- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Question regarding the use of explosives...
Posted on 6/7/10 at 11:15 pm
Posted on 6/7/10 at 11:15 pm
Has the use of explosives been ruled out as a means of stopping this leak? If so, why?
1
Posted on 6/7/10 at 11:19 pm to Porky
Yes. Because US scientists believe it will create a radioactive oil and gas producing crater in the bottom of the GOM with no hope of sealing it off.
Ever
Ever
Posted on 6/7/10 at 11:25 pm to redstick13
I'm talking about conventional explosives being used to collapse the thing below the surface, without creating a new leak on the surface.
This post was edited on 6/7/10 at 11:30 pm
Posted on 6/7/10 at 11:29 pm to Porky
That was never considered and definitely would not work. It would only blow the wellhead off and take away any possibility of capturing any oil and gas.
Putting them in the ground would be even less productive because only a thermonuclear weapon can create enough heat to cauterize the ground.
Putting them in the ground would be even less productive because only a thermonuclear weapon can create enough heat to cauterize the ground.
Posted on 6/7/10 at 11:31 pm to redstick13
Thanks. I was wondering whether conventional explosives could be used as a means to collapse/seal the pipe/flow far below the ocean floor. It seems like this could be accomplished via an adjacent hole which would collapse the initial hole and the explosive hole.
Are they more concerned with capturing the escaping oil at this point than they are stopping it?
Are they more concerned with capturing the escaping oil at this point than they are stopping it?
This post was edited on 6/8/10 at 12:23 am
Posted on 6/8/10 at 6:25 am to Porky
quote:
I'm talking about conventional explosives being used to collapse the thing below the surface, without creating a new leak on the surface.
Hell no. Think for a moment about how exactly that works - basically the explosion creates a pile of rubble that seals it off. Nothing more than that, really.
Thing is, BP just shoved a lot more mud than that down the hole and it didn't work either. The force of the gusher was too high.
With the explosion you just don't get nearly as much rubble as what already failed, plus you run the risk of fracturing the surrounding area and getting even more leaks that you can't stop.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News