Fixing the Gulf oil spill problem

[mheslep]

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6593/648967

From what I read in this article, best case is to let all the oil bleed out, let the algae it eat, and deal with the massive dead zone.

All bleed out? Last I looked the Deepwater reservoirs likely contained contained a couple billion barrels of oil. Even that anonymous post at The Oil Drum doesn't suggest anything like leaving it be.

 

[baywax]

Kevin Costner proves his worth with regard to oil spill clean up technology...

BP bets on Kevin Costner's oil cleaning machine

Sat Jun 26, 1:48 PM
Brett Michael Dykes
Yahoo! News


It was treated as an oddball twist in the otherwise wrenching saga of the BP oil spill when Kevin Costner stepped forward to promote a device he said could work wonders in containing the spill's damage. But as Henry Fountain explains in the New York Times, the gadget in question - an oil-separating centrifuge - marks a major breakthrough in spill cleanup technology. And BP, after trial runs with the device, is ordering 32 more of the Costner-endorsed centrifuges to aid the Gulf cleanup.

The "Waterworld" actor has invested some $20 million and spent the past 15 years in developing the centrifuges. He helped found a manufacturing company, Ocean Therapy Solutions, to advance his brother's research in spill cleanup technology. In testimony before Congress this month, Costner walked through the device's operation - explaining how it spins oil-contaminated water at a rapid speed, so as to separate out the oil and capture it in a containment tank:

continued here... http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/yahoocanada/100626/canada/bp_bets_on_kevin_costner_s_oil_cleaning_machine

(you'd think they'd credit him with "Bull Durham" rather than "Waterworld" though)

 

[GijXiXj]

Why not burn the gunk under the sea ...

Why not burn the gunk under the sea ...
... at the point of emanation ... ?

Been a while since I visited physicsforums - hope my initial impression is wrong, and that the quality of posts hasn't generally gone down everywhere ...

Some crazy ideas posted here, or what?!?

So here's another one:

http://technicalimpulse.tech.officelive.com/Documents/02b_GOD_UnderseaFlaringDome_AltTechRespFm_100527.pdf"

except it's not that crazy.

Apoloogies if s.one else posted something similar - I admit I got so fed up with reading goofy posts, I haven't read the whole thread. ... May get round to it ... ?

All the
Dennis Revell

Pythagoras, he say: S = GijXiXj

 

[Topher925]

Why not burn the gunk under the sea ...
... at the point of emanation ... ?

You're not solving the problem, just making a different mess. Burning crude oil strait from the ground isn't like burning propane. You would be generating all kinds of bad stuff (H2S, CO2, CO, NO2, NO, etc) which would probably throw off the pH of the ocean among other things.

 

[GijXiXj]

You're not solving the problem, just making a different mess. Burning crude oil strait from the ground isn't like burning propane. You would be generating all kinds of bad stuff (H2S, CO2, CO, NO2, NO, etc) which would probably throw off the pH of the ocean among other things.

Didn't say it solved the problem - it vastly mitigates it, by about 100% if it can be made to work. Check out the http://technicalimpulse.tech.officelive.com/Documents/02b_GOD_UnderseaFlaringDome_AltTechRespFm_100527.pdf" and links therefrom. << comment deleted by Moderator >>

All of those combustion products you mention, whilst not good, are, oh, I dunno, about ... infinitely less bad ... than the unburnt poisonous gunk currently killing the Gulf of Mexico, and who knows what else? The Gulf Stream?

In any case, those products were precisely how most of the gunk was, and still is, destined to end up anyway. I guess you haven't noticed they're burning what little they can get to the surface?

Ask the Pelicans, bitterns, dolphins, and of lesser importance, the Gulf fishermen, how they'd have liked to have seen 100% mitigation from the get-go: not one drop of oil on a single beach or Pelican.

<< comment deleted by Moderator >>

All the

Dennis Revell

 

[RonL]

Didn't say it solved the problem - it vastly mitigates it, by about 100% if it can be made to work. Check out the http://technicalimpulse.tech.officelive.com/Documents/02b_GOD_UnderseaFlaringDome_AltTechRespFm_100527.pdf" and links therefrom. << comment deleted by Moderator >>

All of those combustion products you mention, whilst not good, are, oh, I dunno, about ... infinitely less bad ... than the unburnt poisonous gunk currently killing the Gulf of Mexico, and who knows what else? The Gulf Stream?

In any case, those products were precisely how most of the gunk was, and still is, destined to end up anyway. I guess you haven't noticed they're burning what little they can get to the surface?

Ask the Pelicans, bitterns, dolphins, and of lesser importance, the Gulf fishermen, how they'd have liked to have seen 100% mitigation from the get-go: not one drop of oil on a single beach or Pelican.

<< comment deleted by Moderator >>

All the

Dennis Revell

I'm a little reluctant to say anything based on how you responded to Topher925, I think your idea is interesting, igniting with an electric arc is no problem underwater, I also think there are other heat shielding options, so you would not need a firebrick liner.
I can't quite get a handle on size of a containment chamber needed or how to establish the initial firing, due to even a momentary closing of such a large volume of oil, gas, saltwater and other debris ejecting from the wellhead causing an imbalance and weight change of the entire structure.
I think heat would be absorbed by the cold water of the gulf, which would be good for your system. My thought of this based on volume of material combusted and BTU's transfered, is what would it do for the intensity of a hurricane that might come across the gulf at that point ?

Not sure how you think about my idea, but it establishes a control and collection posibility that generates a payback and at a price of less than 10 million dollars, the only real setback would be bad weather.
I think Topher925 has some very valid points.
If your design can have an exhaust collection of some type, I feel it might have possibilites along with possible energy production side effects. Such as recharge stations for electric transportation almost anywhere in any ocean.

RonL

 

[GijXiXj]

Re 1: Why not burn the gunk under the sea?

Ouch! Someone didn't like my last post - an annoyed reply to Topher925's unhelpful, innaccurate &, in my view, time and space wasting reply to mine. Sorry about that, but I'd already got a similarly innaccurate reply from an ego-head and know-it-all called Thom Hartmann in an entirely different scenario. Here's a less annoyed version:

You're not solving the problem, just making a different mess. Burning crude oil strait from the ground isn't like burning propane. You would be generating all kinds of bad stuff (H2S, CO2, CO, NO2, NO, etc) which would probably throw off the pH of the ocean among other things.

Didn't say it solved the problem - it vastly mitigates it, by about 100% if it can be made to work. Check out the http://technicalimpulse.tech.officelive.com/Documents/02b_GOD_UnderseaFlaringDome_AltTechRespFm_100527.pdf" and links therefrom. I'm pretty sure Topher didn't read them before making his? response.

All of those combustion products Topher mentions, whilst not good, are, oh, I dunno, about ... infinitely less bad ... than the unburnt poisonous gunk currently killing the Gulf of Mexico, and who knows what else? The Gulf Stream?

In any case, those products were precisely how most of the gunk was, and still is, destined to end up anyway. I guess Topher hasn't noticed that BP are burning what little they can get to the surface, others are using small boats corralling what they can find, booming it into sufficiently concentrated pools, and then throwing cans of primed diesel fuel at it?

Ask the Pelicans, bitterns, dolphins, the Gulf fishermen, Red Lobster ;-) , how they'd have liked to have seen 100% mitigation from the get-go: not one drop of oil on a single beach, oyster or Pelican.

... Patiently awaiting more constructive responses, including Physics debunking of the idea - this being a Physics forum, and all ...

For more background, see a http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@98.brZik8OWvaS@.77615155/0""[/I].

That thread does ask for a Physics reason(s) debunking - may be I should have started it here instead - this being a, if not "the", Physics forum, hmm. No idea why I didn't think of that at the start.

All the

Dennis Revell

 

[baywax]

Ouch! Someone didn't like my last post - an annoyed reply to Topher925's unhelpful, innaccurate &, in my view, time and space wasting reply to mine. Sorry about that, but I'd already got a similarly innaccurate reply from an ego-head and know-it-all called Thom Hartmann in an entirely different scenario. Here's a less annoyed version:



Didn't say it solved the problem - it vastly mitigates it, by about 100% if it can be made to work. Check out the http://technicalimpulse.tech.officelive.com/Documents/02b_GOD_UnderseaFlaringDome_AltTechRespFm_100527.pdf" and links therefrom. I'm pretty sure Topher didn't read them before making his? response.

All of those combustion products Topher mentions, whilst not good, are, oh, I dunno, about ... infinitely less bad ... than the unburnt poisonous gunk currently killing the Gulf of Mexico, and who knows what else? The Gulf Stream?

In any case, those products were precisely how most of the gunk was, and still is, destined to end up anyway. I guess Topher hasn't noticed that BP are burning what little they can get to the surface, others are using small boats corralling what they can find, booming it into sufficiently concentrated pools, and then throwing cans of primed diesel fuel at it?

Ask the Pelicans, bitterns, dolphins, the Gulf fishermen, Red Lobster ;-) , how they'd have liked to have seen 100% mitigation from the get-go: not one drop of oil on a single beach, oyster or Pelican.

