jjmaccrimmon (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
jjmaccrimmon) wrote2010-06-02 11:17 pm
jjmaccrimmon) wrote2010-06-02 11:17 pm
Random bits of dementia - the spill
Given that British Petroleum (BP) has managed to muck up the Gulf of Mexico along the US southern coast so well, it amazes me to think that this is a company with over 50 years of offshore drilling experience. Is it hubris, corporate ignorance or lack of retaining/empowering technical experts that caused the blow out on the well that is fouling thousands of square miles of Gulf waters? Where was the back up plans? Where was the testing on equipment and procedure? Where was the emergency response plan for everything? It didn’t exist according to most reports. BP has been winging it from the start it appears, with no plans to stop, contain or safely clean up the spill.
So many ideas have been mentioned. Some are simple and others are completely insane. Of the simple ones, one person wrote about simply building a mound of rock over the well head and pour maritime concrete over the whole thing. It was deemed unfeasible for fear the oil would leak around the bottom of the mound. I shocked a dear friend in chat a few days ago when I mentioned one of the more demented ideas I’ve actually heard. Tactical nuke. No this wasn’t my idea, it came via one of the self proclaimed ‘experts’ out there. They actually presented the idea of a detonating a 1kt device about 200 feet above the wellhead to compress and fuse the subsurface rock while the fireball would burn up and vaporize oil soaked waters. They even pointed out that the islands we conducted underwater tests near in the Pacific have recovered well. They failed to consider the blast would generate a 30 foot tidal wave that would hit a close to 700 miles of US Gulf coast alone. In addition, it would likely foul oil coming from any (remaining) oil platforms within 100 miles. The EMP burst would ruin electronics w/in 25 miles. And oh I didn’t mention that we signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty which bans this sort of action. Sorry name of multiple lady friends, I took the dark humor a bit too far. While I admit I played Devil’s Advocate a bit with this ludicrous idea, I didn’t get to mention that it wouldn’t work and that the political powers would NEVER allow this to happen.
Speaking of the political powers, the State of Louisiana and the (much maligned) Federal Government swung into action pretty rapidly to start placing equipment and begin coordinating efforts. Yes, it doesn’t appear at casual glance that the Obama Admin is doing much, but there are thousands of square miles of coastal space that’s being covered and the US Coast Guard is the primary coordination source for action. BP on the other hand is hiring thousands of workers to man boats, clean shoreline and look busy. Yes, look busy.. The problem is BP is hiring many people to do cursory cleanup efforts but isn’t thinking beyond immediate public relations effects. Why would I suggest this?
The EPA came out today with a scathing report described that BP is engaged in at best amateurish efforts to or worst, systemic and calculated efforts to adequately protect clean-up workers. The report goes further to say that the chemical dispersants and solvents are as bad or worse for the environment as the spill itself. Most people have never been around and oil well or a refinery, so let me paint a picture for you. Fresh crude oil reeks. For weeks, it gives off a bouquet of toxic chemicals that damage the respiratory and nervous system, including several known carcinogens. Add the dispersants which are effectively benzene (carcinogen), kerosene (respiratory agent) and several other hydrides (known for respiratory distress issues) and through exposure workers can get continuous low doses of poisons to their systems unless they wear respirators. Oh did I mention, BP isn’t issuing respirators or even advising coastal or sea going cleanup crews to use them? It looks good to hire thousands of people to clean up and pump money into the local economy they’ve devastated, but you can bet they’ll claim no responsibility for the thousands of medical cases that will pop up around the region caused by chemical exposure. They’ll litigate and hand ring until claimants die or the company is forced to pay up.
Wildlife and sea-life in the area are screwed. I wish I could offer a kinder and more hopeful assessment but there is none. The oil and its toxic effects will damage ecosystems where it’s entered. Some animals and fish will flee to other areas. Time and some basic measures will help the ecosystems damaged. The Gulf has had other spills and recovered over a period of several years. Some of the ideas to mitigate the effects come with a price and some have their own risks. One idea comes via the US Corps of Engineers. For years there’s been talk of increasing the release of waters from the Mississippi River to replenish the Delta with sediment. I say, open the flood gates and let the Mississippi and other regional rivers flush the coastal waters. Fresh mud and sediment would cover the oil and tar. In fact, the oil and tar could act as binding agent to allow some barrier islands to regenerate in the face coastal erosion. No it’s not the best situation, but it offers some potential hope. For the marsh areas, one novel idea I read about was to spray/spread saw dust over areas as an absorbtive and clumping material. Oil on the surface would readily bind to it and it could be removed from the waters. After removal it could be burned eventually or dumped on BP’s headquarters. Either one works.
