Look, there is a hole 5000 feet down under water into another 20000 feet of rock. Is the diameter of the hole 36 inches?
Crush it.
We know how to set off an underwater nuclear weapon.
If we set off one or several weapons we will turn that rock to glass and crush the well. When the first estimates of the spill were reported, they talked about 50,000 gallons a day , the contents of a large suburban swimming pool.
Now they are talking about 2.5 million gallons. Could they have been this wrong this long? Maybe, but what if this thing is accelerating? Are we willing to take the entire gulf down because we do not have the audacity to take a risk that has a chance of working?
Do it. Nuke the well. Nothing else is working. It is worth the risk.
What could possibly go wrong?
ReplyDeleteA lot.
ReplyDelete: )
ReplyDeleteTo quote some blogger or other on this matter: "...shit that only works in movies where Morgan Freeman is president."
It is still a hole, a well drilled through rock lined with a metal casing.
ReplyDeleteCrude oil has a specific gravity of 0.82. The pressure at the bottom of a 5000' pipe filled with crude would be 0.82 x 2165 or 1775 psi.
Obviously the pressure below the crude is greater, pushing the crude up toward the surface. Crush the well and you add to the over burden resistance. At a certain point ( unknown) the pressure equalizes and we have the condition that existed before the well was drilled and the oil was trapped.
Alternately, You can have Barack Hussein Obama, Ass kicker and community organizer fix it.
"Alternately, You can have Barack Hussein Obama, Ass kicker and community organizer fix it."
ReplyDeleteRather misses the point, doesn't it? If you're gonna nuke it, it's gonna be the guy sitting in the Oval Office who gives the okie dokie.
I'd feel sorry for the guys doing the due diligence on that one.
ReplyDeleteI'm passing this on as I did not want to be the only old fart receiving it.
ReplyDeleteActually, it's not a bad thing to be called, as you will see. Old Farts are easy to spot at sporting events; during the playing of the Star Spangled Banner. Old Farts remove their caps and stand at attention and sing without embarrassment. They know the words and believe in them.
Old Farts remember World War II, Pearl Harbor, Guadalcanal , Normandy and Hitler. They remember the Atomic Age, the Korean War, The Cold War , the Jet Age and the Moon Landing. They remember the 50 plus Peacekeeping Missions from 1945 to 2005, not to mention Vietnam .
If you bump into an Old Fart on the sidewalk he will apologize. If you pass an Old Fart on the street, he will nod or tip his cap to a lady. Old Farts trust strangers and are courtly to women.
Old Farts hold the door for the next person and always, when walking, make certain the lady is on the inside for protection.
Old Farts get embarrassed if someone curses in front of women and children and they don't like any filth or dirty language on TV or in movies.
Old Farts have moral courage and personal integrity. They seldom brag unless it's about their children or grandchildren.
It's the Old Farts who know our great country is protected, not by politician's, but by the young men and women in the military serving their country.
This country needs Old Farts with their work ethic, sense of responsibility, pride in their country and decent values.
We need them now more than ever.
Thank God for Old Farts!
We set off hundreds, if not thousands, of underground nuclear blasts not more than 40, or 50 miles from Las Vegas. It ain't no biggie.
ReplyDeleteGetting the bomb the right distance from the pipe might be a little dodgy. Or, maybe not.
The only danger I can see is: if it didn't work, and you messed up the pipe too far down, you might not be able to drill the relief well. Then you'd have to keep blasting at it, or resign yourself to twenty years of gushing oil.
It would be entertainment, of sorts.
ReplyDeleteI think that those relief wells will be ready, mid-August.
If those do not stem the flow, by then the President would really be feeling the pressure.
He could blow it, then.
The peaceful atom, at work in the 21st Century.
ReplyDeleteHe just might do it.
The rising estimate has become a central feature of the oil spill narrative. Originally the government pegged the spill at 1,000 barrels a day, then soon raised that to 5,000 barrels, then 12,000 to 19,000 barrels, and then, just last week to 20,000 to 40,000 barrels (840,000 to 1.68 million gallons).
ReplyDelete...
After the pipe was cut on June 3, and a containment cap placed on it, the flow became easier to estimate. In the past 24 hours scientists have taken direct measurements of pressures inside the so-called top hat that is collecting oil and gas.
James Riley, a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Washington, and a member of the flow rate group, said his team, which looked at high resolution video of the geyser after the riser cut, saw evidence of an increase in flow, "but not a dramatic increase." He stressed, however, that it's not an exact science.
