What would a hurricane do to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill?

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 1:57 PM GMT on May 26, 2010

Share this Blog
8
+

Hurricane season is upon us next week, and the Deepwater Horizon blowout is still spewing a geyser of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. With this year's hurricane season likely to be a severe one, with much above average numbers of hurricanes and intense hurricanes, we have the unwholesome prospect of a hurricane churning through the largest accidental oil spill in history. A hurricane has never passed over a sizable oil spill before, so there are a lot of unknowns about what might happen. The closest call came in 1979, after the greatest accidental oil spill in history, the massive Ixtoc I blowout. That disaster dumped 3 million barrels (126 million gallons) of oil into the Southern Gulf of Mexico between June 1979 and March 1980. Category 1 Hurricane Henri passed just north of the main portion of the oil spill on September 16 and 17, generating 15 foot seas and southwest winds of 15 - 25 knots over the spill region on the 16th. Interestingly, the NOAA/AOML report on the spill found that the winds did not blow long enough or strongly enough to control the direction of oil flow, as evidenced by the fact that the wind direction was often 180° to the direction of plume flow. The main impact of the wind was to dilute the oil and weather it, converting it to a thick "mousse".

Oil and beaches
During the Ixtoc spill, prevailing currents circulating clockwise from the blowout carried a 60-mile by 70-mile patch of sheen containing a 300 foot by 500 foot patch of heavy crude 900 miles to the South Texas coast. On August 6, 1979, tarballs from the spill impacted a 17 mile stretch of Texas beach. Mousse patches impacted the shoreline north of Port Mansfield Channel on August 15 and again on August 18. On August 24, mousse impacted shoreline south of Aransas Pass. By August 26, most of North Padre Island was covered with moderate amounts of oil. By September 1, all of the south Texas coast had been impacted by oil. However, Hurricane Henri formed in the Gulf of Mexico's Bay of Campeche on September 17 - 18. At the same time, a strong non-tropical low pressure system formed along the Texas coast, bringing gale-force winds and rainfall amounts in excess of ten inches to the coast. The combination of swells from Hurricane Henri and wind-driven waves from the non-tropical low pressure system scoured the oiled beaches of over 90% of their oil (Gundlach et al., 1981). The oil washed over the barrier islands into the estuaries behind them, and much of it sank to the bottom of the ocean. According to NOAA, impacts to the estuaries were minor. However, Payne and McNabb (1984) noted that selected regions of the coast, most of the beached oil was heavily resistant to transport during storms. Oil/sediment mats were ultimately covered by clean sand, but the oil/sediment mats were re-exposed and washed into the lagoon behind the barrier islands one year later when Category 3 Hurricane Allen battered the coast. No transport of the oil/sediment mats from the lagoon bottom was observed in the 3-year period following Hurricane Allen.

So, the Ixtoc blowout experience shows us that if a sandy beach is already fouled by oil, a hurricane can help clean up the mess. However, the situation is different along shores with marshlands, where the many shoreline plants offer crevices and tangled roots for the oil to accumulate in. A hurricane will help scour some of the oil out of marshlands, but the majority of it will probably remain stuck. This is also true of rocky beaches. Rocky shores fouled by the great Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska in 1989 have been pounded by many hurricane-strength storms over the years, but these storms were not able to clean the beaches of oil like Hurricane Henri did for Texas' beaches in 1979.

Transport of oil by hurricanes
Shores that are already fouled by oil will probably benefit from a hurricane, but the oil cleaned off of those shores then becomes someone else's problem. The strong winds and powerful ocean currents that a hurricane's winds drive will bring oil to large stretches of coast that otherwise would not have gotten oil. This is my chief concern regarding a hurricane moving through the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Consider the case of the Exxon Valdez disaster in 1989. The ill-fated tanker split open in Prince William Sound on March 24, and oil spill response crews were initially able to contain the spill behind booms and make good progress removing it. However, two days later, a powerful Gulf of Alaska storm with 70 mph winds roared through, overwhelming the containment booms and distributing the oil along a 90-mile stretch of coast. The oil went on to foul over 400 miles of Alaska coast, a far larger disaster than would have occurred than if the storm had not passed by. Similarly, a hurricane moving through the Gulf of Mexico spill will very likely make the disaster much worse, spreading out the oil over a larger region, and bringing the oil to shores that otherwise might not have seen oil. It is true that the oil will be diluted some by being spread out over a larger area, so some shores will not see a substantial oiling. But overall, a hurricane passing through the oil spill is likely to result in much higher damage to the coast.

I expect that during the peak portion of hurricane season (August - October), the clockwise-rotating eddy that is attempting to cut off from the Loop Current this week will be fully separated from the Loop Current. The separation of this eddy will substantially reduce the possibility that significant amounts of oil will reach the Florida Keys and Southeast U.S. coast, since the Loop Current will be much farther south, flowing more due east towards the Keys from the Yucatan Channel. Oil moving southwards from the spill location due to a hurricane's winds will tend to get trapped in the 250-mile wide eddy, potentially covering most of the surface of the eddy with oil. Thus we might have a 250-mile wide spinning oil slick in the middle of the Gulf of Mexico for days or weeks after a hurricane. This could potentially have a significant warming effect on the Gulf waters, since the oil is dark and will absorb sunlight, and the oil will prevent evaporation from cooling the waters underneath it. Since Loop Current eddies contain a large amount of very warm water that extend to great depth, they often act as high-octane fuel for hurricanes that pass over. The rapid intensification of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were both aided by the passage of those storms over Loop Current eddies. Thus the warming of the Loop Current Eddy by oil pulled into it by a passing hurricane or tropical storm could lead to explosive intensification of the next hurricane that passes over the eddy.

The Loop Current Eddy will move slowly westwards toward Texas at about 4 miles per day after it fully cuts off. When it reaches the shallow waters near the Texas coast in early 2011, the eddy will turn northwards and gradually dissipate, By then, I expect that the vast majority of the oil in the eddy will have dispersed, sunk, or evaporated.

Storm surge and oil
One of the more unnerving prospects to consider if a hurricane hits the oil spill is what the hurricane's storm surge might do with the oil/dispersant mixture. The foul mix would ride inland on top of the surge, potentially fouling residential areas and hundreds of square miles of sensitive ecosystems with the toxic stew. The impacts of the oil and dispersant on vegetation may be too low to cause significant damage, since the hurricane would dilute the mixture with a large amount of sea water, and wash much of the toxic brew off the vegetation with heavy rain. We do have some limited experience with oil spills during Hurricane Katrina's storm surge to shed light on the subject. Katrina's storm surge caused over 8 million gallons of oil to spill into the storm surge waters. The largest spill occurred when the storm surge hit the Murphy Oil refinery in St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana. According to Santella et al. (2010), The refinery was inundated with 12 feet of water, and a partially filled 250,000-barrel above ground storage tank was dislodged and ruptured, releasing 25,100 barrels (1.05 million gallons) of mixed crude oil. Dikes surrounding the oil tanks at the refinery were flooded and breached and oil from the spill covered a residential area of approximately one square mile affecting approximately 1,800 homes. Front-end loaders were needed to remove the oily sediments from the area. A class action lawsuit resulted from the spill, ending in a $330 million settlement with a buy-out of properties closest to the spill and graded compensation in a larger zone. Katrina also caused a 139,000-gallon crude oil leak from a 20-inch pipeline at Shell Nairn Pipeline Company in Port Sulphur, Louisiana. Approximately 10,500 gallons of the spill reached the shoreline and coastal marshes, and only 10,700 gallons were recovered. This release resulted in a $5.5 million class action settlement to nearby property owners (http://www.nairnclaims.com). I haven't been able to find any information on how the marshlands fared after getting oiled by this spill.

Katrina's storm surge also destroyed an oil tank at Chevron's Empire facility, releasing oil into a retention pond in a region surrounded by marshland. Three and half weeks later, Hurricane Rita's storm surge hit the oily mess in the retention pond, washing 4,000 - 8,000 gallons of oil into nearby marshlands, which were heavily or moderately oiled. According to the EPA and Merten et al. (2008), the oiled marshlands were set on fire six weeks after the spill, resulting in 80-90% removal of the oil and contaminated vegetation. The marshland recovered fairly quickly, as seen in aerial photos taken five months after the burn (Figure 1)--though oil still remained in the roots, affecting burrowing crabs and the wildlife that feed on them. So, oiled marshes can recover somewhat from a storm-surge driven oiling, but it is uncertain if burning could be successfully used to restore a 100+ square mile region of marshland oiled by the storm surge from a major hurricane. Another big unknown is how toxic BP's dispersants might be to the vegetation.


Figure 1. Upper left: oiled marshlands as seen on October 10, 2005, near Chevron's Empire facility, after the storm surges of Katrina and Rita. Right: The marshlands on March 16, 2006, five months after the controlled burn. The marshlands had largely recovered. Bottom: the controlled burn in progress (October 12, 2005.) Image credit: Merten, A.A., Henry, C., and J. Michel, 2008, Decision-making process to use in-situ burning to restore an oiled intermediate marsh following hurricanes Katrina and Rita, 2008 International Oil Spill Conference.

Wind and oil
The winds from a hurricane hurl ocean sea spray miles inland, often causing major defoliation and tree damage far beyond where the storm surge penetrates. For example, Category 2 Hurricane Bob of 1991 blew sea spray inland 4 miles (7 km) inland over Cape Cod. The salt deposited defoliated nearly all the deciduous trees along the coast. Kerr, 2000 document the case of Category 2 Typhoon Gay of November 23, 1992, which hit the 15-km wide island of Guam with 95 - 100 mph winds. Interaction with another typhoon disrupted Gay's thunderstorm activity, resulting in a nearly rainless typhoon for Guam. As a result, heavy amounts of salt coated the entire island, resulting in nearly complete defoliation. The salt didn't actually kill many plants, and the island re-greened within a year. The Category 3 New England Hurricane of 1938 was able to cause salt damage to trees as far as 45 miles inland, due to wind-blown sea spray. Thus we can anticipate that a hurricane passing over the oil spill will be able to hurl oil and toxic dispersants many miles inland during landfall. In regions where little rain falls, the concentrations of the oil and dispersants may be a problem. Again, we have no experience with this sort of situation, so the potential risks are unknown.

Rain and oil
Hurricanes evaporate huge amounts of water from the ocean and convert it to rain. In general, we do not need to worry about oil dissolving into the rain, since the oil and water don't mix. Furthermore, about 50-70% of the oil that is going to evaporate from the spill does so in the first 12 hours that the oil reaches the surface, so the volatile oil compounds that could potentially get dissolved into rain water won't be around. Hurricanes are known to carry sea salt and microscopic marine plankton hundreds of miles inland, since the strong updrafts of the storm can put these substances high in the troposphere where they can be carried far inland as the hurricane makes landfall. The Eastern Pacific's Hurricane Nora of 1997, whose remnants passed over Southern California, brought traces of sea salt and marine microorganisms to clouds over the central U.S. similarly, we can expect any landfalling hurricanes that pass over the oil spill to pick up traces of Gulf of Mexico crude and transport it hundreds of miles inland. However, I doubt that these traces would be detectable in rainwater except by laboratory analysis, and would not cause any harm to plants or animals.

Lightning and oil
Could a lightning strike from a hurricane ignite oil from the spill, and the hurricane's winds hurl the flaming oil inland, creating a fiery maelstrom of water, wind, and flame? This would make a great scene in a typical bad Hollywood disaster movie, but it's not going to happen with the universe's current laws of physics. Lightning could set an oil slick on fire, in regions where the oil is most dense and very fresh. About 50-70% of the evaporation of oil's most flammable volatile compounds occurs in the first 12 hours after release, so fresh oil is the most likely to ignite. However, the winds of a hurricane are so fierce that any surface oil slick of flaming oil would quickly be disrupted and doused by wave action and sea spray. Heavy rain would further dampen any lightning-caused oil slick fires.

Bringing oil at depth to the surface
Hurricanes act like huge blenders that plow through the ocean, thoroughly mixing surface waters to depths as great as 200 meters (650 feet), and pulling waters from depth to the surface. Thus if sub-surface plumes of oil are located within 200 meters of the surface, a hurricane could potentially bring them to the surface. However, the huge sub-surface plumes of oil found by the research vessel Pelican were at depths of 2300 - 4200 feet, and a hurricane will not affect the ocean circulation at those depths.

Comparisons of the Deepwater Horizon blowout with Exxon Valdez
One footnote to consider when comparing the Deepwater Horizon blowout to the disastrous March 24, 1989 Exxon Valdez spill: the amount of oil spilled in that disaster is usually quoted as 11 million gallons (260,000 barrels.) However, this is the number given by Exxon Mobil, and independent assessments by the State of Alaska came up with a much higher figure--24 to 36 million gallons, with state investigators stressing that the lower number was very unlikely. I'd be inclined to believe Exxon grossly understated the actual severity of the spill, much like BP is attempting to do with the Deepwater Horizon blowout. Steven Wereley, an associate professor at Purdue University, used a computer analysis (particle image velocimetry) to arrive at a rate of 95,000 barrels (4 million gallons) per day since the April 20 blowout, nearly 20 times greater than the 5,000 barrel a day estimate BP and government scientists have been citing. If he is correct, and the State of Alaska's figures on the Exxon Valdez disaster are correct, the Deepwater Horizon blowout so far has spilled five times the oil Exxon Valdez did.

References
Gundlach, E.R., Finkelstein, K.J., and J.L. Sadd, "Impact and Persistence of Ixtoc I Oil on the South Texas Coast", Proceedings: 1981 Oil Spill Conference (Prevention, Behavior, Control, Cleanup) March 2-5, 1981, Atlanta, GA. p 477-485.

Kerr, A.M., 2000, "Defoliation of an island (Guam, Mariana
Archipelago, Western Pacific Ocean) following a saltspray-laden
dry typhoon," Journal of Tropical Ecology 16:895901.

Merten, A.A., Henry, C., and J. Michel, 2008, Decision-making process to use in-situ burning to restore an oiled intermediate marsh following hurricanes Katrina and Rita, 2008 International Oil Spill Conference.

Payne, J.R. and D. McNabb, Jr., "Weathering of Petroleum in the Marine Environment", Marine Technology Society Journal 18, 3, Third Quarter 1984.

Santella, N., Steinberg, L.J., and H. Sengul, 2010,Petroleum and Hazardous Material Releases from Industrial Facilities Associated with Hurricane Katrina, Risk Analyis, Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 635-649, Published Online: 16 Mar 2010

90L
I've been focused more on the oil spill, and will have just a limited discussion of (90L) off the South Carolina coast. The storm has changed little over the past 24 hours, and doesn't have time to develop into a subtropical storm, before an approaching trough of low pressure pulls the system out to sea Thursday and Friday. The National Hurricane Center (NHC) is giving 90L a less than 10% chance of developing into a depression or tropical/subtropical storm, and anticipates not writing any more special advisories on 90L. There presently isn't much to be concerned with about this storm, though Bermuda may get more heavy rain and high seas from the storm late this week as it moves out to sea. Wunderbloggers Weather456 and StormW have more on 90L.

