- 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
re: Deepwater Horizon left a 1200 square mile "bathtub ring" on the GoM floor
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:30 am to Taxing Authority
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:30 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
ust curious, why would you presume operators want pollute?
I don't think he's saying they WANT to pollute, but care very little if it happens and they can get away with it.
1
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:32 am to UPT
quote:
care very little if it happens and they can get away with it
Someone hasn't worked for a large O&G company in the past 10-20 years if they say this.
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:35 am to mmcgrath
quote:
That would hardly be notifying the public
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:44 am to C
quote:
Someone hasn't worked for a large O&G company in the past 10-20 years if they say this
this x a million
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:47 am to mmcgrath
quote:I guess it depends on the definition of "public"?
That would hardly be notifying the public and when they report a gusher for a few hours instead of one that went on for a week, who would know then?
The reports are published on the MMS website. Along with detailed yearly summary reports. After hurricanes.. the MMS performs aerial surveys and typically issues a daily press release stating platform shut-in, spill volumes, and production loses in the weeks following.
In fact... if you go to the BSEE.gov site right now, the top press release, on the landing page in the right hand skyscraper is about oil spills on a platform that got busted for not reporting discharges.
If your expecting someone to knock on your door and alert to every spill, that is isn't going to happen (obviously).
As far as "notifying the public"... if you mean through the media... The operators don't control that. The media's editors and producers decide on any given day what to report on -- not the operators.
So maybe your hypothetical beef lies with them?
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:53 am to lsuroadie
quote:Sure. I guess BP's self reporting on the size of the gusher was totally cool with you right after it happened, right? They would have totally corrected that on their own and their early numbers were just because they were so inexperienced I guess.
are you flat out stupid? are you telling me an oil company with drilling operations in deepwater would "hide" a blowout? anything you say, write, think on operations in the GOM from this point forward should be discredited by every person on TD.
And the whole meme that the Gulf of Mexico naturally seeps a lot of oil wasn't pushed by BP either?
How do you like the claim by BP lately that throwing freshwater at the oil spill caused more damage than the oil?
quote:No. I think they would vastly underestimate the amount of oil spilled which is exactly what they did with the Macondo well.
it's so laughable you would even suggest it. what would the oil company do? just pull up the riser, LMRP, pull off location and call it a day?
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:53 am to mmcgrath
quote:
mmcgrath
to further show your stupidity...in the final minutes of Macondo, when they realized the BOP was not shutting the well in, an option the rig had was to divert the kick by using an underwater diverter. in doing so, you 'spill' everything in your column including synthetic mud directly to the ocean, which is a no-no.
so, even up until the final minutes, their decision not to divert, with an environmental spill to answer for, was weighing heavily on the crew's mind....one of many errant decisions that sealed the rig's fate.
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:56 am to mmcgrath
quote:
And the whole meme that the Gulf of Mexico naturally seeps a lot of oil wasn't pushed by BP either?
I mean I get it that you never heard about it until the BP spill but just because you never heard about it before and no one was telling you about it before doesn't mean it's not true. In fact I bet you also didn't know that offshore drilling actually reduce natural seepage significantly. Should we give these producers a credit for this?
Posted on 10/31/14 at 10:59 am to mmcgrath
quote:
they would vastly underestimate the amount of oil spilled
Modeling a deep water spill is inexact. I wouldn't begin to guess who was actually right but I bet both can hire experts to convince you they're number is correct.
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:02 am to mmcgrath
quote:
I guess BP's self reporting on the size of the gusher was totally cool with you right after it happened, right?
trying to estimate the amount of oil in a blowout 5k ft under water is fool's play. there are idiots in every company in the world, including BP. what difference does it make on what the estimate was? the well was going to spill what it was going to spill regardless of who was guessing what.
quote:this is an idiotic argument.
And the whole meme that the Gulf of Mexico naturally seeps a lot of oil wasn't pushed by BP either?
quote:I don't like much claimed by BP...go argue with them, it's not my argument.
How do you like the claim by BP lately that throwing freshwater at the oil spill caused more damage than the oil?
Again, why get so uptight about an estimate...it's foolsplay. a well is going to spill what it's going to spill. whether it's a bbl a day or a bbl a minute the goal should be to stop it.
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:13 am to STEVED00
quote:
If people realized how much oil naturally seeped out of the ground in the GOM then they would realize how much of a non issue this is.
If people realized the crap BP agreed to but is now backing out of and also trying to ruin people's careers and reputations while backing out they would realize all this is an issue.
This is all BP's fault. No one else's.
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:19 am to mmcgrath
quote:Huh? They *did* self-report it. Within an hour every operator in the GOM knew it happened. Hell, they took my workboat!
