Bob Irish Reporting: Delray Beach,FL Monday July 19, 2010
Dear IDE Reader:
Our energy world will never be the same again, thanks to BP. But in re-examining our energy priorities, one sector remains ignored and all-but forgotten. And no way that should be the case, says our own Laura Rodini, IDE’s Chief Operating Officer. For the surprising lesson of BP’s Gulf Disaster, read below.
It’s been 90 days since the BP oil spill began in the Gulf of Mexico, and while BP managed to place a cap on top of the spewing oil late last week, there is no guarantee that the spill is contained.
There’s been a depressing amount of oil spilled - 9 times more oil than the Exxon Valdez, and growing!
And now with hurricane season underway, containment efforts are in danger.
Right now Congress is investigating whether deepwater drilling really is a safe means of oil production.
Which leads us to Andy Gordon’s very interesting pick in this month’s Sound Profits newsletter. You might call this a ‘contrarian pick.’
It’s a substance people normally think is dirtier than oil.
But in light of all that’s going on in the Gulf, I’d say it’s time to think again!
Coal Mythbuster: It’s Not Dirty
Coal is the most misunderstood and underrated of all the energy sectors. Since the 70s, we have tripled our consumption of coal. It provides half the electricity we use.
Yet, everybody discounts coal while championing their favorite pie-in-the-sky alternative...
Obama doesn’t get it. He’s using the BP crisis to push one of his pet projects – the development of solar and wind energy sources – into the forefront of technology development.
The World Bank doesn’t get it either. They’re also pushing so-called clean energy on developing countries.
And most investors don’t get it. They’re getting into other oil majors like Exxon Mobil and Chevron instead of investing in coal.
What these folks fail to understand is that coal is not dirty. The amount of emissions released into the atmosphere has actually shrunk by 40%.
That’s because today’s power plants emit far less pollutants (nasty stuff like SO2, NOX, Particulates, mercury) than the plants from the ‘70s, according to the National Energy Technology Laboratory.
And “scrubbers” installed in older power plants get rid of 99% of the pollutants that used to escape through their chimney stacks. In 2005, 22% of coal-fired capacity east of the Mississippi had these scrubbers. By the end of this year, over 50% of capacity is expected to be scrubbed.
That’s 90.6 gigawatts of coal-fired generation that will be retrofitted with new scrubbers by the end of 2011, according to the EIA.
The other good thing about coal is that we simply have a lot of it lying around....about 262 billion tons, according to the Energy Information Agency.
It accounts for 94% of all our fossil energy reserves – there’s more coal than oil in the U.S. And there’s enough coal in the world to last us another 235 years.
Add in the fact that coal is cheap to use. It’s the number-one fuel of China for a reason, you know.
It’s also hard to replace. Every man, woman and child in the U.S. consumes 3.8 tons of coal per year. That is the equivalent of 17,593 Big Macs.
Another way of looking at this is that the U.S. would have to build 250 nuclear reactors...or produce 17 more trillion cubic feet...or build 500 more damns the size of the gigantic Hoover Dam to replace the coal we use.
How are you going to come close to replacing that? The answer of course is you can’t.
In this month’s Sound Profits issue, Andy recommends one company that’s primed to ride coal’s under-the-radar comeback for major gains. As a Master Limited Partnership, it doesn’t have to pay taxes on its profits. Because it’s allowed to pass on the bulk of its income to shareholders, it sports a juicy 6.6% dividend!
As demand from China and India continue to rise (and maybe the US too, once it sees the light on dangerous offshore oil rigs), this company is primed to shine. In fact, Andy is projecting 80% gains in under two years!
Andy says that coal is not the “bridge to the future” as the so-called energy specialists claim it is. Coal is the future.
For all of the details – including Andy’s Buy Under price - sign up for the Sound Profits newsletter today. You can read all of the details about Sound Profits here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We want your feedback! Let us know your thoughts on this article. Email us at: feedback@investorsdailyedge.com
Market Window
To unsubscribe from Investor's Daily Edge and any associated external offers, Click here
To cancel or for any other subscription issues, write us at:
Investor's Daily Edge
PO Box 7835
Delray Beach, FL 33482
800.718.2891
Copyright © 2010 by Fourth Avenue Financial. All rights reserved. The Fourth Avenue Financial unites the stock-picking talents of several analysts and editors. Each of the services is based on individual trading/investment philosophies or vehicles and specific investment approaches.
Fourth Avenue Financials Investor's Daily Edge is intended specifically for mature investors with a strong sense of individual responsibility who want to arbitrage different viewpoints to optimize their personal investment strategy. We reserve the right to remove readers we believe do not meet these criteria from our distribution list without prior notice.
