Posted on 05/30/2010 11:06:12 AM PDT by Nachum
I can assure you that BP’s costs including the loss of the rig, hundreds of lawsuits, a PR disaster and the years of cleanup efforts will not stop at $75 million. Believe me, it is in BP’s interest to stop this leak ASAP, and every day that goes by is another financial and image disaster. There is no amount of Corexit that could gain them a profit from this mess. What is in jeopardy for them is the prospect of ever again getting the rights to drill in deep water. This is uncharted territory; no one really knew what they would do if there was a big problem a mile underwater. There WAS a safety device, a blowout preventer, but it didn’t work. I don’t think anyone had a plan for anything beyond that, so now all the Rube Goldberg, half-assed ideas are being tried. Ultimately, they may have to think of trying some sort of explosion down there if none of the well tampon schemes work.
That makes no sense to me. How the heck can you control explosives without making the problem worse?
If capping/siphoning doesn't work they will try new wells to relieve the pressure elsewhere. Unfortunately, that option will take months to implement.
For one thing, an explosion at the wellhead would be “tamped” by a mile of seawater. That means all of the explosive force would be applied to the sea bed itself. They would have to ensure that a blast doesn’t just fracture the leak area and cause a bigger leak; it would have to be a decisive explosion. I know that many are saying a nuke would be a terrible idea, but it would in fact melt the silt and sand in the area of the leak into glass and compact the sea bed to the point that a continuing leak is unlikely. Any residual radioactive “fallout” would be heavy and would join the silt on the bottom, a mile underwater. I can’t imagine it would have any worse environmental effects than to let this gusher go on.
The 75M is the liability to the public. It does not include the rig, loss of material, oil, and other operations losses. It will easily exceed $5B.
I’ve seen “Corexit” discussed on Fox News channel’s coverage of the oil spill and I think on Fox Business news also.
IIRC, small amounts are either already being used or were tried.
I also don't read the conspiracy theories that pose we didn't land on the moon.
I prefer to dialog with rational people. Life is crazy enough without making up whackjob theories.
I have DVDs FULL of nuke blasts. When I get the urge, I just pop it in the player. Simpler than urging the folks with the nukes to pop one off for me.
At least two relief wells are in process as we speak. It’s not an instant procedure, so those should be online sometime in July.
.
Well not THESE nuts.
.
I mean the nuts here not my ..... oh forget it!
Excuse me? You lump me with conspiracy theorists who say we didn’t land on the moon? Just shows what happens when you don’t bother to find facts.
My late husband was heavily involved in the aerospace industry from the beginning of the the moon shots to his death in 2000. Your behavior and suppositions reek of illiteracy and lack of incentive.
Keep your stupidity to yourself in the future. No one is impressed with your ignorance. Read a book some time. Something a little heavier and with more meat than “Dick and Jane.”
Not to mention referring to Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway as "Hathaway Berkshire."
Obviously some mighty fine research going into this investigation! < /sarcasm>
Liberals know how to nationalize industries - why not tell BP they’ve got 30 days - then the well becomes US property.
Grow up, learn to read, learn the art of common sense and go tell your mother she wants you. Or go play on the freeway.
Are you getting kickbacks from BP? Is that why you are defending them so?
Try acting your age instead of your IQ. The Shell game only has a different name than it did in the ‘70’s ~~ it’s called, “The BP oil leak game.”
Oh, I kinda like it, it has everyone in it, but the CIA.
Just an oversight, I am sure.
“Are you getting kickbacks from BP? Is that why you are defending them so?”
I get to the point where the wacky info I see here is too much.
Conservatives are normally good thinkers and don’t fall for the wacky stuff.
BP is doing very difficult work in a vital, dangerous industry.
Their critics are sounding like DU posters.
And no check from them to me; they haven’t offered.
Buit I would accept gasoline under $2.00.
You, sir or madam, need a little readjustment of your spine. It would seem your head is at the wrong end.
I grew up in oil country, and I know the danger that is inherent in all aspects of it. If you would read, research, study and question, you might not have such a narrow mind.
If you want oil at under $2.00 a gallon, I suggest you study about the North Slope, about shale oil exploration in the mountain west, and other areas that the liberals refuse to let us drill.
BP stands for British Petroleum, so how much incentive do you think they have for stopping a well that will damage the US? Shell oil is Dutch. Sinclair is American. Who do you buy your gasoline from?
... why not tell BP they’ve got 30 days - then the well becomes US property.
Why let BP off the hook? They should keep it and take care of the problem ... :-)
If the U.S. owns it, then the U.S. taxpayers get the bill for taking care of the problem.
“BP stands for British Petroleum, so how much incentive do you think they have for stopping a well that will damage the US?”
So far BP’s company value has dropped by a minimum of 30 billion dollars, that’s “billion”, with a B. And the longer this goes on the more it will drop. I’d say that’s pretty good incentive to stop the leak.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.