47k Barrels/day
WiO wants us to stick a big black rock down the hole before we nuke it.
ReplyDeleteAtomic Bomb proposal for Gulf of Mexico blown out well a very bad idea for many reasons, by Mud Logging Geologist Chris Landau
ReplyDeleteBefore I explain why there are a few points that the lay person must understand about terminology on a drilling rig and positions of seniority.
1) A mudlog is a schematic cross sectional drawing of the lithology (rock type) of the well that has been bored.
Without looking at the mudlogs and e-logs, we are all navigating blind.
...
2) How many oil and gas horizons were there in this well? There was certainly more than one.
...
3) Is the Company man alive? If he is or is not available publish his daily report that he sent to BP Head office.
...
I always reply to this idea by giving these analogies
Let us say there were some cracks in the dam wall of Hoover dam or any of the other giant dam of the world. Now behind that wall is an immense pressure of water waiting to get out. If you put a giant bomb there, to fuse the concrete, you will break the wall and all the water will come out.
...
Let us say whoever worked on that well from the geologist to the mudmen to the drilling contractors to the company man to geophysicists who sited the well, their reputation was mud.
Personal history on one blowout well near Sacramento California in 2006.
...
The company knows the risks and is prepared to sacrifice people and the environment. After all money is money.
Bad Idea for Many Reasons
Peeking out of all the doom and gloom, however, Melody has freshly washed and kick-ass hair.
ReplyDeleteYou who think it isn't about the smaller things in life, take note.
Because of Europe's continuing trade links with Iran, its extended sanctions on Iran often have more practical significance than those of the U.S., whose commercial relations with the country are limited.
ReplyDeleteU.S. officials have said their more-aggressive unilateral measures will likely target the businesses of Iran's elite military force, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
They have also said that Washington could press companies and countries to act against a range of Iranian finance, insurance and reinsurance companies for their alleged role in aiding Tehran's nuclear and missile programs.
Sanctions Against Iran
Great article from the mud logging geologist, Sam.
ReplyDeleteFor goodness sake exhaust the relief well idea first.
ReplyDeleteI was in Vegas with dad once when they touched off a big one, hotel shook. Impressive. In a spooky sort of way.
Basically we are being asked to find our way to the South Pole across a thousand miles of ice by gut feel alone.
ReplyDeleteThis sounds like a job for the Quirk.
The oil spill is not the last crisis America will face. This nation has known hard times before and we will surely know them again.
ReplyDeleteWhat sees us through – what has always seen us through – is our strength, our resilience, and our unyielding faith that something better awaits us if we summon the courage to reach for it. Tonight, we pray for that courage.
We pray for the people of the Gulf. And we pray that a hand may guide us through the storm towards a brighter day.
- O
A LOCAL tsunami warning has been issued after a 7.1-magnitude earthquake struck eastern Indonesia this afternoon.
ReplyDelete...
The earthquake came hours after another tremor off the coast of East Timor that was felt 650km away in Darwin this morning.
...
A spokesman from Geoscience said earthquakes were very common in the Banda Sea, but that it was relatively unusual for tremors of this size to be felt on the Australian mainland.
Tsunami Alert
"...Melody has freshly washed and kick-ass hair.
ReplyDeleteYou who think it isn't about the smaller things in life, take note."
It's unlikely Melody's kick-ass hair would be appreciated at the BC. The boys over there are not rive gauche enough for the likes of us.
She fits comfortably here.
.
Do it. Nuke the well. Nothing else is working. It is worth the risk.
ReplyDeleteDamn.
WiO. Now, Deuce.
Good thing the EB doesn’t have nuclear capability.
.
I mean.
ReplyDeleteThere could be sanctions; or an embargo; or even, god forbid, a blockade of the EB.
Heck, we might not be able to get any keratin treatments or Milk Duds.
.
.
``As with most things, Charlie is all over the place on the Cuba issue,'' said Rivera, a close ally of Crist's chief Senate rival, Republican Marco Rubio. ``The fact that he would now seek to raise campaign funds from Castro's business partners is an affront to freedom-loving people everywhere.
ReplyDeleteHe is now on the record as cavorting with collaborators of a communist dictatorship.''
Rubio ``believes the president's policy will help provide the Castro regime with more funds for its repressive apparatus,'' campaign spokesman Alex Burgos said.
Charlie Crist
What's this keratin treatment, and, what's a river gauche? Are you some kind of foreigner or something?