You are welcome to distribute this message, at your discretion, to others who you believe share the values of the Fourth Avenue Financial.
NOTE TO OUR READERS: Fourth Avenue Financial or Early To Rise does not act as an investment advisor or advocate the purchase or sale of any security or investment. Investments recommended in this publication should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company in question.
Fourth Avenue Financial expressly forbids its writers from having a financial interest in any security that they recommend to their readers. Furthermore, all other employees and agents of Fourth Avenue Financial and its affiliate companies must wait 24 hours before following an initial recommendation published on the Internet, or 72 hours after a printed publication is mailed.
Email: feedback@investorsdailyedge.com | phone 800.718.2891
We respect your privacy. You can view our privacy policy here.
© Copyright Early to Rise, LLC., 2010
Monday, July 19, 2010
Government Censorship - Oil Spill in Gulf of Mexico might cause Tsunami !
There is a top secret program with some oil companies and the US government called "Deep Water Drilling" and the well that was being drilled was one of those. Even though it was at least one mile below the sea floor the whole well that was tapped may have been 5- 6 miles deep into the mantel of the Earth and the kind of pressure from that being tapped is something that will destroy attempts to cap the well.
Cassitation is a super-sonic implosion. A bubble may come up and sink every ship and platform within a 50 mile radius. The well has been at 100,000 lbs. per square inch pressure. That is why they have took so long capping the well.
Chris Landowe has written 2 papers about predicting that things like this could happen before it happened. All these wells may crack the ocean floor and have a volcano erupt under water, like Mt. St Helens under water
and then a tsunami would obliterate Florida,basically put it under the ocean.
Cloud of Death followed by Tsunami traveling at 400-600 MPH 1/2
Cassitation is a super-sonic implosion. A bubble may come up and sink every ship and platform within a 50 mile radius. The well has been at 100,000 lbs. per square inch pressure. That is why they have took so long capping the well.
Chris Landowe has written 2 papers about predicting that things like this could happen before it happened. All these wells may crack the ocean floor and have a volcano erupt under water, like Mt. St Helens under water
and then a tsunami would obliterate Florida,basically put it under the ocean.
Cloud of Death followed by Tsunami traveling at 400-600 MPH 1/2
Sunday, July 18, 2010
URGENT - GULF OIL SPILL CAUSING TOXIC RAIN, KILLING CROPS??
I predicted that the oil would rise into the atmosphere and would rain
down on everyone as the winds of the Gulf of Mexico sweep over the southern United States. This seems to confirm what I had predicted to my colleagues at the Dept. of Homeland Security. An EPA official also confirmed that he thought this would happen. I believe the investigators may find lead poisoning to be occurring from the lead in the oil that has risen into the atmosphere around the Gulf.
Here is another video confirming that it is actually raining oil on the streets. British Petroleum may have created the largest environmental
disaster the world has seen since the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. BP are corporate terrorists. Does that seem harsh? Well,all
they cared about was saving $500,000 for some saftey fixture and now the
Caribbean ,Southern USA and Mexico will bear the consequences of dying crops, animals and eventually people.
URGENT - GULF OIL SPILL CAUSING TOXIC RAIN, KILLING CROPS??
Toxic Oil Spill Rains Warned Could Destroy North America
Corexit 9500 molecules will be able to "phase transition" from their present liquid to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and allowing their release as "toxic rain" upon all of Eastern North America contaminating water & food supply etc... Excerpt: A dire report prepared for President Medvedev by Russia's Ministry of Natural Resources is warning today that the British Petroleum (BP) oil and gas leak in the Gulf of Mexico is about to become the worst environmental catastrophe in all of human history threatening the entire eastern half of the North American continent with "total destruction". Russian scientists are basing their apocalyptic destruction assessment due to BP's use of millions of gallons of the chemical dispersal agent known as Corexit 9500 which is being pumped directly into the leak of this wellhead over a mile under the Gulf of Mexico waters and designed, this report says, to keep hidden from the American public the full, and tragic, extent of this leak that is now estimated to be over 2.9 million gallons a day. Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured "Beyond Repair" Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured "Beyond Repair" By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers A dire report circulating in the Kremlin today that was prepared for Prime Minister Putin by Anatoly Sagalevich of Russia's Shirshov Institute of Oceanology warns that the Gulf of Mexico sea floor has been fractured "beyond all repair" and our World should begin preparing for an ecological disaster "beyond comprehension" unless "extraordinary measures" are undertaken to stop the massive flow of oil into our Planet's eleventh largest body of water. Most important to note about Sagalevich's warning is that he and his fellow scientists from the Russian Academy of Sciences are the only human beings to have actually been to the Gulf of Mexico oil leak site after their being called to the disaster scene by British oil giant BP shortly after the April 22nd sinking of the Deepwater Horizon oil platform. BP's calling on Sagalevich after this catastrophe began is due to his being the holder of the World's record for the deepest freshwater dive and his expertise with Russia's two Deep Submergence Vehicles MIR 1 and MIR 2 [photo 2nd left] which are able to take their crews to the depth of 6,000 meters (19,685 ft). According to Sagalevich's report, the oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico is not just coming from the 22 inch well bore site being shown on American television, but from at least 18 other sites on the "fractured seafloor" with the largest being nearly 11 kilometers (7 miles) from where the Deepwater Horizon sank and is spewing into these precious waters an estimated 2 million gallons of oil a day. Interesting to note in this report is Sagalevich stating that he and the other Russian scientists were required by the United States to sign documents forbidding them to report their findings to either the American public or media, and which they had to do in order to legally operate in US territorial waters. However, Sagalevich says that he and the other scientists gave nearly hourly updates to both US government and BP officials about what they were seeing on the sea floor, including the US Senator from their State of Florida Bill Nelson who after one such briefing stated to the MSNBC news service "Andrea we're looking into something new right now, that there's reports of oil that's seeping up from the seabed... which would indicate, if that's true, that the well casing itself is actually pierced... underneath the seabed. So, you know, the problems could be just enormous with what we're facing." Though not directly stated in Sagalevich's report, Russian scientists findings on the true state of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster are beyond doubt being leaked to his longtime friend, and former US President George W. Bush's top energy advisor Matthew Simmons, who US media reports state has openly said: "Matthew Simmons is sticking by his story that there's another giant leak in the Gulf of Mexico blowing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. On CNBC's Fast Money, he says he'd be surprised if BP lasted this summer, saying this is disaster is entirely BP's fault."cancelsave
down on everyone as the winds of the Gulf of Mexico sweep over the southern United States. This seems to confirm what I had predicted to my colleagues at the Dept. of Homeland Security. An EPA official also confirmed that he thought this would happen. I believe the investigators may find lead poisoning to be occurring from the lead in the oil that has risen into the atmosphere around the Gulf.
Here is another video confirming that it is actually raining oil on the streets. British Petroleum may have created the largest environmental
disaster the world has seen since the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. BP are corporate terrorists. Does that seem harsh? Well,all
they cared about was saving $500,000 for some saftey fixture and now the
Caribbean ,Southern USA and Mexico will bear the consequences of dying crops, animals and eventually people.
URGENT - GULF OIL SPILL CAUSING TOXIC RAIN, KILLING CROPS??
Toxic Oil Spill Rains Warned Could Destroy North America
Corexit 9500 molecules will be able to "phase transition" from their present liquid to a gaseous state allowing them to be absorbed into clouds and allowing their release as "toxic rain" upon all of Eastern North America contaminating water & food supply etc... Excerpt: A dire report prepared for President Medvedev by Russia's Ministry of Natural Resources is warning today that the British Petroleum (BP) oil and gas leak in the Gulf of Mexico is about to become the worst environmental catastrophe in all of human history threatening the entire eastern half of the North American continent with "total destruction". Russian scientists are basing their apocalyptic destruction assessment due to BP's use of millions of gallons of the chemical dispersal agent known as Corexit 9500 which is being pumped directly into the leak of this wellhead over a mile under the Gulf of Mexico waters and designed, this report says, to keep hidden from the American public the full, and tragic, extent of this leak that is now estimated to be over 2.9 million gallons a day. Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured "Beyond Repair" Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured "Beyond Repair" By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers A dire report circulating in the Kremlin today that was prepared for Prime Minister Putin by Anatoly Sagalevich of Russia's Shirshov Institute of Oceanology warns that the Gulf of Mexico sea floor has been fractured "beyond all repair" and our World should begin preparing for an ecological disaster "beyond comprehension" unless "extraordinary measures" are undertaken to stop the massive flow of oil into our Planet's eleventh largest body of water. Most important to note about Sagalevich's warning is that he and his fellow scientists from the Russian Academy of Sciences are the only human beings to have actually been to the Gulf of Mexico oil leak site after their being called to the disaster scene by British oil giant BP shortly after the April 22nd sinking of the Deepwater Horizon oil platform. BP's calling on Sagalevich after this catastrophe began is due to his being the holder of the World's record for the deepest freshwater dive and his expertise with Russia's two Deep Submergence Vehicles MIR 1 and MIR 2 [photo 2nd left] which are able to take their crews to the depth of 6,000 meters (19,685 ft). According to Sagalevich's report, the oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico is not just coming from the 22 inch well bore site being shown on American television, but from at least 18 other sites on the "fractured seafloor" with the largest being nearly 11 kilometers (7 miles) from where the Deepwater Horizon sank and is spewing into these precious waters an estimated 2 million gallons of oil a day. Interesting to note in this report is Sagalevich stating that he and the other Russian scientists were required by the United States to sign documents forbidding them to report their findings to either the American public or media, and which they had to do in order to legally operate in US territorial waters. However, Sagalevich says that he and the other scientists gave nearly hourly updates to both US government and BP officials about what they were seeing on the sea floor, including the US Senator from their State of Florida Bill Nelson who after one such briefing stated to the MSNBC news service "Andrea we're looking into something new right now, that there's reports of oil that's seeping up from the seabed... which would indicate, if that's true, that the well casing itself is actually pierced... underneath the seabed. So, you know, the problems could be just enormous with what we're facing." Though not directly stated in Sagalevich's report, Russian scientists findings on the true state of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster are beyond doubt being leaked to his longtime friend, and former US President George W. Bush's top energy advisor Matthew Simmons, who US media reports state has openly said: "Matthew Simmons is sticking by his story that there's another giant leak in the Gulf of Mexico blowing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. On CNBC's Fast Money, he says he'd be surprised if BP lasted this summer, saying this is disaster is entirely BP's fault."cancelsave
Water Samples Prove Toxic, Sample EXPLODES! Must Watch !!!
When Water Samples were tested, the samples came back with 16 to 221 Parts per million from Orange Beach, LA.
Dolphin Island Marine Water Sample EXPLODES !!!
Dolphin Island Marine Water Sample EXPLODES !!!
Monday, July 5, 2010
Kevin Costner's Oil-Water separation machines to be deployed by British Petroleum
Jay Vise Reporting
BP has given the green light for funding of a device that can separate oil from water.
Development of the machine, which uses a centrifuge to separate the fluids, has been backed by actor Kevin Costner to the tune of $25 million.
John Houghtaling, Costner's chief partner in the project, told WWL First News that the oil company has ordered 32 of the devices for use in the Gulf of Mexico.
"In a matter of weeks, we can be manufacturing ten of these a week," Houghtaling said. "So we're hoping by the first of August to have all 32 of these things in the Gulf."
Listen to Houtaling talk about the deployment of the device:
According to Houtaling, the machines cost roughly half a million dollars to build, but also require the hiring of vessels to take them out onto the water.
Though the world-famous actor and Houtaling are both pleased that BP has now agreed to deploy the devices, Costner told members of Congress earlier this week. that he'd had a hard time getting an opportunity to try out his centrifuge for the Coast Guard.
"We would offer to take our machines out there but we couldn't get onto the spots because the Coast Guard would regulate that we couldn't get there," Costner testified.
Houghtaling said that in addition to providing clean-up duty in the gulf, deployment of even more of the devices could aid in shortening the six-month moratorium on deep-water drilling.
He said that he'd like to see the government use the machines as a safety measure to keep the deep-water drilling rigs in operation as safety procedures are reviewed.
"By the end of August...our company can have thirty-three of the machines around the rigs. If there's a spill, we can deploy," Houtaling said.
To view an animation of how the device works, click the window below:
Meanwhile Costner's company is moving toward leasing 16 more oil sucking and separating machines to Plaquemines Parish officials directly. They say if BP won't pay for that, they may sell the oil local officials pull from the water and fund the machines that way.
View All 12 "Spill Cam" Video Feeds - WWL - AM870 | FM105.3
BP has given the green light for funding of a device that can separate oil from water.
Development of the machine, which uses a centrifuge to separate the fluids, has been backed by actor Kevin Costner to the tune of $25 million.
John Houghtaling, Costner's chief partner in the project, told WWL First News that the oil company has ordered 32 of the devices for use in the Gulf of Mexico.
"In a matter of weeks, we can be manufacturing ten of these a week," Houghtaling said. "So we're hoping by the first of August to have all 32 of these things in the Gulf."
Listen to Houtaling talk about the deployment of the device:
According to Houtaling, the machines cost roughly half a million dollars to build, but also require the hiring of vessels to take them out onto the water.
Though the world-famous actor and Houtaling are both pleased that BP has now agreed to deploy the devices, Costner told members of Congress earlier this week. that he'd had a hard time getting an opportunity to try out his centrifuge for the Coast Guard.
