Top Kill stops oil well gushing.

[KW4MW]

Perhaps we should assume a wait and see attitude but it looks like the top kill mud plug has worked and now they have to put in the cement cap.

\/
/\

Keeping my fingers crossed.

Ref: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-oil-spill-top-kill-20100528,0,5782115.story

[AF6LJ]

Perhaps we should assume a wait and see attitude but it looks like the top kill mud plug has worked and now they have to put in the cement cap.

\/
/\

Keeping my fingers crossed.

Ref: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-oil-spill-top-kill-20100528,0,5782115.story
There has been an absence of truth in the Gulf oil well disaster. This is a whole lot worse than government, BP, or the news media are letting on.

[WA6MHZ]

According to last nights Newscast, this oil disaster is making our esteemed President look bad, so they HAD to do something QUICK!!!!

[KW4MW]

There has been an absence of truth in the Gulf oil well disaster. This is a whole lot worse than government, BP, or the news media are letting on.

True, and it seems that BP management overrode the safety concerns of the Transoceans rig operators

Argument (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704717004575268302434395796.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_sections_news)

[KW4MW]

According to last nights Newscast, this oil disaster is making our esteemed President look bad, so they HAD to do something QUICK!!!!

Yes - and yesterday he said "Just plug the damned hole" so I suppose BP and Transocean heeded his advice. :)

[AE1PT]

For those who have not been watching:

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/homepage/STAGING/local_assets/bp_homepage/html/rov_stream.html

Live video stream of the well head and riser.

[AF6LJ]

I have read reports early on of people who wanted to videotape the damage done to beaches were told they couldn't videotape or photograph the damage done to Public Beaches.
Now I have a real BIG problem with that.

[AF6LJ]

True, and it seems that BP management overrode the safety concerns of the Transoceans rig operators

Argument (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704717004575268302434395796.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_sections_news)

Good article, there was reference made to this article in a radio show I listen to.

[KI4NGN]

Good article, there was reference made to this article in a radio show I listen to.

Sue, I think you're into your conspiracy mode, assuming that there must be one somewhere and that the government must be involved. I've seen many pictures and videos of the oil on beaches and in the wetlands, and if it has come out that safe protocols may have been bypassed, then it has come out, right?

It's beyond human nature for people who make mistakes to automatically confess to them. That's not a conspiracy, but an attempt to lessen the consequences, which is a natural reaction, especially in any business.

[AF6LJ]

Sue, I think you're into your conspiracy mode, assuming that there must be one somewhere and that the government must be involved. I've seen many pictures and videos of the oil on beaches and in the wetlands, and if it has come out that safe protocols may have been bypassed, then it has come out, right?

It's beyond human nature for people who make mistakes to automatically confess to them. That's not a conspiracy, but an attempt to lessen the consequences, which is a natural reaction, especially in any business.

This is not NASA
This not the Sixties
and most of all
This is not Apollo 13.

This is a private corporation who is doing everything they can to cover up the extent of the damage.

We will all find out in a year when we go to the grocery store to buy saltwater fish, crab and clams.

By the way the oil isn't the major threat it's the dispersent that contains Benzine that is the is going to do the majority of the damage.

Reminds me of GE and the scandal over PCB contamination. The worst environmental disaster to date.

[W9JEF]

This is not NASA
This not the Sixties
and most of all
This is not Apollo 13.



Although in either case,
"Houston, we've had a problem"
seems to apply. ;)




This is a private corporation who is doing everything they can to cover up the extent of the damage.

We will all find out in a year when we go to the grocery store to buy saltwater fish, crab and clams.

By the way the oil isn't the major threat it's the dispersent that contains benzine that is the is going to do the majority of the damage.




I can't help but think that this is an example
of the fallacy of "Out of sight, out of mind"
that BP hopes will mitigate the damage
to their public image.




Reminds me of GE and the scandal over PCB contamination. The worst environmental disaster to date.



When you consider that crude, Corexit® (benzine),
and PCB's all come from the putrid waste matter
digested and contained in the bowels of earth,
isn't it high time we seriously consider
converting to cleaner, more efficient energy?

[K8ERV]

isn't it high time we seriously consider
converting to cleaner, more efficient energy?

I'm doing my part. Trying to get my wife to turn the crank faster.

Next is training dog to help.

I have better things to do.

TOM K8ERV Montrose Colo

[AE1PT]

Hey Sue, there are plenty of them out there. Try the CNN website...:p

[N0SYA]

well, the well was busted right after 0bama signed that law to allow drilling..... nope, no spiracy there!

[N2RJ]

For those who have not been watching:

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/homepage/STAGING/local_assets/bp_homepage/html/rov_stream.html

Live video stream of the well head and riser.

Windows only unfortunately. :(

[NC4JB]

Looks to me like it's still gushing oil :(

[K9STH]

People forget that during World War II there were a lot of oil tankers torpedoed by German submarines within just a couple of miles of the coast of the United States, both in the Atlantic and in the Gulf of Mexico. The amount of oil that reached the beaches was, in total, quite a number of times the amount which the BP well has put into the Gulf of Mexico. We seemed to have "survived" that "happening" quite well!

Glen, K9STH

[AE1PT]

Sorry about the windows only issue. That's what happens when you are too trendy or special for your clothes...:p

What it seems to be gushing now is the "drilling mud"--at considerably less of a rate than it was raw crude and natural gas. It ain't a done deal yet--but if anyone has noticed the head of MM has been fired, and all drilling or permit execution shut down.

Can't say anything more--or I would have to censure myself for political discussion....:cool:

[AF6LJ]

People forget that during World War II there were a lot of oil tankers torpedoed by German submarines within just a couple of miles of the coast of the United States, both in the Atlantic and in the Gulf of Mexico. The amount of oil that reached the beaches was, in total, quite a number of times the amount which the BP well has put into the Gulf of Mexico. We seemed to have "survived" that "happening" quite well!

Glen, K9STH
The problem Glen is nobody is sure how much oil has escaped that well, most of it is under the surface due to it's specific gravity and it's temperature.
Most of the oil that was let into the ocean during WW2 was set on fire.

Different circumstances.

[AF6LJ]

Sorry about the windows only issue. That's what happens when you are too trendy or special for your clothes...:p

What it seems to be gushing now is the "drilling mud"--at considerably less of a rate than it was raw crude and natural gas. It ain't a done deal yet--but if anyone has noticed the head of MM has been fired, and all drilling or permit execution shut down.

Can't say anything more--or I would have to censure myself for political discussion....:cool:
/I have seen the 85,000 whale in the room too. :D

[K9STH]

Sue:

Most of the oil from torpedoed tankers in World War II was not burned. A lot, yes, when the ship was first "hit". But, most of it, no!

There are still sunken ships that are leaking great amounts of oil, gasoline, etc., that were sunk during both World Wars. Also, there are a number of ships that were carrying considerably more toxic materials that still pose a "threat". One such example is a German submarine that was carrying mercury and other toxic cargo from Germany to Japan which was sunk off the coast of Sweden/Norway/Denmark. The containers which held the mercury have become leaky and there is a very large area of the North Sea which has become severely contaminated. The Swedish Navy is at a loss because any attempts to remove the mercury containers will probably result in an even larger "spill".

The beach in Galveston, Texas, has basically been "oil soaked" for many decades. Among the causes are the refineries, sunken oil tankers, the Houston Ship Channel, etc., as well as "natural seepage", resulting in that stretch of beach being "pretty nasty".

Glen, K9STH

[G0GQK]

I know this may sound a strange question, but why is the disaster with the oil well the responsibility of the president ?. With the logic being used then it must be the presidents fault eleven men died, and it must be his fault that the procedures which should have taken place and didn't were also his fault.

It must be part of this everybody apologising for past events.

G0GQK

[AF6LJ]

I know this may sound a strange question, but why is the disaster with the oil well the responsibility of the president ?. With the logic being used then it must be the presidents fault eleven men died, and it must be his fault that the procedures which should have taken place and didn't were also his fault.

It must be part of this everybody apologising for past events.

G0GQK
It's BP's, their subcontractors and at least one government agency who are at fault.
The President can move men and materials to minimize the damage.
There is considerable debate over what to do with the surface oil, conventional wisdom says to burn it.
Conventional wisdom also says that using dispersants that contain bromine is not wise.

There is also a credibility gap regarding what appears to be the actual amount of oil escaping per hour and what BP and the government are saying. But Governments and industry always lie so what else is new.

[W5HTW]

I know this may sound a strange question, but why is the disaster with the oil well the responsibility of the president ?. With the logic being used then it must be the presidents fault eleven men died, and it must be his fault that the procedures which should have taken place and didn't were also his fault.

It must be part of this everybody apologising for past events.

G0GQK

We have thousands of experts here in the USA on oil spills and how to correct or repair them. There are, for example, 100 of them in the US Senate. There are several hundred in the White House. Every state governor is also an expert, as are all of his/her advisers.

So we have plenty of learned scientific experts. Anyone elected to Congress automatically is granted expert prowess in every possible matter under the sun. That is so they can get on the TV and announce they would have done it faster, cheaper, easier, and with far less damage to the environment. Every darned one of them. Frankly, I'd say give all 100 of them a diver's suit and let 'em have at it.

You folks are right. This should not be handled in the White House or Congress. It should be handled by those who CAN handle it, and like it or not, that is BP. If the darned politicos would go back to their real jobs of raising taxes, and let the real experts do the job, this would be done. But it is one of the biggest photo ops since 9/11, and they aren't going to miss a frame of opportunity.

Conspiracy? Nah. Except that Transocean may have falsified tests on the automatic shut down equipment. And we hear rumors that the feds signed off on such documentation, knowing it was false, and even helped in falsifying those documents. These are the same feds who are b******g about it now. They helped create it. It has been reported the documents were filled out in pencil and copied over in ink, after making sure they would pass.

This is an accident. Yeah, it could have been prevented. As can almost all accidents of any type. See? My hindsight is as good as yours. But it happened, and we are right now pointing 50,000 fingers of blame in every possible direction. There is ONE priority - fix it. Blame is not the priority. Clean up the beaches.

OK, the CEO of BP was reviewing the damage on the beach. He told a photographer to "get out of there." Why? Because the photographer, exercising his pee brain, walked into the oily mess so he could turn and take a photo of the CEO. The CEO did NOT tell him to stop taking photos (as Rick Sanchez said on CNN) and did NOT tell the photographer to leave the scene. He just told him to get out of that area where they were scooping up oil from atop the sand. That has been turned into a 'cover-up.' "We won't permit photos." Bull! Thousands of photos have been taken. And while this idiot is wading around in the oil, so he can get a picture, BP is showing live video of the leak itself. Cover-up? Again, Bull. Other photographers, with slightly more sense than to go wading in the oil, kept taking photos. Oh, and it was captured on news video. Kind of a wonder the CEO didn't turn around and tell them to stop shooting video, huh? People will drill down more than 18,000 feet to find a cover-up. They'll drill a new volcano.

Photos of the oily beaches are everywhere. Nothing is hidden. Nothing. Cover-up? More Bull.

Nothing is covered up. With a thousand live photos a day, you can't create a conspiracy.

OK, I had my say. I'm going back to watching those black helicopters as they cross through the contrails that are menacing, directly over my house.

Ed

[KA3TRX]

The same people that don't want government involved in private enterprise are the ones that are squealing the loudest for more government help. Go figure.

[W5INC]

I know this may sound a strange question, but why is the disaster with the oil well the responsibility of the president ?. With the logic being used then it must be the presidents fault eleven men died, and it must be his fault that the procedures which should have taken place and didn't were also his fault.

It must be part of this everybody apologising for past events.

G0GQK

The President is the representative of the mineral owners, which is the American public. Lots of royalty payments derived from offshore drilling going to the US government. Since the government makes itself the representative of the mineral owners, it is their job to make sure the drilling enterprise that takes place for those minerals is done correctly.

This was not done from day 1 in this debacle. The Fed's should not have relied on BP's flow rate numbers from the get go. If the true numbers were given from day 1 contingency plans would have been considerably different then the 5000 barrel a day figure given by BP. The Fed's had no hand in the initial accident. The Feds were not doing their job in representing the mineral owners rights after the accident occurred.

The top kill effort has failed and the oil is still spewing into the Gulf at the same rate as before.

[AF6LJ]

We have thousands of experts here in the USA on oil spills and how to correct or repair them. There are, for example, 100 of them in the US Senate. There are several hundred in the White House. Every state governor is also an expert, as are all of his/her advisers.

So we have plenty of learned scientific experts. Anyone elected to Congress automatically is granted expert prowess in every possible matter under the sun. That is so they can get on the TV and announce they would have done it faster, cheaper, easier, and with far less damage to the environment. Every darned one of them. Frankly, I'd say give all 100 of them a diver's suit and let 'em have at it.

You folks are right. This should not be handled in the White House or Congress. It should be handled by those who CAN handle it, and like it or not, that is BP. If the darned politicos would go back to their real jobs of raising taxes, and let the real experts do the job, this would be done. But it is one of the biggest photo ops since 9/11, and they aren't going to miss a frame of opportunity.

Conspiracy? Nah. Except that Transocean may have falsified tests on the automatic shut down equipment. And we hear rumors that the feds signed off on such documentation, knowing it was false, and even helped in falsifying those documents. These are the same feds who are b******g about it now. They helped create it. It has been reported the documents were filled out in pencil and copied over in ink, after making sure they would pass.

This is an accident. Yeah, it could have been prevented. As can almost all accidents of any type. See? My hindsight is as good as yours. But it happened, and we are right now pointing 50,000 fingers of blame in every possible direction. There is ONE priority - fix it. Blame is not the priority. Clean up the beaches.

OK, the CEO of BP was reviewing the damage on the beach. He told a photographer to "get out of there." Why? Because the photographer, exercising his pee brain, walked into the oily mess so he could turn and take a photo of the CEO. The CEO did NOT tell him to stop taking photos (as Rick Sanchez said on CNN) and did NOT tell the photographer to leave the scene. He just told him to get out of that area where they were scooping up oil from atop the sand. That has been turned into a 'cover-up.' "We won't permit photos." Bull! Thousands of photos have been taken. And while this idiot is wading around in the oil, so he can get a picture, BP is showing live video of the leak itself. Cover-up? Again, Bull. Other photographers, with slightly more sense than to go wading in the oil, kept taking photos. Oh, and it was captured on news video. Kind of a wonder the CEO didn't turn around and tell them to stop shooting video, huh? People will drill down more than 18,000 feet to find a cover-up. They'll drill a new volcano.

Photos of the oily beaches are everywhere. Nothing is hidden. Nothing. Cover-up? More Bull.

Nothing is covered up. With a thousand live photos a day, you can't create a conspiracy.

OK, I had my say. I'm going back to watching those black helicopters as they cross through the contrails that are menacing, directly over my house.

Ed
Ed;
It's a public beach Nobody in BP had the right to tell him to leave.
There needs to be more photos, more transparency.

It is the actions of an international company that are distorting the environment in the Gulf.

They don't have pockets deep enough to pay for the damage.

They don't own the beach, the sea or the fish and mammals killed by their negligence.

[AF6LJ]

The same people that don't want government involved in private enterprise are the ones that are squealing the loudest for more government help. Go figure.

That isn't unusual;
They think they own the government.

[KC8VWM]

There has been an absence of truth in the Gulf oil well disaster. This is a whole lot worse than government, BP, or the news media are letting on.

Yeah for example:

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c49/IgnoranceIsntbliss/Disaster/Oil/Slide06f.jpg

[N0WVA]

At least try to clean up as it comes in. Doing nothing is the worse thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jQUfOZTK-Y

[K8ERV]

I thot I was the only one who recognized the expertise present in congress.

TOM K8ERV Montrose Colo

[KB9LXP]

Plug the d... well!
This is making me sick just watching it on TV.
Please, just get er done.
NO more pointing fingers, or Ill get mad, you don't want to see Me mad:mad:
Mike

[W9JEF]

Pie-chart showing oil contamination
in the whole vast ocean, which comprises
two-thirds of earth's surface?

These attempts to minimize the obvious
long-term damage to our Gulf Coast would
be laughable, if not for the grave impact
this catastrophe has on folks whose encounter
with what is so rightly named "crude"
has been so up-close and personal.

[AE1PT]

Sigh. For all the hoopla and good signs--BP suspended the "drilling mud" operation for 16 hours and will suspend it once again. While it looked like it was slowing the flow--it is appearing that this strategy may result in failure.

Good for the administration today. The head of Minerals & Mining was fired--and all drilling permits suspended--along with a number in Virginia and Alaska revoked.

It's a sorry day...:mad:

[AE1PT]

Yeah for example:

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c49/IgnoranceIsntbliss/Disaster/Oil/Slide06f.jpg

Right. Until there is a problem--and one that can result in the largest petroleum disaster in the history of the modern world...

Got a stupid chart to counter that reality? Probably not.

[KC8VWM]

:) Sorry, no pie chart exhibiting that information and yes you are correct. It seems jet skies leaking oil into waterways is the major problem according to the pie chart huh? lol

I think I have a real solution to plugging the oil gushing problem instead of using golf balls and rubber tires. Interested? ( I could use some peer review on the idea)

[AE1PT]

:) Sorry, no pie chart exhibiting that information and yes you are correct. It seems jet skies leaking oil into waterways is the major problem according to the pie chart huh? lol

I think I have a real solution to plugging the oil gushing problem instead of using golf balls and rubber tires. Interested? ( I could use some peer review on the idea)

Not me. As the sages say here, take it to the system. No charts of evaluations are truthful until the ultimate happens. And that is the trouble with most of this environmental impact statement rubbish. It all looks good until the bad thing happens...:(

[VE7DCW]

Plug the d... well!
This is making me sick just watching it on TV.
Please, just get er done.
NO more pointing fingers, or Ill get mad, you don't want to see Me mad:mad:
Mike

Thats what the guy who turned into the Incredible Hulk always kept saying...... he could've benefitted from some anger management :D

73

[KA9MOT]

While the Gulf Coast is in dire straights right now, I fear this might become a global problem.

The companies are tripping over each other trying to blame the other, our government is calling folks to the carpet to answer for their transgressions.
Why don't these morons get together and work to solve the problem. Fix it, Clean it, and then fight about who pays for it.

And why, are we refusing help? What is wrong with these people?

[KC8VWM]

Not me. As the sages say here, take it to the system. No charts of evaluations are truthful until the ultimate happens. And that is the trouble with most of this environmental impact statement rubbish. It all looks good until the bad thing happens...:(

Placing my resolution idea in the hands of the "system" seems like sound advice. Im not exactly like those guys at BP with a diploma mill degree who are suggesting "golf balls and rubber tires" will solve the problem because my idea to solve the problem actually uses the principles asociated with calculated flow rates, oil material handling specifications, viscosity, porosity and the associated principles of fluid dynamics involving material fluid flow and temperature range flow assessment but you are correct, this is not the place to discuss such engineered design to resolving the problem.

However probably much like yourself, I suppose I am somewhat perplexed concerning the flail and lethargic response to as you put it, to:

"The largest petroleum disaster in the history of the modern world."

I think that statement is not far off course considering the number of days and the amount of gushing oil propelled into the Gulf on a dialy basis we are considering in the scope of things.

Hams are pretty smart when it comes to calculations, so do the math regarding a 20" gushing oil pipe x 36 days and this will give you an idea of the reality of things.

I think it will take decades if not longer to return to what was known as "before."

[AD7N]

While the Gulf Coast is in dire straights right now, I fear this might become a global problem.

The companies are tripping over each other trying to blame the other, our government is calling folks to the carpet to answer for their transgressions.
Why don't these morons get together and work to solve the problem. Fix it, Clean it, and then fight about who pays for it.

And why, are we refusing help? What is wrong with these people?

For one simple reason -necks on the line!

BP etc etc - shareholders and money - if they can position blame to others, they are less likely to get fired and loose shareholders

Politicians (ANY side!) - kudo points - the more they can fluff their feathers and publicly pillory scapegoats, the more street cred they get.

This ALL comes down to games of attrition - who can last the longest in the ring?

All that energy prostrating themselves for points, shareholders etc etc is energy wasted that could go to fixing the problem!

[KC8VWM]

KE7HQY:

I can fix the problem right now. Do you think they want to? How would resolving the problem actually benefit BP from a financial perspective right now exactly?

Keep in mind BP is actually gaining money by suffering such a loss. It's a huge "loss" deduction they can claim on taxes. Think about that will ya?

I'm sure that information (profit losses) will be somewhat accurately reflected on their next released corporate financial statement released to it's shareholders.

