Can anyone give a link to some sort of detailed diagram of this leak? All I've seen so far are general animations which really shows nothing in regard to the exact condition of the leak. How can anyone come up with a good way to stop the leak if we can not see exactly how it's leaking?

I've been watching the news about this leak since it first happened. I still haven't gained a clear picture of what the leak looks like other than the officially released animations which show nothing, and the grainy video of the plumes coming out of an unknown source.

Also, I do not understand why the simplest method did not work. I assume the top hat was just a large open-ended cylinder attached to a tube and pump up top. It's simple physics but they gave us some lame excuse about something freezing down there or something. I don't understand the need for any moving parts or complex engineering down there for this idea to work. It should just be a cylinder and a tube leading all the way up to a ship where the pump would be.

Someone please tell me why this top hat procedure did not work because I just don't get it.

Can the pipe be magnetized ?

If the pipe could be magnetized strong enough then a custom fit cap with valve (left open of course) would cling to it, weld the edge then close the valve.

Here is a live camera from the broken pipe.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCMQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bp.com%2Fliveassets%2Fbp_inte rnet%2Fglobalbp%2Fglobalbp_uk_english%2Fhomepage%2 FSTAGING%2Flocal_assets%2Fbp_homepage%2Fhtml%2Frov _stream.html&rct=j&q=watching+oil+leak+gulf&ei=uK0STNKZIcLflgfypK2LCQ&usg=AFQjCNES0kqx9IsO0ZY6ESCMYePFZ1A91w

The top hat procedure is now working because they finally cut off the broken pipe that prevented a good seal.

If the pipe is clogged beyond the break isn't likely that the pipe will just bust again?

But the pipe isn't clogged , it is open and flowing freely now. All they need do is insert a deflated beach ball type of thing then add air to enlarge it to stop the flow of oil.

Solution: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/magazine/13fob-q4-t.html?adxnnl=1&ref=global-home&adxnnlx=1276344215-XqbcZ/weEtSJevEjk7NZPA&pagewanted=print

Or they could insert a one quarter inch smaller pipe into the larger one thereby allowing full capability to retrieve all of the oil now leaking into the Gulf. The smaller pipe would be pushed as far down as possible so there wouldn't be any leaks. :itold:

They can't spend much time on the Deepwater Horizon disaster because they have a project in full on mode at the second or third largest oil deposit on the planet.

This also ties the president's hands because BP & the feds are partners on the aforementioned giant oil field (http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2010/06/bp-is-too-busy-in-iraq-to-help-gulf.html) they are mutually developing.

This is so sad. nature is the one suffering for all of this.

This is so sad. nature is the one suffering for all of this.

People are as well for many jobs have been lost by the fishing industry for ecades to come. :(

The simplest method I could have suggested initially would have been "Freeze" it.

This would require taking bottles of liquid gases and releasing them at the leak point to freeze the oil in the pipe(or generate a frozen wall of ice from the surrounding water.). Obviously they would have to maintain the temperature, perhaps placing thermal deflectors around the frozen mass and using freezing units.

The problem with this idea however was the potential fatigue that freezing would cause to the actual pipework.

I did also consider whether freezing the water with the oil mixed in, would allow thawing out the water from the oil as a seperation method.

The best method would have been the supertanker method used in the Saudi oil spill. Two of the US engineers who worked on it started contacting BP and the White House on day two of this disaster, they were ignored and still are today.

"We're doing everything we can" http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii18/drmabuse06/smileys/lol.gif

80% of the massive Saudi spill was recovered from the water via the supertanker method. The most ever.

Can anyone give a link to some sort of detailed diagram of this leak? All I've seen so far are general animations which really shows nothing in regard to the exact condition of the leak.
I haven't seen any diagrams of submerged dinosaurs and algae fossils 5,000 feet under water magically subducting themselves 30,000 feet into the mantle in order to produce a 100,000 barrel a day blowout. Have you?

A question on the nature of crude oil.
It is biodegradable. How long does it take and what does it break down into?


A note on the leak.
Can you believe it's coming up on two months and no end in sight?
What if they can't fix it?
Ever.

A question on the nature of crude oil.
It is biodegradable. How long does it take and what does it break down into?
It takes awhile for cyanobacteria and archaea to consume the hydrocarbons. Eventually the complex hydrocarbon bonds break down and they become methane.


A note on the leak.
Can you believe it's coming up on two months and no end in sight?
What if they can't fix it?
Ever.
They should've fixed it a long time ago.

If they can't fix it ever then that's a very very big problem because what BP drilled into in the Macondo Prospect (Mississippi Canyon Block 252) is what is called a "migration channel," a deep fault on which abiotic hydrocarbons generated in the depth of our planet migrate to the crust and are accumulated in rocks, something like Ghawar in Saudi Arabia. Ghawar, the world’s most prolific oilfield has been producing millions of barrels daily for almost 70 years with no end in sight.

I don't think more than a handful of people have grasped just how TINY this leak is.

It is terribly difficult to get agreement on the scale of the leak, but in round figures we may be talking about 100,000,000 gallons. It sounds a lot, but it wouldn't actually fill the lake in New York's Central Park. (Check the volume of your local reservoir; you will likely find a larger number than you expected -- even if it is only one-thousandth or one-ten-thousandth the size of Lake Mead, which weighs in a 7,750,000,000,000 gallons.)

Crude oil is a mixture containing quite a large number of different chemicals. Mostly, it is lighter than water, so it tends to rise to the surface where it can be skimmed. The other tendancy is for it to disperse into the surrounding seawater, quickly becoming dissolved to one part in a thousand or less. I regret I have found no data for the volume of oil that has been skimmed at the surface, and therefore the real effective volume of the leak into the waters of the Gulf.

Let's guess (to keep the arithmetic simple) that the volume of oil let loose into the Gulf of Mexico (i.e. and not skimmed) is 64,000,000 gallons. The volume of seawater in the Gulf of Mexico is 640,000,000,000,000,000 gallons. IN FACT, in relation to the Gulf as a whole, THE OIL LEAK IS PROBABLY NOT EVEN THE GREATEST SINGLE SOURCE OF POLLUTION! US river outflows have been cleaned up by legislation, but the toxic effluents of some Latin American rivers are probably doing more lasting harm than the oil leak.

The newspapers are not full of maps showing the hundreds of miles of coastline covers by oil. I believe only a few miles (are they on an offshore sandspit miles from nowhere?) out many hundreds of miles of coastline are badly affected. Elsewhere a few tarballs have shown up. There are no shoals of dead fish washed up on the shoreline. There are no reports of people dying from eating lethal prawns. In fact, the notion that this is "America's worse ever ecological disaster" is beginning to look silly.

The US public is being presented with a picture of an unstoppable leak without their attention being drawn to the math of the situation. If the oil were to be dispersed into the nearest 1% of the waters of the Gulf, the degree of dissolution would be one part in a hundred million.

Fishing, subject to monitoring in a few areas, has always been completely safe. It is merely the public perception of hazard that has put fishermen out of business. Tourism is suffering on an equally false premise. Almost all the economic damage caused by the leak is down to the media and public perception rather than to BP.

A question on the nature of crude oil.
It is biodegradable. How long does it take and what does it break down into?


A note on the leak.
Can you believe it's coming up on two months and no end in sight?
What if they can't fix it?
Ever.

The Russians had 4 "spills" and used bombs to collapse them all so they don't "leak" any longer.

The Russians had 4 "spills" and used bombs to collapse them all so they don't "leak" any longer.

I was wondering why we didn't do that?

~String

I haven't seen any diagrams of submerged dinosaurs and algae fossils 5,000 feet under water magically subducting themselves 30,000 feet into the mantle in order to produce a 100,000 barrel a day blowout. Have you?

Get lost OilIsMastery.

I was wondering why we didn't do that?

~String

Greed. They were trying to save the well ....if it actually put out 100,000 BPD, that is worth more than all the tea in China :D

A question on the nature of crude oil.
It is biodegradable. How long does it take and what does it break down into?

A lot of nonsense is circulated in the media(propaganda outlets) on that topic.

The fact is? Tens of thousands of gallons of oil are still in Prince William Sound. Right now, today, last team that went up to do on-site stuff was a couple of months back. The oil is not biodegrading up there more than two decades later, and the oil spilled by the tanker was a type of oil more preferred in a 'clean up' scenario. This type in the Gulf disaster is the worst type of oil you could have in a spill situation. They went all around and could dig mere inches on the beach and the smell of oil and oil itself was everywhere this year in PWS, still wreaking havoc on lifeforms that burrow onto beaches. From Otters to crustaceans, etc.

The wildlife never really recovered in PWS.

How about inducting the oil flow or conducting away the oils electromagnetic preasure?

There must be substances like gases/fluids/materials that can do that?

Or even better, attract up free electrons from the oil to the hole to cause induction that slows the oil leak.

Or Charge the hole with an electron/charged particle cannon that causes induction in the hole?

I've read many good ideas on stopping this oil leak. The most simple and obvious ideas being inserting a slightly smaller pipe into the broken pipe to funnel most(and eventually all) of the flow, or inflating devices within the broken pipe to stop the flow. It seems to me that these 2 simple ideas couldn't possibly fail. Yet, BP decided to go with the much more complicated and risky procedure of forcing mud against the flow. And when they finally decide to try the top hat again, they obviously made the hat too small, and/or the pump too weak.

I've thought from the beginning that this oil leak was planned. I won't get into the reasons why, or how it fits into the bigger picture, but so far my predictions have come true. This disaster has to be big in order to fulfill their objective.

So what proof do I have that this oil leak is being made to happen? The proof is in the pudding- the oil leak is still gushing.

If it costs too much, or god forbid is actually helpful, then they're not interested in your solution. If they can't cut corners, they don't have time for it.

The Gulf seabed in the locus of methane hydrates, a very strange structure, which is a water lattice-crystal "jail" around compressed methane molecules. This structure is evidently formed in very cold, very high pressure scenarios.

Many studies have been done to explore these hydrates, and these studies find the methane hydrates to be dangerous (http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2010/06/danger-lurks-in-deep-water.html) to drilling operations. They also found that the "loop current" goes far more north, even to the accident site (ibid).

Additionally, the drill site is within the area affected by the asteroid impact that caused the K-T extinction (http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2010/06/from-deepwater-i-to-deepwater-ii.html) 65 million years ago, forming a 112 mile wide crater..

Add to that ocean warming, and increasing ocean depth, which increases pressures, the hydrates could be becoming more unstable then melting ("dissociating") thereby releasing the methane which can then expand 164 times.

The gushing material being released is 40% methane because the hydrate crystal lattice "jail" is dissociating, which is what took out Deepwater Horizon (http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2010/06/is-new-age-of-pressure-upon-us-2.html) in an instant.

I've read many good ideas on stopping this oil leak. The most simple and obvious ideas being inserting a slightly smaller pipe into the broken pipe to funnel most(and eventually all) of the flow, or inflating devices within the broken pipe to stop the flow. It seems to me that these 2 simple ideas couldn't possibly fail. Yet, BP decided to go with the much more complicated and risky procedure of forcing mud against the flow. And when they finally decide to try the top hat again, they obviously made the hat too small, and/or the pump too weak.

I've thought from the beginning that this oil leak was planned. I won't get into the reasons why, or how it fits into the bigger picture, but so far my predictions have come true. This disaster has to be big in order to fulfill their objective.

So what proof do I have that this oil leak is being made to happen? The proof is in the pudding- the oil leak is still gushing.

Of course it wasn't planned, but it was the result of incompetence. The Top Kill procedure is common, it had a much better chance than an inflated stopper (which could not have held). The weight of all that mud should have worked, they pumped in more mud than should have been necessary, with a 30,000hp pump. The problem is that the well casing is broken way below the surface, so blocking the pipe would only make the leak worse. That is why they are currently not blocking it, and instead are trying to suck up as much as possible (similar to your smaller pipe idea).

The well casing is compromised down deep. It is currently being eroded away, and could fail completely, in which case nothing will stop the leak.

I was wondering why we didn't do that?

~String

Because it's stupid. It would only fracture the geology more, created a leak that could never be stopped (which may be inevitable). We are in a race between a compromised well pipe and drilling a relief well.

Master idea: Make another hole and a filter that filters gas from oil, put it in there and release all the gas in the atmosphere, ignite it, and you have solved the problem...

You have solved nothing. Are you talking about gas or gasoline? Because gasoline can't be made with a filter.

Empty soly gas from well to end preasure

The pressure is coming from deep under the seabed.

You've made a small assumption.

It's a basic operating principle. The hole drilled into the oil deposit is filled with a pipe that is cemented to the walls. Not only are the walls unstable and tend to balloon outwards, the flowing oil is eroding the cement through a rupture in the pipe deep below the seabed. The oil is under pressure, it is not being forced out by a separate flow of vapor. Even if it were, capping it at the top to draw off the vapor would not prevent the oil from being pushed out below the cap (and around it through a likely rupture).

There's preasure. By releasing gas one lighten it.

Something that is interesting is the GOCE data.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=102602

Around the UK (Where BP use to pump oil from) there is a higher level of Gravity. That means people that drilled in the area would likely have a different strategy from the Gulf of Mexico that has a lesser gravity. Lesser gravity would actually suggest why there is such a flow, obviously though I'm just hypothesising, just thought it might intrigue some of you.

Incidentally it did give me another idea about stemming the flow using Electromagnetics, afterall magnetics can effect the flow of water, why not oil?

The thing that's different are regulations and the enforcement thereof.

Something that is interesting is the GOCE data.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=102602

Around the UK (Where BP use to pump oil from) there is a higher level of Gravity. That means people that drilled in the area would likely have a different strategy from the Gulf of Mexico that has a lesser gravity. Lesser gravity would actually suggest why there is such a flow, obviously though I'm just hypothesising, just thought it might intrigue some of you.

Incidentally it did give me another idea about stemming the flow using Electromagnetics, afterall magnetics can effect the flow of water, why not oil?

The problem is, I suggested that idea, and no one wants it, therefor we are gonna lighten the preasure and if that don't work, nothing else do either.

Do you mean drill another well down into the oil deposit and remove some theoretical pocket of pressurized gas?

I'd say go for that. Go for it and do that.

OK man, I'll call the president of BP right now.

Thanks a million spidergoat.

OK man, I'll call the president of BP right now.

You DO have a direct line to Satan!?!?

And on that note, I suppose this same Red Phone can contact the "president" of Monsanto as well?

There are some perks to being one of the 12 Jew bankers that control the world.

The secret moonbase? I've always been especially jealous about that part.

If we assume that BP, the U.S. Government, and all the inventors (both geniuses and crackpots alike) fail to ever stop this leak, how bad will this get? Are we thinking tainted beaches all the way up the North American east coast? Will every island in the Caribbean be rendered uninhabitable? Will it eventually leak it's way to European shores?

I honestly don't know, has anyone else dug up any credible predictions?

How big is the oil reserve? It could leak for a hundred years. People on the coast could burn sand in the winter to keep warm.

Reports by scientists, engineers, and the government show that they all knew the Gulf of Mexico seabed was unstable (http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2010/06/danger-lurks-in-deep-water-2.html) as early as a decade ago. :eek:

I thought peak oil meant that we already ran out of oil several years ago. How could it continue to leak for a hundred years?

Umm... sarcasm.

One thing that seems prevalent everywhere, including this thread, is that we forget that this Gulf Oil Gusher event, as well as many others, could be the straw that breaks the camel's back (http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2010/07/epoch-of-straw-that-broke-2.html), even equating to a K-T (killer-titanic) event.

We do not yet know enough to weigh that lurking straw, but it is always less than increments of the "normal load capacity".

One thing that seems prevalent everywhere, including this thread, is that we forget that this Gulf Oil Gusher event, as well as many others, could be the straw that breaks the camel's back (http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2010/07/epoch-of-straw-that-broke-2.html), even equating to a K-T (killer-titanic) event.

We do not yet know enough to weigh that lurking straw, but it is always less than increments of the "normal load capacity".

Yes? I'm listening...:shh:

How about putting an implosion bomb in the drilled oil hole? To collapse it? Simply a vacuum bomb?

Hey, I didn't mean a REALLY BIG one, just a small vacuum pocket that implodes the walls. We evacuate the area first ofcourse...

AND NOT A FATHER OF ALL BOMBS IN THERE, NO MATTER HOW SMALL IT MAY LOOK :eek:

All concrete will set up (cure) under water. It actually cures better under water than it does above water. you can purchase a special type of cement at your local home improvement center or hardware store known as hydraulic cement.

So put a form around the wellhead, pour in the cement and it will be encased within minutes!

Given things a second thought I'd go with that idea instead of mine.

How about putting an implosion bomb in the drilled oil hole? To collapse it? Simply a vacuum bomb?

Hey, I didn't mean a REALLY BIG one, just a small vacuum pocket that implodes the walls. We evacuate the area first ofcourse...

AND NOT A FATHER OF ALL BOMBS IN THERE, NO MATTER HOW SMALL IT MAY LOOK :eek:

Because exploded walls cannot hold pressure. Oil can make it's way easily through cracks.

All concrete will set up (cure) under water. It actually cures better under water than it does above water. you can purchase a special type of cement at your local home improvement center or hardware store known as hydraulic cement.

So put a form around the wellhead, pour in the cement and it will be encased within minutes!

That was the plan after the top kill was in place. You can't pour concrete into a flow of oil, it will get washed out. So, you pump in mud as a vast rate, which overcomes the oil pressure, forming a plug, then a concrete cap is poured. Sometimes, they do a series of mud, concrete, mud, concrete.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt617zYAbng

Reports by scientists, engineers, and the government show that they all knew the Gulf of Mexico seabed was unstable (http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2010/06/danger-lurks-in-deep-water-2.html) as early as a decade ago. :eek:

Welcome to capitalism..

They have it capped.