Tyranny of depth: The robotic arm of a remotely operated vehicle attempts to activate the Deepwater Horizon’s blowout preventer to stem the ongoing deepwater petroleum.
U.S. Coast Guard
The disaster exposes overreliance on blowout preventers that has been long disparaged by insiders.
The unabated flow of crude oil from a well off the Louisiana coast speaks to "the tyranny of distance and the tyranny of depth," according to Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen, named by President Obama last week to be national incidence commander to take control of the response effort from BP.
Allen has expanded already extensive efforts to disperse, skim, and block the oil that is surfacing from the well blowout that destroyed the Deepwater Horizon drill rig last month. But he told a media briefing this weekend that his top job is stopping the flow of new oil into the sea--a complex and risky process at the one-mile depths where Deepwater Horizon drilled.
The oil leak also reveals an overreliance on one piece of equipment that academic and industry experts have warned of for close to a decade: The blowout preventers, or BOPs, that are the industry's primary line of defense against deepwater oil spills.
Industry experts say BOPs will be front and center in a review of offshore drilling technology ordered by Obama last week, to be completed this month, prior to authorizing any further drilling. "A thorough review and technology change is likely coming now," says Paul Bommer, a senior lecturer in petroleum engineering at the University of Texas at Austin.
The Deepwater Horizon's BOP is a 450-ton set of hydraulic rams that straddles the wellhead, just above the seabed. When the well blew out last month, sending oil and natural gas up the well, signaling from the rig operators or loss of communication with the surface should have automatically released pneumatic pressure stored in the BOP's tanks, driving it to mechanically crimp or shear off the well pipe and close off the well.
BP has been using remotely operated vehicles in a hitherto vain effort to activate Deepwater Horizon BOP's control system's valves. Some experts say that the Deepwater Horizon BOP's lack of a signaling device called an acoustic trigger, which enables remote control of some rigs' BOPs, probably had no impact in this case. Bommer says an acoustic trigger would simply have sent the same signal that the remotely operated vehicles are now delivering, albeit several days earlier.
A second rig has been positioned at the leak site to commence the industry's only proven fallback measure once an undersea well has blown out: bypassing the BOP by drilling a new well or wells to intersect with and then block the leaking well. Unfortunately drilling a relief well will take two to three months.
The delay does not stem from the need for high-precision. Intersecting a seven-inch-wide pipe from several miles away is well within the telemetry capabilities of offshore drill rigs. Rather, the well will take months because of its depth: BP is planning to drill through 18,000 feet of rock to reach down close to the bottom of the leaking well.
Andy Radford, a petroleum engineer and senior policy advisor for offshore issues at the American Petroleum Institute, a Washington trade group, says BP needs to drill deep to create a relief well with sufficient mass to counteract the force of flowing oil. "You have pressure coming up the well from the producing formation. It's thousands of pounds per square inch coming up the hole. You need to be able to overcome that pressure with the kill fluids. The deeper you intersect, the less pump pressure you need to overcome the pressure of the well coming up," says Radford.
In a worst-case scenario, the force of one relief wells will prove insufficient, requiring drilling of a second, adding further delay.
Microbes may have eaten away at BP's oil in deep water; now the marshland needs help.
Safety upgrades are critical but could mean higher prices for oil and gas.
But BP's "top kill" method to stanch the spill could also break it wide open.
Almost lost in the withering scale of this calamity is the initial lives lost in the explosion. I am sure their families are suffering severely. The gravity and consequence of this accident cannot begin to be measured yet. No one can accurately ascertain how much oil is escaping or how long before the tide can be stemmed.
I have vacationed in Gulfport and visited the gulf beaches. I can't imagine the long-reaching impact this will have on the communities and economies there. The lack of a workable fail-safe mechanism is unconscionable. I don't think the technology exists to contain or avoid this disaster of epic proportion. I echo the sentiment that we need to redouble our efforts to convert to renewable energy sources that are in harmony with nature.