Central American disturbance
An area of disturbed weather has developed just off the Pacific coast of Mexico. The disturbance will bring heavy rains to Central America during the remainder of the week, potentially bringing serious flooding rains to portions of Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua. There is the potential for disturbed weather accompanying the disturbance to push into the Western Caribbean early next week and pose a threat to develop into a tropical depression. While there is high wind shear over the northern Caribbean, shear should be low enough to allow development should the disturbance stay in the southern reaches of the Caribbean. Any storm that develops in the Caribbean in the coming week would get steered to the northeast and will not pose a threat to the Gulf of Mexico.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 141 - 91

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45Blog Index

The western low which is being tracked by the NHC is showing signs of equatorward and poleward banding.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
140. IKE
SYNOPSIS FOR THE SW N ATLC INCLUDING THE BAHAMAS
1130 AM EDT WED MAY 26 2010

.SYNOPSIS...BROAD LOW PRES CIRCULATION COVERING MUCH OF SW N
ATLC WITH CENTER NEAR 31N76.5W 1006 MB THIS MORNING WILL MEANDER
THIS AFTERNOON THEN BEGIN TO MOVE SLOWLY E-SE TONIGHT THROUGH
THU NIGHT...THEN BE FORCED SLOWLY S AND WEAKEN TO NEAR 28N68W BY
SAT MORNING AS A COLD FRONT SINKS INTO THE REGION FROM THE N.
THE LOW WILL DRAG A SERIES OF WEAK TROUGHS THROUGH THE BAHAMAS
WITH WINDS BECOMING LIGHT THROUGHOUT THE AREA BY THE LATTER PART
OF THE PERIOD.

Member Since: June 9, 2005 Posts: 23 Comments: 37860
Quoting reedzone:
Just looked at 90E, it is VERY disorganized and probably wont make it to TD today. The big blow up of storms you thought was the main attraction of the invest faded and a new blow up is forming where the originaly low was at. It just shows that this is a convective mess, nothing near TD yet. I give it a 20% to form by tonight. 90L seems to be popping up convection near the center, but that is also disorganized, yet it finally has a dominant low instead of many swirls.


It is not very disorganized. I can see two distinguished centers not many low level swirls as observed with 90L. This thing still needs to sort itself out but whatever forms appears likely to head eastward.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
138. eddye
reedzone u are wrong im looking at satelite
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
136. IKE
54 hr. 12Z GFS...

Member Since: June 9, 2005 Posts: 23 Comments: 37860
Quoting AussieStorm:

Wouldn't a nuke cause a tidal wave?


A nuke would crack the fault system in the area (yep, there is one) and possibly open this thing all the way...


EHHHHH

Try again
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Just looked at 90E, it is VERY disorganized and probably wont make it to TD today. The big blow up of storms you thought was the main attraction of the invest faded and a new blow up is forming where the originaly low was at. It just shows that this is a convective mess, nothing near TD yet. I give it a 20% to form by tonight. 90L seems to be popping up convection near the center, but that is also disorganized, yet it finally has a dominant low instead of many swirls.
Member Since: July 1, 2008 Posts: 13 Comments: 7437
Holy political posting batman! I thought this was a weather blog?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SomeRandomTexan:
Over a month and still the oil spews...

Potentially the worst environmental disaster to ever happen to America.

No one knows the exact amount of barrels entering the Gulf each day but the numbers are only skyrocketing.

This on the watch of a liberal administration which is supposed to care about the environment.

IF we are going to be bailing out everybody and their brother then why doesn't this administration bail out BP and us some technology to get this thing closed.

IF this is Obama's Katrina then he better mobilize the military and National guard in a big way like Bush did for Katrina.


This isn't the government's fault. Please don't start posting irrational government blaming posts. This is a private corporation's fault. This cannot be compared to a natural disaster because it's apples and oranges. Good Lord...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
131. IKE
Quoting asgolfr999:


Thanks Pat.

I know we have had our differences but it absolutely needs to be pointed out that this is not the final attempt, but the NEXT attempt. They can cut the riser and try to cap it, they can stack another BOP on top of the existing one and so on. And they will keep trying until the relief well gets drilled.

No nukes.

No 2 years of an exxon Valdez a day.

A disaster yes, but come on people....get the evilwishcasting out of the system, get positive.


I don't see a whole lot of positive...right now...with this epic disaster of an underwater oil volcano.
Member Since: June 9, 2005 Posts: 23 Comments: 37860
Quoting eddye:
jeff is saying that this will go into the carribean
a part of it will some will break away most will stay in EPAC
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting asgolfr999:


Thanks Pat.

I know we have had our differences but it absolutely needs to be pointed out that this is not the final attempt, but the NEXT attempt. They can cut the riser and try to cap it, they can stack another BOP on top of the existing one and so on. And they will keep trying until the relief well gets drilled.

No nukes.

No 2 years of an exxon Valdez a day.

A disaster yes, but come on people....get the evilwishcasting out of the system, get positive.
You point out something to be positive about and I will listen. The fact is this is going to ruin peoples livelihood and their lives and will do untold damage for generations even if we stopped the flow today.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
128. IKE
84.6 outside my window...right now.

Sitting back and reading the blog with Cheddar Cheese Combo's and a cup of Maxwell House Light.....

Member Since: June 9, 2005 Posts: 23 Comments: 37860
It appears as though there are two lower to mid level circulations along the same 700mb trough axis associated with 90E competing for dominance. Both lows producing a significant amount of lower level convergence.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Over a month and still the oil spews...

Potentially the worst environmental disaster to ever happen to America.

No one knows the exact amount of barrels entering the Gulf each day but the numbers are only skyrocketing.

This on the watch of a liberal administration which is supposed to care about the environment.

IF we are going to be bailing out everybody and their brother then why doesn't this administration bail out BP and us some technology to get this thing closed.

IF this is Obama's Katrina then he better mobilize the military and National guard in a big way like Bush did for Katrina.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
this winter you predicted major severe weather with killer tornadoes

you sure that wasn't killer tomatoes?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Patrap:

If the top Kill fails,..


This animation (Flash Player required) shows that there is a plan to remove the leaking riser and seal off the top of the BOP, prior to injecting the mud.

The idea is to set up a sort of drill press over the top of the BOP, and ream it out, and make a seat for a seal which would then be forced down on top of the BOP. I'm not so sure how they can put a cap down on top of the huge gusher that will be coming out at that point. Most likely this cap will actually be a valved pipe, and the valve will be initially open. If this pipe can be seated successfully, then the valve will be closed.

If this capping procedure is successful, and the BOP and the wellhead hold together, this would stop the flow. This would also in theory allow for successful injection of mud through the "choke" and "kill" lines at high pressure. Now this latter assumes that these two lines in the BOP are in continuity with the well, and that BP engineers can successfully jack into these lines and force mud down them. Obviously the whole thing depends on their ability to set up this giant drill press thingy over the BOP. Not easy at a mile under the ocean. It really reminds me of "The Right Stuff."


Thanks Pat.

I know we have had our differences but it absolutely needs to be pointed out that this is not the final attempt, but the NEXT attempt. They can cut the riser and try to cap it, they can stack another BOP on top of the existing one and so on. And they will keep trying until the relief well gets drilled.

No nukes.

No 2 years of an exxon Valdez a day.

A disaster yes, but come on people....get the evilwishcasting out of the system, get positive.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Just a reminder... We all are frustrated and want to vent. It is a horrible mess!

But if the blog gets too far off the weather topics and other topics covered in Dr. Master's discussion above... The blog can suddenly become less crowded if Admin decides to go into policy enforcement mode.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
POLO!!!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Jeff9641:


They call me out so then I call them out. I would agree with your statement. I mention on the blog earlier that this storm had 2 possible movements Mexico or torn apart and pushed into Florida by the upper flow.


but the current upper flow does not support the system moving into Florida
Member Since: March 10, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 7874
Quoting CycloneOz:


Nuke it shut and cross your fingers.

I agree that it can be done...as the reservoir is below 13,000 feet.


The thought of detonating a nuke doesn't bother you? I guess it's already a cesspool devoid of life at this point, may as well add to the party, right? I think non-nuclear options would be a better idea. Does the thought of de-stabilizing an already unstable sea floor down there and possibly opening up a much bigger gusher not worry you?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
AMY!!!!!


MARCO!!!!
Member Since: December 9, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 2498

If the top Kill fails,..


This animation (Flash Player required) shows that there is a plan to remove the leaking riser and seal off the top of the BOP, prior to injecting the mud.

The idea is to set up a sort of drill press over the top of the BOP, and ream it out, and make a seat for a seal which would then be forced down on top of the BOP. I'm not so sure how they can put a cap down on top of the huge gusher that will be coming out at that point. Most likely this cap will actually be a valved pipe, and the valve will be initially open. If this pipe can be seated successfully, then the valve will be closed.

If this capping procedure is successful, and the BOP and the wellhead hold together, this would stop the flow. This would also in theory allow for successful injection of mud through the "choke" and "kill" lines at high pressure. Now this latter assumes that these two lines in the BOP are in continuity with the well, and that BP engineers can successfully jack into these lines and force mud down them. Obviously the whole thing depends on their ability to set up this giant drill press thingy over the BOP. Not easy at a mile under the ocean. It really reminds me of "The Right Stuff."
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 428 Comments: 129844
Quoting CycloneOz:


Speaking of covering things up. Let's not forget that BP was the biggest financial contributor to Obama's presidential run...and in return...Obama's administration removed key regulations that constrained BP on off-shore drilling.

This snake has two heads. Don't just blame BP, when the U.S. government is just as much at fault or more for cozying up to the oil giant.


None of that is relevant here. We can go back and forth all day from both sides of the aisle about who is cozier with big oil and for how many decades. Regardless of any other factors or ethics, the fact remains that BP could have very easily spent the very small amount of money necessary to prevent this disaster or stop it on day 1. Even unfettered capitalism should recognize the merit in taking such safety precautions regardless of regulations. A disaster of this magnitude is bad for business, don't you agree? Since nothing else matters but profits I would think BP, in the interests of its stockholders and profits, would have anticipated such a possibility. The PR and monetary losses may well put BP under, not to mention having the specter of being responsible for quite possibly the worst ecological disaster in the history of the country. How does skimping on safety for so long sound now? It's not like BP has an impeccable safety history.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The UKMET model and the GEFS takes 90E into the Caribbean
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting twhcracker:


you need to check the other side, because a lot of big money contributors like pepsi, coke, UPS, etc., give equally to both sides, covering themselves no matter who is elected.


I agree with you. I was defending thats all. I know they usually give equally. I will go back to discussing the weather no more politcs.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
SQUAWK!!!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Jeff9641:


It is. Some people are crazy on here if they think this system will all the sudden turn and move due E.


Looking at the loops to me its staying in the EPAC for now, moving slowly WNW-NW

Probably not a good idea to call people crazy or wrong, just because they disagree with you
Member Since: March 10, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 7874
Quoting gator23:


HE ONLY RECIEVED $77,051 from BP that is not alot. He recieved the most money from them but they were NOT his biggest contributor. The Unviersity of California was his biggest contributor at University of California $1,591,395


you need to check the other side, because a lot of big money contributors like pepsi, coke, UPS, etc., give equally to both sides, covering themselves no matter who is elected.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Just as with the current economic situation, the BP mess is a making of the GOP and the Bush Admin. Lets not forget that. It was the Bushies who removed restrictions and gave the 'categorical exclusions' that contributed to this disaster. Has the current admin responded appropriately? No. But after listening to all the conservatives crying "drill, baby, drill" and after seeing Reagan end Carter's attempt and getting us off of oil....the idea that this mess is at the feet of the Obama administration is categorically absurd.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting pottery:

Well the 'best' situation is that the oil will keep coming out like it is doing now.
The 'worst' situation is that they damage the BOP and the oil is able to escape unhindered. Right now there are several restrictions slowing the flow.( Kinked pipe, half-closed BOP (apparently) etc.)
If that happens, you will see the erruption from the coast! And it will be impossible to stop it.


Disastermongering does not help.

They have x-rayed the pipe and determined the odds are in favor of continuing the current attempt.

Anyone who says this thing will flow unfettered for 2 and more years is forgetting that the 2 headed relief well will cut off the flow in August if it cannot be done before...that is the worst case scenario as stated by BP, the Fed and individual university experts.

Doomsaying does not help matters in the least
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RitaEvac:
No one has thought that this spill may have to run dry if they cant fix it.
Bp would probably like that solution then they could keep funneling oil with there tube to help offset cleanup costs.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting asgolfr999:


Sensible comments.

I live about 4 miles from Dauphin island as the crow flies, and there are very few of you observers who could be more unhappy about the whole situation, including BP, Transocean and Haliburton. But let me repeat myself one more time.

BP is probably the only force on the planet right now who has even the slightest inkling of how to STOP THE FLOW RIGHT NOW.

Let them do that unfettered, unaccosted and in fact with all the help we can possibly muster. THEN let them clean up, whether it take 6 months or 6 years, EVERY SINGLE DROP.

THEN, and only then...DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WITH THEM!!! Go ahead and get your pound of flesh...but let them do their thing first.

That's all we want.

What a Sensible remark!
Well said.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:



BP yet to make call on choking Gulf oil gusher

BP is still running tests and will decide Wednesday morning if it will go ahead with an effort to seal the blown-out Gulf of Mexico oil well by pumping heavy mud into a massive device on top of the breach.
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 428 Comments: 129844
Quoting Patrap:


You mean Like having a Oil Man for President for 8 years and Haliburton's leader as VP as well.

Yes indeed,yes indeed.
Yea i mean all of them. Thier all guilty in one way or another! We have the greatest Country in the world, but if it keeps being ran, at least the way it has in the last 50 years, our children and granchildren wont have a great country and wont be able to enjoy the great weather we have in this beautiful nation.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
No one has thought that this spill may have to run dry if they cant fix it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Thanks for the very good article Pat. Post 81.

BBL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting pottery:

This is a fair comment.
But I wonder about this lack of information which seems to be directed at BP but we need to note-

1- at this point I cannot accept that the US Gov. does not have ALL the info concerning the entire problem.
2-the Gov may be obliged to keep info under wraps, and blame BP for the lack of info.
3- it could possibly be that the situation could actually be much worse than they want people to realize.
4- if the attempt at the "top kill" goes wrong, the result could possibly make the present situation look like paradise.

This is an unprecedented and highly complex problem (to plug the leaks). I have no doubt that the attempts are the very best options available right now.
The fact that BP claims that the chance of success is 60-70% says a lot, to me!


Sensible comments.

I live about 4 miles from Dauphin island as the crow flies, and there are very few of you observers who could be more unhappy about the whole situation, including BP, Transocean and Haliburton. But let me repeat myself one more time.

BP is probably the only force on the planet right now who has even the slightest inkling of how to STOP THE FLOW RIGHT NOW.

Let them do that unfettered, unaccosted and in fact with all the help we can possibly muster. THEN let them clean up, whether it take 6 months or 6 years, EVERY SINGLE DROP.

THEN, and only then...DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WITH THEM!!! Go ahead and get your pound of flesh...but let them do their thing first.

That's all we want.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Jeff9641:


With all do respect I disagree with Dr. Masters. Bottomline! If you don't like it then so be it. Given the pattern and the storm now much further NW there is almost no chance od this bending back E into the Caribbean.


Thanks; now on my ignore list.....Good luck to You and let us know when you get your Met Degree to offset your current serious forcasting deficiencies.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 141 - 91

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

JeffMasters's Recent Photos

Lake Effort Snow Shower Over Windsor, Ontario
Sunset on Dunham Lake
Pictured Rocks Sunset
Sunset on Lake Huron