"We would offer to take our machines out there but we couldn't get onto the spots because the Coast Guard would regulate that we couldn't get there," Costner testified.
Houghtaling said that in addition to providing clean-up duty in the gulf, deployment of even more of the devices could aid in shortening the six-month moratorium on deep-water drilling.
He said that he'd like to see the government use the machines as a safety measure to keep the deep-water drilling rigs in operation as safety procedures are reviewed.
"By the end of August...our company can have thirty-three of the machines around the rigs. If there's a spill, we can deploy," Houtaling said.
To view an animation of how the device works, click the window below:
Meanwhile Costner's company is moving toward leasing 16 more oil sucking and separating machines to Plaquemines Parish officials directly. They say if BP won't pay for that, they may sell the oil local officials pull from the water and fund the machines that way.
View All 12 "Spill Cam" Video Feeds - WWL - AM870 | FM105.3
Monday, June 14, 2010
Kevin Costner Sold 32 Oil-Water Separation Machines to British Petroleum
Kevin Costner Sold 32 Oil-Water Separation Machines to British Petroleum
Friday, June 11, 2010
Nukes and Explosive Oil Prices
Whiskey & Gunpowder By Byron King June 11, 2010
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
A reader named Marilyn, from Oregon, wrote with the following question:
“I’ve read Internet threads where people want to use a nuclear weapon to close the oil well blowout in the Gulf of Mexico. Even Matt Simmons, who’s a hero to me because of his Peak Oil work, says we might need to use a nuclear weapon to close the well. Can you discuss that?”
I sure can…
Underwater Nuclear Bursts
Here’s my background even to comment on the subject. It’s based on my Navy experience, from many years ago. I should say right here that these are my personal views. Nothing I say is an “official” statement on behalf of the U.S. Navy, Department of Defense or U.S. government.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I flew a Navy aircraft built by Lockheed called the S-3. It was a graceful twin-engine, carrier-capable jet, and is now retired from Navy service (alas!).
If man was meant to fly, he’d have wings. Or the Navy/Lockheed S-3.
But when the S-3 was flying, one of its key missions was anti-submarine warfare (ASW). It was designed during the depths of the Cold War, when the world’s oceans were crawling with Soviet submarines. The S-3 was among the aircraft carrier’s ASW defenses.
To find Soviet submarines, the S-3 had a superb surface-search radar, and awesome electronic capabilities. The S-3 also carried a large load of sonobuoys that we’d drop in the water and use to listen for submarines.
The S-3 could carry air-delivered, conventionally armed torpedoes, if necessary. But the most powerful weapon capability for the S-3 was its ability to deliver a “special weapon,” namely a nuclear depth bomb called the B57. (This is all unclassified information, by the way. These days, you can look it up on the Internet.)
B57 Nuclear Depth Bomb, on carrying dolly.
Red nose is a plastic cover — please remove before flight.
Point is, back when I was flying S-3s, I became pretty smart about the ASW mission, and also about this particular special weapon. Thus do I know a few things about both nuclear weapons and underwater nuclear bursts.
What Could a Nuclear Weapon Accomplish?
Why are some people — the eminent Matt Simmons among them — discussing the use of nuclear weapons in the Gulf of Mexico? Does Matt know something that other people don’t? Well, I think Matt is off-base on this point. Don’t take it the “wrong” way, but Matt knows more about Peak Oil than he knows about underwater nuclear bursts.
As we used to say in the Navy, from a small splash, you get a big flash. Among people who have no or limited experience with nuclear weapons, this gives rise to many nuclear myths, if not fixations. That is, many people think that you can really DO SOMETHING with a nuclear weapon. Sorry to disappoint, but the last thing you want to do with a nuclear weapon is trigger it, particularly in a misplaced effort to seal a blownout oil well.
There’s GOT to be a better way to seal an oil well than this...
Let’s just consider the explosion. Yes, you can put a lot of energy into the earth — and the water and atmosphere — with a nuclear blast. But is that really what you want? There’s such a thing as putting “too much” energy on your target. And you still might not accomplish the mission.
Nuclear effects — especially subsurface nuclear effects — are not predictable. So even with the best efforts you will doubtless have many unintended consequences. It might seem like a good idea to place a nuclear bomb next to the leaking oil well, cook it off, move an immense level of energy toward that awful oil well and seal it up with fused glass. Except it doesn’t work that way.
Start at the Beginning
Let’s start at the beginning. You need to drill a hole first, into which to place your device. Hey, BP (BP: NYSE) is already drilling two holes next to the blownout well. The two holes are for relief wells. So now you want to drill a third hole for the nuclear device?
