sounds idiotic to me
in [Design]
|
From: John Larkin on 14 Jul 2010 18:20 On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 15:09:26 -0700 (PDT), Rich Grise on Google groups <richardgrise(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Jul 14, 2:02�pm, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> ... >> And why do baseline seismic studies now, when the problem is three >> months old? >> >> Sounds like more politics to me. > >Of course it's politics! > >What I can't understand is howcome our Commander-In-Chief didn't >immediately call out >the Army Corps of Engineers and the Navy Seabees and throw them at the >problem. Or >howcome somebody didn't start dropping those 1,000 lb. sandbags like >they've used to >protect the beaches and inlets when there's a hurricane coming - not >on the beach, but >drop them around and on top of the well, until there's a big enough >pile of them to actually >weight the stuff down. > >Another thing that pisses me off about Obama is that he claims credit >for a $20,000,000,000.00 >"shakedown", when one of the first things BP said was, "We will pay >all legitimate claims" on >May 3, 2010: >http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126468782&ps=rs > >What part of "we will pay" doesn't Obama understand? > >He's just grandstanding, which seems to be all he's ever done, maybe >all he's able to do at all! > >Thanks, >Rich The $20B is going into a trust fund that will be spent by... wait for it... somebody appointed by Omama! What politician can bear to not seize control this sort of spending? Can you say "oink"? John
From: John Larkin on 14 Jul 2010 18:22 On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:27:58 -0700, Tim Wescott <tim(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote: >On 07/14/2010 12:48 PM, John Larkin wrote: >> >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100714/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_20100616040848 >> >> >> If 100% of the oil is spewing out, why not close some valves and see >> if less spews out? What's to lose? > >Is 100% of the oil spilling out? > >You've got a teeny pipe going into a great big oil deposit, and the pipe >is set into ocean floor that's not made of very strong stuff. >Furthermore, the pipe isn't set into the ocean floor very well -- one of >the scandalettes that's flying around is that BP saved money by only >putting in something like 1/5 of the number of reinforcement structures >that their own engineering staff recommended. > >What folks are _really_ worried about now is not so much that the pipe >itself will rupture, but that the stuff the pipe is set into will start >to crack open. Should that happen then you'll get a flow rate that'll >dwarf what we've got now. > >That's what you've got to lose. Well, in that case, they shouldn't close any of the valves at all, ever. Too big a risk. John
From: Jamie on 14 Jul 2010 18:35 tm wrote: > "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message > news:ao0s36praoiibqihlcc6rl8316eirkkhrq(a)4ax.com... > >>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100714/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_20100616040848 >> >> >>If 100% of the oil is spewing out, why not close some valves and see >>if less spews out? What's to lose? >> >>John >> > > > Obama has it under control. No worries. Oh great, you don't know how much I am relieved! Now where is that damn air freshener ? Jamie..
From: John Larkin on 14 Jul 2010 18:29 On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:50:42 -0500, "amdx" <amdx(a)knology.net> wrote: > >"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >news:ao0s36praoiibqihlcc6rl8316eirkkhrq(a)4ax.com... >> >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100714/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_20100616040848 >> >> >> If 100% of the oil is spewing out, why not close some valves and see >> if less spews out? What's to lose? >> >> John >> > > My limited understanding is; the new cap has three valves, two of them are >more on/off >and the third can be shut a little at a time. That's what I gleaned from >Thad Allen's last press conference. >They will shut one and see what the pressure readings are. That will give >them some info about >the integrity of the well caseing. There in lies the rub. Say the pressure >was at 7,850 lbs/sqin >and in 6 hrs it went down to 7,300lbs/sqin. What does that mean? If it went >to 3,000 lbs/sqin >they know they have a problem. > I the caseing is perforated and it's 1 mile under the earth, probably not >a big concern, but if it's >100 yards, we probably can't fix the leak ever. > > So, I think they're thinking. They just started thinking now? John
From: Jamie on 14 Jul 2010 18:37
langwadt(a)fonz.dk wrote: > On 14 Jul., 21:48, John Larkin > <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100714/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_201... >> >>If 100% of the oil is spewing out, why not close some valves and see >>if less spews out? What's to lose? >> >>John > > > can only assume they are afraid plugging the "little" hole will burst > something > and create an even bigger and harder to plug hole. > > an why plug it, why not get the oil to the surface and start > production, it > might as well start making money to pay for all the damage it's > already done > > -Lasse It's obvious they maybe more concerned, not being able to tap that spicket afterwards, wouldn't you say? |