|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 04:06 pm: ||
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 04:20 pm: ||
These things are no simple matter there are a lot of things to consider it takes a lot of time to handle a blow out when on land when this thing happoens on the ocean flour a mile deep many different currents flowing in seperate directions a lone is a major problem and remember there is only a few people with the expertice to handle this. I my 30+ yrs of of working blow outs and recovery I have seen these things go on for weeks. And remember none of us here have had axces to the drilling reports we need to know the activy on rig for last 4 or 5 days leading up to this. With my limited knowledge of what was going on at the time I can think of at least a dozen things that coule have hapopened. I will hold off on making a call on this till I learn more of well history. At this time I dont see any reason to think there was any equipment failure. At this time I do know there is just a hand full of qualified people to handle this problem.
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 04:23 pm: ||
Like the information in the first 24 hours that the wellhead wasn't leaking?
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 04:40 pm: ||
What little I do know of wetland science, this is just about the worst place in the US for this to happen. Approximately 30% of US seafood comes from down that way. Also the wetlands loss in the Louisanna area are the highest in the country and have been for decades. This makes these shoreline habitats even more vulnerable... The straightjacketing of the Mississippi River by the COE near the Atchafalaya is what causes this. The river in the delta area naturally should meander, replenishing the soils of the delta before they sink down. That has not been happening for well over the last 50 years...
Also if you look at large ocean oil spill studies I would bet on this scale they are all done by modeling programs. You can get 1000 different results with 1000 different programs by inputing the same parameters. From what I learned in physical oceanography class, these are very complex currents that are constantly changing... all sorts of crazy calculus goes into studies of this stuff.
It is fascinating. Hopefully the bureaucrats will get the bottleneck resolved quickly...
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 04:49 pm: ||
I guess this brings new meaning to "Sardines packed in oil".
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 05:33 pm: ||
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 06:04 pm: ||
NOAA Website Info
Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill FACT SHEET
One of the biggest industries in the Gulf of Mexico is the fishing (commercial and recreational).
More than three million (3.2 million) recreational fishers took fishing trips in the GOM in 2008, totally 24 million fishing trips.
In 2008, commercial fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico harvested 1.27 million pounds of finfish and shellfish. Commercial fishermen earned $659 million in total landings revenue in 2008. Two of the largest commercial fishing operations in the Gulf of Mexico are red snapper and shrimp. Brown shrimp is the most important species in the U.S. Gulf fishery, with principal catches made from June through October.
The following shrimp species are found in the Gulf of Mexico:
Brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus Ives)
White shrimp (Penaeus setiferus Linnaeus)
Pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum Burkenroad)
Royal red shrimp (Hymenopenaeus robustus Smith)
Seabobs (Xiahooeneus kroverl Heller) - INCIDENTAL BYCATCH
Rock shrimp (Sicyonia brevirostris Stimpton) - INCIDENTAL BYCATCH
There are two resident species of large whales in the Gulf of Mexico that may occur in the area of the spill:
Sperm whales (endangered) Bryde's whales (pronounced Brew-duhs) are not listed as endangered or threatened, but they are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Bryde's whales are baleen whales, meaning they have hair-like "teeth" in their mouths that the whales use to filter water and trap their food. A small population of Brydeís whale (Balaenoptera edeni), the only baleen whale to commonly occur in the Gulf, inhabits the shelf break region in the northeastern Gulf.
Sperm whales are much more abundant than Bryde's whales and are found throughout the northern Gulf of Mexico, especially near the 1,000m depth contour. Sperm whales are listed as Endangered under the Endangered Species Act, and are also protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Sperm whales are the largest toothed whales, and they hunt relatively large-bodied prey in deep water.