Who are we kidding here exactly? Get real,,,, I do know that BP will be reimbursed for profits lost while at the same time BP investors will stand to loose a lot of money caused by this event. I'm no fool when it comes to these things. Been there done that. I didn't exactly win the Businessman of the Year Award as published in the April 2003 edition of the Wall Street Journal just because i'm some idiot who doesn't have any idea of what I am talking about. Think about that. :)

My Best

[AD7N]

KE7HQY:

I can fix the problem right now. Do you think they want to? How would resolving the problem actually benefit BP from a financial perspective right now exactly?

Keep in mind BP is actually gaining money by suffering such a loss. It's a huge "loss" deduction they can claim.

I'm sure that information (loss) will be somewhat accurately reflected on their next released corporate statement released to it's shareholders.

Who are we kidding here exactly? Get real,,,, i'm no fool when it comes to these things. Been there done that.

I am confused as to your post - I am basically arguing the same thing as you are :D

[KC8VWM]

I am confused as to your post - I am basically arguing the same thing as you are :D

Yes we are debating exactly the same thing.. Sorry about that. Would you please accept my sincerest apologies even though we both agree on this matter of discussion anyways? :)

My Best,

[AD7N]

Yes we are debating exactly the same thing.. Sorry about that. Would you please accept my sincerest apologies even though we both agree on this matter of discussion anyways? :)

My Best,

Glad we agree :D

[KC8VWM]

Glad we agree :D

Sorry we do not disagree at this moment. Perhaps you will have an opportunity soon in the near furture. Until then please accept my apologies and I hope we can disagree with one another soon.

Until then, my very best.

[KI4NGN]

KE7HQY:

I can fix the problem right now. Do you think they want to? How would resolving the problem actually benefit BP from a financial perspective right now exactly?

Keep in mind BP is actually gaining money by suffering such a loss. It's a huge "loss" deduction they can claim on taxes. Think about that will ya?

I'm sure that information (profit losses) will be somewhat accurately reflected on their next released corporate financial statement released to it's shareholders.

Who are we kidding here exactly? Get real,,,, I do know that BP will be reimbursed for profits lost while at the same time BP investors will stand to loose a lot of money caused by this event. I'm no fool when it comes to these things. Been there done that. I didn't exactly win the Businessman of the Year Award as published in the April 2003 edition of the Wall Street Journal just because i'm some idiot who doesn't have any idea of what I am talking about. Think about that. :)

My Best

Think about it? Yea, you should. Of course BP wants to shut it down as quickly as they can! Tax deductions are not a profit: you can't stay in business taking tax deductions. Tax deductions offset losses, but they're not profit. The asset that is their life blood is discharging into the gulf, being thrown away. They're going to have to pay for all of the damages this has caused, and that number rises daily. They're going to lose many lawsuits...and you think they'll make all of this look good financially on paper???

[N8ODF]

KE7HQY:

I can fix the problem right now. Do you think they want to? How would resolving the problem actually benefit BP from a financial perspective right now exactly?

Keep in mind BP is actually gaining money by suffering such a loss. It's a huge "loss" deduction they can claim on taxes. Think about that will ya?

I'm sure that information (profit losses) will be somewhat accurately reflected on their next released corporate financial statement released to it's shareholders.

Who are we kidding here exactly? Get real,,,, I do know that BP will be reimbursed for profits lost while at the same time BP investors will stand to loose a lot of money caused by this event. I'm no fool when it comes to these things. Been there done that. I didn't exactly win the Businessman of the Year Award as published in the April 2003 edition of the Wall Street Journal just because i'm some idiot who doesn't have any idea of what I am talking about. Think about that. :)

My Best


Mr Businessman of the year 2003....as doctors have an obligation to treat those that are injured @ an accident they may come upon...would the same rule not hold true that an esteemed Gentlemen of your caliber with the necessary skills to correct such a devastating event as the oil spill...not step forth to provide such information so as to "fix the problem right now"....one certinally has responsibility to his fellow man @ this level of capabilitys would you not say...

[AF6LJ]

Not me. As the sages say here, take it to the system. No charts of evaluations are truthful until the ultimate happens. And that is the trouble with most of this environmental impact statement rubbish. It all looks good until the bad thing happens...:(
I think it's safe to say the system isn't interested in out of the box thinking by someone not on the inside.

Like the people here in SanDiego who cautioned against planting the burned countryside from the 2004 firestorm. They saw their nightmare come true in 2006.

They wouldn't dare ask for help, that would unmask their false air of authority.

[AF6LJ]

Yeah for example:

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c49/IgnoranceIsntbliss/Disaster/Oil/Slide06f.jpg
This is almost laughable if this situation wasn't so dire.

[W9JEF]

Nuclear will be way dirtier for those affected
when again, the unthinkable happens.

Until Murphy's Law gets repealed, that is.

Conserve energy, folks.

Do you really need to drive to work or school
(or most anywhere) in a behemoth.

Use that great solar clothes drier in the sky.
Even on a cloudy day, clothes on a line will get dry.
And they'll have a certain 'fresh energy' fragrance.

[K9STH]

JEF:

Actually, with the nuclear power generating plants used in the United States there is absolutely no chance of a meltdown. Unlike the nuclear plants in the old Soviet Union the plants in the United States now use fuel rods that are only 3 percent nuclear material. The rods used in the Soviet Union were well over 50 percent nuclear material. It is the same with all nuclear powered warships, the fuel rods have considerably more than 50 percent nuclear material. This is because of the need for basically immediate power generation whereas in the civilian power plants there is no real need for immediate power generation and therefore the actual generation of electricity takes place over a number of hours before full capacity is reached.

When I was with TXU (electric company for almost half the State of Texas) I was one of the people who gave presentations to the general public. Although I usually made presentations on lightning protection and grounding techniques, I also made an occasional presentation on nuclear power. This was because TXU operates the Comanche Peak Nuclear Steam Electric Station. In fact, I still have the complete set of 35 mm slides that I used when making the presentations.

At the Comanche Peak facility they are required to make radiation measurements on a regular basis. To date, the highest record of radiation has always been made 6 inches in front of the microwave oven (when the oven is operating) in the break room! The other radiation measurements made within the facility are considerably below the normal "background" measurements for that part of the State of Texas. In fact, the radiation level received from the Sun on a summer day is well over 20 times the maximum radiation level within the facility.

They are now in the process of getting approval for the addition of 2 nuclear electric generators (to go with the 2 that are already in use). The Comanche Peak site was chosen because that area of Texas is the most stable geographically in the state and is one of the most stable in the entire world.

There are several eastern states that receive a substantial amount of their electrical power from nuclear generation. But, it is also people from those states who seem to protest when nuclear plants are proposed in other areas. Also, there are a number of European nations that have nuclear power plants which provide a substantial amount of power for that country.

Frankly, one of the most safe places in the entire State of Texas is within the confines of the Comanche Peak nuclear plant. Not only is the area geographically stable, the containment buildings are constructed to be able to withstand weather situations as well as military strikes, but the security (as required by the NRC) is second to none. You have to pass through at least 3 very secure areas to even get to the containment buildings. Then there are at least 2 more secure areas to make it to the control room. Even as a company employee, I had to go through all of these "check points" and had to be accompanied by a plant employee. For someone else the access was considerably harder.

For "pollution free" electrical generation nuclear power is, by far, the best solution. Also, even though the plants are very expensive to construct, the total cost of electricity generated by nuclear power is only a fraction of that produced by other means.

Glen, K9STH

[KT1F]

Use that great solar clothes drier in the sky.
Even on a cloudy day, clothes on a line will get dry.
And they'll have a certain 'fresh energy' fragrance.

Sadly, that's not an option for many people.

Most HOA controlled environments have strictly enforced bans on the use of the sun as a clothes dryer.

[K3XR]

Sigh. For all the hoopla and good signs--BP suspended the "drilling mud" operation for 16 hours and will suspend it once again. While it looked like it was slowing the flow--it is appearing that this strategy may result in failure.

Good for the administration today. The head of Minerals & Mining was fired--and all drilling permits suspended--along with a number in Virginia and Alaska revoked.

It's a sorry day...:mad:

"Good for the administration today" nothing political about that statement.

[KD5PME]

Conserve energy, folks.



That is the smartest thing I have heard you say.

We waste SOOOOO much energy.

For starters, why do we light up the night sky??? Waste of energy. Actually, waste of a LOT of energy.

[W5INC]

JEF:

Actually, with the nuclear power generating plants used in the United States there is absolutely no chance of a meltdown. Unlike the nuclear plants in the old Soviet Union the plants in the United States now use fuel rods that are only 3 percent nuclear material. The rods used in the Soviet Union were well over 50 percent nuclear material. It is the same with all nuclear powered warships, the fuel rods have considerably more than 50 percent nuclear material. This is because of the need for basically immediate power generation whereas in the civilian power plants there is no real need for immediate power generation and therefore the actual generation of electricity takes place over a number of hours before full capacity is reached.

When I was with TXU (electric company for almost half the State of Texas) I was one of the people who gave presentations to the general public. Although I usually made presentations on lightning protection and grounding techniques, I also made an occasional presentation on nuclear power. This was because TXU operates the Comanche Peak Nuclear Steam Electric Station. In fact, I still have the complete set of 35 mm slides that I used when making the presentations.

At the Comanche Peak facility they are required to make radiation measurements on a regular basis. To date, the highest record of radiation has always been made 6 inches in front of the microwave oven (when the oven is operating) in the break room! The other radiation measurements made within the facility are considerably below the normal "background" measurements for that part of the State of Texas. In fact, the radiation level received from the Sun on a summer day is well over 20 times the maximum radiation level within the facility.

They are now in the process of getting approval for the addition of 2 nuclear electric generators (to go with the 2 that are already in use). The Comanche Peak site was chosen because that area of Texas is the most stable geographically in the state and is one of the most stable in the entire world.

There are several eastern states that receive a substantial amount of their electrical power from nuclear generation. But, it is also people from those states who seem to protest when nuclear plants are proposed in other areas. Also, there are a number of European nations that have nuclear power plants which provide a substantial amount of power for that country.

Frankly, one of the most safe places in the entire State of Texas is within the confines of the Comanche Peak nuclear plant. Not only is the area geographically stable, the containment buildings are constructed to be able to withstand weather situations as well as military strikes, but the security (as required by the NRC) is second to none. You have to pass through at least 3 very secure areas to even get to the containment buildings. Then there are at least 2 more secure areas to make it to the control room. Even as a company employee, I had to go through all of these "check points" and had to be accompanied by a plant employee. For someone else the access was considerably harder.

For "pollution free" electrical generation nuclear power is, by far, the best solution. Also, even though the plants are very expensive to construct, the total cost of electricity generated by nuclear power is only a fraction of that produced by other means.

Glen, K9STH


France, I believe generates close to 90% of their electrical needs by the Nuclear method. Pocket sized units that are made small by design. 50% of all electricity that is generated by any means, is lost in the grid transporting the electricity from the generation site to the end user. Easy to figure out if you cut out the grid you can generate 50% less electricity and still supply the demand.

Small nuclear plants seem like the way to go, just for the fact the grid is only used in a back up situation, if the pocket sized plant goes down. This system works very well in France and should be considered a viable short term solution to our current energy policies as K9STH posts in his reply.

[AF6LJ]

Nuclear will be way dirtier for those affected
when again, the unthinkable happens.

Until Murphy's Law gets repealed, that is.

Glen covered this one really well.



Conserve energy, folks.

Do you really need to drive to work or school
(or most anywhere) in a behemoth.

I walk nearly everywhere I go.
Can't get much greener than that.


Use that great solar clothes drier in the sky.
Even on a cloudy day, clothes on a line will get dry.
And they'll have a certain 'fresh energy' fragrance.
Are you going to donate the house and the land, trapped here in the People's Republic of Kalifornia where houses sell for three times or more what they are worth. I'm stuck using a cloths dryer.

[KC8VWM]

JEF:


For "pollution free" electrical generation nuclear power is, by far, the best solution. Also, even though the plants are very expensive to construct, the total cost of electricity generated by nuclear power is only a fraction of that produced by other means.

Glen, K9STH

I would have to agree. Nuclear power generation in the US is still suffering from the stigma attached to the 3 mile island incident which occurred in 1979.

The truth is if you do the research, you will find out that nuclear power generation is actually one of the safest ways to generate huge amounts of energy that has very little impact on the environment when compared to the oil industry.

In terms of a typical nuclear power plant safety record, every aspect of the entire process is strictly controlled, constantly monitored and there are an unbelievable amount of safeguards, shutdown and safety protocols put into place. Even the entire nuclear reactor building is completely encased inside thick concrete that is engineered and capable of withstanding a nuclear bomb blast. The reactor is designed with it's own built in containment shield if something ever did go wrong.

Meltdown of the core is the primary issue but this core can be flooded with hundreds of thousands of gallons of water at the mere push of a switch, by manual overide, and/or by several other overides and even secondary backup systems. Modern nuclear facility design is complete and utter overkill in the area of safety.

Nuclear generating facilities are not anything even remotely as bad as the safety records exhibited by many coal mining operations, oil rig or even oil refinery industry facilities by comparison.

The costs to construct a nuclear power plant is not about the actual cost of constructing one in itself, it's about the costs associated with NOT building one that are running into the billions of dollars, lives lost and long term environmental impact as this recent incident demonstrates.

I don't think the 3 mile island incident even comes close in terms of negative impact when compared to this recent event.

[KC4RAN]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor

One of the safest designs ever put to paper. Turn off all the coolant, it still doesn't melt down.

[KC8VWM]

Think about it? Yea, you should. Of course BP wants to shut it down as quickly as they can! Tax deductions are not a profit: you can't stay in business taking tax deductions. Tax deductions offset losses, but they're not profit. The asset that is their life blood is discharging into the gulf, being thrown away. They're going to have to pay for all of the damages this has caused, and that number rises daily. They're going to lose many lawsuits...and you think they'll make all of this look good financially on paper???

Well if you somehow think BP isn't really interested in stopping the problem you might read a few of the news items out there such as this one:

"Inventors send 10,000 ideas to stop oil spill, say BP ignoring them"

Read more: http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2010-05-19/ap-stories/inventors-send-10000-ideas-to-stop-oil-spill-say-bp-ignoring-their-schemes#ixzz0pGQojnCo (http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2010-05-19/ap-stories/inventors-send-10000-ideas-to-stop-oil-spill-say-bp-ignoring-their-schemes#ixzz0pGQojnCo)


BP has fielded some 60,000 calls from the public that led to 10,000 tips.

About 2,500 people sent in forms spelling out their ideas in greater detail, and BP advanced 700 to the next phase. Seems rather obvious they are lethargic in terms of doing anything doesn't it?

Yes, there are in fact real world solutions that will actually solve this oil gusher quite well. Let's keep things in perspective shall we? After all, this is merely a leaking pipe we are talking about and it doesn't even require NASA engineers or some exotic technology to devise a way to stop this problem from continuing.

So why haven't any of these 60,000 idea's been attempted or deployed yet? It's not like such technology to stop the oil from gushing doesn't exist because it clearly does.

You have to ask yourself that question and try to understand why this current problem is allowed to continue.

For example, here's a dirt simple solution that works but they don't even use it:

Insert a slightly smaller diameter pipe inside the larger oil gushing diameter pipe. The smaller diameter pipe would lead to the surface which would help "minimize" the impact as the tanker above would recover the oil that is redirected through the smaller diameter pipe causing the flow to be redirected to the surface.

Yet they don't even do something as simple as that. So far they used things they know would fail. Like big concrete collectors, firing mud, concrete, golf balls and rubber tires into this 20" diameter pipe. I mean come on now... does anyone really think any of this nonsense will actually work?

Now ask yourself why they don't attempt something as simple as inserting a smaller diameter pipe inside a larger diameter one to redirect the flow topside? Is it because oil rigs don't have the advanced capability and technology to insert a smaller pipe into a larger pipe? It's really a very simple thing to do when you think about it isn't it?

The company is already losing money and the more they lose equates to mean the possibility of greater long term financial benefits. Perhaps this sets the stage in terms of qualifying BP for a big government bail out or public money like GM did huh? Perhaps this could be an opportunity to engage other plans like a sell off, or merger with another company which would serve to increase profitibility in other markets.

Again, I feel this event might be some opportunity for BP to do something in terms of moving forward with something or it may qualify them for some sort of public money after they start crying about how much "they lost."

Let's see what happens.

[KD5PME]

If we have learned anything from this it is that we need to have a proven contingency in place in case of a disaster like this. We need to know how to cap an ocean well before we start drilling.

[KW4MW]

For starters, why do we light up the night sky??? Waste of energy. Actually, waste of a LOT of energy.

True - but it started 50+ years ago. As a kid I used to go up on the hill behind our farm house to star gaze with my telescope. One night I noticed a difference and it was that the old folks 300 yds down the road had a sodium vapor light installed on an electric pole in front of their house. This was the 1950's folks in rural WV, we left our house unlocked and the keys in the Buick but the electric company was Hell bent on scaring people into buying 'security lights'.

Oddly enough, I went back there recently and now, thankfully, most rural folks have opted for the night sky instead of obscuring it with that gawd-awful yellow light.

[AC0H]

France, I believe generates close to 90% of their electrical needs by the Nuclear method. Pocket sized units that are made small by design. 50% of all electricity that is generated by any means, is lost in the grid transporting the electricity from the generation site to the end user. Easy to figure out if you cut out the grid you can generate 50% less electricity and still supply the demand.

Small nuclear plants seem like the way to go, just for the fact the grid is only used in a back up situation, if the pocket sized plant goes down. This system works very well in France and should be considered a viable short term solution to our current energy policies as K9STH posts in his reply.

There are 59 nuclear plants in France producing 79% of their electrical power. There is nothing pocket sized about them. They range from 900 to 1500 MWe output.

French Nukes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France)

The largest nuke in the US, which is in Arizona, is 1335 MWe.

Biggest US nuke. (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004790.html)

It's a damn embarrassment that the country which invented nuclear power isn't leading the world in research and use of this power source. We let a vocal minority, most of whom have never had real jobs, kill an industry and power source we need to sustain our economy.

If you think Obama and the dems in congress are ever going to let new nukes get built I've got some ocean front property in Iowa to sell ya.

It will take 50 years to get the US off of oil without turning us into a third world country in the process. So, next time some nut job Sierra club member gets in your grill yelling "stop the drilling" politely ask for their car keys, drivers license, car title and house keys, hand them a three man tent with a box of matches then say "you first, hypocrite".

[AF6LJ]

This whole thing is right out of The Knowing.

Reminds me of a Lone Gunmen episode that aired in February of 2001.

[K9STH]

By the way, there has been a nuclear reactor operating near downtown Atlanta, Georgia, since around 1960. Although not really publicized, there has been a very small reactor operating on the Georgia Tech campus since before my freshman year (started September 1962).

Also, the 3 percent nuclear fuel rods are stored outdoors at the bottom of what is basically a large swimming pool. The "spent" rods are stored for a relatively long length of time until enough accumulate to warrant being shipped to a nuclear waste facility.

In addition, there was an article in National Geographic a number of years ago which stated that scientists had developed a very efficient and safe method of disposing on such nuclear waste products. The process basically consists of adding the waste material to "plain old glass" as the glass is being made. Although the glass still has a higher radioactive finger print than "normal" background, these glass "blocks" can be disposed of by sinking in the ocean where the depth is several miles. Even in sea water the glass will not start to break down for many millenium and by that time the nuclear waste will have "half lived" to the point of having radiation levels below "normal" background levels.

Glen, K9STH

[KC8VWM]

You could dispose the spent fuel rods but you don't have to.

You can actually reform, reprocess and reuse them.

Spent fuel rods still contain a lot of uranium 235, plutonium and reforming uranium oxide fuel and reusing fuel rods would actually serve to help the environment because this would decrease the demand for uranium 235 and plutonium which is required to construct new fuel rods.

Jimmy Carter felt that reprocessing fuel rods might lead to unintended weapons development if the spent rods got in the wrongs hands. Seems the approach taken was a decision to bury all spent fuel rods which serves as a method to better control and secure them in areas where they can be closely monitored. Spent fuel rods are not buried, secured and monitored because of their radiation potential, they are monitored for military and homeland security objectives. They are quite reusable.

[W9JEF]

JEF:

Actually, with the nuclear power generating plants used in the United States there is absolutely no chance of a meltdown. Unlike the nuclear plants in the old Soviet Union the plants in the United States now use fuel rods that are only 3 percent nuclear material. The rods used in the Soviet Union were well over 50 percent nuclear material. It is the same with all nuclear powered warships, the fuel rods have considerably more than 50 percent nuclear material. This is because of the need for basically immediate power generation whereas in the civilian power plants there is no real need for immediate power generation and therefore the actual generation of electricity takes place over a number of hours before full capacity is reached.