The US Minerals Management Service commissioned Texas A&M University to do a study on BOP's in 2004. The study revealed the flaws in the devices for new deep water drilling. Nothing was done about it by MMS. Why do we have to pay for MMS if it works to protect the oil drilling companies an not the general public?
That there is not multiple back up systems that assumes total failures, even in the middle of a hurricane, is criminal!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now can a large ring with giant hose be lowered over and around the leak? Then the oil will be directed and sucked into ships until they get a clue as to what they are doing.
Burning crap in the air is not a good idea. The sooner we get away from it, the better. But they have so much invested in the infrastructure of process and transportation of it. It's like a company with thousands of dollars in XP software don't jump to new operating systems quickly. But if your new, your going to get whatever is best.
What would happen if a terrorist attacked a hundred of those platforms. We best stop this shit ASAP.
It is all about cost, the more backup and safety systems you have to put in the more costly it gets, think exponentially here.
The reason nuclear power plants cost so much is all the back up safety systems, same with military equipment.
Perhaps it is time for the Oil Industry to adopt Defense in Depth?
Why drill for oil? We have a century of natural gas on land in shale deposits that we now can access. Even if we convert all coal, nuclear plants and autos to natural gas we would still have 50-60 years worth.
Why take the risk of destroying the oceans? Shale gas is the answer for the short term. In the next 5-6 decades get renewables cost effective and LiFTR reactors going.
Yes, the only thing oil is used for is to power cars. Plastics and other chemicals appear out of thin air.
I wonder if they compensated for the deep sea hydrostatic pressure when they filled the accumulators for the blow out preventer? Too little pressure and the pistons would not activate, too much pressure and the valve between the accumulators and the BOP would stick. Any thoughts?
What would the ambient pressure be at that depth? What cylinder pressure would be required to actuate the BOP at that depth? The feeling that I get from this incident is, if we have to go to such lengths, 50 miles out, drilling under a mile of sea water, in the path of frequent storms, from a floating oil rig, I think we are overreaching. True, we need to do whatever we can to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. But drilling on land is so much more stable. This makes ANWR start to look pretty attractive. What are the estimates on the amount of oil available in this Gulf location, anyway?
We can't see it but it's there. Lots and lots of clean energy, more than we'll ever need. Soon, physicists will wake up from their long slumber and they will finally understand the true causal nature of motion. The short of it is, motion is caused, therefore we are immersed in an immense lattice of energetic particles. Once we fully grok that motion is caused by an energy field all around us (no field => no motion), we will learn how to tap into it for both energy production and super fast transportation.
Ummm.... wow. When are you going to let us in on the secret?
The fact that we're intentionally digging around this planet for all sorts of products is nothing new. There are risks to any venture, but an odd thought had occured to me that perhaps some time during this planets 5 billion year odyssey there must have been some type of natural oil leaks that had occurred in geologic history.
Are the oil sands in Canada, or oil shales we see deposited in various places any evidence that this has happened before? Did crude oil leak out of the primary vaults and saturate the lands at one time?
Why isn't Sarah all over the airwaves with her cute little saying now?
And why isn't there a bypass well drilled ALREADY?! Why do they have to start from scratch, when it seems a reasonable prerequisite for all offshore drilling. At least have such a hole drilled 3/4, or even 1/2 of the way down, for just such a contingency.
Same thing with a capping dome - why not have one ALREADY BUILT?!
No doubt these measures were deemed too "expensive" by BP and the other oil companies.
Seems like you would need a backup well for every backup well? Perhaps a backup dam for every dam we build?
Maybe there is something I am missing about how they use these pipes but it seems to me it would be better to have some sort of valve that in the absence of pressure/power from the rig keeping it open is slaped shut by the well pressure itself.
You got it. The cause of this is not Sarah Palin or Obama or "drill, baby, drill". The fault is BP's alone for failing to have adequate safeguards in place. They should be fined twice the amount it takes to clean up this mess and more.
BOP stacks have shear rams that slice the pipe in two and seal the top of the well. When a well is being drilled and worked on, there are multiple flow paths - inside the drill pipe and also via the annular space (between the drill pip and the outer pipe). The BOP has multiple rams to seal on the outside of the internal pipe and then the shear rams to seal off if all else fails.
It is unclear from all reports read so far exactly what sort of blowout preventer(s) were installed. If anyone has a link to information, such as a piping schematic on the well head components, that would trump anything seen so far.
Most reports state that only an annular blowout preventer was installed. But usually these systems are supposed to have some redundancy that includes both annular and ram type BOPs. The ram type are more expensive, and reports are hinting that BP cut costs by not having this as part of the well head design.
I never understood why undersea equipment doesn't have multiple containment structures. Why not automatically build in a funnel-like-structure with a hose to the surface?
It seems like a giant tent over the rigs and pipelines could be installed during construction. A float can be used to raise the peak of the tent. Since oil and gas rises, it shouldn't be hard to catch and pipe to the surface. There aren't strong currents and waves as on the surface, so it would seem like fabric and cable would suffice.
Nuclear plants are designed with multiple levels of containment-- why not undersea oil? (This is independent of pro or anti drilling.)
Remember that these rigs often have to stop drilling and move off location when the currents get too high (loop currents). Also, in the present situation, those funnel like structures would be lying tangled up with the riser pipe and/or anchor chains, and would be hindering efforts to work on the wellhead. What about the wildlife that might get tangled up in these structures?
It all boils down to money and Politics.
The Cost of putting the correct controls engineered for such a major catastrophe probably would of cost hundreds of millions.
The actual liability BP is exposed to.
BP Gulf Oil Spill Liability Capped At Only $75 Million?
http://kansascity.injuryboard.com/toxic-substances/bp-gulf-oil-spill-liability-capped-at-only-75-million.aspx?googleid=280944
The Cost to the people and environment are going to be in the BILLIONS and the damage will never be completely undone.
As of the day of this post, reports say that the torrent of oil is escaping at a of 210,000 barrels a day and it will take three months to stop it.
The leadership in this Country has failed and is Corrupt both Democrat and Especially the Republican party .
Fossil Fuel Industry - A Mentality that belongs to the Dark Ages
The whole fossil fuel industry, if one did the REAL ACCOUNTING for it would undoubtedly be in DEBT of trillions of dollars. If anyone thinks they are living in Startrek, I'd say its the shareholders and CEOs of these companies. I just think its pathetic that fossil fuel industries hold this world's economy to ransom with a brutality and thinking that is worse than the worst of the Dark Ages. (Please read Technology Review - a fusion reactor is quite likely by the end of this year).
Re: Fossil Fuel Industry - A Mentality that belongs to the Dark Ages
Right... we have the economy of the most of the 19th, the ENTIRE 20th century and the first decade of the 21st reliant on petroleum and coal, and you think that it's a negative number.
Everything you see around you, everything you eat, everything you wear, is due to the fossil fuels you hate.
If you think a fusion reactor will be supplying large scale electricity supplies by the end of the year then it is you that is living in star trek.
If you mean that some one will have a tiny lab model with unknown risks and totally incalculable costs associated with scaling it up to production scale then maybe.
Assume 10 years to build and operate a useful prototype (making the wild assumption that it is scalable). Then another 20 or 30 years to accumulate the capital, do the construction of plants and distribution networks as well as develop the skilled labor to build and operate the requisite number of reactors. And at the end of it, all you have is a lot of electricity which doesn't work for trains, planes, heavy trucks and very large parts of the country
Electric cars are great as long as you don't very fast for very long,don't go up hills, don't use the wipers, air conditioning, interior or exterior lights, heater or stereo and always stay close to a charging station.
If you find the fossil fuel economy so offensive there is nothing stopping you from moving to those parts of the world where modern civilization hasn't reached yet.
Response to Fossil Fuel Industry Disinformation
"arnetwork", judging from your comment, and frankly speaking
I think you are either paid by the fossil fuel industry to regurgitate disinformation
or you are so brainwashed by it that dealing with common sense and logic about it escapes you.
Electric Cars
Yes, electric cars really are GREAT.
To see an electric car outperform a Porsche and a Ferrari,
Click on the following link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXqYbNEiW0Y&feature=PlayList&p=420C966BF9D133F6&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=20
I don't think its worth even responding to what else you wrote about electric cars
- I can't believe an intelligent and informed person would bother with any of it .
Yes Just Electric Power is the Ideal Energy & all We Need
It seems you haven't heard of batteries and capacitors for storing electrical energy.
All we need is electricity to run cars, trucks, trains(the most advanced & fastest ones already run on electricity) and even planes.
Fossil Fuel Companies Facing a Nuremberg like Tribunal
The fossil fuel companies should be required to pay back
the many trillions of dollars in damages to the environment
the missed opportunities
and
the thwarted research and the thwarted enterprises
in part by changing all gas stations into electric charging stations such as solar ones,
and their shareholders, their board of directors and their top management
should face an international tribunal(like the Nuremberg one)
for all crimes (wars and environmental atrocities) they caused or were instrumental in.
Nuclear Fusion
It wouldn't surprise me if an article came out stating fusion technology could have been achievable 50 years ago
if it weren't for the fossil fuel industry with all its front groups fighting it tooth & nail.
In any case, energy such as solar as well as improving efficiency(all easily achievable right now)
is all this world needs to run excellently.
Your "Civilization" = Oceanic Garbage Regions and Global Warming
Don't try to hide the fossil fuel industries behind civilization .
Can't you see that they are causing the diametric opposite of it?
The huge plastic garbage gyres in every ocean is the oil industry's contribution to your "civilization" .
Runaway global warming, due to the fossil fuel industry, is ubiquitous
and unless you think of finding another planet
you are stuck with it EVERYWHERE on poor Earth!
South American indigenous people complain of "oil blankets"(large patches of oil) caused by oil companies,
flowing down the Amazon and its tributaries.
Oil and plastic pollution are causing species mass extinctions and threatening the existence of life on Earth!
Please don't confuse sludge & filth with civilization.
Please see Al Gore's Repower America web page for your education.
Fossil Fuel & Tobacco - The Real Axis of Evil
By the way, I'd think, there really is" an axis of evil"(courtesy George W. Bush)
- the combination of of big tobacco and the fossil fuel industries that share the same strategies.
Conclusion: "Separation of Fossil Fuel Industry and State"(inspired by Antonia Juhasz)
Bring Down the Fossil Fuel Industries Wall
If you have some decency in you, you'll thank me for educating you
and if you want to waste your time defending the environmental atrocities of the fossil fuel industry
then please at least do your homework!
To put it in a nutshell the so called fence you are clambering on
is more like the railing of the Titanic(fossil fuel industry)
of which every bit followed the ship down.
Just as the church and state separation was in past times,
"the state and fossil fuel industry need to be separated" (Thanks to Antonia Juhasz).
I think its instructive to think of the Fossil Fuel Industries Wall
as a symbol of oppression and regression
needing to be broken down and removed from true civilization
just like the Berlin Wall was.
Finally, I believe mankind is at a crossroads of opting either for a steady worsening hell
of pollution and war-crimes with the fossil fuel industries
or a messianic type age of creativity and prosperity with clean, quiet and efficient electrical energy.
Hopefully mankind isn't terrorized too much from deciding the latter.
I'm a Financial engineer. I can tell you that there is not enough of certain commodities, like yttrium, to make the rare-earth magnets needed for production of electrical car motors on a grand scale.
The internal combustion engine is going to be here for another 50 years, only the fuel may change. Thermoelectrics may increase the efficiency somewhat, and a 6-cycle engine (using water) can improve it, but there's nothing to beat the energy density and the environmental footprint yet. How do you dispose of a 2000-lb. lead battery? Where can you mine 400 million pounds of lithium per year?
Quote: " I'm a "Financial engineer". I can tell you that there is not enough of certain commodities, like yttrium, to make the rare-earth magnets needed for production of electrical car motors on a grand scale. "
Why would you need yttrium?
Rare earth magnets are made from rare earth elements with atomic numbers ranging from 57 to 71. These elements are so named because they were thought to be rare when they were first discovered, although they are now known to be relatively common. The strongest and most common type of rare earth magnet is made from an alloy of neodymium, iron and boron. These magnets were very expensive when they were first developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s, but they are now common enough to be used in children's toys.
Most electric vehicles on the road today use Series-Wound or Shunt-wound Dc Motors that use NO magnets at all. In fact Copper, carbon and steel are the primary components, they are easily rebuilt in most cases and I personally have seen some of these motors that are well over 80 years old still working perfectly. They have impressive starting torque numbers from a standstill, which makes them ideal for getting a vehicle moving. There are a growing number of vehicles out there with AC induction motors, which also use no magnets. They are made of copper and steel and have equally high starting torque numbers but the control electronics tend to be cost prohibitive to the average builder.
Oh and these "Old" electric motors have from the low 80's to the mid 90's efficiency numbers. What is the best efficiency you can get from any I.C.E. (Internal Combustion Engine)? 15 maybe 20 percent?
We as a nation have gotten used to having a 300 or more mile average range in our personal vehicles but most of us rarely drive more than 50 miles in a day. I drive a little under 40 miles to work and back each day and that I am offsetting more and more with my Recumbent Trike.
The only reason I can see for insisting on a range greater than 100 miles in an electric car is the lazy attitude we have grown accustomed too. After all it is far easier to drive to the filling station once a week than it is to simply plug the car in when you get home. Ummm…
Lead acid batteries are heavy and smelly and dangerous. But we know much about them and the technology is getting better by the day. They are recyclable so they can be used effectively without digging up half the planet looking for the rare elements that make batteries smaller lighter and so expensive no one can afford them. Well I shouldn't say "No One" just "most" of the population of the world.
Rudolf Diesel published a paper in 1893 describing an engine with combustion within a cylinder. In 1894, he filed for a patent for his new invention, dubbed the diesel engine. He was almost killed by his engine when one of the first prototypes exploded. However, his engine was the first that proved that fuel could be ignited without a spark. He operated his first successful engine in 1897.
Pop the hood on a new Volkswagen TDI and tell me what the difference is between the original from 1897 and that of a new TDI? Time and material is the difference. Both engines share the same cycle and theory but the parts of the Volkswagen TDI are much more refined.
Lead acid batteries have seen many changes over time and have become better understood and more refined. Rudolf Diesel didn't start with aerospace alloys and computer programs to make the most out of the least amount of material. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we should stay with lead acid batteries but do we have to hold up progress to design the perfect battery before we can move to the next step?
On the other hand we do have aerospace alloys and computer programs to make the most out of the least amount of material. What could be done with the simple lead acid battery we have today?
Quote: " How do you dispose of a 2000-lb. lead battery? Where can you mine 400 million pounds of lithium per year? "
Dispose? As in use once and throw it away? I notice you did not ask how to dispose of a 2000-lb Lithium battery. Do you think "they" last forever?
I suppose you have never heard the word reuse or recycle. Lead is lead and can be used again and again just like lithium. And before you go pointing out that lead is dangerous to your health try eating lithium or breathing boron. Lead and lithium both are dangerous but lead is also much cheaper and more abundant than lithium which I guess makes it less desirable for a "Financial engineer" to consider as it would net you a lower profit. So sad.
Cyrus
Just a small correction here to your post: “...Most electric vehicles on the road today use Series-Wound or Shunt-wound Dc Motors... “
GM’s EV-1, previously named the Impact (?), used AC motors. The reason for this is that an AC motor is much more efficient. That vehicle, of course, required inverters to charge the batteries, and another set of electronics to recreate alternating current. The bottom line, however, was a more efficient transfer of energy from an AC power source. Unfortunately GM chose not to provide better (non-lead/acid) batteries. They did have a choice in using NiMH batteries developed by Troy, Michigan’s Energy Conversion Devices, and were slated to build a plant in Ohio. That never took place.
GM’s Volt uses AC motors to drive the wheels. This is a bit difficult to determine from the GM Volt website, so here is a link:
http://gm-volt.com/2007/09/14/clarification-chevy-volt-electric-motor-is-ac/
NiMH batteries would seem to have been a good fit for electric vehicles, since they can be recharged thousands of times, and at reduced charge times and at a greater energy/weight ratio. There are reports that those who control the patents on these batteries will not develop usage for electric vehicles. Much of Energy Conversion Devices funding sources come from oil companies. ECD has never made a profit, but remains in business.
In order to back up the patent encumbrance statement relating to NiMH batteries in the previous post, here is a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries
Of course, it is Wikipedia, so any interested readers of this post may wish to check into this further. The Wikipedia link does appear to jibe with personal experience at GM.
Oil Leak
I recently read an article in Inventions and Innovations Magazine on the history of ice on airplanes wings...
The gist of the article is that five to six times it has been declared that icing on wings has been completely solved... Not so, we are still learning.
My point is that man is not God, nor perfect.
Would we have evolved like we have today, if the committee of the clan, told junior that making a wheel is too dangerous. forget it.
It's easy to make assumptions... but they are only assumptions... the goal is to recognize the problem and to solve it. We can do this.
I do not think BP cut costs to save money. Obviously, they will have lost billions by the time this is over.
Yes, perhaps BP should have listened to the experts.... and Now I'm sure that they now regret not recognizing the flaw. ... alas, we are still human... we make judgment calls, sometimes they are right, sometimes wrong...
ron hansing 5.25.10
Rate this comment
In response to Ron Hansing, please see my post (above). While there may be perceived security issues, the fact remains that it appears no one, except BP and their partners, know exactly what is installed on the well head. At least there are NO posts here, nor are there any in news reports. Therefore no one can really make any determination on what went wrong, other than perhaps regulators, and, of course, BP and their partners. Thus it is ridiculous for anyone to attempt to suggest fixes, or improvements, that will positively effect future events. All sorts of people are getting in the act of giving their opinion without having the knowledge of what exists on the well head. There have been some video camera views of the BOP attempting to be accessed by the undersea rover. But nothing that gives overall images of what is installed on the well head. So anything ANYBODY says about this disaster, outside of BP and their partners, is just participating in a guessing game.
If the above reflects ignorance of what is, in fact, available information, please do post a link.
Maybe "curiosity killed the cat, but information brought him back".
Lets see.... 240 million cars in USA * 500lb Lithium Ion Battery per car * 3 (batteries during life of car)= ALOTTA TOXIC Waste. :) Watcha gonna do with all that junk? Doesn't sound all that Green to me. Seems if we need a change Natural Gas Makes more sense. And given this is the worst disaster ever, why is that CNN can hardly even find a dead fish to take a picture of. Obama finds 2 quarter sized balls of oil. The spill is bad, but its not what some would "like it to be". :)
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
yogamarc
5 Comments
Enough is enough
This event, an atrocity on the Gulf environment, should surely be a turning point. Solar, wind, wave tide energy is all this world needs and soon to come nuclear fusion energy for good measure. Lets all vote now to put an end to all fossil fuel industries!
Reply
nopcbs
12 Comments
Re: Enough is enough
"soon to come fusion energy"???
What Star Trek episode are you living in? Or do you mean "soon"o on a geological time scale.
This spill is a screw-up that should not have happened, but did and that will cause improvements to be made in the drilling and leak control systems.
And by the way, you can absolutely count on it that all these nifty eco-friendy technologies that the greens are so in love with WILL (if they don't already) have unintended and very bad consequences. Just give them time...and I don't mean on a geological time scale.
