Posted on 07/06/2010 10:48:37 PM PDT by Patriot777
Could explosives seal off the Gulf oil leak? Published: 15th Jun 2010 15:11:55 BP's engineers have tried several methods to block off the flow from the well that is causing the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
But oil continues to flow into the ocean, with potentially disastrous consequences for the environment.
Now a former US military scientist has proposed a seemingly radical solution: detonating a massive bomb underwater to seal the leaking well.
It sounds like an extreme measure, but could such a plan actually succeed?
One independent engineer contacted by BBC News agreed that explosives could seal off oil wells. But he also said the plan could make the spill worse.
But Franz Gayl says that the explosion could effectively cauterise the well shutting off the flow of oil into the Gulf. However, he points out that, without detailed computer modelling, he is using educated guesswork.
Mr Gayl, a former civilian science adviser to the US Marines, proposed the idea in an interview with an internet blog.
The exploding MOAB or Daisy Cutter would have an incredible implosive-sealing effect on oil plumbing
He says that the GBU-43 Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) bomb, delivered to the site and then detonated underwater would generate a big enough shock wave to force the leaking pipes shut.
(Excerpt) Read more at birminghamwired.co.uk ...
Couldn’t a big bomb cause some fisures to crack open more?
I think this is the only way that they are going to be able to stop this oil from continually gushing out. It’s time to plan it and do it.
Too much methane in the area. It would be very risky. The best thing is still the relief wells. We had all better hope and pray that these relief wells work.
MOAB is a fuel air explosive. It mixes explosive with the existing air in a mixture and explodes the combined mixture. How does this guy plan to do that a mile under water?
Couldn’t a big bomb cause some fisures to crack open more?
Yep. Should be an absolute last resort.
I’ve also heard there might be a huge “bubble” of methane under the well head. No matter how we look at this, it’s a very bad situation.
Methane, without oxygen, won’t burn/explode.
Too much methane in the area
Woops, I didn’t see your post before making my comment about a big methane “bubble”.
Why do people keep posting these BS articles over and over. Nuke it, blow it up, has most of the people here become liberals? Does no one use their head anymore?
Inquiring minds want to know!
But it might well destroy the buoyancy under the skimmers
and drown all the personnel on site and/or suffocate them
and/or ignite when it reaches the surface where
there is oxygen. There is also an outside chance
that a large rising bubble could generate a tsunami.
All of that is in the realm of possible. Even without
a man-made explosion, there is still the possibility
of erosion or tectonic activity as a releasing mechanism.
All of that is beyond the control of the engineers on
site.
Go back to school. You were cheated.
We should have sent all those drilling rigs that could do the job to that area the 1st week. Instead zero sent them packing.
there are potential consequences. read the article. It’s an option definitely worth considering, though.
But of course. According to "Murphy's Law" an explosion will just make the hole bigger, rather than sealing it off.
It is unknown if the explosion will shut down the well. It is known that unless they do something serious, this thing may never stop spewing.
The Russians have had success with nucs to shut down a well. But we have to prepare our minds to accept the possibility that the spewing well will have to play itself out, however long that may take.
Technically, both can be compressed, but not enough to be any part of a variable here so I am failing to understand the relevancy of it.
I may be well off the mark here, but I think in the end the only way of stopping this thing is a high density of wells over time to pump this thing out. Why this plan hasn't been executed yet is beyond me; there is no negative outcome or any real risk and the oil needs to be retrieved anyway. We need to get as many holes drilled as possible, as soon as possible and get busy pumping it out... that's just my ignorant opinion.
If I was BP, there would have been 10-15 wells going down a week after the blowout.
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.