When I was with TXU (electric company for almost half the State of Texas) I was one of the people who gave presentations to the general public. Although I usually made presentations on lightning protection and grounding techniques, I also made an occasional presentation on nuclear power. This was because TXU operates the Comanche Peak Nuclear Steam Electric Station. In fact, I still have the complete set of 35 mm slides that I used when making the presentations.

At the Comanche Peak facility they are required to make radiation measurements on a regular basis. To date, the highest record of radiation has always been made 6 inches in front of the microwave oven (when the oven is operating) in the break room! The other radiation measurements made within the facility are considerably below the normal "background" measurements for that part of the State of Texas. In fact, the radiation level received from the Sun on a summer day is well over 20 times the maximum radiation level within the facility.

They are now in the process of getting approval for the addition of 2 nuclear electric generators (to go with the 2 that are already in use). The Comanche Peak site was chosen because that area of Texas is the most stable geographically in the state and is one of the most stable in the entire world.

There are several eastern states that receive a substantial amount of their electrical power from nuclear generation. But, it is also people from those states who seem to protest when nuclear plants are proposed in other areas. Also, there are a number of European nations that have nuclear power plants which provide a substantial amount of power for that country.

Frankly, one of the most safe places in the entire State of Texas is within the confines of the Comanche Peak nuclear plant. Not only is the area geographically stable, the containment buildings are constructed to be able to withstand weather situations as well as military strikes, but the security (as required by the NRC) is second to none. You have to pass through at least 3 very secure areas to even get to the containment buildings. Then there are at least 2 more secure areas to make it to the control room. Even as a company employee, I had to go through all of these "check points" and had to be accompanied by a plant employee. For someone else the access was considerably harder.

For "pollution free" electrical generation nuclear power is, by far, the best solution. Also, even though the plants are very expensive to construct, the total cost of electricity generated by nuclear power is only a fraction of that produced by other means.

Glen, K9STH


It should be pointed out that "radiation"
from a microwave oven (and our ham radios)
is the non-ionizing type.
"Safety First" and all that, but it
simply does not compare with the danger
from radiation that's measured in Curies.

The safety measures are somewhat reassuring,
but then, why the need for all that security?

Yes, there are people, who, for whatever reason,
want to get their hands on some of that radioactive
waste, and share it with as many of us as possible.

Focused soley on next-quarter earnings, companies take shortcuts.

Accidents happen.

Murphy is still the law of the Universe.

[KI4NGN]

Well if you somehow think BP isn't really interested in stopping the problem you might read a few of the news items out there such as this one:


Huh? I said that of course BP wants to shut it down as quickly as they can.



"Inventors send 10,000 ideas to stop oil spill, say BP ignoring them"

Read more: http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2010-05-19/ap-stories/inventors-send-10000-ideas-to-stop-oil-spill-say-bp-ignoring-their-schemes#ixzz0pGQojnCo (http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2010-05-19/ap-stories/inventors-send-10000-ideas-to-stop-oil-spill-say-bp-ignoring-their-schemes#ixzz0pGQojnCo)


BP has fielded some 60,000 calls from the public that led to 10,000 tips.

About 2,500 people sent in forms spelling out their ideas in greater detail, and BP advanced 700 to the next phase. Seems rather obvious they are lethargic in terms of doing anything doesn't it?

Yes, there are in fact real world solutions that will actually solve this oil gusher quite well. Let's keep things in perspective shall we? After all, this is merely a leaking pipe we are talking about and it doesn't even require NASA engineers or some exotic technology to devise a way to stop this problem from continuing.

So why haven't any of these 60,000 idea's been attempted or deployed yet? It's not like such technology to stop the oil from gushing doesn't exist because it clearly does.

You have to ask yourself that question and try to understand why this current problem is allowed to continue.

For example, here's a dirt simple solution that works but they don't even use it:

Insert a slightly smaller diameter pipe inside the larger oil gushing diameter pipe. The smaller diameter pipe would lead to the surface which would help "minimize" the impact as the tanker above would recover the oil that is redirected through the smaller diameter pipe causing the flow to be redirected to the surface.

Yet they don't even do something as simple as that. So far they used things they know would fail. Like big concrete collectors, firing mud, concrete, golf balls and rubber tires into this 20" diameter pipe. I mean come on now... does anyone really think any of this nonsense will actually work?

Now ask yourself why they don't attempt something as simple as inserting a smaller diameter pipe inside a larger diameter one to redirect the flow topside? Is it because oil rigs don't have the advanced capability and technology to insert a smaller pipe into a larger pipe? It's really a very simple thing to do when you think about it isn't it?


Do you think that very many of these solutions that appear viable to you and on paper are authored by people who understand anything about applying them almost a mile underwater?

Many would be quite simple on the surface, but executed remotely a mile underwater?

Your solution smaller diameter pipe sounds quite simple, sure. Now apply reality: a mile of that smaller diameter pipe has to terminate on the surface at a very positionally stable platform or that pipe becomes spaghetti. Do you think that any company has oil rigs just floating around that can be moved to location and have the position stability of the rig that was destroyed?

That well was supposed to be capped, and then it would have been ready when a rig became available to connect to it to receive the oil. If that rig was available, they would not have been capping it for an unknown date of production extraction.



The company is already losing money and the more they lose equates to mean the possibility of greater long term financial benefits. Perhaps this sets the stage in terms of qualifying BP for a big government bail out or public money like GM did huh? Perhaps this could be an opportunity to engage other plans like a sell off, or merger with another company which would serve to increase profitibility in other markets.



You are arguing that a company would rather suffer losses for a future bailout than continue to operate profitably?? More losses means greater long term financial benefits? Are you kidding??




Again, I feel this event might be some opportunity for BP to do something in terms of moving forward with something or it may qualify them for some sort of public money after they start crying about how much "they lost."

Let's see what happens.

Not gonna happen.

[KD0EAH]

JEF:

Actually, with the nuclear power generating plants used in the United States there is absolutely no chance of a meltdown. Unlike the nuclear plants in the old Soviet Union the plants in the United States now use fuel rods that are only 3 percent nuclear material. The rods used in the Soviet Union were well over 50 percent nuclear material. It is the same with all nuclear powered............snip

Glen, K9STH

Wow, you have been drinking the kool-aid.

I will admit, nuclear is a high option for alternative energies, solar, wind and hydro are just as viable. As more are produced, it will become more cost effective.

However, it's not going to start with building more energy sources, it's going to start with consumers consuming less energy.

Us as Americans are gluttons. We buy junk, we toss, junk, we have storage places just for junk. And when that isn't enough, we get another storage space for junk. And for what? To have more junk than the next guys junk......

[KA3TRX]

It's not just the safety of the reactors. What about the safety of the support industries that are necessary to create nuclear power? Not far from here is a small town called Apollo, Pennsylvania. A factory there built Babcox and Wilcox nuclear reactors. People living near the plant found white powder all over their property. It turned out to be powdered uranium. An unusually high rate of cancer began to take it's toll. In fact, very few houses along that stretch of road did not have at least one cancer victim living in it. Some had several. These people lived nowhere near a nuclear power plant. But they were dead anyway. I personally knew one of the families that was involved.
Safety costs money. Unfortunately, money is more important than safety. Guess which one gets priorities? If we can't safely handle oil, how can we expect to safely handle something that is potentially much more dangerous?

[KD0EAH]

ok, guess I can't go back and edit to add.

As consumers there are several things we can do to conserve energy. My own house, I am slowly switching over to LED lights. I do not like the CF light bulbs because of the hassle to dispose of them. How soon will it be before THAT becomes an issue. Seems like some of these wonderful initiatives are only thought out part way.

Yeah, they save power over old incandescent, but what about the disposal issues. Has anyone come up with a consistent option to that?

I still WANT a gas guzzling 4X4, but I settled for a sedan to go 80 miles round trip for school and work. Could I move closer? Sure. But there are a lot of factors that are more important to me than the 80 miles.

Think about the vehicles you drive. Honestly researching it, it's more economical to drive an electric car 10-15 miles for normal commuting. 20-75 miles, it's more practical to use a hybrid. Over 100 miles, it goes back to a gas engine for a practical source of energy.

This is taking into account the extra load one would task the electric energy network for the short commuter needs.

[N0SYA]

well, itll be like everything else you buy

some poor 3rd worlder will slave away in a brutal, unsafe factory overseen by criminal tyrants who will suffer the diseases caused by exposure to chems and radiation that make your products for you so you can stay clean and safe, even nuclear fuel rods will be made for you in countries far away by brown people who do not matter

[AG3Y]

"Think about the vehicles you drive. Honestly researching it, it's more economical to drive an electric car 10-15 miles for normal commuting. 20-75 miles, it's more practical to use a hybrid. Over 100 miles, it goes back to a gas engine for a practical source of energy."

I run the risk of going political here, but let me say that the problem is also found in commercial industry.

There are several alternatives to driving 100 miles or more, to and from the workplace. Our town has a computer workcenter where a hundred persons or more could come to, to do the job for their company that they normally have to commute those great distances to. But ( sorry, this is where the political statement comes in ) there are many institutions, including our government, where the PHYSICAL PRESENCE IS REQUIRED of the worker. Is this because the worker is required to meet some particular person, or attend, in person, some important meeting? NO ! The reason I have heard from numerous people is that the EMPLOYER DOES NOT TRUST THE EMPLOYEE to do their job, unless they can be physically observed doing their work !

Now if a person's work involves hours of time behind a computer screen, and they put out a finished product ( spreadsheet, document, computer generated drawings, etc. etc. ) shouldn't that be PROOF ENOUGH that they are accomplishing their job ?

Apparently, in both the political and commercial workplaces, the answer is NO !

BTW, that workplace I referred to, sits almost empty, days at a time!

JMHO 73, Jim

[AC0H]

Wow, you have been drinking the kool-aid.

I will admit, nuclear is a high option for alternative energies, solar, wind and hydro are just as viable. As more are produced, it will become more cost effective.

However, it's not going to start with building more energy sources, it's going to start with consumers consuming less energy.

Us as Americans are gluttons. We buy junk, we toss, junk, we have storage places just for junk. And when that isn't enough, we get another storage space for junk. And for what? To have more junk than the next guys junk......

Talk about kool-aid.

Solar will never be a viable alternative to clean coal, natural gas, and nuclear fired power plants. You could cover every roof of every house in US with the highest efficiency solar panels they make, about 20-25% efficient, and it wouldn't come close to producing enough electricity for current or projected needs.

How about if we cover thousands of acres of Arizona and New Mexico with solar panels? I can hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the environmentalist wackos right now.

Wind turbines do work but there is "push back" from the NIMBY (not in my back yard) crowd along with still another section of environmentalist wackos complaining about birds being killed. How long has it been since a new wind turbine farm was built in California?

Here's a link to a story about the Cape Wind project off of Cape Cod.

Cape Wind Project (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/26/sunday/main560595.shtml)

It's an old story but just read some of the comments from the locals including Ted Kennedy and Walter Cronkite. The clean cheap power is just fine and dandy for the New England elites as long as they don't have to look at it?

The project was finally approved three weeks ago, seven years after it was proposed.

Hydro power?

They're talking about taking dams out. "They" sure as hell won't allow any new ones to be built or upgraded. Some obscure minnow which has been on verge of extinction for a hundred years might be impacted.

[KA5S]

...Our town has a computer workcenter where a hundred persons or more could come to, to do the job for their company that they normally have to commute those great distances to. ...

There is no incentive to pay US wages for people there, if one can get the same work from a work center in China for Chinese wages. All this talk of knowledge work saving the economy? New grads may never make enough to pay back their loans.

Not that its just "knowledge" work. Ask an employer how much work is being exported. Fast-food driveups take orders via Mumbai these days. And if they could FAX in the burgers...


Cortland
KA5S

[AF6LJ]

From what I have read hydro power is at it's maximum. We start building more dams ans we will be causing problems with fish migration and other environmental problems. Small rivers don't generate enough power to justify their cost.

Solar is good for residential use however there is an increasing waste problem associated with solar power.
Same with electric cars, not to mention the increased demand for electricity, which will have to be made up from somewhere....

The most efficient energy conversion occurs with fuels that are hydrocarbons. Hydrogen power is a joke, hydrogen delivers one fifth the power as gasoline.
Ethanol is half the power.
Natural gas is also roughly half or slightly less.

The unseen cost of solar power is the energy that goes into making the cells in the first place. Unless there has been some development I don't know about solar cells degrade over time.

Wind energy is problematic from several standpoints not the least of which is sound pollution, low frequency sound which disrupts the sleep patterns of the people who live near wind farms. Oh and by the way; none of those windfarms have reached the break even point yet. There is a good reason not to have one in your back yard. I would rather have a nuke plant next door.

[AF6LJ]

There is no incentive to pay US wages for people there, if one can get the same work from a work center in China for Chinese wages. All this talk of knowledge work saving the economy? New grads may never make enough to pay back their loans.

Not that its just "knowledge" work. Ask an employer how much work is being exported. Fast-food driveups take orders via Mumbai these days. And if they could FAX in the burgers...


Cortland
KA5S

Now you know why I say


Free Trade Is NOT Fair Trade.
Everyone looses when free trade is the order of the day.

[KA5S]

From what I have read hydro power is at it's maximum. We start building more dams ans we will be causing problems...

What did fossil fuels replace? Muscle. Suppose I need 49 HP to get me to work in 20 minutes (my Hyundai). At about 0.5 HP for a non-top-condition laborer, it will take maybe 118 of them on a treadmill to deliver it. When I was last in California, it cost $10/hr to hire an undocumented worker, so 118 come out to $1180 or -- pro-rated -- $370 for the trip.

It gets better. If we were ALL served so well, where would they go to the bathroom? And no, that isn't a joke; one reason horses were supplanted by trolleys was the manure.

2d order effects department: Anyone happen to know how much a worker doing his best 0.5 HP exhales by way of CO2? Could it be that IC engines are less harmful than laborers?


Cortland
KA5S

[KA5S]

Now you know why I say
Free Trade Is NOT Fair Trade.
Everyone looses when free trade is the order of the day.



Children think things have to be fair. When they grow up they learn better. For adults "fair" means we knew and still went ahead; we knew the consequences and agreed we deserved 'em.

Anyway, isn't trade better than taking by force?


Cortland KA5S

[W9JEF]

As others have said, point-of-use generation
makes more sense than just pumping it into
the lossy power grid.


As to the NIMBY argument:
Conservationists (elite or otherwise)
don't want wind turbines in their back yards
any more than Dirty Energy CEO's want
oil wells in theirs.


That doesn't mean wind power is not welcome
out on the Illinois Interstate.
Even better, what if they were used to
directly fast-charge electric vehicles?
The filling stations of the future might
be 'swap-out' stations, where you get
a freshly-charged battery installed,
and swipe your card to pay for mileage
you got from the last one.

Roof-top solar water heaters would be a
very efficient way to save on utility bills.
Hot water not used for dishes and showers
could suplement a hot-water home heating system.
Wind-driven generators could heat wires
imbedded in outside walls, to compensate
for wind chill on a cold night.


Let's be clear about 'dangers' of
harvesting renewable energy. The making
of a voltaic panel is a one-time operation.
The product then lasts for many years,
as it produces clean energy. On the
other hand, mining or drilling for earth's
ever-dwindling reserve of fossil fuel
exposes workers (and often the public)
to constant peril. Then when it's burned,
it adds more to the already polluted air
and water.

[edit]:
Electric motor powered cars with small engines to maintain battery charge would alleviate much of the increased demand on the grid. Also, with selective billing, most cars would be charged during off-peak hours, thus increasing the overall efficiency of the grid.

[AF6LJ]

What did fossil fuels replace? Muscle. Suppose I need 49 HP to get me to work in 20 minutes (my Hyundai). At about 0.5 HP for a non-top-condition laborer, it will take maybe 118 of them on a treadmill to deliver it. When I was last in California, it cost $10/hr to hire an undocumented worker, so 118 come out to $1180 or -- pro-rated -- $370 for the trip.

It gets better. If we were ALL served so well, where would they go to the bathroom? And no, that isn't a joke; one reason horses were supplanted by trolleys was the manure.

2d order effects department: Anyone happen to know how much a worker doing his best 0.5 HP exhales by way of CO2? Could it be that IC engines are less harmful than laborers?


Cortland
KA5S
Until we manage to crack the riddle of fusion (hot or cold) and can use it to generate power IC engines are going to remain the muscle of modern society.

[AF6LJ]

Children think things have to be fair. When they grow up they learn better. For adults "fair" means we knew and still went ahead; we knew the consequences and agreed we deserved 'em.

Anyway, isn't trade better than taking by force?


Cortland KA5S

I suppose it's a good thing they don't let me make the rules.

[W9JEF]

Someone said that "Fusion is the
power of the future, and always will be."


Cortland, you only need those 49 horses
for 'peak demand' (like when you accelerate
up a hill). With an electric-powered car,
a much smaller (gas-saving) engine could
keep the needed reserve power stored in
a battery rather than a fuel-wasting
larger cylinder bore.

[K9STH]

EAH:

No Kool Aid! Nuclear is as safe, in reality more safe, than coal fired or natural gas fired electrical generation. The "byproducts" of nuclear generation can be controlled MUCH easier than the emissions of coal or gas plants. Hydro generation is well past its prime. Yes, it is definitely "clean" generation. However, the dams needed to produce the water reserves affect the environment considerably and therefore the "greenies" don't like dams.

It is the same with wind generation: The "greenies" are complaining that migratory birds are injured or even killed by the blades. As such, there have been a number of wind generating facilities that have either been forced to curtail generation if not stop completely because of legal action by various groups.

One major thing which has contributed to the expense of building nuclear power plants is all the regulations plus serious revisions of these regulations. Just as soon as a nuclear plant nears completion someone comes along and changes the regulations and the result is that most of the work already completed has to be "torn out" and things started over.

Then there are the "activists" who kick and scream. The Comanche Peak nuclear plant was basically rebuilt 4 times before finally going "on line". As each hurdle was neutralized the number of "activists" declined. The final person who was "fighting" the plant came up with proposed requirements like testing EVERY component that was installed to the point of destruction. If every component was tested to destruction then there would be nothing available for the construction. This woman kept on complaining until TXU finally hired her as a "consultant" with a payment, after taxes, of $1,000,000. At that point she stopped trying to stop the construction of the plant and the plant started producing electricity.

As for the uranium dust: I do not have any idea as to if, or why, this situation happened. But, considering the cost of producing uranium for use in fuel rods, etc., the fact that any material was allowed to "escape" just doesn't make any sense. The cost of producing the material in the first place is very high. As such, it would definitely be in the company's best interest (financially) to trap and reuse the material. The cost of trapping and reusing the material would be only a small fraction of the cost necessary to produce the material in the first place.


JEF:

Solar radiation does contain ionizing radiation. Microwave radiation can be ionizing radiation although the vast majority is not. There are places in the world (including the United States) where natural nuclear radiation is considerably higher than the radiation from a nuclear power plant could ever be. However, people seem to "forget" about that.


Basically, it comes down to a fight between what people "think" can/will happen versus scientific fact. Nuclear power is definitely providing a safe method of electric generation in various parts of the world. Unfortunately, too many people think in terms of nuclear bombs rather than in the "peacetime" uses of nuclear power.

Glen, K9STH

[AF6LJ]

They just announced on the radio that the Top Kill technique is not working, they are going to try and install a new BOP on top of the non functioning one.

[W8JI]

They just announced on the radio that the Top Kill technique is not working, they are going to try and install a new BOP on top of the non functioning one.

Gee, I'm totally shocked. At least a mile of water squeezing down for eons and the pressure in that compacted earth under the ocean where the stuff has been decaying for years and baking powder blown through a soda straw didn't work.

[VA3TSE]

We will all have to get used to some lesser standard of living.

If the average Chinese or Indian or Bangladeshi will actually get to double their standard of living, i guess this spaceship is f.u.b.a.r.

And, please spare us with "clean coal" or all other co2-sequestration kind of sh*te. How can making things more inefficient be top of our agenda? I do not get it!

Nuclear seems cool, but: how long since the last world war? How about keeping the waste locked up for at least the next hundred thousand years, if most of our wars are based in some discussion about some guy walking about the desert some 2k years ago? Yeah right!

[K6BBC]

Nuclear is safe. Well, two months ago Obama said offshore oil drilling was safe. So I guess nuclear is safe until it's not.

