June 18, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

This is a must-read:

A suggestion for meeting the UK Government’s renewable energy target because the adopted use of windfarms cannot meet it,

By Richard S. Courtney, Thursday 26th October 2006

Source: The 2006 Annual Prestigious Lecture to
The North of England Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineers
and
The Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (North East)

On 2010 06 18, Richard S. Courtney posted an excellent and easy-to-understand illustration of the uselessness of windfarms to the blog of Anthony Watts, the most popular science blog in the world.  In that posting, Richard Courtney compares the reasons for constructing windfarms to the reasons for construction the Wall of China: Useless, impractical and extremely costly for meeting the ostensible purposes but very, very effective as widely-visible propaganda efforts.

Posted in Alternative Energy Sources | Print | No Comments »

June 18, 2010 by Walter Schneider.

The other day, some one sent some information to me about a vastly greater catastrophe that is surely bound to happen in consequence of the Gulf Blowout.  Here is another option that will most likely not be used either, although it would be the cheapest of all.  It won’t be used because it is not politically correct.

The Nuclear Option against British Sabotage in Our Gulf
by Laurence Hecht
Editor, 21st Century Science & Technology

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2010/BP_nuclear-option.pdf

The option that will be used, successfully, is most likely the one that was used to plug Atlantic #3, which blew March 8, 1948, near Edmonton, I don’t know exactly where it was and assume that it was in the Leduc Area, SW of Edmonton (that is where the Nisku formation is located into which it had drilled).  That well blew and spilled about as much oil per day as the well at the bottom of the Texas Gulf does right now.  It blew that oil for a lot longer than the Texas Gulf well has been blowing it until now.  It blew for the same reason the Gulf well blew.  Someone decided to dispense with using drilling mud.  It seems that BP learned nothing from Atlantic #3, and it should be severely punished for that.

The June 14, 2010 edition of the Edmonton Journal had an article on Atlantic #3.

Read the article at that link.  You will find that there is little but one difference between the two blowouts.  The pressures involved are about the same, and so are the daily volumes of oil spilled.  Other than that, Atlantic #3 was on top of solid ground, and the Texas Gulf well is at the bottom of the ocean.  Here are some quotes from the article.

Atlantic No. 3 blew wild for six months, spewing 10,000 to 15,000 barrels per day of crude, which made it the biggest blowout in Alberta history. When it later caught fire [in September of 1948] and burned for two months in a spectacular inferno, it made movie theatre newsreels around the world….

Oilpatch historian David Finch says the Atlantic No. 3 disaster created a massive oil spill that was five times the size of the Exxon Valdez spill off the coast of Alaska in 1989.
Fortunately, most of the 1.2 million barrels of oil pouring out of Atlantic No. 3 was corralled by dikes and pumped through a pipeline to Leduc where it was being shipped to refineries in rail cars. But some escaped into the nearby North Saskatchewan River and temporarily contaminated Edmonton’s drinking water supply.

Oilpatch historians have suggested drilling “dry” — without drilling mud — was a flawed technique that led to the disaster. When the rig drilled into the Nisku formation, the uncountered pressure caused the well to blow, and months of effort by wild well fighters failed to stop it. They tried using everything, including tons of sawdust and even chicken feathers to plug the hole, but it blew wild until a relief well was drilled and the formation was flooded with river water…..

Read more: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Alberta+blowout+disaster/3150830/story.html#ixzz0rD8DxpTv

Notice that nothing stopped the fire resulting when the blowout eventually caught on fire until river water was pumped through a relief well into the oil-bearing formation.  Do you recall an oil volcano blowing its top at that time?  No, that did not happen then and won’t happen now.

Nevertheless, stories about “unprecedented” spills, sea floors erupting into oil volcanoes and catastrophic tsunamis resulting from that do get a lot more attention.  To attract attention it is not necessary to tell the truth or what is most likely to happen.  All it takes is to engage in wild, unsubstantiated speculation about extreme possibilities, however unlikely catastrophes.

Posted in Fines & Penalties, Explosions & Fires, Emission Incidents & Issues | Print | No Comments »