Oil spills: unbearable confession!

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Oil spills: unbearable confession!




by Obamot » 22/07/10, 13:27

Here is the incredible cynicism and the unbearable admission of the oil companies:

Image

teletext: 20100722, wrote:editable text version:

Project against oil spills
Four major oil companies announced Wednesday that they will spend $ 3000 billion on a new system that is believed to contain future oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico. These are ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocPhillips and Royal Dutch Shell. The system will use submarine equipment linked together by pipes and collectors, all connected to ships that will be responsible for collecting the oil. The system should be able to operate at a depth of 100m and be able to contain 000 barrels per day.


What about prevention? What a slab!
What about regulations requiring companies to review the design of their wells? What a slab!
And the obligation to install two valves: one on the well head and the other after the regulation unit: What a slab!
And the installation of a non-return valve / mechanism in the event of an explosion of the platform (as was the case in the Gulf of Mexico) What a slab!
0 x
xboxman4
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 120
Registration: 09/07/08, 20:04
x 2




by xboxman4 » 22/07/10, 19:08

Above all, instead of spending billions of dollars to prevent leaks, he could invest them in renewable energy which could replace this oil and remove this madness from the oil spill forever! : Evil:
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 22/07/10, 19:59

... preventing leaks would not cost billions of dollars. Do not exaggerate, it is the oil spills that cost money, not prevention. And this prevention should be mandatory. Do not mix.

On the other hand the war of oil in Iraq cost nearly 800 billion whereas it would be enough of the half of this sum to carry out Désertec.

The cost of "Desert Storm" (the first Kuwait-Iraq oil war) and its shortfall .... would also have made it possible.

Where there's a will, there's a way...
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 22/07/10, 22:20

On the other hand the war of oil in Iraq cost nearly 800 billion whereas it would be enough of the half of this sum to carry out Désertec.

Two remarks:
-1 What costs to one relates to another ... so it's not a pure expense.
-2 The petroleum wars have less to stake the simple value of the deposits than that, much higher, granted by the control on these resources.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 22/07/10, 23:30

And if we overturned the system: an ocean of oil in free access and societies which would sell us clean expensive water: even pedestrians, infants, pensioners and the poor need it .......

Image
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 22/07/10, 23:31

[Edit] The most hallucinating is how they manage to drown the fish by bringing - with this initiative about the "future" - the oil slick in people's minds as a fatality with which we would have to get used ...

Ahmed wrote:
On the other hand the war of oil in Iraq cost nearly 800 billion whereas it would be enough of the half of this sum to carry out Désertec.

Two remarks:
-1 What costs to one relates to another ... so it's not a pure expense.
-2 The petroleum wars have less to stake the simple value of the deposits than that, much higher, granted by the control on these resources.


For sure. On the other hand, they have not achieved their goals. It was expected by the Bu $ h administration that the Iraq War was to be self-financing by the levy of a quota of oil. But it is a bitter failure.

Is this in part what changed currents of opinion and caused the most serious economic crisis America has known since 1929, added to the fact that they live above their means, which has been directly recognized? as a trigger for the stock market crash? Because the latter, subprime or not, would still take place. The unpaid shacks of the ricans were not worth ~ 30'000 billion ... Anyway, there was the (expected?) Effect of "sanitation of the markets". So who paid for this war and this economic disaster ... exactly? : Shock:

Afflicting that we come to lecture governments by questioning their budgetary policy ....

There you go ... and 400 billion for Desertec on a global scale in 50 years is only 8 billion per year, barely enough to "fill up" ... on the scale of the budget of the United States: 0,01% of their GDP ... (relative to their energy needs ...) ditto for Europe (2009 value). In other words, from an economic point of view, getting out of oil and nuclear power seems quite realistic if you do it gradually!

Politically, "control over resources" is effectively the Achilles heel of environmental policy ...
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 23/07/10, 17:59

The storms will disperse the oil towards the coast and we will leave everything unattended !!
There may be less in the Atlantic ???
Pray that no new leak will declare !!!


Subsea operational update:

The relief well activities at the MC252 well site will be temporarily suspended because of potentially adverse weather associated with Tropical Storm Bonnie, which is projected to track into the Gulf of Mexico.

The MC252 well remains shut-in at this time and active monitoring continues as long as weather permits.

Pressure continues to slowly increase and is approximately 6876 psi.

We anticipate the next update will be provided at around 9:30 am CDT on July 24, 2010.

Updated July 23 at 9:30 am CDT
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 24/07/10, 12:23

In my humble opinion they made this proposal, not only because of this catastrophe, but also because of Ixtoc l, the previous platform which had ignited in 1979 in this same Gulf of Mexico:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ixtoc_I

Between 70 and 000 tonnes of oil had already spilled for more than 1 months ...

It is unheard : Shock:
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 24/07/10, 14:37

Unsustainable confession to the news 3 months later:
The alarms, a month before, had been suppressed so as not to wake those responsible who are sleeping with false alarms !!

Hopefully in nuclear power plants we don't do the same !!

We are trivializing oil spills:

The one in China looks as serious of a hidden magnitude:
In the Gulf of Mexico nobody has drowned in ultra thick oil, where it is impossible to swim, as in mud, because a viscous flow without turbulence completely prevents swimming !!!
The sperms with their flagella can swim in the viscous without turbulence !!!
0 x
jean.caissepas
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 660
Registration: 01/12/09, 00:20
Location: R.alpes
x 423




by jean.caissepas » 12/04/12, 19:59

New pollution in the Gulf of Mexico!

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2 ... L-32280308

There is an urgent need to reduce our dependence on oil, because pollution will worsen with drilling in deep waters.
0 x
Past habits must change,
because the future must not die.

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 191 guests