Nuclear reactors used to generate electricity create a toxic byproduct that remains deadly for many centuries. It is irresponsible and immoral for this generation to potentially poison generations to come.

bbc




EAH:

No Kool Aid! Nuclear is as safe, in reality more safe, than coal fired or natural gas fired electrical generation. The "byproducts" of nuclear generation can be controlled MUCH easier than the emissions of coal or gas plants. Hydro generation is well past its prime. Yes, it is definitely "clean" generation. However, the dams needed to produce the water reserves affect the environment considerably and therefore the "greenies" don't like dams.

It is the same with wind generation: The "greenies" are complaining that migratory birds are injured or even killed by the blades. As such, there have been a number of wind generating facilities that have either been forced to curtail generation if not stop completely because of legal action by various groups.

One major thing which has contributed to the expense of building nuclear power plants is all the regulations plus serious revisions of these regulations. Just as soon as a nuclear plant nears completion someone comes along and changes the regulations and the result is that most of the work already completed has to be "torn out" and things started over.

Then there are the "activists" who kick and scream. The Comanche Peak nuclear plant was basically rebuilt 4 times before finally going "on line". As each hurdle was neutralized the number of "activists" declined. The final person who was "fighting" the plant came up with proposed requirements like testing EVERY component that was installed to the point of destruction. If every component was tested to destruction then there would be nothing available for the construction. This woman kept on complaining until TXU finally hired her as a "consultant" with a payment, after taxes, of $1,000,000. At that point she stopped trying to stop the construction of the plant and the plant started producing electricity.

As for the uranium dust: I do not have any idea as to if, or why, this situation happened. But, considering the cost of producing uranium for use in fuel rods, etc., the fact that any material was allowed to "escape" just doesn't make any sense. The cost of producing the material in the first place is very high. As such, it would definitely be in the company's best interest (financially) to trap and reuse the material. The cost of trapping and reusing the material would be only a small fraction of the cost necessary to produce the material in the first place.


JEF:

Solar radiation does contain ionizing radiation. Microwave radiation can be ionizing radiation although the vast majority is not. There are places in the world (including the United States) where natural nuclear radiation is considerably higher than the radiation from a nuclear power plant could ever be. However, people seem to "forget" about that.


Basically, it comes down to a fight between what people "think" can/will happen versus scientific fact. Nuclear power is definitely providing a safe method of electric generation in various parts of the world. Unfortunately, too many people think in terms of nuclear bombs rather than in the "peacetime" uses of nuclear power.

Glen, K9STH

[W9JEF]

JEF:
Solar radiation does contain ionizing radiation. Microwave radiation can be ionizing radiation although the vast majority is not. There are places in the world (including the United States) where natural nuclear radiation is considerably higher than the radiation from a nuclear power plant could ever be. However, people seem to "forget" about that.




Since the ionization from the sun is present
whether or not we collect it for its energy
is that any excuse for allowing exposure
to hazardous radiation that we can avoid.





Basically, it comes down to a fight between what people "think" can/will happen versus scientific fact.



Again, you ignore that pesky Murphy guy.

Wasn't that failed "blowout protector"
supposed to make drilling a mile under the sea
"fail safe?"




Nuclear power is definitely providing a safe method of electric generation in various parts of the world.



Just a drilling under the Gulf was
providing safe harvesting of oil.




Unfortunately, too many people think in terms of nuclear bombs rather than in the "peacetime" uses of nuclear power.
Glen, K9STH




And it's those who think in those terms
that are out to gather hazardous waste
they can use to terrorize the rest of us
that is the concern.

Meanwhile the existing nuclear waste is piling up,
and no one wants it in their back yard.

And how much of it is already unaccounted for?

[KC8VWM]

Gee, I'm totally shocked. At least a mile of water squeezing down for eons and the pressure in that compacted earth under the ocean where the stuff has been decaying for years and baking powder blown through a soda straw didn't work.

hahaha . I'm thinking the same thing.

Everyone knows that concrete flow is just like electricity. It travels the path of least resistance.

With a broken pipe wide open on the top of this blowout preventer and oil gushing from below, it doesn't take a NASA engineer to figure out that you can blow all the concrete inside this blowout preventer all week long and the oil is going to continue to force any concrete blown in, out though the broken pipe at the top. (path of least resistance)

Concrete is not somehow going to magically flow downward inside the well when it's easier to escape from the broken pipe at the top.

Here's the faulty animation they want everyone to believe what will happen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA87WL5K25g&feature=player_embedded

[AF6LJ]

Gee, I'm totally shocked. At least a mile of water squeezing down for eons and the pressure in that compacted earth under the ocean where the stuff has been decaying for years and baking powder blown through a soda straw didn't work.

And those guys are suppose to know what they are doing. If the first BOP had been installed properly and maintained we wouldn't be having this discussion right now.

[AF6LJ]

Nuclear is safe. Well, two months ago Obama said offshore oil drilling was safe. So I guess nuclear is safe until it's not.

Nuclear reactors used to generate electricity create a toxic byproduct that remains deadly for many centuries. It is irresponsible and immoral for this generation to potentially poison generations to come.

bbc
The Japanese and French use breeder reactors to recycle their waste into usable fuel.

When one was proposed to be built in the US the Watermelons (deep green kool-aid guzzlers) cried and whined and tied the project up in court.

[KA3TRX]

Would anybody here want to live next to a nuclear materials handling facility run by BP? Even Babcox and Wilcox doesn't know how to handle the stuff.

[K9STH]

BBC:

You are also ignoring the fact that nuclear waste can be efficiently and safely disposed of by adding the waste to glass. The glass can then be disposed of by placing in deep ocean areas. Not only is the radiation level reduced to a "safe" level by this method, it is also a practical impossibility to recover the radioactive material. Since radio active materials have a "half life", using the glass disposal method would insure that the eventual decay of the radio active material would reach "background" level before there was any chance of the material being able to cause any problems what-so-ever.


TRX:

How about Fluor Daniel? They were the primary construction firm for the Comanche Peak nuclear plant and they did a VERY good job. Brown and Root was the other company that had major responsibility for that plant. Also, Fluor Daniel left the "Peoples' Republik of Kalifornia" a number of years ago and moved their international headquarters to the Dallas, Texas, area (actually are in the suburb of Irving, Texas). That, in itself, shows a remarkable sense of responsibility!

Glen, K9STH

[KA5S]

... Cortland, you only need those 49 horses for 'peak demand' (like when you accelerate up a hill). With an electric-powered car, a much smaller (gas-saving) engine could keep the needed reserve power stored in a battery rather than a fuel-wasting larger cylinder bore.

Not pulling anything!

Anyhow... how many coolies would it take to supply the energy needed -- and might IC engines still emit less CO2 than people doing the same work? Or mules?

We could get back to full employment right quick.

Cortland
KA5S

[KA5S]

I suppose it's a good thing they don't let me make the rules.

I won't post my 1SGT's definition of where to find sympathy. Heh!

There are some really good reasons for tariffs if we expect to pay for what we bought, since right now we don't pay enough to do that. But let's not have the free trade discussion HERE.

Cortland
KA5S

[AB1GA]

...

Apparently, in both the political and commercial workplaces, the answer is NO !

...

JMHO 73, Jim


There is some hope left, at least in the political workplace. For years the federal government has allowed and to some extent encouraged the use of a Compressed Work Schedule. During a two-week pay period, the employee works eight 9-hour days, one 8-hour day, and get one day off. It doesn't sound like much, but if universally deployed would reduce commuting traffic by ten percent. Not all of the savings is captured because folks don't just sit at home on that tenth day, but most of the "day off traffic" tends to be shorter errand runs rather than long commutes, so it's low hanging fruit in the conservation game.

The feds have also come around to the idea of telecommuting, and in some departments the supervisors have to show why the employee should NOT be allowed to telecommute at least some days a week. The big hurdle doesn't seem to be supervisors' attitudes, but rather deploying secure networking and providing computing hardware for home use.

73,

[AF6LJ]

I won't post my 1SGT's definition of where to find sympathy. Heh!

There are some really good reasons for tariffs if we expect to pay for what we bought, since right now we don't pay enough to do that. But let's not have the free trade discussion HERE.

Cortland
KA5S

Actually I know that definition;
:)

I became acquainted with it when I was a teenager and feeling sorry for myself because I was born all screwed up. That definition came to me by way of my mom.

[AD5MB]

I worked midnight shift 15 years. Anyone who works midnight shift and claims to be alert and aware at all times is at best delusional.

you need humans in the loop; and humans caused Chernobyl.

imagine operating a nuclear power plant. a bajillion dials and meters that never move ( when things are going right ). sitting there watching nothing happening at 0330.

put your car on a battery charger. turn the lights on. stare at the gauges all night. don't fall asleep. 5 nights straight. then you get two days off. then come back the next night and see how alert you are.

[AD5MB]

a Compressed Work Schedule. During a two-week pay period, the employee works eight 9-hour days, one 8-hour day, and get one day off.

we do that in our Albuquerque shop. At White Sands we work 4 10 hour days.

if you get used to 4 10s, 4 9s and an 8 is misery. A two day weekend just isn't there, you get nothing done.

when you do 4 10s you can get to the lake or mountains and pick a decent campsite Thursday night.

[KC8VWM]

So not to come across like I am trolling, but am I the only one who thinks BP is not really doing much of anything in terms of efforts to contain and stop this problem?

[2E0WHN]

According to the BBC it has not worked. Looks like the Gulg is done for.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/us_and_canada/10191622.stm

[OH2GRA]

Indeed, it seems that the whole story is not written yet..........

[KA5S]

So not to come across like I am trolling, but am I the only one who thinks BP is not really doing much of anything in terms of efforts to contain and stop this problem?

It appears you are not alone. President Obama says (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/29/president-enraged-latest-failure-stop-oil-gusher/) the news is "as enraging as it is heartbreaking" and net postings are less restrained.. However, BP is very far from "not doing much of anything;" LINK (http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9033657&contentId=7062373).

As you may have noticed, anything BP says now we call too little, too late. That is merely the definition of catching up with the unexpected. You may have noticed a lot of folks say BP is lying to us to protect its interests. And it may have done so. But we also may have too-high expecations what technology can do where no human can go. There have been suggestions ranging from earth-penetrating bombs to nuking the well; I expect someone somewhere has suggested declassifying weapons found at Roswell and melting the ocean floor. And those would be HELPFUL suggestions.

Our anger, coupled with distrust of corporate profiteering, has lead to a number of people urging a boycott of BP, revocation of its licenses, fining it into oblivion, and criminally prosecuting BP executives. These are among the less extreme of the unhelpful suggestions, unhelpful, because they'd do nothing to plug the leak and clean up the mess.

Which only BP -- or a consortium of those who do what BP does -- have ANY chance of doing.

What has not been much talked about is that BP has taken the least risky procedures first. The latest one, sawing off the crumpled riser pipe and putting another pipe on to collect the leaking oil, is the most risky so far because it is the most likely to result in a larger leak. If it is only a crumpled riser pipe that has limited the gusher a mile down, removing it may allow much more oil to flow that we see just now. But as we are not prepared to wait with what BP has done so far, and in repsonse to our anger and demand for action, BP is (possibly in error) going ahead.

What we are also not much talking about is the progress of BP relief wells meant to relieve pressure at the wellhead. That is not much talked about because 1) it isn't going to make a difference soon and 2) BP might even be able to make them producing wells. Maybe make money!

That last reaction is, IMO, another irrational effect of rage. When the action in the ocean is done, and the action in the courts and Congress at its hottest, we will still need the oil. And if we don't stop buying iPods and iPads even when we see child-slaves in all but name killing themselves so we can have them, and when we have to borrow Chinese money to PAY for them; if we don't stop smoking even when we see cigarettes killing us daily, can there be any expectation we will be able to do without oil?

Rational people have come with answers to all these questions. But they are in short supply just now, and it looks like they are nowhere near being in control.


Cortland
KA5S

[2E0WHN]

That last reaction is, IMO, another irrational effect of rage. When the action in the ocean is done, and the action in the courts and Congress at its hottest, we will still need the oil. And if we don't stop buying iPods and iPads even when we see child-slaves in all but name killing themselves so we can have them, and when we have to borrow Chinese money to PAY for them; if we don't stop smoking even when we see cigarettes killing us daily, can there be any expectation we will be able to do without oil?

Rational people have come with answers to all these questions. But they are in short supply just now, and it looks like they are nowhere near being in control.


Cortland
KA5S

It is like enviromentalists saying that the Citreon 2CV car is eco friendly. Shame they never realised the fuel conspumtion and the ammount of Co2 it produced was more than any other car combined. And if we banned oil then how do we get around? Oil makes tyres, plastics, engine lubricants, radio housings... The list goes on.

The oil from the floor is as useful today as anything we will ever need. Gas to make planes fly, heat dissapation for your 1Kw dummy load. Oil for your guns so they do not seize or rust. Maybe the Quakers and the Amish are right. Perhaps they have the answer by having horse and carts. After all they are the ones who do not rely upon fuel from the ocean floor. maybe we should let the world take a 150 year step back to when technology and oil was never used.

I wonder how many would complain then if oil was banned altogether?

[AF6LJ]

So not to come across like I am trolling, but am I the only one who thinks BP is not really doing much of anything in terms of efforts to contain and stop this problem?
The thought has crossed my mind a few times.
They seem to be going through the motions.
But hay;
It's not their country ocen or shorline being messed up.

[W9JEF]

The CYA factor was quite evident.
Before each failed attempt they would
give it maybe a "60% to 70% chance"
--when the actual figure would likely be
single-digit.

Prosecution and conviction of those responsible
to long prison terms won't bring back the
precious wildlife and pristine beaches,
but it will serve as a deterrent.

Perhaps in the future, the risky short-cuts
taken in order to boost next-quarter profits
won't seem so attractive, in the face of
serious personal consequences to the perps

[2E0WHN]

Well as the media is saying that this could be Obama's Katrina, maybe we should compare it to 3 mile island instead. In the Orkneys where a oil tanker went aground about 15-20 years ago there is still oil under the sands.

So maybe saying it is a Katrina mooment, it could be better said as a 3 mile island or a mini Chernobyl.

[KA5S]

Headline:

Flow rate from pipe could increase after BP's next maneuver


The flow rate from the site of the BP oil rig explosion could increase as much as 20% until a containment device is applied over the leak once the riser pipe is cut, the White House said today.

Coast Guard commandant Thad Allen listens as President Barack Obama talks with local fishermen about the federal response to the BP oil spill disaster during a visit to Venice last week.

"Today, the President was briefed by the National Incident Commander Admiral Thad LINK to New Orleans Times Picayune (http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/05/flow_rate_from_pipe_could_incr.html)


Cortland
KA5S

[AF6LJ]

Here is a good one from Slashdot...
http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/05/30/1548218/BP-Knew-of-Deepwater-Horizon-Problems-11-Months-Ago

Interesting how the truth seems to come out a month or so after their screw up...

[K1VSK]

The CYA factor was quite evident.
Before each failed attempt they would
give it maybe a "60% to 70% chance"
--when the actual figure would likely be
single-digit.

Prosecution and conviction of those responsible
to long prison terms won't bring back the
precious wildlife and pristine beaches,
but it will serve as a deterrent.

Perhaps in the future, the risky short-cuts
taken in order to boost next-quarter profits
won't seem so attractive, in the face of
serious personal consequences to the perps

Care to support any of this?
60-70%?
short cuts?
boosting profits motive?

please feel free to describe how you KNOW this...

Got a better idea - everyone who wants to vilify BP or Deepwater H et.al. please describe how they do anything differently than any other oil production company in the U.S.

They all use the same technology, follow the same regs (about as closely as the whiners here no-doubt follow the 25MPH speed limit and seek the same profit for their shareholders, some of whom are likely here.

How about vilifying all oil companies as well as any company involved in oil production in the abundant free time some here apparently have or ----

rather than waste your time, figure out an economical way to convert water to fuel in a practical, mass-production process instead of typing on your plastic keyboard powered by oil fired electric power.

These people don't get it!

[W9JEF]

What BP does not want you to see (http://acp.repoweramerica.org/page/invite/oilspillvideo?source=sprd-fwd&utm_source=crm_email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=oilspillvideo20100527&utm_content=calloutimg)

[W9JEF]

The New York Times

May 27, 2010 10:41 PM EDT

Several days before the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, BP officials chose, partly for financial reasons, to use a type of casing for the well that the company knew was the riskier of two options, according to a BP document.

The concern with the method BP chose, the document said, was that if the cement around the casing pipe did not seal properly, gases could leak all the way to the wellhead, where only a single seal would serve as a barrier.

Using a different type of casing would have provided two barriers, according to the document, which was provided to The New York Times by a Congressional investigator.

Workers from the rig and company officials have said that hours before the explosion, gases were leaking through the cement, which had been set in place by the oil services contractor, Halliburton. Investigators have said these leaks were the likely cause of the explosion.

The approach taken by the company was described as the "best economic case" in the BP document. However, it also carried risks beyond the potential gas leaks, including the possibility that more work would be needed or that there would be delays, the document said.


http://m.cnbc.com/id/37370432

[W9JEF]

The documents show that in March, after several weeks of problems on the rig, BP was struggling with a loss of "well control." And as far back as 11 months ago, it was concerned about the well casing and the blowout preventer.

On June 22, for example, BP engineers expressed concerns that the metal casing the company wanted to use might collapse under high pressure.

"This would certainly be a worst-case scenario," Mark E. Hafle, a senior drilling engineer at BP, warned in an internal report. "However, I have seen it happen so know it can occur."

Violated policies, standards

The company went ahead with the casing, but only after getting special permission from BP colleagues because it violated the company's safety policies and design standards. The internal reports do not explain why the company allowed for an exception. BP documents released last week to The Times revealed that company officials knew the casing was the riskier of two options.


Documents show early worries about rig safety (http://news.mobile.msn.com/en-us/articles.aspx?afid=1&aid=37422018)

[KA9MOT]

W9JEF,
Thanks for posting this information. I suspected that corners had been cut, but had no proof.

[W7JZE]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor

One of the safest designs ever put to paper. Turn off all the coolant, it still doesn't melt down.

YES! I agree with you RAN. I do not understand why Pebble Bed Reactors are not in high volume (Modular) construction right now. We can build them right here in the USA. Simple design with passive fail safe built right into the Pebbles (fuel balls) themselves. Cannot runaway / meltdown. You don't hear much about PBRs in the media. They aren't very dangerous. There isn't much to complain abt. They just (simply & safely) work. The magic is all in the Pebble construction, not the reactor. It is so simple a design, I wonder maybe if there isn't much profit in building them compared to more traditional designs. Maybe GE and other Nuke manufacturers prefer to market the GigaWatt+, Mega-Billion $ designs???

There was an article a few years ago. Pretty sure it was Sci. Amer. China was jumping on the PBR bandwagon at that time. Creating some sort of a 'factory' to put out the PBR 'cookie-cutter' modules. Make them all the same. One design. Qualify the design ONCE, not custom new designs for each installation. Relatively small modules (100 MWs??). Make one module a quarter a place them close to where the usage is located to minimize the load on the grid. Need more current? Add another module.

I wonder if they ever went through with that plan? One per quarter, four per year, they might have a dozen or so up and running abt now.

Time to wake up and smell the Neutrons, folks ;)

[W9JEF]

"If you liked the bp disaster
you'll love a "newtron" spill."

x

[W7JZE]

"If you liked the bp disaster
you'll love a "newtron" spill."

x

Ah heck... My radios all glow in the dark... Why shouldn't I ?? :D

[W5INC]

YES! I agree with you RAN. I do not understand why Pebble Bed Reactors are not in high volume (Modular) construction right now. We can build them right here in the USA. Simple design with passive fail safe built right into the Pebbles (fuel balls) themselves. Cannot runaway / meltdown. You don't hear much about PBRs in the media. They aren't very dangerous. There isn't much to complain abt. They just (simply & safely) work. The magic is all in the Pebble construction, not the reactor. It is so simple a design, I wonder maybe if there isn't much profit in building them compared to more traditional designs. Maybe GE and other Nuke manufacturers prefer to market the GigaWatt+, Mega-Billion $ designs???

There was an article a few years ago. Pretty sure it was Sci. Amer. China was jumping on the PBR bandwagon at that time. Creating some sort of a 'factory' to put out the PBR 'cookie-cutter' modules. Make them all the same. One design. Qualify the design ONCE, not custom new designs for each installation. Relatively small modules (100 MWs??). Make one module a quarter a place them close to where the usage is located to minimize the load on the grid. Need more current? Add another module.

I wonder if they ever went through with that plan? One per quarter, four per year, they might have a dozen or so up and running abt now.

Time to wake up and smell the Neutrons, folks ;)

The PBR design pre-dates the nuclear rod method that is widely used today. Rickover in his vast wisdom led the US and the rest of the world down the fuel rod technology road, when he decided the fuel rod method would power his new play toy.

