|
A $20 Billion down payment...
....for cleanup and damages, pluse $100 million immediately for oil patch
workers out of work, plus no limits on future payments, plus no immunity for court cases... And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? No more than the $75 million cap, the taxpayers would pick up the rest, and we'd be overpaying Halliburton et al for ****ing up the cleanup. But...froggy and his daughter might get work out of it... |
A $20 Billion down payment...
|
A $20 Billion down payment...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry
wrote: ...for cleanup and damages, pluse $100 million immediately for oil patch workers out of work, plus no limits on future payments, plus no immunity for court cases... And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? the taxpayers would be bailing out BP since t hey're rich and need the help... |
A $20 Billion down payment...
|
A $20 Billion down payment...
On 16/06/2010 1:12 PM, Harry wrote:
...for cleanup and damages, pluse $100 million immediately for oil patch workers out of work, plus no limits on future payments, plus no immunity for court cases... And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? No more than the $75 million cap, the taxpayers would pick up the rest, and we'd be overpaying Halliburton et al for ****ing up the cleanup. But...froggy and his daughter might get work out of it... I think it is much more simple. BP foreign. Exxon American GM American Toyota Foreign Obamer is just doing the old bully trick. Bet the CEO for BP gets fired shortly. I am not a shareholder, but if I was, I would torch the CEO... He should have, behind closed doors told Obama o shove it. Forced marist Obama's hand. Worst that happens, is BP (USA) goes down the toilet, BP World lives on and they have nothing to do with marxist USA. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry wrote: And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the oil business working together to plug this well on the first day. I suspect Obama is still not getting that level of cooperation from people he has demonized for 2 years. Come on! Obama had people onsite the next day. The "best people" are, according to all reports, BP techs. They have the most experience. If B/C were in charge, Bush would be flying around the country afraid to land, and Cheney would be holed up in his undisclosed location clinking glasses with his oil buddy execs. Obama hasn't demonized anyone, at least not anyone who didn't deserve it. Please cite your claim otherwise. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
"Jim" wrote in message ... wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry wrote: And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the oil business working together to plug this well on the first day. I suspect Obama is still not getting that level of cooperation from people he has demonized for 2 years. You're both wingers, and full of it. 1. This type blowout has never happened before, and nobody can plug it, then or now. The relief wells will supposedly do that. 2. BP already has had from the beginning the best expertise in the oil industry to try to plug it. It's in their interest to do so, because the longer oil flows, the better their chance of going bankrupt. Obama doesn't need BP's "cooperation." He just has to make them pay for the damages and try to keep his poll numbers up. Umm... he's a politician. He wants to get reelected. That's pretty normal. 3. Only the feds have the clout and resources to clean up the mess. And whether Bush or Obama, it's the same creaky bureaucracy unless POTUS commands the military to take over and control activities with the rules thrown out. The scope of this disaster demanded that from the beginning. Bush failed the test for Katrina. Obama has failed now. The only thing Obama has failed at is when he believed what BP told him and the rest of us. They lied and continue to lie. Equating Bush's complete and utter failure for Katrina, with being mislead is ridiculous. 4. Deep offshore drilling can be made safe with correct procedures. One way is to require an initial 100' cemented caisson with double failsafe shutoffs instead of a single blowout preventer on the seabed. Drilling then proceeds through the caisson. Oh, that adds $20-40 million to the well cost? Big deal. That and the requirement of two relief wells done at the same time. That would add to the costs, but it would still be quite profitable. Certainly, the financial hit would have been less than now. 5. You guys playing politics with a national tragedy are dopes. I agree that this is beyond politics... completely. Jim - Injecting some common sense here. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
|
A $20 Billion down payment...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:24:18 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:11:31 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:02:17 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:42:12 -0400, bpuharic wrote: You may not like it but someone in the business has a better chance in building a coalition of all the oil companies to fix this than an outsider. anybody know what this means? what 'coalition' is necessary? this is an engineering problem. Exactly ... and the more engineers you have working on the fix the better chance you have. actually it's just the opposite. the more people you have working on an engineering problem the more likely you are to argue yourself into indecision. you need the RIGHT people, not MORE people. that's what you don't understand Again, who besides Tony Hayward says BP has the right people? fine. you go find more experienced engineers. then let BP know about 'em. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:18:45 -0500, Jim wrote:
4. Deep offshore drilling can be made safe with correct procedures. One way is to require an initial 100' cemented caisson with double failsafe shutoffs instead of a single blowout preventer on the seabed. Drilling then proceeds through the caisson. Oh, that adds $20-40 million to the well cost? Big deal. Standard procedure when spudding in a new hole. IIRC, you drill several hundred feet, set casing, and cement it in. That "single blowout preventer" is a bit of a misnomer. The BOP has three rams, a shear, an annular, and another ram I forget the name of. BOPs, properly sized and maintained, work. They are not meant for abandonment of the hole, but in a pinch ... There real purpose is be able to seal the whole, while weighting up the mud, circulating on choke, and regaining control of the well. I think you will find when the investigation is complete, BP made some decisions based on economics, that were rather short sighted. One, they continued operation with a damaged annular ram. Two, switching the mud for seawater, was, I believe, the direct cause. 5,000 feet of properly weighted mud may have kept the gas incursion from ever happening. Using seawater was reckless. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
thunder wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:18:45 -0500, Jim wrote: 4. Deep offshore drilling can be made safe with correct procedures. One way is to require an initial 100' cemented caisson with double failsafe shutoffs instead of a single blowout preventer on the seabed. Drilling then proceeds through the caisson. Oh, that adds $20-40 million to the well cost? Big deal. Standard procedure when spudding in a new hole. IIRC, you drill several hundred feet, set casing, and cement it in. That "single blowout preventer" is a bit of a misnomer. The BOP has three rams, a shear, an annular, and another ram I forget the name of. BOPs, properly sized and maintained, work. They are not meant for abandonment of the hole, but in a pinch ... There real purpose is be able to seal the whole, while weighting up the mud, circulating on choke, and regaining control of the well. I'm not talking about "standard procedure" protective casing cementing or a single BOP closure redundancy. That didn't work. None of it. That's why all that oil is in the Gulf. Saying you just keep doing what you've been doing after this won't cut it. The BOP process in use is itself flawed and the Cameron BOP shear isn't designed to cut through fittings, which are 10% of drill pipe length. You can find some info on that here http://energycommerce.house.gov/Pres...12.2010.oi.pdf Why do you think they haven't fitted another closure on top of the BOP? You've seen that undamaged flange just waiting to retain a valve that could shut the flow down. I won't bother to describe the process in detail, because there's more than one way to design it, but essentially you drop a specially fabricated and large throated open valve over the flange, and when in place the valve bottom is hydraulically actuated to clamp under the flange. Suitable gasketing is included or sealant can be injected. As the valve is closed, the well pressure pulls it tight against the flange bottom. This isn't a brilliant idea of mine. It all simple plumbing and BP maybe has already had the fitting fabricated. But they won't use it because they are afraid the well pressure will blow out that "standard procedure" casing and the oil will flow from the seabed with no chance of containing some of it as they are now. That's the same reason they don't try another top kill now that they can make a decent connection for the mud, instead of sticking a tube in a holed riser as they initially tried. They aren't saying what they fear, which is that they don't trust the well casing can hold the pressure. I think you will find when the investigation is complete, BP made some decisions based on economics, that were rather short sighted. One, they continued operation with a damaged annular ram. Two, switching the mud for seawater, was, I believe, the direct cause. 5,000 feet of properly weighted mud may have kept the gas incursion from ever happening. Using seawater was reckless. We'll see. But no amount of regulating inadequate procedures will make them adequate. There will be no proof that the drillers knew the BOP was damaged. I saw the Kenner Coast Guard hearings and heard the driller boss (OIM) testimony. Unless he changes his testimony there was no indication the BOP had a problem. It is possible that many deep wells are waiting to surprise drillers with totally unexpected pressures. There's so much BS and uninformed opinion on the net like what I'm writing that I gave up trying to get a handle on possible pressures. But this is an interesting link with interesting embedded links. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/5...pwater-Horizon BTW, the oil lease cost and royalty payments mentioned there completely contradict what I just heard a congresscritter say - he said it was all totally free oil for BP. You can't trust the pols any more than BP. I firmly believe pressure containment caissons with multiple and perhaps non-retrievable sub-seabed BOPs are the best way to minimize spill chance to an acceptable level. That level is 0% chance. The stakes are too high to keep using "standard procedure." Jim - Now I'm going the change the kitchen sink trap. It's dripping. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
|
A $20 Billion down payment...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:29:52 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:22:20 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:12:15 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry wrote: And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the oil business working together to plug this wel since they CAUSED the leak what makes you think they'd want to plug it? Because they are losing money. I thought about it and I think this is where Clinton and his brothers the Bushes should step in like they did in Haiti and help out. You may not like it but someone in the business has a better chance in building a coalition of all the oil companies to fix this than an outsider. "You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties You want Dick on that well You need Dick on that well". Besides, who says BP caused it. This could well have been a Democrat inspired ploy to get Obama's energy bills passed. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
On 6/17/10 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 06:14:36 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:24:18 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:11:31 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:02:17 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:42:12 -0400, wrote: You may not like it but someone in the business has a better chance in building a coalition of all the oil companies to fix this than an outsider. anybody know what this means? what 'coalition' is necessary? this is an engineering problem. Exactly ... and the more engineers you have working on the fix the better chance you have. actually it's just the opposite. the more people you have working on an engineering problem the more likely you are to argue yourself into indecision. you need the RIGHT people, not MORE people. that's what you don't understand Again, who besides Tony Hayward says BP has the right people? fine. you go find more experienced engineers. then let BP know about 'em. Assuming there isn't a spoofer here, you really need to make up your mind. Either BP is the best of the best or they are incompetent assholes. You have made both cases in consecutive postings. You really don't think anyone from the other oil companies has thought of something better? Actually, no. I don't believe the oil companies spend much money or time devising ways to clean up their messes. In fact, during congressional hearings, it was revealed that the disaster mitigation plans of five of the largest oil companies were nearly identical, only nine pages long and full of boilerplate. I think nations should allow existing arrangements with oil companies to expire, and any new arrangements should keep nations in control of their resources, with the drilling companies hired as subcontractors, not owners, of a nation's mineral wealth. In fact, doesn't norway do that now? That oil belongs to us, not BP. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
"John H" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:29:52 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:22:20 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:12:15 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry wrote: And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the oil business working together to plug this wel since they CAUSED the leak what makes you think they'd want to plug it? Because they are losing money. I thought about it and I think this is where Clinton and his brothers the Bushes should step in like they did in Haiti and help out. You may not like it but someone in the business has a better chance in building a coalition of all the oil companies to fix this than an outsider. "You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties You want Dick on that well You need Dick on that well". Besides, who says BP caused it. This could well have been a Democrat inspired ploy to get Obama's energy bills passed. You're still wearing your aluminum hat right? Don't take it off, even if you decide to take a shower some day! |
A $20 Billion down payment...
|
A $20 Billion down payment...
|
A $20 Billion down payment...
On 6/17/10 4:33 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:29:48 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 06:14:36 -0400, wrote: you need the RIGHT people, not MORE people. that's what you don't understand Again, who besides Tony Hayward says BP has the right people? fine. you go find more experienced engineers. then let BP know about 'em. Assuming there isn't a spoofer here, you really need to make up your mind. Either BP is the best of the best or they are incompetent assholes. You have made both cases in consecutive postings. right now they are the only game in town. BEFORE this event they were crminals and behaved with disregard for safety. NOW they're paying through the ass so it's in their best interests to get it capped you dont understand engineering You really don't think anyone from the other oil companies has thought of something better? nope. technology is technology. If "anyone from the other oil companies" has something better... ....where is it? |
A $20 Billion down payment...
On 17/06/2010 5:45 AM, thunder wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:18:45 -0500, Jim wrote: 4. Deep offshore drilling can be made safe with correct procedures. One way is to require an initial 100' cemented caisson with double failsafe shutoffs instead of a single blowout preventer on the seabed. Drilling then proceeds through the caisson. Oh, that adds $20-40 million to the well cost? Big deal. Standard procedure when spudding in a new hole. IIRC, you drill several hundred feet, set casing, and cement it in. That "single blowout preventer" is a bit of a misnomer. The BOP has three rams, a shear, an annular, and another ram I forget the name of. BOPs, properly sized and maintained, work. They are not meant for abandonment of the hole, but in a pinch ... There real purpose is be able to seal the whole, while weighting up the mud, circulating on choke, and regaining control of the well. Apparently, true or not there is some question if a standard BOP was used. I think you will find when the investigation is complete, BP made some decisions based on economics, that were rather short sighted. One, they continued operation with a damaged annular ram. Two, switching the mud for seawater, was, I believe, the direct cause. 5,000 feet of properly weighted mud may have kept the gas incursion from ever happening. Using seawater was reckless. Amatures... You never pump water down a well to those depths unless you want some extra pressure. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
On 16/06/2010 6:42 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:29:52 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:22:20 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:12:15 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, wrote: And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the oil business working together to plug this wel since they CAUSED the leak what makes you think they'd want to plug it? Because they are losing money. cheney let them save $500K! big bux to an oil company! cheney gutted the regulations. big bux to an oil company You may not like it but someone in the business has a better chance in building a coalition of all the oil companies to fix this than an outsider. anybody know what this means? what 'coalition' is necessary? this is an engineering problem. you righties keep bleating that obama should take his petroleum engineering degree to the gulf to help out BP since it has no experience in drilling. No. But it would not hurt if he shut his big mouth and listened to some professionals in the business. Ones without an axe to grind like the American poluter Exxon. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
On 17/06/2010 9:01 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:29:52 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:22:20 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:12:15 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, wrote: And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the oil business working together to plug this wel since they CAUSED the leak what makes you think they'd want to plug it? Because they are losing money. I thought about it and I think this is where Clinton and his brothers the Bushes should step in like they did in Haiti and help out. You may not like it but someone in the business has a better chance in building a coalition of all the oil companies to fix this than an outsider. "You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties You want Dick on that well You need Dick on that well". Besides, who says BP caused it. This could well have been a Democrat inspired ploy to get Obama's energy bills passed. Who knows. RIP (NYSE) owned and operated the rig on BPs behalf. Going to be a huge lawsuit there. Bet the maggot lawers are already polishing the knives. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
On 16/06/2010 5:21 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, wrote: ...for cleanup and damages, pluse $100 million immediately for oil patch workers out of work, plus no limits on future payments, plus no immunity for court cases... And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge? the taxpayers would be bailing out BP since t hey're rich and need the help... They bailed out American Exxon.... GM too.... a long slew of banks... -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
A $20 Billion down payment...
wrote in message ... On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:33:05 -0400, bpuharic wrote: right now they are the only game in town. BEFORE this event they were crminals and behaved with disregard for safety. NOW they're paying through the ass so it's in their best interests to get it capped you dont understand engineering I do understand this is now a 1500 mile disaster with different challenges at every pass. They can certainly use more than a few engineers. Even at the well head, why wouldn't ideas from other companies that were not brought up in the BP culture be helpful. I do know a little about engineering and I can guarantee, engineers tend to feed off each other and develop a monolithic way of thinking. IBM used to ship a project to another location when they got stuck, just to get another view point on the problems. Good God. You're spot on right about engineers!! lol |
A $20 Billion down payment...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:34:39 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:34:39 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:49:44 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:42:56 -0400, Harry wrote: You really don't think anyone from the other oil companies has thought of something better? Actually, no. Since they are making all of this up as they go along, why would you think that? BP is not the only company that drills oil wells. what makes you think their engineers are dumber than exxon's? Dumber? no but that doesn't mean they all have the same ideas. ideas are generally marginal...incremental. there's no revolution in cleaning up an oil spill yep. cheney told 'em to do what they wanted I bet these plans are 40 years old with numerous revisions along the way. It will still be written to the government standard. yep. That is how it works now. They get to drill under a license from the government. Theoretically the government monitors the drilling but they are not competent to do it. All I have to say about the government actually managing these things is the space shuttle. 40% failure rate of the fleet with total loss of life in each failure. (2 out of the 5 that ever flew, came apart in the air) tell it to toyota. how long were they making cars? Does the government own Toyota? What's your point.? It is certainly not that 40% of the Toyotas ever made crashed. private enterprise isn't better than govt. they both have failure |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:30 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com