $85 billion from more than $160 billion, "leaving BP quite vulnerable." http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/25/news/companies/BP_stock_price/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: mousethief Date: 23 Jun 10 - 10:33 PM No experience with oil well engineering or drilling technology. How much experience does one need to see that we don't know what to do if a deep-sea well blows? Every day that passes drives this point home to the world (or at least that part of the world that is able and willing to follow the news). We don't know how to fix things like this. That's why we need a moratorium. We can't afford another Deepdoodoo Horizon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 23 Jun 10 - 07:59 PM BP stock finished under $30 today. Some investment services are beginnig to look on the stock as a 'buy'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: GUEST Date: 23 Jun 10 - 06:36 PM opps GUEST is Donuel 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. The spills to come might persuade Southern judges who happen to own Trans ocean or BP stock to consider that spills are evidence enough to justify a moritorium. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: GUEST Date: 23 Jun 10 - 06:35 PM 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. The spills to come might persuade Southern judges who happen to own Trans ocean or BP stock to consider that spills are evidence enough to justify a moritorium. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 23 Jun 10 - 06:32 PM Michael R. Bromwich, head of the new Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, will focus on industry oversight and ridding MMS of corruption. He is a litigations attorney, law degree from Harvard, and public policy degree from JFK School of Government. He is with the NYC office of Fried Frank, heading the firm's Internal Investigations, Compliance and Monitoring Practice Group. No experience with oil well engineering or drilling technology. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Greg F. Date: 23 Jun 10 - 01:36 PM Don't shout. It makes you look stupid. As if any additional evidence was needed to carry this point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jun 10 - 12:42 PM Latest: "BP oil containment stopped after gas detected: coordinator Jun 23 12:17 PM US/Eastern The containment system capturing oil from the Gulf of Mexico spill had to be removed Wednesday, leaving the gusher unchecked after a collision involving a robotic submarine, US officials said. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: mousethief Date: 22 Jun 10 - 01:02 AM Don't shout. It makes you look stupid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Teribus Date: 21 Jun 10 - 05:37 PM Until a detailed investigation has got to the bottom of it, it is all gossip, rumour and speculation, which is why all the political grandstanding that is going on at the moment in the US is so completely bloody ridiculous. Testimony before a Congress!!! And you have the likes of Q complaining when questions are answered with the blatantly and perfectly honest answer of "I don't know"!!! Primarily because at this stage mousethief NOBODY KNOWS - FACT. No wonder Gorgeous George Galloway made that hearing he was dragged over to attend look so f***ing stupid. The hearings of another Congressional Committee back in September 2007 attended by one General David H Petraeus, chaired I believe by your current Vice-President Joe "Wrong Again" Biden, after haranging the man for hours were all left with egg on their faces when it was clearly demonstrated that "The Surge" had worked. Petraeus must actually kill himself laughing to himself every time he has to shake Joe Biden's hand. Congressional hearings - You have got to be joking - They don't impress at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: mousethief Date: 21 Jun 10 - 03:43 PM Sorry, Teribus, but testimony before Congress is not gossip, rumour, and speculation. Romanyman, of course we kick up when it happens in our waters. As other countries should kick up when it happens in theirs. What do you expect? We can't enforce the laws of other countries. The world thinks we meddle in the affairs of other sovereign nations too much as it is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: romanyman Date: 21 Jun 10 - 03:07 PM See now when it happens to good ol USA dont they kick up ! what about what the american companies are still doing in africa south america, india, to name just a few, sorry its happened but perhaps its a wake up call. the love of the car and the dollar, it had to kick back at some time, why not develop the hydro or the ethanol engine its there it works oh yeh i forgot the oil companies and the government or the shareholders wont get the usual cash backs oh silly me, i thought it was about money |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Teribus Date: 21 Jun 10 - 12:30 AM mousethief, until such time that a full investigation is carried out and the information from that investigation is assembled and analysed it is all gossip, rumour and speculation, some may be more informed gossip, rumour and speculation than others, but still remains as being gossip, rumour and speculation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: gnu Date: 20 Jun 10 - 12:38 PM Red Sea spill from oil rig. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: mousethief Date: 20 Jun 10 - 12:10 PM Except they're not based solely on gossip, rumour and speculation. People from on board the rig have spoken. Then were apparently hushed. It might be worthwhile to find out why they're so quiet now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Teribus Date: 20 Jun 10 - 09:26 AM Still leading the lynch mob I see Q? OK now having realised that you were in error regarding who was responsible for doing what on the Transocean deepwater drilling rig Deepwater Horizon, care to explain to the folks what those responsibilities entail. For some reason they don't seem to believe me when I tell them, apparently 35 years in the industry, doesn't qualify one to voice an opinion. While the rig is attached to the seabed, the legally responsible person on the Transocean Deepwater Horizon for everything, repeat everything, that occurs onboard rests with a guy with the title Offshore-Installation-Manager (a Transocean employee). As soon as the rig is no longer connected to the seabed that legal responsibility devolves to the Rig Master, or Captain (another Transocean employee). Ultimately responsible for everything, repeat everything that happens in their licenced area is the Operating Company - BP. Now while they might be responsible, that does not necessarily and automatically mean that they are at fault. Now instead of knee-jerk reactions and calling for people to be tarred and feathered Q, I would rather wait until some real and relevant information is published before jumping to conclusions based solely on gossip, rumour and speculation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 19 Jun 10 - 03:37 PM I wish to apologise for mis-identifying the driller, tool push and their crew as members of BP; they were Transocean employees on contract to BP. Two of those who died were employees of M-I-SWACO, a company that "manages risks of fluids-related issues, safeguards completion, and the formation, minimizes production-related problems, manages oilfield waste, and works with deepwater solutions." The report by BP will be interesting; undoubtedly it will be an excellent description of a regrettable accident in which none of their procedures was at fault. The testimony of survivors will play part in future actions by the government and legal procedures. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 19 Jun 10 - 12:55 PM Oh, dear! terrible Terrybus is upset. Anadarko, 25% owner of Macondo, is distancing itself from BP, the operator, placing the blame on BP. Anadarko could be liable for damages as a partner, although it had no physical part in the drilling of the gusher. Mitsui, the Japanese company, owns 5. Anadarko has drilled at least 2 wells into pre-salt beds, successfully. The MMS list of deepwater wells is on line; some 50 or so have drilled in 5000 feet or more of water (noted before in this or another thread. Obama should separate the pussycats from the tigers- go-ahead ought to be given for drilling in shallower water. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: mousethief Date: 19 Jun 10 - 12:04 PM OPEC has a hard time agreeing on what to have for lunch. Venezuela, IIRC, sells most of its crude to the United States. The infrastructure really isn't there for it to start selling to someone else in a hurry. And oil revenue is a huge part of their income. Don't look to them to be voting for or participating in such a boycott. Indeed the oil-producing countries are pretty addicted to the $$ the US sends into their midst. There's a reason there hasn't been a crisis like the 1970s since the 1970s. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Teribus Date: 19 Jun 10 - 11:57 AM FUKUI, Japan (Dow Jones)--Global oil output could fall up to 900,000 barrels a day from projected levels for 2015 if oil producing countries follow the U.S. lead and impose moratoriums on development of new offshore oil reserves, International Energy Agency Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka said Friday. (From one of the links given by Ed T) Anybody tell me why anybody would be stupid enough to follow the U.S. lead?? Sort out any prospective oil shortage caused by this moratorium by refusing point blank to sell oil to the U.S. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Ed T Date: 19 Jun 10 - 08:40 AM Possible impact of oil production with a U.S. moratorium and its implications worldwide: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100618-702620.html?mod=WSJ_World_MIDDLEHeadlinesAsia Vast amounts of natural gas contained in crude escaping from the blown Gulf of Mexico oil well could pose a serious threat to marine life: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5heVm0Cu8W-4DT920tco-mgrlXw_AD9GDU0200 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Teribus Date: 19 Jun 10 - 03:21 AM Tony Hayward's testimony at the Congressional hearing had much of an "I don't know" and the "investigation is incomplete" flavor, although some 59 days have passed since the blowout- Nonsense! Yet another idiotic announcement from Q Tony Hayward was sworn in at the hearing? If so if he was asked a question and he did not know the answer then what answer should he give other than "I don't know"? Has BP completed its investigation Q? A simple Yes or No will suffice. If it has not (and it has not) should the CEO of BP lie about it being completed and invent answers? Or should he simply state the truth that the investigation is incomplete and as such answers to detailed questions as to what failed and what went wrong will have to wait. So 59 days have elapsed have they Q? Ample time for the BOP to have been recovered eh? Oh wait a minute they cannot recover anything from the site until the well has been sealed; the leak stopped; the site made secure and debris cleared out of the way. Only then can examine things in detail at the moment the priority is to reduce and stop the leak. Oddly enough I was thinking back to the IXTOC I blow out, I worked on that and I was wondering how it compared. Subsea intervention was successfully provided by two Norwegian Dynamically Positioned Dive Support Vessels, the first to have worked in the GOM (Arctic Surveyor and Arctic Seal). Now then Q, IXTOC 1 was in much shallower water, don't know about drilling depth, but that took from 3rd June 1979 to 23rd March 1980 to get under control. But BP will have its relief wells drilled quicker than that won't they? In fact a great deal quicker than that. By the way Q on the SEDCO 135 did Pemex provide the drilling crews? Seeing how rig owners and operators only do the positioning, cook the meals and make the beds? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: mousethief Date: 19 Jun 10 - 01:44 AM It's true, Alice. Everything is made out of plastic these days. I sometimes talk with friends about remembering the days when things were made of glass and wood and metal and paper. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Alice Date: 19 Jun 10 - 12:57 AM Yeah, mouse... must... have.... more... oil. Drive, baby, drive! And as the advice was to the Graduate, "PLASTICS". If people only knew how much they consume in addition to their car tank. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: mousethief Date: 19 Jun 10 - 12:49 AM Drilling for oil is perfectly safe. Let us do more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 18 Jun 10 - 09:49 PM Ixtoc Take the middle figure, 20,000 bbl/day. In one month, 600,000 bbl. In nine months, 5,400,000 bbl.X42= 226,800,000 gallons US. In other words, 140 million gallons may be a low side estimate. For Macondo, estimates range between 30,000-60,000 bbl/day, middle figure 45,000 bbl/day or 1,350,000 bbl/month, thus flow rate more than twice Iztoc. When will the well be killed? Most optimistic guess is mid-August. What will be the total captured in the meantime? How much will that leave uncaught? Regardless, it's going to be a long-term disaster. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Ed T Date: 18 Jun 10 - 08:50 PM Ixtoc 1 Oil Spill - June 3, 1979 - March 23, 1980 Location: Bay of Campeche off Ciudad del Carmen, Mexico Amount of Oil Spilled: 140 million gallons Bahia de Campeche, Mexico On June 3, 1979, the 2 mile deep exploratory well, IXTOC I, blew out in the Bahia de Campeche, 600 miles south of Texas in the Gulf of Mexico. The water depth at the wellhead site is about 50 m (164 feet). The IXTOC I was being drilled by the SEDCO 135, a semi-submersible platform on lease to Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX). A loss of drilling mud circulation caused the blowout to occur. The oil and gas blowing out of the well ignited, causing the platform to catch fire. The burning platform collapsed into the wellhead area hindering any immediate attempts to control the blowout. PEMEX hired blowout control experts and other spill control experts including Red Adair, Martech International of Houston, and the Mexican diving company, Daivaz. The Martech response included 50 personnel on site, the remotely operated vehicle TREC, and the submersible Pioneer I. The TREC attempted to find a safe approach to the Blowout Preventer (BOP). The approach was complicated by poor visibility and debris on the seafloor including derrick wreckage and 3000 meters of drilling pipe. Divers were eventually able to reach and activate the BOP, but the pressure of the oil and gas caused the valves to begin rupturing. The BOP was reopened to prevent destroying it. Two relief wells were drilled to relieve pressure from the well to allow response personnel to cap it. Norwegian experts were contracted to bring in skimming equipment and containment booms, and to begin cleanup of the spilled oil. The IXTOC I well continued to spill oil at a rate of 10,000 - 30,000 barrels per day until it was finally capped on March 23, 1980. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/454782/the_worst_major_oil_spills_in_history_pg3.html?cat=37 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Ed T Date: 18 Jun 10 - 06:11 PM "Speculation is that their Russian assets (TNK-BP) of $16-18 billion might go up for sale, but at a discount". Who has the cash and the need? Maybe China? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 18 Jun 10 - 05:00 PM President Medvedev of Russia, discussing the costs to BP, wondered "Whether the company can digest these expenditures, whether they will lead to the annihilation of the company or its break up is a matter of expediency." (raising specter of TNK-BP sale?). http://newsBBC.co.uk, Friday news. Asset Sale: BP has agreed to pay $5 billion into the compensation fund this year, followed by quarterly payments of $1.25 billion until the total of $20 billion is paid. BP also said that it will be selling about $10 billion of "non-core" assets to raise cash, in addition to canceling dividends this year. Speculation is that their Russian assets (TNK-BP) of $16-18 billion might go up for sale, but at a discount. Also from BBC News Admiral Allen said about 25,000 bbls. were recovered on Thursday, compared with the 35-60,000 bbls flowing daily. Tony Hayward's reduced role (Ed T, above), and replacement by Managing Director Robert Dudley as handler of the oil spill, takes Hayward out of the spotlight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Ed T Date: 18 Jun 10 - 03:19 PM BP CEO Hayward has his role reduced in oil spill http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20100618/bp-hayward-100618/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 18 Jun 10 - 01:38 PM Now just what was wrong with the stoppage to check out safety on the barges? Toxic crude oil, fire hazard, sick volunteers, suits against Louisiana and the US government for illness or death. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jun 10 - 09:22 AM Dear God, BB- on what planet do you actually spend most of your time? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jun 10 - 04:22 AM Somebody want to tell me again how Bush didn't do enough to help in Katrina? At least his administration did not STOP the local efforts! "BP Oil Spill: Against Gov. Jindal's Wishes, Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard 59 Days Into Oil Crisis, Gulf Coast Governors Say Feds Are Failing Them 450 comments By DAVID MUIR and BRADLEY BLACKBURN June 17, 2010 PrintRSSFont Size: Share:EmailTwitterFacebookMoreFarkTechnoratiGoogleLiveMy SpaceNewsvineRedditDeliciousMixxYahooEight days ago, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal ordered barges to begin vacuuming crude oil out of his state's oil-soaked waters. Today, against the governor's wishes, those barges sat idle, even as more oil flowed toward the Louisiana shore. Louisiana Governor Jindal frustrated over decision-making red tape. "It's the most frustrating thing," the Republican governor said today in Buras, La. "Literally, yesterday morning we found out that they were halting all of these barges." Watch "World News" for David Muir's report from Louisiana tonight. Sixteen barges sat stationary today, although they were sucking up thousands of gallons of BP's oil as recently as Tuesday. Workers in hazmat suits and gas masks pumped the oil out of the Louisiana waters and into steel tanks. It was a homegrown idea that seemed to be effective at collecting the thick gunk. "These barges work. You've seen them work. You've seen them suck oil out of the water," said Jindal. Related WATCH: Citizens Take ChargeBP Spill: Oil Thicker Than Ever on ShoreBP CEO: 'I Fully Grasp the Terrible Reality' Coast Guard Orders Barges to Stop So why stop now? "The Coast Guard came and shut them down," Jindal said. "You got men on the barges in the oil, and they have been told by the Coast Guard, 'Cease and desist. Stop sucking up that oil.'" A Coast Guard representative told ABC News today that it shares the same goal as the governor. "We are all in this together. The enemy is the oil," said Coast Guard Lt. Cmdr. Dan Lauer. But the Coast Guard ordered the stoppage because of reasons that Jindal found frustrating. The Coast Guard needed to confirm that there were fire extinguishers and life vests on board, and then it had trouble contacting the people who built the barges. Louisiana Governor Couldn't Overrule Coast Guard The governor said he didn't have the authority to overrule the Coast Guard's decision, though he said he tried to reach the White House to raise his concerns. "They promised us they were going to get it done as quickly as possible," he said. But "every time you talk to someone different at the Coast Guard, you get a different answer." After Jindal strenuously made his case, the barges finally got the go-ahead today to return to the Gulf and get back to work, after more than 24 hours of sitting idle. more |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 18 Jun 10 - 12:28 AM OK, just google the title of the article. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 18 Jun 10 - 12:23 AM Ultra Deepwater Gulf Scroll through the article to Figure 14. There are faults in the stratigraphic section, and deep earthquakes are known, one 3 years ago magnitude 5.1. Some have speculated that there is a connection to the fault that produced the great Mexico, Missouri, quake of the 19th C. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 18 Jun 10 - 12:16 AM A subsurface section, much simplified, showing the deepwater play beneath the salt layers is illustrated in this article, which outlines the great size of the prospective fields. The article is generalized, but I no longer subscribe to the technical journals that would contain more detail. Prospectivity of the Ultra-Deepwater Gulf of Mexico, Anderson and Boulanger, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University. Some of the difficulties in designing drilling for this realm are discussed. http://leanenergy.Ideo.columbia.edu/docs/UltraDeep%20Prosp%2010-22-02.pdf |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 17 Jun 10 - 09:07 PM The Pemex gusher ended with about 3 million barrels spilled (Wiki, I have not checked for more reliable information); about equal to the amount so far (guessing about 50000 bbl/day) from BP Macondo, and which will be some 7 million barrels if the offset wells are sucessful in August. Yes, I agree, there were several warning signals from the Mexican well (and from Anadarko and other deep wells more closely related to the BP well); the blowout preventer failed at the Mexican well among other things. Tony Hayward has admitted that blowout preventers need re-design (yet the base of the well was not properly secured- obvious carelessness by BP); the Macondo situation is orders of magnitude greater than the Mexican well. Little is known about the formations below the deep salt layers although seismic gives enough data to identify some high spots- should have been a red flag here, as these highs often have high gas pressure. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: off shore oil rig spill and more From: Ed T Date: 17 Jun 10 - 04:04 PM "The Mexican gusher did not attract the attention of Americans to a great extent because effects on Texas areas of the Gulf were only moderate. The BP Macondo gusher affects millions of Americans directly" I can understand if USA media, and possible USA citizens are mostly interested in major environmental stories (for example, oil spills)if they directly effects USA citizens, interests, or USA waters and coasts. But, I am puzzled that the "Mexican gusher" did not attract the attention of world interests, environmentalists and media the world over? It was an oil spill that was close to this one in volume (could be greater, and lasted nine months, plus). At a minimum, as the news story indicates, it could have provided a warning signal. And, this is not even suggesting a double environmental standard....one for first economic tier countries and lesser so for the lower tiers. |