... Patiently awaiting more constructive responses, including Physics debunking of the idea - this being a Physics forum, and all ...

For more background, see a http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@98.brZik8OWvaS@.77615155/0""[/I].

That thread does ask for a Physics reason(s) debunking - may be I should have started it here instead - this being a, if not "the", Physics forum, hmm. No idea why I didn't think of that at the start.

All the

Dennis Revell

I'd say you're on the money with this one. The only debunking left to do is to try the system out and let the cards fall where they may fall. Maybe petition people like Kevin Costner or Tyra Banks to finance the process... or even BP for that matter.

This would be a measure taken to stop the pollution of the Gulf waters while a relief well is drilled to stop the oil flow a mile down, right?

 

[RonL]

And what's this about air bubbles?

Just watched the evening news, the mention of using air bubbles is going to be tried as a method of moving oil to the surface. No details other than a cost of $700,000. dollars per month ??

 

[OmCheeto]

Just watched the evening news, the mention of using air bubbles is going to be tried as a method of moving oil to the surface. No details other than a cost of $700,000. dollars per month ??

I still like your fabric tube the best.

But...

This just in:

From: horizon.support
Subject: An Important Message from Horizon Support
Date: June 28, 2010 11:15:00 AM PDT


Dear Omcheeto,

Thank you for your submission to the Alternative Response Technology (ART) process for the Deepwater Horizon MC252 incident. Your submission has been reviewed for its technical merits.

It has been determined that your idea falls into one of the following ART categories: Already Considered/Planned, Not Feasible, or Not Possible, and therefore will not be advanced for further evaluation. To date, we have received over 80,000 submissions with each submission receiving individual consideration and priority based on merit and need.

BP and Horizon Deepwater Unified Command appreciate your contribution and interest in responding to this incident.


Thank you very much,
Horizon Response Team

 

[RonL]

I was flying back from Ky. last week and realized that the best engineers to design the tube I described, would be the ones that design for airdome sports stadiums. Close to or more than 100,000 people enclosed inside a fabric dome should demostrate the potential of the material.
I still think it is a good and low cost possibility, also I have figured out how to hold the ring in a controlled manor, while making it self center over the location, even after moving a considerable distance in any direction.

I did submit to BP and also found a contact well up the chain of command with FEMA.

It breaks my heart to see what is happening and to think August or beyond, what a mess.

RonL

 

[baywax]

I still like your fabric tube the best.

But...

This just in:

Nice try OmCheeto. You're an ARTzy guy/girl!

 

[Topher925]

Ouch! Someone didn't like my last post - an annoyed reply to Topher925's unhelpful, innaccurate &, in my view, time and space...

I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you're not only an expert in combustion and an ecologist, but a marine biologist as well. I did read your entire PDF, including this part:

Also mentioned is that whilst the combustion products are none too desirable, that they would be almost infinitely less damaging than the unburnt crud (sic). CO2 would be the largest undesirable combustion product, but that’s how most of the crud was destined to end up anyway. Although from a Climate Change perspective it is much longer lived than CH4, the latter does exhibit 22 times the Global Warming forcing that CO2 does. If, as may be the case, we are anywhere close to a Climate Change “tipping point”, it may be that it would be wisest to try to prevent/reduce the vast emissions of CH4 from the GOD, and live with the much less active CO2. The Pelicans, Bitterns, Dolphins … &c … would undoubtedly have preferred it this way ...

And while you go on and on about how it won't significantly affect global warming, that was clearly not my point. My point was referring to the local effects on ocean life and the very delicate ecosystem that the ocean possesses. Introducing several hundred tons of CO2 into the ocean in such a high concentration isn't going to make the pelicans, "bitterns", and dolphins happy. It will actually most likely kill them due to ocean acidification. A problem that is already becoming a serious environmental problem that will only be exacerbated by your "solution".

http://royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id=13314
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification#cite_note-raven05-8

 

[RonL]

I still like your fabric tube the best.

But...

This just in:

Thanks Om,
Glad you gave it a try.
I will likely get the same letter, unless our presentations are different enough based on numbers and description of design.
I mentioned the air bubble curtain and gave the PBS.org article about the whales as my source of thought inspiration. Don't know if a company or individual, presented what they are trying, I couldn't find the mention of what I saw on Diane Sawyer's segment of the evening news.

I told my wife I'll keep trying as long as anyone makes the mistake of listening
I'm thankful you like the basic idea, that has been a big boost for my morale.

It might be good that I try to make some good drawings, they will have to be hand renderings as I'm not skilled with any of the drawing programs.

