BREAKING NEWS: "Top Kill" method to stop Gulf oil leak has failed

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100529/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill

ROBERT, La. – BP said Saturday failed in its latest attempt to plug the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico with mud and cement. BPChief Operating Officer Doug Suttles said the company determined the "top kill" method had failed after studying it for three days. The method involved pumping heavy drilling mud into a crippled well 5,000 feet underwater.

"We have not been able to stop the flow", Suttles said. "We have made the decision to move onto the next option."

It was the latest setback for the company trying to stop the crude from further fouling waters, wildlife and marshland. Other attempts included a gigantic box placed over the leak and a tube inserted to siphon the oil away. The box failed after ice-like crystals clogged it, while the tube was removed to make way for the top kill after it sucked up more than 900,000 gallons of oil.

The spill is the worst in U.S. history and has dumped between 18 million and 40 million gallons into the Gulf, according to government estimates.

Oh that's fantastic.

BP better be held accountable (money wise) once this is fixed... In the senate hearing the BP spokesman was very vague on the damages they would cover and the senators were "ok" with that...

I was really hoping that one would work. have they tried the garbage thing yet?

All that marine life :(

Why don't we just filter out the oil. Use if for our cars.

BP better be held accountable (money wise) once this is fixed... In the senate hearing the BP spokesman was very vague on the damages they would cover and the senators were "ok" with that...

Buttons1990

Why don't we just filter out the oil. Use if for our cars.

Loco_Live

[QUOTE="Buttons1990"]

BP better be held accountable (money wise) once this is fixed... In the senate hearing the BP spokesman was very vague on the damages they would cover and the senators were "ok" with that...

Serraph105

Yes for the things they agreed to pay... But when questioned about things like paying damages done to local economy items such as fishing or tourism... The BP spokesman said (and I am serious) "Question Mark"... When asked if they would pay...

[QUOTE="Serraph105"][QUOTE="Buttons1990"]

BP better be held accountable (money wise) once this is fixed... In the senate hearing the BP spokesman was very vague on the damages they would cover and the senators were "ok" with that...

Buttons1990

Yes for the things they agreed to pay... But when questioned about things like paying damages done to local economy items such as fishing or tourism... The BP spokesman said (and I am serious) "Question Mark"... When asked if they would pay...

I think we should plug it up with BP employees.

[QUOTE="Loco_Live"]

Why don't we just filter out the oil. Use if for our cars.

Serraph105

Even if you could simply filter out the oil (and I doubt you could, at least not in a cost-effective matter), the size and scope would simply be too great.

I think we should stop using oil and switch over to something else, who cares how much it costs, money is an illusion created by yours truly. **** the system and **** the greed. It's time to change.

[QUOTE="Serraph105"][QUOTE="Loco_Live"]

Why don't we just filter out the oil. Use if for our cars.

PBSnipes

Even if you could simply filter out the oil (and I doubt you could, at least not in a cost-effective matter), the size and scope would simply be too great.

Dammit! I thought that the method was working. Well, I was having a good day.

So, um, when will the oil stop, next year? I believe I read 2 weeks ago that the spill is the size of Texas so imagine it now :shock: This is just sick and probably wont get completely cleaned up for decades.Fuhgeddabouditt

There are some other things they can try (there's something similar to the top kill method, only with an extremely viscous liquid instead of thick mud), but the only foolproof (or at least as foolproof as possible) methods are drilling a relief well (which will take until late-June/early-July at the earliest, IIRC) or literally nuking the leak (Russia's done it a few times, apparently).

The worst thing about this is that they actually removed a pipe they'd inserted which was successfully siphoning off a massive portion of the oil so that they could try this top kill method, which has failed. *face palm*Ninja-Hippo

[QUOTE="Fuhgeddabouditt"]So, um, when will the oil stop, next year? I believe I read 2 weeks ago that the spill is the size of Texas so imagine it now :shock: This is just sick and probably wont get completely cleaned up for decades.PBSnipes

There are some other things they can try (there's something similar to the top kill method, only with an extremely viscous liquid instead of thick mud), but the only foolproof (or at least as foolproof as possible) methods are drilling a relief well (which will take until late-June/early-July at the earliest, IIRC) or literally nuking the leak (Russia's done it a few times, apparently).

