re: Oil Spill and Offshore Fishing (Latest Developments)

quote:

---

another rumor

---

So it was just a rumor?

I guess I will keep listening to the media then.

I need to go back and read to catch up on this. Just tell me that Mr. CT isn't going to get laid off again because of no drilling. He just got back to work.

Does the offshore industry have to follow OSHA 1910 PSM Standard? Is it different for drilling versus production?

Just using the internet to research this, the BOP used in the Deepwater Horizon site was a 2 x Cameron Type TL 18¾in 15K double preventers; 1 x Cameron Type TL 18¾in 15K single preventer; 1 x Cameron DWHC 18¾in 15K wellhead connector.

Cameron BOP

My experience is with chemical plants onshore; for catastrophic events identified by a PHA (HAZOP) for positive shutoff a valve like this would require:

1) two different manufacturers (cameron and someone else)
2) two different technologies (ball valve / plug valve / etc.)
3) two different means to close each respective valve
4) devices like this would be rigorously tested for proper operation at a minimum interval of 6 months.

What I am understanding based on my limited knowledge of the event is that the common mode failure seems to be the hydraulic rams used to close the same type of valve made by the same manufacturer. Seems like too much trust in one manufacturer.

I'm also hearing that acoustic control systems are available but not used here in the US:

acoustic control bop

Could one of the valves been designed to be a spring return failed closed instead of using hydraulic rams? That would be a different and diverse technology which makes the probability of failure much less.

I realize hindsight is 20 / 20 per say. But what may come out of this is diverse technologies for these type of critical devices for positive shutoff.

Like I said, my experience is with chemical plants. I realize that offshore is a different animal alltogether but it is the diverse technology concepts which is the point I am trying to get across.

quote:

---

Not BP or TO. Offshoot of Pride.

---

congrats!!!

back in the chips!

Re: the chemical dispersants

It's my understanding that it will just break up the oil and not dissolve it and that the same amount of oil will be floating out there regardless. With that said, these chemical dispersants introduce new toxic chemicals into the environment...obviously making the water more toxic.

I'm wondering if these dispersants are more of a cosmetic solution rather than a functional solution. And if they're just a cosmetic solution, why are we introducing more harmful chemicals into our environment?

What are everyone else's thoughts on this?

BOYCOTT BP!

quote:

---

but anyone who realistically thinks that it is going to put BP into bankruptcy needs to go take an intro-level business class. There is 0.0% chance of that happening as a result of this.

---

quote:

---

In the end, BP will walk away unscathed with the exception of a little chump change...

---

Are some of you really that clueless?? If you really think that BP is just gonna receive a slap on the wrist and that this will not affect them at all then you are delusional. This may not bankrupt BP as a whole, but BP as we know it in the US could be over

quote:

---

Gotta love the news.

---

25,000 miles, or, no, actually 112 miles, whichever. Same diff.

More awesome news.

Slick triples in size in about 24 hours-yippee!

I don't think they will come out unscathed, but the impact will be regulatory and/or almost all publicity-related. The financial impact will be minimal, and not even close to approaching anything capable of putting them into bankruptcy.