When this spill first started, I ridiculed Tim for using (what I thought was) hyperbole and gross exaggeration to describe the possible ecological collapse of the Gulf. Well, with this thing still not capped and oil pouring into the fragile coastal wetlands of Louisiana, it appears we may be heading for a man-made ecological disaster of sadly epic proportions, and it appears that Tim might end up being right. I fear that if we don’t get this under control, and if we don’t figure out a way to block the oil from the saltwater marshes that harbor so much life, we may end up creating a dead zone that will never recover in our lifetimes.
WTF? I thought rules 1-10 of the LR are that You Never Back Down On A Position In The Lavendar Room even if you have to start using really bizarre and embarrassing logic.
Given the track record of drilling in the gulf, the number of rigs and the lack of major accidents, and the medias anti anything except green fantasy energy I would take them at their word until we see otherwise. It seems our government did the same.
We have now seen otherwise. Heres hoping things can be fixed and this isnt used to further damage us but I think the latter is a pipe dream.
The AP puts this disaster in the proper perspective:
“There is still a hole in the Earth, crude oil is still spewing from it and there is still, excruciatingly, no end in sight. After trying and trying again, one of the world’s largest corporations, backed and pushed by the world’s most powerful government, can’t stop the runaway gusher.”
This also illustrates how inner space (our oceans) is far more difficult to operate in than outer space. We’re trying to do a King Canute a mile down in attempting to plug a raging hole in the Earth that refuses to do what we want it to do. And there’s probably nothing that we can do about it in the immediate future.
the facts in the article have been corrected a few times since it first came out - but the essential idea is still the same.
Notice now how the talk is becoming more and more about August when the adjacent well is to be completed. Anyone else skepital of BP’s deadlines and strategies?
That’s not the issue. What risks and costs are they willing to take to stop the leak? That is the question.
If the stories are true, BP wanted to drill a single relief well which is cheaper than drilling two relief wells. They were willing to risk the single well option because it was cheaper at the risk of not having a backup. Sure they want to stop the well, but they will fight to do it on the cheap which may have led to the problem in the first place.
Nope I got it from the same place everyone else did. BP
That is some of the biggest information in this mess. BP has not provided a single estimate, guesstimate or any other survey - they are playing mocking bird and repeating what they were told. All of the original estimates on the leak were provided by others…BP simply drills and and refines oil, they are not ecologists.
As much as I dislike everything he stands for I just cant pin this one to him. I do however think it shows a gigantic flaw in many areas both private and public.
I have a hard time believing that. The court of public opinion will be way more costly any of the more immediate but costly fixes. I think this is beyond the scope of what they have dealt with before and it is trial and error time.
I think this is beyond the scope of what they have dealt with before and it is trial and error time.
I’ve heard it said over and over again that the only established method for mitigating this situation is to drill a relief well, which could take months.
Makes you wonder. If it’s the only proven method, why don’t they pre-drill relief wells simultaneously when tapping these reserves, so that it could be accessed in the event of such incidents? I’d hazard a guess it would’'ve cost them a good bit less than the clean-up for this nightmare will.
Also sounds like a reasonable requirement for deep water drilling going forward.
If the stories are true, BP wanted to drill a single relief well which is cheaper than drilling two relief wells. They were willing to risk the single well option because it was cheaper at the risk of not having a backup. Sure they want to stop the well, but they will fight to do it on the cheap which may have led to the problem in the first place.
As long as companies are afforded “Limited liability” via government rules and regs there is no reason for BP or any other company to put proper precautions in place to prevent suit from damages nor any reason to do two versus one well because the cost of two wells is FAR more than the cost of their liability exposure.
If BP was on the line for every dime of damage you can guarentee that whatever costs the least would be what they would do. If two wells was cheaper than paying the money out in lost revenue, damages and clean up then we’d see two, three or more wells as well as multiple other options taking place at the same time as long as they were cheaper than the damages.
I don’t fully understand the economics of oil production, but I do know that drilling is an ENORMOUS cost. Drill rigs on land are very valuable assets that they strive to keep in use 24/7. I can only imagine that it’s MORE expensive for a deepwater rig. In light of that I’d say there’s little to no chance that this is economically viable. They’d simply avoid drilling in deepwater if this were required. Which may be a reasonable solution–don’t drill there if you can’t fix problems.
Makes you wonder. If it’s the only proven method, why don’t they pre-drill relief wells simultaneously when tapping these reserves, so that it could be accessed in the event of such incidents? I’d hazard a guess it would’'ve cost them a good bit less than the clean-up for this nightmare will.
Don’t think this would work.
What do you do when the relief well has a blowout while you’re drilling it?
A relief well has pretty much the same risks as any other well. So pre-drillling a relief well would just double the risks of a blowout.
In addition, a relief well usually has to be drilled from a separate location, so infrastructure requirements would double.
Finally, having a pre-drilled relief well might’ve mitigated the spill in this particular case, but would not have helped with the human errors and equipment failures that led to the fatalities and initial spills. The media seem to have forgotten that 11 people died.