The nuclear fuel rod operates @ temps close to the sun's surface temp. The PBR's "hot pile" design, operates @ 1500 Degrees to heat the helium for the turbines. No chance of a meltdown at that operating temperature. With today's ceramic technology it is possible to build the outer coating of the PBR to withstand tremendous forces and not get ruptured. The PBR is more efficient then the rod technology in terms of service life in the reactor. The PBR will last 100s of times longer then a fuel rod. With such a long service life with PBRs, this should cut down on the amount of actual nuclear material needed to generate our electricity.

China & South Africia are pouring millions of dollars into PBR based reactor research. In the very near future the US power companies will be buying PBR reactors from China, since it looks like the US is to inept to actually move this technology forward. The PBR technology will provided the module or pocket sized reactors of the future. This will get rid of the power grid problems we now have with our antiquated system that is now in place.

Indian Point has been on line for over 40 years now. It supplies NYC with over 30% of the electricity the city uses. From Indian Point to the Empire State building, the distance is less then 30 miles. 2 of Indian Points reactors are still up and running. The generating company wants to extend the life of the Indian Point plant and is planning on submitting the necessary paperwork for that to happen.

[KI4NGN]

The PBR design pre-dates the nuclear rod method that is widely used today. Rickover in his vast wisdom led the US and the rest of the world down the fuel rod technology road, when he decided the fuel rod method would power his new play toy.

The nuclear fuel rod operates @ temps close to the sun's surface temp. The PBR's "hot pile" design, operates @ 1500 Degrees to heat the helium for the turbines. No chance of a meltdown at that operating temperature. With today's ceramic technology it is possible to build the outer coating of the PBR to withstand tremendous forces and not get ruptured. The PBR is more efficient then the rod technology in terms of service life in the reactor. The PBR will last 100s of times longer then a fuel rod. With such a long service life with PBRs, this should cut down on the amount of actual nuclear material needed to generate our electricity.

China & South Africia are pouring millions of dollars into PBR based reactor research. In the very near future the US power companies will be buying PBR reactors from China, since it looks like the US is to inept to actually move this technology forward. The PBR technology will provided the module or pocket sized reactors of the future. This will get rid of the power grid problems we now have with our antiquated system that is now in place.

Indian Point has been on line for over 40 years now. It supplies NYC with over 30% of the electricity the city uses. From Indian Point to the Empire State building, the distance is less then 30 miles. 2 of Indian Points reactors are still up and running. The generating company wants to extend the life of the Indian Point plant and is planning on submitting the necessary paperwork for that to happen.

The temperature of the Sun's surface is approximately 10,000 degress F.

There is no reactor operating anywhere near that temperature because there is no material that would withstand that temperature.

[AG3Y]

From Wikipedia

"Coronal heating problem
The coronal heating problem in solar physics relates to the question of why the temperature of the Sun's corona is millions of kelvins higher than that of the surface. The high temperatures require energy to be carried from the solar interior to the corona by non-thermal processes, because the second law of thermodynamics prevents heat from flowing directly from the solar photosphere, or surface, at about 5800 kelvins, to the much hotter corona at about 1 to 3 MK (parts of the corona can even reach 10 MK). The amount of power required to heat the solar corona can easily be calculated. It is about 1 kilowatt for every square meter of surface area on the Sun, or 1/40000 of the amount of light energy that escapes the Sun.

Unsolved problems in physics Why is the Sun's Corona so much hotter than the Sun's surface?

This thin region of temperature increase from the chromosphere to the corona is known as the transition region and can range from tens to hundreds of kilometers thick. An analogy of this would be a light bulb heating the air surrounding it hotter than its glass surface. The second law of thermodynamics would be broken.

Many coronal heating theories have been proposed, but two theories have remained as the most likely candidates, wave heating and magnetic reconnection (or nanoflares). Through most of the past 50 years, neither theory has been able to account for the extreme coronal temperatures. Most solar physicists now believe that some combination of the two theories can probably explain coronal heating, although the details are not yet complete."


BTW, here is an interesting URL with a Kelvin to Fahrenheit conversion tool:

http://www.metric-conversions.org/temperature/kelvin-to-fahrenheit.htm

[KU5Q]

......this weekend in the Texas Gulf/South Padre Island. Ended the Memorial Day Weekend fishing in the bay and 67mi SE in the TX gulf. Caught plenty of Redfish, Amberjack, and a few unusual tuna.

The mother earth is still far stronger than what little p*ss ant us can do to it.

Whenever you have a serious doubt, go check things out for yourself if you can. You may be surprised.

I did, and I wasn't. The media loses even more credibility with me after my holidays in South Texas this past week.

Also.......offered to meet with outspoken critic in Lyford, TX was not accepted after leaving my direct contact information either, so another set of questions was answered too.

Face to face is the way.

No further comments.

:)

[KB9BVN]

Looks like a BP/Federal Government FAIL of Biblical proportions.

[W9JEF]

How fortunate that the Padre Island National Seashore hasn't been mucked-up -- yet -- like the beaches to the east, where the current has taken the stuff. Not so lucky are the folks whose lives have been changed forever.

Sure, earth will roll with the punch,
continuing its merry way around the sun.
But maybe feeding seven billion people
just got tougher, owing to the destruction
of ocean habitat, the very foundation
of our food chain.

[KD5PME]

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/DN-oilspill_01int.ART0.State.Edition2.2980e20.html

[N5MDT]

How fortunate that the Padre Island National Seashore hasn't been mucked-up -- yet --
You're obviously a youngster... what was it, the Bay of Campeche spill that got South Padre Island about 1984?

[KU5Q]

You're obviously a youngster... what was it, the Bay of Campeche spill that got South Padre Island about 1984?

Now, now.....be nice. :)

[AG3Y]

Terry, be very thankful that the currents are pushing that oil AWAY from you! :eek: Not so fortunate for all the others EAST of the leak! :(

[KU5Q]

Terry, be very thankful that the currents are pushing that oil AWAY from you! :eek: Not so fortunate for all the others EAST of the leak! :(

Jim,

I have a lot of respect for you, and will always pay credence to your comments. I mean that sincerely, and will take heed.

Thanks.

Terry, KU5Q

:)

[N4BBQ]

......this weekend in the Texas Gulf/South Padre Island. Ended the Memorial Day Weekend fishing in the bay and 67mi SE in the TX gulf. Caught plenty of Redfish, Amberjack, and a few unusual tuna.

The mother earth is still far stronger than what little p*ss ant us can do to it.

Whenever you have a serious doubt, go check things out for yourself if you can. You may be surprised.

I did, and I wasn't. The media loses even more credibility with me after my holidays in South Texas this past week.



Nothing like a 500-mile-away eyewitness report. Heck, in that case, my brother-in-law and I did a little trout fishing in the Chestatee River this weekend and didn't see any oil either, and I'm also about 500 miles from ground zero.

[KU5Q]

Nothing like a 500-mile-away eyewitness report. Heck, in that case, my brother-in-law and I did a little trout fishing in the Chestatee River this weekend and didn't see any oil either, and I'm also about 500 miles from ground zero.


Well.....economics drives all. And since that most of the world's health is ill, you cannot trust any govt, nor available news media in whole. We will all have to dig out our truth. Nothing's changed, and I will end my comments at this border.

Thanks for you comments. I understand.:)

[W9JEF]

"Underwater vasectomy." It's a jagged cut. Stay tuned.

From the liniked article:

On Wednesday, film director and deep-sea explorer James Cameron said that BP had turned down his offer to help combat the massive spill.

"Over the last few weeks I've watched, as we all have, with growing horror and heartache, watching what's happening in the Gulf and thinking those morons don't know what they're doing," Cameron said at the All Things Digital technology conference.

Cameron, the director of "The Abyss," "Titanic" and "Avatar," has worked extensively with robot submarines and is considered an expert in undersea filming. He did not say explicitly who he meant when he referred to "those morons."


BP slices oil pipe in 'significant step forward' (http://news.mobile.msn.com/en-us/articles.aspx?afid=1&aid=37463005)

[KA9MOT]

However you look at this, what ever they do, regardless of how long it takes to clean this up, history will show that this went very badly.

I think this disaster is going to affect the oceans globally.

[N4BBQ]

Well.....economics drives all. And since that most of the world's health is ill, you cannot trust any govt, nor available news media in whole. We will all have to dig out our truth. Nothing's changed, and I will end my comments at this border.


Thanks for you comments. I understand.:)
{hijack thread}
Well I have one of those FTA satellite systems and can watch PRESS TV on 97 West and I know they never lie. :)
{/hijack thread}

I'm semi with you sir. I also don't believe we can destroy this place ,but we could make it so trashy it'd be difficult to live here. ALTHOUGH, I've seen some pretty nasty-@$$ places and people seem to be carrying on there...

[AF6LJ]

However you look at this, what ever they do, regardless of how long it takes to clean this up, history will show that this went very badly.

I think this disaster is going to affect the oceans globally.
There is bacteria in the ocean that will eat the oil.
There has been natural leaks of oil into the oceans of the world, and there will be in the future.

What angers me is BP's pretending to be stupid by doing things like not supporting the pipe they were cutting with the diamond saw that became stuck.

Anybody who has ever picked up ether a hand saw or a hand held power saw knows better or will learn soon enough.

The longer this goes on the longer it appears to be contrived.

[W9JEF]

There is bacteria in the ocean that will eat the oil.
There has been natural leaks of oil into the oceans of the world, and there will be in the future.



The bacteria will thrive on this large volume
of oil, and in that process, deplete much
of the oxygen that supports other marine life.




What angers me is BP's pretending to be stupid by doing things like not supporting the pipe they were cutting with the diamond saw that became stuck.

Anybody who has ever picked up ether a hand saw or a hand held power saw knows better or will learn soon enough.

The longer this goes on the longer it appears to be contrived.


The BP CEO finally admitted that basically,
they don't know what they're doing.

[AG3Y]

Absolutely! I don't think they are PRETENDING to be stupid, at all !

[AF6LJ]

Well it's nice to know BP has morons drilling holes in the bottom of the ocean.

As far as the oil goes, if an earthquake or meteor opened up a fisher in the ocean over an oil deposit the results would be the same. Oil seeps up in the Santa Barbra Channel all the time, even before drilling ever took place there. Oxygen will return to the water in a short time, the very same thing happens when there are naturally occurring die-offs in the ocean. That's how all the "biotic" oil got there in the first place.

I'm not discounting what happened it is a disaster no doubt about it.

But what truly shocks me is how stupid BP is.
I can't actually believe they are that stupid, I'm more convinced they have something to gain by faining incompetence.

[N4BBQ]

I can't actually believe they are that stupid, I'm more convinced they have something to gain by faining incompetence.

I fully concur not that it means a daelm thang.

[AG3Y]

Remember, Sue, the job usually if not always, goes to the LOWEST bidder !

[WB3JLA]

What angers me is BP's pretending to be stupid by doing things like not supporting the pipe they were cutting with the diamond saw that became stuck.

Anybody who has ever picked up ether a hand saw or a hand held power saw knows better or will learn soon enough.

The longer this goes on the longer it appears to be contrived.

Like trying to cut a tree branch
If it is laying on the ground and attached to the tree after a storm
you will bind the chain saw

also it must be like trying to handle a saw in space no gravity to get footing

I hope that sub had good thrusters to hold it in place

[AB1GA]

This could be a business opportunity for someone with the right skills.

If we ever get past this mess, it's likely that governments will try to avoid this sort of thing happening again. Since insurance only buys off the victims and doesn't prevent the problem, we may see a requirement for drilling and production companies to have the ability to fix deep-water problems.

That would be very expensive for each company to do individually, and there's no added value for a government to run such a show. But if an oil company could meet the requirement by placing a deep-water repair company on retainer, it could make things simpler all around.

This putative company, call it DeepWaterFixIt, could raise capital to design and build heavy equipment designed to work directly on the seabed, rather than relying on submersibles. This might give them greater capability, affording easier, and faster, repairs to distressed underwater infrastructure.

'JLA would have to be the company chairman, since he has the best suspenders. :)

[AF6LJ]

Like trying to cut a tree branch
If it is laying on the ground and attached to the tree after a storm
you will bind the chain saw

also it must be like trying to handle a saw in space no gravity to get footing

I hope that sub had good thrusters to hold it in place
There is a way to do just that, it's complex and involves taking out wedges of wood.
It can be done, it just takes three times as long.
(I've seen it done on a tree in front of my old house in Encanto.

[W9JEF]

There is a way to do just that, it's complex and involves taking out wedges of wood.




Taking out life insurance would also be advised.
They don't call those "widow makers" for nothing.
And be fast on your feet. Backwards.

[AF6LJ]

Taking out life insurance would also be advised.
They don't call those "widow makers" for nothing.
And be fast on your feet. Backwards.
True enough.

[N0SYA]

"As to the NIMBY argument:
Conservationists (elite or otherwise)
don't want wind turbines in their back yards
any more than Dirty Energy CEO's want
oil wells in theirs."

but

if someone designed small, elegant, and effective turbines, or even oil rigs that fit a back yard or a rooftop, why not?

[AG3Y]

I wouldn't mind an oil rig ( or two or three ! ) in MY back yard, if I were making the PROFITS off of them !

[K0RGR]

Charles Krauthammer, in his column yesterday, explained the whole thing:

It's all the ENVIRONMENTALIST's fault!

Those tree huggers wouldn't let them drill for oil in ANWR, and they wouldn't let them drill in the Santa Barbara Channel, or off the coast of Florida, so the poor oil companies, who did absolutely nothing wrong, had to go drill in risky deep water.

Krauthammer said this in all sincerity. Please join me, in sending boxes of dung to his editor in our appreciation. Please share this with Fox viewers you know.
Did it occur to either Krauthammer or his paymaster that the tree huggers were trying to prevent this kind of disaster in those places? Imagine San Diego dripping in black ooze. Who would be the first looney tune to set the slick on fire?

Yes, the government failed here, because BP assured them, in writing many times over, that BP could and should handle any disaster of this kind. Indeed, Federal law prohibits the government from taking control of oil spill disasters - the idea being to prevent the Feds from incurring huge debts as a result. Still, I am pretty certain that nobody even looked at BP's filings over the last 10 + years. If BP said it was good, that was enough for everybody. That's why they were fired.

But, already we have certain congressweasels demanding legislation to limit BP's liability from this catastrophe. How long will it be before these same friends of the oil industry demand a bailout for BP, to prevent them from going bankrupt, throwing gas station attendants and 10,000 lobbyists out of work?

I hear AC0H's complaints about NIMBY's. The NIMBY's are going to have us all freezing in the dark before long. Up here, they are fighting the construction of much-needed power transmission lines, as well as new wind turbines. I can agree with some of their concerns, but these folks don't want the things anywhere they can see them. My wife owns a farm in Audubon County Iowa. It sits on the Riparian Divide, which is the windiest place in the region. There is a brand new high voltage transmission line running through the farm. My inlaws and their neighbors would love to have the income from some windmills on their land. Sadly, a small group of NIMBYs - from the one big city in the county - got the county to outlaw them! Arrrrrgh....!

In order to get off oil, we are going to have to develop ALL viable sources of energy. Solar, Wind, Nuclear, and yes, "clean" coal. If we fail to do so, we'll be a 3rd world country before long.

[AG3Y]

We have a NIMBY situation right near us in W.VA.

Down near Harper's Ferry, the well known site where John Brown had his famous rebellion, a huge power company is trying to run a power distribution system across the state, to serve the greater D.C Metro area. The fight has been going on, seemingly for YEARS, now, with neither side being able to come up with a suitable compromise.

You don't want those unsightly power lines cutting through historical countryside, but you don't want the nation's capitol to be short on power during the miserably hot summers, either. It goes on and on !

Good thing they are NOT digging for oil anywhere close by!

[AF6LJ]

BP Buys search terms from Google in order to maintain news blackout.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/27378/20100608/oil-spill.htm


Google and BP can go to Hell.

Google is not your friend.

[K8MHZ]

BP Buys search terms from Google in order to maintain news blackout.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/27378/20100608/oil-spill.htm


Google and BP can go to Hell.

Google is not your friend.

No, the MEDIA is not your friend! The story is BS.

This is from the story in the link you posted:


When the phrase “oil spill” is typed on Google or Yahoo, the immediate result guides one to BP (http://www.ibtimes.com/topics/detail/488/bp/)’s “Gulf of Mexico (http://www.ibtimes.com/topics/detail/439/mexico/) response”, its official page dedicated to giving information about its attempt to curtail the spill.


I typed 'oil spill' into Google and got this as the very first return:

http://www.google.com/search?q=oil+spill&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=R80&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=nivb&source=univ&tbs=nws:1&tbo=u&ei=Jl4OTOH0JaCMNdfzwPcM&sa=X&oi=news_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CDYQsQQwAA

Here is a picture from that page:

http://news.google.com/news/tbn/EzMggntrTJ0J/6.jpg

[W9JEF]

We have a NIMBY situation right near us in W.VA.

Down near Harper's Ferry, the well known site where John Brown had his famous rebellion, a huge power company is trying to run a power distribution system across the state, to serve the greater D.C Metro area. The fight has been going on, seemingly for YEARS, now, with neither side being able to come up with a suitable compromise.

You don't want those unsightly power lines cutting through historical countryside, but you don't want the nation's capitol to be short on power during the miserably hot summers, either. It goes on and on !

Good thing they are NOT digging for oil anywhere close by!



Lack of a/c in Congress might be a good thing.
Shorter sessions, less bs.

Ever since we moved to this place (1981)
the power company had had a 7200 volt line
across our driveway. Their easement specified
only along the highway. (The telco
also had a line, but they've since gone underground.)

The Great Ice Storm of '09 gave me an excuse
to cut that power line (no longer in use anyway),
as fallen limbs had pulled it down in the vehicular path.

If we can send people to the moon,
why can't we transmit electric power
over long distances underground?

[AF6LJ]

No, the MEDIA is not your friend! The story is BS.

This is from the story in the link you posted:



I typed 'oil spill' into Google and got this as the very first return:

http://www.google.com/search?q=oil+spill&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=R80&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=nivb&source=univ&tbs=nws:1&tbo=u&ei=Jl4OTOH0JaCMNdfzwPcM&sa=X&oi=news_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CDYQsQQwAA

Here is a picture from that page:

http://news.google.com/news/tbn/EzMggntrTJ0J/6.jpg

Not all the news articles are displayed, when I go though and modify the search term to include specific sources I don't see them.

Here is Google
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&tbo=p&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&tbs=nws%3A1&q=oil+spill%2C+infowars.com&aq=f&aqi=&aql=f&oq=&gs_rfai=

Here is Startpage.com
http://us2.startpage.com/do/metasearch.pl?

This is the kind of censorship that exists though Google and Yahoo.

[KI4NGN]

Lack of a/c in Congress might be a good thing.
Shorter sessions, less bs.

Ever since we moved to this place (1981)
the power company had had a 7200 volt line
across our driveway. Their easement specified
only along the highway. (The telco
also had a line, but they've since gone underground.)

The Great Ice Storm of '09 gave me an excuse
to cut that power line (no longer in use anyway),
as fallen limbs had pulled it down in the vehicular path.

If we can send people to the moon,
why can't we transmit electric power
over long distances underground?

It's more expensive.

[W9JEF]

http://www.tonyboon.co.uk/imgs/images/powerlines1152.jpg

Of course R&D is needed to come up with cost-effective
and reliable underground transmission lines.
Shielded from lightning and solar flares,
burried lines might even be less expensive
in the long run.

[W9JEF]

http://search.msntv.msn.com/search/Search.aspx?FORM=WEBTV&cfg=MSTVXML&v=1&c=US&q=%22oil+spill%22

powered by MSN

Results 1 - 15 of about 40,600,000 containing ""oil spill""

next

WEB DIRECTORY SITES:ABOUT
Oil spill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An oil spill is the release of a liquid petroleum hydrocarbon into the environment due to human activity, and is a form of pollution. The term often refers to marine oil spills ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spill

Obama says ready to kick ass over Gulf oil spill ...
VENICE, La/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said he wanted to know whose ass to kick over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, adding to the pressure on energy giant BP Plc ...
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6573FD20100608

Oil Spill Expert: BP Is 'Groping In the Dark' - ABC ...
A leading scientist following the BP oil spill said Monday that if the company or the government had made realistic estimates about the amounts flowing into the Gulf of Mexico ...
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/oil-spill-expert-bp-groping-dark/story?id=10849389

Oil spill keeps Fla. Panhandle beaches off list - News- msnbc.com
The possibility of tar balls prevents the Panhandle's beaches from being on Dr. Beach's annual year's Top 10 Best Beaches list, out Friday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37385329/

Gulf oil spill workers report health problems - USATODAY.com
More than a dozen workers have been treated at local medical centers for flu-like symptoms ranging from chest pain to dizziness, nausea and headaches, presumably due to exposure to ...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-06-04-oil-spill-workers_N.htm

BP's oil spill takes toll on Florida economy - Jun. 8 ...
The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico could end up costing Florida 195,000 jobs and $10.9 billion in annual spending, research from the University of Central Florida shows.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/08/news/economy/bp_oil_spill_florida/index.htm

Exxon Valdez oil spill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Exxon Valdez oil spill occurred in Prince William Sound, Alaska, on March 24, 1989, when the Exxon Valdez, an oil tanker bound for Long Beach, California, hit Prince William ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxon_Valdez_oil_spill

Gulf Coast Oil Spill News - Latest Headlines - CBS News
Complete coverage of the massive oil spill hitting the U.S. gulf coast.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2718-201_162-558.html

Some oil spill events from Tuesday, June 8, 2010 ...
A summary of events on Tuesday, June 8, Day 49 of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill that began with the April 20 explosion and fire on the drilling rig Deepwater Horizon, owned by ...
http://www.latimes.com/business/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-us-gulf-oil-spill-today,0,6773631.story

Volunteers recruited to help in oil spill threat - CNN.com
Efforts to minimize the damage from the huge oil spill from a rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico are under way, but wildlife conservation groups say the oil could pose a disaster ...
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/04/30/impact.oil.spill/index.html?hpt=Sbin

Oil spill's danger for Democrats - CNN.com
There was a theory, back in the day, that if the president could only pass health care reform, the glow of that victory would spur him on to better things: more wins, more ...
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/05/26/borger.oil.spill/index.html

Obama Steps Up Tough Talk on Oil Spill - CBS News
White House Push to Present President As Actively Engaged in Dealing With Oil Spill
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/08/politics/main6559563.shtml

Businesses seek aid following oil spill - Small business- msnbc.com
Thousands of small business owners across the South are turning to the federal government for financial help following the oil spill in the Gulf and last month's devastating ...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37115475/ns/business-small_business/

Hi-res photos: Gulf oil spill - latimes.com
div#rail{display:none !important;visibility:hidden !important;} div#moduleArticleToolsContainer {width:900px !important;} div#content{width:900px !important;} h1{display:none ...
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-oil-spill-html,0,6610369.htmlstory

Fickle oil spill scatters threats throughout Gulf ...
Associated Press Fickle oil spill scatters threats throughout Gulf By RAY HENRY and BILL KACZOR , 06.08.10, 11:20 AM EDT
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/06/08/general-us-gulf-oil-spill_7669998.html?boxes=Homepagebusinessnews


next

[KI4NGN]

Of course R&D is needed to come up with cost-effective
and reliable underground transmission lines.
Shielded from lightning and solar flares,
burried lines might even be less expensive
in the long run.

That's it in a nutshell: cost effective, and there's the problem.

There are not many materials, if any(!), than are less expensive than air. Add in the cost of getting all of the lines underground, versus just stringing some wires hundreds of feet from point to point, and high-voltages lines strung from tower to tower will be hard to beat.

I'm not disagreeing with the desire, but I don't think buried will ever be less expensive, and cost drives everything.

[W4PG]

I'm not disagreeing with the desire, but I don't think buried will ever be less expensive, and cost drives everything.

What about when you factor in the costs of maintenance?? We don't have any problems with our underground cables after a hurricane, but certainly do with the above ground ones!!

............Bob

[WB2WIK]

Of course R&D is needed to come up with cost-effective
and reliable underground transmission lines.
Shielded from lightning and solar flares,
burried lines might even be less expensive
in the long run.

May not ever be viable in places that have earthquakes. Hard to maintain continuity when the ground suddenly moves 50 feet to the left of where it was just a second ago.

[KI4NGN]

What about when you factor in the costs of maintenance?? We don't have any problems with our underground cables after a hurricane, but certainly do with the above ground ones!!

............Bob

Well, we were discussing the HV transmission lines. I've never heard of any being brought down by trees, but I suppose it could happen....with some pretty big trees, though there are not normally any in the falling vicinity of an HV transmission line. :)

And what happens when someone accidently digs into one? If it can happen, it will, and instead of knocking out a neighborhood, and whole section of a grid gets knocked out. Everything has it's pluses and minuses. :)

[AF6LJ]

May not ever be viable in places that have earthquakes. Hard to maintain continuity when the ground suddenly moves 50 feet to the left of where it was just a second ago.
The last time the ground moved that much in the US it really tore up Alaska.

Power lines will be somewhere down the list of priorities behind food, water medical aid..........

[AG3Y]

Have you ever seen those shows where they go along the HV transmission lines with a helicopter to service the poles? Before they can get a man on the pole, they have to get the copter and everything attached to it, to the same potential the line is at!

When they reach out with that "Jesus Stick", there is an arc about three feet long that jumps to the pole.

Now imagine trying to contain all that electricity in some kind of closed pipe or conduit! You GOTTA be KIDDING ! ! !

[AF6LJ]

Well, we were discussing the HV transmission lines. I've never heard of any being brought down by trees, but I suppose it could happen....with some pretty big trees, though there are not normally any in the falling vicinity of an HV transmission line. :)

And what happens when someone accidently digs into one? If it can happen, it will, and instead of knocking out a neighborhood, and whole section of a grid gets knocked out. Everything has it's pluses and minuses. :)
They make more sense in Southern Kalifornia, we have wildfires and foolish people who go out and plant wild grasses so the thirty year wildfire cycle is shortened to two to three years.

It would be far cheaper to underground them than to keep firebreaks around all the high power lines that feed SanDiego and LA.

[AF6LJ]

Have you ever seen those shows where they go along the HV transmission lines with a helicopter to service the poles? Before they can get a man on the pole, they have to get the copter and everything attached to it, to the same potential the line is at!

When they reach out with that "Jesus Stick", there is an arc about three feet long that jumps to the pole.

Now imagine trying to contain all that electricity in some kind of closed pipe or conduit! You GOTTA be KIDDING ! ! !
They wouldn't have work on them cold.

[W5INC]

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0608/BP-live-feed-doesn-t-lie-Is-BP-oil-spill-plume-worse-than-before

From the CSM newspaper today. still no accurate measurements on the actual flow rate. Does the $4800.00 @ gallon fine that BP is facing for every gallon that is lost into the Gulf have something to do with this flow rate question? Not only does BP have to pay the $4800.00 a gallon fine, it must pay the royalty fees to the Feds for the lost oil also.

Will the money that the Feds receive in the form of fines levied against BP, be used for the long term clean up of the Gulf coast? :rolleyes:

[K8MHZ]

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0608/BP-live-feed-doesn-t-lie-Is-BP-oil-spill-plume-worse-than-before

From the CSM newspaper today. still no accurate measurements on the actual flow rate. Does the $4800.00 @ gallon fine that BP is facing for every gallon that is lost into the Gulf have something to do with this flow rate question? Not only does BP have to pay the $4800.00 a gallon fine, it must pay the royalty fees to the Feds for the lost oil also.

Will the money that the Feds receive in the form of fines levied against BP, be used for the long term clean up of the Gulf coast? :rolleyes:

Actually, its $4,800 per barrel, not per gallon, but still......

[AF6LJ]

BP knows how much oil is escaping....

So does Obama, this is the right crisis for the need to institute new taxes.
On the wellhead
On the gas pump
and
Cap and trade.

And if you can't find a good crisis to take advantage of, you make one.

It's all a good show down to the A$$ kicking for public consumption.

[N6UGJ]

Are you living on the same planet as us or did you post this presumption prematurely after another bogus news story on perhaps Faux News??

Forgive me for being snarky, but if it is working, what are those big, fast-moving, plumes of mud and oil I still see coming out the sides of "said" cap.

[N6UGJ]

Oh yeah, ok....let's go get our updates from the very people who have been lying about the severity from hour ONE.

I will take a major pass on the BP website. Nothing but propaganda. Go to Woods Hole, or NOAA for facts.

[AF6LJ]

Oh yeah, ok....let's go get our updates from the very people who have been lying about the severity from hour ONE.

I will take a major pass on the BP website. Nothing but propaganda. Go to Woods Hole, or NOAA for facts.

Just remember BP bought search terms from Google, so Google is also not your friend.

[W9PSK]

It's a conspiracy!!

[KI4NGN]

They make more sense in Southern Kalifornia, we have wildfires and foolish people who go out and plant wild grasses so the thirty year wildfire cycle is shortened to two to three years.

It would be far cheaper to underground them than to keep firebreaks around all the high power lines that feed SanDiego and LA.

Well, since they don't do it, I would imagine that it is in fact not cheaper, or else they would. :)

[AF6LJ]

Don't let a good crisis go to waste.....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100505/us-gulf-oil-spill-aid/


Now I have to go look for parts..........

[KC8VWM]

You do understand that while BP attempts it's ongoing futile efforts in response to this event, we could have prepared a spacecraft, trained several astronauts and have already flown them to the moon and back.

Oh, lets see.. That's right.., nowhere on planet earth do we have any such technology to fix this problem.

Never in the entire history of the world have we ever had to fix a broken gushing pipe before.

Yeah..ok.. uh huh.. Let's all try to go along with that concept...

Say... does BP have any more good jokes like this one?

Oh wait .. here's a few:

Notice the flaws in the animation:

This one fills the well in from the top down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA87WL5K25g&feature=player_embedded

This one fills the well in from the bottom up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4YG7J-Ws6k&feature=related

But what they don't tell you is that neither approach would work actually because when the well is pushing oil out of the well and through a broken pipe on top, where do you think the concrete flowing in going to end up?

a: deep inside the well?
b: out through the top of the broken pipe on the surface?

There will be a quiz later.. lol

[K8MHZ]

Latest on BP's track record.

(Don't miss the part about the biggest safety fine in the history of the nation or the explosion in Texas that killed 15 people)

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/09/2737498/bp-has-history-of-safety-environmental.html

BP has history of safety, environmental violations



Over the past two decades, BP subsidiaries have been convicted three times of environmental crimes in Alaska and Texas, including two felonies. It remains on probation for two of them.
The company eventually pleaded guilty to a felony violation of the Clean Air Act, was fined $50 million and sentenced to three years' probation. The Occupational Health and Safety Administration assessed BP the largest fine in OSHA history – $87 million – after inspectors found 270 safety violations that had been previously cited but not fixed and 439 new violations.
BP is appealing that fine.




Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/09/2737498/bp-has-history-of-safety-environmental.html#ixzz0qY6alJPC

[AF6LJ]

You do understand that while BP attempts it's ongoing futile efforts in response to this event, we could have prepared a spacecraft, trained several astronauts and have already flown them to the moon and back.

Oh, lets see.. That's right.., nowhere on planet earth do we have any such technology to fix this problem.

Never in the entire history of the world have we ever had to fix a broken gushing pipe before.

Yeah..ok.. uh huh.. Let's all try to go along with that concept...

Say... does BP have any more good jokes like this one?

Oh wait .. here's a few:

Notice the flaws in the animation:

This one fills the well in from the top down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA87WL5K25g&feature=player_embedded

This one fills the well in from the bottom up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4YG7J-Ws6k&feature=related

But what they don't tell you is that neither approach would work actually because when the well is pushing oil out of the well and through a broken pipe on top, where do you think the concrete flowing in going to end up?

a: deep inside the well?
b: out through the top of the broken pipe on the surface?

There will be a quiz later.. lol
Over the last twenty four hours a few insiders have leaked information as to what has happened and what is going on...

First the well from the bottom of the gulf down is over five miles deep, closer to six. This isn't a record by the way the Russians have drilled for oil over seven miles down.

The average wellhead pressure on a well that is two miles deep is 1500 PSI. They are not sure what the head pressure of this well was because of catastrophic failure, estimates put it well over 25,000 PSI.

The well casing is damaged in several places and there are several fishers leaking oil in the aria.

Besides oil there are several highly toxic chemicals not the least of which of which is sulfur dioxide in quantities 1000 times the safe level.

The last item; BP has lied from day one as to how serious this failure really is including the estimated amount of oil leaking into the Gulf.

There is near total news blackout.

[AF6LJ]

Latest on BP's track record.

(Don't miss the part about the biggest safety fine in the history of the nation or the explosion in Texas that killed 15 people)

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/09/2737498/bp-has-history-of-safety-environmental.html

BP has history of safety, environmental violations



Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/09/2737498/bp-has-history-of-safety-environmental.html#ixzz0qY6alJPC




This is not surprising, they could be the worse offenders of the whole lot of the oil companies.

[KI4NGN]

You do understand that while BP attempts it's ongoing futile efforts in response to this event, we could have prepared a spacecraft, trained several astronauts and have already flown them to the moon and back.


Nah.




Oh, lets see.. That's right.., nowhere on planet earth do we have any such technology to fix this problem.

Never in the entire history of the world have we ever had to fix a broken gushing pipe before.


Please post a link to any article discussing the fix of a leaking pipe over a mile underwater, especially a pipe that had an oil rig come crashing down on top of it.




Yeah..ok.. uh huh.. Let's all try to go along with that concept...

Say... does BP have any more good jokes like this one?

Oh wait .. here's a few:

Notice the flaws in the animation:

This one fills the well in from the top down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA87WL5K25g&feature=player_embedded

This one fills the well in from the bottom up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4YG7J-Ws6k&feature=related

But what they don't tell you is that neither approach would work actually because when the well is pushing oil out of the well and through a broken pipe on top, where do you think the concrete flowing in going to end up?

a: deep inside the well?
b: out through the top of the broken pipe on the surface?

There will be a quiz later.. lol

[KI4NGN]

Over the last twenty four hours a few insiders have leaked information as to what has happened and what is going on...

First the well from the bottom of the gulf down is over five miles deep, closer to six. This isn't a record by the way the Russians have drilled for oil over seven miles down.

The average wellhead pressure on a well that is two miles deep is 1500 PSI. They are not sure what the head pressure of this well was because of catastrophic failure, estimates put it well over 25,000 PSI.

The wellhead pressure has nothing to do with the depth of the well other than the deeper the well, the higher the pressure may be because otherwise the oil would have been pushed to the surface naturally. There are wells that require pumping fluid into them to force the oil out.


The well casing is damaged in several places and there are several fishers leaking oil in the aria.

Besides oil there are several highly toxic chemicals not the least of which of which is sulfur dioxide in quantities 1000 times the safe level.

The last item; BP has lied from day one as to how serious this failure really is including the estimated amount of oil leaking into the Gulf.

There is near total news blackout.

[AF6LJ]

The wellhead pressure has nothing to do with the depth of the well. There are wells that require pumping fluid into them to force the oil out.

To an extent you are correct, however the petrolatum engineer that was interviewed (who has super deep well experience) said that the pressure exceeded the ratings last resort valve and the BOP. He also went on to say that the pressures in these wells are much higher than those in your average well.

Yes there are low pressure wells they are often near the end of their useful life and steam and water are often injected into the wells to force the ramaining oil out.

[KA9MOT]

There is near total news blackout.

Which was proven last night on ABC News.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Media/conversation-press-hassled-gulf-coast/story?id=10877263

[K3XR]

An interesting exchange between ABC reporter Jake Tapper and Admiral Thad Allen, the man in charge of the effort to manage the spill.


"TAPPER: I talked to a guy who runs a company in Maine that offers boom, and he has – he says – the ability to make 90,000 feet of boom a day. High quality. BP came there 2 weeks ago, looked at it, they are doing another audit today. He is very frustrated, he says he has a lot of high quality boom to go and it is taking a long time for BP to get its act together. Don’t you need this boom right now?
ALLEN: Oh we need all the boom wherever we can get it. If you give me the information off camera I’ll be glad to follow up."

The quote comes from hotair.com, where you can follow up and I can avoid the Zed Political Police.

[AF6LJ]

Something else interesting.......

http://www.businessinsider.com/deepwater-horizon-employee-are-you-fing-happy-the-rigs-on-fire-i-told-you-this-was-gonna-happen-2010-6

http://static.businessinsider.com/image/4bdae57c7f8b9a63798d0100-300-225/oil-rig-explosion-3.jpg

[AF6LJ]

An interesting exchange between ABC reporter Jake Tapper and Admiral Thad Allen, the man in charge of the effort to manage the spill.


"TAPPER: I talked to a guy who runs a company in Maine that offers boom, and he has – he says – the ability to make 90,000 feet of boom a day. High quality. BP came there 2 weeks ago, looked at it, they are doing another audit today. He is very frustrated, he says he has a lot of high quality boom to go and it is taking a long time for BP to get its act together. Don’t you need this boom right now?
ALLEN: Oh we need all the boom wherever we can get it. If you give me the information off camera I’ll be glad to follow up."

The quote comes from hotair.com, where you can follow up and I can avoid the Zed Political Police.

There are several reports of groups ready to put out boom and they are told they can't.
The states can act independently from the Feds under the Ninth and Tenth Amendment and they won't.

This whole thing stinks
This whole thing stinks
This whole thing stinks!!!!!

[KC8VWM]

Gulf Leak Meter

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/oil-ticker/

[AE5JU]

(trimmed)

Roof-top solar water heaters would be a
very efficient way to save on utility bills.
Hot water not used for dishes and showers
could suplement a hot-water home heating system.
Wind-driven generators could heat wires
imbedded in outside walls, to compensate
for wind chill on a cold night.


(trimmed)


HOA's won't let you put up a ham antenna, but you think they'll let you put all this stuff on your roof?

:D

[AE5JU]

Reading through all of these pages I've been seeing a lot of comments about BP lying about how much oil has spilled. I'm not a BP apologist by any means, but without metering equipment of some sort, how could anyone know?

OK, do this... go out to your yard, turn on the garden hose. Watch it for 15 minutes. OK, what is the flow rate in gallons of water per day?

That's my point. There is no one that can just look at the rover monitors and say, "That's a x,000 barrel a day flow." There are no such experts, and any figure short of getting that oil corralled and measured as it gets into tanks on a ship is just a wild guess.

To expect any kind of ballpark answer to this question is rather naive.

Besides, even if we knew even an estimated amount, what good would that do? In what way would it help anything?

73
Paul - AE5JU

[AF6LJ]

Reading through all of these pages I've been seeing a lot of comments about BP lying about how much oil has spilled. I'm not a BP apologist by any means, but without metering equipment of some sort, how could anyone know?

OK, do this... go out to your yard, turn on the garden hose. Watch it for 15 minutes. OK, what is the flow rate in gallons of water per day?

That's my point. There is no one that can just look at the rover monitors and say, "That's a x,000 barrel a day flow." There are no such experts, and any figure short of getting that oil corralled and measured as it gets into tanks on a ship is just a wild guess.

To expect any kind of ballpark answer to this question is rather naive.

Besides, even if we knew even an estimated amount, what good would that do? In what way would it help anything?

73
Paul - AE5JU
There have been leaks from current and former BP employees that suggest BP is lying.
The fact that BP has repeatably revised the flow rates and has not allowed people to photograph beaches is enough evidence to BP lying.

Don't use Google or Yahoo to look for BP information BP has bought search terms that allows them to place a near news blackout over what is going on.

Use Startpage www.startpage.com/ or another search engine. There are plenty of foreign articles to be had that will fill you in on what is going on.

[AE5JU]

There are plenty of foreign articles to be had that will fill you in on what is going on.


Sue, I do think I'm a little closer to this than you are, if nothing else, by geography. This is happening in my own "back yard", so to speak.

Once they have begun actually capturing the oil they have been able to revise their estimates.

I'm fairly well informed, or I would not have written that post.

73,
Paul - AE5JU

[AF6LJ]

Sue, I do think I'm a little closer to this than you are, if nothing else, by geography. This is happening in my own "back yard", so to speak.

Once they have begun actually capturing the oil they have been able to revise their estimates.

I'm fairly well informed, or I would not have written that post.

73,
Paul - AE5JU
I understand Paul please read the last article I posted yesterday. It will provide some insight to what may be going on.

[KC8VWM]

The fact that BP has repeatably revised the flow rates and has not allowed people to photograph beaches is enough evidence to BP lying.


Who needs pictures of a beach to understand the scale of the problem...