ReplyDeletefrom Oprah's website--
Posted on Jul 30, 2009 9:44 AM
HELP!!! I got a keratin hair treament to take the frizz out of my hair! I went to a reputable salon that has extensive training, followed the instructions for aftercare. it has been ten days. I have washed it three times with the recommended shampoo for this treament. After the first wash, may haird starting falling out in handsfulls. I have washed it three times since getting it done. I will be bald by Christmas! Piles of hair! And everyone is "passing the buck". I even called the manufacturer of this particular Keratin treatment that the salon uses, which is based in Florida (the manufasturer), and "Go see a doctor, not our product". My hair started falling out right after the first wash.
Has anyone had a similar experience? What do i do now? I can't afford a doctor. This treatment was a 50th bday gift, and it looks like I'll be getting awig for my 51st bday!!!
SUGGESTIONS QUIRK!! I am terrified of touching my hair, that is all it takes for it to fall out by the root. I can see the air follicle!
If you're not careful, Quirk, after the treament, your haird may fall out in handsfulls. O my air follicle! Those amazon women may start to skirt you!
If I had a nuke I'd want to use it on the Idaho Fish and Game Department.
ReplyDeleteObama is a muslim--
ReplyDeletehttp://www.americanthinker.com/2010/06/report_obama_said_i_am_a_musli.html
just like my friend Dale said "that thing" was from the very beginning.
In the United States, the construction of mosques continues rapidly. There is already one major mosque operating in Manhattan, another in Brooklyn, and another has been approved for construction adjacent to the location of the World Trade Center, which was destroyed on Sept. 11, 2001, by people who claimed to be acting in the name of their god.
ReplyDeleteThe New York Times said protests against construction of mosques have occurred in Staten Island, N.Y., Brentwood, Tenn., Sheboygan, Wis., and Dayton. No reciprocal rights have been granted to Jews and Christians to build synagogues and churches in Muslim countries, nor has Obama called for such reciprocity.
A year after the president's Cairo speech, there is no evidence anything has changed. Radical Muslims are intent on changing us, and they will not stop until they've reached their objective.
Changed Nary a Thing
That about the Idaho Fish and Game was said in jest, of course. What I'd really do is defund the fools.
ReplyDeleteCommentary
ReplyDeleteThe Real Problem With Renewables
Robert Bryce 05.11.10, 2:55 PM ET
The growing oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico has, predictably, resulted in a new chorus of voices calling for increased use of renewable energy sources. But over the past five decades renewables have actually been losing market share.
In 1949 nearly 91% of America's total primary energy came from coal, oil, and natural gas. The balance came from renewables, with hydropower being a dominant contributor. By 2008 the market share for coal, oil and natural gas, along with nuclear, had grown to 92.5% of total primary energy in the U.S. with the remainder coming from renewables.
Given the raging hype over renewable energy sources, those numbers, which are readily available from the Energy Information Administration, are remarkable. Over the past six decades tens of billions of dollars have been spent on renewable and alternative energy schemes such as wind energy, solar energy, corn and other biofuels, and electric cars. All have aimed at cutting our hydrocarbon use. And yet only nuclear power, which went from zero to about 8.5% of the U.S. primary energy over that time frame, has managed to steal significant market share from coal, oil and natural gas.
In other words, despite these huge investments, renewables' share of the energy market has been shrinking. What's happening? While conspiracy theorists may want to believe that Big Oil, Big Coal and Big Nuclear are stifling the growth of renewables, the simple truth is that coal, oil, natural gas and nuclear can satisfy the Four Imperatives: power density, energy density, cost and scale.
The Four Imperatives provide a simplified way to analyze the physics and math that rule our energy and its delivery, the latter better known as power. Before going further we must differentiate between energy and power. If you recall your high school physics, the definitions are straightforward: Energy is the ability to do work; power is the rate at which work gets done. Put another way, energy is an amount; power is a rate. And rates are more telling than amounts.
ReplyDeleteThe first of the Four Imperatives, power density, is the most telling of the rates. Power density refers to the energy flow that can be harnessed from a given unit of volume, area or mass. Common metrics of power density include: horsepower per cubic inch, watts per square meter and watts per kilogram. And given the current infatuation with renewable energy sources like wind and solar, the essential metric for power density is watts per square meter (W/m2), which shows how much power can be derived from a given piece of real estate. It is also the metric that exposes the inherent weakness of sources like corn ethanol, wind energy and solar energy. If a source has low power density, then it will likely require too much real estate, material or space to provide the power that we demand at prices we can afford or in the vast quantities that the world needs.
The production of corn ethanol is a loser for many reasons. Just a quick glance at corn ethanol's power density--just 0.05 W/m2--shows why the fuel makes no sense from a physics standpoint. Corn ethanol's low power density is inherent in all biomass, which leads us to the second of the Four Imperatives. Energy density refers to the quantity of energy that can be contained in a given unit of volume, area, or mass. And the low energy density of biomass--corn, switchgrass, wood, etc.--makes it difficult to produce sufficient amounts of energy without occupying huge swaths of land.
Now let's consider the power density of wind energy, which is about 1.2 W/m2, and solar photovoltaic, which can produce about 6.7 W/m2. Both sources are superior to corn ethanol (nearly everything is), but they are incurably intermittent, which makes them of marginal value in a world that demands always-available power. Nor can they compare to the power density of sources like natural gas, oil and nuclear. For instance, a marginal natural gas well, producing 60,000 cubic feet per day, has a power density of about 28 W/m2. An oil well, producing 10 barrels per day, has a power density of about 27 W/m2. Meanwhile, a nuclear power plant like the South Texas Project--even if you include the entire 19 square-mile tract upon which the project is sited--produces about 56 W/m2.
Simple math shows that a marginal gas or oil well has a power density at least 22 times that of a wind turbine while a nuclear power plant has a power density that is more than 8 times that of a solar photovoltaic facility. Those numbers explain why power density matters so much: if you start with a source that has low power density, you have to compensate for that low density by utilizing more resources such as land, steel, and ultra-long transmission lines. Those additional inputs then reduce the project's economic viability and its ability to scale.
That can be understood by comparing the land use needs of a nuclear plant with those of a wind energy project or a corn ethanol operation. The two reactors at the South Texas Project produce 2,700 megawatts of power. The plant covers about 19 square miles, an area slightly smaller than the island of Manhattan. To match that output using wind energy, you'd need a land area nearly the size of Rhode Island. Matching that power output with corn ethanol would require intensive farming on more than 21,000 square miles, an area nearly the size of West Virginia.
ReplyDeleteEnvironmental groups and many politicians in Washington insist that the U.S. must lead the effort to develop renewable energy sources, with wind, solar and biomass being the lead components. But doing so will mean replacing high-power-density sources that are reliable and low cost with low-power-density sources that are highly variable and high cost.
The ugly oil spill in the Gulf may continue growing in size. In response the Obama administration may approve more projects like Cape Wind, the controversial offshore wind energy project in Massachusetts. And Congress may pass another energy bill that gives yet more mandates and subsidies for renewables, but try as it might, Congress cannot repeal the laws of physics.
Robert Bryce is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. His newest book, Power Hungry: The Myths of “Green” Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future, was released last month.
Democratic Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias and his Republican opponent, Mark Kirk, both agree with the Obama administration's six-month ban on new permits for deep-sea oil drilling.
ReplyDelete...
But Kirk spokeswoman Kirsten Kukowski calls a pause in exploratory drilling "prudent" while systems to stop future leaks are developed.
Giannoulias and Kirk are vying for President Barack Obama's former Senate seat.
Drilling Moratorium
I run my Chevy on Corn Ethanol; I can't run it on Nuclear Energy.
ReplyDeleteJune 22, 2010 (LPAC)-- Serious consideration for the design and tailoring of a peaceful nuclear explosive to seal the BP well must now be a highest level priority. On the basis of information available in the public domain, such preparation is mandatory. Testimony from the leading U.S. expert on peaceful nuclear explosions as to the efficacy of using a nuclear device to seal the BP well has now been made public. Evaluations of the probable compromised condition of the well bore and seafloor come from reliable professional sources, which can be checked. BP's presentation of the situation must neither be believed nor tolerated.
ReplyDeleteThe political problem is that we have a President who is not in the real world. The very existence of the United States is endangered by the President's determination not to offend the British Empire, Wall Street, or both. But we can't let that stop us from saving the United States from a horrible fate. We can't wait two elections to save the United States from an incompetent President.
The prospect of massive flow of oil into the Atlantic within as early as 18 days, according to a projection by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, will make this a global disaster. There might be debatable features of such estimates, but lying by BP and its apologists is so severe we cannot base policy on such vast and portentous cover-ups. At the point this massive oil leak enters the Atlantic, it is a point of no return for North and possibly South America, and will rapidly move on to become a European and a global crisis.
This has become a major national security question, the only one more dangerous being the President himself.
For more details see
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2010/BP_nuclear-option.pdf
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2010/Nordyke_Interview.pdf
Chuck Stevens