I have also worked with the idea that this entire design can work in a completely submerged condition, 100 or 200 feet below the surface. I'm still trying to figure out the separation of the natural gas so that it does not react like your balloons.
Being below the surface would almost if not completely remove the effects of weather and surface conditions (maybe even a hurricane) Think of an air-dome stadium under water.

Radical disasters require radical thinking (right ?)

RonL

 

[OmCheeto]

Thanks Om,
Glad you gave it a try.
I will likely get the same letter, unless our presentations are different enough based on numbers and description of design.
I mentioned the air bubble curtain and gave the PBS.org article about the whales as my source of thought inspiration. Don't know if a company or individual, presented what they are trying, I couldn't find the mention of what I saw on Diane Sawyer's segment of the evening news.

I told my wife I'll keep trying as long as anyone makes the mistake of listening
I'm thankful you like the basic idea, that has been a big boost for my morale.

It might be good that I try to make some good drawings, they will have to be hand renderings as I'm not skilled with any of the drawing programs.

I have also worked with the idea that this entire design can work in a completely submerged condition, 100 or 200 feet below the surface. I'm still trying to figure out the separation of the natural gas so that it does not react like your balloons.
Being below the surface would almost if not completely remove the effects of weather and surface conditions (maybe even a hurricane) Think of an air-dome stadium under water.

Radical disasters require radical thinking (right ?)

RonL

Yes. This does require some radical thinking. With the knowledge of the volume of gas and oil coming out of the well, I've gone back to one of my old ideas.

But without knowing anything about the internal structure of the well head device, the following may not be feasible:

Successively insert a set of triangular flow restrictors, fashioned similarly to mountain climbing cams.

[PLAIN]http://www.mumc.org.au/gear/climbing/cam_large.jpg

Design such cams that they can be shoved down the throat of the well head, and the flow of oil will cause the cams to expand, locking the teeth of the cams into the sides of the pipe wall. Each cam device would restrict the flow of oil only partially. Setting in place as many of these devices as possible may reduce the flow to the point where the Horizon crew could contain the remaining flow.

And I won't tell you about my idea to weld, end to end, 4 derelict aircraft carriers to create a makeshift Troll to drop over the leak.

[URL]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Oil_platform_Norway.jpg/220px-Oil_platform_Norway.jpg[/URL]

Cuz that's just goofy.

 

[Topher925]

Do you mean like a hydraulic shaft seal?

 

[RonL]

Yes. This does require some radical thinking. With the knowledge of the volume of gas and oil coming out of the well, I've gone back to one of my old ideas.

But without knowing anything about the internal structure of the well head device, the following may not be feasible:

Successively insert a set of triangular flow restrictors, fashioned similarly to mountain climbing cams.

[PLAIN]http://www.mumc.org.au/gear/climbing/cam_large.jpg

Design such cams that they can be shoved down the throat of the well head, and the flow of oil will cause the cams to expand, locking the teeth of the cams into the sides of the pipe wall. Each cam device would restrict the flow of oil only partially. Setting in place as many of these devices as possible may reduce the flow to the point where the Horizon crew could contain the remaining flow.

And I won't tell you about my idea to weld, end to end, 4 derelict aircraft carriers to create a makeshift Troll to drop over the leak.

[URL]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Oil_platform_Norway.jpg/220px-Oil_platform_Norway.jpg[/URL]

Cuz that's just goofy.

That sounds good, a little like the junk shot they tried. The push frame would have to be mounted to the pipe in order to move against the flow pressure of 3,000 psi ?? or more.
At those pressures anything that has flex or compression properties will pass through small cracks or holes like toothpaste out of a tube.
Restricting the flow completely would likely cause a blowout somewhere else.

 

[Pattonias]

The pressure is the reason they have avoided using any methods like this. They have to protect the head of the well or they could lose what containment they do have.

 

[RonL]

The X-Prize group is looking for input on how to setup a contest promoting a solution for the gulf leak. I tried to link to the news story, but it brought up something else.
Here is the link to X-prize.

http://www.xprize.org/x-prizes/overview

I will try to get the article I found, later. Found it

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100628/ap_on_bi_ge/us_oil_spill_prize

RonL

 

[Relay]

How about this to stop the oil leak. I am omitting all the little details.
1.) Make a large pressure vessel that can hold the pressure and is large enough to contain the blow out preventer.
2.) Have no bottom on this pressure vessel(cylinder) and attach a heavy flange on the top side. The flange is to receive a valve which is connected last. The flange bore should be larger than the leaking pipe diameter.
3.) Weld rebar on the inside surface of the vessel as rings. Attach two ports on the vessel. One four feet from the bottom and the second, close to the top.
4.) Set the vessel over the blow out preventer. The oil should continue to flow out the top flange. Some site cleanup might be required.
5.) Pump hydraulic cement into the lower port to fill the bottom four feet of the vessel. Wait a day for the cement to cure.
6.) Pump hydraulic cement into the top port until the oil starts forcing cement out the top flange. Make sure no hydraulic cement bonds to the top flange. Wait a day.
7.) Connect a valve (open) to the top flange and bolt down using their deep sea robotics. Don't forget the gasket in the connection.
8.) Close the valve and pray the cement holds.