At the end of June, I’m supposed to head to the Mississippi coast for a photoshoot with a model there. At that time I’ll get a first hand view of the situation.
So many ideas have been mentioned. Some are simple and others are completely insane. Of the simple ones, one person wrote about simply building a mound of rock over the well head and pour maritime concrete over the whole thing. It was deemed unfeasible for fear the oil would leak around the bottom of the mound. I shocked a dear friend in chat a few days ago when I mentioned one of the more demented ideas I’ve actually heard. Tactical nuke. No this wasn’t my idea, it came via one of the self proclaimed ‘experts’ out there. They actually presented the idea of a detonating a 1kt device about 200 feet above the wellhead to compress and fuse the subsurface rock while the fireball would burn up and vaporize oil soaked waters. They even pointed out that the islands we conducted underwater tests near in the Pacific have recovered well. They failed to consider the blast would generate a 30 foot tidal wave that would hit a close to 700 miles of US Gulf coast alone. In addition, it would likely foul oil coming from any (remaining) oil platforms within 100 miles. The EMP burst would ruin electronics w/in 25 miles. And oh I didn’t mention that we signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty which bans this sort of action. Sorry name of multiple lady friends, I took the dark humor a bit too far. While I admit I played Devil’s Advocate a bit with this ludicrous idea, I didn’t get to mention that it wouldn’t work and that the political powers would NEVER allow this to happen.
Speaking of the political powers, the State of Louisiana and the (much maligned) Federal Government swung into action pretty rapidly to start placing equipment and begin coordinating efforts. Yes, it doesn’t appear at casual glance that the Obama Admin is doing much, but there are thousands of square miles of coastal space that’s being covered and the US Coast Guard is the primary coordination source for action. BP on the other hand is hiring thousands of workers to man boats, clean shoreline and look busy. Yes, look busy.. The problem is BP is hiring many people to do cursory cleanup efforts but isn’t thinking beyond immediate public relations effects. Why would I suggest this?
The EPA came out today with a scathing report described that BP is engaged in at best amateurish efforts to or worst, systemic and calculated efforts to adequately protect clean-up workers. The report goes further to say that the chemical dispersants and solvents are as bad or worse for the environment as the spill itself. Most people have never been around and oil well or a refinery, so let me paint a picture for you. Fresh crude oil reeks. For weeks, it gives off a bouquet of toxic chemicals that damage the respiratory and nervous system, including several known carcinogens. Add the dispersants which are effectively benzene (carcinogen), kerosene (respiratory agent) and several other hydrides (known for respiratory distress issues) and through exposure workers can get continuous low doses of poisons to their systems unless they wear respirators. Oh did I mention, BP isn’t issuing respirators or even advising coastal or sea going cleanup crews to use them? It looks good to hire thousands of people to clean up and pump money into the local economy they’ve devastated, but you can bet they’ll claim no responsibility for the thousands of medical cases that will pop up around the region caused by chemical exposure. They’ll litigate and hand ring until claimants die or the company is forced to pay up.
Wildlife and sea-life in the area are screwed. I wish I could offer a kinder and more hopeful assessment but there is none. The oil and its toxic effects will damage ecosystems where it’s entered. Some animals and fish will flee to other areas. Time and some basic measures will help the ecosystems damaged. The Gulf has had other spills and recovered over a period of several years. Some of the ideas to mitigate the effects come with a price and some have their own risks. One idea comes via the US Corps of Engineers. For years there’s been talk of increasing the release of waters from the Mississippi River to replenish the Delta with sediment. I say, open the flood gates and let the Mississippi and other regional rivers flush the coastal waters. Fresh mud and sediment would cover the oil and tar. In fact, the oil and tar could act as binding agent to allow some barrier islands to regenerate in the face coastal erosion. No it’s not the best situation, but it offers some potential hope. For the marsh areas, one novel idea I read about was to spray/spread saw dust over areas as an absorbtive and clumping material. Oil on the surface would readily bind to it and it could be removed from the waters. After removal it could be burned eventually or dumped on BP’s headquarters. Either one works.
At the end of June, I’m supposed to head to the Mississippi coast for a photoshoot with a model there. At that time I’ll get a first hand view of the situation.
no subject
good post/read btw
been reading a lot lately, some of the ideas floating around out there, though, never cease to amaze me, glad not to be alone
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject