Archive for the ‘Oil Spill’ Category

Obama’s Oil Moratorium Denied Twice but Obama is Doing it Anyway   1 comment

Wow, seriously, check this out

What the heck is Obama’s problem?  I know he’s president and all, but he needs to stop trying to destroy our economy and do some ACTUAL WORK!  OBVIOUSLY this man cares more about environmental control issues than he does about people feeding their families!  NO MEANS NO, MR PRES!  Get over yourself!  You are NOT God!

It is just one disturbing thing after another with this guy.  I wonder what it would take for this country to band together to impeach him…

First, he passes the healthcare reform act without the consent of the people who it will affect the most and no one was allowed to read it!

Second, he’s attacking Arizona for requiring Federal Law to be adhered to, going COMPLETELY against his own people and even siding with a foreign power to fight this!!!!!!!!!!  Not only that, but he’s passing his Amnesty bill…er, I mean, ‘Comprehensive Immigration Reform’ and I reeeeally doubt he’s going to care what the American people have to say about it.

THIRD, he spirited in an individual to take a high-policy making position in the government that will affect 1/3 of the healthcare provided to our people and who has been dubbed ‘Obama’s One Man Death Panel’.  No one is allowed to get his view on VERY IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF HIS VIEWPOINT AND BELIEFS and NEVERMIND THAT HE WAS BASICALLY GIVING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE FINGER BY DOING SO!

This moratorium has been turned down TWICE and he’s going to pass it whether anybody wants it or not.

This man needs to be stopped!  Seriously people!!!!  This has GOT TO STOP!  He’s issuing rules and laws without consent of congress or the people!!!!

Typical Chicago style politics if you ask me 😦

Here is the article:

Officials: Gov’t to issue new oil moratorium

FREDERIC J. FROMMER, Associated Press Writer Frederic J. Frommer, Associated Press Writer – 31 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration will issue a new revised moratorium on offshore drilling Monday.

Two administration officials have told The Associated Press of the plans. Both requested anonymity so as not to pre-empt the official announcement.

Last week, a federal appeals court rejected the government’s effort to restore its initial offshore deepwater drilling moratorium, which halted the approval of any new permits for deepwater projects and suspended drilling on 33 exploratory wells. It was first rejected last month by U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said at the time that he would issued a new, refined moratorium.

The administration says it wants to ensure that deepwater drilling is safe


Exxon Valdez 21 Years Later–A Warning to BP and Those Helping to Clean Up   Leave a comment

Exxon Valdez 21 Years Later—a Warning to BP and Those Helping to Clean Up

Here is an article from CNN, of all places, that I find extremely important.  It also harkens back to an interview that I posted about a week ago with a woman who was working directly with the BP clean up and how BP is not allowing any of its workers or volunteers to wear respirators when they work.  BP has also suspended the First Amendment from the spill sites, not allowing any news from private journalists to leak into the American public. 

And Obama is hiring big wig corporate types into high levels of government? 


Here is the article in all its chilling glory:

Critics call Valdez cleanup a warning for Gulf workers

By Drew Griffin, CNN Special Investigations Unit

July 8, 2010 10:33 a.m. EDT

Editor’s note: Watch “AC360°” tonight at 10 ET as CNN’s Drew Griffin investigates whether BP is trying to hide risks to cleanup workers.

Anchorage, Alaska (CNN) — Two decades ago, Roy Dalthorp helped clean up the rocky shores of Prince William Sound after the tanker Exxon Valdez ran aground, producing what was then the largest oil spill in U.S. history.

Today, with that record surpassed by the 11-week-old disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, Dalthorp struggles to breathe. He coughs, and his failing eyes sometimes tear up uncontrollably.

Dalthorp told CNN that he was “slowly poisoned” during the Alaska cleanup effort — and he says some of those now working to clean up the BP spill off Louisiana and neighboring states are risking the same fate.

BP says it is working with federal health and environmental regulators to make sure cleanup workers are protected from the hazards of the Gulf spill. But observers like Rikki Ott, an environmental activist who studied the Exxon Valdez spill, said cleanup workers in the Gulf are showing “the exact identical symptoms down here that we had 21 years ago.”

Dalthorp says his troubles started when the then-out-of-work oil worker joined the Exxon Valdez cleanup effort. For six weeks, he lived and worked aboard a ship that ran boilers to heat sea water. The 120- to 140-degree water was used to blast crude off the shoreline, and it left plumes of oily-smelling steam in the surrounding air.

“I had no choices, because I was behind on my house payments, and no health insurance,” he said.

Soon he began to cough. Teams from the Environmental Protection Agency were monitoring the cleanup, but “nobody ever checked with us,” Dalthorp said.

Tanker owner Exxon paid to study the effects of the spill on nearly every creature that came into contact with the 11 million gallons that were dumped into Prince William Sound — except people.

“Clams and mussels, to fish and otters, to ducks and eagles, and even deer and bears,” said Anchorage lawyer Dennis Mestas, who represented another worker who was involved in the cleanup. “But they never studied what this oil was doing to the workers — to the human beings in Prince William Sound.”

Mestas warns history may be repeating itself thousands of miles away in the Gulf of Mexico, with evidence of workers getting sick, and their medical records being controlled by BP.

Dalthorp never filed a workers compensation claim or had a doctor determine the cause of his illness. But Mestas said the man he represented — Gary Stubblefield, who he said “still struggles for each breath” as a result of the cleanup — sued Exxon over his illness. The oil company settled for a reported $2 million, without admitting any blame, after Mestas went to an Exxon office in Houston, Texas, and viewed medical records of cleanup workers.

Exxon had asked the court to keep those records under seal to protect the workers’ privacy. But Mestas said the company was forced to let him view summaries of the health records of 11,000 cleanup workers, and found that 6,722 of them had gotten sick.

In a statement issued to CNN, Exxon — now ExxonMobil — said it could not confirm that number. The workers hired for the cleanup “tended to be transient, temporary workers, making any medical follow-up incredibly difficult,” it said. And it noted that out of roughly 50,000 workers hired for the effort, “there were no adverse judgments rendered against the company.”

“After 20 years, there is no evidence suggesting that either cleanup workers or the residents of the communities affected by the Valdez spill have had any adverse health effects as a result of the spill or its cleanup,” the company said.

The issue has drawn the attention of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has been holding hearings on the Gulf disaster. On July 1, the committee asked ExxonMobil to turn over all records related to the health of workers who took part in the Alaskan cleanup. The company says it is reviewing the request.

At the time, the government and the company called those illnesses the “Exxon crud,” a flu or cold that Exxon was not required to report to federal health officials. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health agreed, but Mestas said the agency “never looked at any medical records,” which were controlled by Exxon.

“The only epidemiology was that there were a few head colds that they could identify, and NIOSH didn’t have any of the records,” he said.

ExxonMobil told CNN that the institute had “full access to Exxon’s records” during its study.

Since the Gulf spill erupted in April, CNN has been receiving reports of fishermen hired to take part in the cleanup effort developing upper respiratory illnesses, nausea and vomiting.

Louisiana’s state health department reported 128 cleanup workers believed to have been sickened by exposure to oil by the end of June, with symptoms like dizziness, nausea and breathing issues. On a video provided to CNN by a state health official, one hospitalized fisherman says that “a lot of the other guys” had the same complaints.

In a statement to CNN issued Wednesday, citing state figures, BP said 21 people had “short hospitalizations.”

“Most workers reported having had symptoms that cleared up quickly resulting from exposures attributed to a variety of chemicals,” the company said. But it said that so far, air testing conducted by the EPA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration have not found “a single reading above OSHA regulations to date.” And the company says there is no need to issue respirators to the cleanup workers based on those results.

BP says a database of injury and illness data is shared daily with state and federal health officials. It has 25 first-aid stations in the field and a clinic in Venice, Louisiana, that is run by federal officials.

But Ott, a marine biologist who studied the effects of the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, says the symptoms being reported in the Gulf states are the same ones that hit workers in Alaska. And just like then, people with their backs against the wall financially are flocking to the take jobs with the cleanup.

“I’m feeling like BP is forcing them into this situation where BP holds all the cards, and BP is letting these workers get sick,” Ott said.

Obama Still Trying for Drilling Moratorium Case   Leave a comment

What IS it with Obama attacking states in court?  Should he not be listening to them and helping them rather than attacking them as though they are his enemy.  He wants to take jobs that would be effecting at least 20,000 people away for what?  What would the moratorium on oil rigs already in place and operating safely do?  His only agenda is to stop drilling and move towards ‘clean energy’.  I agree that we should be moving in that direction, but not while destroying the lives of tens of thousands of people.  He has done nothing to help them but bitch, bully and cry like a spoiled child not getting his way!  He needs to man up and do something constructive that doesn’t involve Big Brother Leftist Totalitarianism!

His plea for a 6 month moratorium was already denied in court.  Get over it, Obama.  You already got owned once.  What would appealing it do, unless you’ve fixed the ruling judges to see things your way?

It’s just sad.

Appeals court to hear drilling moratorium case


Thu Jul 8, 6:48 am ET

NEW ORLEANS – A federal appeals court is set to hear the Justice Department’s bid to delay a judge’s decision to overturn a six-month deepwater drilling moratorium.

A three-judge panel from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans is scheduled to hear arguments Thursday from lawyers on both sides of a lawsuit filed by companies that oppose the Obama administration’s temporary drilling ban.

The Interior Department says it halted new permits for deepwater projects and suspended drilling on 33 exploratory wells to protect the Gulf of Mexico from another environmental disaster while it studies the risks of deepwater drilling.

The government is asking the 5th Circuit panel for an order that would keep the moratorium in place while they appeal last month’s ruling

Obama Sues Arizona Over Illegal Immigration Bill   Leave a comment

Well, we all saw THIS coming, didn’t we?  Of all the promises Obama made in his candidacy and his current presidential reign, this just has the be the one he follows through with?  We have MILLIONS of gallons of oil SPEWING in the Gulf each day, MILLIONS of jobs being flushed away, given to illegals, or outsourced to other countries…and all he can do is stamp his feet and cry like a spoiled middle schooler who doesn’t get his way?  Even though he’s whining about the enforcement of a law that HE should be enforcing and hasn’t been doing.

Wow, Mr. Prez.  I’m not impressed.

Now, my son is 10 years old.  One of the laws of the house is that he MUST keep his room clean.  If his room gets so out of control that I myself have to start doing his work, then he KNOWS he’s in trouble and he has to step in to fix it because he knows he’ll get in trouble if he doesn’t. 

Obama can learn from this boy.  My son knows how to take responsibility for something and knows when things have gotten too far.  But then, my son isn’t a politician and he isn’t trying to get votes.

It’s kind of interesting when you think that Obama made all these campaign promises and has yet to follow through.  Or else he has followed through, but it’s like completely not what he had promised or he misrepresented certain aspects of said ‘change’.  Bringing our troops home from Iraq as soon as he was brought into office was one promise he hasn’t fulfilled.  He also led the country to believe that he was going to solve all their medical insurance issues right off the bat, but most of the laws don’t take affect until 2014, or will cost A LOT MORE than most people were expecting, I think.  But, he said those things for one reason: to get elected.  To get votes.  He knew that if he made promises, even completely ridiculous promises in a suave, charismatic way, that people would get him into office because they were motivated by greed. 

Not to sound cliché but…how’s that ‘change’ working for you?

This is just another example of pandering for votes and completely disregarding what the people are saying.  Either he really DOESN’T KNOW what the people want (which I DOUBT) or he just really doesn’t care (more likely) and he will do whatever it is he wants to do. 

Anything for a party vote.  Anything to get democrats elected into office in November since their numbers are falling like flies after some Raid. 

But, this defiance comes with a big price–for us, the American people.  It comes at the price of our borders, our national security, our jobs, our taxes, all to cater to votes.  I mean, he’s already handed over American land to Mexico in the name of these vicious drug gangs and their trafficking.  Instead of PROTECTING US AS HE IS SWORN TO DO, he rolls over LIKE A DOG AND LICKS THE FEET OF THESE PEOPLE!!!!!

Ew, I think I just threw up a little in my mouth after that mental image.

Anyway, not that everyone doesn’t already know, but here is one of the first articles in question that I ran into in regards to it:

Suit: Arizona immigration law crosses ‘constitutional line’

McClatchy Newspapers // <![CDATA[

if(!YAHOO){var YAHOO = {};}

YAHOO.BuzzWidgetTries = 0;

if(YAHOO && YAHOO.util && YAHOO.util.Event && YAHOO.Media && YAHOO.Media.Buzz){
(function(){ var buzz = new YAHOO.Media.Buzz("buzz-top",{"sync":"buzz-bottom","countPosition":"after","fetchCount":false,"loc_strings":{"buzz_up":"Buzz up!","buzzed":"Buzzed!","one_vote":"{0} vote","n_votes":"{0} votes"}});buzz.onSuccess.subscribe(function(){ if(YAHOO.Updates){ YAHOO.Updates.Disclosure.showDialog({"container":"yup-container","source":"buzz","type":"buzzUp","lang":"en-US"}); } }); })();(function(){ var buzz = new YAHOO.Media.Buzz("buzz-bottom",{"sync":"buzz-top","countPosition":"after","fetchCount":true,"loc_strings":{"buzz_up":"Buzz up!","buzzed":"Buzzed!","one_vote":"{0} vote","n_votes":"{0} votes"}});buzz.onSuccess.subscribe(function(){ if(YAHOO.Updates){ YAHOO.Updates.Disclosure.showDialog({"container":"yup-container","source":"buzz","type":"buzzUp","lang":"en-US"}); } }); })();
} else if(YAHOO.BuzzWidgetTries //

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department Tuesday sued Arizona over its tough new immigration law, charging the state with crossing a “constitutional line” that would undermine the federal government’s efforts to monitor illegal aliens.

Really?  They were ACTUALLY monitoring illegals?  Riiiight…

In its lawsuit, filed in Phoenix , the Justice Department explained that the federal government has the strict and sole authority to create national immigration policy.

” Arizona’s immigration policy . . . exceeds a state’s role with respect to aliens, interferes with the federal government’s balanced administration of the immigration laws, and critically undermines U.S. foreign policy objectives,” the department said.

Arizona’s law, which seeks “attrition through enforcement,” establishes a mandatory system that requires law enforcement officers to verify any given person’s legal status if the officer is suspicious of “unlawful presence.”

NOPE — WRONG!  The person in question CAN ONLY BE QUESTIONED AFTER A LEGAL STOP!  THEN their immigration status can be checked.

The department asked for a preliminary injunction against the policy to prevent “irreparable harm” to the U.S. The law was signed by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer on April 23 and is slated to take effect on July 29 .

“As a direct result of failed and inconsistent federal enforcement, Arizona is under attack from violent Mexican drug and immigrant smuggling cartels,” Brewer said in a statement. Now, Arizona is under attack in federal court from President Obama and his Department of Justice .”

Last week, in his first major speech on the issue, President Barack Obama urged Congress to make a comprehensive immigration overhaul a priority, citing Arizona’s law. However, he offered no new specifics or a deadline for enacting a bill.

>>’Comprehensive Immigration Overhaul Bill’ = AMNESTY!<<

Arizona’s law, the department wrote, would disrupt the national framework and potentially lead other states down a slippery slope of patchwork policies that would “cripple” federal policy.

The law is unconstitutional, the department wrote primarily because “it impermissibly attempts to set immigration policy at the state level and is therefore preempted.”

Although the law rightfully seeks to deter “unlawful entry” of illegal aliens, the lawsuit asserts, it ignores all other aspects of federal policy.

The department noted that Arizona’s law could potentially result in the “harassment and incarceration” of legal aliens and even U.S. citizens who are stopped by police officers and who lack immediate documentation as proof of legal presence.

The use of extensive resources to target all potential illegal aliens, instead of focusing attention on major threats, conflicts with U.S. policy, the department argued.


Oh no, mr. drug smuggler!  Don’t be upset with us!  Here, would you like some free health care?  How bout some food stamps? We’re not racist!

“Arizonans are understandably frustrated with illegal immigration, and the federal government has a responsibility to comprehensively address those concerns,” said U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in a press release. “But diverting federal resources away from dangerous aliens such as terrorism suspects and aliens with criminal records will impact the entire country’s safety.”

Janet Napolitano , the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security , said she vetoed similar pieces of legislation during her two terms as governor of Arizona . She echoed Holder’s concerns and added that, if implemented, the Arizona law would undermine “the vital trust between local jurisdictions and the communities they serve.”

As sad and horrible as it is for me to even THINK this way, you know Obama is going to force Arizona to end it’s law.  And, you also know that Obama will declare amnesty. 

I don’t want that to happen–but it’s almost inevitable.  I will fight it tooth and nail, and I hope O’Reilly is right when he said that if Obama were to declare amnesty, that it would be an impeachable defence.  And, I gotta tell you, I don’t drink and I don’t generally like to party — but the party will be at my house IF and when that happens!  TRUST ME!

Nuke the BP Well? Really?   1 comment

Apparently that is a topic under discussion.  Well, it has been for a while, or at least it has been rumored so, but this is the first time I’ve seen it in the mainstream media.

This just has ‘Armageddon’ type overtones and undertones all through it.  Has anyone ever read ‘On the Beach’?  Okay, NOT exactly the same thing, but still the prospects of what could happen after an ‘oops’ is pretty shockingly real.  (Oh, and please don’t read that book if you are prone to depression–it is NOT a mood lifter!)

Nuke the BP well? Idea has backers, but more critics

Russian experience touted — and ridiculed; radiation, bigger blowout, time are factors

MOSCOW/WASHINGTON — His face wracked by age and his voice rasping after decades of chain-smoking coarse tobacco, the former long-time Russian minister of nuclear energy and veteran Soviet physicist Viktor Mikhailov knows just how to fix BP’s oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico.

“A nuclear explosion over the leak,” he says nonchalantly puffing a cigarette as he sits in a conference room at the Institute of Strategic Stability, where he is a director. “I don’t know what BP is waiting for, they are wasting their time. Only about 10 kilotons of nuclear explosion capacity and the problem is solved.”

A nuclear fix to the leaking well has been touted online and in the occasional newspaper op-ed for weeks now. Washington has repeatedly dismissed the idea and BP execs say they are not considering an explosion — nuclear or otherwise. But as a series of efforts to plug the 60,000 barrels of oil a day gushing from the sea floor have failed, talk of an extreme solution refuses to die.

For some, blasting the problem seems the most logical answer in the world. Mikhailov has had a distinguished career in the nuclear field, helping to close a Soviet Union program that used nuclear explosions to seal gas leaks. Ordinarily he’s an opponent of nuclear blasts, but he says an underwater explosion in the Gulf of Mexico would not be harmful and could cost no more than $10 million. That compares with the $3 billion BP has paid out in cleanup and compensation costs so far. “This option is worth the money,” he says.

And it’s not just Soviet boffins. Milo Nordyke, one of the masterminds behind U.S. research into peaceful nuclear energy in the 1960s and ’70s says a nuclear explosion is a logical last-resort solution for BP and the government. Matthew Simmons, a former energy adviser to U.S. President George W. Bush and the founder of energy investment-banking firm Simmons & Company International, is another calling for the nuclear option.

Even former U.S. President Bill Clinton has voiced support for the idea of an explosion to stem the flow of oil, albeit one using conventional materials rather than nukes. “Unless we send the Navy down deep to blow up the well and cover the leak with piles and piles and piles of rock and debris, which may become necessary … unless we are going to do that, we are dependent on the technical expertise of these people from BP,” Clinton told the Fortune/Time/CNN Global Forum in South Africa on June 29.

Clinton was picking up on an idea mooted by Christopher Brownfield in June. Brownfield is a one-time nuclear submarine officer, a veteran of the Iraq war (he volunteered in 2006) and now a nuclear policy researcher at Columbia University. He is also one of a number of scientists whose theories rely not on nuclear bombs — he did toy with that thought for a while — but on conventional explosives that would implode the well and, if not completely plug it with crushed rock, at least bring the flow of oil under control. “It’s kind of like stepping on a garden hose to kink it,” Brownfield says. “You may not cut off the flow entirely but it would greatly reduce the flow.”

Blasts from the past
Using nuclear blasts for peaceful ends was a key plank of Cold War policy in both the United States and the Soviet Union. In the middle of last century, both countries were motivated by a desire to soften the image of the era’s weapon of choice.

Washington had big plans to use peaceful nuclear explosions to build an additional Panama Canal, carve a path for an inter-state highway through mountains in the Mojave Desert and connect underwater aquifers in Arizona. But the experimental plans were dropped as authorities learned more about the ecological dangers of surface explosions.

The Soviet program, known as Nuclear Explosions for the National Economy, was launched in 1958. The project saw 124 nuclear explosions for such tasks as digging canals and reservoirs, creating underground storage caverns for natural gas and toxic waste, exploiting oil and gas

deposits and sealing gas leaks. It was finally mothballed by Mikhail Gorbachev in 1989.

The Soviets first used a nuclear blast to seal a gas leak in 1966. Urtabulak, one of its prized gas-fields in Uzbekistan, had caught fire and raged for three years. Desperate to save the cherished reserves, Yefim Slavsky, then Minister of Light Industry, ordered nuclear engineers to use the most powerful weapon in their arsenal.

“The minister said, ‘Do it. Put it out. Explode it,'” recalls Albert Vasilyev, a young engineer and a rising star in the project who now teaches at the Lenin Technical Institute in Moscow.

