Spill here, spill now

Energy expert: Nuking oil leak ‘only thing we can do’

By Daniel Tencer
Saturday, May 29th, 2010 -- 7:18 pm

As the latest effort to plug the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico meets with failure, the idea of nuking the immediate area to seal the oil underground is gaining steam among some energy experts and researchers.

One prominent energy expert known for predicting the oil price spike of 2008 says sending a small nuclear bomb down the leaking well is "probably the only thing we can do" to stop the leak.

Matt Simmons, founder of energy investment bank Simmons & Company, also says that there is evidence of a second oil leak about five to seven miles from the initial leak that BP has focused on fixing. That second leak, he says, is so large that the initial one is "minor" in comparison.

Simmons spoke to Bloomberg News on Friday, before BP announced that its latest effort to plug the leak, known as the "top kill" method, had failed.
Story continues below...

"A week ago Sunday the first research vessel ... was commissioned by NOAA to scour the area," he said. They found "a gigantic plume" growing about five to seven miles from the site of the original leak, Simmons said.

Simmons said the US government should immediately take the effort to plug the leak out of the hands of BP and put the military in charge.

"Probably the only thing we can do is create a weapons system and send it down 18,000 feet and detonate it, hopefully encasing the oil," he said.

His idea echoes that of a Russian newspaper that earlier this month suggested the US detonate a small nuclear bomb to seal the oil beneath the sea. Komsomoloskaya Pravda argued in an editorial that Russia had successfully used nuclear weapons to seal oil spills on five occasions in the past.

Live Science reports:

Weapons labs in the former Soviet Union developed special nukes for use to help pinch off the gas wells. They believed that the force from a nuclear explosion could squeeze shut any hole within 82 to 164 feet (25 to 50 meters), depending on the explosion's power. That required drilling holes to place the nuclear device close to the target wells.

A first test in the fall of 1966 proved successful in sealing up an underground gas well in southern Uzbekistan, and so the Russians used nukes four more times for capping runaway wells.

Simmons also told Bloomberg that the idea to use radical measures like a nuclear bomb to seal the leak is probably not being contemplated by decision-makers "because BP is still totally in charge of the news and they have everyone focused on the top kill."

Asked by a Bloomberg reporter about the risks involved in setting off a nuclear bomb off the coast of Louisiana, Simmons argued that a nuclear explosion deep inside a well bore would have little effect on surrounding areas.

"If you're 18,000 feet under the sea bed, it basically wont do anything [on the surface]," he said.

Joe Wiesenthal at Business Insider says the idea of using nukes will be getting a lot of attention now that the "top kill" procedure has failed.

Next, the so-called "nuclear option" is about to get a lot of attention. In this case, of course, nuclear option is not a euphemism. It's the real idea that the best way to kill this thing is to stick a small nuke in there and bury the well under rubble. ... By the middle of the coming week, it will be all over cable news, as pundits press The White House hard on whether it's being considered and why not.

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0529/ene...nuke-oil-leak/

==============

2nd leak? related to BP drilling or something completely co-incidental?

all the gov knows how to do is spend more then they bring in
anything the gov is in charge fails

wanting the gov in charge of the oil leak is stupid

people are really dumb thinking the gov since they fail at everything would be doing better then bp

BP is doing whatever the fuck they want to do. Handcuffed is the last thing they are.

Wow, this shit again?

I mean fucking really?

Handcuffed, I say!

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/2...ethewhales.jpg

"Gotta nuke something."

touche

News networks say access to oil spill ’slowly being strangled off’

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0529/med...strangled-off/

http://i.imgur.com/3JFae.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

http://i.imgur.com/3JFae.jpg

---

If there is a GOD, make that S.O.B Obama eat that.

Jack, doncha know nigras like only fried chicken and catfish, not that race has anything to do with Magic Negro hatin.

what animal is that in the picture?

type of dolphin?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Jack, doncha know nigras like only fried chicken and catfish,

---

You're racist.

Considering the continual failures, detonating a mini-nuke, like the Ruskies have done forever now to deal with this stuff doesn't sound so out of place, does it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Considering the continual failures, detonating a mini-nuke, like the Ruskies have done forever now to deal with this stuff doesn't sound so out of place, does it?

---

Yes, it does. Not to mention that these people suggesting this also fail to realize its illegal due to the limited test ban treaty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Yes, it does. Not to mention that these people suggesting this also fail to realize its illegal due to the limited test ban treaty.

