Is Offshore Oil Drilling Truly Safe?

[PRDan4th]

Would I be wrong in saying that the answer to the OP title is now a clear: "No". Whatever else may be true, this would seem to indicate that safety and recoverability are ongoing experiments at these depths.

By the by, it seems that they are going to try and seal the well-head now, for reasons which are still unclear. Their plan as stated has been to pump ethanol or hot water into the "box" to preheat the water and prevent hydrates from forming. I'm not sure why they seem to have moved into a "plug it an see" mode, but I wonder if this is likely to be effective? The depth makes all of this very risky in my view, and since I was last, um, able to post, the environmental impact has made itself far better known.

The effect of these dispersants (they are using two) is questionable given the saturation of the water column with oil, now dispersed oil and toxic dispersants. Toxic, I might add, to humans, as studies in Alaska have shown. The toxicity to fry and eggs or oyster/shrimp young is unclear in the words of one marine toxicologist. It seems wise to stop dumping surfactants into the damned gulf thus compounding this event.

http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/05/chemicals_used_to_fight_gulf_o.html

I realize this is not merely cosmetic, but the notion that this will really help an ongoing leak of this size to "Degrade" seems specious.

No, you are not wrong in stating that deep water oil production is not "safe". Deep water oil exploration and production in known Hydrate areas is not only not safe, it dangerous! Ships can be sunk or capsized in large gas blow-outs. This is too bad because deep water was expected to be very large in new oil production. This episode could could be to offshore oil production as TMI was to nuclear power.

 

[aquitaine]

Obama has sent SWAT teams to inspect the oil rigs, see for yourselves.I have a question, since when did SWAT have investigative power?

 

[Cyrus]

Obama has sent SWAT teams to inspect the oil rigs, see for yourselves.


I have a question, since when did SWAT have investigative power?

Don't you mean, SWOT teams? (There is also a "http://www.swat-ab.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=61&Itemid=86"" team that deals with oil spills in Canada, so he might have meant that as well).

 

[Sbrownstein]

Something here doesn't compute. Like most of us, I have only a couple of days experience in researching methane hydrates, however it would appear that they are generated by the combination of relatively high pressures, methane gas and pre-crystalline water. With that in mind, we must assume that hydrates are not present in the oil flow from the deposit at 18,000 feet, but that methane gas is present and mixed with the oil. If we wanted to form as much hydrate as we possibly could, we would bubble the methane into the cold seawater and position a surface directly above the gas stream to trap the small hydrate crystals that were forming. In other words, lower a great big containment box over the gas/oil stream and let the oil continue to rise and collect the hydrates on the inner top surface of the box...until the outlet hole in the box plugged completely with methane hydrate.

Now, however, if we fill the box with something other than water (lighter of course) and close the outlet and position it over the leak, the box will rapidly fill with oil that displaces the water or other compound. The oil would then begin to leak out of the bottom of the box, where it interfaces with the mudline! HOWEVER, at this point hydrate formation would stop since the methane in the flow would no longer come in contact with sea water, which is required for hydrate formation. If we then tap the box (open the valve) and always maintain oil over the end of the riser, hydrates would stop forming and we could allow the oil to be placed in a tanker and removed from the environment.

By my calculations, if the leak is something like 5000 barrels a day, the available volume in the box (looks like say 15' high by 12 by 12) would contain about 2 hours of oil without allowing any oil up the vent pipe.

If the hydrate was already present in the oil from the production casing, why hasn't it begun to plug the crimps in the line itself? Most of the literature indicates that hydrates are concentrated in the sediment layers and have been formed as methane has bubbled up, combined with cold seawater and become trapped by the sediment.

As a result, it would seem that the absolute worse thing we could do would be to lower the box over the leak with an open vent for the oil to continue to escape.

What am I missing?

 

[IcedEcliptic]

Something here doesn't compute. Like most of us, I have only a couple of days experience in researching methane hydrates, however it would appear that they are generated by the combination of relatively high pressures, methane gas and pre-crystalline water. With that in mind, we must assume that hydrates are not present in the oil flow from the deposit at 18,000 feet, but that methane gas is present and mixed with the oil. If we wanted to form as much hydrate as we possibly could, we would bubble the methane into the cold seawater and position a surface directly above the gas stream to trap the small hydrate crystals that were forming. In other words, lower a great big containment box over the gas/oil stream and let the oil continue to rise and collect the hydrates on the inner top surface of the box...until the outlet hole in the box plugged completely with methane hydrate.

Now, however, if we fill the box with something other than water (lighter of course) and close the outlet and position it over the leak, the box will rapidly fill with oil that displaces the water or other compound. The oil would then begin to leak out of the bottom of the box, where it interfaces with the mudline! HOWEVER, at this point hydrate formation would stop since the methane in the flow would no longer come in contact with sea water, which is required for hydrate formation. If we then tap the box (open the valve) and always maintain oil over the end of the riser, hydrates would stop forming and we could allow the oil to be placed in a tanker and removed from the environment.

By my calculations, if the leak is something like 5000 barrels a day, the available volume in the box (looks like say 15' high by 12 by 12) would contain about 2 hours of oil without allowing any oil up the vent pipe.

If the hydrate was already present in the oil from the production casing, why hasn't it begun to plug the crimps in the line itself? Most of the literature indicates that hydrates are concentrated in the sediment layers and have been formed as methane has bubbled up, combined with cold seawater and become trapped by the sediment.

As a result, it would seem that the absolute worse thing we could do would be to lower the box over the leak with an open vent for the oil to continue to escape.

What am I missing?

BP and government do not want to risk sealing an incredibly valuble well? From what I have heard, this box can be filled with junk and sealants to form a cap, but trying this first makes sense. Sealing the well is what causes the problem in the beginning, yes? What do you seal it with now, without risking another rig?

 

[IcedEcliptic]

I will now answer my own question: http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/09/gulf.oil/index.html?hpt=T2&hpt=C1

Huh.

 

[Sbrownstein]

No, I think that you are confusing two separate strategies. Right now the pressure at the end of the riser is "slightly above" the water pressure at the 5000 depth. I say slightly above since 200,000 gallons or so a day are managing to leak out and eventually reach the surface. This pressure is controlled by the "kinks" and crimps in the old riser both at the preventer and between the well and the open end of the riser. If they try to plug the free end of the line (somehow) the pressure on the plug will then rise to meet the actual wellhead pressure, which we don't know, but is generally estimated to be much, much higher. Who knows it the plug or the damaged riser will hold as the pressure increases. This is no different than home plumbing or current flow and voltage in an electrical circuit that has finite resistance. A permanent "junk shot" would require unrestricted access to the wellhead, or at least to the either partially or completely non functional blow out preventer. To do this they will have to remove either the riser or the BOP itself, attach a new riser to it and pump all kinds of stuff like concrete, old tires, mud, etc down into the well itself. This is clearly opening pandora's box since once the restrictions are removed, the well will release oil in a pretty much uncontrolled state and could make the situation far far worse if they were unsuccessful in securing a plug.

As far as the "value of the well" is concerned, they are currently drilling not one but TWO "rescue wells," presumably at about $100M each and spending maybe $10M a day on cleanup efforts. I am sure that they would love to destroy the current well and stop the bleed...if they could only figure out how to do it.

 

[aquitaine]

Don't you mean, SWOT teams? (There is also a "http://www.swat-ab.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=61&Itemid=86"" team that deals with oil spills in Canada, so he might have meant that as well).

SWAT in america means "Special Weapons And Tactics" (or their original name Special Weapons Attack Teams), a part of local police forces for dealing with heavily armed criminals, hostage situations, that sort of thing.


And I'm pretty sure I heard the "A" when he said SWAT.

 

[PRDan4th]

Something here doesn't compute. Like most of us, I have only a couple of days experience in researching methane hydrates, however it would appear that they are generated by the combination of relatively high pressures, methane gas and pre-crystalline water. With that in mind, we must assume that hydrates are not present in the oil flow from the deposit at 18,000 feet, but that methane gas is present and mixed with the oil. If we wanted to form as much hydrate as we possibly could, we would bubble the methane into the cold seawater and position a surface directly above the gas stream to trap the small hydrate crystals that were forming. In other words, lower a great big containment box over the gas/oil stream and let the oil continue to rise and collect the hydrates on the inner top surface of the box...until the outlet hole in the box plugged completely with methane hydrate.

Now, however, if we fill the box with something other than water (lighter of course) and close the outlet and position it over the leak, the box will rapidly fill with oil that displaces the water or other compound. The oil would then begin to leak out of the bottom of the box, where it interfaces with the mudline! HOWEVER, at this point hydrate formation would stop since the methane in the flow would no longer come in contact with sea water, which is required for hydrate formation. If we then tap the box (open the valve) and always maintain oil over the end of the riser, hydrates would stop forming and we could allow the oil to be placed in a tanker and removed from the environment.

By my calculations, if the leak is something like 5000 barrels a day, the available volume in the box (looks like say 15' high by 12 by 12) would contain about 2 hours of oil without allowing any oil up the vent pipe.

If the hydrate was already present in the oil from the production casing, why hasn't it begun to plug the crimps in the line itself? Most of the literature indicates that hydrates are concentrated in the sediment layers and have been formed as methane has bubbled up, combined with cold seawater and become trapped by the sediment.

As a result, it would seem that the absolute worse thing we could do would be to lower the box over the leak with an open vent for the oil to continue to escape.

What am I missing?

The oil being produced from the deep well is too hot for hydrates to form. All three components are in the oil stream; oil, gas and water. The reason that hydrates form at the sea bed in the box is that the temperature is cold. the large amount of sea water in the box cools the oil/gas stream and reacts with the gas phase to form hydrates. If this stream can be kept hot all the way up the pipe the the surface hydrates would not form.

 

[Frame Dragger]

SWAT in america means "Special Weapons And Tactics" (or their original name Special Weapons Attack Teams), a part of local police forces for dealing with heavily armed criminals, hostage situations, that sort of thing.


And I'm pretty sure I heard the "A" when he said SWAT.

Surface Water Assessment Team (of the Minerals Management Service, part of U.S. Dept. of Interior) http://www.answers.com/topic/swat-2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swat

There are also SWOT teams.

The only people frothing about this being a Special Weapons and Tactics team are right-wing lunatics. Seriously, check on google, it's about 3 or 4 pages of "policestate" and "abovetopsecret" crap.

EDIT: The funny bit here, is that as you said, SWAT is LOCAL to police forces. There is a federal equivalent, and it's the FBI's HRT (Hostage Rescue Team), so if the feds were to do such a thing, they wouldn't haul some random county's SWAT offshore. Critical thinking people, come on.

 

[Gokul43201]

SWAT in america means "Special Weapons And Tactics" (or their original name Special Weapons Attack Teams), a part of local police forces for dealing with heavily armed criminals, hostage situations, that sort of thing.And I'm pretty sure I heard the "A" when he said SWAT.

You're just guessing, really ... and likely guessing wrong.

5. Don’t you think it’s crazy how SWAT teams are going out to examine rigs in the Gulf? There are definitely some folks who do. Former Reagan cabinet adviser Mark Levin has called it a “stunner,” and says, “I think those SWAT teams are there in coordination with the attorney general’s office, the Interior Department, Homeland Security, maybe the EPA to gather records, to seize records at these sites and to lay the foundation for more government takeovers.” But are they SWAT teams? Or teams from SWAT Consulting? Or Soil and Water Assessment Tools? Or strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) teams? Or does it simply stand for Swift Action Team? The latter seems the best guess, but feel free to let your conspiracy theories run rampant until we get a definitive answer.

Link: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/five-things/the-oil-spillleakfiasco-in-the-gulf-of-mexico/363/

See also:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2010/04/oil_spill_the_governments_resp.html

INTERIOR DEPARTMENT:
The department deployed SWAT teams from the Minerals Management Service to inspect 30 drilling rigs operating in the deepwater sections of the Gulf of Mexico. Inspections should be completed within the next week, according to an Interior Department spokeswoman.

Inspectors will check to see whether the rigs have conducted blow-out preventer tests and inspect related records, the spokeswoman said. The teams will also verify that emergency well control exercises are taking place. Inspectors will then inspect 47 deep-water production platforms in the gulf, a process that will take longer than rig inspections because of the complexities of the structures.

I dug into the Minerals Management Service website for any mention of SWAT (or SWOT) and found the following in a 2008-2012 Production Business Plan:

• Workload Inventory Reduction/Consolidation of Production Accounting and
Verification Processes:

o Consolidating all production accounting and verification processes
including OGOR reporting and error correction, PASR reporting and error
correction, and LVS and GVS exception resolution.
o Identifying efficiencies that can be gained from consolidated processes.
o Obtaining permanent and temporary additional staff for SWAT efforts.
o Prioritizing system changes required to improve processes.​

​

Link: www.mrm.mms.gov/StudyRepts/PDFDocs/PROD5YrBP.pdf[/URL]

I think it's safe to say that Tactical Weapons teams are not currently crawling all over the rig.

 

[Borg]

I think that the SWAT acronym has been hijacked over the years to include any situation where a specialized team needs to go in and deal with an unusual problem. Could this be part of the confusion here?

 

[Frame Dragger]

When has reality ever burdened such great minds as Rush Limbaugh and others who make him look the voice of sweet reason?

It appears that Mark "I hear voices" Levin started this idiocy, and as usual the right-wing punditry ran with it. Doubtless there will be retractions in VERY small print, with very LARGE caveats in a week or two.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_042910/content/01125113.guest.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/levin-swat-team-response-to-oil-spill-is-government-takeover-plot.html (Thanks Mark Levin, I see why you and Reagan were such pals)

 

[mgb_phys]

I think that the SWAT acronym has been hijacked over the years to include any situation where a specialized team needs to go in and deal with an unusual problem. Could this be part of the confusion here?

I think that when the Soil and Water Assessment department where trying to think of a cool acronym.

In the UK secret government committees were always named after the room they met in for secrecy.
It's hard to keep an operation secret if you name it "Operation beach landing in Normandy".

The (just about) current government renumbered the offices so that the anti-terrorism committee could meet in room 'A', hence making it "Cabinet Office Briefing Room A" = COBRA team.

 

[Sbrownstein]

PRDAN4th...That too was my first assumption, since oil directly from a well head is generally much warmer than the 40 degree water. However, remember that this orifice is not at the wellhead but is at the end of nearly 5000 feet of abandoned drill riser. This low speed flow would have served to significantly cool the oil before it exits the broken pipe. In addition, since the oil is buoyant, I would expect that the compressed methane that is in the stream first encounters cold water on exiting the pipe and hence forms hydrates as it bubbles through the seawater. I had heard that there was a plan to pump surface water down a concentric pipe to keep the oil flowing. Since surface water at the moment is probably 80 degrees F, a significantly larger pipe should serve to rewarm the oil on the way up. HOWEVER, they will need to torch off the significant volume of methane as soon as the flow reaches the surface, which is commonly done on production platforms. I find it hard to believe that the wellhead is producing water as well, it just doesn't make hydrodynamic sense, especially when the deposit is quite hot and the entire wellhead is under positive pressure.

 

[Frame Dragger]

PRDAN4th...That too was my first assumption, since oil directly from a well head is generally much warmer than the 40 degree water. However, remember that this orifice is not at the wellhead but is at the end of nearly 5000 feet of abandoned drill riser. This low speed flow would have served to significantly cool the oil before it exits the broken pipe. In addition, since the oil is buoyant, I would expect that the compressed methane that is in the stream first encounters cold water on exiting the pipe and hence forms hydrates as it bubbles through the seawater. I had heard that there was a plan to pump surface water down a concentric pipe to keep the oil flowing. Since surface water at the moment is probably 80 degrees F, a significantly larger pipe should serve to rewarm the oil on the way up. HOWEVER, they will need to torch off the significant volume of methane as soon as the flow reaches the surface, which is commonly done on production platforms. I find it hard to believe that the wellhead is producing water as well, it just doesn't make hydrodynamic sense, especially when the deposit is quite hot and the entire wellhead is under positive pressure.

I believe they've aleady given up on heating sea-water, and are considering using an ethanol mixture as antifreeze.

 

[Sbrownstein]

PRDAN4th...Either way, although ethanol is miscible, some sort of antifreeze in the cofferdam to begin with will keep the hydrates from forming until the oil level fills below the drill pipe. After that and with flow established the system should settle down to steady state and as long as they keep the seawater at the bottom of the chamber and away from the methane that is coming out of the pipe. Take the ethanol that is going into my gas tank and pump it down the pipe...even glycol. They should be able to lower the chamber and make sure the instantaneous back pressure matches the water column for every depth. This should work, and if they have a smaller chamber...so be it, although it means that they will have less tolerance on maintaining the level going forward. Just don't bubble the methane through the seawater while they are setting it. Surface water won't hurt to keep the pipe warm, and help the flow, although it won't eliminate hydrate formation as it is not hot enough...but they do have an awful lot of it on the surface anyway.

 

[Sbrownstein]

BY the way, has anyone found any sources of information on what is happening and what they are thinking. I haven't seen any ROV images since the day after the fire and most of the popular press doesn't even understand or write about what they are trying to do. I'm tired of reading about political implications or Obama or Bush. Technology got us into this...and technology will get us out of it!

 

[Cyrus]

SWAT in america means "Special Weapons And Tactics" (or their original name Special Weapons Attack Teams), a part of local police forces for dealing with heavily armed criminals, hostage situations, that sort of thing.


And I'm pretty sure I heard the "A" when he said SWAT.

I'm well aware of what SWAT means (I live in America, BTW), in the police sense. However, that does not mean it is the only acronym that uses those letters.

 

[pallidin]

I think it's good that there have been some clarifications on acronym use.
With a general U.S. public perception that SWAT is a police-only acronym could lead to erroneous speculation on this disaster issue.

Anyway, I hope progress is made to cap or redirect the oil. Haven't checked the news lately.

 

[turbo]

Our local paper printed an AP report regarding the frequency of blowout preventer failure. It seems that they aren't too foolproof.

To hear some industry officials talk, these devices are virtually foolproof.
But a detailed AP review shows that reliability questions have long shadowed blowout preventers:
_ Accident reports from the U.S. Minerals Management Service, a branch of the Interior Department, show that the devices have failed or otherwise played a role in at least 14 accidents, mostly since 2005.
_ Government and industry reports have raised questions about the reliability of blowout preventers for more than a decade. A 2003 report by Transocean, the owner of the destroyed rig, said: "Floating drilling rig downtime due to poor BOP reliability is a common and very costly issue confronting all offshore drilling contractors."
_ Lawsuits have fingered these valves as a factor in previous blowouts.

But the agency, known as MMS, then did its turnaround and required tests half as often. It estimated that the rule would yield an annual savings of up to $340,000 per rig. An industry executive praised the "flexibility" of regulators, long plagued with accusations that it has been too cozy with the industry it supervises.
Laurence Power, of Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen, Scotland, an engineering teacher who has studied these valves in offshore oil wells, said he has "not been able to see their logic" for reducing the frequency of testing.
In 1999, right after that rule change, an MMS-commissioned report by a research group identified 117 blowout preventer failures at deepwater rigs within the previous year. These breakdowns created 3,638 hours of lost time — a 4 percent chunk of drilling time.
In 2004, an engineering study for federal regulators said only 3 of 14 new devices could shear pipe, as sometimes required to check leaks, at maximum rated depths. Only half of operators accepting a newly built device tested this function during commissioning or acceptance, according to the report.

Still:

After the accident, BP CEO Tony Hayward said of blowout preventers in general: "It's unprecedented for it to fail."

Unprecedented? As in never happened before? To borrow a line from Inigo Montoya (Princess Bride): You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g5Ne4XXtnk-mPq3yqkwj_jh3ST3wD9FIQI6O0

 

[Frame Dragger]

I think it's good that there have been some clarifications on acronym use.
With a general U.S. public perception that SWAT is a police-only acronym could lead to erroneous speculation on this disaster issue.

Anyway, I hope progress is made to cap or redirect the oil. Haven't checked the news lately.

Alas, the attempt with the "big box" (thank you for that sobriquet media) seems to be a was as it was originally intended. I suspect much of the uncertainty in reporting at this point stems from Ivan Seeking being right: this is an experiment on the fly. As for ROV images, do you really think either BP or the government wants a steady stream of images of fumbling and failure?

Thus far, attempts to "defrost" have failed, or have been shot down before deployment. The last idea floated was the trash concept, and no new info is available regarding that. Everything else is rumour at this point, as far as I can tell.

 

[IcedEcliptic]

They now are resigned to a relief well and a junk shot. This is not a good situation, made in arrogance and ignorance, made worse with the same.

 

[gravenewworld]

To think, a single quart of motor oil pollutes 250,000 gallons of water (which is 5 times the amount an average single person uses in a year). The oil spill in the Gulf is estimated to be leaking at a rate of 1 million quarts per day, and over the past 20 days that would equate to roughly 5 trillion gallons of water that's been polluted thus far.

 

[Astronuc]

I heard this morning that estimates of the well flow (~5000 bbl/day) are based on what is reaching the surface. There is apparently much more below the surface, and one estimate puts the flow at more like 5x or 25,000 bbl/day (~ 1 million gal/day). Apparently neither the Coast Guard or BP is releasing the video of the oil plume exiting the blow out. Must look really nasty.

 

[Frame Dragger]

I heard this morning that estimates of the well flow (~5000 bbl/day) are based on what is reaching the surface. There is apparently much more below the surface, and one estimate puts the flow at more like 5x or 25,000 bbl/day (~ 1 million gal/day). Apparently neither the Coast Guard or BP is releasing the video of the oil plume exiting the blow out. Must look really nasty.

I feel both miserable and vindicated by events.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/08/gulf.oil.spill/index.html

Junk shot and prayers... great.

 

[Frame Dragger]

Tyical: http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/11/news/companies/BP_hearings/index.htm?hpt=T1

 

[Astronuc]

Tyical: http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/11/news/companies/BP_hearings/index.htm?hpt=T1

From the CNN article - "Transocean said the blowout preventer performed fine in tests just a week before the accident."

But did they test it at 5000 ft (at pressure and temperature)? Did clathrates (methane ice) form in the blowout preventing and cause it to fail? Was the system consistent with other systems used at 5000 ft (1500m)?

It is BP's resonsibility to ensure the work of Transocean and Haliburton, both of whom may have done it according to the book. If this was the first time that they work this particular rig at 5000 in the Gulf of Mexico, or anywhere, then BP did not do their homework.

Oil executives face Congress on Gulf spill
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100511/ts_nm/us_oil_rig_leak

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Protesters and angry lawmakers greeted top executives of companies involved with the Gulf of Mexico's massive oil spill at a congressional hearing in which the company leaders were poised to blame each other for the unfolding environmental disaster.

 

[IcedEcliptic]

EPA has given the ok to dump more dispersants. We cannot win for losing.

 

[mheslep]

Oil executives face Congress on Gulf spill
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100511/ts_nm/us_oil_rig_leak

The federal Minerals Management Service is responsible for overseeing the operators, and Congress is responsible for overseeing MMS before, not after, the fact. Who will they face?

 

[Astronuc]

The federal Minerals Management Service is responsible for overseeing the operators, and Congress is responsible for overseeing MMS before, not after, the fact. Who will they face?

The voters?

 

[mheslep]

The voters?

Meanwhile MMS people could be up there testifying, if they can find some time between http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/washington/11royalty.html?_r=1" Even Congress doesn't have to wait for elections to investigate itself (the interior and energy committees could be reviewed by House leadership), not that such a thing has any chance of occurring.

 

[Frame Dragger]

Meanwhile MMS people could be up there testifying, if they can find some time between http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/washington/11royalty.html?_r=1"

So, the SEC, which is a pathetic entity in which doing your job is nearly pointless, the MMS, EPA, and other neutered agencies which are beholden to politicians who are in the poclets of energy, banks, polluters, etc... all act like dopes. What a shock. I'd need some drugs too if my entire agency was a bad joke.

 

[Astronuc]

Meanwhile back at the site - top hat.

Political patience wanes as Gulf oil spill grows
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100512/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill

"If this is like other catastrophic failures of technological systems in modern history, whether it was the sinking of the Titanic, Three Mile Island, or the loss of the Challenger, we will likely discover that there was a cascade of failures and technical and human and regulatory errors," said Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Executives from BP, rig owner Transocean Ltd. and contractor Halliburton Co., among others, were expected back on Capitol Hill on Wednesday for an inquiry by a House subcommittee into the spill.

I wonder how often someone has asked "What's the worst that could happen".

 

[IcedEcliptic]

Meanwhile back at the site - top hat.

Political patience wanes as Gulf oil spill grows
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100512/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill

I wonder how often someone has asked "What's the worst that could happen".

Engineers can be as arrogant as executives, it is just what happens. I am amazed that there is no plan of action that is proven to work at the 5000 foot of depth! I can hardly track this story anymore, it is too much. Environment is uncertain, this is no K-T extinction, or "Great Dying", but what will it be? I hate this, waiting to see matters unfold, utterly helpless.

How can one do this, and not have a fail-safe?! I don't understand, but I am not an engineer.