BP's Deepwater Oil Spill - Continuing to Wait; Wave Glider - and Open Thread

This thread is being closed. Please comment on http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6911.

Additional work near the Deepwater Horizon well site continues to be delayed by high waves. Once the current weather pattern clears, work can commence again.

We understand that today, Wednesday, BP is expect to submit a new report evaluating lessons learned in its response to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico to U.S. regulator the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement. According to BP, "This report focuses in particular upon the key equipment, facilities and planning tools that were successfully deployed in responding to the spill." There will be another report released by BP later this month, which will examine the causes of the explosion.

Some new devices that we have not commented on are the new Wave Gliders that will monitor water quality. BP is deploying these in the Gulf of Mexico, near the Macondo well site. According to an August 25th press release:

As part of its long term monitoring and research program in the Gulf of Mexico, BP is deploying a new technology that will enable nearly constant monitoring by two satellite-controlled, unmanned vehicles.

The vehicles, known as Wave Gliders and developed by Liquid Robotics in Silicon Valley, California, get their propulsion power from wave action and use solar power for their electronics. They will be deployed beginning today and begin a months-long, ongoing research program in the Gulf of Mexico.

According to the press release, the types of monitoring performed will include

  • water quality – detection of any emulsified, dissolved and dispersed oil in water; phytoplankton (chlorophyll); colored, dissolved oxygen matter (CDOM) and other scientifically useful variables
  • marine mammal vocalizations
  • weather and water temperature data

The first step in using the devices will be calibrating the optical sensors, according to Roger Hine, president and CEO of Liquid Robotics. "We look forward to working with BP on this extended research program."

There is also a Wave Glider Fact Sheet available. It indicates

Typically robotic systems have been challenged by limited battery power. The Wave Glider innovatively overcomes this challenge. It uses no fuel, has no motor, and no propeller - but it can swim in any direction at speeds up to two knots - for as long as necessary. It uses a unique, patented, system for converting even the tiniest amount of wave motion into thrust, in any direction. It uses solar panels to power electronics, and houses a sophisticated set of sensors, satellite communications, and microprocessors.

According to the fact sheet, the technology was invented, originally, to listen to humpback whale song. The Wave Glider fleet has been at sea for a combined total of 11.5 years and has covered over 100,000 miles.

Update from the IRC #theoildrum chat

Not much happened on the seafloor in the last 24 hours. The capping stack and the BOP are still standing.

The hydrate bubbles coming out of the top of the capping stack were somewhat reduced with much less "burps" observed than during the previous period.

A "Methanol Skid" was lifted from the seafloor and has now be hanging at a depth of 300 feet for several hours. The waves on the surface may currently be too height to lift it safely.

There was no significant ship movement observed around the well. Average wave height at the BP Thunderhorse platform some 25 miles south of Macondo is currently about 5.2 feet.

Adm. Thad Allen will hold another press briefing at 10:30 a.m. CDT.

From the image galleries of the Serpent Project (Scientific and Environmental ROV Partnership using Existing iNdustrial Technology) - a tripod fish standing on the seafloor of the GoM and waiting for prey.

Repeat from the last thread:-

MOON. Interesting picture you posted, of the lifting tool. It appears to be fitted with alignment horns, but I am unsure what sockets they are going to align with? I assume that on the bottom of this gizmo, it has a standard H4 hydraulic connector. So put me right if you think otherwise.

We have a hydraulic unlatch-able H4 on the bottom of the DWH BOP. We have an H4 between the BOP and the LMRP. We have an H4 on top of the new spool piece that is bolted to the LMRP riser flange. We have H4 on top of the capping stack, which will connect with the new lifting tool.

I think I read up thread, that the Cap stack will come off first. The spool piece; LMRP and the BOP will then come off the well head in one string. What say you?

You are right with H4 connectors and the sequence.

The "alignment horns" are in this case more maneuvering handles. There is nothing for them to align with.

Thanks so much for the tripod fish (my favorite critter yet), Moon.

Here is a link to the full water testing report for the Ben Raines article posted yesterday about the dispersants found in Mississippi Sound:


Also, here is a link to a news article by the law firm about a new website for testing:



It’s been suggested to me, frequently, that these sorts of findings be posted online somewhere so people can easily examine results for themselves – the opposite of the non-transparency of the BP “research.” We’ve taken those repeated suggestions to heart. So, now, research compiled by Gulf Oil Disaster Recovery and the Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) is available at a public website maintained by Mr. Kaltofen’s company, Boston Chemical Data. You may especially like the mapping function, which shows where samples are being taken.

Thanks for this.

I'm not a chE but I'm hoping we have one on board. What I'd like to know is 1) if there's anything in the data that could pinpoint Macondo oil in the samples and 2) same for Corexit, either type.

Dispersant in Mississippi Sound (Video)


What is so damning about our dispersant testing is that we – through court-obtained channels – used the actual oil from the Macondo Well and the actual dispersant, Corexit.


And a note in anticipation of the eventual counter-attack: Granted, our legal team is paying for this research, but I find it offensive that anyone would use that to discount the findings. First, these are professionals with integrity maintained over distinguished careers. And also think about this: We intend to introduce these findings into a court of law as evidence, so any tiny mistake in procedure and the court tosses out some very expensive work. So these scientists are careful, diligent and unfortunately are finding that our fears are justified.


I'm not a ChemE either, but I am a chemist by trade (nonaqueous electrochemistry), so I guess I'll put my 2 cents in, though petroleum/organic chemistry is not my bag.

I skimmed the 56 page report from ALS lab group.

brief answers:
1) samples L917222-4 and to a lesser degree -13 and -12 have strong evidence of being contaminated with Macondo oil.
2) I missed or there is nothing specific in this report about Corexit components.

What the lab did is to extract (wash with a solvent) the samples,
add some known marker compounds, then ran the samples through a Gas Chromatograph.

A quick overview is that a Gas Chromatograph is a long heated tube, coated inside or filled with a substance that slightly interacts (in a sticky way, NOT a chemical way) with the samples one is testing. A small amount of the sample in injected at one end and is vaporized. An inert carrier gas sweeps through the tube, carrying the sample along. As the sample travels along, the lighter/less sticky parts travel faster, and the heavier/stickier components lag behind. At the exit end of the tube is a detector that indicates when something besides carrier gas is passing by (various detectors may give more information).
You end up with a plot of detector signal vs. time.
If you have known compounds in there, you'll see their peaks, so you can more accurately correlate different runs of the GC.

So if one has an oil sample of unknown origin, and some reference samples of known origins, one can run all these samples separately, then see if the unknown matches any of the knowns. Or in this case, they have one known, and multiple unknowns.

Crude oil contains many thousands of individual compounds, most of which are very common and simple, but some will be unique to a given mix of source material (algae, bacteria, plants) and the conditions of petroleum formation, migration and interaction with the reservoir rock over time. The unique compounds tend to be bigger molecules, like:
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons - multiple rings of "aromatic" character (like a benzene ring, most of the rings of carbon atoms are bonded with sigma AND pi bonds shared.
Terpenes - think essential oils, and sap/resin like substances.

Opps, I just noticed that the report refers to terpAnes, and steranes, some kinds of molecules with rings in them,
and I'm NOT an organic chemist - so I'm about at the end of my competence (all those names in organic chemistry - eeeehh!)
These apparently survive degradation very well, so they're used for "fingerprinting" oil.
Here's a biomarker page from MIT with way more info:

Apparently the sample L911700-3 is the known Macondo oil, and the L917222-XX are plant, animal and mineral samples suspected of being contaminated with Macondo oil.

Contrast the graphs in fig 12 (pg 12) for the Methyl Chrysenes in a non-matching sample, vs. fig 18 (pg 15) for a match.

I wonder if anyone actually read the report before broadcasting it all over the net. The report quite clearly states that no sign of leaked hydrocarbon was found in the oyster samples. Yes, there was significant hydrocarbon found in the oysters, but that hydrocarbon was from plants, not from the spill.

They did find evidence of leaked hydrocarbon in grass and silt samples.

hydrocarbon was from plants, not from the spill

but described as "catabolic degradation of petrogenic hydrocarbons" in a discussion of terpane previously found in phytoplankton samples, which could have implications for the food chain.

If someone could explain this more fully--neither oysters nor phytoplankton catabolize hydrocarbons, right? So we are talking about, what, partially degraded PHC from plankton, fish, and crustacean feces?

Wow, Smith Stag has had a massive program going since May to collect their own data, must be costing a fortune.

This is the GOM. There were going to be derivatives of petrogenic hydrocarbons in the food chain regardless of whether Macondo leaked or not. Any analytical chemist worth his salary should be able to find them.

What we are seeing now are a series of analysis out of context; no tox assessment and no comparison to a base case.

Amplified in the press and on blogs of course by all those who have an axe to grind.

Agreed. Still waiting for a chE to direct me to a Corexit footprint, too.

I am a ChE, with a PhD. While I have some insight into the data here it doesn't look to me like there is anything that is specific to Macondo or Corexit in the data published.

I also think that there are other disciplines that are likely to provide insight in this area, analytical chemists with personal experience in the methods used here topping that list.

So from this report we learned:

1) They have a good lab
2) There was oil on grass and a bit in silt
3) There was no oil anywhere else

Time for a pound of Cajun shrimp and half a dozen oysters to celebrate and Blue Bell for desert ;-)

Sorry, I did not mean to suggest that there was/is no problem. I was responding to the initial alarmist reports that the oysters were very heavily contaminated by the oil spill.

email sent to Smith Stag:

I'm looking at http://www.bostonchemicaldata.com/LEAN/Data/DWH/LabReports/LabLEAN124to1...

Interested citizen, no axe to grind except for being pissed abut the entire debacle. Could you or your staff please point me to where in this report there are clear indicators in samples of either Corexit EC9500A or Corexit EC9527A and if there's some fingerprint that's clearly associated with oil from the Macondo well? Much appreciated.

Hot dawg, now to see what reply you get (from a menu including silence).

I kind of expect a boilerplate say nothing, sales pitch sort of response if there's any at all, but what the hell. I didn't have to waste a USPS stamp on it.

Yeah, prolly.

Good job, too bad you'll get no reply just like me from UoMiami...

I agree with sunnnv and Speaker.

I read the Boston Chemical report carefully. The form of the lab report is meticulous. Like many lab reports, it has too little narrative to allow much inference except by those who know the unstated context. The report does not mention dispersant or Corexit. The report covers 13 samples (2 water, 4 silt, 1 grass, 1 vegetation, 1 crabs, 3 oysters, 1 mussels). All were compared to a reference oil source, and conclusions were made as to likelihood of contamination based on biomarkers and presence of PAHs. The groups of analytes identified were polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (enumerated), hydrocarbons, and percent moisture.

There is no statement about sampling protocol, but with so few samples, it’s reasonable to assume the sampling was selective (perhaps where unusual sediment, floc, tarballs, oil sheen, or soiled plants were found), not random or broadly representative. There is no statement about locations or dates of samples, nor whether taken at times/places where fishing was closed or open. So there is no basis for inference as to whether the data are representative of typical field conditions or whether seafood organisms were eligible for market.

Of the 13 samples, conclusions were stated for 8:
Strong evidence for source-oil contamination for 2 (grass, vegetation) based on biomarkers and PAHs.
Reasonable evidence for contamination for 1 (silt) based on biomarkers and PAHs.
Weak evidence for contamination for 2 (silt, silt) based on biomarkers, PAHs detected below reporting limits.
Weak evidence for contamination for 1 (water) based on biomarkers but no PAHs detected.
No evidence for contamination for 2 (mussel, oyster) based on biomarkers but PAHs detected below reporting limits.
No conclusions are given for 5 samples (water, silt, crabs, oysters, oysters).

Note that none of the seafood organisms tested as contaminated!

The lab report seems to bear no relation to several statements made in the news article.

Yeah, I don't see where the Corexit connection comes in relative to the linked analytical report either. What I also don't get is the apparent surprise that components of Corexit (of whatever flavor) might be present in weathered oil that has moved close to shore. Short of finding a little puddle of unadulterated Corexit liquid sitting on oiled water near the shore (which might be evidence or recent spraying), if the stuff got sprayed out on drifting slick far off the coast, and some of that slick then drifts into the coast, why is there shock that some components of Corexit might have hung around for the ride?

I think because Corexit is supposed to biodegrade within 28 days...

Naples area water samples showing signs of Corexit 9527 (the nasty one) http://youtu.be.com/ym6haebWz0A

50.3 ppm butoxyethanol-2 in swimming pool north of Tampa, (sample date: 17Aug10): http://is.gd/eR7Qw

I've observed patches of, what seems to me uncharacteristic for this area, brown, turbid, water, and thin brown film/sediment in areas around here in Naples, south of the pier, north of gordon pass, on a recent kayak outing. I also observed patches of dark grey sediment, the grains didn't appear to be tar, based on hardness. Could be limestone, dolostone grains for all I know, just noting here because I was looking at the sediment more closely as a result of the patches of brown water, and they seemed unusual.

On the same day as I observed this, I also noted a brown film in our pool, which could very well be related to chemicals being added the week before. Again, noting this, because it was unusual, and concurrent to the observations of brown patches, where usually the water is clear, and the sediment grains are normally very light-coloured.

In other words, I'm not trying to unnecessarily hype, but trying to be complete.

In other news, I tried BBIC for the first time last night, it was pretty darn good.

Hope everyone is well, sorry if any of this has been posted and addressed elsewhere.

edit: added links to a couple low-qual pics I took. Deleted some to make room for pictures of the wildlife I saw that day, which was plentiful; dolphins, manatees, tons of fish, (sometimes schools of small fish can make the water appear darker, and while there were plenty of places where this was the case, the brown water/sediment was clearly unrelated), etc...

The first link doesn't work, but I chased down the video, a Rense interview with Dr. Tom Termotto. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ym6haebWz0A&feature=youtu.be

Dr. Tom Termotto's credentials

oh, rats. I forgot to edit out the .com on that first link, it should be http://youtu.be/ym6haebWz0A

err, Rense, Termotto, are abiotic oil guys?

I don't mean to dismiss the lab results out of hand, but, I'm a little embarrassed. The source of those links seems alarmist to me, but I was thinking they had lab results worthy of mention. Based on the sources, I'm a little skeptical, I guess I'll keep monitoring.

