Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nuke that slick (the Russians Nuked Oil Leaks 5 Times)
True/Slant ^ | May 4, 2010 | Julia Ioffe

Posted on 05/04/2010 12:33:17 PM PDT by Arec Barrwin

Nuke that slick By JULIA IOFFE

Underwater nuclear test, 1958.

As BP prepares to lower a four-story, 70-ton dome over the oil gusher under the Gulf of Mexico, the Russians — the world’s biggest oil producers — have some advice for their American counterparts: nuke it.

Komsomoloskaya Pravda, the best-selling Russian daily, reports that in Soviet times such leaks were plugged with controlled nuclear blasts underground. The idea is simple, KP writes: “the underground explosion moves the rock, presses on it, and, in essence, squeezes the well’s channel.”

Yes! It’s so simple, in fact, that the Soviet Union, a major oil exporter, used this method five times to deal with petrocalamities. The first happened in Uzbekistan, on September 30, 1966 with a blast 1.5 times the strength of the Hiroshima bomb and at a depth of 1.5 kilometers. KP also notes that subterranean nuclear blasts were used as much as 169 times in the Soviet Union to accomplish fairly mundane tasks like creating underground storage spaces for gas or building canals.

(Excerpt) Read more at trueslant.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: bp; energy; nuclear; oil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 05/04/2010 12:33:17 PM PDT by Arec Barrwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

If this report has validity and it works, then do it.


2 posted on 05/04/2010 12:37:54 PM PDT by Riodacat (Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Riodacat
The Russians weren't doing this "offshore" one mile deep under the ocean,

As much difficulty as the folks are having manipulating relatively simple devices at that depth, I doubt many of us would feel all that comfortable with the same guys using nukes!

3 posted on 05/04/2010 12:39:33 PM PDT by muawiyah ("Git Out The Way")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

This article fails to mention the insertion point of the nuke is Teheran.


4 posted on 05/04/2010 12:41:14 PM PDT by Zuben Elgenubi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Riodacat

I’ve heard others say that the ocean floor in the Gulf, and particularly in this area, is so porous that a nuclear blast would only open more leaks.


5 posted on 05/04/2010 12:41:22 PM PDT by AnglePark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

It’s the only way to be sure.


6 posted on 05/04/2010 12:41:35 PM PDT by jiggyboy (Ten per cent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

We can’t do that! Think of the radiation that will kill the fish!/s


7 posted on 05/04/2010 12:42:03 PM PDT by Dallas59 (President Robert Gibbs 2009-2013)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

Do it from orbit


8 posted on 05/04/2010 12:48:34 PM PDT by JRios1968 (The real first rule of Fight Club: don't invite Chuck Norris...EVER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

when a problem comes along
you must nuke it

before the oil sits out too long
you must nuke it

when something’s going wrong
you must nuke it

now nuke it
into shape

shape it up
get straight

go forward
move ahead
try to detect it

it’s not too late
to nuke it

nuke it good!


9 posted on 05/04/2010 12:48:56 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin
Did someone say nukes?


10 posted on 05/04/2010 12:50:29 PM PDT by almost done by half
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

I am a DEVO fan as well


11 posted on 05/04/2010 12:53:19 PM PDT by Arec Barrwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: Arec Barrwin

Don’t forget your Energy Dome! LOL!


13 posted on 05/04/2010 12:55:07 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

Nuke it from orbit, baby!


14 posted on 05/04/2010 12:57:18 PM PDT by dennisw (It all comes 'round again --Fairport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

How to get rid of the oil slick
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s1MspmfEwg


15 posted on 05/04/2010 12:59:18 PM PDT by Scythian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AnglePark
I’ve heard others say that the ocean floor in the Gulf, and particularly in this area, is so porous that a nuclear blast would only open more leaks.OK, well that's the ocean floor. The bore is 30,000 feet from the head (which is in 5000 feet of water.). So you could put the nuke in at 15,000 feet, giving the maximum buffer to both the ocean and the oil.
16 posted on 05/04/2010 1:00:52 PM PDT by Jack Black ( Whatever is left of American patriotism is now identical with counter-revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AnglePark

Yep. The Gulf naturally seeps lots of oil all the time. It’s constantly leaking oil. Approximately one to two Exxon Valdez worth seeps naturally into the Gulf every year.

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-40428


17 posted on 05/04/2010 1:04:06 PM PDT by ltc8k6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Riodacat

“If this report has validity and it works, then do it.”

The US has experience in underground nuclear explosions in gas wells too. Project Rulison and Gas Buggy in the 1970s.

They were attempts to fracture the rock in very low permeability formations in order to create improved flow channels tthorugh which gas can be produced.

The problem they found out was that the blast was so hot it melted all the rock surrounding the well and turned it essentially into glass. It was the reverse of what was intended.

So yes, you can probably stop the flow from the blowout.


18 posted on 05/04/2010 1:43:20 PM PDT by bestintxas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

Good Idea, Hicks!


19 posted on 05/04/2010 2:05:23 PM PDT by ffusco (The President will return this country to what it once was...An arctic wasteland covered in ice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

Transocean/BP has started drilling a relief well with planned TD of 18,000 ft. On completion, this will be used to pump heavy mud to kill the wild well. Eventually it will be cemented. Estimated drilling time is two to three months.

This is the conventional way of controlling a blowout, and I think it’s the proper way to go.


20 posted on 05/04/2010 3:27:53 PM PDT by Ole Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson