Barack Obama sends nuclear experts to tackle BP

this is going to backfire so bad they dont even know
when they say the smartest people at work, they really mean the dumbest, sure its worked in the past, but they are soon going to find it will backfire #ing up alot of # and water

what if a thunder storm was in the gulf of mexico and the oil that is left lighting hits it and it turns to fire ?

what if there was an Earthquake in the gulf of mexico could that make something that could produce another oil spill or 2 ?





[edit on 16-5-2010 by AndersonLee]

Originally posted by Soular System

Show me where it's been done at 5000 ft?

Otherwise, it's experiMENTAL

Do we really want to experiment with nukes in the Gulf, when we already have a catastrophe of epic proportions?

Well, in the previous thread, on the exact same topic, I came to the conclusion that we should use a different type of explosive like dynamite or something.

Here are the links if you care.

Obama Sends Bomb Inventor, Mars Expert to Fix BP Oil Spill
Nuke the oil leak?... It worked for the Soviets!

As far as an explosion at 5000 ft... From above link

The first happened in Uzbekistan, on September 30, 1966 with a blast 1.5 times the strength of the Hiroshima bomb and at a depth of 1.5 kilometers. KP also notes that subterranean nuclear blasts were used as much as 169 times in the Soviet Union to accomplish fairly mundane tasks like creating underground storage spaces for gas or building canals.

1.5 kilometers = 4921.25984 Feet

-E-

reply to post by Soular System


I've had a leak in my bathroom for a while, and I just can't fix it.

This gives me an Idea!!!

Ok, I'm not a Islamic Extremist so I obviously can't get my hands on any
fisionable material but maybe some good ol' fashioned Dyno-Mite will do
the job.

This can't be any more crazy than the fix for the Credit Crunch.
To eleviate the Credit Sqeeze we need to borrow more money from the
very companies that were borrowing money from the Government.

Come to think of it, it is crazier. But then what do I care, it's not my Backyard.

Ka-Boooom, Fix one Environmental Disaster by creating an even bigger
Environmental Disaster. It's the American Way.

Wow. That's all I can say. I don't know much about Nuclear weapons (what kind of source they use, what the dose rates after an explosion are), but I don't imagine it could be good! To think that we may potentially eat a fish with a contaminated particle in it then have that particle irradiating in our organs gives me the willies!

Has some sort of environmental assessment been completed from the last attempts?

Why not a conventional bomb of egual yield ? 30 x 2.2x 1000 the dynamite equivlency of a thirty kilo ton bomb. C 4 or advanced conventional explosives of equal yield why won't this do the same effect . They blow up entire mountains drilling a hole and just using dynamite for heavens sake. We needed this done a month ago only one other deep water well is even within miles of this well. What the blank are they waiting on. Call the russians in for their help , Knowledge is the key.

Why not a conventional bomb of egual yield ? 30 x 2.2x 1000 the dynamite equivlency of a thirty kilo ton bomb. C 4 or advanced conventional explosives of equal yield why won't this do the same effect . They blow up entire mountains drilling a hole and just using dynamite for heavens sake. We needed this done a month ago only one other deep water well is even within miles of this well. What the blank are they waiting on. Call the russians in for their help , Knowledge is the key.

Why not a conventional bomb of egual yield ? 30 x 2.2x 1000 the dynamite equivlency of a thirty kilo ton bomb. C 4 or advanced conventional explosives of equal yield why won't this do the same effect . They blow up entire mountains drilling a hole and just using dynamite for heavens sake. We needed this done a month ago only one other deep water well is even within miles of this well. What the blank are they waiting on. Call the russians in for their help , Knowledge is the key.

reply to post by circle 360


The smartest post on here yet... x3!

-E-

reply to post by Stormdancer777


You might be thinking what I am. If the Gulf leaking oil naturally, then wouldn't it be a kick in the (bleep) if instead if sealing the well, the nuke blew a bigger hole in it.

reply to post by fixer1967


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting that the item I posted earlier from the Sun:


www.abovetopsecret.com...

which predicted Judgment Day on September 11, 2010 included a mention of a toxic event in the ocean that ended up effecting 66% of the earth's waters. (although they did mention pacific ocean, not the gulf which flows into the atlantic. ) and of course it is just a prediction.

There are other reasons why I believe the chances are about 70% that nuclear will be used, but will reserve those comments for if/when the final decision is made.

If I remember right the Russian's use of nuclear to control a well were at a depth of 300 feet only, vs. the several thousand feet of this well --again if that's is correct, that does make this concept unique.











[edit on 16-5-2010 by manta78]

reply to post by fordrew


thank you for bringing a bit of sanity here, solar hick or whatever his name is was probably just hurt that his idea is probably wrong, considering he's been perpetuating it with every post that isn't him admitting to being an idiot.

Originally posted by Soular System


Now, what on earth are nuclear experts doing on an oil spill, other than they are thinking about blowing up the well head.

Not only will we have oil, and chemical dispersants, but now radiation?

I think we are most definitely headed toward a global catastrophe.

Blow a hole in the ocean, that'll fix it. Man, these people are insane.

www.telegraph.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

I think you need to check your facts before posting my friend.

The Russians have used nukes to fix oil disasters like the one we are currently facing on many occasions. I forget the exact number off the top of my head, but I believe they used approx. 130 controlled explosion (correct me if I'm wrong), which were all nuclear I believe.

If they do end up using a nuke, the short term effects will be much better than the long term effects of allowing this oil to keep spilling into the ocean and spreading to others in the long hall.

reply to post by Blazer


They have the pipe inserted now. Interesting, seems like a race now between BP and the Obama Admin.

Oil company BP says it has resumed pumping oil to a ship on the surface after a weekend setback that halted efforts to siphon off the crude spewing from a damaged well at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico.

CNN


[edit on 16-5-2010 by ogbert]

reply to post by warpcrafter


lol! That is totally what I'm thinking right now! All this ATS talk about immigration...masonic numerical fancies...creeping 2 minutes closer to disclosure is all just a bunch of background noise at this point.

This is when bad gets worse. Not to be a catastrophist, just calling a spade a spade.

Warpcrafter, may I have permission to use your post as a signature? Please?

Originally posted by tellmemoreok
Yep...be prepared to start hearing about an underwater nuclear explosion to fix the problem. I hope it works, because if it doesn't it will really be a mess down there.

Mercury-flavored blackened seafood...now with added uranium! MmmMmm Good!

I wonder how many times this has been done without anyone knowing. Is under water nuclear testing still practiced/legal?

Eff you dolphin, and eff you whale

reply to post by highlyoriginal


Well buddy i'd love to find out what your smoking. If you noticed all the russian detonations were on land and in places where no one lived.

The closest example would be the 1958 detonation at 2,000 feet. Course it was way out in the pacific with no population to worry about. Also it stated that after the detonation a 300 meter wave moved out in all directions. Thats ruffly 1,000 feet in height.

I Live on the gulf coast, so first we got the fishing industry killed off, tourisim in the toilet. And you think that detonating a nuke at only 50 miles from the gulf coast where millions of american live and work is a good thing?

You do know if they went ahead and did the detonation, the wall of water would be vast coming ashore around the whole circumfrance of the gulf. Thats coastal Lousiana, Mississippi, alabama, florida, texas, mexico, yucatan penisula, key west, possibly cuba, the carrbean.

Were talking millions of people, homes washed away, land radioactive. And for what? because a bunch of corporate idiots that couldn't plug up a leak had to use a Nuke to do the deed? Thats crazy, even more so that criminal.

You remember all the folk that couldn't afford to evacuate durring hurricane Katrinia. Thosands died. Theres no way the gov't could evacuate everyone along the gulf. There would be untold of folks that would die.

And how far would you tell folks to move inland? Montgomery? Atlanta?Dallas? It would be a logistical nightmare to evacuate millions of people.

And what do you do with them aftewards? They can't go home, theres no home left, its all been smashed by the 1000 foot wave, then washed back out into the gulf. And who's going to pay for the loss of the state of Florida, and the other states? When the water receeds it leaves behind all manners of radioactive mess. The whole area would be off limits for habitation for decades. If ever.

BP, transocean, Haliburton have already killed off the best fishing area on the planet. And you think they should nuke the broken pipe? And reduce the gulf coast states to a radioactive contamination zone for possibly 100 years or more?

Your crazy, BP Crazy, the gov't crazy if they think thats the only way to seal off a 21" pipe...

You can put one of the big lasers they build on a ship go out over the pipe, target the pipe and cut lose. Weld that baby shut. No radiation, no 300 meter tsunami's. No puting a huge hole in the floor which mind you is really close to various fault zones.

And what of all that methane that bubbles up from the sea floor? A nuke would ignite that along with the vast oil deposit and the effect would be ..unthinkable.

We thought it was bad seeing the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, picture all the local faults being jared awake by the pressure wave. Various dormant volcanos waking up with a fury. The pressure wave running through the earths crust could set off other faults within the US and surrounding areas.

How many people are you willing to sacrifice? 1 milllion, 30 million, 100 million?

yes that would be the worse case scenario. But since its never been done at 5,000 feet we have no idea what would happen. And taking in all those other things its the worst idea Ive ever heard.

Unless...

Its what TPTB want to happen...

As for me, since I'm only 100 yards from the gulf, Id probably be washed away. I'll say this, anyone that uses a nuke to seal a pipe in my book would be responsible for Genocide against American.

Think about that when you say Nuke a pipe...

Obama says,[ Reading Teleprompter ]
"How dare you people threaten my democracy with this INFORMATION."

[edit on 17-5-2010 by ObamaSucks]

reply to post by Soular System


"I'll have the 3 eyed fish, please!"