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

Skip to comments.

Former Shell Oil Chief, Engineer: Supertankers Could Save the Gulf, So Why Won't BP Listen?
The Sean Hannity Show ^ | 6/4/2010 | Ariel Schwartz

Posted on 06/04/2010 9:18:54 PM PDT by GVnana

John Hofmeister and Nick Pozzi tell Fast Company how a possible solution to the Gulf Oil spill is sitting under BP's nose.

Underwater robots, containment domes, top hats, hot taps, junk shots ... the potential fixes to the Gulf Oil Spill sound like they come straight from a cringeworthy disaster flick (or a PR think tank). But what if the solution is right under our noses? What if it's already sitting in the Gulf? John Hofmeister, the former president of Shell Oil, and Nick Pozzi, a former pipeline engineering and operations project manager for Saudi Aramco, think it might be.

According to Hofmeister, oil supertankers could be used to suck up massive amounts of oil--possibly millions of barrels at a time.

In an interview with FastCompany.com, Hofmeister explained that a little-known Saudi oil spill from an offshore platform in the early 1990s dumped more crude into the sea than any spill in U.S. history (think hundreds of millions of gallons). But the government and local press kept it quiet. And that's why one of the big fixes in the Saudi oil spill--the oil-skimming supertanker--hasn't been publicized.

"[They] figured out how to deploy supertankers that had the ability to both intake and discharge liquids in vast quantities with huge pumps," Hofmeister explained. "The supertankers could simply suck in seawater and oil simultaneously--they can hold millions of barrels--and when full, they could discharge oil at a port into tanks where they could separate oil from water. The idea is novel in that you can get massive of oil amounts quickly." Once the supertankers make it to to the port, water can be treated and discharged, and oil can either be used or destroyed.

(Excerpt) Read more at forums.hannity.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: johnhofmeister
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
Pozzi saw the technique used in the Middle East, where it recovered 85% of the oil from the Saudi spill. And he thinks it could work in the Gulf of Mexico. "The only downside is that you tie up oil tankers. That's why we think that BP won't listen to us. They don't want to spend that extra money."

After learning about the supertanker technique a few weeks ago, Hofmeister decided to bring it to the government's attention. "I've been trying to connect engineers with decision-makers at the Coast Guard and in the interior department," he said.

Pozzi and his business partner Jon King have also tried to contact officials, with no luck. "I called the President of BP, got his secretary and then got a call from a lady inside the building we were standing outside of. We never really heard back from her. Nick also knew some people and got one of the men in charge of the spill. He threatened to sue Nick for not going through channels," King said.

In the meantime, our too-cowardly-to-chase-an-ambulance "president" tells the Gulf Coast citizenry to let their businesses die, put on the neck braces, and wait for a lawsuit settlement.

1 posted on 06/04/2010 9:18:54 PM PDT by GVnana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GVnana; Army Air Corps

Shell has more experience at this, I think.

This confirms what I have heard, right AAC?


2 posted on 06/04/2010 9:20:33 PM PDT by GeronL (Political Correctness Kills)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana
According to what I read Pozzi is an engineer who worked for ARAMCO and he is a top expert on oil spill solutions.
3 posted on 06/04/2010 9:25:38 PM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana
A shallow water oil spill is a heck of a lot different than a deepwater blowout, and has virtually nothing in common with the Saudi spill. Add to it the massive areas involved, drifting underwater pools of oil, and the truth is, you can maybe clean up some of the spots with this idea, but on the whole, you're bailing out the ocean with a bucket. Just doing stuff to make it seem like you're doing stuff.

Meanwhile BP is doing the only thing that is absolutely sure to work, which is drilling the relief wells. And not just one, but two of them. All the other ‘fixes’ are just ‘hey, wonder if this will work’ type things, just to pass the time while the relief wells are being drilled.

Truthfully, all these ‘I got the answers, but BP’s too cheap to do it’ guys are just seeking media time. I guarantee all their ideas have been considered, and dismissed not because of cost, but due to their being ineffective ideas. Because if it did work, you've got tens of millions of gallons of oil just sitting there for the taking - why not just go collect that free money yourself if BP’s too cheap to do it. And heck, make the feds pay you at the same time too.

4 posted on 06/04/2010 9:28:11 PM PDT by kingu (Favorite Sticker: Lost hope, and Obama took my change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana

Obama has a better solution

call in the lawyers, that should fix the problem


5 posted on 06/04/2010 9:29:43 PM PDT by DanielRedfoot (What a fool believes, No wise man has the power to reason away)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana
They don't want to plug the leak, they want to get the oil. A twenty inch collet and a large nut would have stopped the flow.
6 posted on 06/04/2010 9:29:57 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingu
you've got tens of millions of gallons of oil just sitting there for the taking - why not just go collect that free money yourself if BP’s too cheap to do it. And heck, make the feds pay you at the same time too.

You've got a point, but who says the feds would let you? Where are you going to refine the oil, and would the EPA allow you to discharge the water? Probably not.

This situation cries for leadership and we have none.

7 posted on 06/04/2010 9:31:10 PM PDT by GVnana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GVnana

We’ll have to wait to see if James Cameron approves of this. /sarc/


8 posted on 06/04/2010 9:31:31 PM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana

I believe Newt Gingrich referred to previous spills where the supertankers were used to great effect. It was in the Indian Ocean, IIRC.