The following 21 marine mammals that routinely inhabit the northern Gulf are protected under the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act:
1) Bottlenose dolphin
2) Atlantic spotted dolphin
3) Brydeís whale
4) Sperm whale (also protected by the Endangered Species Act)
5) Dwarf sperm whale
6) Pygmy sperm whale
7) Cuvierís beaked whale
8) Blainvilleís beaked whale
9) Gervaisí beaked whale
10) Short-finned pilot whale
11) Killer whale
12) False killer whale
13) Pygmy killer whale
14) Melon-headed whale
15) Rissoís dolphin
16) Rough-toothed dolphin
17) Fraserís dolphin
18) Pantropical spotted dolphin
19) Striped dolphin
20) Clymene dolphin
21) Spinner dolphin
The greatest threat to whales from the oil spill is probably fouling of the baleen. If Bryde's whales are skim-feeding in the slick or otherwise get oil in their mouths, the oil would quickly clog and foul the baleen. Fouled baleen could lead to compromised feeding, starvation and death. Skin contact or inhalation exposure is probably a much less serious risk for large whales, and would probably only have sub-lethal effects. Long-term impacts are also possible through take-up of oil components through the food chain and likely "biomagnification" of the contaminants in large marine mammals.
There are nine species of dolphins that routinely inhabit the northern Gulf and are protected under the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act:
1) Bottlenose dolphin
2) Atlantic spotted dolphin
3) Rissoís dolphin
4) Rough-toothed dolphin
5) Fraserís dolphin
6) Pantropical spotted dolphin
7) Striped dolphin
8) Clymene dolphin
9) Spinner dolphin
There are five species of turtles that inhabit the Gulf of Mexico:
Kempís Ridley, Lepidochelys kempii (endangered)
Leatherback, Dermochelys coriacea (endangered)
Loggerhead, Caretta caretta (threatened)
Green, Chelonia mydas (endangered)
Hawksbill, Eretmochelys imbricate (threatened)
Possible -- olive ridley, Lepidochelys olivacea (threatened)
The only place in the world that the Kempís Ridley nests is in the western Gulf of Mexico. They are now in the peak of their nesting season. One of the only foraging grounds for the Kempís Ridley is in the area of the oil spill. They are currently foraging there.
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 06:10 pm: ||
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 06:22 pm: ||
soil oil ...oil comes from soil so there really isnt that much of an inpact other than lost jobs and some wildlife that die but they were going to die anyway.
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 06:34 pm: ||
In that case how about a nice big bowl of polyaromatic hydrocarbons for breakfast?
found in coal tar, crude oil, creosote, and roofing tar, but a few
are used in medicines or to make dyes, plastics, and pesticides.
What happens to PAHs when they enter the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry ToxFAQs September 1996
PAHs enter water through discharges from industrial and
wastewater treatment plants.
Most PAHs do not dissolve easily in water. They stick to
solid particles and settle to the bottoms of lakes or rivers.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Public Health Service
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
How can PAHs affect my health?
Mice that were fed high levels of one PAH during
pregnancy had difficulty reproducing and so did their offspring.
These offspring also had higher rates of birth defects
and lower body weights. It is not known whether these effects
occur in people.
Animal studies have also shown that PAHs can cause
harmful effects on the skin, body fluids, and ability to fight
disease after both short- and long-term exposure. But these
effects have not been seen in people.
How likely are PAHs to cause cancer?
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
has determined that some PAHs may reasonably be expected to
Some people who have breathed or touched mixtures of
PAHs and other chemicals for long periods of time have
developed cancer. Some PAHs have caused cancer in laboratory
animals when they breathed air containing them (lung
cancer), ingested them in food (stomach cancer), or had them
applied to their skin (skin cancer).
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) has set a limit of 0.2 milligrams of PAHs per cubic
meter of air (0.2 mg/m3). The OSHA Permissible Exposure
Limit (PEL) for mineral oil mist that contains PAHs is 5 mg/m3
averaged over an 8-hour exposure period.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) recommends that the average workplace air levels for
coal tar products not exceed 0.1 mg/m3 for a 10-hour workday,
within a 40-hour workweek. There are other limits for workplace
exposure for things that contain PAHs, such as coal, coal
tar, and mineral oil.
Carcinogen: A substance that can cause cancer.
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 06:37 pm: ||
No, Mmmi, you don't understand. Oil comes from well rotted algae. Then you layer rock over it, and press. Wait many years, drill through rock, and Viola! energy & chemicals from stored sunlight!
It's generally BAD to put dressing on a living salad. I don't think we have enough vinegar.
The ecological damage.....oh, heck, pretend you care less about the pretty birds, this affects FOOD!
If you have a mountain full of "Mercury Ore", it's no problem to live on it, or even near it. No mad hatter side effects that you'd notice. Mine the ore, concentrate the desired chemicals, then spill them. You have a very nasty poison, that does very nasty things to your children, and doesn't do you much good, either. Less mercury in the area than before, but it's concentrated, and that changes everything.
There have always been oil slicks in the Gulf. There's Oil under there, and it leaks out. This leak is a big one. Even though nature, not man, concentrated the organics into a nasty chemical compound, it's still a major problem.
So, Whatever, Move New Orleans? You're right, we've really messed up that river trying to stop the natural flooding. Not as bad as the Nile and the Aswan, but a real problem.
Whatevet beat me too it.....
(Message edited by aesquire on April 30, 2010)
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 06:59 pm: ||
We have a state superfund site in northern Wisconsin on the shores of Lake Superior. There is coal tar that was dumped there for some 70 years and on top of it the ravine they dumped the coal tar into was filled with municipal and industrial waste... including coal ash that has heavy metals in it.... so the tar is seeping out into the shallow rocky shoreline bottom which is prime lake trout spawning habitat.
The PAHs will burn your skin on contact if you want to scuba dive down to take an environmental sample. They really don't know how much product is down there as the coal tar was dumped by an energy company over a period of roughly 65 years. Not so good for the environment or human health... it is nasty stuff.
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 07:07 pm: ||
So why are they sending SWAT teams to other rigs?
Mr. Obama said SWAT teams were being dispatched to the Gulf to investigate oil rigs and said his administration is now working to determine the cause of the disaster.
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 07:19 pm: ||
Every one will have forgotten about this in 90 days. This is just a drop in a barrel compared to Kuwaait The earth has rebounded and it is not even a thought any more.
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 07:59 pm: ||
Kuwait's oil fire were in the desert, the oil spill Saddam ordered was in an already hammered gulf. Also, I don't live there, so don't know the damage remaining. I do know we are helping to fix the salt marshes in Iraq, ruined by Saddam.
Anyway, who cares about the mess in one of the richest countries per capita half a world away? They can fix their own mess with the money they get from us for oil....
Gumbo is at stake! GUMBO!
I'll refrain from picking on this admin's response time. No good will be served. Though I note more responsiveness to lawsuits ( The AG is sending a team ) than the ecology.
(Message edited by aesquire on April 30, 2010)
|Posted on Friday, April 30, 2010 - 08:09 pm: ||
Not meaning to pick on BO's response in any way. I'm just pointing out the SWAT team thing. If it is clearly not a deliberate act, as some are saying, then what are the SWAT teams for? I actually think that if there is any question about the cause it may be prudent to beef up security until more is known.
|Posted on Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 12:49 am: ||
Yeah, it's a little like sending the Air Force to do tornado recovery, seems like the wrong skill set.
Coast Guard, of course, the rescue & boarding specialists. Even a Navy Cruiser battle group for security, makes sense.
|Posted on Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 09:23 am: ||
Apparently the US Minerals Management Service has SWAT teams. They want a rapid response team to investigate. Good thinking.
Now the Navy is called in they are supposed to help with coordination. I am sure this could easily turn into a logistical clusterf*** with all the agencies involved.
We will see what BO does here... maybe DOD and the rest of them can mitigate the damage... as the first oil has hit the shore already. I am hopeful.
|Posted on Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 12:45 pm: ||
What can Navy warships do to combat an oil slick?
Is "SWAT" the accurate description for an "investigative" team?
Cowboy, is it likely the escaping oil is passing through the BOP or that the cement/casing have failed. I assume from the rig fire that it kicked straight through the BOP and up the full length of the riser; is my thinking correct?
|Posted on Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 02:18 pm: ||
Blake this is a floater and is not moored. is held on location by the thursters only. As I am not there and dont have knoledge of when the power went down. but the thursters lost power and the riser was aparently riped from well head. I am only second gussing as I dont have drilling report to go by. but I think well head was damaged when this ocured.
|Posted on Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 02:33 pm: ||
What I've heard is that when the rig sank, it damaged the riser (well, duh!), that's where some of the current leakage is happening. Seems like the riser must still be hooked onto the wellhead--if it continues to leak from the riser, something's got to be feeding it.
|Posted on Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 06:38 pm: ||
SWAT - Special Weapons And Tactics
I'm gathering that this isn't what BO sent to the rigs if they are from the US Minerals Management Service. If they are an investigative team then why are they being sent to other rigs. Still not trying to rip on BO's response to this disaster, but it would be good to have Gibbs or some other peon try to explain what he really meant to say.
They really shouldn't let BO talk without his teleprompter.
|Posted on Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 11:04 pm: ||
My first thought on hearing about SWAT teams was "what blew up the rig?" ie sabotage, terrorism, etc. I'm glad to hear the other rigs are being protected (if protection is what is happening).
|Posted on Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 11:59 pm: ||
So then the fire happened first, then the drill string catastrophe. That is more plausible to me. Someone could probably easily blow up and ignite the diesel tanks on the rig.
Working on the SEDCO 472 drillship in the Gulf during a near hurricane, we got blown off the hole and had to disconnect the riser from the BOP. Before doing so--it was a bit of a panic situation--they goofed big time and activated the shears before the rams. About three thousand feet of severed drill pipe went down hole, all the way to the bottom, some 18,000' down.
After things calmed down, they used the video cameras on the bottom of the riser to re-dock with the BOP, amazing stuff.
Took a whole day of jarring to pull the severed string of pipe loose. It was a bit crinkled.
|Posted on Sunday, May 02, 2010 - 03:12 pm: ||
Interesting article and lots of pictures. At least it sounds like it was an accident, not some form of intentional act.
|Posted on Sunday, May 02, 2010 - 05:48 pm: ||
Could they blast the well closed?
How deep is the well below the sea floor?
|Posted on Monday, May 03, 2010 - 10:08 am: ||
Navy ships can transport and dump oil absorbing material and oil dispersing chemicals. They can also drag floating containment devices into place. I don't know what they are actually being used for, but those are some possibilities. I'm sure the oil industry has ships available for these purposes, but the President does not have direct control over those assets. He probably doesn't want to be accused of not doing anything. Whether the Navy is actually helping is another matter, but in a 24 hour news cycle, appearance is everything.
|Posted on Monday, May 03, 2010 - 10:34 am: ||
The well was reportedly about 10,000 feet deep below the sea floor. The report hyperlinked by Sifo above however states 18,000 ft. Not sure which is most accurate.
I've never heard of using blasting to close a well. Pressures are typically high and would blow the debris right out the well and then you'd have another break in the well encasement.
You may be thinking of the now common Red Adair fire extinguishing technique where they use explosives to deny a wellhead fire oxygen.
I've seen a very interesting report from a power-player in the industry. Not sure if I can share it here verbatum. Will let the power player do so if he sees fit.
Reports indicate that the BOP remains intact and that leakage is from riser (basically well casing plus integrated controls lines that runs between BOP on sea floor and oil rig) and the open end of the drill pipe.
The report also indicated that the disaster was indeed a massive blowout. No information as to why the BOP failed to seal the wellhead, or why the crew was unable to defend against the blowout.
Leakage is reportedly occurring from exposed drill pipe and also broken riser.
Rig went down with riser still connected and is resting on the ocean floor about 1500' from well head.
Please ignore the ignorant reports from news media referring to a leak in the "pipeline." There is no pipeline per se as typically understood. They should be saying "riser, a large well casing/pipe connecting the rig to the wellhead." I pipeline is something that contains a flow of some type of fluid, whether gas, or liquid, or particulates. The riser is an encasement, not a pipeline.
Google if you are interested in more details.
Even if human error or negligence turns out to be the culprit, it's dead wrong in my view to lay the blame for the disaster on BP. The rig is owned and operated by Transocean, the world's largest offshore drilling contractor. But of course they aren't a big bad multi-national oil company.
Interestingly, Transocean purchased the offshore drilling company that once employed me, SEDCO-FOREX, a Schlumberger company. Previous to the merger with FOREX, it was just plain SEDCO of Dallas, Texas.
(Message edited by blake on May 03, 2010)
|Posted on Monday, May 03, 2010 - 10:46 am: ||
Odd that the Federal response was so slow and lethargic.
Almost like someone wanted the spill to spread in order to increase the damage.
|Posted on Monday, May 03, 2010 - 11:37 am: ||
"You may be thinking of the now common Red Adair fire extinguishing technique where they use explosives to deny a wellhead fire oxygen."
I thought they put the fire out with their coats and used the money to get the brakes on their truck fixed.