Vasilyev remembers the technology behind the program with obvious pride. “The explosion takes place deep underground,” he says. “We pinch the pipe, break it and the pipe collapses.” According to Vasilyev, the blast at Urtabulak sealed the well shut leaving only an empty crater.

In all, the Soviets detonated five nuclear devices to seal off runaway gas wells — succeeding three or four times, depending on who you talk to. “It worked quite well for them,” says Nordyke, who authored a detailed account of Soviet explosions in a 2000 paper. “There is no reason to think it wouldn’t be fine (for the United States).”

But not everything went smoothly. Vasilyev admits the program “had two misfires”. The final blast in 1979 was conducted near the Ukrainian city of Kharkov. “The closest houses were just about 400 meters away,” Vasilyev recalls. “So this was ordered to be the weakest of the explosions. Even the buildings and the street lamps survived.” Unfortunately, the low capacity of the device failed to seal the well and the gas resurfaced.

Alexander Koldobsky, a fellow nuclear physicist from the Moscow Engineering and Physics Institute, insists the peaceful nuclear explosions were safe. The people who worked on the program “were brilliant professionals”, he says. “They had a culture of safety, which did not accept the word ‘maybe’, but only accepted the words ‘obligation’ and ‘instruction.’ Any derivation from these in nuclear technologies is a crime.”

Still, he concedes, “there were different scenarios of what happened after an explosion.” At his first blast in a Turkmen gas field in 1972, “the stench was unbearable,” he says. “And the wind was blowing toward a nearby town.” He closes his narrow lips into a smile as if refusing to say more.

Koldobsky shrugs off any suggestion of fear or emotion when the bomb exploded. “I felt nothing. I was just doing my job.”

Chernobyl to America?
Not everybody is so sanguine about the Soviet experience. Speaking on condition of anonymity, an expert from Russia’s largest oil exporter Rosneft, urges the United States to ignore calls for the atomic option. “That would bring Chernobyl to America,” he says.

Vladimir Chuprov from Greenpeace’s Moscow office is even more insistent that BP not heed the advice of the veteran Soviet physicists. Chuprov disputes the veterans’ accounts of the peaceful explosions and says several of the gas leaks reappeared later. “What was praised as a success and a breakthrough by the Soviet Union is in essence a lie,” he says. “I would recommend that the international community not listen to the Russians. Especially those of them that offer crazy ideas. Russians are keen on offering things, especially insane things.”

Former Minister Mikhailov agrees that the USSR had to give up its program because of problems it presented. “I ended the program because I knew how worthless this all was,” he says with a sigh. “Radioactive material was still seeping through cracks in the ground and spreading into the air. It wasn’t worth it.”

“Still,” he says, momentarily hard to see through a cloud of smoke from his cigarettes, “I see no other solution for sealing leaks like the one in the Gulf of Mexico.”

The problem, he goes on, is that “Americans just don’t know enough about nuclear explosions to solve this problem … But they should ask us — we have institutes, we have professionals who can help them solve this. Otherwise BP are just torturing the people and themselves.”

Nordyke too believes the nuclear option should be on the table. After seeing nine U.S. nuclear explosions and standing behind the control board of one, he estimates that a nuclear bomb would have roughly an 80 to 90 percent chance of successfully blocking the oil. According to his estimates, it would have to be an explosion of around 30 kilotons, equivalent to roughly two Hiroshima bombs or three times as big as Mikhailov’s estimate. The explosion would also need to remain at least 3 to 4 miles away from other offshore wells in the area.

The bomb, says Nordyke, would be dropped in a secondary well approximately 60-70 feet away from the leaking shaft. There it would create a large cavity filled with gas. The gas would melt the surrounding rock, crush it and press it into the leaking well to close it shut.

Although the BP well is thousands of feet deeper than those closed in the Soviet Union, Nordyke says the extra depth shouldn’t make a difference. He also says that so far below the ground, not much difference exists in onshore or underwater explosions — even though the latter have never been tried.

Nordyke says fears that radiation could escape after the explosion are unfounded. The hole would be about 8 inches in diameter and, despite the shockwave, the radiation should remain captured. Even in the case of radiation escape, he says, its dispersed effect would be less than that of floating oil patches.

Bigger blowout a possibility
But don’t expect an explosion under the Gulf of Mexico any time soon. Even a conventional blast could backfire and cause more problems. There is a chance any blast could fracture the seabed and cause an underground blowout, according to Andy Radford, petroleum engineer and American Petroleum Institute senior policy adviser on offshore issues.

The U.S. Department of Energy has no plans to use explosives “due to the obvious risks involved,” according to a DOE spokeswoman.

There’s also the question of time. Preparations for a nuclear explosion could take up to half-a-year; BP has said it will have a relief well in place to stop the leak by August. “I think it has to be considered as only the last resort,” Nordyke says. But “they ought to be thinking about it.”

Would he be willing to work on such an operation? “I’d be happy to help,” he says.

Officials Saying that Oil Spill is Hitting All Gulf Beaches   Leave a comment

And just imagine what it will be like when the oil hits the Gulf Stream and heads up the East Coast!  My heart goes out to the families affected and the wildlife that has been and that will be destroyed because of this! 

We also have to take into consideration that BP is monitoring what kind of information goes out into the public.  Were this under Bush’s watch, this kind of stuff would be ALL OVER THE NEWS in the most horrific detail possible!  My sister lives out in TX and she says that the tar balls have been there for at least a few weeks, maybe even a month, and yet this is just coming out in the news now!  I will have to do some research into the lack of information coming out of the affected areas.

The article can be found here:

Officials say BP spill now hitting all Gulf states

TEXAS CITY, Texas – Tar balls from the Gulf oil spill found on a Texas beach were the first evidence that gushing crude from the Deepwater Horizon well has reached all the Gulf states.

A Coast Guard official said on Monday that it was possible that the oil hitched a ride on a ship and was not carried naturally by currents to the barrier islands of the eastern Texas coast, but there was no way to know for sure.

The amount discovered is tiny compared to what has coated beaches so far in the hardest-hit parts of the Gulf Coast in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and the Florida Panhandle. It still provoked the quick dispatch of cleaning crews and a vow that BP will pay for the trouble.

“Any Texas shores impacted by the Deepwater spill will be cleaned up quickly and BP will be picking up the tab,” Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson said in a news release.

The oil’s arrival in Texas was predicted Friday by an analysis from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which gave a 40 percent chance of crude reaching the area.

“It was just a matter of time that some of the oil would find its way to Texas,” said Hans Graber, a marine physicist at the University of Miami and co-director of the Center for Southeastern Tropical Advanced Remote Sensing.

About five gallons of tar balls were found Saturday on the Bolivar Peninsula, northeast of Galveston, said Capt. Marcus Woodring, the Coast Guard commander for the Houston/Galveston sector. Two gallons were found Sunday on the peninsula and Galveston Island, though tests have not yet confirmed its origin.

Woodring said the consistency of the tar balls indicates it’s possible they could have been spread to Texas water by ships that have worked out in the spill. But there’s no way to confirm the way they got there.

The largest tar balls found Saturday were the size of pingpong balls, while the ones Sunday were more like nickels and dimes.

Galveston Mayor Joe Jaworski said he believed the tar balls were a fluke, rather than a sign of what’s to come.

“This is good news,” he said. “The water looks good. We’re cautiously optimistic this is an anomaly.”

The distance between the western reach of the tar balls in Texas and the most eastern reports of oil in Florida is about 550 miles. Oil was first spotted on land near the mouth of the Mississippi River on April 29.

The spill is reaching deeper into Louisiana. Strings of oil were seen Monday in the Rigolets, one of two waterways that connect the Gulf with Lake Pontchartrain, the large lake north of New Orleans.

“So far it’s scattered stuff showing up, mostly tar balls,” said Louisiana Office of Fisheries Assistant Secretary Randy Pausina. “It will pull out with the tide, and then show back up.”

Pausina said he expected the oil to clear the passes and move directly into the lake, taking a backdoor route to New Orleans.

The news of the spill’s reach comes at a time that most of the offshore skimming operations in the Gulf have been halted by choppy seas and high winds. A tropical system that had been lingering off Louisiana flared up Monday afternoon, bringing heavy rain and winds.

Forecasters at the National Hurricane Center said there had been a 60 percent chance the system could blow into a tropical storm. But that was reduced later Monday to almost no chance because the storm had moved over land.

Last week, the faraway Hurricane Alex idled the skimming fleet off Alabama, Florida and Mississippi with choppy seas and stiff winds. Now they’re idled by smaller storms that could last well into this week.