Then you need a nuclear device to emplace in the hole. Except that the U.S. has no nuclear devices rated for 5,000-foot and deeper water depths. Sure, U.S. special weapons are built to withstand multi-G accelerations, and all sorts of launch and drop shock loads. The devices can function in the vacuum of space. They can even pass through transient re-entry heating. But there’s no weapon design out there — none that I’ve ever heard of — to deal with the high external pressure under a mile or more of water.
That goes for nuclear-armed torpedoes as well — which I can’t discuss except to say that long ago, the Navy developed weapons to chase down Soviet deep-diving submarines. If you ever read Tom Clancy’s book The Hunt for Red October, he has a particular Soviet submarine diving to over 2,000 feet. That’s all I’ll tell you.
Wigwam Test
So let’s say that we overcome the initial obstacles of drilling a hole and emplacing a weapon. Let’s say that we can put a nuclear device down there next to the well. What happens with an underwater nuclear blast?
From unclassified sources, I can tell you that the deepest underwater nuclear explosion on record is the Operation Wigwam test, conducted on May 15, 1955. Wigwam consisted of a subsea 30-kiloton nuclear detonation, or a bit over twice the power of the 1945 Hiroshima blast.
The Wigwam test blast was about 450 miles southwest of San Diego, Calif. (29 Deg N, 126 Deg W) in open ocean, with water depth of 16,000 feet. The purpose of the test was to look at the vulnerability of submarines to deep underwater nuclear explosions. (I can’t tell you much on that, but it’s not pretty.)
The Wigwam nuclear device — a very large B7 “Betty” specially reinforced and rigged as a depth charge — was suspended by a 2,000-foot cable from a barge. The dry weight of the bomb was 8,250 pounds, and 5,700 pounds when submerged. After it detonated, here’s what the blast wave did, just before the fireball exited through the surface.
“Beware, beware!” Little splash, big flash. Cover your eyes and hope you’re upwind.
Oil, Water and... Radionuclides?
Right now we have a well spewing oil into the Gulf of Mexico. It looks like BP is getting the well under control. The relief wells are also going down, slowly but steadily. We can envision this tragedy coming to an end.
At this point, do we want to let loose a nuke and have radioactive particles mix with the oil and water? Do we want radioactive water vapor rising into the atmosphere just south of New Orleans?
And what of the shock wave? Do we want to rip the seafloor to shreds? Do we want a nuclear-level shock wave traveling through the seafloor in the vicinity of the BP oil well? What will that do? Will it break other oil pipelines installed on the bottom?
What of an oceanographic phenomenon called “bottom bounce”? That’s a situation in which the shock wave bounces off layers of seawater and travels back down to the ocean floor to be reflected even further out. You could, possibly, put destructive levels of energy many dozens of miles away from the burst point. You could break things faraway. So you see where I’m going with this.
What about the oceanic environment? This is not the early days of the Cold War. We know a lot these days about the complex biology of the ocean. Radioisotopes, like strontium and iodine, concentrate as you move up the food chain.
Your basic oyster is a filter feeder, moving hundreds of thousands of gallons of seawater through its system over its lifetime. This causes isotopes to concentrate to a level that can poison wildlife and people. Anybody or anything that eats these critters will surely suffer from radiation damage to every level of cellular function, and almost certainly to reproductive cells. More specifically, radioactive strontium and iodine concentrate in the bones and thyroid glands, respectively.
This is all straightforward, established science. If you want things to get even uglier, and last a real long time, you’ll use a nuclear weapon out in the Gulf of Mexico.
Bottom line is that we need to get the nuclear weapon discussion off the table. Put the nukes back in the bunkers, where they belong.
Where to from Here?
Marilyn, I’m glad you asked your question. But a nuke clearly isn’t the right choice.
With that said, another question comes to light…
With a small percentage of oil still flowing out of the well, a massive cleanup ensuing, more goverenment regulation and the effects of a drilling moratorium tying the hands of our energy industry – where do we go from here?
I’ll start by making a statement I’ve made before and I’ll make again: the cheap and easy oil is GONE. Finding new energy to fuel our nation is going to be harder, more regulated and more expensive.
Is a U.S. moratorium the right choice? I’ll let you decide that.
But there’s one matter that you won’t have a choice on: the higher price you pay for oil.
With oil sitting north of $70 a barrel I can’t imagine it getting any cheaper.
Indeed, a few years from now we may look back and deem this period the point where the U.S. lost its edge in energy.
That’s all for now. Thanks for reading...