On the Rachel Maddow show she dug up some videos from a similar oil leak that happened in the 70s. It was interesting because they have done almost everything that BP has done and it all failed the same. Ultimately, it will take those other wells that are months away to stop it was her conclusion. That sucks.

I still think the U.S. should pursue off-shore drilling.

You know what would be interesting? Instead of comparing the size of the spill to a state, they should let the public now how many kilowatt hours have been lost. I bet that number is more staggering.

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

[QUOTE="Fuhgeddabouditt"]So, um, when will the oil stop, next year? I believe I read 2 weeks ago that the spill is the size of Texas so imagine it now :shock: This is just sick and probably wont get completely cleaned up for decades.Fuhgeddabouditt

There are some other things they can try (there's something similar to the top kill method, only with an extremely viscous liquid instead of thick mud), but the only foolproof (or at least as foolproof as possible) methods are drilling a relief well (which will take until late-June/early-July at the earliest, IIRC) or literally nuking the leak (Russia's done it a few times, apparently).

SAVE US KEVIN COSTNER! imaps3fanboy

sadly in the last 5 weeks he seems to be the only person to come up with any real way to help.Serraph105

Um, what? They can't even USE their centrifuge until the leak has stopped. Hail him as a hero when his company can actually do something.

I still think the U.S. should pursue off-shore drilling.

entropyecho

I suspect this incident wont really disrupt oil exploration at all. It will most likely increase efforts to make tapping shale oil economically viable.

If you pour alcohol down the pipes it will un-crystallize and be usable again. Why are we not trying this?

If you pour alcohol down the pipes it will un-crystallize and be usable again. Why are we not trying this?

dann14v

I present to you a youtube video which was taken from news sites http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8O3aEBvnbUSerraph105

3,000 gallons of oil a day (the amount each unit can clean) times 31 units is 93,000 gallons/day. Even in the absolute best case scenario (going by the 18,000,000 gallon estimate in the OP), that's ~193 days of non-stop use if the leak stopped *now* and the cleaning units were 100% effective. Now consider the costs and resources required to effectively use and maintain those cleaning units, not to mention potential related issues (for example, I doubt the process for turning oil into water works by harnessing the power of positive thinking, nor would the remaining 1% of the oil be all sunshine and rainbows).

Maybe it'll make sense to use them for spot duty around particularly vulnerable areas, but otherwise it'll be an utterly futile effort.

I find it hilarious that there's "a nuclear option." :lol:

about the nuking, how would that work? I imagine it making the problem worst. Fuhgeddabouditt

I'm not sure, but I'd assume it's simply that the explosion collapses the well and/or creates enough debris (and then some) to clog the leak. Nuking the ocean isn't exactly an environmentally friendly option, but neither is letting millions of gallons of oil leak into the gulf.

Granted it isn't a particularly reasonable solution now since so much oil has already leaked out, but potentially creating Blinky the three-eyed fish would arguably have been a small price to pay in order to protect most of the gulf coast.

Granted it isn't a particularly reasonable solution now since so much oil has already leaked out, but potentially creating Blinky the three-eyed fish would arguably have been a small price to pay in order to protect most of the gulf coast.

PBSnipes

[QUOTE="Fuhgeddabouditt"] about the nuking, how would that work? I imagine it making the problem worst. PBSnipes

I'm not sure, but I'd assume it's simply that the explosion collapses the well and/or creates enough debris (and then some) to clog the leak. Nuking the ocean isn't exactly an environmentally friendly option, but neither is letting millions of gallons of oil leak into the gulf.

Granted it isn't a particularly reasonable solution now since so much oil has already leaked out, but potentially creating Blinky the three-eyed fish would arguably have been a small price to pay in order to protect most of the gulf coast.

I find it hilarious that there's "a nuclear option." :lol:

entropyecho

dude, theirs... always a nuclear option:twisted:

[QUOTE="dann14v"]

If you pour alcohol down the pipes it will un-crystallize and be usable again. Why are we not trying this?

UbiquitousAeon

[QUOTE="UbiquitousAeon"][QUOTE="dann14v"]

If you pour alcohol down the pipes it will un-crystallize and be usable again. Why are we not trying this?

Fuhgeddabouditt

maybe next they can try filling it with the hopes and dreams of the children in cambodia...Linkthedueler