Dr. Michael Pravica is a physics professor at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas and he has been appealing to elected officials and BP to hear his idea for what may be the best temporary solution to stop the gushing oil.
His expertise is in high-pressure physics, which is what he got his Harvard Ph.D in. He studies hydrocarbons -- constituents of oil -- under extreme conditions. So far, only the local NBC affiliate has taken an interest and tried to get the word to BP.
From the very beginning of the crisis, Dr. Pravica suspected what BP last week finally admitted -- that there is damage beneath the sea floor.
In a letter to interested parties, Dr. Pravica wrote:
From my point of view, we are not even close to solving this problem because BP doesn't understand the basic physics of what's going on in the world of very high pressures and/or still wants to save their wellhead. It's very difficult when you know exactly where BP is going wrong but feel powerless to stop it.
In the first of two youtube videos, the UNLV professor demonstrates the unsuccessful methods that BP has tried so far, and shows why they don't work. He also expresses his concerns that so far BP has been looking for a fix that preserves the blowout preventer and so all the solutions have prioritized that goal rather than the goal of stopping the flow as quickly as possible. He explains that the oil pressure is 17,000 pounds per square inch and says, "I don't know of any traditional valves that can seal 17,000 psi." At this point, he explains, the situation calls for a brute-force solution, which he demonstrates in the second video.
BP has all the more reason to try this approach, given that the blowout preventer (BOP) was most likely damaged and its valves mechanically compromised during the explosion when the whole platform fell into the Gulf and the pipes cracked just above the BOP. In other words, there's no guarantee that the device is still any good anyway. Additionally, he says, "we're dealing with higher pressures than would normally be used in these kinds of fittings, because we've had a catastrophic failure of all the protection apparatus."
His solution? Deform the pipe. The easiest way is through brute force such as taking a series of concrete slabs that would crush the BOP, sealing the leak imperfectly. "You will deform all the material around this hole in the earth and you will form a seal," he explains.
Because the BOP is four storeys tall and so there may be doubts about the possibility of crushing it (though explosives could take care of that), another possibility -- one that would even maintain the integrity of the BOP, is this: Drop a slab of concrete equipped with a concrete stopper -- perhaps laden with copper or lead around it -- on the pipe above the BOP. This "goes in and seals and deforms, squishing all the material. Then you put flat concrete slabs until you seal it. It wouldn't be a perfect seal, but it would severely slow this down until a better solution can be found.
"You would be classically deforming this hole in the ground by crushing it -- either crushing the BOP or blowing it out of the way or dropping slabs onto it until we can find a permanent solution."
In his desperate attempt to bring attention to his idea, Dr. Pravica has made a youtube appeal stating:
I am asking that our political leaders set up a clearing house for ideas and information to be exchanged freely between scholars who might be interested in this problem. I am worried that BP has not been forthright and honest in all of the discussions and data that is released about the Gulf oil incident, and I feel it's imperative at the moment that we share data so that we can jointly try to find solutions, because I think now this crisis is so disastrous that it's beyond the scope of BP's abilities to solve it. I ask my fellow Americans to encourage our elected officials to begin to take over this project and stop this disaster in the Gulf because life is truly hanging in the balance.
In a related letter to the Las Vegas Sun responding to a reprinted New York Times article, Dr. Pravic wrote:
...I do not understand why BP has been adding the dispersing chemicals to the Gulf of Mexico, which may actually make matters worse.
The essence here is that if we allow the lighter oil to rise to the surface, it is easier to collect/separate and/or burn away than when dispersed in the sea. Adding dispersants/detergents alters the biochemical balance in the Gulf by contaminating it with more chemicals (that may harm life) on top of the toxic oil and, worse yet, may starve the Gulf waters of oxygen as certain bacteria can apparently metabolize/degrade the oil but need oxygen to do so.Can the bacteria do this successfully at all depths, as not all life can function properly, let alone exist, at 160 atmospheres of pressure and near freezing temperatures on the floor? Adding dispersants to surround oil droplets may also frustrate the ability of the oil to rise to the surface, making it very difficult to remove.
It seems to me the primary reason for using the dispersant is to reduce the visible and dramatic effect of this public relations nightmare for BP and not to truly clean this mess.
Is anyone listening?
Follow Julia Gorin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AntiTwit
BP CEO Tony Hayward calls Gulf of Mexico oil spill a 'complex accident' in ...
BP commits $20 billion to cover oil spill claims
US oil spill in Gulf 'making dolphins act drunk'
BP hit by new blow to credit rating over oil spill
Australian Minister to Act 'Promptly' After Oil Spill Report
Political Wisdom: How Much Did Joe Barton Change Oil-Spill Politics?
You made an excellent point which I wholeheartedly agree with. Rome is burning but that's OK as long as we have our mindless entertainment. We need a government run clearinghouse because we're not getting the full story from BP - that's what my instincts are telling me.
All the best.
Michael
All that crude and corexit will become everyone's problem when the hurricanes dump all that crap on everyone's head, landscape, and in fresh waters. "The tish hits the fan" doesn't begin to describe how bad this really is.
BTW: The concrete slabs will come in handy to help fuse that hole shot with a nuke. The Navy is in the Gulf now; they can do it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP8iN4ZX1JU&feature=channel
What I do agree with is that we shouldn't let BP in charge of this one day more.
A definite possibility. The DOE official I spoke with was hesitant about this option. If they are worried about opening up channels for the oil flow, this might have a high probability of doing so especially if the region near the unfinished bore ends up being significantly eroded.
I hadn't read that the well diverts horizontally into the seabed though I know that they have the capability and will be doing this for the relief well. If this is the case and it is leaking in more than one place along the seabed, this is even more serious as there will be new channels formed elsewhere. Are you saying that the pipe is leaking along the horizontal? My understanding is that the hole is drilled 35,000 feet deep into the lithosphere. Hydrostatic pressure is chiefly dependent on the vertical depth. If you plastically deform the material surrounding the hole, you will seal the leak. I do it almost every day with a diamond anvil cell. Nevertheless, this is exactly why BP must be forced to give more information on this problem so scholars can help solve it.
It is do-able ( in time) , the materials are nearby and it is a prevention concept. Should be SOP for future drilling.
Thanks for the great comments and thanks to Julia for attempting to publicize this issue. There are a few points that Americans should be aware of on the Gulf crisis:
1. The force coming from the hole above the BOP is estimated at 10,000,000 pounds-it would literally amputate your hand if you placed it there.
2. The rushing oil has sediment and minerals in it. As water does in the Grand Canyon, the rushing oil will remove the softer basalt from the region of the wellbore making the hole beneath the concrete casing bigger and bigger with time making it much more difficult to plug. We need to slow or stop the flow of oil. My suggested method does just that.
4. As the pressure near the oil reservoir is near 2.5 thousand atmospheres, near the yield strength of concrete, we risk losing the concrete bore as well but the basalt will likely NOT fracture as the crushing pressure is at or near the yield strength. It's probably quasi-hydrostatic which means that it will seal. The key problem in my opinion is EROSION of the hole because of the massive flow of oil.
Finally, why are we doing a research project/experiment on our only home? This never should have been allowed to happen. The pressures we're dealing with here are far above pressures that humans are accustomed to dealing with.
I'm less convinced of the merit of your proposal to drop a huge concrete block on it. I readily concede your superior expertise in high-pressure regimes -- I have only a B.S. in physics -- but I am troubled by the fact that we don't seem to have an accurate picture of the physical situation at the borehead or down in the bore. This makes me have about the same reaction I have to the idea of a small nuke: "What could possibly go wrong?"
You make a good point about erosion widening the bore and making it more difficult to plug. BTW, do you have an estimate of the rate of bore widening? Sorry, just curiosity.
What concerns me is the possibility that the concrete block won't seat properly, or won't deform the pipe sufficiently, or that there are already subsurface breaches in the bore casing such that oil is emerging outside the bore. Or, you know, that it will break in half. If the result were a 50% reduction in flow, but the flow were now so dispersed that it could not be collected, would this be a net good thing? This is my naive concern.
