RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 12:17:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyCimarron
I hope you are right. Myself and probably the rest of the world could give a rat's ass if they salvage any oil. But I don't know about those blood suckers. They've lied about everything. It would be just like them to try to figure out ways to save their precious oil rather than saving the planet.


They're scum, no question about it. They can stuff Tony Hayward down the hole and leave him there, as far as I'm concerned. I have no doubt that if it were cheaper for them to let it continue leaking, they'd do it in a heartbeat and never look back. But in a perverse way, the incredible scope of the damage they're doing is exactly what will motivate them to fix it.




SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 12:38:13 PM)

The pr is working[:D]




ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 12:43:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3

The pr is working[:D]


I've seen you make good arguments in the past. I wasn't expecting you to run out of them so quickly this time!




SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 12:59:00 PM)

I'm not an expert in deep sea drilling I just assume that if you drill a hole relieving the pressure, that this pressure existed before the hole was tapped and so could be reinstated much as it was before (if you filled the hole). The pressure hasn't just suddenly increased and are we suggesting that once oil is tapped it must flow or else? What would have happened to that pipe if this oil supply was cut off in normal operation? How is it we know so much about a well head even though we can't even work to a depth to fix the pipe? We know more about the situation at a level deeper than the pipe we can't fix?

I'm just a natural sceptic.




popeye1250 -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:09:10 PM)

Yahoo said that Obama is "furious."
B.P. i$ h$s b$ggest contr$butor. Of course he's "fur$ous!
And they were telling people that "it was all the little people mailing in their $10 and $15 donations."
Awwwwwwwwww! Isn't that cute!

Sounds like OIL money to me!
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."




ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:25:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3

I'm not an expert in deep sea drilling I just assume that if you drill a hole relieving the pressure, that this pressure existed before the hole was tapped and so could be reinstated much as it was before (if you filled the hole). The pressure hasn't just suddenly increased and are we suggesting that once oil is tapped it must flow or else? What would have happened to that pipe if this oil supply was cut off in normal operation?


You just hit on one of the root causes of this particular event, although you may not have realized it. That's one of the things that make deepwater drilling so tricky - oil that deep is usually under incredible pressures. This was a very high-pressure reservoir, which is exactly why it's so attractive for BP to drill it - all you need to do is tap it, and huge volumes of oil flow out under their own pressure. You don't need to pump water into the reservoir to force the oil up; just hold a bucket under the faucet and add up the revenues. 

If I recall correctly, the Horizon deposit has a "bottom hole" pressure of around 25,000 pounds per square inch. That means that at the point where the borehole taps into the top of the reservoir (at about 18,000 feet below the seafloor), the pressure is 25,000 psi. That pressure will decrease as you bring the oil closer to the surface, but the casings in the borehole are still under tremendous pressures, and it's a constant battle to keep the pressures stable. It's a very delicate balancing act, and the initial blowout came because they lost  control of the process they were using to balance it, and once they lost control, there was no way to get it back.

Once you tap into that much pressure, you are at constant risk of having  your casing and/or your wellhead blow out if you don't keep it in balance. What "Top Kill" was intended to do was re-establish the balance in the borehole by pumping mud into the casing, but the casing had already been damaged by the uncontrolled pressures of the initial blowout, and they didn't know how badly. All they knew was that they were losing pressure at a point in the borehole that should have been holding pressure, and that could only mean a leaking (and therefore damaged) casing. If they had tried to simply cap the pipe at the seafloor without stabilizing the pressure below that point, yes - it would have blown the pipe out completely.

That's the biggest danger of deepwater drilling - once you poke a hole in that reservoir, you'd better be ready to contain whatever is coming out, because sure as hell  it's coming out. There are other reservoirs in that region that they can't even consider producing, because they have bottom-hole pressures of 35,000 psi or greater, and nobody has the technology to control that kind of pressure. Deepwater Horizon was close to the edge of existing technology, and as we are seeing this last week or so, it was apparently a lot closer to the edge than anyone realized.





quote:

ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3
How is it we know so much about a well head even though we can't even work to a depth to fix the pipe? We know more about the situation at a level deeper than the pipe we can't fix?


