Super User roadwarrior Posted July 15, 2010 Super User Posted July 15, 2010 As of 2:25 CST, the oil flow into the Gulf of Mexico has been stopped! http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/15/bp-begins-critical-pressure-test-new-cap-oil/ Quote
Super User Grey Wolf Posted July 15, 2010 Super User Posted July 15, 2010 That's good to hear !!!!!!!!!!! Quote
Bass_Fanatic Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 Yea!!!!! Maybe all the fish aren't dead yet??? Quote
NateFollmer Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 All I can say: It's about time! Why wasn't this done weeks ago? Quote
Uncle Leo Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 My only worry is that this is a good fix. They lack experience with this and as pressure builds who knows. Quote
frogtog Posted July 16, 2010 Posted July 16, 2010 They took my advice with the hydraulics and it worked. I was born one day but it wasn't yesterday. Now watch the gas prices. Quote
Super User Long Mike Posted July 16, 2010 Super User Posted July 16, 2010 The big worry for BP and all others is that the well could be blowing out through possible fissures in the surrounding earth. This is a rarity with oil well blow-outs, but BP is being extremely cautious in not allowing the cap on the well to cause any over-pressure on those potential fissures. That's a good thing. Quote
Super User 5bass Posted July 16, 2010 Super User Posted July 16, 2010 All I can say: It's about time! Why wasn't this done weeks months ago? Fixed your post Nate Quote
Nice_Bass Posted July 16, 2010 Posted July 16, 2010 Good news. Now hoping it really is the truth and it indeed is fixed...completely Quote
Super User fishfordollars Posted July 16, 2010 Super User Posted July 16, 2010 Time will tell. Lot of questions remaining. Quote
Super User roadwarrior Posted July 16, 2010 Author Super User Posted July 16, 2010 Well, it seems that even if the cap is not a permanent solution, most of the oil seepage can now be recovered instead of being dispersed. Progress on the relief wells is ahead of schedule and drilling has resumed. 8-) Quote
Super User SirSnookalot Posted July 16, 2010 Super User Posted July 16, 2010 The way I understood is tat with the cap they can capture 80,000 gal a day instead 25,000. The key is the relief well to permanently stop the leak. Quote
Super User Sam Posted July 16, 2010 Super User Posted July 16, 2010 The damage is done and it will take decades to repair the marsh and economy. We also need to drill closer to shore to avoid drilling in deep water. Quote
Super User roadwarrior Posted July 16, 2010 Author Super User Posted July 16, 2010 My guess is the "damage" is way overstated and the entire region will be back to normal by next spring. Oil evaporates and dissipates over a relatively short period of time: http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects/120/120BG.PDF Quote
Tokyo Tony Posted July 16, 2010 Posted July 16, 2010 Was the delay caused by the fact that they weren't looking for a way simply to plug the leak, but a way to plug it and still make money off of it? RW I hope you're right, and that things are better by next spring. I'd like to live on the Gulf Coast someday. Quote
tyrius. Posted July 16, 2010 Posted July 16, 2010 My guess is the "damage" is way overstated and the entire region will be back to normal by next spring. Oil evaporates and dissipates over a relatively short period of time: http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects/120/120BG.PDF Oil from the Exxon Valdez is STILL on the shores of Alaska 21 years after that spill. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10661883 http://www.unc.edu/news/archives/dec03/peters121803.html Quote
tyrius. Posted July 16, 2010 Posted July 16, 2010 Was the delay caused by the fact that they weren't looking for a way simply to plug the leak, but a way to plug it and still make money off of it? Let's think about it logically a bit. How long does it take to come up with the idea, design, build, test, deliver, and install an 18 foot tall, 150,000 pound device that is capable of containing greater than 8,000 PSI of pressure at an undersea depth of around 1 mile? This isn't something that they can cobble together MacGyver style. Quote
1inStripes Posted July 16, 2010 Posted July 16, 2010 My guess is the "damage" is way overstated and the entire region will be back to normal by next spring. Oil evaporates and dissipates over a relatively short period of time: http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects/120/120BG.PDF Oil from the Exxon Valdez is STILL on the shores of Alaska 21 years after that spill. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10661883 http://www.unc.edu/news/archives/dec03/peters121803.html But there was very little effects long term fromt he Ixtoc II (sp) oil leak that was quite similar in the Gulf of Mexico in 1979. Quote
Super User bilgerat Posted July 16, 2010 Super User Posted July 16, 2010 My guess is the "damage" is way overstated and the entire region will be back to normal by next spring. Oil evaporates and dissipates over a relatively short period of time: http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects/120/120BG.PDF Tell that to the folks that earn their income from the gulf. I hope you're right, but how can pumping that much oil in such a (relatively) short period of time NOT have an impact ? It's a documented fact that there are still lingering effects from the Exxon Valdez spill back in the 80's, one being the loss of the herring fishery there. Quote
Super User Long Mike Posted July 16, 2010 Super User Posted July 16, 2010 I'm not disputing the fact that the Gulf coast will suffer major damage, but the big difference between the Alaska tragedy and the Gulf is the temperature. The muchhigher temps in the Gulf will aid tremendously in the evaporation of the oil. Quote
Super User .dsaavedra. Posted July 16, 2010 Super User Posted July 16, 2010 I'm not disputing the fact that the Gulf cost suffer major damage, but the big difference between the Alaska tragedy and the Gulf is the temperature. The much higher temps in the Gulf will aid tremendously in the evaporation of the oil. good point, mike Quote
seyone Posted July 17, 2010 Posted July 17, 2010 I am pretty sure that the high temps in the gulf will aid in the evaporation. Since I am not a chemist I don't know how much faster. One of my concerns is about the oil that does evaporate. What impact does it have when it gets into the atmosphere, and what happens if and when it comes down in the rain? Quote
Super User SirSnookalot Posted July 17, 2010 Super User Posted July 17, 2010 I am pretty sure that the high temps in the gulf will aid in the evaporation. Since I am not a chemist I don't know how much faster. One of my concerns is about the oil that does evaporate. What impact does it have when it gets into the atmosphere, and what happens if and when it comes down in the rain? Right on ! To say the damage is over rated is burying your head in the sand. The hardship caused to the local people is catastrophic to them, due to no fault of their own, many of these people just make it by in the best of times. Quote
Super User cart7t Posted July 19, 2010 Super User Posted July 19, 2010 I'm not disputing the fact that the Gulf coast will suffer major damage, but the big difference between the Alaska tragedy and the Gulf is the temperature. The muchhigher temps in the Gulf will aid tremendously in the evaporation of the oil. The stuff on the surface appears to be the tip of the iceberg. There are large oil plumes deep in the ocean that may or may not surface. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-08/toxic-undersea-oil-plumes-lurk-in-gulf-of-mexico-update2-.html Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.