Cousteau's grandson: "This is a nightmare."
![]()
"A cloud of granular oil."
That's how Phillipe Cousteau, Jr. described the situation under water in the Gulf. He and ABC reporter Sam Champion shot the footage above about 25 miles off the Louisiana coast in the center of the oil slick that has reached the surface.
One of the reasons for the dive was to see if BP's application of the dispersant Corexit was effective or more harmful. I'm not sure that question was answered, but there's no doubt left about the toxicity of the area. It's dangerously toxic to any living thing. Cousteau and Champion had to be hosed off and "degreased" before removing their hazmat suits. Lucky them. Unfortunately, marine life and birds don't have a similar option.
The Corexit website claims the dispersant works by breaking the oil into tiny droplets. From their front page:
When the COREXIT dispersants are deployed on the spilled oil, the oil is broken up into tiny bio-degradable droplets that immediately sink below the surface where they continue to disperse and bio-degrade. This quickly removes the spilled oil from surface drift…reducing direct exposure to birds, fish and sea animals in the spill environment. By keeping the oil from adhering to wildlife COREXIT dispersants effectively protect the environment.
Oil clearly adhered to Champion and Cousteau, so I'm a little confused about that claim, even though they had hazmat suits and not feathers. But even more than that, Cousteau has a point when he says that breaking up the oil into droplets means it has more points of entry into the fish and other wildlife than it might otherwise.
Nalco, the manufacturer of Corexit, has responded to claims of environmental Armaggedon with a special statement about the properties of their dispersant. In the long run, history will prove the truth of their claims, I expect.
Top Kill: Working or not?
As I write this at 4:30pm, BP has stopped their Top Kill effort because more mud is escaping along with oil than they expected.
The more I read, the less optimistic I am about this technique working.
A 2004 Texas A&M Study (PDF) commissioned by the MMS looked at the problem of a deep water blowout where oil is flowing outside of the blowout preventers. It's interesting to note that they didn't even consider a catastrophic failure of the blowout preventer itself, as is the case here. They're not very optimistic, at least in their intro:
In failure scenarios where there has been a catastrophic failure either of the surface equipment, the wellhead system or high casing, or at almost any point where influx is flowing outside of the blowout preventers, options become very rapidly non-existent. Even higher-horsepower ROVs can do little but stay outside an area of turbulence, and visibility could well be reduced anyway. Mudline mechanical intervention becomes an impossibility at this point with present tools and techniques. Specifically, there are no tools available which can hold station in a blowout with influx moving through the desired intervention area. ROVs also do not possess the horsepower required to consider some of the work tasks involved in a given scenario, particularly when affecting repairs on damaged blowout preventers.
The authors have a pretty dim view of the "Top Kill" technique, calling it the "least desirable of the blowout control alternatives (p.195). If the mixture isn't set in the right place, it won't be effective and the only solution will be to drill a relief well to relieve the pressure, which would take months.
Or, as I said in another post, there just hasn't been significant technological advancement in this area. If development investment is a reflection of where the heart is, then our hearts are near computers and medicine. Oil slicks, not so much.
So, we wait. And we hope.
We're all locked in a battle where fear fights to overtake hope. It's a horrible situation, and BP is looking worse than ever.
At the end of the Texas A&M report section on blowout simulation, there's a blunt reality for BP.
Causes for blowouts vary widely, however there is a constant. The majority of blowouts can be attributed to complacent, careless drilling practices.
Careless drilling practices. Outdated technologies. Drilling on the edge of the precipice of the Continental Shelf. Arrogant regulators working in a system where regulation was something to scoff at, not take seriously. As usual, the victims are many, from dolphins to the humans who lost their lives on that rig.
It is, indeed a nightmare. I just hope it's not a recurrent nightmare.




When hurricane season comes and all that oil gets washed up on the land during the storm surge.
This is all very depressing , just sickening . The collapse of the economy ,this gulf disaster , so many lives ruined and in trouble ... none of this had to happen but for greed , corruption and a lot of rotten low life fools .
Insanity , it is what it is , there is no understanding it .
voting Republican.
All along you guys have been saying how dangerous dispersants such as Corexit are. Now you've completely reversed your stance and are saying that the dispersants are doing "a lot of good". So,here's my question for the EPA: How much were you guys paid off in cocaine, hookers, porn, and golf outings? Really. I want to know.
If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders.
George Carlin
I want to know how I can get a piece of that action, having been unemployed or underemployed over the past 15 months...
I'm sure he still has lots of connections.
I always looked at the Prince William Sound disaster in Alaska from a strangely skewed perspective. A drunken sailor running aground with an oil tanker? OMG – how ridiculous. But it was Alaska, very far away in a strange and cold place. At the time I thought, “Well, clean it up. I guess they’ll start using those double hulls…” I saw the pictures of the oil on that pristine shoreline with the dead fish and birds. Tragic – but it was very far away, and very cold. It didn’t affect me much.
To those affected by the Exxon Valdez oil spill – I now apologize for my lack of understanding. My view has changed over the last few weeks. This time, it’s my backyard. This time the spill is worse.