9 posted on 06/04/2010 9:31:40 PM PDT by FreeKeys (BP, British Petroleum, insulted us with economic illiterates opining on energy policy in their ads)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingu

What you said is true. Oil pouring out of a gash in the hull of a tanker vessel is quite different than an atomized oil/water jet a mile down. Also, supertankers are designed for storage and transport. They are hardly optimized skimming vessels.


10 posted on 06/04/2010 9:34:59 PM PDT by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Look, mate, the Saudis have applied the "let's suck up detritus from a petro spill into (take your pick) barges and/or transport vessels equipped w/vacuum hoses" since their first major spill back in the 1970s, and encompassing spills both Persian Gulf and Red Sea spills.

This policy has been SO effective that one can hardly find a criticism of Saudi offshore-drilling policy ANYWHERE. It also happens to be all of 1) practical, 2) effective, and 3) easily accomplished, given the availability of appropriate vessels, of which the Saudis have no shortage.

I'll **cheerfully** bet you my life against a cold beer that A) BP would gladly deploy assorted vacuuming ships/barges, were the assorted Reicharschloches of this administration to let them do so, B) the Kenyan doesn't want this to occur because he, doctrinally, believes that a collapse of Gulf states' economies benefits him (...gee, not a coincidence that **every** governor of the 5 Gulf states is...shock me!...a Republican!), and C) the same said bastard is and has been deliberately involved in the destruction of as many portions of the American economy as possible since 20 January 2009.

Care to fade me, laddiebuck?

11 posted on 06/04/2010 9:35:16 PM PDT by SAJ (Zerobama? A phony and a prick, ergo a dildo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kingu
Because if it did work, you've got tens of millions of gallons of oil just sitting there for the taking - why not just go collect that free money yourself if BP’s too cheap to do it. And heck, make the feds pay you at the same time too.

Some enterprising salvager can make a killing...if he had the right equipment.

12 posted on 06/04/2010 9:35:19 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Build a man a fire; he'll be warm for a night. Set a man on fire; he'll be warm the rest of his life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

They’ll get the oil. Just not from this particular hole.


13 posted on 06/04/2010 9:36:10 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Build a man a fire; he'll be warm for a night. Set a man on fire; he'll be warm the rest of his life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SAJ

Who me? Nah, I agree with you. The problem is that BP is Saudi and has much less experience at the deep drilling than Shell.


14 posted on 06/04/2010 9:37:45 PM PDT by GeronL (Political Correctness Kills)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GVnana

So why won’t BP listen?

***************

Because increasingly, it looks more and more like the White House wants to inflict as much damage as they can to as many people as they can for as long as they can.

If they ruin the economies of the Red States, that increases their chances of consolidating power.


15 posted on 06/04/2010 9:38:02 PM PDT by Eccl 10:2 (Pray for the peace of Jerusalem - Ps 122:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana; Eaker; mylife; Brucifer


^*We're not BP*^

16 posted on 06/04/2010 9:38:26 PM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana
those supertankers could hold more oil if it's separated from the water in situ -

and they have the machines in the gulf to do just that. These machines use centrifical force to suck up the oil and water, separate them, and spit oil out one side and water that's 97% pure - pure enough to drink - out the other.

BP had tested them and They and Adm. Allen approved them and want to use them. 3 weeks later - nada. They can't go ahead without permission for the WH - who is, as we've been told “IN CHARGE.” (The one thing the “WON” is good at is dithering - or fiddling?)

Why the news blackout on this - hasn't been an update in a week or more. Put these tankers and machines together - and the oil can be stopped from circling around Florida, up the eat coast and off to Europe. (It took the “WON” 6 months of dithering before he finally, and too late for a lot, sent some troops to Afghanistan) -

http://www.wwltv.com/news/BP-OKs-Costners-oil-cleaning-device-94189959.html

so what's the holdup? Is the “WON” afraid of Costner and his machines stealing the limelight?
Let Rome burn?

17 posted on 06/04/2010 9:39:02 PM PDT by maine-iac7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana
You've got a point, but who says the feds would let you? Where are you going to refine the oil, and would the EPA allow you to discharge the water? Probably not.

Mere triffles to consider. Venezuela would love the PR storm of 'saving' the United States by using supertankers to sweep the ocean, and then process the oil for home heating by poor Americans. I mean, really, the PR nightmare of some fed trying to stop a Venezuelan flagged vessel from sucking up oil that is floating around in the gulf?

It's not that it's too expensive to do, or that there's no technology available, it just is that it wouldn't do anything useful.

18 posted on 06/04/2010 9:42:36 PM PDT by kingu (Favorite Sticker: Lost hope, and Obama took my change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GVnana; All
"Supertankers Could Save the Gulf, So Why Won't BP Listen?"

Photobucket

Photobucket

19 posted on 06/04/2010 9:42:38 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana; kingu; All

In answer to your remarks : “you’ve got tens of millions of gallons of oil just sitting there for the taking - why not just go collect that free money yourself if BP’s too cheap to do it. And heck, make the feds pay you at the same time too.

“You’ve got a point, but who says the feds would let you? Where are you going to refine the oil, and would the EPA allow you to discharge the water? Probably not.

“This situation cries for leadership and we have none”

see post #17.


20 posted on 06/04/2010 9:44:36 PM PDT by maine-iac7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 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