Very interesting article I found....
#1
Interesting reading. If true, we are not being told anything even close to the truth.
The Russians have done this. Is anyone listening to them???????
Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured Beyond Repair By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers A dire report circulating in the Kremlin today that was prepared for Prime Minister Putin by Anatoly Sagalevich of Russia's Shirshov Institute of Oceanology warns that the Gulf of Mexico sea floor has been fractured "beyond all repair" and our World should begin preparing for an ecological disaster "beyond comprehension" unless "extraordinary measures" are undertaken to stop the massive flow of oil into our Planet's eleventh largest body of water. Most important to note about Sagalevich's warning is that he and his fellow scientists from the Russian Academy of Sciences are the only human beings to have actually been to the Gulf of Mexico oil leak site after their being called to the disaster scene by British oil giant BP shortly after the April 22nd sinking of the Deepwater Horizon oil platform. BP's calling on Sagalevich after this catastrophe began is due to his being the holder of the World's record for the deepest freshwater dive and his expertise with Russia's two Deep Submergence Vehicles MIR 1 and MIR 2 [photo below] which are able to take their crews to the depth of 6,000 meters (19,685 ft). According to Sagalevich's report, the oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico is not just coming from the 22 inch well bore site being shown on American television, but from at least 18 other sites on the "fractured seafloor" with the largest being nearly 11 kilometers (7 miles) from where the Deepwater Horizon sank and is spewing into these precious waters an estimated 2 million gallons of oil a day. Interesting to note in this report is Sagalevich stating that he and the other Russian scientists were required by the United States to sign documents forbidding them to report their findings to either the American public or media, and which they had to do in order to legally operate in US territorial waters. However, Sagalevich says that he and the other scientists gave nearly hourly updates to both US government and BP officials about what they were seeing on the sea floor, including the US Senator from their State of Florida Bill Nelson who after one such briefing stated to the MSNBC news service "Andrea we're looking into something new right now, that there's reports of oil that's seeping up from the seabed. which would indicate, if that's true, that the well casing itself is actually pierced. underneath the seabed. So, you know, the problems could be just enormous with what we're facing." Though not directly stated in Sagalevich's report, Russian scientists findings on the true state of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster are beyond doubt being leaked to his longtime friend, and former US President George W. Bush's top energy advisor Matthew Simmons, who US media reports state has openly said: "Matthew Simmons is sticking by his story that there's another giant leak in the Gulf of Mexico blowing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. On CNBC's Fast Money, he says he'd be surprised if BP lasted this summer, saying this is disaster is entirely BP's fault." As a prominent oil-industry insider, and one of the World's leading experts on peak oil, Simmons further warns that the US has only two options, "let the well run dry (taking 30 years, and probably ruining the Atlantic ocean) or nuking the well." Obama's government, on the other hand, has stated that a nuclear option for ending this catastrophe is not being discussed, but which brings him into conflict with both Russian and American experts advocating such an extreme measure before all is lost, and as we can read as reported by Britain's Telegraph News Service: "The former Soviet Union (U.S.S.R.) used nuclear weapons on five separate occasions between 1966 and 1981 to successfully cap blown-out gas and oil surface wells (there was also one attempt that failed), which have been documented in a U.S. Department of Energy report on the U.S.S.R.'s peaceful uses of nuclear explosions. Russia is now urging the United States to consider doing the same. Komsomoloskaya Pravda, the best-selling Russian daily newspaper, asserts that although based on Soviet experience there's a one-in-five chance a nuke might not seal the well, it's "a gamble the Americans could certainly risk." Reportedly, the U.S.S.R. developed special nuclear devices explicitly for closing blown-out gas wells, theorizing that the blast from a nuclear detonation would plug any hole within 25 to 50 meters, depending on the device's power. Much as I had idly imagined, massive explosions can be employed to collapse a runaway well on itself, thus plugging, or at least substantially stanching, the flow of oil. "Seafloor nuclear detonation is starting to sound surprisingly feasible and appropriate," University of Texas at Austin mechanical engineer Michael E. Webber is quoted observing, while Columbia University visiting scholar on nuclear policy and former naval officer Christopher Brownfield wrote in the Daily Beast: "We should have demolished this well with explosives over a month ago. And yet we watch in excruciating suspense while BP fumbles through plan after plan to recover its oil and cover its asset." As to the reason for Obama's government refusing to consider nuking this oil well, Sagalevich states in this report that the American's "main concern" is not the environmental catastrophe this disaster is causing, but rather what the impact of using a nuclear weapon to stop this leak would have on the continued production of oil from the Gulf of Mexico, and which in an energy starved World's remains the Planet's only oil producing region able to increase its production. On top of the environmental catastrophe currently unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico the situation may about to get even worse as new reports from the US are confirming the grim predictions of Russian scientists regarding the oil dispersement poisons being used by BP which are being swept up into the clouds and falling as toxic rain destroying every living plant it touches, and as we had detailed in our May 23rd report titled "Toxic Oil Spill Rains Warned Could Destroy North America" To what the final outcome of this catastrophe will be it is not in our knowing other than to state the obvious that the choice facing the American's today is to either stop this disaster now, by any means, or pay dearly for it later. After all, is cheap petrol really worth the cost of destroying our own Earth? BP surely thinks so, let's keep hoping Obama doesn't.
__________________
( R E T I R E D , and glad of it)
YES ! ! ! There is life after trucking. a GOOD life
#2
Yes, this was thought of about a month and a half ago, Obama said the US will never allow a nuke to be detonated underwater to attempt to stop the spill. Yes, we've done some testing before in the Pacific with nukes underwater back in the 40's and 50's but it was well away from human contact and we weren't looking to collapse a spill on itself. What the Russians did was not underwater so it worked, it has never been tried underwater so the success rate is unknown and not guaranteed. Right now anything might work so it's worth a try but this could end up making things worse. It could blow the seafloor apart and open up the entire well or it could work. It could end up being an utter disaster since we have no info to go on or it could be something out of Hollywood.
#3
This IS an interesting article. It is GOOD to see the amount of co-operation by the Russians. I truly believe this "event" could be a Global problem if not solved soon.
However, I don't buy SOME of the rhetoric in the article, especially the following:
As to the reason for Obama's government refusing to consider nuking this oil well, Sagalevich states in this report that the American's "main concern" is not the environmental catastrophe this disaster is causing, but rather what the impact of using a nuclear weapon to stop this leak would have on the continued production of oil from the Gulf of Mexico, and which in an energy starved World's remains the Planet's only oil producing region able to increase its production.
And the Gulf is certainly NOT the "only oil producing region able to increase production." [google ANWAR] America, in general, sits on 2% of the world's oil reserves! So that blows THAT stupid claim out of the water! On top of that... His moratorium has SHUT DOWN any such production because he feels it is NOT significant to even our OWN oil needs! So, although I found some interesting things in this article, I believe it is "biased" and not scientifically founded. [probably found on FoxNews site.] There ARE many people considering the nuclear option, and I really hope it doesn't come to that. For ONE thing... we don't know the outcome of THAT anymore than we know what is happening NOW! But, I wouldn't SAY that "we're not being told the truth," because I have heard this discussed MANY times on several news stations. EVEN the "fake" ones like FoxNews! ![]() This is a terrible disaster. I agree that Obama's administration is not handling it as well as "I" would! But, I guarantee you that they are doing better than the "oil sucking" administration of Dubya and Dick "Halliburton" Cheney (with HIS secret meetings for energy policy) would have done! I think "nuking" the ocean floor could be VERY dangerous. But, it MAY become the only option. And I have NO DOUBT that Obama will do it IF it becomes the only or "best" option. The Republicans ( and that includes MOST of you here,) have taken a position of APOLOGIZING to BP for making them PAY for this disaster that THEY caused! Or at least, fighting Obama on EVERY move he makes! HOW is that "productive" in the current situation? There are battles to be fought by partisan "nametags" in congress. But... THIS is not ONE of them! Before he strayed into "regime change" in Iraq.... I SUPPORTED Dubya in his retribution against Al Quaida for the attack of 9/11. How is it that NONE of you will / can support Obama in his fight against this disaster in the Gulf that affects our entire country? Never mind.... I KNOW the answer! :hellno:
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between. TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!! "I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
#4
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Somewhere between Rochester NY and Gaults' Gulch
Posts: 2,698
This IS an interesting article. It is GOOD to see the amount of co-operation by the Russians. I truly believe this "event" could be a Global problem if not solved soon.