Reply
rvaccare
7 Comments
Re: Enough is enough
You are 100% correct nopcbs - great moniker by the way! None of those green technologies work in a car... how do you get wind power into a vehicle? A wave tide? Then I would have a wet car. I break wind in my vehicle, but it doesn't help propel the vehicle down the road. Nonetheless, we need to begin the transformation from fossil fuels, but as nopcbs astutely points out, it is not going to happen overnight!
Reply
guerojose
10 Comments
Re: Enough is enough
Don't be dense - it's called a battery, or a fuel cell. And these CAN be powered by the renewable methods mentioned. The primary reason these technologies can't happen "overnight" is because they've already been actively suppressed by the fossil fuel industry for decades.
Reply
newarkitecture
1 Comment
Re: Enough is enough
i run my car on waste vegetable oil with little effort. and im just some guy in new jersey... i would think an trillion dollar infrastructure could make alternative energy work.
Reply
ssamd
18 Comments
Re: Enough is enough
what fox show are you watching, what environmental technology is going to end fishing in a multi state region? And that was no screw up that was a crime, we don't have to wait for improvements there already are better valves but they are not required in our free market.
Reply
Staberdearth
7 Comments
Re: Enough is enough
I suggest that you do a bit more realistic research on the switch from nonrenewable to renewable energy sources and stop it with the shallow proclamations.
As a P.E. and long time member of "evil" industry, I endure a lot of wishful thinking with very little reality to the thought by folks that I can usually spot just as they open their mouths or post a micro thought on the topic.
Firstly, do a complete process analysis of a "renewable energy" source of your choice by drawing a huge circle around the processes and sub processes necessary to make those "renewable" energy sources a reality. Take an obvious one, like corn based ethanol...or even a wind turbine...
Where does that electricity or energy to make that electricity come from? Does it all come from a wind turbine, a solar cell, a hydro plant? How were those generation sources built? Using renewable energy, or just more nonrenewable energy? You've merely displaced the source and added line losses and other inefficiencies in the transmission of it to boot. Sort of a feel good, outta sight, outta mind, dream state.
Although you do not mention it my name, I'm intrigued by the non technical minds who proclaim a "hydrogen economy". With what? Making H2 from HC's via nonrenewable energy using a nonrenewable source? Or...using electrolysis via renewable energy to drive the reaction to derive the H2 species? Big difference, and in today's production it is not even close to being a large H2 source. So the ignorant go on their merry way, excited about H2 and the SMR (duh, what's dat?) used to produce most of it.. Where does that CO2 go?
H2 is not an energy source it is an energy carrier! You must expend energy to get it, just make sure you expend the correct energy or you're back to square one and too stupid to realize that you've merely been around the energy balance block...for what? To feel good? ...but still just as ignorant...
Too much of the energy debate is carried on by politi-morons who like to sling their ignorant half baked, half assed, half truths, for political points to an equally as ignorant hoi polloi who essentially disrespect the very technical resources that understand the comprehensive concepts of energy and the basic laws of thermodynamics, process technology, and economics. ...and of course, there's always got to be a conspiracy...it makes it so much easier to be intellectually lazy than to actually THINK!
Reply
stevedap
1 Comment
Re: Enough is enough
The leak could likely have been plugged within a couple of weeks after the initial blowout by imploding the well several hundred feet below the seabed: Drill a set of 6" boreholes 250 feet into the seafloor around the wellhead. Pack the bottom of the boreholes with high explosive. Detonate. The pressure wave would collapse thousands of tons of surrounding material and cinch up the well 250 feet below the seabed, effectively sealing the leak. No, there would be no possibility of making the leak worse than it already is. There would be many millions of tons of seafloor material above the imploded well to contain it. The wellhead at the seafloor would not be damaged. Any mining engineer worth his salt could design the "shot" in a day.
Reply
Gaetano Marano
246 Comments
My solution for Gulf of Mexico's oil spill
.
here you can read my solution for Gulf of Mexico's oil spill
http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/070oilspillsolution.html
.
Reply