That's one idea, but I don't think that stopping the leak is part of the plan. Why do I think this;
1.) It's been leaking for 72 days.
2.) Specific information of the problem is not released to the public.
3.) There's huge money to be made and lost in an oil clean up.
4.) Gas prices are low.
5.) BP website won't accept solutions unless they are in english.
6.) BP website is not user friendly.
7.) This disaster will allow big brother to grab more power.
8.) BP is not equiped to handle this disaster.
9.) Legally BP can only be sued to some limit.
10.) It's been leaking for 72 days.

 

[Quantum-lept]

I have not seen the "dispersant" issue addressed.

For a few thousand gallons of oil in the gulf a dispersant used to cover the mistake is normally used.

BP blindly assumed that the use of a dispersant in such a large body of water would work until they could come up with a fix for the leak.

Well, dispersant was a bad idea and is still a bad idea if one wants to contain the crude so that it can be collected. Not to mention the environmental damage it may be causing.

After the initial disaster the priority should have been to contain the spill to as small an area as possible. Adding dispersant to the gushing crude made that impossible.

The flexible tube to contain and direct the crude to an area that will allow collection sounds like a idea that will work in conjunction with the system they are now using. The pipe that they are now using could be used to help with the control of the flexible tube which could be placed around the pipe and anchored to the sea floor.

But, use of dispersants needs to be halted and taken out of the tool bag for oil spills! If anything, a way to bind the crude together should be explored, making collection an easier task. As it is now, with the dispersant contaminated crude, the ability to collect is extremely difficult if not impossible outside of that which is piped directly from the well head.

Did i mention that i think using dispersants is a dumb idea?!

 

[RonL]

I have not seen the "dispersant" issue addressed.

For a few thousand gallons of oil in the gulf a dispersant used to cover the mistake is normally used.

BP blindly assumed that the use of a dispersant in such a large body of water would work until they could come up with a fix for the leak.

Well, dispersant was a bad idea and is still a bad idea if one wants to contain the crude so that it can be collected. Not to mention the environmental damage it may be causing.

After the initial disaster the priority should have been to contain the spill to as small an area as possible. Adding dispersant to the gushing crude made that impossible.

The flexible tube to contain and direct the crude to an area that will allow collection sounds like a idea that will work in conjunction with the system they are now using. The pipe that they are now using could be used to help with the control of the flexible tube which could be placed around the pipe and anchored to the sea floor.

But, use of dispersants needs to be halted and taken out of the tool bag for oil spills! If anything, a way to bind the crude together should be explored, making collection an easier task. As it is now, with the dispersant contaminated crude, the ability to collect is extremely difficult if not impossible outside of that which is piped directly from the well head.

Did i mention that i think using dispersants is a dumb idea?!

Control and capture has always been my main thought, sometimes first actions are not the best. Here is a link for anyone to have, that helps in the knowledge of how things are being looked at.
Hope it helps set aside some fears about how bad some things are and how well the disaster is being monitored.

http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants-testing.html

RonL

 

[Quantum-lept]

Ideas for collection: http://www.physorg.com/news197282039.html

 

[Quantum-lept]

Some quotes that support my dislike for dispersants:
http://www.physorg.com/news197219866.html

Note that the dispersed oil droplets can penetrate deeply into the sand, causing damage not even yet discovered.

 

[Quantum-lept]

Some quotes that support my dislike for dispersants:
http://www.physorg.com/news197219866.html

Note that the dispersed oil droplets can penetrate deeply into the sand, causing damage not even yet discovered.

 

[RonL]

Received a reply!

"Dear RonL
Thank you so much for taking the time to think about and submit your proposed solution regarding the Horizon incident. Your submission has been reviewed for its technical merits. A similar approach has already been considered or planned for possible implementation. All of us on the Horizon Support Team appreciate your thoughts and efforts.

Sincerely yours,
Horizon Support Team"

Close to the same as your's, Om

I wonder how well the big ship will work ? and if a boat of some kind might run far enough ahead dragging a deep submerged air bubbling system, helping to bring the oil up that lies in large quantities far below the surface.
Should be an interesting few weeks ahead

Ron

 

[RonL]

Some quotes that support my dislike for dispersants:
http://www.physorg.com/news197219866.html

Note that the dispersed oil droplets can penetrate deeply into the sand, causing damage not even yet discovered.

I agree and think any oil that hits the shore is a bad thing. I really don't like anything that creates more mass to handle.
Anything that can suck it up while it is in suspension or floating on top of the water, should be a top priority.

Ron

 

[Bystander]

I highly doubt it was overpressure. The BOP is rated for 15,000 psi. They were drilling with 14 ppg mud weight if I recall correctly and the well was in check at 18,000-ft or so.

(snip)

15,000 for an 18,000 foot hole? Cased with what is probably Chinese steel? Somebody call the suicide hot line.

 

[RonL]

15,000 for an 18,000 foot hole? Cased with what is probably Chinese steel? Somebody call the suicide hot line.

I lost something somewhere, what does pressure have to do with footage

 

[baywax]

Thanks for putting all you guy's expertise into this problem. I feel for all the folks along the coast there. Like I said, I feel responsible for the damn thing every time I start my car.

 

[RonL]

Thanks for putting all you guy's expertise into this problem. I feel for all the folks along the coast there. Like I said, I feel responsible for the damn thing every time I start my car.

I think you are completely wrong, we all could clean up our driving habits a little, but that is such a small part of what petroleum means in our modern world, I would like to challenge you to make a list of all the good things that come out of this industry. For every bad thing you should have many times more good ones.

I feel very bad about what has happened and the magnitude of the spill, but the things that need to be changed are better safety and a rapid response system for keeping things in better control while repairs are being made.

I have a few ideas about keeping oil from getting to the shore and a design or two for separating oil from the water, all hand powered. I will chose my method of presentation and to whom, a little better in hopes that dumb logic is not passed over in search for brilliant solutions.

Just hope you don't load yourself with too much undeserved guilt.

RonL

 

[OmCheeto]

Thanks for putting all you guy's expertise into this problem. I feel for all the folks along the coast there. Like I said, I feel responsible for the damn thing every time I start my car.

Don't feel bad. I drive a gas car too.

It's only a matter of time before we get off our gas.

member of the OEVA in the Hillsboro Independence Day parade http://www.facebook.com/album.php?a...id=4503019&id=138510433019&fbid=404776333019"

 

[RonL]

Don't feel bad. I drive a gas car too.

It's only a matter of time before we get off our gas.

member of the OEVA in the Hillsboro Independence Day parade http://www.facebook.com/album.php?a...id=4503019&id=138510433019&fbid=404776333019"

Hi Om,

Are those the headlight covers for the car you showed before, the one that had solar panels covering the back? It was red before?

That looks like an interesting car club.

Ron

 

[OmCheeto]

Hi Om,

Are those the headlight covers for the car you showed before, the one that had solar panels covering the back? It was red before?

That looks like an interesting car club.

Ron

Nope. That red car was mine, and it was gas powered. I traded it in last May for a 2009 Ford Ranger. Like boats, trucks have lots of room for electro-mechanical can-tinkery.

Since BP won't consider your totally tubular idea, the next step is to not have another oil spill, which involves some retro-innovation. As in hybridizing my truck.

 

[RonL]

Nope. That red car was mine, and it was gas powered. I traded it in last May for a 2009 Ford Ranger. Like boats, trucks have lots of room for electro-mechanical can-tinkery.

Since BP won't consider your totally tubular idea, the next step is to not have another oil spill, which involves some retro-innovation. As in hybridizing my truck.

I did find this little blurb, at the bottom of the first page, they will change out the risers and replace them with something more flexable, after a bad weather disconnect the ends will remain in suspension about 300' below the surface.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0627/How-BP-wants-to-start-over-in-bid-to-contain-Gulf-oil-spill

Again, thanks for your input, it helped keep me inspired. I think there is far more time ahead to come up with other things than we want to hear.

Ron

 

[OmCheeto]

I did find this little blurb, at the bottom of the first page, they will change out the risers and replace them with something more flexable, after a bad weather disconnect the ends will remain in suspension about 300' below the surface.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0627/How-BP-wants-to-start-over-in-bid-to-contain-Gulf-oil-spill

Again, thanks for your input, it helped keep me inspired. I think there is far more time ahead to come up with other things than we want to hear.

Ron

That idea is actually very similar to yours. They simply used a different material.

The one problem that I see with such a system is that with the exit so close to the surface, all of the methane will be coming up and out of the ocean in a much more concentrated area whenever the ships are disconnected. This is going to create an extremely hazardous environment for the ships to work in once they go back.

I'm starting to understand the logic of your 100 mile diameter containment ring.

What a bloody mess.

 

[SonyAD]

Most industrial and commercial engines are CI. It has been suggested runaway diesel generators were implicated in the disaster.

Why they weren't fitted with choke valves is beyond me.

 

[baywax]

I think you are completely wrong, we all could clean up our driving habits a little, but that is such a small part of what petroleum means in our modern world, I would like to challenge you to make a list of all the good things that come out of this industry. For every bad thing you should have many times more good ones.

I feel very bad about what has happened and the magnitude of the spill, but the things that need to be changed are better safety and a rapid response system for keeping things in better control while repairs are being made.

I have a few ideas about keeping oil from getting to the shore and a design or two for separating oil from the water, all hand powered. I will chose my method of presentation and to whom, a little better in hopes that dumb logic is not passed over in search for brilliant solutions.

Just hope you don't load yourself with too much undeserved guilt.

RonL

Well you're right of course, the magnitude of good things coming out of petroleum may actually surpass the magnitude of wars, economic downturns, spills and environmental damage. My responsibility for the Horizon incident is responsibility, not guilt.

I keep hearing about how an implosion at the site, on the ocean floor, might seal off the gusher and the entire deposit. Is this too risky to try? I don't mean a nuke. Just a well placed charge.

 

[RonL]

Most industrial and commercial engines are CI. It has been suggested runaway diesel generators were implicated in the disaster.

Why they weren't fitted with choke valves is beyond me.

I once had an 8 cylinder Detroit diesel engine that locked full open, when I tripped the emergency kill lever the vacuum became so great it sucked the seals out of the bearings, this allowed enough air to pull through that the RPM kept climbing. I was lucky that someone was close to the fuel intake line, he pulled it out in time that the fuel cleared the line and filters and the engine died before it flew apart.

Not sure what happened on the rig, but I understand that the best fail-safe device will not always work like planned. My engine was old and had not been operated often, the seals were likely dried and brittle?

 

[RonL]

Well you're right of course, the magnitude of good things coming out of petroleum may actually surpass the magnitude of wars, economic downturns, spills and environmental damage. My responsibility for the Horizon incident is responsibility, not guilt.

I keep hearing about how an implosion at the site, on the ocean floor, might seal off the gusher and the entire deposit. Is this too risky to try? I don't mean a nuke. Just a well placed charge.

I have seen this proposed many times, my thought is when the moment of ignition and explosion takes place everything is in a plasma or liquid state, the oil, gas and saltwater from the well is under such high pressure it will blow right through the explosion, the cold water of the gulf would eliminate all but a small amount of glass fusion.

Might not be very technical of a description, but this is what my mind sees.

 

[RonL]

That idea is actually very similar to yours. They simply used a different material.

The one problem that I see with such a system is that with the exit so close to the surface, all of the methane will be coming up and out of the ocean in a much more concentrated area whenever the ships are disconnected. This is going to create an extremely hazardous environment for the ships to work in once they go back.

I'm starting to understand the logic of your 100 mile diameter containment ring.

What a bloody mess.

That largest ring I mentioned was 10 miles, and when I calculated the box containers for a single row at 22,700 or there about, I backed off that size and when you came up with a 17 years to fill a 1 mile ring, the 500' started to make sense.

My newest thoughts are will they ever come to the thinking of putting a boat on each side of the A-Whale with a boom between the boats and the ship, the booms attach just behind the skimmer openings and funnel oil in. This rig could maybe cover a 1/4 mile wide or more on each pass.

Welll...?

?

 

[rolls]

How do people differentiate between real reports and apocalyptic doomsday reporting like this?

http://www.helium.com/items/1882339-doomsday-how-bp-gulf-disaster-may-have-triggered-a-world-killing-event

The amount of conspiracy theorists and doomsday scenario lovers surrounding this is driving me mad.

 

[dr dodge]

The amount of conspiracy theorists and doomsday scenario lovers surrounding this is driving me mad.

there is noting wrong with "conspiracy theory" if facts are collected then an informed decision is made.
the fact that useful news and information are being blacked out makes it darn'd near impossible to rely on main stream news anymore.

and many "theories" have quite a bit of truth, and some have even been proven right with time

dr

 

[russ_watters]

How do people differentiate between real reports and apocalyptic doomsday reporting like this?

http://www.helium.com/items/1882339-doomsday-how-bp-gulf-disaster-may-have-triggered-a-world-killing-event

Well, the first clue would be that you are reading a source (helium.com) that has no standards for quality as it is completely open for anyone to post anything. So you know that no one has checked the postings for crackpottery/accuracy.