Until we meet again,
Byron W. King
P.S.: As if the BP oil spill weren’t bad enough. As if this indefinite moratorium and the expensive regulations that are sure to follow weren’t worse enough...
There’s another reason oil is going to get painfully more expensive. In fact, the disaster in the Gulf and the moratorium are just icing on the cake! There are powerful forces lining up against the U.S. and they’re looking to start an absolute oil war.
But I specialize in preparing my subscribers to profit from the skyrocketing energy prices that are on their way. Some of my recommendations from 2009 alone are up 36.3...53.6...61.8...even 102.5%.
To find out more about the coming oil war...and what to do right now to be ready to profit from much higher energy prices...click here.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
A reader named Marilyn, from Oregon, wrote with the following question:
“I’ve read Internet threads where people want to use a nuclear weapon to close the oil well blowout in the Gulf of Mexico. Even Matt Simmons, who’s a hero to me because of his Peak Oil work, says we might need to use a nuclear weapon to close the well. Can you discuss that?”
I sure can…
Underwater Nuclear Bursts
Here’s my background even to comment on the subject. It’s based on my Navy experience, from many years ago. I should say right here that these are my personal views. Nothing I say is an “official” statement on behalf of the U.S. Navy, Department of Defense or U.S. government.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I flew a Navy aircraft built by Lockheed called the S-3. It was a graceful twin-engine, carrier-capable jet, and is now retired from Navy service (alas!).
If man was meant to fly, he’d have wings. Or the Navy/Lockheed S-3.
But when the S-3 was flying, one of its key missions was anti-submarine warfare (ASW). It was designed during the depths of the Cold War, when the world’s oceans were crawling with Soviet submarines. The S-3 was among the aircraft carrier’s ASW defenses.
To find Soviet submarines, the S-3 had a superb surface-search radar, and awesome electronic capabilities. The S-3 also carried a large load of sonobuoys that we’d drop in the water and use to listen for submarines.
The S-3 could carry air-delivered, conventionally armed torpedoes, if necessary. But the most powerful weapon capability for the S-3 was its ability to deliver a “special weapon,” namely a nuclear depth bomb called the B57. (This is all unclassified information, by the way. These days, you can look it up on the Internet.)
B57 Nuclear Depth Bomb, on carrying dolly.
Red nose is a plastic cover — please remove before flight.
Point is, back when I was flying S-3s, I became pretty smart about the ASW mission, and also about this particular special weapon. Thus do I know a few things about both nuclear weapons and underwater nuclear bursts.
What Could a Nuclear Weapon Accomplish?
Why are some people — the eminent Matt Simmons among them — discussing the use of nuclear weapons in the Gulf of Mexico? Does Matt know something that other people don’t? Well, I think Matt is off-base on this point. Don’t take it the “wrong” way, but Matt knows more about Peak Oil than he knows about underwater nuclear bursts.
As we used to say in the Navy, from a small splash, you get a big flash. Among people who have no or limited experience with nuclear weapons, this gives rise to many nuclear myths, if not fixations. That is, many people think that you can really DO SOMETHING with a nuclear weapon. Sorry to disappoint, but the last thing you want to do with a nuclear weapon is trigger it, particularly in a misplaced effort to seal a blownout oil well.
There’s GOT to be a better way to seal an oil well than this...
Let’s just consider the explosion. Yes, you can put a lot of energy into the earth — and the water and atmosphere — with a nuclear blast. But is that really what you want? There’s such a thing as putting “too much” energy on your target. And you still might not accomplish the mission.
Nuclear effects — especially subsurface nuclear effects — are not predictable. So even with the best efforts you will doubtless have many unintended consequences. It might seem like a good idea to place a nuclear bomb next to the leaking oil well, cook it off, move an immense level of energy toward that awful oil well and seal it up with fused glass. Except it doesn’t work that way.
Start at the Beginning
Let’s start at the beginning. You need to drill a hole first, into which to place your device. Hey, BP (BP: NYSE) is already drilling two holes next to the blownout well. The two holes are for relief wells. So now you want to drill a third hole for the nuclear device?
Then you need a nuclear device to emplace in the hole. Except that the U.S. has no nuclear devices rated for 5,000-foot and deeper water depths. Sure, U.S. special weapons are built to withstand multi-G accelerations, and all sorts of launch and drop shock loads. The devices can function in the vacuum of space. They can even pass through transient re-entry heating. But there’s no weapon design out there — none that I’ve ever heard of — to deal with the high external pressure under a mile or more of water.
