Deepwater Horizon oil spill - Page 6

06-10-10, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krashkart

Ten thumbs up!

Ten? Do you live near Alamogordo? Or in West Virginia? I kid!

But yea, funny stuff. Kevin Costner...

Edit. I nominate mookiemookie's vid as The Funniest Video Posted To Subsim Radioroom In 2010.

tater · 06-10-10, 02:36 PM

Trinity is way closer to Socorro than Alamagordo.

(If they blew another one up, I think I'd see the cloud from my den window)

krashkart · 06-10-10, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Ten? Do you live near Alamogordo? Or in West Virginia? I kid!

Actually, I'm an Idaho native, expatriated in Iowa.

"Ten thumbs up", referring to being 'all thumbs'; e.g. "I keep dropping things. I'm all thumbs today".

Platapus · 06-10-10, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

I don't agree with that at all geetrue. That smacks of vengence.

BP from the word go has accepted responsibility, paid out compensation straight off without complaining. I agree that they should postpone the dividend however screwing BP till they go bankrupt is irresponsible and vengeful.

Where are Transocean and Halliburton? They seem to be pushing all the blame onto BP. The BOP was Halliburtons.

Yes. That's a good mature attitude to have.

SteamWake · 06-10-10, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geetrue

We should freeze all BP assets and take over BP aka AM/PM

Never thought I would see the day that Geeter agreed with Rosie O'donnell

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-gra...mb-mother-eart

Platapus · 06-10-10, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tater

http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/info...n-trench-0249/

That is a cool graphic. A good way to put things in perspective. 150 ATM. That's some pressure.

CaptainHaplo · 06-10-10, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

My understanding is that the BOP was Halliburtons and that it did not work. Therefore if that is the case then Halliburton should also shoulder the blame.

Ok thank you for clarifying that Xabba.

This may help to sort out the confusion (emphasis added):

Quote:

BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said interviews with Transocean workers on the rig revealed crewmembers tried to activate the BOP from the rig's bridge before the fire forced them to evacuate, but the BOP did not close off the well.
Suttles also revealed that BP remotely-operated vehicles (ROVs) had hit "subsea access points" that should close the BOP, but that they also failed to trigger the mechanism to shut.
"We don't know why the BOP failed to stop the flow," he said. "Ultimately we will recover the BOP, get it to the surface and find out."
"I'm sure Transocean, who actually owned blowout preventer, will be interested to find out why it didn't work," Suttles said.

Source: http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article213497.ece

By that statement - it would be Transocean who holds the largest responsibility. However, I personally am not willing to let BP off the hook because of it - when they made numerous decisions that created the need for a working BOP in the first place.

06-11-10, 02:54 AM

Experts double the size of the oil spill.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_...a/10290238.stm

Nice going UK & US.

XabbaRus · 06-11-10, 03:31 AM

Quote:

when they made numerous decisions that created the need for a working BOP in the first place.

Apologies I thought Halliburton owned it.

As a matter of course whether drilling in shallow or deep water a BOP is required and is common sense.

Yes BP as the project owner is responsible and I won't absolve them, however they are stepping up. Transocean is walking away and letting BP take the flack. The BOP didn't work as it was designed to. It was designed to shear older type pipework. Piping materials have improved, got stronger for an equivalent grade than 20 years ago. That is why the BOP couldn't cut the pipe, that is Transoceans responsibility and they should be chucked under the boot along with BP.

Oh someone sort Pelosi out too.

krashkart · 06-11-10, 05:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Oh someone sort Pelosi out too.

Get Palin to stop railin' about her new neighbor and we'll talk about the Pelosi thing.

Quote:

Experts double the size of the oil spill.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_...a/10290238.stm

Nice going UK & US.

Double again that size, just to be on the safe side. Now, if you break it down to the owners and operators of the systems that failed, you get the ones that should probably shoulder the blame. That leaves Transocean and BP. Make it a little more complicated by tossing in the government, who appear to have been dragging ass since April, and we almost have a complete list of suspects. Where's Frank Drebbin when you need him?

What part did Halliburton play in building the platform/riser/BOP/(anything else I missed) system? I heard something about a concrete pour for the BOP, was that it?

Howdy Haplo. *wave*

XabbaRus · 06-11-10, 05:50 AM

I don't know. Looking back I don't think Halliburton have that much to do with it.

It is Transocean and BP who are the biggies.

Seriously though on this side of the Atlantic people are getting fed up with Obama's rhetoric and language and can't help feeling the there is an anti-British sentiment being stirred up and coming out of Obama. Saying that I never thought he cared much for the UK as a partner anyway, or anyone else for that matter.

CaptainHaplo · 06-11-10, 06:22 AM

In the final stages of closing the well, a concrete "plug" is poured to seal the well. Farther up, another concrete plug is poured to insure its clamped shut. Haliburton was responsible for the concrete pours. After the first one, they noted some problems in writing to both Transocean and BP because the testing indicated there could be some gas still leaking through. This is why the mud cycle should have run for 8-12 hours minimum (to get the mud at the bottom of the pipe up to be checked for gas absorbtion) and that BP only circulated for 30 minutes - not enough by a mile. Had they done so, they would have known they had a gas leak, and it was unsafe to swap the mud out for seawater (which allowed the gas up the pipe and led to the explosion. Normally the mud isn't swapped until the second plug is in place and tested, but BP did get a permit to only use the one, and ignored the warnings that there was a problem.

krashkart · 06-11-10, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

I don't know. Looking back I don't think Halliburton have that much to do with it.

It is Transocean and BP who are the biggies.

Seriously though on this side of the Atlantic people are getting fed up with Obama's rhetoric and language and can't help feeling the there is an anti-British sentiment being stirred up and coming out of Obama. Saying that I never thought he cared much for the UK as a partner anyway, or anyone else for that matter.

I don't blame the UK; I blame Ireland. (J/K)

I'm not picking up as much on any anti-whomever sentiment as much as I'm picking up on strong language and a more-relaxed-than-is-confortable approach to a very big and serious problem. I can respect that Obama prefers not to pitch a fit, and I can only imagine what he really thinks about it; but I'm actually seeing (in the news) more action being taken by BP, Bobby Jindahl, and coast residents than is being taken by the feds. The Big O needs to be showing me some real strength in this soon, and something tells me that strength will be coming along with the inquiries. He's meeting with BP Chairman today. Let's see what happens. (Please, Mr. President, hand the man his ass on a silver platter *pray*)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

In the final stages of closing the well, a concrete "plug" is poured to seal the well. Farther up, another concrete plug is poured to insure its clamped shut. Haliburton was responsible for the concrete pours. After the first one, they noted some problems in writing to both Transocean and BP because the testing indicated there could be some gas still leaking through. This is why the mud cycle should have run for 8-12 hours minimum (to get the mud at the bottom of the pipe up to be checked for gas absorbtion) and that BP only circulated for 30 minutes - not enough by a mile. Had they done so, they would have known they had a gas leak, and it was unsafe to swap the mud out for seawater (which allowed the gas up the pipe and led to the explosion. Normally the mud isn't swapped until the second plug is in place and tested, but BP did get a permit to only use the one, and ignored the warnings that there was a problem.

Okay, that clears up a lot for me. The well was in the process of being closed up. BP took a poorly calculated shortcut, against documented evidence (the Halliburton reports) that they should proceed with caution, and ended up sinking a Transocean oil rig, which ultimately cost lives and has released several tens-of-millions of gallons of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico. Did I get that right?

<vehement rant>
*indescribable verbal abuse*

</vehement rant>

SteamWake · 06-11-10, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krashkart

Get Palin to stop railin' about her new neighbor and we'll talk about the Pelosi thing.

She has been busy out endorsing (sucessfully I add) candidates.

But what this has to do with the oil spill I'm not sure.

krashkart · 06-11-10, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteamWake

She has been busy out endorsing (sucessfully I add) candidates.

But what this has to do with the oil spill I'm not sure.

Yeah, I wondered too. Not sure how Pelosi fits into the picture, either. Just funnin' with the man.

06-11-10, 05:50 AM	#86
XabbaRus Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,330 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	I don't know. Looking back I don't think Halliburton have that much to do with it. It is Transocean and BP who are the biggies. Seriously though on this side of the Atlantic people are getting fed up with Obama's rhetoric and language and can't help feeling the there is an anti-British sentiment being stirred up and coming out of Obama. Saying that I never thought he cared much for the UK as a partner anyway, or anyone else for that matter. __________________

06-11-10, 06:22 AM	#87
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	In the final stages of closing the well, a concrete "plug" is poured to seal the well. Farther up, another concrete plug is poured to insure its clamped shut. Haliburton was responsible for the concrete pours. After the first one, they noted some problems in writing to both Transocean and BP because the testing indicated there could be some gas still leaking through. This is why the mud cycle should have run for 8-12 hours minimum (to get the mud at the bottom of the pipe up to be checked for gas absorbtion) and that BP only circulated for 30 minutes - not enough by a mile. Had they done so, they would have known they had a gas leak, and it was unsafe to swap the mud out for seawater (which allowed the gas up the pipe and led to the explosion. Normally the mud isn't swapped until the second plug is in place and tested, but BP did get a permit to only use the one, and ignored the warnings that there was a problem. __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo

06-10-10, 02:36 PM	#77
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	Trinity is way closer to Socorro than Alamagordo. (If they blew another one up, I think I'd see the cloud from my den window)

06-11-10, 02:54 AM	#83
OneToughHerring Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Experts double the size of the oil spill. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_...a/10290238.stm Nice going UK & US.