 

[RonL]

Anyone interested in mechanical or ocean engineering might be worthwhile to look at the BP ops taking place. They plan to have a new cap in place by Monday and their ROV's are covering a lot of work going on.

http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9033572&contentId=7062605

The link again.

I made a folder in my favorites and labeled it BP ROV's, then open anyone of the ones listed and add it to the folder, after you list all 12 you can then open one, then open a new page and bring up another one, I find two per computer can give almost a full view of each screen.
Thanks to a tolerant wife, I have watched almost the entire week of work.

Time well WASTED.

Ron

 

[Quantum-lept]

""They are first and foremost a public relation tool to manipulate public opinion into believing the oil spill is disappearing, digested by microbes. The dispersants keep the oil underwater and together have created a deadlier mix than oil and water. Out of sight, out of mind, and the American public, with an increasingly short attention span buys into it. In reality an oil spill treated with chemical dispersants poses an even greater ecological threat than the oil spill left alone.""

""-repeated and prolonged inhalation. MSD of Corexit EC 9527A states:
Symptoms of Exposure
- Acute : Excessive exposure may cause central nervous system effects, nausea, vomiting, aesthetic or narcotic effects.
- Chronic : Repeated or excessive exposure to butoxyethanol may cause injury to red blood cells (hemolysis), kidney or the liver.""

""-a large cloud of dissolved hydrocarbons has been discovered undersea, by a research team headed by University of South Florida oceanographer, David Hollander. The contaminants are invisible and the reasons Mr. Hollander says, "may be due to the application of the dispersants that a portion of the petroleum has extracted itself away from the crude and is now incorporated into the waters with solvents and detergents."""

http://www.oil-price.net/en/articles/gulf-oil-spill-the-aftermath.php


""-chemical dispersants keep flowing into the Gulf of Mexico at virtually unchanged levels despite the EPA’s May 26 order to BP to “significantly” scale back.""

http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/bp-now-using-eight-types-of-chemical-dispersants-in-gulf

 

[Quantum-lept]

""For the first time Friday, the Coast Guard and BP acknowledged that a mysterious second pipe, wedged next to the drill pipe in what remains of the Deepwater Horizon’s riser-""

""actually comes more than a month after the Department of Energy noted the existence of two pipes using special imaging technology. At the time, BP dismissed the Energy findings as “impossible”""

WHAT??..BP are the EXPERTS!...COULD THEY HAVE MADE AN ERROR?!

""If the well casing has come up through the BOP, the relief wells are unlikely to work.""

http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/coast-guard-and-bp-now-admit-
mysterious-second-pipe-experts-say-indicates-casing-dislodged

 

[RonL]

It's hard to watch what BP is trying with their cap, It looks like they have 4 ports that could have had suction being pulled at each one, if they had connected all 4 and had their pumps running top speed it might have offset most of the pressure of the well discharge.

I called this in last Sunday, apparently it did not make it past the filter process. I wonder how many others might have had the same thought.
Did these engineers miss the class on pressure and surface area ?

I guess that I should consider the fact that I have to assume conditions and equipment on the surface, a total unknown to me.

 

[RonL]

Sorry about my Sunday morning rant, the cap is still at about 2500' and is reacting to the flow from the well. I just looked at what might be a guide pipe which would answer my concern of holding position.

I'm glad they made the live feeds that show their operations, I'm really impressed with what I see and just did not realize how much can be done with these machines. It has been interesting to see a couple of crashes into the sea floor and getting their wires crossed then having to untangle them, I'm glad no major damage was incurred, even got to see a little of the maintenance topside, overall I have enjoyed a week of observation thanks to so many live feeds and the fact I have three screens showing two and sometimes three ROV's at work at the same time.

I will continue to try and find, a better method of keeping this kind of mess from continuing in such a long drawn out fashion. I think the petroleum industry should continue and that accidents will happen, a faster response can and should be in place with some program that brainstorms what might happen and how to best meet a demand for proper equipment to be quickly deployed and put in place.


This comment is not meant toward anyone, just a general observation, for a thread in engineering of design and systems, I am a little disappointed at how few serious solutions were thrown out and now the thread has pretty well died (think I'm hearing an echo) the problem is still in crisis mode and I'm not seeing the concern. Regardless of who might be at fault, right or wrong, there is still so much ahead that will involve cleanup of the gulf region and industry correction to those risky corporate judgement calls that put everyone at risk. Don't let this slip into a "out of sight, out of mind" type of situation.


Back to the observation room

RonL

 

[RonL]

They just put the first section in!
Is that a Hubble mistake ?


OH! Hand me a larger hammer