You are absolutely correct that because BP has not been forthright in supplying the public (and probably the US Government) with information on this crisis, we are all largely guessing at its' seriousness. That's why I'm appealing to the US government (which is supposed to act in the public's interest) to establish a two-way information clearinghouse - not a black hole where ideas are submitted but no information is given out.
That said, I can guarantee you that with sufficient numbers of concrete slabs, you WILL deform/crush the region surrounding the hole beyond the yield strength of the seabed to deform it and ultimately seal the leak. You can also add a thick layer of soft but dense metal such as lead to the bottom of the first slab to aid in sealing. I have no idea at the moment of the erosion (there will definitely be some) of the unfinished hole 25,000 below the seafloor but at that depth, the pressure is something like 2.2 thousand atmospheres and for the incredible rate of oil flow, I'm very concerned that the erosion will be significant. When looking at the video of the gushing oil, I notice a lighter plume next to the darker plume. I assume that this is methane gas or perhaps some lighter oil constituent but I wonder if there might be some sloughed-off pieces of basalt coming with it.
the well is leaking around the bore pipe.
Only a tent over the entire site with suction to a tanker, will work.
See: Life Threatening Danger at http://www.aesopinstitute.org updated today.
Also, What to Do! on the same website.
Since oil is apparently escaping from cracks in the seabed, Chris Landau, a geologist, believes they may need to drill 8 or more new, vertical wells, in a circle around the gusher, on the assumption that far more oil will be produced than can otherwise be controlled.
He states the oil might continue to be produced in huge quantities.
He believes several new wells can allow recovery of the oil, which may need to continue for a very, very, long time.
You may want to also read Moving Beyond Oil and Running on Water on that Aesop site.
With adequate support, a 24/7 development program could move breakthrough technologies into production.
This may prove to be an emergency equivalent to all out war!
These new technologies are much less complicated than weapons systems.
The science is hard to believe, as it disagrees with conventional wisdom. But, independent and National laboratories are increasingly involved. Once prototypes for schools are in production, it will become obvious that gasoline, oil, coal, natural gas and nuclear power will face low cost competition that can leave all of them behind.
Recognize this emergency! We have a difficult, but possible, job to do!
So, let's begin to really do it! An important step is to learn more about what to do!
Ah! with the hydrino delusion.
The report (TechnicalPresentation021710.pdf) on http://www.american-reporter.com/ is just a lot of rehashed publicity showing spectra results easily explained by crystal field theory. When science is not on your side (you can do a lot of fancy math and hand-jiving but Mother Nature has the last say), appeal to authority and bring out the celebrities: "The company has assembled a formidable board of directors that include a former head of Westinghouse, a top federal nuclear energy official, ..." The American Reporter is another left-wingnut rag. Show us something from, say, National Science Foundation or the American Physical Society.
Garret Moddel from colorado.edu have debunked all this ZPE wet dreams in his paper "Assessment of proposed electromagnetic quantum vacuum energy extraction methods" (xxx.lanl.gov). Unfortunately for himself, who has aUS patent “Quantum vacuum energy extraction,” Patent 7379286, he did not understand the physics of EM surface waves on Casimir tubes; thus his scheme is worthless. After exchanging a couple of emails, Moddel admitted to me that his patent was a mistake. Sensible people becoming silly.
As I said before, I emailed Rowan. The faculty at Rowan were tight-mouthed and referred me to Black Light Power for any discussion. They are backing away from BLP claims that they confirmed hydrinos.
Sell your contraption at QVC or Home Shopping Network. They have a lot more credibility than you and I know they will take no nonsense from you.
There is the Hydrino Study Group, an assembly of useful morons (to Mills, Roarty, and Goldes). From their website:
question (by dcampen)
It is unfortunate that Mills does not have this 2002 paper available on the BLP website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-2860(02)00355-1
By putting 30 watts into a simple mixture of helium-hydrogen Mills was getting 300 watt output and a power density of 30 MW/cubic meter. Has he ever explained why he can't make a power generator from this? What is his need for these new exotic fuels when a simple mixture of helium and hydrogen would give such high power densities?
response (by VelvetPoster): Helium is a very expensive and very finite resource.