Sure. I guess BP's self reporting on the size of the gusher was totally cool with you right after it happened, right?
quote:What are you talking about? If you're talking about some of the hyperbolic spill numbers reported in the media--they NEEDED to be corrected because they were pure fiction. I heard numbers reported rhat exceeded the GOM all-time production record from an entire platform -- supposedly coming from a single, uncompleted well with topside reatrictions and a partial plugged wellbore.
They would have totally corrected that on their own and their early numbers were just because they were so inexperienced I guess.
quote:Not that I know of. Can you cite a BP press release or a BP media briefing where that was used?
And the whole meme that the Gulf of Mexico naturally seeps a lot of oil wasn't pushed by BP either?
quote:Actually, their estimates, given the BHP and restrictions, and analogues in the same RP... always looked entirely reasonable.
No. I think they would vastly underestimate the amount of oil spilled which is exactly what they did with the Macondo well.
Further... You should know that the worst case discharge estimates Used for permitting are included in their gocernment-approved DOCD, OSRP, and (I think) the EP, too. The MMS supplied the guidance for those calculations.
No offense, but it's pretty clear your basing your ideas on "big oil is bad" memes, rather than actual knowledge.
This post was edited on 10/31/14 at 11:26 am
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:21 am to lsuroadie
quote:Factored into the decision to not disconnect from the riser as well. It's for the lost part an automatic fine. No OIM wants that!
so, even up until the final minutes, their decision not to divert, with an environmental spill to answer for, was weighing heavily on the crew's mind....one of many errant decisions that sealed the rig's fate.
This post was edited on 10/31/14 at 11:22 am
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:23 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
Not that I know of. Can you cite a BP press release or a BP media briefing where that was used?
Here is the BP PR Attack dog:
BP's PR Machine
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:27 am to Taxing Authority
quote:There are a large number of incident reports on the web site. But given the limited number of inspectors who can't even physically keep up with statutory inspections you can see how a lot of these reports that include spills of thousands of barrels of various stuff can become an internal investigation simply signed off on by the inspectors.
In fact... if you go to the BSEE.gov site right now, the top press release, on the landing page in the right hand skyscraper is about oil spills on a platform that got busted for not reporting discharges.
The ATP report you mentioned is regarding a rig that was engineered to automatically put dispersals in the water following normal operations. I think that is a step beyond under reporting of incidents and is obviously much easier to catch given that they had pipes connecting a reservoir of dispersant to a discharge pipe.
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:30 am to mmcgrath
quote:
There are a large number of incident reports on the web site. But given the limited number of inspectors who can't even physically keep up with statutory inspections you can see how a lot of these reports that include spills of thousands of barrels of various stuff can become an internal investigation simply signed off on by the inspectors.
The ATP report you mentioned is regarding a rig that was engineered to automatically put dispersals in the water following normal operations. I think that is a step beyond under reporting of incidents and is obviously much easier to catch given that they had pipes connecting a reservoir of dispersant to a discharge pipe.
You liberals and your propaganda tactics ruin good threads. You always take things for a loop.
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:33 am to lsu13lsu
quote:JusT skimmed, but didn't see the anything about natural seepage cited. Maybe it was in the referenced oyster report, but that's not BP's.
Here is the BP PR Attack dog:
And the article is correct about many of he hyperbolic claims of catastrophic environmental destruction. What is BP supposed to do? Just lay back and take it?
ETA: added the underline part to make it more clear!
This post was edited on 10/31/14 at 3:04 pm
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:39 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
JusT skimmed
It is a really short article (advertisement) so not sure how you missed this:
quote:
Natural oil seeps release up to the equivalent of nearly six Exxon Valdez spills in the Gulf each year, and microbes in the Gulf have adapted over time to feast on oil. Several studies have shown that these voracious microbes consumed a significant amount of oil after the spill.
You are the one who said BP doesn't use this PR tactic and you are wrong.
This post was edited on 10/31/14 at 11:42 am
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:40 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
And the article is correct about many of he hyperbolic claims. What is BP supposed to do? Just lay back and take it?
Unless you are totally unfamiliar to this entire process they were told by the Plantiffs and Judge this (fraud) would happen and they agreed to it anyway. They said they didn't care they just wanted to pay up and move on and make it right.
Posted on 10/31/14 at 11:41 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
JusT skimmed, but didn't see the anything about natural seepage cited. Maybe it was in the referenced oyster report, but that's not BP's.
And the article is correct about many of he hyperbolic claims. What is BP supposed to do? Just lay back and take it?
Are you for real?
Page 2 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News