However, I don't buy SOME of the rhetoric in the article, especially the following: I don't believe that America's (or Obama's) MAIN CONCERN is the impact a nuclear option (nucular... for you Dubya fans) would have on continued oil production from the Gulf... especially in light of his MORATORIUM on such production! :roll: And the Gulf is certainly NOT the "only oil producing region able to increase production." [google ANWAR] America, in general, sits on 2% of the world's oil reserves! So that blows THAT stupid claim out of the water! On top of that... His moratorium has SHUT DOWN any such production because he feels it is NOT significant to even our OWN oil needs! So, although I found some interesting things in this article, I believe it is "biased" and not scientifically founded. [probably found on FoxNews site.] There ARE many people considering the nuclear option, and I really hope it doesn't come to that. For ONE thing... we don't know the outcome of THAT anymore than we know what is happening NOW! But, I wouldn't SAY that "we're not being told the truth," because I have heard this discussed MANY times on several news stations. EVEN the "fake" ones like FoxNews! ![]() This is a terrible disaster. I agree that Obama's administration is not handling it as well as "I" would! But, I guarantee you that they are doing better than the "oil sucking" administration of Dubya and Dick "Halliburton" Cheney (with HIS secret meetings for energy policy) would have done! I think "nuking" the ocean floor could be VERY dangerous. But, it MAY become the only option. And I have NO DOUBT that Obama will do it IF it becomes the only or "best" option. The Republicans ( and that includes MOST of you here,) have taken a position of APOLOGIZING to BP for making them PAY for this disaster that THEY caused! Or at least, fighting Obama on EVERY move he makes! HOW is that "productive" in the current situation? There are battles to be fought by partisan "nametags" in congress. But... THIS is not ONE of them! Before he strayed into "regime change" in Iraq.... I SUPPORTED Dubya in his retribution against Al Quaida for the attack of 9/11. How is it that NONE of you will / can support Obama in his fight against this disaster in the Gulf that affects our entire country? Never mind.... I KNOW the answer! :hellno:
#5
Sorry Hobo, can't support a POTUS who goes and plays golf on Saturday with Biden while criticizing the head of BP for going to a yacht race. Also can't support a POTUS who goes Friday night to an MLB game while the BP head goes to the yacht race and then criticizes the BP head for it. I would love to support Obama in this crisis but he/his admin is doing more to keep it from being fixed than helping it. Why haul BP before hearings when they need to be coming up with a solution? Why keep telling them "No, you can't do that for environmental reasons," when that may be the solution to the whole spill? Stop the oil first then work on anything else that needs to be taken care of but don't keep tieing their hands behind their back then demanding they come up with a solution.
Is Obama really handling this better than Bush would? A Louisanna poll found that a large majority thought Bush would have been better in charge with this mess than Obama. A large majority was also found to believe Bush did a better job with Katrina than Obama has done on the spill. Yes they are 2 totally different scenarios but the handling of the oil spill has been more like the Keystone Cops. Bush got to NO as soon as he was allowed, Obama waited what, 50 days before he made his first trip to the beaches of the Gulf? During those 50 days he waited, he played 6 rounds of golf, attended 2 concerts and made a few campaign fundraisers.
#7
Did that article come from the Weekly World News or The National Enquirer? I find it hard to believe that we (the humans) have "broken the planet".
__________________
My facebook profile: http://www.facebook.com/malaki86
#8
What I find interesting is the oil coming out of the floor several miles from the blow-out site. It would suggest there was a "rift" in the floor that may have ruptured as a result of the blow-out. It also makes it pretty clear that capping the blow-out, itself, will not stop the oil from spewing out. Maybe, at some point along that "rift", water is getting into the oil cavity through another rupture and is pushing the oil out. Yes, I do know that there are "gushers", but if all wells were pressurized like this one, we would not need all the "slow-motion" pumps to pump the oil out of the ground, that you see so often when driving by in a truck. Perhaps, they need to find out where the water is seeping into the bottom to replace the oil in the cavity. That would be the rupture to plug, and then the next, and the next...
I know that this is not a good time to go swimming at the beach. The oil is toxic, the dispersing agents are toxic, and a variety of sharks are coming in close to the beach to get away from it all. Another thought crossed my mind, too. I understand the well was "exploration" only. It was never supposed to be a producing well. But, with a mishap like this, there is no way BP can keep things quiet and the public will know what it is producing. Was it something intentional by an individual on the rig? Like the "Flood of '93" was a single guy with a backhoe at the dike? Somebody that did not expect it to get this bad, but didn't want BP to keep it quiet?
__________________
( R E T I R E D , and glad of it)
YES ! ! ! There is life after trucking. a GOOD life
#9
Or it could indicate that there was a rift or earthquake that caused the problem with the well. Obama wants to roll out the criminal lawyers before the cause is even known. Regardless of what actually caused the spill it is going to be some time before things get back to normal, if they ever get back to that point. I think that until they stop the leak that it is going to be next to impossible to know what actually caused it. BP may or may not have cut corners. Someone could have failed to properly do their job. From what I have read, the government failed to do proper inspections on the well. I am sure that there is sufficient blame to go around. I expect the the head of BP will be the sacrificial lamb in this case, regardless of whether he is at fault or not. People want someone to blame. He is a good target.
#10
Well, lest we forget that another rig about 10 miles away is also spewing oil into the Gulf...........it is not BP owned. Other than a quick 24 hours in the news, haven't heard a peep about that company from anyone in the media or the govt. Nobody even named who owned it. SO, how do we determine who's oil is who's that is washing up on beaches knowing that at least 1 other rig has faulty seals and is allowing a good amount of oil to get away?
|