That goes for nuclear-armed torpedoes as well — which I can’t discuss except to say that long ago, the Navy developed weapons to chase down Soviet deep-diving submarines. If you ever read Tom Clancy’s book The Hunt for Red October, he has a particular Soviet submarine diving to over 2,000 feet. That’s all I’ll tell you.
Wigwam Test
So let’s say that we overcome the initial obstacles of drilling a hole and emplacing a weapon. Let’s say that we can put a nuclear device down there next to the well. What happens with an underwater nuclear blast?
From unclassified sources, I can tell you that the deepest underwater nuclear explosion on record is the Operation Wigwam test, conducted on May 15, 1955. Wigwam consisted of a subsea 30-kiloton nuclear detonation, or a bit over twice the power of the 1945 Hiroshima blast.
The Wigwam test blast was about 450 miles southwest of San Diego, Calif. (29 Deg N, 126 Deg W) in open ocean, with water depth of 16,000 feet. The purpose of the test was to look at the vulnerability of submarines to deep underwater nuclear explosions. (I can’t tell you much on that, but it’s not pretty.)
The Wigwam nuclear device — a very large B7 “Betty” specially reinforced and rigged as a depth charge — was suspended by a 2,000-foot cable from a barge. The dry weight of the bomb was 8,250 pounds, and 5,700 pounds when submerged. After it detonated, here’s what the blast wave did, just before the fireball exited through the surface.
“Beware, beware!” Little splash, big flash. Cover your eyes and hope you’re upwind.
Oil, Water and... Radionuclides?
Right now we have a well spewing oil into the Gulf of Mexico. It looks like BP is getting the well under control. The relief wells are also going down, slowly but steadily. We can envision this tragedy coming to an end.
At this point, do we want to let loose a nuke and have radioactive particles mix with the oil and water? Do we want radioactive water vapor rising into the atmosphere just south of New Orleans?
And what of the shock wave? Do we want to rip the seafloor to shreds? Do we want a nuclear-level shock wave traveling through the seafloor in the vicinity of the BP oil well? What will that do? Will it break other oil pipelines installed on the bottom?
What of an oceanographic phenomenon called “bottom bounce”? That’s a situation in which the shock wave bounces off layers of seawater and travels back down to the ocean floor to be reflected even further out. You could, possibly, put destructive levels of energy many dozens of miles away from the burst point. You could break things faraway. So you see where I’m going with this.
What about the oceanic environment? This is not the early days of the Cold War. We know a lot these days about the complex biology of the ocean. Radioisotopes, like strontium and iodine, concentrate as you move up the food chain.
Your basic oyster is a filter feeder, moving hundreds of thousands of gallons of seawater through its system over its lifetime. This causes isotopes to concentrate to a level that can poison wildlife and people. Anybody or anything that eats these critters will surely suffer from radiation damage to every level of cellular function, and almost certainly to reproductive cells. More specifically, radioactive strontium and iodine concentrate in the bones and thyroid glands, respectively.
This is all straightforward, established science. If you want things to get even uglier, and last a real long time, you’ll use a nuclear weapon out in the Gulf of Mexico.
Bottom line is that we need to get the nuclear weapon discussion off the table. Put the nukes back in the bunkers, where they belong.
Where to from Here?
Marilyn, I’m glad you asked your question. But a nuke clearly isn’t the right choice.
With that said, another question comes to light…
With a small percentage of oil still flowing out of the well, a massive cleanup ensuing, more goverenment regulation and the effects of a drilling moratorium tying the hands of our energy industry – where do we go from here?
I’ll start by making a statement I’ve made before and I’ll make again: the cheap and easy oil is GONE. Finding new energy to fuel our nation is going to be harder, more regulated and more expensive.
Is a U.S. moratorium the right choice? I’ll let you decide that.
But there’s one matter that you won’t have a choice on: the higher price you pay for oil.
With oil sitting north of $70 a barrel I can’t imagine it getting any cheaper.
Indeed, a few years from now we may look back and deem this period the point where the U.S. lost its edge in energy.
That’s all for now. Thanks for reading...
Until we meet again,
Byron W. King
P.S.: As if the BP oil spill weren’t bad enough. As if this indefinite moratorium and the expensive regulations that are sure to follow weren’t worse enough...
There’s another reason oil is going to get painfully more expensive. In fact, the disaster in the Gulf and the moratorium are just icing on the cake! There are powerful forces lining up against the U.S. and they’re looking to start an absolute oil war.
But I specialize in preparing my subscribers to profit from the skyrocketing energy prices that are on their way. Some of my recommendations from 2009 alone are up 36.3...53.6...61.8...even 102.5%.
To find out more about the coming oil war...and what to do right now to be ready to profit from much higher energy prices...click here.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)