BIODIESEL & SVO DISCUSSION FORUMS





Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Biodiesel  Hop To Forums  Biodiesel Politics    Enough Oil to BURN

Moderators: Shaun, The Trouts
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Enough Oil to BURN
 Login/Join
 
Member
posted
BP has now decided to start incinerating 210,000 to 420,000 gallons of oil a day.

Plagued by capacity issues, BP has now decided to just start burning the oil it at the source.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...&pos=1&asset=&ccode=

Hmmm,
Shouldn't a company determine that they can handle the capacity of a well and before digging the well?

I suppose it is better to incinerate the oil than continuing to dump it into the sea. But, every day they are planning on burning more oil than most people burn in a lifetime.

Ok,
So if the average Prius has an 11.9 gallon tank, gets about 50 MPG, and is 175.6" long...

Then.
In one day BP is incinerating enough fuel to drive a Prius about 420,000 x 50 mpg, or about 21,000,000 miles (21 million miles).

Or...
If you filled up the tanks, then lined them up, you could get a line of Priuses....
((420,000 gallons / 11.9 gallons per tank) * 175.6 inches long)/(63,360 in/mile)

And you get 35,294 Priuses that line up to make a line about 98 miles long!!!!!

(of course assuming a 1:1 crude to gasoline ratio which does simplify things a bit).
 
Location: Oregon | Registered: October 17, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Well at the time of the blowout they claim they were capping it for future production.
 
Location: Colorado | Registered: March 20, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Put another way, they are torching in a day about the amount that Niue consumes in a year.

On a daily basis, they are planning on burning more oil than Barbados, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Rwanda, Niger, Belize, Afghanistan, or Wake Island use.

Or, also looking at daily consumption... they are torching the same amount as the total combined amount that: Niue, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos Islands, Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas), Kiribati, Cook Islands, Montserrat, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, Sao Tome and Principe, Equatorial Guinea, Vanuatu, Comoros, British Virgin Islands, Dominica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, AND Nauru use.

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/cfapp...m?tid=5&pid=54&aid=2

I suppose in a sense the amount of oil being torched is only a drop in the bucket of US consumption. And it is much much better than continuing to dump it into the sea. But, it is just changing one type of pollution for another.
quote:
Originally posted by UFO:
Well at the time of the blowout they claim they were capping it for future production.

If one wants the oil in the future... then leave it in the ground until one actually needs it in the future... and has the technology to deal with it.

BP has had 2 months since this "crisis" began to get the processing equipment and platforms in place. Yet, they didn't even start moving a production platform into place until the beginning of this month, and it will be weeks before it arrives. Aren't there any available production platforms closer? Owned/Operated by anybody?

Perhaps they should just lease the Exxon Valdez to move the oil to Louisiana. It won't be much different even if it does leak some of the oil out!!!! And, I've heard that Captain Joseph Hazelwood is looking for work!!!!
 
Location: Oregon | Registered: October 17, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
member

posted Hide Post
Yeah, this is really B$. Not only are they devastating enviromentally delicate areas, they will compound that by burning the crap and pumping tons of carbon and other pollutants into the atmosphere, all the while wasting a natural resource in short supply, namely the oil they first set out to pump. We are in a world of hurt if we continue to trust these fat cat oil execs. Here we are trying to save some bucks by squeezing what we can out of grease while these idiots send the petroleum up in flames.


"mixing up a bunch of magic stuff"

Al

2005 Jeep Liberty CRD - B25 - 100
2005 Ford F250 6.0 - B25 - 100
Kubota BX 2300 - B25 - 100
Kubota BX 1860 - B25 - 100
5KW Generator Set - B25
Lopi Republic 1250 - Glycerol/Sawdust Logs
Bath and Laundry - Glycerine Soaps
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA | Registered: June 12, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
BP has really proven how short-sighted they are. They were running behind schedule with this well so they decided to take short cuts to save time. Bunch of Idiots, they're way behind schedule now!!
 
Location: western new york | Registered: November 19, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
member
2013 Sponsor
posted Hide Post
I live practically on the Gulf Coast. My Family shops in Mobile and Pensacola regularly. This nightmare directly effects me and my family. Just as an example, Every restaurant down here sells seafood. That is until now. The only seafood available is flown in from the East and West Coasts. When it is available, it is prohibitively expensive.

We are angry with BP for letting the spill happen, we are angry with BP for hiding the true scope of this disater. We are angry with the Beuracrats caught up in the Washington Culture of Corruption that sold their approval stamp to BP, while they refused to enforce existing laws. We are angry with Obama two months of lip service without any real action. We are angry with the President for shutting down offshore oil drilling; laying off an entire industry during an economic disaster. The anger down here is real and boiling and I just scratched the surface with these examples.

The Presidents speach was about a month and a half late. Like everyone else down here, we are doing what we can to clean up the oil. The big question on everyone's mind is: Was the Presidents speach just talk or will there be action. The burning is a small step in the right direction. The EPA has prohibitied burning for over a month. It's just one tactic (worth 10,000 bbls a day) among many that have been resisted by the government. This one might just keep some of the oil out of sensitive ecological environments.

This whole mess is likely to destroy the way of life of a thousand miles of coastline. For those of you on the West Coast. Imagine an oil spill that killed all the wetlands from San Francisco to San Deigo. If burning can save the oyster beds and the shrimp beds and the coral reefs, then burn baby burn. Is it sad to see all that energy wasted, you betcha, but it's worse watching the death of a hundred thousand jobs and a way of life going back 300 years.

Rick
 
Location: Cowboy Country | Registered: December 06, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RickDaTech:
I live practically on the Gulf Coast. My Family shops in Mobile and Pensacola regularly. This nightmare directly effects me and my family. Just as an example, Every restaurant down here sells seafood. That is until now. The only seafood available is flown in from the East and West Coasts. When it is available, it is prohibitively expensive.
Don't forget the "Rocky Mountain Oysters". Perhaps one could get the BP execs to donate some!!!!

I agree that incinerating the oil is better than dumping it in the water.

But it seems to be such a waste.
 
Location: Oregon | Registered: October 17, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
<DCS>
posted
quote:
Originally posted by RickDaTech: The burning is a small step in the right direction. This one might just keep some of the oil out of sensitive ecological environments.

This whole mess is likely to destroy the way of life of a thousand miles of coastline. For those of you on the West Coast. Imagine an oil spill that killed all the wetlands from San Francisco to San Deigo. If burning can save the oyster beds and the shrimp beds and the coral reefs, then burn baby burn. Is it sad to see all that energy wasted, you betcha, but it's worse watching the death of a hundred thousand jobs and a way of life going back 300 years.

Rick


I wonder what the thick palls of toxic black smoke from burning the oil are going to damage wherever the fallout of that lands and what it kills on the way?
Maybe they are hoping it will end up contaminating some small country that isn't significant enough to get much media attention or have the clout to do anything about it.
Seems to me the smartest idea would be to limit the area of the damage rather than spread it round and ruin any more environments, livelihoods or ways of life.

You can bet that all the decisions relating to controlling and rectifying the situation will be cost based rather than actually focused on the best of speediest solution beyond all else.
 
Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
John,

Excellent short about BP.

DCS...

I've wondered about how clean burning the oil will be in bulk. Certainly there won't be any sulfur scrubbing if that would be an issue.

Most of the oil seems to be spreading along the US Coast. I've missed comments from Cuba and other "Gulf Countries"... A few seem to be showing up on the internet. I imagine the debates will spread. And the question seems to be whether this will give a unique opportunity for the two countries to forge a partnership, or whether it will degrade into a blame game.

This photo was labeled by CBS as a "controlled burn".



I am hoping the BP has actually developed a burner that will torch the oil HOT, rather than burning it on the surface of the water where it will naturally be cold.
 
Location: Oregon | Registered: October 17, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Ya get what ya pay for...
http://online.wsj.com/article/...SecondNewsCollection
The Wall Street Journal reported late on Friday that BP's well used a cheaper technology than the industry standard and was less secure against natural gas blowouts of the type that destroyed it. The newspaper's analysis found that BP used the cheaper technology much more frequently than rivals.



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Ya get what ya pay for...
http://online.wsj.com
The Wall Street Journal reported late on Friday that BP's well used a cheaper technology than the industry standard and was less secure against natural gas blowouts of the type that destroyed it. The newspaper's analysis found that BP used the cheaper technology much more frequently than rivals.



 
Location: coldest N.America | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post



  Powered by Social Strata  
 

Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Biodiesel  Hop To Forums  Biodiesel Politics    Enough Oil to BURN

© Maui Green Energy 2000 - 2014