Graphic: BP plan to kill leak, "Top Kill".

[NYC_SKP]

In which kill mud is pumped into the Blow Out Preventer, and then cement.



Note: A 4000 x 2253 pixel image here: http://tinyurl.com/2fzshk4

Article Here: http://www.ogj.com/index/article-display/2867244755/articles/oil-gas-journal/general-interest-2/2010/05/100516-pd-bpspill-riserworking.html

7-10 Days.

They could, it seems to me, have tried this on day one.

:shrug:

[jfkraus]

1. Yes. The could have.

But BP is a clusterfuck.

[rrneck]

2. Hey, give 'em a break,

it'll probably wreck the BOP, and those things are expensive.

:sarcasm:

[Statistical]

6. I actually worry about it breaking the BOP.

The BOP did partially close. If they end up blowing the BOP the spill rate could increase 10 fold.

[rrneck]

7. True that,

maybe we should try a junk shot first - using the assets of oil company executives. And if that fails, perhaps they could make a more personal and direct contribution to the effort...

[merh]

3. They should have but no one told them they had to

No one told them that they had to make it stop.

[kristopher]

4. "They could...have tried this on day one."

What does that tell you about its chances of success?

The "Oil and Gas Journal" is still reporting the gusher as 5K/day.


Color me cynical.

[NYC_SKP]

5. The "Oil and Gas" Journal was found on Google to support the graphic that I found first.

"Top Kill" has not been widely published, AFAIK.

I found the graphic first, then went in search of an article.

The graphic was at deepwaterhorizonresponse.com.

Not an unbiased source itself, but a great source of graphics, video, updates, on the industry side.

[kristopher]

8. I was doubting their optimism, not your sourcing.

If this were so likely to work, why wasn't it tried first. It is using technologies the industry is intimately familiar with so the delay to reach for it as the answer doesn't bode well for the outcome IMO.