Here we go - BP says possible delays in Top Kill

[JBoy]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37330890/ns/gulf_oil_spill/

GALLIANO, La. - BP will begin a key procedure to stop the flow of a leaking undersea oil well on Wednesday at the earliest, but the timing "could extend on from there," a company executive said Tuesday.

"In terms of when the actual kill might go forward, the earliest would be tomorrow," BP senior vice president Kent Wells told reporters on a conference call, referring to the "top kill" procedure.

------------
I predict later today, they will announce it won't happen on Wednesday.

[phleshdef]

1. The problem is, if it goes wrong, it could just end up causing more leaks.

[Lerkfish]

2. I thought you trusted BP implicitly as the only ones capable of solving it.

are you saying now that their solution might make things worse?

oh, noes! who will trust then?

[phleshdef]

13. I'm not responding to your inane, dishonest trolling.

Other than just to call it what it is.

[Lerkfish]

20. am I being inaccurate or dishonest? really?

did you or did you not start a thread telling us BP was the only entitity qualified to solve this crisis, because of their equipment and expertise?

if you'd like, I can link directly to that thread for you, in case you've forgotten you wrote it.

[phleshdef]

21. You are being dishonest by pretending that my comment regarding top kill contradicts any of that.

I did in fact say that the people with the equipment and training in petroleum engineering are the best people for the job. And I stand by that. Because unlike you, I use the common fucking sense that nature bestowed upon me. My suggestion of what could happen if "top kill" went wrong didn't come from me. Its actually coming from the same petroleum engineers that are going to end up attempting the top kill option. They are the ones that warned what could happen if it goes wrong.

If you are going to attempt to play petty little "gotcha" games by stalking me across threads, make sure that you actually have a relevant argument to play said "gotcha" game with. At this point, I almost feel sorry for you that you would be so desperate to undertake such a stretch and create such a weak, fragile argument.

[Lerkfish]

22. really hitting a nerve by being accurate, i guess

you confirmed that i was not being dishonest at all.

so, in a backwards way, thanks.

[phleshdef]

23. If you weren't being dishonest, then you were just being intellectually deficient.

I gave your sense of intellect the benefit of the doubt. My bad. You aren't a liar, you just aren't very bright.

Saying that "top kill" can go wrong does not equate to saying that the petroleum industry knows the best way to deal with a petroleum accident. You aren't convincing anyone with that. Your attack is completely ineffective. If I wasn't so creeped out by your e-stalking, I'd probably be laughing.

[Lerkfish]

25. FWIW, I don't think my IQ is the issue here

luckily for you.

if you consider it an attack to point out correctly what you've said, and how it appears you're being inconsistent, then I guess most posts by most people here would fall into that category.

But you elucidated your position on top kill, which does delineate a marked departure from your previous stand, in regards to top kill. So thanks for the clarification, which I was unable to discern from your clipped one liner that I responded to.

See, a bit of advice, anytime a group of tyrants try to tell me to STFU, I react in the opposite direction. That's not stalking, that showing you I have no intention of feigning complacency on issues I care about just because you like censorship.

It's just the liberal in me that rejects groupthink.

[phleshdef]

26. LOL. You are just making yourself look worse and worse.

LOL, how fucking stupid. I admire that you have no shame though. Suddenly saying that "if top kill goes wrong, then that would be bad" is "elucidating a position". God damn, I've seen some ridiculous desperation by people to create fake arguments and then declare themselves the fake winner, but you take the cake.

Face it, you've embarassed yourself here. No one would read my one line statement about the nature of "top kill" and come up with some grand revelation that I have contradicted myself on the opinion that petroleum engineers are the best people to handle matters of petroleum engineering. NO ONE. You can't back away from this now. You've all ready done the damage to your credibility. Thats what happens when you take Internet conversations so super personal that it drives you to stalk people around threads trying to look at a way to get back at them because they successfully called you out on your foolishness at some point in the past. You seriously need to reanalyze your bizarre behavior and maybe get some therapy.

[Lerkfish]

27. *smiles*

holds up mirror.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. Let me add some history

as to why this top kill makes me nervous, as well as the Engineers you speak off.

They tried that with the Ixtoc I... it led to more fractures, and more leaks... in the end the only thing that worked (and I fear will work) was a relief well.

Now as you know facts don't matter to many folks round these parts.

Oh and THAT relief well took 9 months.

:hi:

And it would not matter if this was PEMEX, Petrobras, Shell, BP or the left handed widget. They know the risks as you and I well understand.

I hope it works... (they will still need the relief well)... but I am not counting on it.

[GreenTea]

3. BP lies have and will continue to get more frequent and uglier each day for month's to come...

[chowder66]

4. Last night on Rachel Maddow...

Secretary Chu explained that they were in the process of running diagnostics to make sure the oil stacks could withstand the pumping of mud and depending on the conclusions that there could be a delay. He was optimistic that they would be able to move forward though. He also discussed that they used Gamma Rays to x-ray the blow-out preventor caps so they could get a better understanding of what they were up against. This was one of Sec. Chu's ideas so people are involved from the administration.

[Subdivisions]

5. All weekend it was going to be done today. Then, yesterday that was

changed to tomorrow. Did you notice how not a single media outlet made note that the move from Tuesday to Wednesday constituted a delay? It was simply announced without comment.

[AngryOldDem]

6. Anne Thompson on MSNBC indicated that most likely, it won't.

Just how much more bullshit and delay tactics are we to tolerate from BP?

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SammyWinstonJack]

11. Too bad BP didn't 'proceed with prudence and caution' right out of the box.

If they had done so, perhaps they wouldn't need that 'prudence and caution' now.

Seems they were the impatient ones, also greedy bastards.

[KittyWampus]

17. so lack of foresight beforehand makes it appropriate now? That seems to be your position-

Which is foolish.

[TransitJohn]

18. +1

:hi:

[liberal N proud]

8. I think someone is afraid to make a decision. ANY decision

They need to pull their heads out and JUST DO SOMETHING!

[JBoy]

10. I think the Wednesday date really was the "earliest possible"

and that there were likely a laundry list of issues that would push it past that. Not surprising, they've hit one or more of those.

[PJPhreak]

9. This should help in understanding whats going on with the "Top Kill"

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6505

Snip:

The next attempt to shut off the flow from the leaking BP well in the Gulf is still aimed to occur early Wednesday. The attempt will use the “top kill” method to try and kill the well. While I have described this in earlier posts, the Unified Command have put out a video animation of the process, and there was an earlier diagram. So I am going to use these, which are simplified explanations, with some additional comments and tie it in to more facts that came out of briefings today, to try and give a more detailed explanation.


Great website,anything one wants to know about this Fucking Mess...Without the "Politics"

[DURHAM D]

12. Sadly I noticed earlier today that some started posting political comments there.

I thought - good god, I'm back on DU with with the Holiday Inn Express crowd.

I hope a moderator removed the "spill" over there.

It is an excellent website.

[PJPhreak]

16. I just ignore the Politcios and go for the facts...

posts in the comments section under the articles,as the Webheads say is FTW.

VERY INFORMATIVE!!!

[greencharlie]

14. yeah, what's the hurry? We'll go at OUR speed... no one tells BP what to do ;)

besides... what's the difference between 12 million barrels in the gulf and 12.2 million barrels?

:sarcasm:

[meow mix]

15. translation: "this isnt going to work either"

they are already planning on the next "fix" with a new hat

[Lone_Star_Dem]

19. It depends on the pressure tests they're conducting beginning today

It would be worse to proceed before they know if their design will withstand the pressure and increase the risk of failure. As it is with everything being optimal it's still a 60-70% risk of failure.