---

This would classify as an extenuating circumstance, technically not even a military test.

I'm sure the world would understand that we need to protect one of the world's oceans.

Although, this might set off a precedent, where creative rogue nations could intentionally start an oil leak, and then claim they need to plug it immediately the very next day using a nuclear weapon.

They're drilling 1 or 2 new holes to relieve the pressure enough to plug the first hole, which assumes the new holes will be more reliable than the first hole. Another 90 days before the new holes finished.

Will BP pocket enough oil from the new holes to cover the blowout costs? I really don't believe they're not ever going to extract that oil now that they invested in finding it

Seems like another, but much heavier, top hat-style project is next up.

WC isn't the right-wing Oregon inbred, backwoods, engeryco-talking-point-parroting nutjob:

"Running on the GOP ticket for Congress in Oregon’s 4th District, Art Robinson, who in 2004 wrote that the world’s ocean life was “starved” for crude oil, might want to consider adopting, as a campaign mascot, a dolphin."

“Wastes dumped into the deep ocean will soon reach the bottom, where they are less hazardous than nearly any other place on Earth. Most materials will remain there: marine organisms are rare in the deep ocean, food chains are long, and few materials will be carried back to mankind. And that is what waste disposal is all about…

…The oil companies’ reckless greed, we are told, has devastated the oceans with their oil spills.

Baloney.”

“As for oil spills in the open and deep ocean, they amount to far less than natural seeps and river runoff, and any unbiased oceanographer will confirm that they are a boon to marine life, inflicting damage mainly on the oil and shipping companies. For crude oil is a natural, organic, biodegradable product of the earth’s ancient plant and animal life, and it is this type of hydrocarbon that marine life in the open and deep ocean is starved for.”

“The environment, then, has no better protector than its owner, and no worse enemy than a system where everything belongs to “the people.” Species are endangered when they belong to everybody and nobody; and nothing short of the profit motive will protect them.”

In a 2008 World Net Daily column Art Robinson wrote,

“No less than 31,000 American physical scientists, including 9,000 Ph.D.s, have… declared the [Global Warming] hypothesis false and have pointed out that atmospheric carbon dioxide is required for all life on Earth and that the modest increases of recent years have fertilized plant growth and actually much enhanced our natural environment.”

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/...obinson/print/

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/oil...ry?id=10631495

Quote:

---

They may be dramatic, but federal officials are warning that pictures of dead dolphins washing ashore in gulf states may not have anything to do with the oil leak coming from the Deepwater Horizon disaster site.


"Even before this oil spill occurred, we were experiencing unusually high stranding rates," said Blair Mase, NOAA's southeast region marine mammal strandings coordinator.

Dolphin strandings are common, said Mase, who noted that 57 bottlenose dolphins were found stranded on beaches in Florida , Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana in the month of March alone.

---

"Even before this oil spill occurred, we were experiencing unusually high stranding rates,"

.... covered in oil?

I'd like to see an autopsy of oil-covered dolphins to see whether they are polluted with oil and Corexit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

"Even before this oil spill occurred, we were experiencing unusually high stranding rates,"

.... covered in oil?

I'd like to see an autopsy of oil-covered dolphins to see whether they are polluted with oil and Corexit.

---

A healthy dolphin is too smart to hang around in an oil plume.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Yes, it does. Not to mention that these people suggesting this also fail to realize its illegal due to the limited test ban treaty.

---

The treaty allows for underground explosions. It was signed and established in 1963.
Russia used the nuke technique 5 times from '66 to '81 to close gas and oil leaks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

The treaty allows for underground explosions. It was signed and established in 1963.
Russia used the nuke technique 5 times from '66 to '81 to close gas and oil leaks.

---

And it won't harm any fish, sea turtles, or dolphins. :lmao

Hey man, I'm just messin with ya. I wonder how a nuke work work? Wouldn't it blow out a lot more oil as well as other debris into the water?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

And it won't harm any fish, sea turtles, or dolphins. :lmao

Hey man, I'm just messin with ya. I wonder how a nuke work work? Wouldn't it blow out a lot more oil as well as other debris into the water?

---

I think the idea is to crush and displace the rock underground, basically sealing the leak. They had 80% success with it, so it's not foolproof. But considering how long this has been going on for, it might be time for more drastic measures.