Thanks BP for ruining our beaches with oil

[ThaFlash]

It was a simplistic viewpoint, and one that only takes into consideration few components of history (when you consider the 200+ year history). But the spirit of the overall point you made is very valid today and in recent history.

 

It goes back to something Obama mentioned, when people get scared they cling to their guns and their bibles. Our government perpetuated a state of fear after 9/11... It happens, we as a population need to be smarter about it and accept that our actions have consequences beyond our state lines. It's not going to happen, but it's still what we need to do.

 

It really is a difficult situation for the USA at the moment. I know for a fact that companies involved in this sort of work are declining invitations to get involved.

Most seem to think of it as a hot potato that entails a helluva lot of risk for an average reward.

Even then, I doubt the money is the driving force. Nobody who isn't already involved wants to risk the potential legal action and likely damage their reputation will suffer after getting involved with this.

 

 

If they really want to be involved they can be involved through the US Coast Guard and essentially get immunity for approved actions, we grant that all the time for approved DoD contractors. But like you said, it's average reward, what company would jump through hoops for an average wage when they don't have to.

[Stealthbomber]

Course, it doesn't help that there's a lot of self-interest at work here too.

 

You've got an oil company, a pipe-laying company and a services company all involved in this fiasco.

 

What I mean is, if it was just BP that was involved, half a dozen pipelay companies might be offering to work with specialist services companies to step in and fix this for BP, make a few bob and get hailed as saviours etc.

 

As it is, all the other pipelay companies are weighing the potential to make a few bob against the benefit of sitting back and watching Transocean take a lot of flak for this.

Equally, there are plenty of specialist services companies who could help but most of them have spent the last 15 years watching Halliburton getting preferential treatment in the industry so they're not gonna be that keen to do anything to reduce the amount of pain Halliburton take over this.

 

It's not helping the beaches of Louisiana but good ol' capitalism (which the USA normally loves) dictates that companies will do what's in their own best interest and, right now, letting BP, Transocean and Halliburton clear up their own mess - and take a beating in the eyes of the media - is the smart thing to do.

 

I bet half the worlds pipelay and services company CEOs are lying in bed at night and quietly dreaming of Transocean and/or Halliburton going out of business over this.

[ThaFlash]

Unfortunately, our "brilliant" rules regarding oil companies doesn't end there. There are caps regarding how much money these companies are liable for, it's something like $65m for BP and $55m for Transocean. Last I heard Haliburton was making the claim that all of their construction was approved and signed off on so that waives their liability.

 

Like usual, it's privatized profit and socialized loss.

[Titleist]

MMmmm...."toxic clouds"....mmmmm

 

http://gizmodo.com/5547548/the-gulf-oil-disaster-video-that-bp-doesnt-want-you-to-see

[Victory]

I think at this point they're accepting any and all suggestions regarding how to fix it.

 

As a self proclaimed "gun nut"...I have a solution to the problem...let's shoot at it! By golly, that oil ain't nothin' that a big .50 can't stop!

 

But really though, has this been mentioned? I ran a search of the thread, and didn't see it, so here it goes.

 

Can Microbes Save the Gulf Beaches? The Challenges Are Myriad

 

At this point it's unclear how much of an environmental threat oil spreading from the BP spill will cause, but the federal government is mobilizing thousands of workers to prepare for the worst. They have a potential ally: microbes that have evolved an ability to break down oil that seeps from the ocean bottom. It gets devoured by a variety of bacteria, which eat it by chemically transforming its compounds into useful cellular constituents. "If it wasn't for the natural ability of bacteria to eat oil we would all be knee-deep in the stuff," says bioremediation expert Ken Lee of the Bedford Institute of Oceanography in Nova Scotia, Canada.

 

So could bugs help cleanse the gulf? A number of companies have tried to create bacteria that could break down oil on demand, but Lee and colleague Albert Venosa of the Environmental Protection Agency say that experiments have shown that novel bacteria, even if they show promise in the lab, cannot compete with bacteria already living on beaches and marshes. Experiments have shown that adding nutrients like nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium to the beaches can speed up the ability of natural bacteria to break down oil. "What would've taken 5 or 6 years to accomplish can occur in a single summer," says Lee.

 

While adding such fertilizers has worked in small scale coastal experiments in which oil was purposefully spread on wetlands, experts don't know of examples from an actual spill. The challenge with wetland marshes is that the toxicity of the oil can kill plants before the microbes have a chance to get to work on the oil. "If that happens, you can lose the whole marsh," Lee says. Workers have been trying to remove as much oil at sea as possible to reduce the amount that hits the shore. They will also need to deploy protective booms to protect the wetlands.

 

Another challenge: it appears to Vennosa, from photos and news reports, that the oil leaking from the borehole contains water. That makes it more difficult to burn at sea, more difficult to break up into tiny particles using chemicals called dispersants, and more difficult for bacteria to break down. But he cautions that he has not gotten real data on the makeup of the oil striking the coast.

 

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/04/can-microbes-save-the-gulf-beach.html

 

It is an experimental process, and who knows how long it would take to create the necessary amounts of bacteria, but it might be worth a shot?

 

-Vic

 

Edit: They are now working on the top kill.

 

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

[Azulsky]

Top Kill is theoretically supposed to go down tomorrow

 

I call fail on it already. Has only ever been attempted on land...

 

It seems rather silly, injecting stuff at high pressure into a crippled system already under high pressure sitting a mile under the ocean.

 

fingers crossed tho

 

 

I think we are now 3 weeks into the 3 month(best case) timeline of implementing the relief well.

 

Thankfully my state grew a pair and has told the Army Corps of Eng to shove it and is proceeding with the dredging plan without their approval.

If they would have done it two weeks ago the amount of difference it would have made.....

[Stealthbomber]

MMmmm...."toxic clouds"....mmmmm

 

http://gizmodo.com/5547548/the-gulf-oil-disaster-video-that-bp-doesnt-want-you-to-see

Must say, I don't have much sympathy for stuff like that.

 

There's oil in the water. It's done and it can't be undone.

The question now is where do you want it?

Do you want it dispersed on the seabed somewhere out at sea or do you want it on the surface washing up onto your beaches?

 

It kinda irritates me that a guy jumps onto a boat and chugs out into the ocean to complain about the harm we're doing to the environment.

If you don't like it, throw away your neoprene wetsuit, get yourself a rowing boat and stop f**king bleating about the oil industry cos without it you wouldn't have any of your cool f**king toys!

 

I know that's a bit harsh but we need to accept that this is the world we've made and if you want to drive about in a truck with a huge V8 engine, watch a big screen TV and live in a city then you need to undertand that sh*t like this is an inevitable consequence of those needs.

 

Top Kill is theoretically supposed to go down tomorrow

 

I call fail on it already. Has only ever been attempted on land...

 

It seems rather silly, injecting stuff at high pressure into a crippled system already under high pressure sitting a mile under the ocean.

 

fingers crossed tho

FWIW, it's a valid procedure.

 

It's not like they're going to be pumping anything into the actual flow.

 

The BOP is, basically, a big daft valve.

 

It'll have various cavities, voids and diaphrams within its architecture.

Bascially, if you think of a bathroom tap, there's the bottom part where water comes out of (known as the "body" of the valve) and the top bit where the handle is (known as the "stem" or "bonnet").

Finally, when you turn the tap you're forcing a plunger (known as a "gate" or "plug") down to interrupt the flow of water.

 

When a valve is open the plug will retract into the bonnet of the valve.

When it's closed the plug will be wedged into the body to stop the flow so the bonnet will be empty.

 

They might, for example, be going to pump the valve bonnet full of water.

If it pressurises they know the seals are working properly and they can quantify the volume of water injected to figure out whether the plug is still in the bonnet or if it's lowered.

If the bonnet doesn't pressurise they know the valve seals are damaged.

 

Basically, by checking whether they can pump water into a variety of places in the BOP, they can work out what state all the BOP internals are in.

Maybe it's closed but the plug has just been blown out of the valve (worst case scenario).

Maybe it's open but just hasn't triggered or maybe it's partially closed and jammed.

 

Depending on the state of the thing, it's possible they might be able to trigger it by pressurising some of the control points.

If it's shut but hasn't sealed it's often possible to apply pressure to the valve cavity in order to force the plug to shift in its seat and, hopefully, seal properly.

 

It's actually a pretty smart idea.

It does rely on all the various fittings to be ROV accesible, free from underwater crud and undamaged though.

 

I assume they've already surveyed the BOP with an ROV and decided it's worth a punt though.

[ThaFlash]

Actually, that video is informative. Most people, even if they claim otherwise, live by the "out of site, out of mind" way. This video merely shows that maybe oil on top and in the beach isn't as bad as the alternative. There really isn't that much reporting going on about this, at least nothing that compares to the significance of the disaster.

 

What is stupid is that it took this long for the EPA to say that this is a bad thing.

[Azulsky]

Well as with anything i trust the engineers crunched the numbers before they do the top-kill. As far as what ive read though the potential danger of doing it wrong is causing more damage to the riser and/or BOP.

 

It only goes to show the extra issues that arise from the deepwater wells that we(in hindsight) were not prepared to deal with.

 

More stuff from the BP internal investigation. It will be interesting to see how the blame gets spread around in a cascading failure like this where any 1 of the measures theoretically was supposed to be able to prevent all this from happening.

http://rigzone.com/n....asp?a_id=93711

 

 

 

As far as the underwater oil plumes this has been known for a while and there are supposed to be much much larger ones way below the reaches of divers.

 

Essentially that is what they are sweating bullets over in Florida, and its potential to reach the reefs.

 

Have to wonder though wont the dispearsed clouds eventually come back up to the surface if they are pushed onto a beach? As well as they get past all the absorbent boom which essentially floating styro only designed for surface oil.

 

Dont go thinking for a second that the stuff on the surface is a pushover. So far its course of action has destroyed a fair bit of marsh on the barrier islands and those plants are all that hold the land together down there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ThaFlash]

I don't know, it's all bad. I just feel that, at least on the surface you can prepare for the oil and you know what it's going to bring. Free roaming under the surface seems to me that it can have a more drastic long term affect on a greater span of life forms.

 

I just want my shrimp.

[Stealthbomber]

I just want my shrimp.

Is that right?

 

You gonna be happy to trade in your Chevy Blazer for a Prius and smile when it costs you $15 a gallon to fill it up?

Welcome to the real world, where everything has a price.

 

Funny thing is, it's only a few posts back that you were talking about how the problem with americans is that they only consider the short term.

Seems like you just fell into the same trap.

[Seraphim989]

It seems yo may have missed his sarcasm in your rush to prove him wrong...

[Stealthbomber]

It seems yo may have missed his sarcasm in your rush to prove him wrong...

Either that or support his POV if that was sarcasm, eh?

[ThaFlash]

Yeah, pretty much.

 

I wanted a Prius, but the price of gas didn't justify the cost of the car. I really, really want BMW to bring more of their Diesels to the U.S. I'm very interested in electric motorbike advancement. I'm all for getting off oil (although I don't know what we'd do about plastics) and onto something sustainable.

 

Oh, and me just wanting my shrimp isn't really short term, it's more long term. It's saying that I care more about that environment... but then again shrimping boats are pretty dirty and I wasn't thinking of that.

[Jon L]

bugger the prius, I dont understand why there is all this research into hybirds. It would make more sense to just go the whole hog and totally remove petrol/diesel from the equation. It is going to be hard enough to get people using hybrids as it is, let alone anything else.

 

What i would really love to see is more work being done to chance peoples perceptions of greener technologies and ways of life. There are so many little things we as individuals can do to help better ourselves and our world but most of us are just too set in our ways to bother.

 

Anyway back on topic...

[amateurstuntman]

The reason BMW and other manufacturers can't release more of their diesels in the US is that in most gas stations your diesel is filthy ######-filled rubbish that would wreck the delicate workings of a modern diesel engine.

 

For that matter your typical pump gas is rubbish too, my car for example is 35 to 40 hp more powerful over here than it is there.

[Moriquende]

For that matter your typical pump gas is rubbish too, my car for example is 35 to 40 hp more powerful over here than it is there.

My car would probably self destruct on US petrol due it's high compression ratio.

 

I can't even begin to understand how people in the US can get their tuned cars to run on such *suitcase* fuel.

[ThaFlash]

Not really true.

BMW has their *35d released here which is pretty awesome, I drove a 525d through Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Italy and it was as fun to drive as my last 325i. We (at least I) can get better fuel, especially better quality diesel, it just ends up costing more (good diesel costs as much as our premium). We have public ignorance in regards to diesel, not a deficiency in fuel, contrary to foreign belief. Generally our public believes diesels to be dirty and slow and our car companies have no intention of changing that belief, probably due to the likely EU competition and corn subsidies that keep pushing E85 Ethanol.

 

There used to be a pump close to my house that had up to 110 (R+M)/2, now I believe 99 is the most I can get in my area, I pump 91. Our 91 is equivalent to Euro 95. We have a different method of measuring it.

[amateurstuntman]

yeah, if you know where to look you can get 110 but the typical 91 you get is no good.

 

I live near brands hatch so there is plenty of race fuel to be had around here.

 

In an on topic thing it seems that the oil has (at least temporarily) stopped gushing.

[The End]

The reason BMW and other manufacturers can't release more of their diesels in the US is that in most gas stations your diesel is filthy ######-filled rubbish that would wreck the delicate workings of a modern diesel engine.

 

For that matter your typical pump gas is rubbish too, my car for example is 35 to 40 hp more powerful over here than it is there.

 

 

or maybe people over in the US just aren't interested in BMW diesel cars...

[Azulsky]

TDI has no problem on our diesel.The Obama visit today seems like the biggest lol ever.

[amateurstuntman]

I know what you are saying. It would seem like it is happy but unbeknown to you your engine would be happier on different fuel.

 

I did back to back dyno runs on my friend's rolling road, same car, same day, same weather, same tyres, different fuel.

I had a difference of 41 bhp between the worst performing fuel and the best.

 

It's not just down to the octane reading but also the different additives put in the fuel by the petrol companies.

 

For example, Tesco's 99 octane gave better power than BP's 101.

[SuperJesus37]

Oil Spill to Iraq War compensation to crappy gasoline. WTF is up with this thread? lol

 

But srsly. I hate the beaches. Maybe now all those annoying 13 year old girls will stay inside and spread their narcissistic 400 photo photo albums on Facebook instead of flocking around the beaches "flaunting" their "hot bodies"...

 

I freakin' hate the beach...

[cool-breeze87]

I wonder how much petrol prices will jump because of this lol.

[Abelius]

I freakin' hate the beach...

[/thread]

 

I feel bad for the fauna and fishermen though. Oil disasters always suck, no matter how you look into it.