Officials have plans for the worst-case scenario: a hurricane barreling up the Gulf toward the spill site. But the less-dramatic weather conditions have been met with a more makeshift response.

Skimming operations across the Gulf have scooped up about 23.5 million gallons of oil-fouled water so far, but officials say it’s impossible to know how much crude could have been skimmed in good weather because of the fluctuating number of vessels and other variables.

The British company has now seen its costs from the spill reach $3.12 billion, a figure that doesn’t include a $20 billion fund for damages the company created last month.

The storms have not affected drilling work on a relief well that BP says is the best chance for finally plugging the leak. The company expects drilling to be finished by mid-August.


Associated Press writers Tom Breen and Mary Foster in New Orleans contributed to this report.

Obama Awards $2 Billion for Solar Power, Hails New Jobs. Really?   Leave a comment

What is interesting is that when I saw this article this morning, my insticts went, “Hmmm, doesn’t sound right.” but I failed to act due to other happenings in the AM.  However, upon re-examining this claim, I was able to do a little preliminary googling and found what was bothering me.

The article in question touts Obama’s move to give some of the stimulous money to two Solar Power plants in order to create jobs. I love how mainstream media is trying to scrape together a positive image for him.  It sounds good, doesn’t it?  Oh, Solar Power, new jobs.  Excellent!

Well, take a look.  The article only states that, in total, there will only be about 5,100 jobs created between the two plants.  Most of them are temporary construction jobs, which is good, but they will eventually end, and only one location is promising for any permanent jobs but doesn’t give specifics on what type of jobs. 

Obama awards $2B for solar power, hails new jobs

WASHINGTON – The government is handing out nearly $2 billion for new solar plants that President Barack Obama says will create thousands of jobs and increase the use of renewable energy sources.

Obama announced the initiative in his weekly radio and online address Saturday, saying the money is part of his plan to bring new industries to the U.S.

“We’re going to keep competing aggressively to make sure the jobs and industries of the future are taking root right here in America,” Obama said.

The two companies that will receive the money from the president’s $862 billion economic stimulus are Abengoa Solar, which will build one of the world’s largest solar plants in Arizona, creating 1,600 construction jobs; and Abound Solar Manufacturing, which is building plants in Colorado and Indiana. The Obama administration says those projects will create more than 2,000 construction jobs and 1,500 permanent jobs.

Obama’s announcement came a day after the Labor Department reported that employers slashed payrolls last month for the first time in six months, driven by the expected end of 225,000 temporary census jobs. Meanwhile, private-sector hiring rose by 83,000 workers.

The unemployment rate dropped to 9.5 percent.

Obama said that while it may take years to bring back all the jobs lost during the recession, the economy is moving in a positive direction. He placed some of the blame for the slow pace of recovery on Republicans, saying GOP lawmakers, “are playing the same old Washington games and using their power to hold this relief hostage.”

Obama has said that to bring the nation’s economy back from the brink of a depression, it was necessary to add to the country’s debt in the short term.

Republicans have tried to capitalize on that growing sum. Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss said in the Republican’s weekly address that the country’s $13 trillion debt is a national security issue that will leave the U.S. vulnerable and force future generations to “pay higher taxes to foot the bill for Democrats’ out-of-control spending.”

What irks me about it is that when you think about how many Gulf oil jobs are going to be lost–HAVE been lost–and have the potential for being lost, those numbers are much, much higher.  What is even more interesting is that OBAMA HIMSELF WANTED TO PASS A MORATORIUM ON OIL DRILLING that would have affected at LEAST 20,000 jobs, maybe even MORE, over the next year!!!!!!! OBAMA’S moratorium on Gulf drilling WOULD HAVE BEEN A BIGGER DISASTER THAN THE OIL SPILL ITSELF!  YET, in the ARTICLE, he states that the REASON the jobs aren’t coming back is because of Republicans!!!! 

Really?  Is that it?  Republicans are to blame?  Our beloved annointed president who cares SO much for us tried to ruin the lives of 20,000 people and families with a drilling moratorium in the Gulf—HIS IDEA–and he blames…Republicans?

Nevermind that this is a large sum of money to drop into a technology not very many households are yet able to utilize to the max.

I can’t believe that this was actually front page material!  Well, homepage material.  It sounds like they are trying to cover for a kid who has been failing all year and brings home a C one day and they are so proud that they tell the everyone.  Really?  Wow.  I’m not very impressed, mr prez.