3 ms·

An ex BP oil engineer (who I know) used the following words when I asked him about it: dear god no, it would be horrific His opinion is that the geology in th

by ErrantX 16y ago

An ex BP oil engineer (who I know) used the following words when I asked him about it: dear god no, it would be horrific His opinion is that the geology in the region would not take a massive explosion well and the most likely result (he admits it could plug/slow the well) would be a large number of cracks/channels deep underground that would seep up through the sea floor and be pretty much unstoppable.

sebastianavina 16y ago
also, I understand there are a lot more oil rigs near the disaster site... So I guess a nuke would mean a halt in oil production, and maybe a worst problem...
bradleyland 16y ago
The problem with questions like this is that you need knowledge from a variety of areas in order to offer a well informed answer. I mean, how much can a BP oil engineer know about exploding a nuclear bomb underground? I'd imagine that there are only a handful of scientists around the globe who have worked directly with exploding nuclear devices, and even fewer who have studied the effects such explosions on underwater geology. There are entire fields of study dedicated to the effects of explosions on geology, but they deal with relatively small explosions, and the results simply don't scale to things like 30 kiloton nuclear detonations. For me, this is what makes the answer a "no". We simply do not know what the results will be. There aren't enough trustworthy experts. As much as relations have improved with Russia, I don't think we can trust their advice in this situation. From a policy perspective, they have a history of putting results before safety.
- ErrantX 16y ago
  I am told that there has been occasions when explosions are used to either break or cap wells - not this deep (as you say). But the point is that there is experience in such an activity; and those people seem to be pretty much saying the same as yourself (we don't have the experience)

by ErrantX 16y ago

sebastianavina 16y ago

also, I understand there are a lot more oil rigs near the disaster site... So I guess a nuke would mean a halt in oil production, and maybe a worst problem...

bradleyland 16y ago

The problem with questions like this is that you need knowledge from a variety of areas in order to offer a well informed answer. I mean, how much can a BP oil engineer know about exploding a nuclear bomb underground? I'd imagine that there are only a handful of scientists around the globe who have worked directly with exploding nuclear devices, and even fewer who have studied the effects such explosions on underwater geology. There are entire fields of study dedicated to the effects of explosions on geology, but they deal with relatively small explosions, and the results simply don't scale to things like 30 kiloton nuclear detonations. For me, this is what makes the answer a "no". We simply do not know what the results will be. There aren't enough trustworthy experts. As much as relations have improved with Russia, I don't think we can trust their advice in this situation. From a policy perspective, they have a history of putting results before safety.

ErrantX 16y ago
I am told that there has been occasions when explosions are used to either break or cap wells - not this deep (as you say). But the point is that there is experience in such an activity; and those people seem to be pretty much saying the same as yourself (we don't have the experience)