You learn the darnedest things on the internets. For example, I just found out that the Gulf of Mexico is the primary disposal site for unexploded military munitions - over 30 million pounds of bombs, projectiles and chemical ordnance.
And because records are spotty and incomplete, we don't know exactly where these dumps are.
(Are you following me?)
Many of these bombs are unstable. Just about anything could detonate them - say, an oil rig that's digging deeper than what owners noted on their permit application. So we're leasing offshore drilling rights to oil companies IN A FRICKIN' MINE FIELD. (You'll notice this NY Times piece on the problems of offshore drilling doesn't even mention it.)
Drill, baby, drill!
There is technology available to carefully map underwater hazards like UXO but so far, I haven't found anything that indicates offshore drilling lessees are required to do so. I have to assume that a company will try to protect their investment, but you never know.
But it seems prudent that this fact be part of the public debate on offshore drilling.
Here's some of this information from a paper presented at the 2007 Offshore Technology Conference in Houston.
In June of 2006, the MMS (Editor's note: Minerals Management Service) released its Notice to Lessees NTL 2006-G12, which outlined regulations for conducting Ancillary Activities in the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region.
Within this Notice, the MMS states a requirement to comply with protective measures when conducting activities within Ordnance Dumping Zones, as well as Military Warning Zones (“Water Test Areas”) 1 through 5. Figure 1 displays the areas delineated by the MMS as Ordnance Disposal and Military Warning Areas in the Gulf of Mexico.
Additionally, during the writing of this paper, the MMS released NTL 2007-G01, which updated the Shallow Hazards Program requirements. This notice also recognizes ordnance as a manmade hazard that may have an adverse effect on proposed well operations. Although the standard Gulf of Mexico geohazard survey and assessment does not currently involve a specifically defined unexploded ordnance
assessment, prudent owners, operators, and service vendors
should consider it on top of the To-Do list when planning projects in those sensitive areas. This paper presents such an assessment as well as provides additional insights into the problem of unexploded ordnance encountered in deepwater.
Three fundamental problems exist that the standard geohazard assessor faces in dealing with the UXO problem. These are simply limitations in technology, awareness, and expertise.
The solution lies in the utilization of innovative technology,
well thought out and appropriately planned geohazard survey specifications, and most importantly the utilization of unconventional industry experts with the ability to perform adequate and thorough ordnance risk assessments.
Historically, incidents involving ordnance discovered off the
coasts of the United States have been limited primarily to
fishing boats dragging ordnance up in their nets. It is very rare
that a detonation occurs during one of these events although it
has happened. In the early 1980s off the coast of New Jersey,
a fishing boat attempted to haul a WWII torpedo warhead in to
harbor. While at anchor, outside the harbor, and awaiting
Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) responders, a storm emerged. The increased wave and wind activity rattled the warhead against the fishing boat, accidentally detonating it and sinking the fishing boat. Due to instances like these, survey, transportation, and exploration companies venturing into deep waters are becoming more susceptible to encountering UXOs and the distinct possibility of an
accidental detonation.
UXO (unexploded ordnance) dump zones also exist off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. Although the Atlantic and Pacific oceans drop off very quickly and oil and gas exploration has been limited along those coasts, current technology for deepwater production is making the possibility of Atlantic and Pacific margin exploration more of a reality. This will only increase the need for UXO awareness and viable solutions to their existence in deepwater.
This is not good. Setting off one old, unstable bomb could result in sympathetic detonations of who knows how many nearby others. We used to bombard the range at San Clemente Island. There was old unexploded ordnance out there. Every once in awhile we'd get secondary explosions from stuff that had been lying out there for God only knows how long. Some of the detonations were quite spectacular.
Setting those bombs off 5000ft below the surface would have what effect on a) the surface, and b) the seafloor some distance (miles) away from the explosion. Water does have a way of dampening things ;)
All the life under the sea would be kinda pissed unless they were initally killed by the blasts.
