thereismore
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 11:25 AM
Original message |
I think we should place conventional charges some distance away from the gusher |
|
and detonate, so that the pressure wave and/or moving ground would crimp the main pipe. The explosion would be nowhere near the gushing methane, so there would be no explosion. The crust is 5 miles thick there, so what's the worry?
|
stuball111
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 12:38 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Hmm.. the answer to getting rid of everything? Blow it up? |
|
Ok Ok... I'm thinking....
|
RaleighNCDUer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. How is that 'getting rid of everything'? |
|
This is something I thought they'd consider from day 1 - but nobody's mentioned it.
|
stuball111
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
sorry for not posting the:sarcasm: seems to me though, it might make an even bigger mess...I was thinking it might be a good solution for all our woes... just blow it up! You know...
|
RaleighNCDUer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. Got it - wearing my 'slow' hat today. |
|
Maybe it is that there are just too many unknowns, but it does seem to me that with that kind of pressure at that depth it wouldn't take much to collapse the pipe and then just the water pressure on the seabed would force enough material into any little cracks that might remain, plugging it.
But I'm no demolitions engineer so that's all mere supposition on my part.
|
stuball111
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
It is blatantly obvious though, that BP never had any back up plans for something like this, or they'd have plugged it by now. It's a sad sad thing... We have such a fragile planet to survive on, yet somehow people can't see that...blinded by greed and oblivious to those around them...
|
AngryAmish
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
10. Have we had any problems with the moon since we bombed it? |
Merchant Marine
(650 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 12:50 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Nice "solution" Hollywood. |
thereismore
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
7. That was very constructive from you. nt |
Dr Morbius
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 02:37 PM
Response to Original message |
8. I actually prefer the notion of dropping tons and tons of mud and rock on it. |
|
As opposed to trying to detonate our way into blocking the gusher. An error, however slight, could cause the oil to come from a much larger area, like a crack. It could cause a more severe gusher than the one we have now; I am told that the amount of oil under that spill is several times the area of Manhattan. My point is that the leak is bad enough now; I would want BP to be DAMN careful about how it brings this under control.
|
thereismore
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. I agree. But it seems BP is happy with the yield it is getting, so I don't think |
|
they will try to stop it at all. Until the US makes them to. Ultimately I think the capping will be done by the US government at our expense.
|
Dr Morbius
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-18-10 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. Yeah. I noticed myself that after a freaking month of toxic spewing, |
|
the first thing BP managed to do was collect some of this oil in order to sell it! I mentioned it to several non-political coworkers; the irony was not lost on them.
Something tells me the President is going to keep up the pressure on BP to stop the leak. That's the least bumpy road, politically speaking. There remains a tiny reason for hope, in other words.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:40 AM
Response to Original message |