I can't recall the exact details, but in loose terms, they can tell a lot about what part of the pipe is leaking by how much pressure they're losing and at what  point in the process they start losing it. In the days and weeks after the initial blowout, they were able to determine from going over their logs and analyzing the pressure readings that a specific joint in the casing (a joint which was located about 1,000 feet below the seafloor) had apparently been blown out during the accident. In simplest terms, I believe they noticed a sudden pressure drop at the time that the gas bubble was passing through that joint. Ergo, that joint failed, and released some of the pressure at that instant.

Now they knew they had a weak point in their casing, so that was their best guess as to why they were unable to hit their target pressure in the casing - it was leaking out through that hole, and there was a risk that if they kept stressing that part of the well, it would blow completely. I may have some of the details wrong on that point, because I haven't been able to get much information on it, but I know that I have the gist of it down.




domiguy -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:27:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

Yahoo said that Obama is "furious."
B.P. i$ h$s b$ggest contr$butor. Of course he's "fur$ous!
And they were telling people that "it was all the little people mailing in their $10 and $15 donations."
Awwwwwwwwww! Isn't that cute!

Sounds like OIL money to me!
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."


Everyone here thinks there is something seriously wrong with you. Even the people that have something seriously wrong with them feel this way.

But I forgot you are a centrist......lol!!!! Just like Sanity.......lol.




Jeffff -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:29:35 PM)

I refuse to acknowledge Sanity until I see his birth certificate!




thornhappy -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:33:07 PM)

Same timeline for Ixtoc I - 281 days, and took 2 relief wells.  That was a Gulf blowout that smacked Texas back in 1979.

The blowout preventer didn't work because the shears were trying to cut through drill collars.


quote:

ORIGINAL: flcouple2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3
I am very sceptical that a company which has the technical ability to drill for oil at 5,000ft can't then have a strategy to fix this problem sooner.


The time to ask that question was when the blow out spewed oil for almost 3 months in the Timor Sea last year.  It wasn't capped until the relief well was finished.

THAT was the time to say wait a minute, before we start punching any more deep water holes does anyone have a better plan than that?




domiguy -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:34:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot

Not Ghostbusters, but close.

WASHINGTON — It’s official: The Gulf oil spill is a titanic mess.
The Obama administration yesterday called in Hollywood director James Cameron, of “Titanic” and “Avatar” fame, to help fix the massive gusher fouling the Gulf of Mexico.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/movie_plug_feds_enlist_cameron_L1Rv5k97wsxRRrTBkS2E2L#ixzz0pjxdbgvU


Unfuckingbelieveable !  In as much as Bush fucked up the Katrina mess, I would have loved to have seen the reaction if he had called on Hollywood actors and directors to be " experts ". I didn't think a disaster could have been handled any worse than Katrina. I was wrong.

I am sure we will have pages of how " inovative" and "refreshing " Obama's approach is.   He has anything and everything available to him to help resolve this horrendous disaster, and Cameron and Cosner are right up there on the most desirable minds to use ?  If it weren't so sad, it would be laughable.

               mbmbn


It goes to show that you are an idiot to not be able to think this thing out.

"He has anything and everything available to him to help resolve this horrendous disaster."

And yet it hasn't been fixed....It goes to show what type of a problem one encounters with oil spilling out of a pipe 5,000 feet below the surface. There is no quick fix....If there is a "fix" at all.


But you go ahead and blame Obama. That is what you wanted to do by posting this right?

Stupid people.




MstrPBK -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:35:07 PM)

Been silent on the side for a while on this. My concern here is that no-one will see this as a wake-up call for alternate power sources to be taken seriously. We as humans are a very very very dense creature when it comes to realizing common sense. We have faced oil spills (land and water) for many decades and we still do not comprehend the dangers of oil drilling.

As painful as it may seem the only thing President Obama can call is a stoppage of oil use, and a push for now fuel forms which may be safer.

MstrPBK
St. Paul, MN USA




domiguy -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:38:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot

I will gladly eat a big ole heaping plate of crow, when one of you.... in the future, links me to the breaking news that Cameron and Cosner played a pivotal role in fixing the oil spill.