Thanks for pointing that out, snakehead.

mtm, the problem is the "youtu.be." Gotta be "[...]youtube.com[...]" or it won't work.

thanks, lotus. I haven't gotten the hang of hand-formatting youtube's link shortener, yet. youtu.be/... is shorthand for youtube.com/watch?v=...

Whoops, I didn't even know about that one, mtm. Skewzz me.

No skewzzs needed, I'm forever trying to unconfound the latest new tricks the internet throws at me.

Edit: I see from discussion elsewhere that y'all are familiar with the florida oil spill law site.

I'm skeptical, myself, but thought the sample was worth mentioning. It's the first I've heard my area mentioned in connection with the oil spill, and I am interested in independent results, if they can be verified.

ChuckV - thanks for the patents.

From the 4/18/10 Halliburton report 5.2

Liquid volume In = 1007.80
Total Volume Out = 1016.95

Oooooops! They may have pushed that cement too far. John Wright might hit cement yet!!!

P.S. I was an "intern" to the extent that one day a week, all of us younguns got to visit different departments throughout the company, as a way to further our educations. We got paid about $120 per week.

My boss was Joe Marsdorff, who was a slide rule engineer at the dawn of the digital age. My job was to get the company's IBM 360 to do all the numbercrunching so as to save the slide rule engineers' time, rather than have them do dull repetitive, but essential, number crunching. Joe couldn't program an IBM 360 to save his soul! I was a computer nerd decades before they invented the term.

Edit - For comparison purposes, IIRC a grunt in 'Nam made about $120 per month back then. Of couse, I'd guess more than a few of them owe their lives to the Iron Tadpole, so they wouldn't begrudge me my higher compensation!

ChuckV US Patent 7,013,975 Example 9

...The cement composition described above was foamed at 200 F and a pressure of 1000 psi in the MACS analyzer, i.e. an instrument known as a multiple analysis cement slurry (MACS) analyzer. The foamed cement slurry in the MACS analyzer was transferred at 200 F through a manifold system to curing cells that were preheated and charged with nitrogen at the same pressure to which the slurry is subjected in the mixing chamber of the analyzer [snip]

So as long as Halliburton subjects the mixing chamber to 12,000 psi I suppose everything will be A-OK????


You wrote:

"From the 4/18/10 Halliburton report 5.2

Liquid volume In = 1007.80
Total Volume Out = 1016.95

Oooooops! They may have pushed that cement too far. John Wright might hit cement yet!!! "

I'd say the cause for that volume increase is the addition of foaming agents and gas. Note that in section 5.2 at minute 22.38 the in / out cumulative volumes are equal, but thereafter "out" is greater.

Look at section 3.2, Foam Pumping Schedule for liquids. Note that between minutes 22.38 and 30.12 they add 11.8 gal of foaming agents.

Look at section 3.3, Foam Pumping Schedule For Gas. Note that between minutes 22.38 and 30.12 they inject 22,700 scf of gas.

You can also go to section 3.4, Foam Slurry Data, and tally up the Base Slurry Vol. and Foam Slurry Vol. columns. I get 1007.39 bbl and 1016.16 bbl, respectively. The 8.77 bbl delta differs slightly from the 9.15 bbl increase in section 5.2., but it's essentially 9 bbl in both cases.

I'd guess that the expansion followed by contraction that's evident in section 5.2 goes to your interest in compression effects. (At minute 42.75 "out" exceeds "in" by over 37 barrels.) I've continued to try to find some real example of compression in foamed cements without much success. I did find an article today that's interesting from a deep water perspective. It's an American Association of Drilling Engineers paper from 2003 regarding reverse foam cementing (pumped down the annulus and up the casing) of an offshore well. It was done with a bottom hole temp of 415F at 21,555 ft TVD. See:


Regarding those old days (grunt pay and IBM 360's): I'd say your 'Nam-era grunt pay recollection of $120/mo is about right. During an Air Force stint (1963-1967), my pay ranged from $75/mo all the way to a princely $215/mo.

When I returned to school after that, the engineering curriculum had introduced something new--a required FORTRAN programming course using your fabled IBM 360. Coding sheets. Punch cards. Deliver the card deck to the computer facility today. Come back tomorrow to find out what you goofed up. What fun. But by 1973 things had advanced so far that, for only $395, you could buy a portable calculator (the HP-35) capable of taking square roots!


LOL, I also remember the IBM 360, and the Model 29 (I think) card punch machine. Fortran IV no less. Our 360's card reader would occasionally throw all the cards out on the floor. Then you got to pick them up and try to put them back in order to try again. I think I still have some of those cards in a box in my shed. I saved some to use as bookmarks.

A trick I learned was to use a marking pen to draw a diagonal line across the top of the card deck. If you dropped it you had a visual guide that could get you almost all the way back to a sorted deck. Using a single diagonal, corner to corner, and a set of steeper diagonals could get you all the way there without ever looking at the code on the card.

I learnt on punch cards for my first two years at uni. IBM 27 and 29 series punches. We ran on a CDC 173. I still have circuit boards cards from it, and its predecessor, a CDC 6400. The 6400 used discrete transistors, in modules crafted by Seymore Cray.

RE: The old days.
Yep, remember the 360, Fortran IV and punch cards. My sister was making good money as a keypunch operator…no help to me though. In grad school we used the big sexy XDS Sigma 7 computer, but we still used punch cards. We would drop off the cards at the front desk and a guy would pick them up and disappear through a door. Some hours later they would bring back the print out. They told me the computer was behind the door, but I never did actually see it. Took my Post Versalog slide rule with me to the oil patch. Bought a TI SR-10 calculator when it first came out and soon upgraded to an HP-21. That HP made my life a ton easier. Coincidentally, I just discovered the Post slide rule and the HP-21 in a box about a month ago. The HP won’t turn on and all I can do with the Versalog is multiply (remember C/D scales?).

Oh, the nostalgia...

I learned LSI-11 assembler on a PDP-11 that used toggle switches to program op codes. I had an HP something that I can't remember. Those were strange calculators that used Enter instead of = key. I think the entry of mathematical expressions was called Reverse Polish Notation.

Yeah, Reverse Polish Notation. Univac 1100, IBM 360, IBM 370. Decwriters.

We also had several ADDS System 50 "mini computers". The size and shape of an office desk with the screen molded into the top and the keyboard into the front. I just loved those machines. They took Basic, Fortran, and Assembler. I spent a lot of my free time hacking them, trying to understand the operating system. But that's where I learned my lesson about saving work as you go: I had spent about 3 hours typing in a long program, and the power failed. Bloop!

I recall those having floppy drives that took a really BIG floppy, maybe 8" or so, and that only held something like 360K. Oh, green-on-black screen too. Yeah, those were the days. I've been in love with computers ever since.

I highly recommend a visit to the Computer History Museum for anyone passing through Silicon Valley. Their displays include many makes and models.

I first saw some of their inventory when they were giving occasional tours through a large warehouse that contained everything from a NASA operator's console that came complete with a built-in ashtray to an actual Enigma machine from WWII. It was fun to walk through it as part of a small group of varying ages as each of us exclaimed as we caught sight of the first computers or computing devices we had worked with in the casual jumble of stuff - including various keypunches and unit record equipment.

Since they've moved into their new modern building, the displays are a bit more formal now. One room is devoted just to several 1401's, which are being lovingly tended by retired IBM CEs. (Anybody here remember being able to enter word-marks from the console?)

The lobby is the current home of the second Babbage machine ever built. It's put through its paces a couple of times a day.

Weighing five tons, 11 ft long and with 8,000 parts, it's quite impressive. There's a link to a short video of it in action here.

Ooo, I'd love to see that Enigma machine! That whole Bletchley Park saga has always fascinated me.

It was quite a surprise to see one just sitting out amidst all the other artifacts in the old warehouse. Most of the others in the tour group were too young to have any idea what it was. It's now been dusted off and placed under pristine plexi-glass.


Terrific! Thanks so much for this glimpse, rainy!

If there is anyone you need murdering, and you have one of those to spare, just let me know.

rainyday: I want my hours back! I hate you; my family will hate you. And, everyone else I send the link of this time-sink to will hate you as well ";-^) God, that is a beautiful machine. Thanks! g

I learned LSI-11 assembler on a PDP-11 that used toggle switches to program op codes.

If memory serves correctly, to boot the PDP11-45: 773100 load address 777344 start. We had 256 kbytes of actual core memory. Can't believe we threw it out. PDP11 machine language was a thing of beauty.

More than just square roots! RPN with a 4 deep stack.

One of the things to consider is that $395 was in 1973 dollars too. Probably $1500 in current dollars.

It was a great relief to me that a few years later I could get a TI calculator with similar abilities for $50. I was incompetent with the fine motor skills needed to use a slide rule well.

Anyway here is the object of envy of all engineers of that time...

Yep, I couldn't afford one. I got the TI model as soon as it came out. In fact, I think that might be somewhere in my shed too. I'm something of a packrat, don't like to toss stuff just because it doesn't work anymore...

I got one of those HP calculators, and took it to the office, convinced management we had to move into the future, and they ordered two, which we were supposed to share. Later, I convinced them to program an IBM 38 to do some work we did by hand.

Eventually, we ordered an HP mini, but the order was cancelled by our IT department, which wanted to keep a monopoly over the computing power using their mainframes, which of course THEY had to program even though they took 6 months to do what we did in 2 hours.

A year later, I became a supervisor, and I told the guys in my group it was dog eat dog, anybody who wanted to perform had to perk up and go buy their own PC. Most of us bought Macs, the early version. We programmed Excel sheets, used superpaint for our wellbore sketches, and got our work done a lot faster, so our engineering manager relented and asked IT to buy us an IBM PC.

Two years later, the dam broke and they started issuing us Toshiba portables. Those were interesting years, with the IT department fighting in a very organized fashion, as if they were the US Army, and we would be the Viet Cong, getting to them whichever way we could. I really hated the bastards, in the end it was a draw, we had our laptops, and could hook up to plotters, printers, and so on, but they insisted in controlling the software we could use. So I spent thousands buying my own software and loading it into my computer at home, then taking the results to the office. Some of the software I used 20 years ago they haven't got around to using effectively yet.

Ah, yes! I mentioned only the square roots because one of my employer's field sites requisitioned one in '73 solely because their missile guidance system analysis tasks required frequent square root calculations--or at least that's the excuse they presented. The best those of us in the home office could do was share a couple TI 4-bangers that were 3/4 the size of a common brick and cost a measly $149.

And slide rules. Every couple years I dig out my trove of slip sticks and caress them for a while, then snap out of the trance when I remind myself what a great invention the $10 scientific calculator was.


I've still got one. Also got a 45 and my original 25. I souvenired the 35 and 45 when the CS department was throwing out stuff. My 25 still works. Had to break open the battery pack and replace the long since disintegrating NiCd batteries. Always had a soft spot for the HP calculators.

Regarding those old days (grunt pay and IBM 360's): I'd say your 'Nam-era grunt pay recollection of $120/mo is about right. During an Air Force stint (1963-1967), my pay ranged from $75/mo all the way to a princely $215/mo

Thanks to the Social Security annual reports, my Vietnam pay is well documented. I joined the Marines in 1964 and was discharged in 1968. The years 1965 - 1967 were wholly military pay.

1965 - $1138.00 (private thru LCpl)
1966 - $2081.00 (LCpl thru Cpl)
1967 - $2861.00 (Cpl - Sgt)

IIRC, combat pay ($65.00 per month) wasn't taxable, so isn't included in the above figures.

Is it safe to assume that you think $120 per week was reasonable for a guy who was making it possible for you to get day/night all-weather close air support, even in monsoon season? Maybe you saw one of those haze gray Iron Tadpoles with NAVY on the side?

I did see one depicted in the movie "We Were Soldiers Once...And Young", right when things were getting desparate and they sent up a prayer, it was answered. So the public at large can get the idea of what was needed. If you were there, you'd already know.

MoonofA, How do you know those are hydrate bubbles coming out of the stack and not oil drops and gas and with the terrible resolution of the capping stack how can you tell what the rate of flow is.

These are dissolving hydrates, so yes, they are at least partly oil and gas. But there is no reason to believe that this fresh oil or gas.

Reasons to believe that these are from hydrates:

1. The behavior one can observe with the dirt coming out on top of the stack is similar to the behavior we have seen earlier with hydrates outside of the capping stack collet connector. Small drops leaving steadily, bigger chunks braking off every once a while. The total mass so small and seemingly decreasing that IMO there is no reason to worry.

2. Thadmiral said so.

Why should hydrates "dissolve"?
Is the BOP warmer now than before?
How does dirt become bouyant and rise like oil droplets?
What kind of dirt?

A few days ago I voiced skepticism about the blobs of dark stuff rising from the top of the capping stack being residue from when the well was flowing, and asked if anyone had recently seen a good view that did not show stuff coming out. Yesterday the flow was greatly diminished, and along with it, my skepticism.


man -- From the previous section: Is BP afraid to drill the RW? If they aren't concerned they are idiots IMHO. The RW will encounter 1 of 2 conditions: the annulus is dead (no flowing pressure) or it's around 11,900 psi with a flow potential of 50,000+ bopd. If the annulus is hot then they'll be drilling into a live blow out. Been done by Mr. Wright numerous times but that doesn't make it a less dangerous situation. Mr. Wright can control a live annulus by pumping in a heavy mud under high pressure. But I gather BP has a rightful concern about the integrity of the csg and the shallow seals.

Still back to two choices: bottom kill with an unknown flowing pressure status or a BOP replacement with a known flowing pressure status (zero psi more or less). Granted some mysterious and unpredictable event might suddenly start the well flowing again when they remove the cap. But I would think BP et al considers that possibility as small. Drilling into the annulus is a 50/50 proposition IMHO: it's either hot or it's not. So to once again to use a well worn phase: better to go with the devil you know then the one you don't. Replace the BOP and set the top plugs IMHO. Either way it's a potential risky situation. BP needs to get over it and get the job done one way or the other. In drilling ops time is seldom your friend. Once you've learned all there is to learn you make a decision, take action and try not kill someone in the process.

I recall a computer science professor in a class long ago talking about what it means for a computer resource to be in use. He gave the example of a telephone book, which is "in use" whenever there is a possibility that it might be needed at a moment's notice, even though it is only rarely pulled down from the shelf and opened.

The relief wells may fall into the category things that served an essential function without actually being "used".

From the Wave Glider Fact Sheet that Gail linked above:

  • The Wave Glider fleet has cumulatively been at sea for 11.5 years and has covered over 100,000 miles. (That's an average of 8700 miles per vehicle year, about half of what I drive in my car.)
  • Two Wave Gliders, Honu and Kohola, traveled from Kona, Hawaii to San Diego, California – 2,750 miles in 79 days. (Average 1.45 mph)
  • A Wave Glider, Red Flash, traveled from Mexico to Alaska and held station in 21 foot seas and 50 knot winds. (That takes a very small wind profile and sufficient drive to counteract any current.)

I'm impressed.

Here is a short video clip of a Wave Glider in action.

There is also an hour-long Stanford University presentation on the Wave Glider here.

I thought they were kind of impressive too. It would have been good if we had had them in the Gulf of Mexico earlier, so we had an idea of baseline conditions.

From prior thread

Except there is no evidence that supports that theory. The evidence says that the OIM let the process go forward because he didn't know it was dangerous. And the same can be said for the BP company men. None of these men thought they were putting the rig (and their own lives) in danger.

Jinn, you are flat out wrong. The mistake you make time and again is to confuse your opinion for fact. And once you settle on an opinion, you assert it as fact with nothing to back it up.

There is one piece of evidence that supports your theory, the OIM's testimony. Or more accurately, one small portion of the OIM's testimony. He later contradicts that, and so does his attorney. His attorney was quoted in a news article stating that Harrell was concerned about more than the negative test being done, he was also concerned about displacing the mud with seawater, and expressed that to the company man.

The other evidence, the testimony of the other witness, is more credible than Harrell's halting denials and retractions on the pinchers comment as well. Your version makes little sense in context (why would OIM be pissed and use the pinchers remark if he won the argument and got the negative test?).

So, you are clearly wrong that there is no evidence to support my interpretation. There clearly is. The testimony of the other witness, Harrell's pincher comment and comments after the blow-out, his attorney's remarks, and Harrell's less than credible testimony. Moreover, the evidence makes more sense and fits together better under my interpretation than yours. Put another way, not only is there evidence, but the weight of the evidence significantly favors one interpretation over the other.

It appears that BP is going to make the negative pressure test the focus of it's analysis of what went wrong on the DWH. And of course that is one of the key events. But focusing on it to the exclusion of other events will, IMO, present a less than accurate or complete picture of what led to the blowout.

There are more issues that merit investigation than I care to touch on here. But one that is important IMO and that BP's version may seek to side-step is the human factor issue of the dynamics of the relationship between the company man and the OIM, and how that may have impacted decision making and error compounding.

Because under one reasonable interpretation of the evidence, had the company man not asserted his authority over the driller and OIM, the crew would not have followed the procedures they did in displacing the riser and conducting the negative test that the company man insisted on and the crew objected to. And as a result, it is not unreasonable to assume for purposes of this analysis, the blowout would have been avoided.

If Harrell did indeed use the pinchers remark to express serious misgivings, and, after the blow out, did indeed say, in effect, "see, I told you that was a really dumb way to go, are you happy now," then clearly he did not stop a procedure he felt needlessly put the rig at risk. For whatever reason, he was unable to assert his authority over the company man and say no. Had he, disaster would have been avoided. Presumably, he didn't out of concerns for his job or concerns over the relationship between BP and TO. That's a problem. How do you fix that.

Granted, the underlying assumptions are not proven, but they are not unreasonable, and I think the problem exists and is a legitimate focus regardless. This relationship is dysfunctional, or potentially so, in that the de facto roles and authority do not line up with the assigned roles and authority, and what is presented as a check and balance is really often just a rubber stamp that presents a high error compounding risk. Plus the ultimate authority is left in the hands of the party with the conflict of interest of profit vs. safety.

edit: My assumptions fail to note the back and forth that does occur and the value of the OIM challenging and expressing concerns to the company man about proposed procedures. But nevertheless, the OIM did not exercise his ultimate authority when it would have really counted and could have avoided disaster, assuming Harrell's reservations were as strong as they seem to have been. Is there a way to make the OIM a more effective check and balance on poor judgment or error by the CM?


I am in total agreement with your final sentence!

This is such a strange business in that the company man has such power over a rig.

If I were to hire a company to make a product, I could make suggestions as to how they should go about producing that product. My on-site manager, on the other hand, could not and should not tell the company how to go about their business to produce that product.

IMO, the system is flawed by the absolute power of the company man to have the final say.

Excellent discussion of the decision making. At several points in the CG hearings the DWH is referred to by BP person as the best rig in BP's floater fleet. It seems to me that BP treated TO or at least the portions of TO leased to BP as a de facto subsidary of BP. In fact, didn't the DWH since its launch always work on BP jobs. So it wouldn't be unusual for TO's OIM to defer to BP's top dog regardless of what the written word said about the final decision being with TO. Perhaps a recommendation would be to have contracted rigs switched around different lessors to prevent the above conflict.

lab - flawed to a degree. It always gets down to a timing issue. If there is time every company man I've worked with has checked with the head engineer in the office if it's a big issue. The little stuff he'll handle. But sometimes a decision has to be made in a matter of minutes...no time to call anyone for a second opinion. But even then most coman will check in with the office ASAP to make sure they did the right thing. Every coman I've worked with was constantly under stress as to what his boss onshore would think of every decision he made.


Sounds like they need a culture change. Making fast decisions under tight scrutiny from shore does not sound like "best practices" to me especially in light of the nature of the business. One should not have to make decisions based on what his boss might think in hind sight. I guess I would rather be on shore and breathing than out on a rig I can't get off of if I think someone has made a poor judgement.

"Is there a way to make the OIM a more effective check and balance on poor judgment or error by the CM?"

He already is. Transocean company-wide policy: Everyone has authority to halt work on safety concerns. They don't have to prove it. Legitimate concern is enough.

Of course said company-wide policy is compromised when jobs are on the line, as they often are, possibly even careers. Fact is money people care more about money than safety, and there are plenty of money people in high places.

Think about it. Had Harrell put his foot down and told Kaluza "No, we are NOT going to do this, it's DANGEROUS. Go BACK to your people and bring us a plan that's SAFE, and were gonna sit RIGHT HERE till you do, END of discussion." he would have been the HERO of the day, all the TO guys would have CHEERED him on ...but it may have been the end of his job ...even career.

In other words the idea that the OIM is in ultimate charge on the rig is a myth.


NAOM -- Like many aspects in life: it depends on the man. To put in the time honored vernacular of Hollywood: would you take the bullet. Each of likes to think he would if he were in that tough decision position. Most are lucky if they are never put to the test to find out.

syn -- valid points all but I still like to simplify the situation: Harrell et al now say they thought they WERE NOT doing anything to endanger the rig or crew. The actions they ordered led to the blow out and explosion. Obviously their conclusions were wrong. They are responsible for their conclusions: they performed the tests and did the analysis. So far no testimony has been given to indicate that anyone else had an influence on that decision. The well blew out because Harrell, with the consent of the OIM, ordered the csg/riser to be displaced with sea water. Whatever did or didn't happen down hole isn't relevant: the well kicked and blew out because of the displacement. Had the mud not been replaced with sea water the well would not have blown out even if they had the worse cmt job in the world or every joint of csg ruptured. Any hand that honestly thinks it's isn't dangerous to displace the well bore with a fluid of insuffucient weight to prevent a hydrocarbon bearing reservoir from flowing is WRONG. And that for a change, is not MHO: it is an indisputable fact. It's no different than pointing an "empty" gun at someones head and pulling the trigger...doesn't matter if you checked it a dozens times to make sure it's not loaded: IT IS DANGEROUS. Many people have been shot with an "empty" gun. Most wells have blown out when "they" believed there was sufficient control in place. The well wasn't monitored sufficiently to see the kick coming or that data was also misinterpreted. Had it been the blow out might not have occurred. Even if the well had been shut in successfully and the blow out not occurred, the well kicked because of the sea water displacement. If the BOP had stopped the blow out the decision to displace was still wrong. And that decision was made by the company man and was not prevented by the OIM.

There is little interpretation as possible in my above statement: the well came in because there wasn't sufficient head to prevent flow. The lack of head was a direct result of the decision to displace with sea water. The displacement was ordered by the BP company man. This led to the blow out and 11 deaths and an environmental/economic nightmare for the Gulf Coast. As I've pointed out before: even if every possibile mistake in csg design, cmt composition, cmt testing, centralizers decisions, etc, were valid, the well would not have blown out if the displacement had not been done. And that decision was made by the company man with the now self admitted concurrence of the OIM. From my simple view of the law both men have admitted their guilt, however it might be qualified, for the accident.


When and why did the MMS start allowing unbalanced wells to be temporarily abandoned?

It may be a safe practice, but certainly does not meet your criteria for leaving a safe well.

Is it about cost of leaving 16lb. mud till the well is finished?

lab -- I don't know for a fact that the MMS allows such displacements to happen. Jinn sees an approved well plan that allows it and syn sees a reg that prohibits it. The problem with the well plan (assuming it does allow such displacement) is that I'm sure it is permitted only after the cmt is tested properly. Obviously the test wasn't conducted properly or was interpreted incorrectly. If the MMS regs do allow displacement it can only be done with a valid cmt test. Regardless of the details, it appears the cmt failed and thus any test or analysis thereof was faulty. From the testimony so far it appears only two people were responsible for passing judgment on the cmt test: the BP company man and the OIM.

Not just my practice: any well that's left underbalanced for any reason is in an unsafe mode. Well bore balance is THE KEY foundation of all safe driling practices. There may be an occasional justification for putting a well in that condition but it doesn't change the risk factor. As far as costs go these are not the least bit relevant when compared to the total cost of the well let alone the cost of handling just a kick. If the kick had been controlled and the well had not blown out, the costs of dealing with just that situation would have been many times the cost of displacing with a heavy completion fluid

There is little interpretation as possible in my above statement: the well came in because there wasn't sufficient head to prevent flow.


Yes that does seem to be correct based on the evidence so far.

However they were supposed to conduct a test that would first check to see if the well could stand the removal of the mud weight. It is pretty clear now they did not correctly test the well down to the same level of under balance that they displacement would create. hey were required to do that and they just didn't for reasons not yet clearly explained. If they had tested the well they would have discovered the problem while everyone was paying attention and it was still relatively easy to control.

They did conduct the test, and it failed. Twice.

There are three issues here. Well control. Testing. Well monitoring.

From my understanding of safe practices, a negative pressure test is of limited value. The tests are not fool-proof. They do not constitute a barrier to loss of well control. They are merely a tool to verify integrity of a barrier. And not a fool-proof tool at that due to the need for interpretation and the loose procedures.

I do not believe the old regs treat the tests as a barrier. The new ones sure do not.

We still don't have a clear picture of what procedures the crew wanted to use, or exactly what the arguments were. That is still somewhat unclear. But what is clear from the regs is that good well control practices require redundant barriers. Hydrostatic balance is one barrier. The bottom cement was another.

IMO, it was a clear violation of safe practices to displace the riser even if the test had passed without replacing the loss of hydrostatic balance as one barrier with another suitable barrier, whether that be the top plug and lock-down sleeve, or hydrostatic balancing within the well itself.

Putting that barrier in place would require extra rig time of course. It was a step they skipped to save time. So they were not only under-balanced, but there was only one barrier in place at the time of the blowout. If it failed because they made an error on the pressure test, there would be nothing to stop a blow out. That is not sound well control practice in operation. It's throwing the book it out the window...unless i have it wrong.

As far as well monitoring, we don't know yet why they failed here as well. It could be that BP insisted on a schedule of procedures that precluded effective monitoring. It could be that the visiting executives distracted people from well concerns and monitoring. Harrell was busy with the executives all day and had little time for the well. We don't know enough yet to say.

As far as well monitoring, we don't know yet why they failed here as well. It could be that BP insisted on a schedule of procedures that precluded effective monitoring.

I've been scanning some of the May testimony (looking for a link to the elusive approved-by-MMS P&A document) and was surprised to see both Harrell and Ezell asked why or if the mud logger, Joseph Keith, was taken off from monitoring the flow of returns before the well was completely ... Both replied that they weren't aware that he had been taken off.

Ezell was then asked who would have knowledge of Keith's removal outside of Keith and responded "Not that would be alive."

Joseph Keith, the potentially removed mud logger, has been scheduled to appear before the Board several times, most recently the August 27th session in Houston, but has yet to actually testify.

I worked for a driller way over 60 years ago who always said " Wells don't blow out, people LET wells blow out"

Trite but true

Rock, yes, that's the price of living in the box. You go down with the ship if things go wrong, which they usually don't. Protecting the job is a more immediate and pressing challenge.

But i wanted to focus on this because it is useful for analyzing BP's apparent strategy.

What if BP's apparent analysis is correct, and Vidrine is at fault because he blew interpretation of the pressure test. What do we have then? Negligence, and nothing more. He tried his best, but got it wrong. He then had Faluza phone BP with his decision. The guy made a mistake. (Why BP had no process in place, if it did not, to verify Vidrine's decision would again be a matter of negligence.)

However, if the focus is instead the displacement decisions and procedures, it is going to be much easier to present what happened there as reckless conduct, or grossly negligent conduct. Here we appear to have people consciously disregarding known risks and good practices and, IMO, regulations to take a short cut to save rig time.

Faluza and Harrell and the driller all had problems with what BP wanted to do. They did it anyway. And the results speak for themselves. (There's another side to it, no doubt, but you can now see the foundation for an allegation of reckless disregard for known risks that does not exist if Vidrine takes the hit.)

Moreover, the decisions to set the plug so low and remove 10 times more mud, as well as the decision to displace the riser without a second barrier in place came from on shore, Halfe and morrell, and they all increased risks. These guys saved BP $15 million or so in the last couple of weeks. But they're engineers. They know there are risks involved.

Displacing the riser without a second barrier was, as you note, like playing with a gun. That's reckless. Consciously disregarding a known risk that could cause disaster. Punitive damages now become viable. BP's partners getting out of their share of expenses now becomes viable. Who knows what else.

Anyway, just some rank speculation. Kind of fun though to see the implications of picking one cause over another.

Edits to clean up the mess

Your interpretation of the evidence is jumbled and incoherent.

The fact is the negative test and the replacement to seawater was part of the well plan. That is not my opinion that is written in black and white. That well plan was prepared in advance and approved and reviewed by half a dozen BP engineers as well as been reviewed and approved by the MMS.

There does appear to have been some discussions (possibly even arguments) on April 20 in regards to how the rig was going to carry out its implementation of the well plan In particular how it was going to proceed during the afternoon of April 20. But all the evidence also indicates that whatever disagreements existed in the day preceding the blowout those issues had been resolved at least an hour or two before the blowout occurred.

It is pretty obvious that neither the BP company men or the OIM or the mud loggers or the men in the drilling shack were acting as if there was danger lurking around the corner. All the evidence indicates that none of these people acted as if they were being cautious. There is no evidence that a single one of them behaved as if they suspected that danger was lurking. If the OIM knew he had just committed the rig to an extremely dangerous procedure as you suppose he did - Why did he take a shower and go to bed?

"Your interpretation of the evidence is jumbled and incoherent."

Maybe to someone with their mind made up everybody on the rig was incompetent. But it made perfect sense to me.

And no I don't wish to debate it, your (jumbled incoherent) rants barely justify this response.


Since the well plan keeps getting brought up by you as supporting your position on MMS having approved the negative pressure test issue and also the plan to leave the well unbalanced, I had gotten the impression that you must have previously provided a link to it, but were tired of repeatedly providing it any more, even though you've gotten considerable push back on that issue.

So I decided to do a search.

I'll grant you that I'm not the most skilled internet tools manipulator available, but I was unable to discover any link that you had provided to that document. It seems as though life would be easier for you (and perhaps the rest of us) if you could either provide the link on which you have based your assertions, or at least point us to where it might be found.

In my searching, I noted that upon several occasions you have been asked for the link, but have never responded to those requests, let alone provided the link, so far as I could determine.

It would help if you could either provide the link, or, if appropriate, acknowledge that you don't have either the link nor a copy of the document, and therefore might be basing your assertions on your memory of the document.



The permit for temporary abandonment is part of the record Of The USCG/MMS joint investigation. I don't have a link handy

Displacement to seawater down to 8367' is part of that permit. The negative test is also part of that permit. As Mr Hafle testified the precise details of that negative test procedure are left to the rig site to implement.

Mr Hafle's testimony:

Q. Did you have a detailed procedure for
performing a negative test on the production
A. I wrote the permit for that temporary
Q. Yes, sir.
A. Which included the negative test.
Q. Yes, sir.

A. The detailed procedures are generated
at the rig site.
Q. And those are sent to the rig?
A. The permit's sent to the rig.
Q. Okay.
A. The detailed procedure is created on
the rig site.

A half dozen witnesses have testified that there was a discussion or possibly argument between the OIM and BP man as to exactly what constitutes a negative test. The OIM had one idea. The company man had another. They ended up doing the test both ways, but neither test actually did what they were supposed to do which was test the casing down to the low pressure that displacement would create.

However when the tests were over there was general agreement among everyone that they had a good test. Ezell, Pleasant, and Harrel all were involved in the tests and all testified they thought they had a good test. They also testified the TO driller and toolpusher that said they had a good test. They all seemed to genuinely believe that. None of these men were BP employees.

What wasn't part of that permit was displacing the riser with only the bottom plug in place and no second barrier.

Put up or shut up on that, please. I've had enough of you opinion passed off as the word of the lord.

And your account of the facts finds little support in the more reliable accounts given by the players themselves, Halfe's testimony notwithstanding. The NO paper called for a criminal investigation after Halfe testified based on his clearly untruthful testimony. He has since invoked the 5th and refuses to testify further.

Here's how the WSJ article presents the testing concerns:

By 5 p.m., Transocean workers had removed much of the mud and started the pressure test, according to a timeline of events prepared by BP.

It didn't go well. Pressure built up unexpectedly, and no one was sure why. Workers in the rig's central "drilling shack," a type of control room, struggled to interpret the readings. In walked Mr. Harrell with the visiting VIPs.

Mr. Harrell stayed behind as the tour moved on, but he didn't think the problem was serious. He ordered another worker to tighten down a valve at the top of the blowout preventer—the device that is supposed to pinch off the well in the event of disaster—that prevented mud above from leaking down.

This seemed to resolve the problem. Mr. Harrell testified that he was satisfied with the test results and went back to the visiting executives.

It was the last time there is any record of Mr. Harrell, the rig's most experienced leader, setting foot on the drill floor. His lawyer says he wasn't distracted by the visiting executives and that the crew could have asked for his help at any time, but never did.

Mr. Harrell's second-in-command, Randy Ezell, stuck around the drill shack for a few more minutes, but soon he also left to return to the visiting executives. He later testified to the joint Interior Department and Coast Guard panel that if it hadn't been for the tour, he would have stayed longer to deal with the situation.

With Mr. Harrell gone, the argument continued. Wyman Wheeler wasn't convinced everything was all right. Mr. Wheeler was the dayshift toolpusher, the man who supervised the drilling crew for 12 hours each day.

"Wyman was convinced something wasn't right," Christopher Pleasant, another Transocean worker, later recalled in testimony. Mr. Wheeler couldn't be reached for comment.

But Mr. Wheeler's shift wrapped up at 6 p.m. on April 20. His replacement, Jason Anderson, came on duty and had his own interpretation of the test, according to Mr. Pleasant.

Mr. Anderson, 35, had worked on the rig since it left the shipyard in 2001.

A burly former high school linebacker, Mr. Anderson had earned the respect of his fellow rig workers, and now he assured them that the pressure readings weren't unusual.

Mr. Kaluza decided to check with Donald Vidrine, an experienced BP manager who was due to relieve Mr. Kaluza at 6 p.m.

The two BP men conferred for an hour, with Mr. Vidrine peppering Mr. Kaluza with questions. Mr. Vidrine wasn't satisfied. "I wanted to do another test," he said, according to the notes of BP's internal investigation seen by the Journal.

Workers performed the test again, but this time the results were even more perplexing. One smaller tube that led up from the well showed no pressure, a sign that the well was stable. But gauges on the main pipe did show pressure, according to BP's preliminary investigation.

The two pipes were connected and should have had the same pressure. It wasn't clear what was going on in the well. One possibility, put forward by engineers who have studied the events subsequently, is that the smaller pipe was clogged, interfering with pressure readings.

Finally, about 7:50 p.m., Mr. Vidrine made a decision, according to Mr. Pleasant. He turned to Mr. Kaluza, his colleague, and told him to call BP engineers in Houston and tell them he was satisfied with the test, Mr. Pleasant said.


It does not quite jive with your peachy account where everyone agreed all was fine.

Yes the WSJ has that account more or less correct. It was Anderson, Pleasant, Ezell and Harrel that all claimed the test(s) was good. But the 1400 Psi that was reported on the drill pipe is all the evidence you need to know that no negative test had been done. The rig did indeed perform some procedure but it is evident they hadn't tested the casing to see if it could stand the under-balance.

It was BP men that thought something was fishy going on, but the Transocean guys all were saying that is a good test when in fact no test had been done.

They should have circulated bottoms up. It was omitted to save time.

syncro, would you perchance have a link to that statement (or remember Harrell's attorney's name)? I tried searching for it t'other day but couldn't get very far. Thanks.

My dear Lotus, I would be honored to be of service to you.

It's a pretty good WSJ story. I'm going to post several quotes and end with Harrell's attorney's.

But BP engineers in Houston, including Mr. Morel and his colleague Mark Hafle, had decided to set the cement plug much deeper than usual and remove 10 times as much mud as is normal before running the test. It was unusual, but BP says it changed the procedure in order to avoid damage to a key seal.

Ronald Sepulvado, the top BP manager who was on shore that day with his phone switched off, was asked under oath by the Interior Department-Coast Guard panel in July if he had ever run a negative test where so much mud had been removed.

"No, ma'am," replied Mr. Sepulvado. Had he ever heard of BP doing so anywhere? "No, ma'am."

BP had asked federal regulators for permission to use a deeper plug on April 16, and received approval after only 20 minutes. But Transocean workers and contractors aboard the rig later said that they weren't informed of the change until the morning of April 20.

The decisions to pull out so much mud perplexed Robert Kaluza, BP's day-shift manager on April 20. "Don't know why—maybe trying to save time," he later told BP internal investigators, according to notes from that conversation reviewed by the Journal. "At the end of the well sometimes they think about speeding up."


BP said the notes are only investigators' interpretation of Mr. Kaluza's comments.


At a daily 11 a.m. meeting in the rig's cinema room, Mr. Kaluza told everyone about BP's plan. Mr. Harrell protested.

"All these plans kept changing," Mr. Harrell later testified. Mr. Harrell and Mr. Kaluza argued about the negative test, according to one witness.

"This is how it's going to be," Mr. Kaluza said, according to sworn testimony from one witness, and Mr. Harrell "reluctantly agreed."

In sworn testimony, Mr. Harrell denied arguing with Mr. Kaluza. He said he just wanted to make sure that a negative test was performed and that Mr. Kaluza agreed. But his lawyer, Pat Fanning, said that Mr. Harrell also told Mr. Kaluza he didn't want to remove so much mud before running the negative test and was overruled. Mr. Kaluza couldn't be reached for comment for this story.

"It was BP's well, they were paying for it. BP gave the marching orders," Mr. Fanning said.


I have stuff to do but will be back later.

The rest of the article is worthwhile and there is a nifty diagram about the dangers of the displacement.

Thanks so much, syncro -- meecha back here laytah!

In sworn testimony, Mr. Harrell denied arguing with Mr. Kaluza. He said he just wanted to make sure that a negative test was performed and that Mr. Kaluza agreed. But his lawyer, Pat Fanning, said that Mr. Harrell also told Mr. Kaluza he didn't want to remove so much mud before running the negative test and was overruled.

In other words they had not done the negative test. They were removing mud to do the negative test. Where was the packer?


More from the story:

... The two BP men conferred for an hour [post shift-change], with Mr. Vidrine peppering Mr. Kaluza with questions. Mr. Vidrine wasn't satisfied. "I wanted to do another test," he said, according to the notes of BP's internal investigation seen by the Journal.

Workers performed the test again, but this time the results were even more perplexing. One smaller tube that led up from the well showed no pressure, a sign that the well was stable. But gauges on the main pipe did show pressure, according to BP's preliminary investigation.

The two pipes were connected and should have had the same pressure. It wasn't clear what was going on in the well. One possibility, put forward by engineers who have studied the events subsequently, is that the smaller pipe was clogged, interfering with pressure readings.

Finally, about 7:50 p.m., Mr. Vidrine made a decision, according to Mr. Pleasant. He turned to Mr. Kaluza, his colleague, and told him to call BP engineers in Houston and tell them he was satisfied with the test, Mr. Pleasant said. ...

I'm willing to buy that Vidrine's failure to testify truly could be due to collapsed health -- mental, physical, or (most likely) both in combo.

After BP Oil Spill, Offshore Regulator Institutes Ethics Policy

According to the Associated Press, Bureau employees must now notify a supervisor about any potential conflict of interest and step aside when inspections or other official duties involve a company that employs a family member or close personal friend. Furthermore, inspectors who join the agency from the oil industry cannot perform inspections or other work involving their former employers for two years.

Employees must also now report any incident in which contacts “attempt to bribe, harass, coerce, or improperly pressure or influence’’ a federal regulator, the Associated Press said. And they must avoid even the appearance of a conflict and report activities that “raise a question regarding his or her impartiality.”

On the press call that just finished up, Admiral Allen said that their biggest concern was the amount of lean -- 2 degrees -- that the BOP is exhibiting and how that would impact the removal of the BOP.

Seems to me that it would also be a concern in terms of putting the new BOP on, no? I do recognize that they wouldn't have to deal with the errant DP at that point, though.

Just curious.

Capping stack lean I can understand. How came BOP to lean 2 degrees?

My guess is they drilled it that way,
or else the column has been bent below the seafloor by the catastrophe.

From my notes (which we've all seen can be a tad off): "the condition of the wellhead itself is a concern." The blowout with the riser falling probably bent the BOP over and they've been attempting to "level it". The alignment might impact the pull of the BOP.

Sorry, I wish I knew shorthand so I could be confident with my quotes. I'll be the first to retract my words if the transcript proves me way off base. :)

I remember when Allen said the BOP was leaning 12 to 15 degrees.


I think that was in reference to the top hat and connector above the flex joint. They have attempted to correct that with shims and jacks so they could put the capping stack on.

No it was not in reference to the Top Hat. That was moving all over the place and had a 35+ degree list to it most of the time it was on. He was talking about the BOP having a lean, which was confirmed by several ball bearing levels on the BOP.

No, he is talking about the riser adaptor on top of the flexjoint leaning at that angle not the top hat.


I remember that too, because it was more of a lean than the Tower of Pisa, which i believe has an 11 degree tilt to it.

Bon Jovi, Brad Paisley to play Gulf Shores beach shows
The other flip-flop has finally dropped: Bon Jovi and Brad Paisley will follow Jimmy Buffett in performing BP-funded beach concerts in Gulf Shores.
The Gulf Shores and Orange Beach Tourism agency announced Wednesday morning that Bon Jovi will perform on the Gulf Shores Beach on Friday, Oct. 15, followed by Brad Paisley on Sunday, Oct. 17.
According the agency, the shows are free to the public. Tickets will be available through “Gulf Shores and Orange Beach lodging partners” starting Wednesday, Sept. 8. That suggests that most tickets will be given to hotels and condo owners to help attract overnight guests.

Gulf Shores is a conservative town with a Mayor that has no musical taste. Apparently, he listened to his PR director for once. He is probably an Alabama grad.

Since no one knows what is going on any more with BP and there OPS. Look at the debris on the ROV's streaming down like a matrix screen saver. Do we have any idea as to what it is??

BOEM is hosting a discussion forum that is open to the public in Houston, Biloxi, and Lafayette about the drilling ban.


Is BP afraid to drill the relief well?

-Rockman, thanks for your response earlier. I have a lot of respect for your opinion.

Your taking advice from someone who is just reading the headlines that Thad Allens spits out...Rockman sounds like all he does is play his guitar all day long since he is always lurking these forums. Or he just works for BP...

You just dumped yourself into the TOD trash bin and closed the lid on yourself, as far as I'm concerned. /ignore on.



Come on guys ...be nice to CCT. I got a real kick out of the comment. I did try to play guitar long ago but it cut into my Blue Bell time too much so I gave it up. Work for BP? No...but I would if 1) they paid me really good and 2) didn't risk my life. I've been a consultant (read: oil patch whore) since 1982. Hell...I've worked for ExxonMobil a few time and never lost sleep over it. As long as they don't take chances with people's lives or the environment (and the check doesn't bounce) I'll work for anyone.

Oh, Rocky, we nice. We just 'splained to CCT why no one who's around today will ever bother with him again.

'bin doin that already.


'bin doin that already

Truth be told, me too. 'Twas snakehead's reaction that snagged me ("CCT" being one of the handles that translates "Scroll, baby, scroll!").


OK, ROCKMAN, which is it? Do you work for BP or play guitar all day?

Alas Nubs I don't get a BP check nor play the guitar. Even worse: I'm on the Blue Bell wagon until I lose 30 lbs and get my knees fixed.

BTW: for the record I've never read a press release by Thad, BP or Mr. Wright. But it's difficult to avoid them as folks toss them out on TOD. I know it sounds odd but I think I've developed a better idea of what's happening now and in the past by using an imagination and 35 years of experience. That way I'm not confused by many of the conflicting "facts" being offered. In my little world we call in "pattern recognition". Sorta like the old "been there...done that...heard the excuses before".

Aha! No need to read press releases when the force is with you!

Nubs - Nor in this case when the farce is with me.

Rockman sounds like all he does is play his guitar all day long

Uh-huh, and Thomas Jefferson sounded like all he did was write recipes all day. (Or he just worked for George III.)

CCT, kiddo, you've so stepped in it.


Rockman, as well as many of the other regulars here, have shown me over the months that they have exceptional intellect (no matter the degrees!), overwheliming common sense, and unbelievable generosity with their time and knowledge. I grew up in Wyoming and I guarantee you, if not born with them we quickly develop highly sensitive BS detectors....and Rock has never set mine off!!

CCT~Wow, how did you know he played the guitar....have you been peeking in my bedroom as my other female friend and I ply him with BBIC for answers and music after we force feed him oysters and redbull for the extra stamina to handle 3 women just after we bring out the handcuffs and whips(crap, did I just post that)?

J/K Rock~couldn't help myself, you know what they say about sarcasm........it's your mind's self defense mechanism for idiots:)

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! o^0



Nice nockle-ears!

Mummie -- To be crudely honest in my youth I once contemplated being with two women at once. But after careful consideration I decided to pass on the idea. Dealing with one disappointed woman was bad enough. Two would be all the worse.

LOL~I thought every man in history at least "thought" about it at least once, you do make me laugh with the last line.....I doubt you'd be a disappointment, never met you but to most women the sexiest man is sexy because of their intellect and humor (course you could be hot too, and that doesn't hurt, just not a pre-requesite)

TOTALLY O/T.......but anyone in the oil profession familiar with ALVAH T WICKBOLDT? Supposedly he worked for Exxon and has plenty of money. He lives on the beach and just learned some extremely disturbing news from the school today, which is why I have been on another site and attending a meeting with locals about the information just released :(

Take your pick mummsie. But I would recommend the first date be in a very public place.

Designation: Sexual Offender Name: ALVAH T WICKBOLDT Status: Released - Required to Register Department of Corrections #: Not Available
Search the Dept of Corrections Website Date of Birth: 01/02/1954 Race : White Sex: Male Hair: Grey Eyes: Hazel Height: 6'00" Weight: 160 lbs

Recommended Order - DBPR: Home Page - Florida Department of ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
... individual from Exxon. He worked as a research technologist for Exxon for 34 years. As ..... Certified Mail to Alvah T. Wickboldt, 1760 ïvalea Circle, ...

Heck...if it's the same guy he might not only curl your blue speckled toes but get you a deal on a nice beach front lot.

That's what our meeting was about, he just moved about 2 blocks east of the elemtary school and I found he was just busted again here in Escambia County for child porn and more.....so needless to say he wouldn't curl my toes as much as make me vomit and other things I can't post in public. It IS the same guy, I checked and was told so many scary stories tonight. Parents here let their kids walk, bike and skateboard home from school and there are kids within 100 yds af his new rental. I pray IF guilty he is out away for life after I learned the charges from East Baton Rouge, LA. It's sad because our kids can't even play outside without worrying and here it's like a throw back to the 50's in the way the kids have so much freedom. This is one reason I made one post only to Gregg Hall, as someone asking for money to take a pic of the beach to support his lifestyle pales in comparison to the welfare of our kids on the Island. To me, one offense and you should be relocated to an island with the 1,000's of other offender's with one can of spam and a liter of water for all of them, save the taxpayers a hell of a lot of money, and anyone who has 3 charges of child molestation (and I won't allude to the victim) isn't worth the oxygen they take up.

When I heard he was in the oil biz I just wondered if anyone had ever heard of him........thanks RM


mummsie -- Yes...rather scary. You know how red neck the oil patch is and just like we hear about prison, child molesters are considered fair game. Many years ago I was on a rig where rumors were flying about one hand being investigated for molesting his step daughter. Turns out a near miss of a 10# wrench dropped from 60' off the derrick was sufficient incentive for the guy to ask to be sent in. No idea if the charges were valid or if they had actually been made. Let's just say emotions run high with red neck dads. "Justice" on a rig may not always be fair but it is swift as a rule.

Nice post, I like the Wave Glider. Reminds me of the Aquaskipper that came out a while back. Except, in this case, it actually serves a purpose other than buffoonery.


Wave power, certainly the potential is there....


As far as quality control and working environments, in any industry, which seems to be somewhat of a sore topic here: I don't know if anybody here is familiar with Mr. Demmings, I thought there was maybe even a chance one of you old fogies here might have known/worked with him. Just thought I'd throw this out there, while we are waiting for the mothership....cough.


Wait, it appears they already landed, and are actively snatching brains.


T-P headlines:

BP payments for Gulf of Mexico oil spill response facilities lagging, some say

After several companies and landowners involved with Gulf of Mexico oil spill response in St. Bernard Parish said they have not been paid by BP for their services, Parish President Craig Taffaro called on the oil giant Tuesday evening to resolve the issues and avoid potential work interruptions in the coming days.

Taffaro said one of the companies that manages the land in Hopedale, where most of the spill response activities are conducted, has given him a 10-day notice to vacate unless it is paid. ...

Judge refuses to toss out suit over drilling ban

A federal judge who overturned the Obama administration's initial six-month moratorium on deepwater oil drilling has rejected the government's bid to have the court challenge thrown out.

Government lawyers argued that a lawsuit filed by several offshore service companies over the May 28 moratorium was moot because the Interior Department imposed a new, temporary drilling ban on July 12.

But U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman rejected that argument Wednesday, saying the second moratorium "arguably fashions no substantial changes" from the first. ...

Blowout preventer removal to resume Thursday

... Waves are expected to have lowered to about 4 feet at noon on Thursday, allowing the Discoverer Enterprise drill ship to remove a capping stack atop the well. The capping stack is the small blowout preventer put on top of the well July 15 that effectively stopped the flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The capping stack will be placed on the sea floor after it is removed.

Following the capping stack's removal, the Q4000 platform will attempt to remove the once-gushing well's failed blowout preventer. The Q4000 needs calmer seas, with waves of no more than 3 feet, to remove the blow out preventer because it will do so using a less sturdy mechanism called a drill string, Allen said. ...

In contrast to the first story, however . . .

BP Spent $93.4 Million On Advertising Between April And July

,,, According to Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), who's heading one of the investigations into the oil spill, that's three times the amount BP spent on advertising in the same period last year. ...

moved to subthread

Do any of you smart guys here know how to find out who writes the site over at Floridaoilspilllaw.com?

Whenever I read that site I feel like the world's coming to an end. Whoever started the site is very careful not to put his name anywhere. That makes me really suspicious of his motives. Could be an agent provocateur type.

With my CT hat firmly in place, I do believe that there are folks and groups who have an agenda to divide and scare people. On the other hand, if the news there is even 80% accurate, we Gulf coast folks are screwed, physically, economically, and psychologically.

Do any of you smart guys here know how to find out who writes the site over at Floridaoilspilllaw.com?

Whomever it is they are hiding. from "whois"

AboutUs: floridaoilspilllaw.com

Registration Service Provided By: UK2 Group
Visit: http://uk2group.com

Domain name: floridaoilspilllaw.com

Registrant Contact:
Private Registrant ()

164 N. Spring Creek Parkway
Providence, UT 84332

Administrative Contact:
Private Registrant ()
Fax: +1.4357553449
164 N. Spring Creek Parkway
Providence, UT 84332

Technical Contact:
Private Registrant ()
Fax: +1.4357553449
164 N. Spring Creek Parkway
Providence, UT 84332

Status: Locked

Name Servers:

Creation date: 18 May 2010 17:10:00
Expiration date: 18 May 2011 12:10:00

p'dancer, this is all you really need to know to see whazzup there, eh? Me, after one visit, I see that URL and waste no further clicks on it.

The street address is that for 'Westhost' - a company that offers a domain name for $4/month.

The phone number comes back to the same company.

Very good find, Useless! Thank-you!

I've wondered about that too. The "contact" button leads to a mailing address in Stuart, Fl. Maybe it is a law firm looking for damage claimants. I guess someone could email them saying Corexit has given grampaw leukemia, and see what response you get.

They are doing everything they can to stir up fear and suspicion.


I've thought that, too. No offense to the juris doctors out there, (my son is one) but this oil spill can mean huge money for lawyers .

The WHOIS database shows the registration for Floridaoilspilllaw.com as "private." No easy way to find out. BTW, with no fully-disclosed "About Us" page, it is a pretty good indication of something not right.

Because of their name, I originally though that this was a shill site for attorneys drumming up clients. Now, I think it is just another ad-whore website.

The site is heavily into Google advertising (check out the number of advertising spaces on their pages) so they get paid when someone clicks through to an ad. With enough traffic and enough resulting clicks, they can make a lot of money.

It has proven that one can stir up the sheepeople with bad news. BTW, even the MSM know this; try to find much good news on the front page of a paper.

Websites, because of free speech, can basically say anything they want to short of very, very minimal limitations in the law. "Heavily slanted" news and information is a bit of an understatement.

BTW, none of their stories even has to be true. The wilder, the more over the top that the coverage gets, the more clicks they get from the sheepeople and the more revenue from Google.

Some sites, like GLP, make no pretense of being truthful (read their disclaimer sometime). Other sites mask the same drivel as "news" to fool the gullible. In short, there are no ethical or professional standards a website has to meet.

As scams go, pretty low risk way to make money under the guise of presenting an "alternative" view.

BB~just read your reply to my comment from last night. Again ITA, and AH's blog, floridaoilspilllaw and BK Lim are the fav's of the local CT, and if you recall FOSL was the site that posted the article about the 5 deaths from ppl swimming in "contaminated water", when in reality it was 5 drownings during red or double red flag days for rip currents and strong surf, sadly one was a 2 yr old child. So, again incredibly misleading.

GLP because of their own disclaimer lost $1200.00 they thought was going to Gregg Hall, when they found out it wasn't they were going to sue until a poster told them to read their own disclaimer about role playing etc., they screwed themselves (and not in a good way either)

A little digging produced:

From: http://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jul/16/3-suits-over-alleged-r-j-copyr...

--Grant N. Grand and an entity called Florida Oil Spill Law, which are associated with the website www.floridaoilspilllaw.com. A May 10 R-J story about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill allegedly was posted on that website. Court records show the posting included the byline "BY OILFLORIDA," but also included a link to the R-J story on the R-J website.

From: http://www.city-data.com/forum/florida/1007742-florida-doomed-7.html

Registration Service Provided By: UK2 Group
Contact: hostmaster@westhost.com
Visit: http://uk2group.com


Registrant Contact:

G.N. Grand ()

201 Colorado Ave
Stuart, FL 34994

Administrative Contact:

Grant Grand (grantgrand@hotmail.com)
3084 Wimbledon Ter
Palm City, FL 34990

This posting was from June 30th so it appears that FloridaOilSpillLaw.com has nly recently switched to private registration.

Edit: to add case info

From: http://dockets.justia.com/docket/nevada/nvdce/2:2010cv01177/74815/

Plaintiff: Righthaven LLC
Defendants: Florida Oil Spil Law and Grant N. Grand

Case Number: 2:2010cv01177
Filed: July 15, 2010

Court: Nevada District Court
Office: Las Vegas Office

Boffo work, bb!

Ain't the Internet grand! ;-)

Nailed by Righthaven, a copyright troll.

Yep. However, good lesson to be careful of "fair use" of copyrighted material.

There are folks that have made a legal business out of going after websites that misuse copyrighted material.

You guys are awesome! I knew you'd be good sleuths!

I guess the ma and pa scaremongers have to make their stories scarier than ever in order to pay their legal fees for copyright infringement,lol. The story about the swimming pool water was really over the top, IMHO, but it's gotten a ton of comments, so I guess he got a lot of hits on that one!

Thanks for making me feel better, folks:0)

Sorry, got side-tracked on my day job ;-)

One "Grant N. Grand" shows to be an attorney at law in Florida. See http://www.quickclickattorney.com/attorney/fl/grant-grand/857092

He may be associated with Prime Design LLC. See http://www.corporationwiki.com/Florida/Stuart/prime-design-llc/26658415....

So, the "jury is still out" to use a bad pun. FOSL is certainly an ad-whore site but I wonder if Grand is trolling for clints too.

Assuming that Mr. Grand is indeed the site's publisher/owner AND he is hussling for clients, I wonder what his professional requirements are with the Bar. In Texas, the Bar Association is pretty tough on attorney websites advertising for clients. Attorneys actually have to submit their websites to the Bar for review. I wonder what the Florida Bar's oversite of websites consist of.

who writes the site over at Floridaoilspilllaw.com?

alexhiggins732 on September 1, 2010 - 1:21am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Parent subthread | Comments top I see you found a nice clean area of the beach...

1) There are many news reports of BP admitting to covering up the fact they have been hiding the clean up of tons of oil in Pensacola.

2) Pensacola Gregg Publishes beach reports twice daily of the oil washing up on Pensacola. http://www.youtube.com/user/pcolagregg

3) Here are screen caps of his latest video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Qjb_fQoy24

If ALEX HIGGINS is around, I am familiar with this area, it's actually around 1199 Ft. Pickens Road, some of these are in front of Condos just west of walkover 6.

SOME of that is seagrass, and some of his pic'c are from the sound (but he'd never admit to it unless he knows you live down the beach and then it's a private PM). We will obviously get tar balls now and then, but they are by no means ALL OVER the beach as he proclaims, FGS this is a man who wrote Jesse Ventura to tell him that "I'm a marked man" LMAO.........

Gregg walks the beach in the morning and afternoon when not hanging out in the bars or getting tattoos from donated money, and still wants donations and has the donate button on 3 pages:)

As far as BP coming clean about oil, they hire enviromental crews and workers who have been cleaning up the sound, the Ft. Pickens and and NAS, where the workers were chest deep in water pulling OLD WEATHERED tar mats out for months, so it's really not a shock that they admit to it......I would like the specific source of whomever stated they denied it, when the man from O'Briens was out at NAS too, and if you are relying on Project Gulf Impact, I have to laugh as they were the ones telling everyone to evacuate because the buses were coming to take them to FEMA camps and their children were going to get a chip inserted and then be seperated forever, sadly many in LA bought into that and where scared to death.

Gregg falls in that category too, here are just a few of HIS post, begging and a few threats......so if that's the best you got, good luck.

The cover up in the Gulf Oil Disaster is unprecedented. I am going as hard and as fast as I can for you guys to keep getting the truth out and I appreciate everyone who is helping, BUT I am probably a week away from being completely out of funds so if you know any organizations that will get behind what we are trying to do please help us.

Gregg Hall

From Gregg: Project Gulf Impact has headed on over to Orange Beach, Alabama to document the location where an independent scientist who is being harassed by BP has revealed the Government is covering up toxic levels of oil and dispersants in the water and has found large amounts of dispersants being applied on ...

(ME: how does a internet used car saleman/internet marketer know what dispersant LOOKS like in the water?)

Gregg Hall , I blocked him a week ago because he was talking crap like he knew me and didn't have a clue. Please report him. If I find him NO ONE else will...

I hear ya Gregg. I already reported him. He needs to go bother somebody else or I might have to hunt him down. You stay where you are at doing what you are doing. I'm crazy. I can get away with it. shhh.

Gregg Hall ‎@KMDNews - The MSM consists of those who are bought and paid for - they are cowards and most who work for them are cowards as well - who else have you seen who has sacrificed their income to bring you the truth?

(ME.....sacrificing their income? HE was fired for cause, and he's begging for money-that's not a sacrifice IMO)

Gregg Hall BP has already bought numerous scientists and government officials - You need only see the lies they spew to know they have been paid - Just like Thad Allen, I hope he likes it hot, there is a special place in Hell for people like him...

Gregg Hall
Sorry if I have offended anyone but anyone who knows me knows I am a warrior soul and I hide from no one. In another time the heads of my enemies would adorn spears outside my abode. We have violated the laws of nature and survival of the fittest and have diluted the DNA of enlightened powerful beings who got us to this point

Hall When you are right you cannot be too radical; when you are wrong, you cannot be too conservative.

Gregg Hall @jayrod59 I cannot get ANYONE to help me... I am being discredited and called a liar by everyone in our local government...

Gregg Hall I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.

Gregg Hall @Abbershay - Looks are deceiving. The water smells, it is bubbling and fizzing and my skin burns for hours after getting out of it. Nothing good about it

Gregg Hall I should have my VOC Blood Profile by Monday or Tuesday John, then everyone will know exactly how much this has cost me and the sacrifice I chose to make...

XXXXXXXXXXXX You've never asked for money anywhere?????? Then why are you asking for money on your page??? http://www.facebook.com/l/585b5TCNfXEYk16eB145uDfVXSg;pcolagregg.com/ I liked what you were doing until you just told that lie!!!!!! And he does have a point. If you care so much about the ...environment... Why is YOUR picture on this page instead of something from the environment? And he is right about a few other things... GET A JOB, STOP ASKING FOR MONEY AND TELL THE TRUTH!!! If you want to pay for testing let the people send money to the testers. I have seen videos of you on here at bars, clubs etc. Who is paying for that?????
Glad I didn't send you any money! Your page says you work! Just another lie I guess!"


True Reporting On Gulf Oil Spill Out in rain and storms reporting for all of you and just got a call that some guy named Sean Doyle is accusing me of profiting from the disaster when I've lost thousands and xxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxx are chiming right in with him on True Reporting. I'm about to leave you to fend for yourselves. I'm sick of bein...g attacked and I'm sick of the lies and accusations

Gregg Hall I don't understand and it pisses me off that they would interview him, then I LIVE her and sacrifice everything, I gave up a six figure income, sacrificies my relationships, my health and probably my life to tell me people the truth, and I get NO credit, the media doesn't come to me for interviews when I know the truth from my sources, there are mercanaries after me and I have seen unmarked cars outside my house and know they are watching me, yet he gets the credit. It's not fair

Gregg Hall
Looks up on http://ezinearticles.com/

I used to be one of the top writers on the Internet ;)

(ME: and he wrote about everything from foreplay to ladies bras, so if this is who you are getting your info from, no wonder you sound like a loon, and it's not about the fact he looks like a cross between mr clean and a pirate, it's the fact he's spreading looney conspiracies about BP mercanaries outside his condo watching him to the surf boiling like acid and attacking and threatening anyone who challenges him for facts and he has personally threatened me....)

How on earth could he even be taken seriously FTLOG?




Sorry for the long reply to A Higgins, but since we were told to STFU by one of his (Gregg's) "peeps" as he calls them, I thought you should know why random posters who pop in like BARICH1979 have the mindset they do...........scary IMO.

Edit~missing word

Silly me. Anything goes. I forgot.

No doubt I am strange, to use YOUR verbage to some, but since we had a few of the cult members posting yesterday and today from this specific person, I thought it is relevant to show their mindset as to why they are so confrontational (they think they know everything, and anyone who has a different opinion is ignorant). I posted a fraction of what they are spoon fed non-stop, so others have a little insight ....

FYI~not my diary, my life isn't that intersting. I just have a friend who's hubby works for the dpt of agriculture and he's been assigned to this case, as I understand it is illegal in Florida to ask for donations unless you are registered and she told me her hubs is a plant on these pages -the FB pages watching the threats of violence, begging for money and CT's. She has tons of post and info from him, and sorry but those pic's to me are funny as shit and I needed a laugh.


I believe the claim that BP denied knowledge of the sunken tar in Pensacola Bay came from PNJ reporter Kimberley Blair, who based the claim on "13 interviews" but didn't give any names or quotations.

Obviously there is tar and will be tar in the areas that got hit by the slick and beyond. Everybody who has learned anything about what happens to oil in the water knows that. If someone can produce a quotation from a BP or government official to the effect that there is no more tar in the Gulf, I'd like to see it. Otherwise let's stop ginning up the "everybody's lying to us all the time" theme.

You are right, it did come from PNJ. Surely you'd think they'd know that workers have been out there cleaning it up for months before posting that and running with it, all the CT sites ran with it like BP AND gov't officials stated it, that's why I wanted a source that was valid, and I would LOVE more than anything to see the "theme" stopped about the gov't and BP lying, but if it doesn't fit the agenda it continues even when you ask for facts to back up the info...I hope you don't think I was stating the "everybody's lying to us", as I don't buy that nor that they are telling us everything either, but I certainly don't believe they have mercanaries running around spraying corexit and stalking/threatening Bob Naman, corexit in swimming pools etc.

According to this article BP was denying they were finding oil in the bay and so was the government but finally admitted it. The article also talks about a half mile ribbon of oil they were cleaning up.

Despite persistent denials from BP last week, thousands of pounds of weathered oil is being pulled from under the surface of Pensacola Bay every day.

During more than a dozen interviews last week, BP officials and spokespeople for a number of government agencies working on the Deepwater Horizon Oil spill response denied knowledge of oil in the bay.

Booms and oil-absorbent material also were being used to clean up orange-colored ribbons of oil — one a half-mile long — about a foot below the surface of the water near the beach.


According to this article BP was denying they were finding oil in the bay and so was the government but finally admitted it.

I suspect sloppy journalism. Despite it's claim/inference that BP denied the existance of the oil, I couldn't find a single direct quote from a BP or government spokesman doing any such thing.

Or maybe you just didn't read carefully enough - the 2nd paragraph of the article goes on to say:

During more than a dozen interviews last week, BP officials and spokespeople for a number of government agencies working on the Deepwater Horizon Oil spill response denied knowledge of oil in the bay.

Her "denied knowledge of" is not quite the same as your "denying they were finding".

The local BP guy certainly knew about it and seems to have been forthcoming enough when the reporter finally got around to talking to the right guy:

On Saturday, Scott Piggott, who heads the Escambia and Santa Rosa cleanup operation for BP, said cleanup workers began noticing the submerged oil at Barrancas Beach in July.

"The last month, we've spent considerable effort to get people to concentrate on that," he said. "Then we notice the same phenomenon at the Fort Pickens site, and cleanup has been going on there for two weeks."

Yeah, it's a shame that not every element of the cleanup effort has instant total knowledge of every detail of what every other element is doing. But then maybe a competent reporter would have figured out how to find Mr. Piggott last week instead of talking to a bunch of people who had no clue as to what was going on in her little corner of the world.

And it's too bad that the one organization in this country with the most experience in dealing with a widespread complex disaster recovery operation like this has apparently had to sit on the sidelines and watch a bunch of rookies put something together on the fly.

I hope you have reported his death threats to the FBI. Probably some internet resources you can contact over his site but I can't think of any at the moment.


Nah~I didn't, his pages (5 IIRC) have been monitored for awhile, and someone mentioned the fact the threats over the net were illegal and SOME were deleted my friend told me, but according to her it doesn't matter, they can still find them and also had screen grabs and it's public knowledge it's not like I'm outing anything......of course they think it's BP and the Gov't, thus the message to Jesse Ventura for his support due to the local being a marked man LOL, marked by tats maybe but that's about it (not that I am against tats, just not that many.....no offense to anyone)

From Beachmommie's comment:

"Gregg Hall
Sorry if I have offended anyone but anyone who knows me knows I am a warrior soul and I hide from no one. In another time the heads of my enemies would adorn spears outside my abode. We have violated the laws of nature and survival of the fittest and have diluted the DNA of enlightened powerful beings who got us to this point"

Good grief, the guy is really in a bad way! Diluted DNA? Maybe he was a fan of Hitler, too!

Unfortunately, I do believe there are many environmental uncertainties about this oil disaster that still need to come to light in order for people to feel they've been dealt with truthfully, and that time will eventually heal the wounds. But it is nutballs like the ones that go over the top, that make it so hard to discern truth from lies, reality from imagination.

I just wish there was a better way for the average person to recognize the truth from the BS.

LOL PD~That is nothing compared to the info she has compiled, maybe the corexit got in his bottled waters and diluted some brain cells, but I can read the one FB page as it's a "like" page and I LMAO sometimes so I have seen alot crazier chit than that posted, but the cult eats it all up like its prime rib.

I have a hard time taking anyone serious that surrounds themselves in clouds, fig leaves of looks like MR Clean + Pirate combined, but agree about so much info and trying to figure truth/lie/speculation. Thankful I live at the beach, so I know when he says the water and sand are black for miles than it is a patent lie, but most believe it as gospel:(

I just wish there was a better way for the average person to recognize the truth from the BS.

There is: by becoming and staying informed!

In my undergraduate days, I declared a second major in jounalism (way outside my science field) and my professors taught us how to really become informed. Yes, it is a lot of work and you have to read a lot, but it's a darn good idea. Otherwise, you will always be dependent of having someone else telling what things mean. This is actually dangerous.

My favorite mentor/prof from J-school always couched it in terms of an obligation of citizenship in a free society to be informed (on all sides of issues) and to learn to think critically for yourself about everything. My professor would have said that we "average people" have an obligation to be informed, otherwise, we're not really "free" only a target of the first person to come along with a persuasive pitch.

You're here at TOD. You're an artist, as I recall, but you're here reading (like me) way outside of your area interest (like me) about the oilpatch. As we learn more, we will develop our own BS detectors.

Edit: Also, the Baloney Detection Kit helps too. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUB4j0n2UDU

Good advice, BB.

I've learned a lot from this site, but need to get back to painting. I spend WAY too much time here:0(

So I've decided to close my mind before my brains fall out.

Thanks for the link.


"keep an open mind, just not so open that your brains fall out."


Please tell me why I should give a worm's anal polyp about this.
Did I miss something or does this make no sense whatsoever?

Hello Liz Townsend - Nice to see you spewing lies and misinformation here now that I finally blocked you from my pages.

I have had numerous people walk the area I walk with me everyday, people who had the guts to take the time to do it instead of sit in their million dollar home and talk trash about someone they don't know.

I won't bother wasting time to respond to the rest of your BS because 95% is totally false, and I wasn't a used car salesman....

I know the difference between oil and seagrass - I grew here, you flew here.

AND, I am not the one that created the pictures - I can't help what people who believe in what I am doing anymore than I can stop people like you from being a hater.

Believe what you want to believe, ANYONE that wants to see for their self, my offer to take a walk with me still applies.

I personally NEVER asked for a nickel, the people that are on my pages asked me to put that on my pages and besides one personal friend - the grand total over a couple of months was less than $1000

My tattoo was arranged and traded out in exchange for promotion months before the oil disaster occurred...

You try to act like you know so much about me and you know nothing about me - LIZ TOWNSEND from the east end of Pensacola Beach...

Gregg Hall

Well, that was a big success. Now we have two of them.

I won't be hanging around. Was just alerted to the libel and slander so I came and responded, then copied, pasted and forwarded to my attorney.

Good luck


Good luck with that "limited purpose public figure" thing for libel and slander.

Too bad Greg, you could learn a lot of facts and counterpoint here.

I really like your youtube work and reporting. Keep up the good work, man.

I got a problem with mommydearest as well, quite a bully for one claiming to be a lady...

From the Chronicle:

BP says it has learned from the spill
But its report stops short of acknowledging any mistakes

The offshore oil and gas industry is better equipped to deal with deep-water accidents because of lessons that BP learned battling its massive oil spill, the British oil giant says in a report due on federal regulators' desks today. ...

Though not made public Tuesday, the report hews closely to a presentation made in early August by BP executives at a federal forum on offshore drilling, a person familiar with the report said.

In that presentation, BP highlighted a number of "lessons learned" in battling the worst oil spill in U.S. history but stopped short of saying it made mistakes. ...

"This will be a classic in crisis management, and I don't think BP will come off well," said William Arnold, a professor of energy management at Rice University. ...

Get ready for a new round of hysteria:
Hurricanes Could Carry Gulf "Oil" Inland

“People who are living in upland areas, thinking I don’t need to be concerned much about the health effects of the oil spill, because I don’t live near the coast, If you have rain that has some of these hydrocarbons in it, many of which are toxic and carcinogenic, and hurricanes drop this rain in areas far north, upland areas of the Gulf states, sometimes hurricanes from the Gulf coast make it as far north as New England .. that rain could very well have these hydrocarbons in it, and essentially, dropping hydrocarbons along the way."

“It may not be raining oil, but it could be raining hydrocarbons that come from the oil in the Gulf of Mexico.”


Granting the first "if," all the rest follows.

Unfortunately I'm sure that not everyone will pick up on that and will rather see it as an assertion, not an argument based upon a flawed premise.

... and ignore the probability that every hurricane since the 1800s has dumped some hydrocarbon components.

Nothing wrong with the testing protocols or the hypothesis. If the testing produces FACTS, that's the bottom line, and you evaluate it from there.

Now if we could apply the same logic to Politics, etc....

snakehead, that's damned disappointing from not only this guy but Nat'l Geo: pure speculation, not reporting -- "could" and "may," not "did" and "will." Painful to see that kind of unprofessionalism from a source I've trusted as long as I could read.

Not the first time Nat Geo reporting has disappointed related to this spill event.

Alternate headline I could have lived with -

"Scientists to study whether storms can disperse oil spill compounds"

But hey, Nat Geo has to make a buck too.

Lotus, that was my first thought exactly.

Nothing wrong with having the guy explain his research, but given the current climate, a responsible researcher would say what is obviously true, that nobody need feel threatened by parts per trillion of hydrocarbons in the rainwater. In fact the only practical value of this research that I can see is that it should demonstrate that there's nothing to fear. Instead he goes out of his way to mention that some of the oil constituents are toxic, as though he expects to discover a hazard.

Here we go, Gob: 1 - 2 - 3 GRRRRRR!

For what it's worth, NatGeo simply isn't the Pub it used to be. It's gone diversified and politicized (not that it was ever anything else just on a smaller scale) but at least they used to put out a wowser magazine that was rock solid factual. All of my data indicate that there may or may not be integrity there anymore. Must be something in the water in D.C.

[Dosclosure: Former editor in Washington, knew an editor who worked at NatGeo.
A shame how far we done fell...]

Painful to see that kind of unprofessionalism from a source I've trusted as long as I could read.

There is actually a term for it: "tabloidization" - see http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tabloidization

Search Google for "tabloidization of media"

My "serious jounalist" buddies in Sigma Delta Chi have been decrying the trend for years claiming that no media outlet is immune; too much business pressure for circulation and ratings (sad comment on our society, but tabloidization actually does increases rating/circulation/viewership). If NatGeo caves, I guess they're right.

I call it social collapse and creeping idiocracy.

The tussle between people in positions like the TO OIM and BP "Company Man" is, in my opinion, reflective of issues farther up the ladder, but unfortunately the events of April 20 suggest that the ones who are responsible are unlikely to experience either a sense of responsibility for what happened, or be seen as responsible, because of a flaw in the management culture.

When I was a manager at various points up a company ladder (in a couple of my previous incarnations), my attitude was that my job was to support my employees, and help them do the best job they able to do. While it was certainly my responsibility to hold my employees accountable, and provide any corrective intervention when their attitude strayed off the reservation, I saw myself as more of a facilitator, and in a support role than a boss or enforcer.

A good manager is in touch with his employees, spends enough time to know who they are, what they're good at, where they encounter challenges while doing their job, and helping them solve problems when needed, all without micro-managing them. That's why management are paid more. They need to do more, and more sophisticated, work than their employees.

In this case, the next level of management, as well as the level of management above that in both organizations involved, should have been fully aware that there was an issue here, long before it became highly visible on and just before April 10, not because their employees were keeping them posted but because they were keeping themselves informed (in fact even, and especially, if their employees were trying to conceal problems from them).

If they had been, they were in a position to resolve the problems well before the disaster.

I suspect that Rockman and others here will recognize this management ethic, even if, perchance, they haven't been conscious of it, simply because it's so much a part of what they do instinctively because of who they are.

When organizations promote upon the basis of people doing a good job at what they're doing, that is seen as rewarding performance and, indeed, is doing that. What it's also doing, however, if we don't take into account other aspects of their abilities, is to invite the "Peter Principle" to rear its ugly head, with the result that we promote people to the level of their incompetence, where they lose their ability to contribute to success, and instead become a liability to the company.

This is an important part of the management culture which differentiates good companies from mediocre and bad companies. If there is no attempt to ensure that this kind of culture permeates the whole organization, that failure will come back and bite you every time.

Sand Shark digs for oil at Pensy Beach

There are areas where oil washed ashore and is more than a foot below the surface. Buck Lee with SRIA said BP's contractor hasn't received a go-ahead to go deeper and has been given no reason why.

According to yesterdays toe test, this mechanism is not necessary...
No oil under the sand, nothing to see here, have some gumbo...

Dat be mo bettah as conk chowdah. Florida Gulf coast isn't real gumbofied.

An' conk fritters, doan fergit!

The Queen Conch she be threaten', no harvest in Florida since 1975. God knows what they serve as conch in Key West these days.


God knows what they serve as conch in Key West these days

Lately, they're from Puerto Rico. Best I ever ate, though (years ago but not pre-'75), were on a dive-boat off Islamorada -- right up out of the water, out of the shell, and into our moufs!

So funny you would misrepresent what I stated, I posted that I couldn't find any on MY AREA of the beach, so the nut job posting that I referred above stating IT IS ALL OVER THE BEACH was a gross mis-statement and if you read correctly I also stated that is is certainly on other areas, especially west of the pier.....but that is NOT the ENTIRE beach as far as the eys can see. I do enjoy the gumbo at Peg Leg's though and had some last night:)

Also, I certainly think it is necessary and should be used where the oil is layered-------thankfully that is more the west end of the Island. Comprehension is pretty important to keeping what is posted in context.

Off to get a shrimp cocktail in a bit

A real scientist would do something like this:


In fact a real scientists would take a core sample survey along the entire gulf coast before they started digging with heavy equipment.

The truth is out there regardless of your 'half full' perspective.
Your prejudiced toward tattooed people shows the character to judge may be your own.

Mommy.....I loved the toe test...and those blue nails -- pretty hot!! Please don't let Hex or those recent joiners bother you a bit. I've learned a lot from your perspective over the past weeks/months and always look for your posts. We have a nice "beach" (that's what we call it anyway!) here too but nothing like yours!! Ahhh, please pass the oysters and red bull!! Love that shrimp cocktail too, but your recent recommendation of oysters and red bull sounded interesting!! Wonder if it works on old guys like me?!! Guess I'll just have the cocktail part and enjoy a couple of olives with it! Best I can do from here!

Lotus.....you're right...this is a gorgeous place that God built....but let's face it, they're all over the world!!

but let's face it, they're all over the world

I reckon, but for someone used to humid, flat sea-level, Tahoe's environs (or Snowdonia or the Alps or Andes) are especially knockout. Wooo.

Thanks~not really a test, more of an photo op to show P-Cola Beach is not black with tat and oil and I appreciate your comment, on the red bull and oysters I must say I have no clue s to what and "old guy" is by definition (to me it's how you think, and feel about your age that counts), but my BF is almost 59 so I will say just oysters work LOL.

To Hex, not predjudice to tat as I am getting one on my foot of a small dragonfly, just don't like liars......so try again:)
To Gregg Hall, not Liza here although she is a friend and our kids go to school together and she works with me so I get alot of info from her, just an FYI - truth is the absolute defense in libel/slander and Frontier Motors was your last employers and told your position as internet used cars sales, and your own Linkedin site:

I won't bother wasting time to respond to the rest of your BS because 95% is totally false, and I wasn't a used car salesman....

Gregg Hall’s Experience
Internet Sales Manager
Frontier Motors Inc
(Automotive industry)

Currently holds this position

Internet Sales Manager
Pensacola Used Cars
(Automotive industry)

I personally NEVER asked for a nickel

The cover up in the Gulf Oil Disaster is unprecedented. I am going as hard and as fast as I can for you guys to keep getting the truth out and I appreciate everyone who is helping, BUT I am probably a week away from being completely out of funds so if you know any organizations that will get behind what we are trying to do please help us.
I will be leaving Pensacola Beach early Saturday morning to head for Grand Isle for some meetings, then going on shrimp boat for opening of shrimp season, you can bet there will be some good video and images coming from that.
Thanks for helping me spread the truth in a literal sea of disinformation,



the grand total over a couple of months was less than $1000


We went for a walk by the water first and talked about many spiritual things..

Gregg might be a big guy but his heart is even bigger..

I didn't feel it was appropriate to video tape him during this meeting..

He's not into the "hero" thing..

He doesn't want to be a hero he just wants to get the truth out..

I hooked him up with another 2k cash while I was there..
O.K. guys...

I just got off the phone with the REAL Gregg Hall from pensacola who has been doing all the coverage..

We got everything straightened out and I sent him the $1,683 in donations from glpers...



NOW, I am no math scholar but that lools like more thna $1,000.00 to me...maybe I need a calculator


Anyway, I haven't even seen the post since I left work for the emergency meeting today, and have more issues to deal with than some conspiracy theorist begging for money

Sic'em, tiger.

I have dealt with guy before on a professional basis. Now I remember who he is. He was totally rude to me AND my guest. I have a witness and will attest to it on a deposition or affidavit. You can have your attorney E-mail if necessary, Gregg you are an asshole. Thanks for the info.

Edit: And you do not know everything about computers either Gregg, unlike your proclamations to me that day. You dang sure know nothing about people or how to use basic courtesy. If you want to know what your real problem is, it is that even an average dumb, computer illiterate (although I am a master of such things), guy like me should be treated with PROFESSIONALISM, something you totally lacked when I visited you earlier in the year. I never thought in my life I would get a chance to recount my experience with you and how you acted like such a douche. Even my guest commented how your childish manners embarrassed her. I can contact her if you feel it is necessary. I am not afraid of your lawyers, I am not the one that acted bad that day, YOU WERE! AND I CAN PROVE IT!

NO~Thank you TFHG, and thank you for speaking out and confirming what everyone here locally knows already. You are generally considered a "local" IMO, and this is what I was talking about regarding his reputations (better watch out or he'll sick his atty's on you LOLOL). Were you by chance one who took him up on his walk on the beach, or was it a used car, or computer issue (not that you have to tell me!!)

Like I said, I have never seen the personal page, just the public ones and heard and saw it at Liza's house & know about the dpt of ag, which for some reason also encompasses the consumer affairs division is on all the pages, blogs and forums monitoring the info. Interesting to hear your experience was THAT bad, although from the expereince my friend has had on his pages trying and begging him to stick with facts vs supposition and threats it doesn't surprise me. Also LMAO that Hex thinks I'm a bully (I just have minimal tolerance for BS and call it like I see it) and knew when I posted the info about barich1979 it would get back to him, so nothing I am surprised by. I have heard from the plant that looks like he is not going to have to go back to work as it seems he and has struck a deal with the conspiracy site GLP, so I AM very grateful and hope it stops the cyber begging from gullible and scared ppl on the net. This was what he, the plant sent and his wife shared

Congratulations Gregg on the Godlike Productions deal! Gregg Hall Thanks XXXXX - a blessing to allow me to keep reporting full time - I had a choice to take a job that would have paid me twice as much or to accept their offer which would let me do what I NEED to do and pay my bills - NOT a hard decision...

I'd love to share your experience with him if you'd like to email me.......enough of the BS here, except when one of his trolls like barich1979 pop in telling ppl to STFU.

Sand in crack much?
This is looking more and more like an irrational vendetta.
Please stop clogging the threads with this cheap Jerry Springer nonsense.

[And no, I won't call you "mommy." It's perverse.]

I debated whether to mention this, but after one of my earlier (last week) comments, I got a phone message from the 702 area code. It was a short quick "Don't give me a black eye in front of those ...." and they hung up. I couldn't make out the last part. Time stamp on the message is 8-27 12:28 PM CDT. I still have the message.

So it appears someone important is reading our comments here. I don't have a clue how they got my phone number.

If that someone reads this comment, please understand we're not trying to give anyone a black eye. If you were involved in the decisions made April 20 and you feel bad about the decision(s) you made, best thing I can recommend is confess it. It clears the conscience.

rovman let slip that ROV operators are reading us and implied that they were occasionally pulling our chain for fun. 702 is Las Vegas NV. Not exactly in the oil patch, but secret squirrels have all sorts of telecom tricks.

Speaking of which, there's a secret squirrel ROV at the stack now, no feed.

Las Vegas & Clark County Nevada

702 area code


Yup....NAOM got it just right....Clark County which contains LV, Henderson, etc. The rest of the state uses the 775 area code....that's mine (if it wasn't already obvious by my handle)!

tim, you gotcha one gawjuss place to live. Congratz on that.

Heck, use VOIP (Voice Over IP/Internet) and have an area code anywhere.

For what it's worth guys: I know hands who rotate in the GOM from Canada, Costa Rico, etc. A a good many from the exotic lands of Mississippi.

someone important is reading our comments

Well, far as I'm concerned, no one reading here is more important than anyone else (unless/until asinine comments undermine "anyone else's" cred).

i checked your bio and nada. are you known here by your real name and location or are you anonymous?

IF anonymous, then are you suggesting that they got info through TOD administrators?

Some have already suggested that TOD and other forums could not only contain shills, but be owned and operated by them too.

This for Avonaltendorf:

I've been following this site for several months now, and even though you've seemed to attract a Greek chorus of nay-sayers, I've found most of your comments—and ironic questions—thought-provoking.

It's clear you've become quite skeptical of BP's methods—not to mention their motives (I too confess being taken aback by BP's "shock and awe" media offensive)—but what isn't clear is WHY?

If managing Macondo were so straightforward—a simple engineering problem, many would have us believe—why the secrecy? What is it they are trying to hide?

I'm not screaming about methane bubbles, imminent tsunamis, or the end of the world as we know it—but what it is you fear?

I have never believed, suggested, or implied that a cataclysmic methane bubble or tsunami was possible. I don't know who started that meme, but it wasn't me.

What I do believe is that BP has slowed down well intervention, not from an "abundance of caution," but to give their bankers and lawyers time to negotiate and close US upstream asset sales. I also believe that top kill cement was implemented to preclude measurement of flowing oil. It made no sense otherwise to stop the relief well a few feet from intersection and bottom kill. Now, bottom kill is considered "risky."

