U.S Oil leak

On the subject of the fractured sea bed, there's this news report from Matt Simmons from before the 'top kill' effort.

Simmons is head of a multimillion dollar oil investment fund.

 
I do hope the Royal Opera House productions continue to be sponsored by BP.
 
After watching Panorama tonight I have to ask what the fuck were those guys doing on a pleasurecraft FISHING in a drilling field, where there would be an exclusion zone, even sailing between the pontoons?. IF that really happened.


Sounds like bullshit to me.
 
http://m.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/06/breaking-gulf-geyser-uncapped

After an accident involving the containment system, the Gulf gusher is spewing oil iat full force yet again. Here's the breaking news blast from the Washington Post:

Adm. Thad Allen said Wednesday that an accident triggered the removal of a containment cap on the oil geyser. Officials are examining the cap to look for hydrate formation and hope to replace it on the gushing well.
The Associated Press reports that a robotic vehicle hit the containment dome's venting system, which caused gas to rise through the vent. The system cares warm water through the dome to keep ice-like crystals from forming, which is what foiled previous capping attempts.
 
I do hope the Royal Opera House productions continue to be sponsored by BP.

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/media/story/2010/06/27/bp-british-artists.html?ref=rss

British artists are joining with environmental activists to protest BP's sponsorship of many famous U.K. galleries and museums in the wake of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.

Composed of musicians, filmmakers, writers and artists, Good Crude Britannia says on Monday, it will picket Tate Britain's summer party, which marks 20 years of sponsorship by the oil giant.

John Browne, also known as Lord Browne of Madingley, is chair of the Tate and was once the head of BP.

The oil company won't reveal how much it spends on the arts in Britain but it is likely to be one of the top three corporate sponsors in Britain. It is a financial supporter of the British Museum, the Tate galleries, the Royal Opera House, the National Portrait Gallery, the National Maritime Museum and the Science and Natural History Museum.

"Organizations like the National Portrait Gallery help shape public attitudes towards the big issues of the day and if the gallery is serious about climate change then the sponsorship deal with BP has got to end," Robin Oakley, Greenpeace's campaign director, told The Guardian newspaper.

On Tuesday, Greenpeace will hold an "alternative exhibition" at a private viewing at the gallery.

Monday's action — the biggest one yet by art activists — follows in the past week by another group of artists, the Greenwash Guerrillas, who distributed pamphlets outside the National Portrait Gallery at a BP-sponsored arts event.

And in May, a group called Liberate Tate entered the gallery's main hall and released dozens of black balloons attached to dead fish.

The Tate issued a statement after that incident saying that it "works with a wide range of corporate organizations and generates the majority of its funding from earned income and private sources."

It said the museum's board and ethics committee "regularly review compliance" with its sponsorship policies.
 
This makes me want to cry...



So now we have nature taking up both water and oil from the ocean and dumping it back on the land as rainfall.
If fish are considered too toxic to catch because of the slick i wonder how long it will be before crops are classed the same way.
Unless of course it is a load of old tosh

http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/06/raining-oil-gulf-oil-spill-BP

Then there is this report about a potential methane reserve of something like 20 miles diameter just waiting to fuck things right up

http://www.helium.com/items/1864136-how-the-ultimate-bp-gulf-disaster-could-kill-millions

with a bit more evidence to substantiate those claims

http://www.newsinferno.com/archives/21454

John Kessler of Texas A&M University in College Station, one of the scientists on the research expedition, said last week that methane in deep-ocean waters (below 1,000 feet) near the oil spill are 10,000 to 100,000 times higher than normal. At times, the team measured methane levels that were 1 million times above normal.

and just to give it a bit more credence a video that purports to show the oil leaking from fissures in the seabed. if this is for real then it goes some way to backing up the previous claims. Time to be scared?

"According to worried geologists, the first signs that the methane may burst its way through the bottom of the ocean would be fissures or cracks appearing on the ocean floor near the damaged well head."



and in an effort to adopt a sitting on the fence posture for myself try this

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25816.htm

BP Welcomes You to the Apocalypse

By Mark Morford,

By Mark Morford,

June 25, 2010 "SF Gate" -- Please do not worry. Please do not fret about that one thing you always fret about, or that other thing, or even that third thing that might have something to do with erupting oil, dead pelicans and that sickening feeling in your gut that Something is Very Wrong Indeed.

I come bearing fabulous news. There is no longer any need to concern yourself with pesky trifles like love, a mortgage, child rearing, planting a garden, dreams, money, shoes, wristwatches, parking spaces, mysterious rashes, foreign policy, baseball, bridge tolls or generally caring about much of anything in particular.

I am delighted to report it will all be over soon. If not sooner. It's true.

And it's a good thing, too, because I was just reading up on six of the worst-case scenarios resulting from the BP spill, all sorts of horrors and tragedies, abuses and unspeakables, from dire seafood shortages to horrifying ecosystem destruction, wildlife mutilation to all the years and decades before the gulf region will be anywhere near recovered. These scenarios all were, in a word, bleak. They were, in three more, thoroughly f--ing depressing.

They were also, whoops, from about two months ago. So I clicked around and quickly found another, far more recent worst-case scenario article, and boy, were its scenarios worse indeed. So awful that they effectively made the earlier batch seem meek and laughable and even sort of quaint.

So it's come to this. Every day in the media, a sort of deranged, comical footrace to figure out which worst-case scenario is really the worst, because every day comes a new stat, prediction, photo, possibility for abject horror we hadn't even conceptualized yet because, well, we've never exactly been here before, not at this scale. How bad can it all get, really? No one has a clue. Joy!

But I'm not at all worried. Because the fact is, almost none of those worst-case scenarios will actually come to pass. Do you know why? Because there are two or three even worse worst-case scenarios that easily trump any you might be reading about anywhere. Ultra, mega, super worst-case scenarios that make all the rest seem like a little splotch on your pretty new iPhone 4.

So, just what are these supermegaworst-case scenarios? They all have one thing in common: Each one of them, all by itself, spells the end of modern life as we know it. Utter annihilation. The End. I am so not kidding. OK, maybe a little. But only until we all die. After that, not kidding at all.

BP Will Kill Us All Scenario #1: Everyone knows that, early on in the spill, BP was thoughtful enough to pump millions of gallons of a horrible chemical dispersant called Corexit 9500 into the gusher, a violently toxic compound so notoriously lethal it's been banned for years by the European union. Obama & Co finally caught on to BP's tactic and told them to knock it off.

Too late. Obscure Russian scientists tell us Corexit's deadly compounds are now breaking up and evaporating into North American rainclouds, which will shortly begin raining down complete toxic hell on us all, poisoning all crops, babies, cats, Christians, Starbucks baristas and none-too-bright redneck videographers -- though it will somehow magically spare the really good jazz clubs in Louisiana and that one guy who scored the goal for the USA in the World Cup, because he's a freakin' hero.

These scientists say the toxic rain could be so poisonous, it will destroy the entire food chain and plunge North America into chaos, rendering the entire region unlivable, with any straggling survivors crawling desperately up to Canada, where they will be promptly made into slave labor to build hockey arenas and drink lager and fade into the woods.

Does that sound dubious? Totally implausible? Fine. No problem. For there is another, even better backup apocalypse scenario, even more melodramatic and wickedly cinematic, and therefore much more likely to come to pass.

BP Will Kill Us All Scenario #2: Apparently, deep in the ocean floor, just beneath the gushing oil, lives a massive bubble of methane gas the size of... oh, let's just say Texas. Maybe Oklahoma. South Carolina. Someplace gassy and slightly rancid and always ready to explode at the poke of a big phallic stick.

This is the drama: All our mucking around on the ocean floor could trigger a methane explosion so gargantuan, it will cause a tsunami. Not just any tsunami, mind you, but a "supersonic tsunami" so ultra-awesomely massive it will effortlessly wipe out the much of the gulf coast states, killing millions and completely destabilizing the nation and inducing zombie riots in the streets as everyone wails over the loss of Florida. Or, you know, not.

So there you have it. Toxic rain and supersonic tsunamis, the end of North America as we know it. Done. Finished. Certainly, one of those two scenarios is guaranteed to come to pass, right? Maybe, if we're really lucky, even both?

All right, fine. In the off-off chance that invisible Russian scientists and nutball doomsayers are wrong (impossible!), well, there is one more glorious mega scenario to consider. There is a backup to the backup to the backup. Hey, we're Americans. When it comes to dorky apocalyptic visions, we got you covered.

Here is your grand finale: A new survey says that a disturbingly large percentage of Americans -- 40 percent, to be exact -- actually believe Jesus will return by 2050, likely riding on the back of a flaming asteroid (30 percent think one will hit us by then), waving a cowboy hat and yodeling as he careens toward our hapless blue dot of inequity, pain and lousy AT&T reception.

Jesus will then crash land in Texas, wink at Dubya and Sarah Palin, and then sweep up all the True Believers in their beige Dodge minivans just as the earth shudders and implodes, just like one of those swirling black holes in "Star Trek."

How cool will that be? Answer: It will be very cool indeed. It is so cool, in fact, it totally wipes out the need to care much about anything at all. See how easy? Now, who wants pie?

Isnt speculation a wonderful thing
 
I think the "raining oil" story is a load of old tosh... but the oil leaking through the sea bed is very worrying. As for the methane gas.... a 20+ mile gas bubble under 100,000 psi rising to the surface is just fucking scary.
 
It makes you wonder in whos interest any prevention of the truth being told is in !?

I've thought from the beginning that BP will get an easy ride from the US administration. Bad press (or any) will only harm BP's shares. Has the Obama administration got down on its knees to suck the corperate cock... albeit only being seen to come down hard ???

If BP lost control of its company and went under then who would be left to foot the bill ? Its not only the money for the clean up thats at risk from all of this but all of our pensions as well.

I really dont know enough about the politics of it all to say for certain.
 
It's official - the sea bed is damaged and leaking oil and gas:-

http://www.itn.co.uk/news/cf292e2aa1be2f98237fc027dcd807a8.html

Where does the "Its official" come from? It seems far from it from the article you posted.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10692360

The big issue that BP now suffer is that the increased pressure "could" cause the sea floor to fracture. Which would be a shitter. As it is the recent cap HAS stopped a vast amount (if not all) of the oil flow. Thats a GOOD thing however you want to look at it.

However I still stand by the point that the idea that these fractures miles from the well even exist, and further more are responsible for the vast majority of the spill, are a bit tenuous at present. Its also worth noting that natural oil seeps are not uncommon the world over, ESPECIALLY off California's Pacific coast ...
 
Where does the "Its official" come from? It seems far from it from the article you posted.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10692360

The big issue that BP now suffer is that the increased pressure "could" cause the sea floor to fracture. Which would be a shitter. As it is the recent cap HAS stopped a vast amount (if not all) of the oil flow. Thats a GOOD thing however you want to look at it.

However I still stand by the point that the idea that these fractures miles from the well even exist, and further more are responsible for the vast majority of the spill, are a bit tenuous at present. Its also worth noting that natural oil seeps are not uncommon the world over, ESPECIALLY off California's Pacific coast ...

Oh yes, definitely a good thing that a cap is on. The reports of seepage from the seabed are from the White House apparently:-

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38304846

Although in the video I posted weeks ago of Matt Simmons, he was talking then about seepage from the seabed 2 miles away. Interesting that it has taken this long to become "official" news.

Agreed that it might be natural seepage, but if it is, it would seem to suggest considerable pressure and volume of oil and gas not far below the seabed.
 
i think there's little doubt now, that oil is seeping from fissures in the soft rock above the oil deposit. Some of this is appearing from vents some distance from the well-head
There are many reports that seem to confirm this.
This isn't because the seabed has cracked as a result of the drilling, but because the oil is being pushed sideways into the soft porous rock, half way up the well-bore.
Putting the cap on the well head could make that worse, because the pressure effectively increases with the cap in place, thus forcing the oil harder into the fissures.
It is not believed to be natural seepage as that usually results in asphalt volcanoes, aiui, which although fairly common in the GoM, have not been observed near the well-head.
 
Although in the video I posted weeks ago of Matt Simmons, he was talking then about seepage from the seabed 2 miles away. Interesting that it has taken this long to become "official" news.

Equally If you watch it they are saying that after doing the calculations that 5000 barrels a day was about the top amount that could have been leaking out of the pipe and yet BP managed to capture almost 16,000 barrels a day off it ... which seems a bit contradictory.

i think there's little doubt now, that oil is seeping from fissures in the soft rock above the oil deposit. Some of this is appearing from vents some distance from the well-head
There are many reports that seem to confirm this.

TBH Its the "seem" part that leaves me a little suspicious. Maybe I'm not suspicious enough or maybe I'm too suspicious but I would say that if the USGS come out and say its leaking from the seabed then I'll believe them. I think it'll be interesting over the next couple of days to see how the size of the slick changes ...

This isn't because the seabed has cracked as a result of the drilling, but because the oil is being pushed sideways into the soft porous rock, half way up the well-bore.
Putting the cap on the well head could make that worse, because the pressure effectively increases with the cap in place, thus forcing the oil harder into the fissures.

Interesting theory ... I guess thats the whole point of the relief well drilling? To go through the harder layers and then block the well below that?

It is not believed to be natural seepage as that usually results in asphalt volcanoes, aiui, which although fairly common in the GoM, have not been observed near the well-head.

Well so far they have only detected methane as far as i can tell ...
 
From The Oil Drum:-

There are three areas where concern has been raised over the possibility of oil escaping the well below the sea bed and migrating back up to the surface. This is why the ROVs are located around the well monitoring the sea bed itself. There are, as noted earlier, patches where the sea bed is evidently bubbling (in that you can see where the bubbles pop out of the mud). But there is no sign of gas or oil then slowly rising to the sea surface from the bubble action. It may, therefore be something like a field of clams sitting below the surface and aspirating and then spitting out some of the sea water. This action is not at the moment of concern, BP has checked the fluid coming out of the sediment and it is running at around 15% methane, which could just arise (according to Mr Wells) from biodegradation in the mud below the sea bed.

There is a natural seep some two miles from the site. This hydrocarbon flow has been tested and is not related to the Deepwater Spill. And so the only other area of concern is a very small leak coming out from the seal in the flexible joint (which, if you remember was straightened before the new cap was installed). The leak, at the moment is very small, and not of that much concern. However, if the leak starts to get bigger, and then turn into a stream, it may pick up some of the sand that is reported as being a concern from being in the BOP assembly. This will then, at the pressures anticipated, be enough to erode out the leak to an unacceptable size within a couple of hours. For now, however, it is very small, and not continuous flow, and so can be viewed with less concern, relative to other issues.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6756...ampaign=Feed%3A+theoildrum+%28The+Oil+Drum%29
 
This thread has had less views than the venom party thread had replies in 3 months..

Just goes to show that peeps who frequent these boards care more about where the next party will come from, than the life forms in our oceans...

Now this I find sad :Sad:
 
Back
Top