The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Was - Could BP blow up the oil well .. to to Who is responsible and plolitics of  (Read 7006 times)

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Re: Could BP blow up the oil well to stop the leak?
« Reply #25 on: 15/06/2010 02:22:14 »
On a slightly more positive note ;D I have a rather daft suggestion that might be worth considering for about a millisecond:

Could we trap oil in a vortex?

I seem to remember that things that float in water tend to get "stuck" in wirlpools. Would oil become trapped in a vortex, and if so, would it be practical to produce vortices to at least prevent some of the oil from spreading over the ocean surface?

I'm guessing it is possible to create a vortex by drawing a large volume of water into a pump below the surface - a sort of artificial plug-hole.

Perhaps something like this is already in use. Any ideas?
 

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Could BP blow up the oil well to stop the leak?
« Reply #26 on: 15/06/2010 19:09:08 »
I decided to split this away from "Geology, Palaeontology & Archaeology" to Just Chat. We are not discussing anything related to geology - or any science. This has become about companies, politics, etc.

 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Was - Could BP blow up the oil well .. to to Who is responsible and plolitics of

I didn't know Toto Who had anything to do with it. After all, it's a long way from Kansas.

Or did you mean Desmond Tutu? If so, we might be able to drag religion into it as well  ;D
« Last Edit: 15/06/2010 20:01:23 by Geezer »
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Oops! Maybe I should not have mentioned religion.


"AP - BP says oil containment operations have resumed in the Gulf of Mexico after a ship fire caused by a bolt of lightning had shut down the containment for about five hours."

 

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
Actually, perhaps Why did Sir William Petrie Flinders WEAR HIS TUTU?

And there is another side of the coin. Should all of the politics result in BP having problems it would cause huge damage to the US. Already the 6 month moratorium on drilling in the GOM is estimated to probably cause the loss of about 250,000 off- and on-shore support jobs in the Gulf Coast region. That is a huge economic hit for any country to take

This is a world-wide disaster as BP is the largest producer of oil in the world.

When General Motors was the largest car company in the world it was said that "As GM goes, so goes the nation." Now, I am very afraid that it is "As BP goes, so goes the world."
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Does "too big to fail" sound familiar?

Regarding media coverage of these unfortunate events, I get the impression that the media in the UK did a really excellent job of getting everyone there all bent out of shape in response to the "sound bites" coming out of The White House on the subject of holding bp accountable. (BTW - I'm not sure those comments were appropriate, or helpful.)

I would really like to know if the media in the UK gave similar coverage to the sound bites coming out of the mouth of Tony Hayward, or did they play that down. His most offensive comment to date is "I want my life back." Under the circumstances, probably not the most appropriate thing for the CEO of the largest oil company in the World to have said after a accident that killed eleven people.

Anyway, is the UK media being even handed, or is it not?

Also, the "main man" in the US has spoken. When does the main man for bp (the invisible chairman) plan to speak up?
 

Offline graham.d

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2208
    • View Profile
In my opinion BP took on this job with a clear understanding of the risks involved. They may have rated the risk as low (in likelyhood) but must have known the extent of the financial consequences should it go wrong. If they didn't, they should have. I guess they thought the potential reward was worth the gamble. It turned out they lost this one.

Obama is playing politics. I am not sure that it will all be to the benefit of the US. His concept to rid the world of the need to drill for oil by development of alternative energy sources is a great idea if there was any immediate simple replacement. I'm sure the rhetoric sounds good but I am not sure the engineering will be that simple. There are two likely outcomes from this:
1. The cost of deep sea drilling will now be astronomic if in waters that could damage the US if anything went wrong. I think BP were the only company who could do it and I don't see them trying again anytime soon.
2. Drilling will continue in and off the coasts of third world countries where there is less likely to be litigation as a result of problems. This is not without economic and political consequences though.

The net result will be an escalating cost of fuel. It will happen eventually but this will mean it is going to happen sooner.
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Quote
Anyway, is the UK media being even handed, or is it not?

I think the UK media is more interested in the World Cup atm, but then I only really listen to BBC Radio 4.  It hasn't really been a topic of conversation amongst the people I know (drink with).

The reporting on R4 seems to be just pretty much what different people are saying.  This has mostly amounted to what the various US government officials have said, as they've been the most vocal and vociferous about who's fault is was, and more to the point, who's going to pay for it, but it has included a few views by people who have been annoyed by the US government's attitude that BP has been deemed to be guilty and are already seeking compensation before the 'trial' has even begun.  For the most part though, R4 doesn't have an overt opinion of its own and just reports what is said by various people, leaving the listeners to come to their own conclusions (one could argue that they do express an opinion just by virtue of what they do and don't report, but overall it seems pretty balanced to me when I compare what they say with other sources).

If there was any real degree of opinion about it here, for example in newspaper editorials, it's likely that R4 would broadcast that fact, so as I've not heard about it I'm assuming that the newspapers aren't really pushing any particular angle either, and are just more interested in the sensationalism of the scale of the event.

I think it has to be said that many, if not most people in the UK regard the antics that we hear of from the US with a high degree of bemusement, largely though, because it's only the weird, daft or sensational stuff that's interesting, but having said that, there does seem to be a lot of it.  However, it's a much bigger country, with a lot more people to do more weird things.  In fairness, I should also mention that in general, the people of the UK don't have much regard for their own government either (regardless of which party is 'in').  With regard to the current Gulf oil spill, I don't think many people here are too surprised by the ever increasing estimates of how much oil is being spilled, and nor by the talk of criminal charges being pressed, because it just seems to be a pretty clear case of the complainant exaggerating their claim to increase their compensation.

Perhaps some of the folks who do read the rags can comment?
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Thanks gents!

Lee, I think Radio 4 would try to be quite fair in their reporting.

I think Graham is right. The bottom line is consumers will have to pay more. And it's one thing to say we are going to kick our addiction to oil, but we've been hearing that for years. Mind you, it's an ill wind, so maybe this mess will finally get the US heading in a different direction.


 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums