2010 v 1979... Nothing Changes in the Oil Industry

[RugbyD]

Also, anyone notice they couldn't control this in 200 feet of water!?!

Controlling leaks in 300 feet of water today is just like another day at the office. Shell indicated as much today. The topkill solution appears so far to be working better in 5000 ft than it did in 200 ft. I'll hazard a guess and say that time, technology, and experience have combined to make that possible assuming that it ends up working.

The problem here more than anything else is that this is in such deep water. 30 years ago it was unthinkable to drill an offshore well that deep, so plenty has changed within the oil industry in terms of conducting various operations at that depth. Creativity in terms of finding solutions to a blowout doesn't seem to have progressed much, but I don't know if there is really much of a range of possibilities either given the restrictions imposed by the properties and fluid dynamics of the oil and surrounding water.

One thing conspicuously left out of the clip was what the environmental impact of the 1979 leak was. Given the volume and length of time of the leak, it was a massive amount of oil dumped out into the ecosystem. I never heard of the 1979 event until today, so the environmental impact likely wasn't that big of a deal and makes the hysterics surrounding talk of the environmental impact of the current spill to be premature if not unwarranted. I could be mistaken though.

[StlSluggers]

I agree, Rugby. I was left wondering how bad things were impacted in 1979 after watching that (they said 30,000 barrels per day! ).

Also, I found out that they have created directional drilling since then, so one thing has changed: They can get to oil faster now than ever before. Good on them!

[urbanbreez]

There is something about fire burning on top of ocean water that makes me want to pray to little baby Jesus. Like the Horsemen of the Apocalypse are on the way.

Speaking of horses, does Rachel Maddow have multi-position eligibility?

[TheRock]

Speaking of horses, does Rachel Maddow have multi-position eligibility?

She is only eligible at androgynous. No, it doesn't matter that evidence you can provide that she is a horse-face. Horseface of the month doesn't matter, she is known for being androgynous, that's all you can use her for.

[StlSluggers]

Speaking of horses, does Rachel Maddow have multi-position eligibility?

i haven't laughed this hard in a long, long time.