VelvetPoster's response is incorrect since first, helium can be recirculated around and helium is cheap enough tobe available at mom and pop stores. Mills and company have be switching to sodium, potassium, helium, nickel, etc..
No success.
They are ONLY being used to disperse the oil from the TOP of the water to make the spill look smaller from the surface and therefore a PR ploy ... See Morefor BP. DISGRACEFUL.
http://washingtonindependent.com/85311/epa-bp-has-24-hours-to-start-using-less-toxic-chemical-dispersant
www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html - LET'S OVERHAUL THE %^&* EPA!!!
But he is right about the dispersants - they're being used to hide the oil, not mitigate its impact.
www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants.html - LET'S OVERHAUL THE %^&* EPA!!!
http://firedoglake.com/2010/06/18/breaking-bp-video-oil-leaking-through-cracks-in-floor-of-gulf/
Also: Nuclear device only way, according to UBER expert Matt Simmons--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MARDF8F4P4&NR=1
I hope you have some inside information. But what Matthew Simmons is saying after hearing what the Thomas Jefferson research ship found last week is disturbing, to say the least. It took nine months for the Ixtoc 1 gusher to stop, and they were successful early on with one of the relief wells they drilled; it just didn't work to stop the flow. And they were in about 160 feet of water, so they could send divers down to work on the sea floor.
Simmons said on Tuesday that there's a lake of thick oil the size of 40% of the Gulf itself; that's what he said the Thomas Jefferson found. Add in the methane problem, the continued use of a toxic, banned-in-Europe dispersant Corexit, and I say we've effectively killed off the Gulf.
Today the Gulf, tomorrow the world?
I wish I shared your confidence.
.
Some are speculating the piping inside has already been breached....
If you stop it from the top... the oil just might gush from the sides and that would be even more Catastrophic and more difficult stop
We (the general public) don't have the specifics of the geology of the ocean floor at the point of the well head. What he proposes could just push the whole mess down into the mud and make things worse.
I have my own suggestion. If they can successfully cut off the pipe, (which they did) they should be able to cut or grind the nuts off of the flanged connection. Once that has been done, they now have something they can work with (a flat surface) to tie onto. Either a new pipeline, or a flanged valve that can be mechanically clamped onto the old flange. Close the valve, problem solved. Assuming the pipeline below the BOP is structurally adequate to handle the pressures. I now question if this isn't the real underlying problem.
The information I have seen is deep water wells generally having 5000 psi oil pressure. The professor is talking 17,000 psi a whole new ball game. We (again the general public) have no idea what pressures B.P's engineers designed their system for. If it was designed to handle 5000 and now has to deal with 17,00 PSI, we may be looking at more than a (BOP) "valve" problem. It could be structurally inadequate designed "system".
Might even work IF...
The explosion caused NO damage to the structure below the BOP.
If there is damage below the BOP then the 17,000 psi of oil goes there instead.
That would be very bad, very very bad.
They almost certainly know more than they are telling us.
This might very well explain lack of interest on capping solutions and a focus on sucking out what they can from the continuing gusher, as has been suggested elsewhere.
So much of the rhetoric surrounding this event seems to be of the CYA variety.
BP probably wishes the government does take over managing the mess so when things get worse (as they are almost certain to at this stage) BP can blame somebody else for their cockup.
I can just hear it now... " If we had been left in charge, our experts tell us..."
BP's bottom line should be where they sign over ALL their corporate assets to the USA.
Let the future textbooks sort it out.
THAT's CAPITALISM!
We're thinking along the same lines........
Fanning #5
What happens to those 17,000 psi if the pipe is 'deformed' ?
That pressure will be redirected. If the sea floor is in fact cracked, as some
evidence seems to indicate, managing to 'shut off' the flow at the well head
might be the worst possible thing to do.