                                 mbmbn


You are a dishonest twat....Both you and servantforuse.....Who should fix the oil spill?

BP is doing a bang up job.

It was the EPA that called in Cameron and listened to Costner....If you had any expertise in something other than being a worthless bitch they would have probably asked for your input as well.




thompsonx -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:55:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

Ah, you and your damned quoting techniques!!!  [sm=angry.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

I would point out that it was bp who chose to use a less effective and cheaper blow out preventer.
It was bp who chose to lie about the magnitude of the spill.
It was bp who lobied to reduce the protocol precautions concerning blow outs.


A separate issue, but actually it supports my  point more than it does yours.

I am unsure what you are talking about here. My point is that these folks took a difficult engineering problem and turned it into a disaster of monumental porportions all in the name of black ink on the bottom line.
After the fact they lied about the magnitude of the incident in an effort to minimize their economic exposure on clean up etc.




I agree that the only thing that motivates these despicable rat bastards is their bottom line, but that's exactly why they want to get this shut off as soon as possible. The point you're overlooking is that no matter how much oil they salvage, every day that the leak continues costs them far more than the value of however much oil they might recover. It's simple math. At most, even if they were able to recover and sell half the oil that's leaking, they might get as much as a million dollars a day in revenue (that's assuming a leak of 25,000 bbl per day and oil at $80 a barrel). They have already spent well over a billion in less than 50 days, and the true costs haven't even started piling up yet.

It is not my point that they would rather recover the oil than fix the leak.
I am well aware that what they do not pump out of the hole cost way more than it is worth to recover but if they could walk away whistling and not get caught they would not retrieve an ounce.
With cuba, the evil commie nation, in the path of the spill one might wonder just how they will deal with that issue...it will be interesting to see how it plays out.


Any way you look at is, there's just no way to jigger the math to make it even come close to making sense for BP to deliberately drag their feet shutting down the leak. None. It just doesn't add up.




quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
I believe the link was posted about the two skimmer ships from sweden that retrieve the oil with centrifuges brought in by bp.


Of course. The only way to get the oil out of the water is to separate it from the water. Skimmer ships, centrifuges, polymer filters, whatever. What are they supposed to do, leave the oil in the water in order to prove that they don't really want it?

Comm'on you know that is no part of what I am talking about.



quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Do you remember reading recently how the fines levied against exxon for the exxon valdez spill were reduced to about 1/100 of the original fine.


First of all, I don't believe the fines were reduced. Damages were, but I don't recall fines being reduced. I'm open to being wrong about that; I just don't remember it. And if I recall correctly, compensatory damages were not reduced at all; it was punitive damages that were cut.

Remind me again why we assess punitive damages? If standard oil had not evaded the punitive damages perhaps the bean counters at bp might have said "lets buy the better blow out preventer because they could empty our cash box if we fuck up.

We need to remember that fines, damages, and cleanup costs are three totally separate issues. There's no way they're going to get the cleanup costs reduced, because whatever it costs is what it costs, and it's their responsibility. So that's almost certainly going to be a minimum of $5 billion that they're on the hook for.


Do you believe that the exxon valdez spill has been fully remediated?

Compensatory damages will also be in the billions, and I think it's very probable that the $75 million cap on damages will be lifted because of negligence or criminal misconduct. That will total another several billion.

Punitive damages are always a wild card, but I think it's a safe bet they'll be considerable - probably well into the billions, and while that may be reduced, it will still be considerably more than the value of the oil that is flowing out of the ruptured pipe.

How much those "scum suckin' pigs" loose out of the pipe is of concern to me only in so far as it will wind up in the environment and the damage it will have done. Their monitary losses make no impact on my opinion of them.



And, the same is true of the fines. There's no way to know what they'll total, and what they'll be reduced to, but political pressure will probably dictate very high fines and relatively modest adjustments. They're going to get crushed before this is over, any way you look at it.

Yes we can see from how badly standard oil has suffered from the "huge fines" that were imposed and, later after years of fucking around in court, reduced to zip.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Had not the headlong rush for black ink on the bottom line not clouded their judgement about the predcautions relating to this sort of enterprise then perhaps this would not be happening. Perhaps people and corporations should be sanctioned out of business for the willing disregard for the safety and well being of others.



No argument there. Few things would make me happier at this point than seeing BP wiped out as a company, and some of their key personnel serving lengthy prison terms after being sued for everything they own and being bankrupted.

I would be content if the entire company were tossed into the can for twenty years and all of the stock holders also. But you already know how I feel about corporations so I will not bring that rant here ...unless asked to do so[;)]






maybemaybenot -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:59:29 PM)

" Idiot "....... " Twat ".........    " worthless bitch "

Jeeez, DG you're getting me all wet and sloppy with that sweet talking. You ol charmer, you.

I don't Blame Obama for the oil spill. I do hold him accountable for pulling in the Hollywood gang to solve the problem.

As for who should fix the spill... I believe Obama said... just today.... when he was in La : it was his responsibility to get things righted with this mess.  I certainly can't speak for him, but he seems to be agreeing with me, in that BP has fucked this up to a fair thee well, and he needs to be more pro active to insure this thing gets righted. He will, as he should, make BP finacially responsible for however and whomever gets the job done.

If you have read my posts you would see, I credit Obama with attempting to get things done, I criticize adding the Hollywood element to the mix.

            mbmbn




domiguy -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 2:59:32 PM)

Thommy you really need help with your quotey thing.




domiguy -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 3:00:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot

" Idiot "....... " Twat ".........    " worthless bitch "

Jeeez, DG you're getting me all wet and sloppy with that sweet talking. You ol charmer, you.

I don't Blame Obama for the oil spill. I do hold him accountable for pulling in the Hollywood gang to solve the problem.

As for who should fix the spill... I believe Obama said... just today.... when he was in La : it was his responsibility to get things righted with this mess.  I certainly can't speak for him, but he seems to be agreeing with me, in that BP has fucked this up to a fair thee well, and he needs to be more pro active to insure this thing gets righted. He will, as he should, make BP finacially responsible for however and whomever gets the job done.

If you have read my posts you would see, I credit Obama with attempting to get things done, I criticize adding the Hollywood element to the mix.

            mbmbn



You want to criticize Obama because he is a Dem and President....that is what this is all about....That is it in a nutshell.

You do a search under your name and the word "Bush".....All is quiet on the Western Front.


Bullshit on your part.....Please find one post you made criticizing Bush for any blunder....Just one. Anything. He farted. Anything....




thompsonx -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 3:07:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Thommy you really need help with your quotey thing.


I do it on purpose so that my detractors, who have no rebuttle to one of my positions, will not be limited to correcting my spelling errors.[;)]




ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 3:13:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Thommy you really need help with your quotey thing.


I do it on purpose so that my detractors, who have no rebuttle to one of my positions, will not be limited to correcting my spelling errors.[;)]



Who the heck would ever do a thing like that?

And it's "rebuttal," by the way!




ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 3:19:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

I am unsure what you are talking about here. My point is that these folks took a difficult engineering problem and turned it into a disaster of monumental porportions all in the name of black ink on the bottom line.
After the fact they lied about the magnitude of the incident in an effort to minimize their economic exposure on clean up etc.




Then I'm unsure what we're talking about at all here. Your initial post in this particular discussion seemed to be a refutation of my response to SL4V3. If you weren't disagreeing with me, then I don't know what we're arguing about. I don't think I disagree with anything you said in this post. Sounds like we see it pretty much the same way, unless I'm still somehow mistaking your meaning.




maybemaybenot -> RE: BP Oil Spill : Who's Obama gonna call ? (6/4/2010 3:27:41 PM)

LOL, you are too funny. That's right you won't find anything. So my silence on Bush, somehow is an endorsement of him ? I couldn't stand him. But I am sure you don't believe that either. I voted for Clinton and was a big supporter of his, altho critical of a few things. I am sure you don't believe that either.


Did you do a search of my name for Obama ? You will find four.... one of which was a Professor Gates thread and spoke of Obama in it. And didn't really say anything negative/detrimental. 

I love your:  either with us or against us attitude. Three criticisms of Obama and I am a hater... ummm, good you go with that Domi. I am sure it makes you all warm and fuzzy and fullfills your self rightousness.

                         mbmbn




Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875