The preferred term for UXO is now MEC (Munitions and Explosives of Concern). Becoming the industry standard since UXO implies that things will blow up. MEC implies the items are just things you should just watch out for. Semantics if you ask me, to give things a glossy image. None of it is good stuff though.
I wouldn't go near a UXO. If you asked me to sit on a MEC, though... meh.
site has a map of the chronological spread of the slick. The ordinance dump sites are prominently displayed on the map.
http://deepwaterhorizon.noaa.gov/bookshelf/19...
Be as you wish to seem
http://blog.al.com/live/2010/05/animation_gul...
but it made me feel sick to my stomach.
I'd like to see the same thing but in 3D (like a 3D bar chart). The increasing volume below the surface is more critical than what is on the surface at any given location. But determining that is probably just guesswork at this point..
Why would drilling deeper than permitted increase the risk of detonations? It seems like the initial drilling is where the risk is incurred.
It's not like the ordinance is 18,000 feet below the bed of the ocean.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
It seems to be more on deep water drilling. Purely my speculation, but if I were dumping bombs I'd want to send them deep to get them out of the way. I'd actually look for the deep water. That might mean that deep water drilling is more likely to run into these bombs because that's where we put them. Deep water might also mean that it's more difficult to determine whether it's safe or not. Just guessing here.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
The further offshore you go, the more you have to pay the crew.
Both?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
That's not about deep-water drilling. That's a reference to drilling further into the crust of the Earth.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
If you're going to dispose of unexploded military munitions, why wouldn't you just explode them?
Seriously!
aren't there constructive uses that these munitions could have been put to rather than just dumping them unexploded on top of Ariel and all her sea friends?
Way too many of them to explode them all. We were required to dump all unused ammunition over the side. We were not allowed to bring one bullet back to shore. Not one bullet. It was a court martial offense. Strictly enforced. One of our officers went to prison after being caught with purloined ammo. Once the seals on the ammo cans were broken the ammo had to be shot up or dumped over the side. No exceptions.
Sounds like a provision that arms manufacturers had put into place. In all seriousness though, is any exposure to the elements enough added risk to humans and equipment that the expense is justified?
so much for Ariel, Scuttle, Flounder, and Sebastian.
As well as Nemo, Marlin, Dory, and Crush the Sea Turtle.
;)
:P
Corruption favors the wealthy.
just clam up!
;)
You did that on porpoise ;)
Corruption favors the wealthy.
It was a good oppor-tuna-ty.
~
Corruption favors the wealthy.
one is having a crappie day.
I've been floundering all week.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Ride the wave and anchor yourself.
does it leave squid marks?
What if they leak? It could be Poseidonous.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
the disaster would be of a sharkingly enormous scale.
We've halibut enough, fiver.
;)
a haddock, anyway.
Or was that just for the halibut?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Yes, of course, silly!
;)
Didn't we do this already?
We've been schooled.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
This is lobsta fun.
it wasn't just a bream.
Just a good fin-tasy roe-mance novel, a reel page-tuna!
But I don't know that I can afford it? Hamachisit?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
My herrings not so good (some mussel conched out).
Try:
http://www.britsuperstore.com/acatalog/Haywar...
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
We all need to stop trolling for puns.
I'll try to reel it in.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
We're not our brothers' kippers.
Why?
They are punny.
ha,ha,ha
Reel-y clever, Lib! Good one :)
You walrus hurt the one you love.
(I'm running on empty here.)
This thread has become shrimply unbearable.
(second wind)
I have no wind left in my sail anyway!
;)
driving me koi-zy anyway.
You're good. Real good.
:)
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=b...
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
I luv it, ysb!
You know, avoiding shipping lanes or coastal waters or whatever.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
They couldn't just lock the unused stuff up in boxes under security until time for their next use? It's not like they've got expiration dates.
The boxes (cans) had lead seals. These were broken when we started the shooting exercise. There was no provision for resealing them. We were told that the precautions for getting rid of excess munitions was because of the fear of terrorism. This was in the early to mid '70s. We were fairly heavily armed and carried a variety of weaponry and ammunition for the armament we carried. If a weapon malfunctioned we had to dispose of the ordinance on the spot. I personally did not like the policy because I worried about the pollution. But, I was just an enlisted man and had to do what I was told.
That an empty chest with a lock on it would reasonably suffice. Even one you could retrieve (still locked) later if you had to dump it. It just seems so asinine and wasteful. But that's the US government/military for you.
No offense meant, btw.
No, I agree with you. It bothered me to no end. I was a sailor, surfer and diver so I respect the ocean. It bugged the shit out of me to be putting all of that toxic shit in the sea. It still bugs me thirty five years later.
what about that "nukular bomb thingy" they lost off the coast of georgia?
Over the last sixty years or so they have lost a few. If you are interested they divide them into categories - Broken Arrows, Bent Spears and Dull Swords. It denotes the severity of the accident. There are several books written on the subject. If it wasn't for the seriousness of the subject some of it would actually be kind of funny. Burning planes on runways and atomic bombs fall off onto the runways. Zoiks! A plane skitters into a runway in Greenland and the nuclear bomb tumbles into a crevasse in a glacier never to be seen. Oops! I believe that I read somewhere that the U.S. Air Force has actually accidentally dropped more nuclear weapons on the continental U.S. than anywhere else in the world. Lucky for us none of them went off.
I hate that when that happens.
;)
.
Spears
There's Joe, Luke and Zak.....there's a Jason Spear (no plural), a Manfred Speer, and then, of course, there's Brittany (not-porn, but there ya go). ;)
Please don't get pissed ....but a very popular porn Star from a few years ago was Savannah.....go figure!
That's actually a very sad story, ending with her suicide after a disfiguring car accident.
dingdingdingding!You are very right sir! Actually, the disfigurement wasn't that bad any way, I knew a girl that laid her mouth open from the corner of her mouth to her ear, after it healed it just gave her character, she was hot as hell, the prettiest one of a family of 6 girls,there wasn't one guy in school that didn't have the hots for her myself included. She ran a mini-bike through a barbed wire fence....wicked shit.
That's what I call the few I have, and I have stories to go with all of them.
Barbed wire and a mini-bike? Ow.
is on FindaDeath.com. It's very interesting.
Actually, she totalled her Corvette, accroding to FAD.
That explains it all. Ick, ick, ick.
If you don't hear from me tomorrow you'll know what happened.
Can you put some more details on the Open Thread?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
.
Hello?
get into it. With the new DHS we have no rights, no probable cause or search warrant necessary, no attorneys, nothing. Talk about sweating bullets.
And good luck.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
the poster you have been addressing has been detained.
Meanwhile, here is some light music.
♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♪♫
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aG9pvAUBKlU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq204wG8UfA
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
They stopped to get directions to the nearest Stuckey's for a pecan log?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
That's there, "I got mine," attitude for ya...
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
btw - the containment box is hanging over the leak at 200 Ft. as of about 30 minutes ago... then they still have to attach the lid and the piping.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
This goes beyond all comprehension.
I'm no fan of careless drilling, shipping, nuking, etc. but let's be realistic.
At 5000 feet and many years in salt water, most ordnance would be neutralized (but much that was not would be more unstable, it is true.)
And water does not dampen. It transmits. Underwater explosions can be extremely destructive (and can behave in unusual ways.) I'm not sure what the effect of, say, the explosive payload from a big naval gun would be at 5,000 feet, but I am sure it would be outside of design specifications.
But a sensible risk assessment makes ordnance dumping ranges extremely minor areas of concern.
First, they are everywhere. Basically anyplace in or near the shipping lanes or areas of heavy naval activity can get the designation; it's not like they were specifically barging gigantic loads out and dumping them to carpet the bottom.