It's true of all disasters. I know it's hard to get all worked up about an earthquake in (say) China, but if you think about the locals and what they're going through. Out of sight, our of mind. Completely natural human behaviour until it's your backyard.
It might be why we tend to sit back as our planet goes to hell too. My neighbourhood is OK. No problems.
far left loon >.<
is not as bad as the worst case scenario described in the Texas A&M link. I didn't think they would be able to push sufficient flow through the chokes to generate the pressure to force mud down the bore while it was escaping through the BOP and riser leaks and it is evident that the mud blowing out after pumping ceased means that is so. They can try again with a heavier mud but really what they need to do is reduce the leakage rate to the point where sufficient pressure will be generated to kill the well. I'm guessing the next step will be to cut the riser immediately above the BOP and attach a valve that can do this. Then perhaps a top kill would have a chance of succeeding.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
I am not at all sure the word "nightmare" adequately describes the situation in the Gulf.
Man definitely left his footprint on the entire gulf coast, and I am perplexed as to why no-one has been charged yet, as this is without a doubt a huge crime.
At 1st I thought that appalling, so few posts, but then what else can you add after watching that video.
Goodnight, Frau Blücher
than anyone can stand in one day. I think there's a point where it feels inundating. I hesitated to even post this, but the dispersant issue seemed like something that hasn't really been talked about much.
I think people just get to a point where they can't really be any more outraged, frustrated or sad and they fall silent.
This is not the same news we got from the Pres this morning:
http://www.eutimes.net/2010/05/toxic-oil-spil...
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
Why EVERYTHING that can be done is not being done.
Get some STRAW on that oil...
Get some Tankers out there to suck up that oil in the water...
Get Kevin Costner's machines out there...
Fill that fucking pipe with that material used to secure nuclear material that hardens instantly and is 6 times more dense then mud...
Get us into a next generation Manhattan project for energy!
Not now... Right Fucking Now!
There is no excuse to do otherwise...unless we are intent with self initiated extinction.
Because not EVERYTHING that can be envisioned can be done or would be useful. Why put straw on the oil for example? Aside from the difficulty of covering an area the size of New Jersey with straw, then you'd have to pick up vast amounts of wet straw and oil. Good luck with that. I suppose they could station tankers topside to watch the oil go by but it's not like they have the capacity to suck oil off the surface. Centrifuges work pretty well once you find a way to feed them a steady supply of oil and water. That's not easy on a heaving ocean however. That material that is six times more dense then mud (iron filings mixed with epoxy) is useless unless you can pump it in massive volumes and at high pressure with an API rated pump which I very much doubt you can. The reaction that sets the epoxy is exothermic and uncontrollable in the wide delta between topside and seabed temperature and even worse would be abrasive as hell and would erode any pipe or valve you tried to pump it through. There are many reasons they use mud for drilling and one of the principle ones is that it isn't abrasive.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Solutions should be considered under the following criteria:
- How well does it address the problem?
- What are the drawbacks to the solution/method?
- Given the above, is it worth the cost/risk?
Yes, we're facing an ecological disaster of sizeable proportions.
Yes, I would appreciate some form of deliberate, decisive leadership/action. But the biggest issue is that solutions/technologies that were developed for land-based wells will not necessarily work underwater or at the scale needed. (For example, Rduke may be familiar with kitty-litter-like stuff that you sprinkle on your driveway to soak up oil drippings ... but that doesn't mean we should be dumping truckloads of the stuff into the Gulf.
Having worked with RTV products for mold & modelmaking, I understand the constraints of time and temperature; once you mix part A with part B, you've got x time to get your material in place before it sets, and the reaction spreads throughout ... so if you're mixing and shooting it down a pipe, eventually everything in the pipe will catalyze/harden. I suppose running two pipes might work, but then you have to assure the right amounts of each component, and - simply put - it's more chemicals into the water.
And it's expensive too! BP might lose money! Impact negatively on the economy! Damage business! Decreasing our standard of living!...and then...and thennnn....
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Here's a Cousteau family nightmare:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5DG5jPFXr8
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
burned out. All this is too much for most people to process on a continual basis.
I just want to say this..
If this spill was in Calif, it would completely fill the San Francisco Bay, The Monterey Bay, The Santa Monica Bay and a whole lot more.
The Gulf will bounce back. In about 30-40 years. But it will never be like it was.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
And wildlife will flourish again!
"Coool...three eyed fish!"
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Is it being implied that BP and other oil industry cottage industries may not be operating completely on the up and up? Is it being implied that all this deregulation may have led to reduction in safety levels for things like oil dispersants? Is it being implied that deregulation may in fact be leveraged by industry to reduce costs while at the same time increasing risk to people and property?
I had no idea. I was led to believe that by allowing a "free market", that it would bring out the best talents of individuals and lead to an overall uplifting of the general society.
Gee, maybe there should be some kind of governmental agency that oversees these activities. It would be manned by individuals with real oversight over the industry, and independent of industry indfluence.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Just when I think my outrageometer has leveled out, I find there were uncharted regions of red, burining hate waiting beyond my psychic horizon...
I'm right with you -I'm numb
Humans are gonna get Mother Natures Karma and its not going to be pretty (for humans).
Comments are closed on this entry