'Top kill' plugs gulf oil leak, official says (FAILED)

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
So blaming Obama for the oil spill is idiocy?

Obama may deserve a part of the blame, and JSt0rm01 explained that. However, to properly figure out who is to blame and by how much in this whole situation will take quite some time, and trying to figure it out now, before the well is even confirmed to be fully plugged, is idiotic.
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
If BP is successful it's because Obama forced them to :) God Bless him for doing so and preventing more damage.

Federal government had expertise and resources to help Katrina victims. It has no expertise and resources to plug oil wells 1 mile deep. If you are advocating a government takeover of offshore drilling, so that it does, I am all for it.

That's a fail. The government couldn't do anything about it, ergo, Obama does not receive the credit for it.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
Not to mention, that solar energy isn't just disappearing. It's used by natural systems already. You extract energy from a system, it will have effects. We may not know what those effects are until we do it, but the idea that solar panels provide free energy that was just being wasted is silly.

Sun beating down on a roof isn't contributing any energy to natural systems except heat in a built environment... No one wants to build solar panels on top of forests, that would make no sense.

Even if they did, it doesn't take much area of solar panels to serve all our needs.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,198
126
That's a fail. The government couldn't do anything about it, ergo, Obama does not receive the credit for it.

Obama put the government boot on the neck of those private sector scumbags and got them to fix it. God bless the government and God bless Obama!
 

Ldir

Platinum Member
Jul 23, 2003
2,184
0
0
Federal government had expertise and resources to help Katrina victims. It has no expertise and resources to plug oil wells 1 mile deep. If you are advocating a government takeover of offshore drilling, so that it does, I am all for it.

This. You have to be hopelessly stupid to think the two are comparable. The federal government knew how to help after Katrina. It sat on its hands and let people die.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Obama put the government boot on the neck of those private sector scumbags and got them to fix it. God bless the government and God bless Obama!

You do realize that nobody wants to stop all that money flowing away more than BP, right?
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,198
126
You do realize that nobody wants to stop all that money flowing away more than BP, right?

Whatcha talking about? That well is useless to them. The rig is sunk. What BP wants is to avoid the blessed Government from revoking its ability to drill more wells.
 

Rebel44

Senior member
Jun 19, 2006
742
1
76
Original estimate for "top kill" was 10 hours, later we were told that result should be known in 24 hours... and that it wont take over 48 hours total

Its over 24 hours and we still dont know result - I expect this to fail.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
And Obama lack of response (for a month) pertaining to the stoppage, containment, and cleanup of this oil spill hasn't/wont have devastating effects on people?

what should he of done? Hmm? You have no idea do you. And dont say nuke it from orbit we went there already...
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
Obama put the government boot on the neck of those private sector scumbags and got them to fix it. God bless the government and God bless Obama!

Yep, we know you love the government, and here is yet another piece of proof.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
If BP is successful it's because Obama forced them to :) God Bless him for doing so and preventing more damage.

you're kidding right? BP loses more money every day that oil pumps into the water instead of into storage containers. They lose more than it costs to fix it that's for sure. You have to be a goddamn idiot if you don't think BP could have and would have been working on this without the government lending a hand.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
you're kidding right? BP loses more money every day that oil pumps into the water instead of into storage containers. They lose more than it costs to fix it that's for sure. You have to be a goddamn idiot if you don't think BP could have and would have been working on this without the government lending a hand.

Yes folks, it's opposite day.
 

Daedalus685

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2009
1,386
1
0
Not to mention, that solar energy isn't just disappearing. It's used by natural systems already. You extract energy from a system, it will have effects. We may not know what those effects are until we do it, but the idea that solar panels provide free energy that was just being wasted is silly.

A lot of solar energy is disappearing though, it is being radiated into space from rocks and so on.

Only a small portion is actually used.

Obviously we can't be so closed minded to put them were the energy is otherwise needed by a forest or to use so many that it redistributes energy too strongly but it is easy to do reasonably provided we don't get greedy.

This is all energy that was going to hit the earth anyway, and it will be re-emitted into space quite soon after it is captured. The flux from the earth wont change from using solar in this fashion. Problems arise if we capture solar energy in space and take it here, or we store a massive amount to use all at once. Mind you both of those don't seem to be well understood... but for instance if we got all of our power from solar panels on the moon we would be adding one hell of a lot of heat to the earth's system.
 
Last edited:

Daedalus685

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2009
1,386
1
0
you're kidding right? BP loses more money every day that oil pumps into the water instead of into storage containers. They lose more than it costs to fix it that's for sure. You have to be a goddamn idiot if you don't think BP could have and would have been working on this without the government lending a hand.

The money they 'lose' to the oil loss is pittance compared to the cost to clean it up that they are only on the hook for due to either government force or because they are not total jack shit's. Take your pick which. In effect it is not lost money ahving oil leak, it is a missed opportunity to make money, which is not the same thing at all unless the have not recouped the capitol of the rig in the first place (no idea if they have or not).

They only have motivation financially to clean it up because they are on the hook for the damages. Though even without the loss due to damages the sheer black eye this gives their business may be enough to warrant the expense to clean it up in order to ever sell anything to anyone ever again.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Sun beating down on a roof isn't contributing any energy to natural systems except heat in a built environment... No one wants to build solar panels on top of forests, that would make no sense.

Even if they did, it doesn't take much area of solar panels to serve all our needs.

Jesus you're ignorant.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,198
126
you're kidding right? BP loses more money every day that oil pumps into the water instead of into storage containers. They lose more than it costs to fix it that's for sure. You have to be a goddamn idiot if you don't think BP could have and would have been working on this without the government lending a hand.

Are you stupid? They are sealing the well, the platform is sunk. They aren't getting that oil. Period. What they want to avoid is the GOVERNMENT that is pissed off at the environmental damage and won't let them drill anymore at all. Not the "wasted" oil, and not the puny $75M in liabilities, but the GOVERNMENT choking off their ability to make billions from drilling in the area.
 

Daedalus685

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2009
1,386
1
0
Jesus you're ignorant.

What exactly did he say that you don't agree with?

By building a house we have already destroyed the natural usefulness of the land. Using a solar panel on the house won't do anything at all if the energy is used by the house itself. All it would accomplish is balance out the emission (roughly black body) of the house by increasing that in the night time and decreasing it in the day time.

If the energy was sent to another location you might notice an increase in flux in that location, thus we would get an imbalance. This would be dangerous if we start taking heat from the desert and pumping it into a city. Which is one reason these sorts of things need to be decentralized.
 

zephyrprime

Diamond Member
Feb 18, 2001
7,512
2
81
Whatcha talking about? That well is useless to them. The rig is sunk. What BP wants is to avoid the blessed Government from revoking its ability to drill more wells.
The well is useless but the field is still valuable. Stopping the leak preserves oil in the field where another well can be drilled to extract it.
 

zephyrprime

Diamond Member
Feb 18, 2001
7,512
2
81
If the energy was sent to another location you might notice an increase in flux in that location, thus we would get an imbalance. This would be dangerous if we start taking heat from the desert and pumping it into a city. Which is one reason these sorts of things need to be decentralized.
Eh, even if we centralized it, I don't think it would be that big a deal. We don't really use that much electricity compared to how much radiant energy the sun beams down on us.

It's kinda complicated though. The solar panels aren't 100 percent efficient but they are probably 95% black. Desert land is probably only 10% black. So having solar panels in the sunny desert would probably make the desert air hotter but the ground cooler?

Whatever. I say screw the desert.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,198
126
The well is useless but the field is still valuable. Stopping the leak preserves oil in the field where another well can be drilled to extract it.

Not if the GOVERNMENT bans them from drilling there again. The value of the leaking oil is minuscule compared to the economic risk BP is facing from government action due to environmental damage it's causing. This is like saying the biggest problem with Chernobyl was that the loss of generation capacity.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
Are you stupid? They are sealing the well, the platform is sunk. They aren't getting that oil. Period. What they want to avoid is the GOVERNMENT that is pissed off at the environmental damage and won't let them drill anymore at all. Not the "wasted" oil, and not the puny $75M in liabilities, but the GOVERNMENT choking off their ability to make billions from drilling in the area.

... Obviously you're an idiot because you can't even understand what the fuck I'm saying. The government did not need to in anyway help BP. The regulations for environmental effects are already in place they didn't just magically spring up right now because of this accident. BP without the Feds or anyone else stepping in would of worked on and fixed this problem. It costs them more to not fix it than to fix it. When you guys have a minimum of a week of work in this industry under your belt you can talk to me like you know what the fuck you're talking about.

zephyrprime is on the right path.