Also just because an areas is designated that way doesn't mean there won't be lots of those things elsewhere. A vast amount of ordnance has gone over the side.
But mainly those rigs check the area pretty closely before they bite. That one was worth like half a billion dollars--they aren't going to go around flumping their gear into the sea floor randomly. Among the things the outfits do before drilling is close surveys of the ocean floor with very sensitive instruments, including magnetometers. Any unexploded ordnance would show up very clearly (as would sunken treasure galleons and Grassy Knoll rifles next to skeletons wearing concrete galoshes.) They will drill only when the coast is clear. ANd remember this well was pretty far along in the process; this wasn't the start of that operation. Once the drilling is complete and the apparatus for maintaining the well (and the various safety mechanisms) are in place, the danger from such hazards would be tiny; far greater risks would be in play every day.
The ocean, deep or shallow, teems with hazards, but by far the highest risk factors are the obvious ones: degradation of materials from corrosive salt water; design flaws; major storms; ship collisions; sabotage or human error in operation; attempting mass kidnapping and anal-probing of the crew by aliens; and the biggest one, attempting to control the high-speed, high-pressure collection, separation, and storage of extremely volatile petroleum that is undergoing substantial chemical and physical changes. IF somebody drilled into or collided with an explosive device, well, that would be a fantastic longshot.
Less of a longshot--who would think? A billion dollar supertanker rated to handle hurricanes is disabled because of a stripped screw, wombles onto rocks, and is split open jsut a few miles off the coast of France? A billion dollar supertanker with a drunk at the helm in clear weather and FAC conditions hits a plainly marked rock despite state of the art autopilots and nav gear? Naah. That would never happen.
What else would never happen? Two huge oil spills would be caused in precisely the same way 30 years apart! Both Ixtoc and this BP spill resulted from a failure of the BOP because...BOP's don't work so well when the tube is full of drilling gear. Who would think that you can't use a hydraulic ram to shear off a well pipe when it's full of drilling gear designed to operate thousands of meters below the sea floor and thousands of meters below the sea surface? Oh, yeah, sure, that makes perfect sense. We learn nothing.
ice9
But now I won't be able to sleep tonight for thinking about those damned aliens!
.
I do not think that they are in their plans
to get excited about I suspect this is the least of the problems. I'm pretty sure a site survey would identify any uxb's in a drilling area.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
A better chart.
NOAA - 11360
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but isn't the rig outside the marked ordinance areas?
Seems like it would be a problem at the start of drilling a new well, not when you're capping off one that you've just drilled. I'm not seeing any particular additional risk of oil spills or even significant equipment damage from the possibility of MEC.
If you'll click on the links, you'll see that vibrations from a storm can trigger them, too.
A former award-winning journalist and lifelong class warrior, keeping a jaundiced eye on the Washington elite.
Most ordnance has some kind of fuzing device in it that provides a detonation source; these tend to be rather sensitive chemical or electronic devices, which do not do well in corrosive environments like salt water. Immersion for any extended length of time would render them inert, and without the detonation source, the munitions become just crocks of chemical compounds.
Highly unlikely that the danger of accidental explosions is high enough to warrant panicing.
"Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati" - Red Green
Freedom Ain't Free - Pay Your Share
.
They have a cream for that.
Don't you think that the pressure at 5000 feet would probably have crushed most of this ordinance? And wouldn't that render it harmless or maybe even explode it? It would be nice to hear from some actual experts on this.
Nope.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/mu...
A former award-winning journalist and lifelong class warrior, keeping a jaundiced eye on the Washington elite.
While dumped ordinance may lie in deeper water, it is not more likely to be set of by drilling deeper under the sea floor, as this article suggests.
Sickening, disheartening, should have never happened.
There were not the appropriate safeguards in place, and heads should roll over this one.
http://news.suite101.com/article.cfm/bp-goes-...
Comments are closed on this entry