Hows this photograph look from space?

http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/replicate/EXID5738/images/NASAOilLatest.jpg

[KD7SIZ]

This Video's web address given below shows a much larger pipe than BP's pipe being completely squeezed tightly closed.
　
This simple and relatively easy method to stop the oil spill leak was never tried by BP.
　
Here is one video that shows the full functioning operation of an almost-on-the-shelf and ready-to-buy squeeze tool device that is made to squeeze until completely closed tight, steel pipes that are up to 24 inches in diameter. I believe that the BP pipe size is much less in diameter, and BP's steel pipe is not much over 18 inches in diameter.
　
Maybe the whole Blow Out Preventer could still be squeezed closed.
　
http://www.regentools.com/index.html
　
and
　
http://www.regentools.com

[KD7SIZ]

Youtube Video Title: The REAL REASON Behind the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico - 2010

This video speaks about how all countrys on the earth ( except the USA ) require "acoustic switches" for deep sea drilling, which have been proven to be 100 per cent fail safe for deep sea blow outs. Not much other detail is given.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77pBcf0o444&feature=related

[KS4VT]

This just in....BP stopped the oil spill. "They put a wedding ring around the pipe and it stopped putting out...."

[KA9MOT]

This just in....BP stopped the oil spill. "They put a wedding ring around the pipe and it stopped putting out...."


I am one person who can appreciate a joke. Good, Bad, it doesn't matter. While your joke is appreciated, it is not that funny.

I just woke up, read your joke and immediately hit the News Sites looking for more info......That was a funny joke......

When first read, I thought it said, "welding ring". I've had a cup and now see my error.

Thanks for the Sunday Morning Funny!

[KS4VT]

I am one person who can appreciate a joke. Good, Bad, it doesn't matter. While your joke is appreciated, it is not that funny.

I just woke up, read your joke and immediately hit the News Sites looking for more info......That was a funny joke......

When first read, I thought it said, "welding ring". I've had a cup and now see my error.

Thanks for the Sunday Morning Funny!

Your quite welcome and glad you re-read it a second time after your first cup of joe and found the humor in it.

73

[AF6LJ]

This just in....BP stopped the oil spill. "They put a wedding ring around the pipe and it stopped putting out...."
One thing is for sure;
They are married to that mess. :)

[KD7SIZ]

Here is another possible real good and quick solution to the oil spill problem, Do a google and youtube search engine search for the subject of "oil eating microbes". The oil eating microbes remove all the oil quickly and they do not harm the environment and are safe.

[N0WVA]

I dont see any reason we need to stop the oil leak until all the fishing industry in that area is decimated. Those fishermen were probably quite independent, making a living from nature. We just cant have that, They need to go to work at Wally World or something. Lets wait until we are sure they will never recover, then we can stop the leak.

[KI4NGN]

There have been leaks from current and former BP employees that suggest BP is lying.
The fact that BP has repeatably revised the flow rates and has not allowed people to photograph beaches is enough evidence to BP lying.

Don't use Google or Yahoo to look for BP information BP has bought search terms that allows them to place a near news blackout over what is going on.

Use Startpage www.startpage.com/ or another search engine. There are plenty of foreign articles to be had that will fill you in on what is going on.

Just curious: How does BP stop anyone from photographing a beach?

[KI4NGN]

This Video's web address given below shows a much larger pipe than BP's pipe being completely squeezed tightly closed.
　
This simple and relatively easy method to stop the oil spill leak was never tried by BP.
　
Here is one video that shows the full functioning operation of an almost-on-the-shelf and ready-to-buy squeeze tool device that is made to squeeze until completely closed tight, steel pipes that are up to 24 inches in diameter. I believe that the BP pipe size is much less in diameter, and BP's steel pipe is not much over 18 inches in diameter.
　
Maybe the whole Blow Out Preventer could still be squeezed closed.
　
http://www.regentools.com/index.html
　
and
　
http://www.regentools.com

Please, show me where it states than any of these tools will work a mile underwater.

Some of you just don't seem to get it: the basic problem is that this leaking pipe is under 5,000+ feet of water, and this severely limits any approaches to shutting it down.

It's not the size of the pipe that's the problem, but where it's located.

[AF6LJ]

Just curious: How does BP stop anyone from photographing a beach?
With threats and the promise of arrest by national guard personnel.

[W9JEF]

BP Strawmen Won't Fix the Gulf (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/bp-strawmen-wont-fix-the_b_612001.html)

"As citizens, we want the hole in the Gulf plugged up as fast as possible, we want the spill contained, and we want everything cleaned up and damages paid -- no matter how much it costs BP's shareholders. But if we're BP shareholders, we want to minimize all such expenditures -- including our long-term liabilities.

"Get it? There's no conflict between Britain and the United States. The conflict is between two kinds of interests -- shareholder interests and citizen interests.

"And unless or until citizenship interests predominate in the Gulf -- unless or until BP's shareholders are forced by law to part with their assets to ensure the safety of the American public -- shareholder interests will come first. That's why it's so important for the Administration (and, if necessary, Congress) to take steps to put BP America under temporary receivership, establish an escrow fund of at least $10 billion that BP must pay into, and whatever else is necessary to trump shareholder interests."

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

When BP loses its assets, who's gonna pay?
I say we make them front us 50 billion NOW
while they still have it.

BP Strawmen Won't Fix the Gulf (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/bp-strawmen-wont-fix-the_b_612001.html)

[KD7SIZ]

Please, show me where it states than any of these tools will work a mile underwater.

Some of you just don't seem to get it: the basic problem is that this leaking pipe is under 5,000+ feet of water, and this severely limits any approaches to shutting it down.

It's not the size of the pipe that's the problem, but where it's located.

Maybe hydraulics will not work at 5000 feet ( as I don't know - but oil is oil just keep the bubbles out of the hydraulics and keep it warm), but some type of other very long leverage mechanical device with a very long lever to a big screw thread device could be designed to do the same thing as the hydraulics as shown in the video given at www.regentools.com (http://www.regentools.com).

[KD7SIZ]

A news story ( NBC or ABC or CBS ??? ) that I watched on my TV a few weeks ago said that there are little bit more investors and pensions in the USA who are the investors in BP, than in England. And this news told me that BP is really a USA company. BP in the distant past, once stood for British Petroleum. But today BP only means the letters BP, and BP has nothing today to do with the term of the past called British Petroleum.

[KD0EAH]

put a couple things in "perspective.

Every 33 feet of water depth is one atmosphere of pressure.

at one mile, that's 160X the atmosphere at the surface.

For an 8" pipe if that's what it is, that's a 50 square inch area having 2350 PSI

Combined, that means the oil is coming out the end of that pipe at 118224 Pounds of pressure.

Imagine trying to cap a hydraulic ram that's under full pressure at the surface and STOPPING IT from moving that's that' large at an undetermined flow rate.

[N2NH]

Perhaps we should assume a wait and see attitude but it looks like the top kill mud plug has worked and now they have to put in the cement cap.

\/
/\

Keeping my fingers crossed.

Ref: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-oil-spill-top-kill-20100528,0,5782115.story

So it's working or it's not. Title sez it is. BP sez your wrong.

http://iphone.cbsnews.com/site?sid=cbsnews_ip&pid=sections.detail&storyId=6530758&index=1

Where exactly are all those who were for offshore drilling? You know, all those who moronically chanted "DRILL BABY DRILL"?

Where's all that outrage now?

Where are all the chanting teabaggers now?

Especially with all those tax dollars we'll be using to clean this mess? Don't really think BP is going to pay do you? They're not paying those helping to clean up right now. Then again they are paying millions on their image.

So wrong, so often, so predictable.

[N2NH]

A news story ( NBC or ABC or CBS ??? ) that I watched on my TV a few weeks ago said that there are little bit more investors and pensions in the USA who are the investors in BP, than in England. And this news told me that BP is really a USA company. BP in the distant past, once stood for British Petroleum. But today BP only means the letters BP, and BP has nothing today to do with the term of the past called British Petroleum.

According to BP, they are.

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/STAGING/global_assets/downloads/B/bp_first_quarter_2010_results.pdf

Notice "London" in the upper right.

Also the British PM is taking BP criticism personally- always a sure sign.

[AF6LJ]

So it's working or it's not. Title sez it is. BP sez your wrong.

http://iphone.cbsnews.com/site?sid=cbsnews_ip&pid=sections.detail&storyId=6530758&index=1

Where exactly are all those who were for offshore drilling? You know, all those who moronically chanted "DRILL BABY DRILL"?

Where's all that outrage now?

Where are all the chanting teabaggers now?

Especially with all those tax dollars we'll be using to clean this mess? Don't really think BP is going to pay do you? They're not paying those helping to clean up right now. Then again they are paying millions on their image.

So wrong, so often, so predictable.
I am still for off shore drilling, from what little news is getting out of the BP news blackout This shouldn't have happened.
So as far as I am concerned

Drill
Baby
Drill.

[KI4NGN]

With threats and the promise of arrest by national guard personnel.

Excuse me?



Originally Posted by AF6LJ
There have been leaks from current and former BP employees that suggest BP is lying.
The fact that BP has repeatably revised the flow rates and has not allowed people to photograph beaches is enough evidence to BP lying.

Don't use Google or Yahoo to look for BP information BP has bought search terms that allows them to place a near news blackout over what is going on.

Use Startpage www.startpage.com/ or another search engine. There are plenty of foreign articles to be had that will fill you in on what is going on.

You said that BP has not allowed people to photograph beaches. BP does not control the National Guard nor the state government, nor has anyone that I've read about reported the National Guard disallowing photos. Do you have a link to even this claim of threats?

Also, I have seen many photos and videos from all over the gulf area showing the oil, further refuting your claim.

Sue, you're entrenched in your conspiracy bunker and just can't fathom that some things are what they appear to be (or close to it), are covinced that there must be some sort of cover-up at its worst.

[KI4NGN]

Maybe hydraulics will not work at 5000 feet ( as I don't know - but oil is oil just keep the bubbles out of the hydraulics and keep it warm), but some type of other very long leverage mechanical device with a very long lever to a big screw thread device could be designed to do the same thing as the hydraulics as shown in the video given at www.regentools.com (http://www.regentools.com).

I have no doubt that something could be designed and built, including enabling it to operate remotely a mile underwater. How long do you think to would take to do this and get it deployed?

The point is that there are many thousands of suggestions being made, most are not workable in this situation, and experts are working on this problem despite what many seem to believe.

First things to try are those solutions that are readily available. It takes time just to figure which have a chance of working, and as is obvious, there is no certain solution.

The problem is that any solution to this unique situation is going to take time (very unfortunate, but true), and everyone wants it stopped now.

[KI4NGN]

So it's working or it's not. Title sez it is. BP sez your wrong.

http://iphone.cbsnews.com/site?sid=cbsnews_ip&pid=sections.detail&storyId=6530758&index=1

Where exactly are all those who were for offshore drilling? You know, all those who moronically chanted "DRILL BABY DRILL"?

Where's all that outrage now?

Where are all the chanting teabaggers now?

Especially with all those tax dollars we'll be using to clean this mess? Don't really think BP is going to pay do you? They're not paying those helping to clean up right now. Then again they are paying millions on their image.

So wrong, so often, so predictable.

Please provide a link that supports this.

[KI4NGN]

I am still for off shore drilling, from what little news is getting out of the BP news blackout This shouldn't have happened.
So as far as I am concerned

Drill
Baby
Drill.

It's called an accident.

[N2NH]

Please provide a link that supports this.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2010/0125/Alaska-beaches-still-have-oil-from-1989-spill

http://www.bradenton.com/2010/06/15/2361648/attorney-cautions-fishing-guides.html




Don't even have to. It's on the news every day. You can't get away from it. Coast guards out there- you don' t think that is already costing Tax money do you? BP is not paying the local businesses for their losses and fishermen but they are spending millions on those ads assuring us they are doing all thrANC an. Beaches are relatively easy to clean yet there is still oil to this day oil under the sand where the Exxon Valdez dumped. It will not be any different here. In a recent news story, a reprorter took a spoon and had no trouble finding Oil on those Alaskan beaches even after decades.

As far as the bayou and swamps? Most estimates say it will take 300 years to clean. And that there's little we can do.

This morning the news has shown that it Is in the Gulf Stream. It now is merely a matter of time before it reaves the Atlantic and a current that goes around the world.

[W4PG]

This morning the news has shown that it Is in the Gulf Stream. It now is merely a matter of time before it reaves the Atlantic and a current that goes around the world.

It would be fitting if oil washes ashore in Great Britain!! :eek:

[N2RJ]

Well Obama and the CEO of BP are saying that taxpayers aren't going to pay a dime for the cleanup efforts.

So are you calling both of them liars?

[KI4NGN]

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2010/0125/Alaska-beaches-still-have-oil-from-1989-spill

http://www.bradenton.com/2010/06/15/2361648/attorney-cautions-fishing-guides.html




Don't even have to. It's on the news every day. You can't get away from it. Coast guards out there- you don' t think that is already costing Tax money do you? BP is not paying the local businesses for their losses and fishermen but they are spending millions on those ads assuring us they are doing all thrANC an. Beaches are relatively easy to clean yet there is still oil to this day oil under the sand where the Exxon Valdez dumped. It will not be any different here. In a recent news story, a reprorter took a spoon and had no trouble finding Oil on those Alaskan beaches even after decades.

As far as the bayou and swamps? Most estimates say it will take 300 years to clean. And that there's little we can do.

This morning the news has shown that it Is in the Gulf Stream. It now is merely a matter of time before it reaves the Atlantic and a current that goes around the world.

Nothing in either article says that BP will not be covering costs, and the first article says nothing relating to who pays for anything, just supports the fact that clean-up can and will be difficult.

Again...anything to substantiate your claim that BP is not going to cover costs????

[N2NH]

It would be fitting if oil washes ashore in Great Britain!! :eek:


My thoughts exactly Doc. Couldn't agree more.

Firemen don't go into a fire wearing a t-shirt. If a company doesn't take proper precautions this is the result. Worshipping the profit margin is penny wise pound foolish.

[AG3Y]

Like calling heads of state "Liers" has never been done before! Careful RJ, this could get "Political" very quickly!

My biggest issue is that they should have had the equipment etc. to tackle a problem like this BEFORE they started drilling deep wells. But that would cost MONEY, now, wouldn't it ? ? ?

I wonder HOW MUCH MONEY, THIS is going to cost? And WHO is going to pay for it?

[KD7SIZ]

Please, show me where it states than any of these tools will work a mile underwater.

Some of you just don't seem to get it: the basic problem is that this leaking pipe is under 5,000+ feet of water, and this severely limits any approaches to shutting it down.

It's not the size of the pipe that's the problem, but where it's located.

I don't know of an expert to even ask about this 5000+ feet of water and hydraulic actuator question. But here is my newest suggestion of how to make these hydraulic actuators work as desired at 5000+ feet of water.

My solution is first to use sea water as the actuator fluid and not use hydraulic oil at all. So if the hydraulics system leaks then there is no expense or trouble in replacing the hydraulics system internal liquid with just more seawater, as seawater is abundantly available. If the hydraulic actuators are too tight at 5000+ feet, then loosen up the hydraulic seals, and then just keep pumping more seawater into the system. If seawater will cause the hydraulic's insides to rust, then don't worry about it as this whole hydraulic's system only needs to hold this thing in place for a just few months and then it all can be thrown away, when the relief drilling wells are completed.

[KA9MOT]

I don't know of an expert to even ask about this 5000+ feet of water and hydraulic actuator question. But here is my newest suggestion of how to make these hydraulic actuators work as desired at 5000+ feet of water.

My solution is first to use sea water as the actuator fluid and not use hydraulic oil at all. So if the hydraulics system leaks then there is no expense or trouble in replacing the hydraulics system internal liquid with just more seawater, as seawater is abundantly available. If the hydraulic actuators are too tight at 5000+ feet, then loosen up the hydraulic seals, and then just keep pumping more seawater into the system. If seawater will cause the hydraulic's insides to rust, then don't worry about it as this whole hydraulic's system only needs to hold this thing in place for a just few months and then it all can be thrown away, when the relief drilling wells are completed.

Rust would insure a more permanent seal. Sea Water would be perfect. We all know liquids don't compress.

[KI4NGN]

I don't know of an expert to even ask about this 5000+ feet of water and hydraulic actuator question. But here is my newest suggestion of how to make these hydraulic actuators work as desired at 5000+ feet of water.

My solution is first to use sea water as the actuator fluid and not use hydraulic oil at all. So if the hydraulics system leaks then there is no expense or trouble in replacing the hydraulics system internal liquid with just more seawater, as seawater is abundantly available. If the hydraulic actuators are too tight at 5000+ feet, then loosen up the hydraulic seals, and then just keep pumping more seawater into the system. If seawater will cause the hydraulic's insides to rust, then don't worry about it as this whole hydraulic's system only needs to hold this thing in place for a just few months and then it all can be thrown away, when the relief drilling wells are completed.

It's not the loss of the fluid, but the loss of the pressure. It's not enough to replace what's being lost, but maintaining the working pressure, and the more you increase the pressure to maintain it (because of the leak), the more you lose in the leak.

A leaking hydraulic system is useless.

There are reasons why water is not used in hydraulic systems. Viscosity is one: the thinner the liquid, the more difficult to maintain a seal. Working temperature is another. The higher the pressure the fluid is put under, the higher its temperature is raised. A leak from a hydraulic system in which the water is above its boiling point would be a catastrophe.

[KI4NGN]

My thoughts exactly Doc. Couldn't agree more.

Firemen don't go into a fire wearing a t-shirt. If a company doesn't take proper precautions this is the result. Worshipping the profit margin is penny wise pound foolish.

Yea, it was pretty neglient of them to not plan for their rig exploding, and then sinking down 1 mile, right on top of the well.

It's called an accident, and if anyone tells you that they have planned for anything that can happen, then that person is a fool or a liar.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

[KA9MOT]

Was it really an accident?

From Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: ac·ci·dent
Pronunciation: \ˈak-sə-dənt, -ˌdent; ˈaks-dənt\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin accident-, accidens nonessential quality, chance, from present participle of accidere to happen, from ad- + cadere to fall — more at chance
Date: 14th century
1 a : an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance b : lack of intention or necessity : chance <met by accident rather than by design>



There is some evidence that BP was warned there was a problem and they chose to ignore these warnings.

I'm not buying the accident part. The explosion was a direct result of cost cutting and a lack of maintenance.

[KD7SIZ]

Rust would insure a more permanent seal. Sea Water would be perfect. We all know liquids don't compress.

If such a pipe squeeze device is used, then it should be constructed with some type of fail safe ratcheting device so that as soon as the pipe is squeezed to become closed then the hydraulics would not be needed again at that pipe location and the pipe would become automatically locked into a closed position that would stay closed without any more hydraulics action.

If BP would say that it is just too cold to use this pipe squeeze device, then electric heaters could be placed inside and outside and the whole thing wrapped up inside of insulation with all the lights and cameras placed inside of the insulation.

[KS4VT]

Was it really an accident?

From Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: ac·ci·dent
Pronunciation: \ˈak-sə-dənt, -ˌdent; ˈaks-dənt\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin accident-, accidens nonessential quality, chance, from present participle of accidere to happen, from ad- + cadere to fall — more at chance
Date: 14th century
1 a : an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance b : lack of intention or necessity : chance <met by accident rather than by design>

There is some evidence that BP was warned there was a problem and they chose to ignore these warnings.

I'm not buying the accident part. The explosion was a direct result of cost cutting and a lack of maintenance.

That is like a vehicle crash. 99.5% of the time someone is at fault and it is only an accident that they weren't paying attention. That is why the State of Florida changed the name of the "accident report" to a "crash report" many years ago as a majority of the time some gets cited for the crash.

[KS4VT]

If such a pipe squeeze device is used, then it should be constructed with some type of fail safe ratcheting device so that as soon as the pipe is squeezed to become closed then the hydraulics would not be needed again at that pipe location and the pipe would become automatically locked into a closed position that would stay closed without any more hydraulics action.

If BP would say that it is just too cold to use this pipe squeeze device, then electric heaters could be placed inside and outside and the whole thing wrapped up inside of insulation with all the lights and cameras placed inside of the insulation.

Sounds like something that NASA can design.

[KI4NGN]

That is like a vehicle crash. 99.5% of the time someone is at fault and it is only an accident that they weren't paying attention. That is why the State of Florida changed the name of the "accident report" to a "crash report" many years ago as a majority of the time some gets cited for the crash.

Calling something an accident does not mean that there is no fault.

Negligence may cause the unforeseen and unplanned, meaning that there is blame to be placed, but it is still an accident. BP certainly did not want, foresee, or plan for this to happen: it was an accident.

[KI4NGN]

Sounds like something that NASA can design.

Sure, and do you know how they would do it? They'd be calling in the deep water, high pressure experts. Know who most of them work for? The oil companies!

NASA has thousands on their staff who are experts as designing and manufacturing equipment that operates at up to 15 PSI less than the pressure found on the surface of our planet.

It's a far greater challenge to design and manufacture machinery that can operate under thousands of PSI, and that's something that is not NASA's expertise.

[AF6LJ]

Like calling heads of state "Liers" has never been done before! Careful RJ, this could get "Political" very quickly!

My biggest issue is that they should have had the equipment etc. to tackle a problem like this BEFORE they started drilling deep wells. But that would cost MONEY, now, wouldn't it ? ? ?

I wonder HOW MUCH MONEY, THIS is going to cost? And WHO is going to pay for it?


playing catch up.........


The biggest problem is the existing information blackout. Every week the estimated amount of oil escaping the well doubles.

as to who is going to pay for this act, I think we already know who is going to pay as soon as BP goes bankrupt.

Seen the value of their stock lately?

[AF6LJ]

Well Obama and the CEO of BP are saying that taxpayers aren't going to pay a dime for the cleanup efforts.

So are you calling both of them liars?

And you believe that?
I don't not for a nanosecond.

Many of the people living in the surrounding coastal communities will pay with their health and their lives.

[KI4NGN]

playing catch up.........


The biggest problem is the existing information blackout. Every week the estimated amount of oil escaping the well doubles.

as to who is going to pay for this act, I think we already know who is going to pay as soon as BP goes bankrupt.

Seen the value of their stock lately?

How is there an information blackout if each week the estimate doubles? Isn't that information? Just what is it that you suspect is being withheld by this conspiracy? Do you want a news release everyday that says there's no news, nothing has changed since yesterday?

News organizations want something "new" to report everday, some new tidbit, some new revelation, some new blame, some new cost...something, anything. What happens if there just isn't anything new to report? Well, it must be an information blackout! Nothing new to report, let's speculate, and that's all that anyone is doing.

I'm not an apologist for BP, and I certainly don't own any stock. Am I surprised that BP may try to make it appear not to be as bad as it is? No way(!)....what company wouldn't?? If you were responsible for some horrible traffic accident, would you go out of your way to emphasize how horrible it was, emphasize your blame for it? That's not reality, but it's certainly fodder for cover-up conspiracies.

How can anyone know the cost of a accident, who's going to be paid and how much, the cost for cleaning it up, while it's happening?

The fact is that it is what it is, and the cost will not be known, who's going to be paid, how much, and by whom, until the problem is resolved, because it can't be known until then.

[KI4NGN]

And you believe that?
I don't not for a nanosecond.

Many of the people living in the surrounding coastal communities will pay with their health and their lives.

Why don't you believe it other than your hatred for the government?

Exxon paid many billions of dollars in restitution, fines, costs, for the Valdez spill. Why are you so certain that BP won't?

[AF6LJ]

Why don't you believe it other than your hatred for the government?

Exxon paid many billions of dollars in restitution, fines, costs, for the Valdez spill. Why are you so certain that BP won't?

It's more than a couple of billion dollar clean up job.

There is a six month ban on oil drilling in the Gulf ordered by you know who....

BP's stock is lost much of it's value.

There are more reasons but these are reason enough.

Regardless of what "I", or what you think is my opinion of the government, who do you think is going to pay for it if BP threatens BK?

Really.....

[AF6LJ]

How is there an information blackout if each week the estimate doubles? Isn't that information? Just what is it that you suspect is being withheld by this conspiracy? Do you want a news release everyday that says there's no news, nothing has changed since yesterday?

I want reporters on the ground in the aria, on the beaches and pictures of the actual damage, not BP propaganda.

The fact there is only one source of "news" is suspect.


News organizations want something "new" to report everday, some new tidbit, some new revelation, some new blame, some new cost...something, anything. What happens if there just isn't anything new to report? Well, it must be an information blackout! Nothing new to report, let's speculate, and that's all that anyone is doing.

There hasn't been word one on how this failure actually happened


I'm not an apologist for BP, and I certainly don't own any stock. Am I surprised that BP may try to make it appear not to be as bad as it is? No way(!)....what company wouldn't?? If you were responsible for some horrible traffic accident, would you go out of your way to emphasize how horrible it was, emphasize your blame for it? That's not reality, but it's certainly fodder for cover-up conspiracies.

I would keep my mouth shut and not do any more damage to my credibility. Besides anything I say can and would most likely be used against me in court.


How can anyone know the cost of a accident, who's going to be paid and how much, the cost for cleaning it up, while it's happening?

The fact is that it is what it is, and the cost will not be known, who's going to be paid, how much, and by whom, until the problem is resolved, because it can't be known until then.

Nature will clean up the oil in a relatively short time.
The oil is the least of the problems, there are toxic chemicals that come out of the ground besides oil and natural gas. This is going to be the cost BP cannot cover and the loss of livelihood many will have to endure.

I still want to know what caused it.

[KI4NGN]

It's more than a couple of billion dollar clean up job.

There is a six month ban on oil drilling in the Gulf ordered by you know who....

BP's stock is lost much of it's value.

There are more reasons but these are reason enough.

Regardless of what "I", or what you think is my opinion of the government, who do you think is going to pay for it if BP threatens BK?

Really.....

You didn't answer the question: why are you so sure that BP is not going to pay for all of this? You keep saying it, and all I'm requesting is what you base this opinion upon?

[KI4NGN]

I want reporters on the ground in the aria, on the beaches and pictures of the actual damage, not BP propaganda.

The fact there is only one source of "news" is suspect.

I'm not sure where you get your news from, but every day I see pictures from all over the gulf showing the oil that has washed up.

Are you really trying to say that you believe that everything that all of the news media provides on a daily basis, the oil path, the wash up, is all provided by BP??? Are you serious? What am I saying: you also said that BP was preventing anyone from taking coastal pictures. Sue, BP does not control the media. BP does not command the National Guard. BP is not some secret controller of state governments.




There hasn't been word one on how this failure actually happened

What part of it's still being investigated don't you understand?


I would keep my mouth shut and not do any more damage to my credibility. Besides anything I say can and would most likely be used against me in court.

So that's what you would do, but if BP does anything like that, then it's a cover-up? It's OK for you but not for anyone else?



Nature will clean up the oil in a relatively short time.
The oil is the least of the problems, there are toxic chemicals that come out of the ground besides oil and natural gas. This is going to be the cost BP cannot cover and the loss of livelihood many will have to endure.


Those toxic chemicals will also disperse.

Why don't you understand that much of the cost that BP will have to pay for IS the lost livelihoods? What other significant costs are there besides the clean-up?



I still want to know what caused it.

There's only but so much forensic investigators can look at, and like it or not, that takes time. Hell, many aircraft crashes take months for the cause to be determined, and that's with recovered black boxes and the wreckage on the ground. This was a major accident with most all of the evidence a mile underwater!

[KA9MOT]

BP is a corporation and even huge corporations do not have bottomless coffers. BP will have to pay only a small portion of the over-all cost because it will cost billions more then what BP has. BP will file bankruptcy and the American Taxpayer will be forced, once again, to foot the bill.

Unless it gets into the Gulf Stream (something I believe it will do). Then it becomes a Global Event and all Nations will have to Pony Up. Of course we all know that should this go Global, the US will Pony Up the largest amount.

[KI4NGN]

BP is a corporation and even huge corporations due not have bottomless coffers. BP will have to pay only a small portion of the over-all cost because it will cost billions more then what BP has. BP will file bankruptcy and the American Taxpayer will be forced, once again, to foot the bill.

How do you know what the cost is going to be?

It's not a matter of having bottomless coffers, but of having steady income, which it certainly has. It may well be that the vast majority of its profits go into a repayment fund for years, but it's certanly going to continue to operate as long as there's a demand for oil.

It doesn't need to have the money all at once, pay it all at once. I have no doubt that they'll be paying for it for years....but they will pay for it because they'll continue to obtain and sell one of the world's most important commodities. Closing the doors won't stop that because all that's required for the liquidation is that a condition of purchasing the assets be that "X" percentage of the profits go into the repayment fund.





Unless it gets into the Gulf Stream (something I believe it will do). Then it becomes a Global Event and all Nations will have to Pony Up. Of course we all know that should this go Global, the US will Pony Up the largest amount.

[KA9MOT]

How do you know what the cost is going to be?

It is pretty obvious isn't it? The clean-up costs for the Exxon Valdez was 3.8 BILLION Dollars in 1989 money. How much larger then that disaster is this one currently? How much worse is it going to be?


It's not a matter of having bottomless coffers, but of having steady income, which it certainly has. It may well be that the vast majority of its profits go into a repayment fund for years, but it's certanly going to continue to operate as long as there's a demand for oil.

This company has lost half of it's value as of today. That can change in either direction, I'm betting any change will not be for the better anytime soon. A company has to have Capital to Operate (Pay it's bills). When the stock dries up they lose Capital.

They can leverage what they have rights too, just like any other company.


It doesn't need to have the money all at once, pay it all at once. I have no doubt that they'll be paying for it for years....but they will pay for it because they'll continue to obtain and sell one of the world's most important commodities. Closing the doors won't stop that because all that's required for the liquidation is that a condition of purchasing the assets be that "X" percentage of the profits go into the repayment fund.

Really? Then who pays? Will all the folks who need to feed the family wait to be paid? No....They won't and they shouldn't have too. The American Taxpayer will Pay, and we will pay through the teeth. I can see it now...Obama decides to bail-out BP with the provision that the US Gov'ment owns a controlling interest like they did GM. That will go over like a lead balloon.

[K0RGR]

The news I'm seeing is pretty uniformly negative. The majority opinion in the region seems to be that it's all Obama's fault, for not foreseeing this problem, and instantly mobilizing tens of thousands of vessels to clean up the oil back when the explosion first happened. Politicians in the area are screaming that there aren't enough boats out there to clean up the oil. Of course, somebody would have to pay for those boats, and they would have had to have been built a long, long time ago. And maybe they would have been, but those same politicians wanted the tax revenues from the oil wells. Oh well... drill there, drill now!

The real cause? Cheap oil is mostly gone. To get more oil, we have to drill in places we probably shouldn't be drilling, like at ocean depths where we don't have the technology to deal with a blowout. Of course, the oil companies have assured us again, and again, and again that they have the technology and resources to handle something like this. And government panels loaded with 'Brownies' and 'Homers' have reviewed their testimony and judged it good.

Well, Obama fired some of the Brownies when he took office, and we're told he has now fired the rest of them and most of the Homers, too. But it was too little, too late.

I also hope that Obama has the sense to go after BP in a way that does not drive it into bankruptcy. Instead, we need to tap their income for a long time to make up for this. They should not escape for free, either, but we don't have a 'corporate death penalty', though maybe we should. My anger at BP is more over their lack of judgement. It's apparent that they did not follow industry standards in the way they drilled this well, and for that act of carelessness, they will pay.

BP's excuse is that the Brownies and Homers gave them permission. That is, the people BP paid to get appointed approved everything. It's sort of like a kid killing his parents, and then pleading for mercy because he's an orphan.

It is also my hope that the President's pledge to rebuild the Gulf region is real.
So many politicians have promised so much and delivered so little since Katrina. We pour money into the region by the kiloton, and it does nothing.
And in spite of countless billions of dollars in direct aid, the people down there continue to complain about the evil socialistic government. They appear to want more oil drilling, not less. Perhaps they should learn to live with tar balls.

[KA9MOT]

I lived in Gulfport, MS in 1979 and 1980. I think your opinion of the people is off. I think it is based on what you see on TV.

The people I once knew were fiercely independent and hard working. Very hard working. I have allot of admiration for those folks.

I knew a family that was dirt poor. The father worked odd jobs and charged folks what they thought the job was worth. The rest of the family would buy 1 or 2 bags of Oysters at whatever the market price was for the day (usually $8 -$12 for a 50 pound burlap bag) and they'd shuck those oysters into Gallon Jars and sell them by the gallon to local restaurants. They never took a dime of welfare....to proud for that. These were damn fine people and I was better off for knowing them. I shucked allot of Oysters too!

When my Girlfriend and I split up, those folks opened up their home to me, and made me feel like family. I stayed with them for 2 weeks until I found another place. At the time they helped me, I was a stranger.

[KI4NGN]

It is pretty obvious isn't it? The clean-up costs for the Exxon Valdez was 3.8 BILLION Dollars in 1989 money. How much larger then that disaster is this one currently? How much worse is it going to be?

Yes, the cost in 1989 was in 1989 dollars, and was paid with dollars from around that time.

This accident's cost will be set in 2010 dollars, and paid in 2010 dollars.

What did a gallon of gas cost then, and what does it cost now?

That's an irrelevant comment.

How much larger a disaster will this one be? I don't know, do you? So far not even a fraction of the oil that hit the Alaskan shores from Valdez has been seen on the Gulf shores, and there is no certainty that it will be.

Do you know how much of it will stay at sea, eventually just to be dispersed by natural actions?





This company has lost half of it's value as of today. That can change in either direction, I'm betting any change will not be for the better anytime soon. A company has to have Capital to Operate (Pay it's bills). When the stock dries up they lose Capital.

A company has to have capital to grow, not to sustain profitable operations, which by definition means that revenues meet or exceed expenses. Any company that requires a constant influx of new capital (which is not the same as revenue) to stay in business is a business operating at a loss. BP is far from a company operating at a loss!



They can leverage what they have rights too, just like any other company.



Really? Then who pays? Will all the folks who need to feed the family wait to be paid? No....They won't and they shouldn't have too. The American Taxpayer will Pay, and we will pay through the teeth. I can see it now...Obama decides to bail-out BP with the provision that the US Gov'ment owns a controlling interest like they did GM. That will go over like a lead balloon.

What people shouldn't have to wait for and what they may have to wait for are two different things. I'm very sorry for anyone who may suffer economically for this, but why do you believe that the taxpayer should foot the bill just so that they don't have to wait?

The government saved GM because the company couldn't sell enough of it's cars to stay in business, resulting in expenses exceeding revenues. GM did not manufacture and sell a commodity that is in high, world-wide demand. There's no comparison.

[KA9MOT]

Yes, the cost in 1989 was in 1989 dollars, and was paid with dollars from around that time.

This accident's cost will be set in 2010 dollars, and paid in 2010 dollars.

What did a gallon of gas cost then, and what does it cost now?

That's an irrelevant comment.

The comment is relevant because initially I said the cleanup would cost billions. Your response to that was, "How do you know that?". I quoted your response so you would know what I was responding too. Since you missed it, Here it is again.

We know the cost will be in the Billions because the Exxon Valdez cleanup costs were $3.8 Billion in 1989 dollars. This spill is much worse than that one was already. How much larger it gets remains to be seen.






I'm very sorry for anyone who may suffer economically for this, but why do you believe that the taxpayer should foot the bill just so that they don't have to wait?

I'm not saying Taxpayers should.....I am saying Taxpayers will be forced to. Just like we will be forced to pay for the claeanup.

[KI4NGN]

The comment is relevant because initially I said the cleanup would cost billions. Your response to that was, "How do you know that?". I quoted your response so you would know what I was responding too. Since you missed it, Here it is again.


No, what you said was:



Originally Posted by KA9MOT
BP is a corporation and even huge corporations due not have bottomless coffers. BP will have to pay only a small portion of the over-all cost because it will cost billions more then what BP has. BP will file bankruptcy and the American Taxpayer will be forced, once again, to foot the bill.
We know the cost will be in the Billions because the Exxon Valdez cleanup costs were $3.8 Billion in 1989 dollars. This spill is much worse than that one was already. How much larger it gets remains to be seen.


to which I asked....How do you know??

BP has already set aside $20 billion towards all of this, which, BTW, they easily pull in in ONE year.

BTW, the Valdex spill was close to shore, and a significant percentage of the oil made it to shore. No one has estimated how much of this Gulf spill is going to make it to shore anywhere. It may turn out to be much worse, from that perspective, than the Valdez spill, and it may not hold a candle to that spill. No one knows yet, and that will figure significantly into the cost of clean-up.



I'm not saying Taxpayers should.....I am saying Taxpayers will be forced to. Just like we will be forced to pay for the claeanup.

You're side-stepping.

Who is going to force the tax-payers to pay for this, and why?

[KD7SIZ]

Regarding the pipe squeeze closing mechanism idea mentioned in earlier threads of this post, a ratching close and hold device might probably better be powered ( to close the pipe ) with small explosive charges to move the pipe closed just a litle bit at a time with each explosive charge, and not use hydraulic actuators at all.

[AF6LJ]

I'm not sure where you get your news from, but every day I see pictures from all over the gulf showing the oil that has washed up.

I am sure you do, independent reporters are not allowed to be in certain arias. That is not acceptable since we are talking about public lands.



Are you really trying to say that you believe that everything that all of the news media provides on a daily basis, the oil path, the wash up, is all provided by BP??? Are you serious? What am I saying: you also said that BP was preventing anyone from taking coastal pictures. Sue, BP does not control the media. BP does not command the National Guard. BP is not some secret controller of state governments.

Nothing secret, BP is controlling the flow of news, I've already posted links to articles where BP has purchased key word strings from Google and Yahoo.
That is enough for me to confirm there is a news blackout, or at the very least controlled access to news regarding the oil spill. The media is easily controllable in this country when you look at who owns the major media outlets. What we have for media in terms of freedom is close to what the Russians had in the seventies. the news all comes from a couple of sources.

Don't believe me, go look for yourself and find out who owns the half dozen major news outlets in this country.




Why don't you understand that much of the cost that BP will have to pay for IS the lost livelihoods? What other significant costs are there besides the clean-up?


How much is "much"
How much do you really think BP is going to be paying for when they go BK or are bought out by another company?
You can't possibly think the American Tax Payers are going to get off without paying for the majority of this.

Do you really think BP is going to pay for all of the costs, cleanup, loss of livelihood, loss of life, and loss of property? I really don't think so, I was born in the morning but it was NOT Yesterday Morning.

I know better, what about the the rest of the people commenting in this thread, Do You Know Better than to believe the BS from BP and the Man they contributed to becoming President.
The street smart people know better...........



There's only but so much forensic investigators can look at, and like it or not, that takes time. Hell, many aircraft crashes take months for the cause to be determined, and that's with recovered black boxes and the wreckage on the ground. This was a major accident with most all of the evidence a mile underwater!
It usually doesn't take that long, once all the peaces are are at hand.

There is more than enough reason to be skeptical, this is not a plane crash. This is not an auto accident, or on the extreme side the Space Shuttle blowing up.

More to follow.

[KW4MW]

When Katrina hit New Orleans and the surrounding coastal regions every one was (or should have been) completely aware of a major disaster in the making. Indeed NOAA and the National Hurricane Center – both federal agencies BTW - predicted the path, the time and even the magnitude of destruction of hurricane Katrina. As I recall, the state of Louisiana waited until peril was looming before asking for federal aid, at which point it was too late to get first responders safely in before the storm reached landfall. Also New Orleans failed to mobilize their transportation options and evacuate low lying regions before the storm struck. The end result was a case of too little, too late when federal help finally arrived in the storms aftermath. The feds followed that up with a lack of leadership, preparation and coordinated planning which made them look about as organized as a soup sandwich.

Compare that with the current oil leak in the gulf. I think that the president and his staff (along with the rest of us) trusted BP when they stated that they would have the well plugged in a few days and that there was no need to panic.

However after a week or so the feds should have realized that BP wasn’t delivering as promised and that a war room scenario should have been establish. At least this time, the states tried to proceed with defensive tactics only to be stymied by Fed regulations.

Selected experts, that is to say people with real world experience who have gotten their hands dirty in the field instead of fawning egotistic chrome domed Ivy League theorists, should have been brought in, given all the facts and given full authority to proceed in a deliberate and professional manner to (a) contain and clean up the oil slicks and (b) provide advice and assistance to stem the flow of oil. Instead we see the feds actually being counter productive with their use of EPA and Coast Guard regulations and the Army Corps of Engineers mentality.

So history repeats itself again - The end result has become several cases of too little, too late. A lack of leadership, preparation and coordinated planning are again making the Feds look about as organized as that proverbial soup sandwich.

[KA9MOT]

The people of New Orleans knew there was a risk for decades. I remember when I lived down there, every-time there was talk of a storm there was also talk of New Orleans being beneath sea level....Hell, I believe there was a Country song about it.

They, city officials, residents, gambled.........and the gamble didn't pay off.

[KD7SIZ]

The 24 inch squeeze pipe video that showed this 24 inch pipe being pinched closed is no longer being shown at the web page address as given in prior threads of this post at http://www.regentools.com since about wednesday 6-16-2010.

But, before this 24 inch squeeze pipe video had been discontinued by Regentools, someone else had made a good copy of this video and has placed this video copy on youtube with the youtube video title of "B.P. oil leak fix " at the youtube web address as follows:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpBKszbZqPo