Posted on 07/02/2010 6:15:35 AM PDT by PMAS
MOSCOW/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - His face wracked by age and his voice rasping after decades of chain-smoking coarse tobacco, the former long-time Russian Minister of nuclear energy and veteran Soviet physicist Viktor Mikhailov knows just how to fix BP's oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico.
"A nuclear explosion over the leak," he says nonchalantly puffing a cigarette as he sits in a conference room at the Institute of Strategic Stability, where he is a director. "I don't know what BP is waiting for, they are wasting their time. Only about 10 kilotons of nuclear explosion capacity and the problem is solved."
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
"Why did we buy a nuclear device, if you don't intend to use it?"
"This could be bad PR. I think we should wait."
"Dammit, these things aren't cheap, and keeping it in a closet at corporate HQ isn't helping us. I say we blow the well."
"Would Obama let us do that?"
"Who cares? We own the well! We can nuke it if we want to. It's none of the president's business!"
"Alright. Let's do it."
What say we test in on Rooters first or maybe CONgress?
I hate to say it, but Bill Clinton’s take on this made a lot of sense to me. I know we have developed some big-time “bunker busting” conventional bombs. Why not use them?
Colossal shrimp does sound appealing tho.
Because it could make things A WHOLE LOT WORSE. The uppermost section of pipe casing is known to not be bonded into place in its hole (BP reports prior to the accident). That is what several offshore petroleum engineers believe to be the cause of the initial gas leak and explosion.
Explosions work on out-of-control oil well fires on land because they serve to blow out the candle. After that, crews can secure the gush of oil. That is not the problem. We do not have a fire on the sea bed.
Clinton was an idiot to suggest that as a solution.
Maybe the Russians and Iranians will offer to do it
Did the Russians ever “seal” a leaking wildcat well gushing tens of millions of barrels of oil plus methane ... with a nuclear blast .... over an earthquake fault.... in deep water that rapidly shoals to shallow shelf...40 miles offshore from some of the heaviest populated coastlines in the world ..... containing a major city, sinking, only surviving because levies hold back the sea water?
surf’s up!
crickets
Bll Clinton’s faux folksy “piles and piles of rocks and stuff” quote was ridiculous
You think so. Try getting the cocktail sauce on them. They will fight back.
I agree partially with what you are stating. The instability of the sea floor could undermine the theory that this would work. It could simply shatter the berock and cause a 3 foot wide hole to become a 3 mile wide hole (yikes). however, the use of nukes on land isnt to put out the fire so the gusher can be plugged. the nuclear explosion compresses and crystalizes the surrounding rock and sort of “squishes” closed the well. imagine placing a large block of play-doh on the table, make a pencil sized hole to signify a well. now slam your fist DOWN on the block and look to see what happened to the hole...its closed. thats how i understand the russians used it on land
Just what we need. Hundreds of years of Radioactive seafood.
Oil leaking is one thing..Radioactive oil leaking is another....
This does sound interesting, and the Russians have supposedly been successful doing it. I also love the idea of the anti-nuke environuts going ballistic over the successful, peaceful use of nukes.
OTOH, I know the Russians didn’t give a damn about the environmental consequences of their actions, so I wouldn’t trust them that this won’t cause problems itself.
Be that as it may, the Russians have used this method to seal off at least one well, maybe more. The heat from the explosion melts the rock and seals it. Only a Nuke explosion would do this.
However, some experts are saying the stata at this site is much different than the strata at the Russian well and that the nuke wouldn't work.
Since I'm not an expert on this I can't say one way or another but I do know it worked for the Russians and that is why they are saying to do it.
I was going to post a similar thought, but it would have paled before your wit. Well Done.
Obama will be reluctant to do this because a beneficial use of Nuclear power for any reason will cause his whacked out environmental base to abandon him permanently.
Admittedly, that would be a perk to him having to do it.
The Russian is correct. However, Obama does not WANT the problem solved. He wants to use the crisis for all the political leverage (read: cap and trade) that it’s worth.
Gulf Oil Cover Up: Underneath Gaping Chasm of Gulf Floor is a Mt Everest Sized Cavern
American Pendulum ^ | June 14, 2010 | F. William Engdahl
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2545025/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.