My involvement in studying the blowout, Congressional and USCG testimony, and subsea activities was mostly professional. I run a business. Offshore oil exploration crashed as a consequence of the Macondo blowout and moratorium. I also write an energy column for Seeking Alpha.

This drama is nearing a conclusion, for better or worse. If BP can recover the iron and P&A from the top, using a new BOP, that will be good. We can all go back to work.

What I fear is they have a flowing well and subsurface migration. Maybe that's okay. Top cement plug and recovery of the old BOP will satisfy the government.

Can someone tell me what the blown up, beaten on, cut on, pressure hosed by leaks, frozen, defrosted, sulfurated, cemented, flushed, trimmed on, and so on BOP will tell anyone when it is finally raised? Hoses are cut off, switches changed/moved --without much regard to any plan per comments.Is there a smoking gun there--or at least enuf evidence left to determine what happened?

In my opinion, no. Like Rockman said, BOP is well control of worst resort. They already know it was modified in China and overdue for maintenance. Chris Pleasant changed the rubber goods, checked hoses, knew nothing about BOP logic or electrical. They splashed it with dead batteries. Hydraulics failed when the rig exploded. What more is there to investigate?

Couple of unrelated links: from NatureNews, a good overview of the possibilities for longer-term damage to the ecosystem. My only cavil: they exaggerate the danger of tuna, etc., diving into the plumes. The plumes are too deep for that. It's actually a blessing for everybody but the deepwater benthic community that a lot of the oil stayed below 1000m.


Then here's some true madness about the plumes from, ta-da, Bobby Jindal's czar of coastal affairs:

"Before we put our guard down, I think we need to be very confident and have clear awareness on where this residual oil is," Graves said. "We don't want to pull up all the stakes and send all the skimmers away and everything else only to have a storm come through and stir up the plumes, and next thing we know, we're covered in oil again."


the deepwater benthic community

Wouldn't those guys be the most-likely acclimated by seeps? (A fond hope of mine only?)

ta-da, Bobby Jindal's czar of coastal affairs


I don't know about acclimation, but it seems that our youtube buddies could be in for a hard time of it. They got more of the toxic BTEX volatiles (benzene etc.) than anybody else because those dissolved in the water, mostly down deep. They had exposure to dispersed oil in the plumes. Their sediments are receiving the leftovers, not only from the plumes, but from the surface layer as well. I'd guess PAH levels will be considerably higher in the sediments within 20 or 50 miles around the well than elsewhere. Fortunately for the rest of the Gulf, this sector is largely isolated from the rest of the ecosystem, except for the material that rains downward, a one-way connection.

I see what you mean. Drat. Ahhh, nobody gets out of here alive, huh?

Always something new and different at Macondo. Oil Bouyant dirt leaking from outside the rim of yellow H4 connector shell occasionally during the last couple of hours.


Wonder what pushed that out.

I have been watching this ROV feed and observed the well and surrounding ground heaving.

It is a rather unsettling scene to say the least. Please shills spare me the fish dookey swarm excuse or I am seeing things that are not there. BS.

Why is the well and seafloor heaving ?

Have you ever considered the possibility that the ROV carrying the camera is the one heaving, not what it's looking at, n'fool?

Are you trying to be funny? New low in disinformation.

She's not being funny. That's what I see there too. ROV is bobbing around a bit.

Cannot see the seafloor from the top of the stack. Sorry if I was abrupt. But the BP shills have used every imaginable trick to blur evidence and confuse everyone. Perhaps what you see is the capping stack wobbling since they pulled the shims out.

Damn, AvA. Are you using "BP shills" as some kind of shorthand or do you really think there are people at TOD who are being paid to obfuscate the *real* truth?

Yes I do. They have motive, means, opportunity.

While some companies will try to perform their own psyops out of their PR departments, I suspect BP has outsourced their efforts. Even the US government, NSA, Military Intelligence, CIA and so on outsource most of it for a variety of reasons, not the least to get around the law. Many private companies can legally do what the government can't do, simply because the law never envisaged private companies engaging in for-hire psychological ops.


This sounds like tinfoil hat time.

And pretty stupid to - why should the military outsource psyops when they openly have units whose mission is psycological warfare?

See the attached link that describes the US Army Civil Affairs and Psycological Operations Cammand:

FYI - there are many private companies that conduct psycological operations - they are called 'advertising firms.'

Can't advertise here, nor would it do BP any good. That's why they hired hot shots to do web disinformation, attack anyone who asks embarrassing questions.

Ah - so what you are saying is that you would rather believe that there is a conspiracy out to 'silence' you - instead of the considering the possibility that you are wrong?

BTW - do you have any evidence to support your claims that BP hired 'hot shots' to discredit you?

Not me personally, no. All of us. Sow confusion, break the thread of discussion, make crude mocking remarks, smear and mischaracterize, trivialize.

In reality, you (and some other notable CT's here) are only shilling for your BP shorts. So just how many BP shares are you short?

It's a hedge, not a big one. If BP succeeds (which I hope they do), that's jake, we all get to go back to work. If they screw up and BP stock crashes suddenly, I make enough to pay business overhead a couple extra months and don't have to lay people off or file bankruptcy. Everyone in the oil business uses hedging.

I appreciate your reply. I am not much of a fan of ad hominem attacks, and it seems like "BP shill" is the current popular one on these threads. If there is evidence, then fine point it out. But if not, I can't see what it adds to the discussion.

Remember the nutcase PropheticSeer on YouTube back on Aug 3rd claimed the seafloor was heaving. Made his own "you're not going to believe this" story about the giant methane bubble causing the seafloor to rise and heave. Yes, it was only the ROV climbing higher and the pov of the camera changing, not the seafloor heaving.

Made his video to music "It's the end of the world as we know it."

CT's and he finally claimed that it was the sub-seafloor nuke at well B (or was that A) that caused the upheaval.

Anyway, it scarred the shit out of me.

I really don't want to see the end of the world before the end of me. I like this place (Earth), and hope other critters (including people) have a chance for a future.

Could the clouds be from a chemical line leak,its greenish and they have cables everywhere. Also, have seen the seafloor move like a carpet when sea critters get going. In fact, one large glob came up out of the edge of the camera, then burst out with lights. A squid? Octopus? See it in the midline towards the left the glob of lighted something. I hope the ROV researchers saw it.
Neat Sea Critter at 5000 feet

Hey, now that does look just what I glimpsed, was it yesterday or Monday. The one we thought might be a whaleshark.


There's a good deck view from Q4000 right now. You can see the vessel's movement relative to the horizon, whitecaps, swinging cables and such. They've got a pretty good swell out there that I would think would affect anything subsurface (ROVs, cameras, etc) not sitting on the seabed.

I did not think stationary objects at 5000 ft below sea level would be affected by surface waves but what do I know.
The well is tilted, thats a fact. Has the surrounding area been compromised due to subsurface leaks ?

Surface waves do not affect anything that deep, you're right. But the reason all those handles are on the equipment is so ROV pilots can grab on to hold still. Otherwise it's not easy to prevent motion. For whatever reason, this guy just isn't holding on.

IMO, it would be a geological impossibility for the seafloor to 'contain' anything that leaked up under pressure. It's unconsolidated mud, and any gas or oil would just come right up. Possibly a small bubble could form, but nothing capable of lifting any big piece of the floor.

ROVs have big steel cages, used to safely splash and recover from ship hulls. Cages go up and down with wave action. An ROV deployed at a distance from its cage does not.


Not all of the ROV's are deployed from cages. Some come down on a hanger similar to an upside down wastebasket. They have shorter tethers than the caged ROV's and seem to bob up and down more.

...a hanger similar to an upside down wastebasket.

That's called a 'top hat TMS'. (TMS = Tether Management System)

They don't necessarily have shorter tethers, both cages and top hats generally have the same size drum in them (the limiting factor for tether length). Nor do they bob up and down more, both bob up and down just the same amount as the surface vessel they are being deployed from.


Can someone tell me what's going on with Olympic Challenger 30?

Odd for sure. The legend says sonar sweeps, but that's obviously not what he's doing. He has a methanol stab in the right claw and a hydraulic stab in the left. Since he keeps turning, he drags the hoses and has stirred up a mess. Strange.

Looks like cables and green stuff leaking a little.Are they removing old equipment? Disconnecting stuff?

Some of the ROVs have been spending time in cleanup mode recently... collecting tools, hooking up and lifting a methanol skid, etc.

Allen was asked today what was going to happen to all the equipment on the seafloor. Thad really warmed up to that question and responded with his thoughts on the potential information to be gained from it, implicitly suggesting it will all be recovered.

There is a lot of this stuff out there. There’s a manifold sitting on the sea floor that was built specifically to accommodate both the production of the oil and gas and also to accommodate the attempt at the top kill and the static kill. A lot of these devices, I think – this is a personal opinion here. A lot of these devices were built specifically for containment and recovery and production of oil related to this response. I think there’s a lot of discussion going on between the major oil companies in the Gulf and BP regarding future recovery systems to make sure you have the ability to respond to a future incident. So I think everything that’s been engineered and constructed in conjunction with this response is going to get a very close look to whether or not they should be considered as prototypes or interim capability that might be used in the Gulf should that type of capability need to be required again.

Thanks, Pinkfud. When I first tuned in OC was trying to put the handle back on that he had knocked off yesterday. Then I think he dropped it, and went hunting for it on the seabed. Apparently he didn't find it because it looks like another has been sent from topside. But sometime during his hunt there was a big surge of methane (?) or oil (?) or both? He started spraying with the green stuff (antifreeze?). Then things were just basically crazy until he started untangling the hoses (LOL). God, what a nightmare for a ROV and his operator to be faced with such a tangle. Anyway, looks like things are under control now.

Is BP afraid to drill the relief well?

It is going to be funny when Mr. Wright punches into the casing and finds concrete.

BP is afraid to drill the relief well. They have no confidence in the integrity of the well. They have no confidence that the seafloor/sub-surface geology is stable.

The static kill procedure has complicated everything. They have two bad options now. Go ahead with the relief well in a much more dangerous situation post-static kill. Or improvise a half-ass kill from the top and abandon procedure.

BP had bad motives when they did the static kill. If this thing really was killed for good, then the Macondo well would have been abandoned.

Some on here have characterized what's going on now as trivial-nothing more than complying with some regulations. That is not true. The government has the discretion to waive regulation enforcement in appropriate circumstances. If the well was under control, the relief wells not needed- if continuing them is actually more dangerous as BP claims; then the government would not have denied BP's request to abandon and the leave the well as is.

How absurd an argument- that a soverign government would impose laws on itself through mandatory regulation enforcement without the authority to waive the rule when applying it would produce negative results.

Man: The well is NOT killed for good, and no one has said it was. It has to be properly plugged before that can be declared. Rockman said yesterday that the current situation makes it safer and more effective to do the top-down P&A, and I defer to him because he knows more about wells than I will ever understand. I still say they aren't afraid to complete the relief well, it's just not the right thing to do at this time. The RW crew is still standing by ready at a moment's notice in case the situation changes. BP is paying for that, and I don't think they would hesitate to pull out if there was NO chance the RW will be needed. They're covering all bases and trying to get this mess behind them.

BP Shills:

BP has shills dismissing everything on this board at The Oil Drum. Why? Because it would be stupid not to. Control the message: BP has already demonstrated their commitment to doing this- they have spent close to $100 million on their public relations/advertising campaign response to the disaster. MSNBC ran stories on the concerns raised by a poster on here, DougR. If BP is willing to drop that kind of cash on tv commercials, then obviously they would like to influence the substance of news broadcasting as well. MSNBC reports something from here- in their minds, I bet they concluded they won't let that happen again because you don't even have to spend money for your message control, just discredit the poster enough and news outlets won't report it.

If BP has shills here to discredit posters, they're wasting their time and money, because posters who need to be discredited always do it to themselves.

Well Jeff, if that's your cyberspace outlook then certainly you would agree with me that BP has done more than enough to discredit itself in the real world.

BP has indeed. As big as BP is, it seems certain that there must be current or former employees here. But I haven't seen anyone really trying to excuse them for anything - usually the opposite. For my part, I don't work in the oil industry at all. I'm a geologist, just here because this stuff interests me. No one pays me anything to post here.

I will admit people bring up an interesting topic : Shilling.

Just for for an experiment, I had started a blog back in June, and had started posting and reading a finance message board concerning BP, and BP related news surrounding the "spill". Day traders and the like, shorts and longs constantly bickering and going back and forth on all the various topics at hand all day. I would post a link to an article on my blog, with a server hosted on my computer, and then gather info about all the various computers that landed on my site. Using common and free IT tools reveals a whole lot. Here's a nice one :


Who, where, when, how, all the other information you leave behind online when you visit a website is easily tracked, as well as whether or not you have hyper-linked the page, and possibly a whole hell of a lot more, etc etc. I was very amused to find that posters with names like "cockmunch33" work for Halliburton , BP-TNK, etc, etc and various departments of our government, but even more amused to read some of the things they were posting on various sites. Even more interesting was some posters would change names and tactics/persona on a daily basis according to the daily news, but only be active during US trading hours.

It's not entirely unbelievable that paid "shills" are at work online on some websites. I have seen stranger things happen.

The OD, does not strike me as one of the shilled websites, that's JMNSHO.

But it goes to show, you never know who is behind the screen, or what their true intent is. I always say, if you are in doubt of something, look it up for yourself, but always take everything with a grain of salt.


On another topic..

I have to say, slinging mud at people is a common tactic, but I am a little surprised to see people resorting to to posting half-naked tattooed bald men on the Oil Drum, although...., if you are half-naked and take a picture to post online, don't be surprised if it comes back to haunt you.

Welcome to the internet, the bathroom's down the hall on the right, no running by the ool, enjoy your stay.

PS: Notice there is no "P" in the ool, let's try to keep it that way.

I suspect the traders are just attempting to introduce further market uncertainty in order gain personal profit rather than as some grander corporate-sponsored plot.

That was by far, not the only site I was monitoring traffic from...

People who portray themselves as being traders on the floor of the NYSE, who are actually physically located at various oil refineries on the Gulf coast, are up to no good, whether it's personal or paid. It would be one thing to see those comments coming from a computer in Manhattan, spinning news for stock price manipulations is possible and not hard to imagine happening on some level. It doesn't take much to zoom in on anybody's location from space simply with an IP address.So, I was left with more questions then answers,in regards to that.

I like the OD. I don't see any grand conspiracy going on here, and I always look behind the curtain and under the hood. Honest answers and reasonable logic is what I see here.



I find that the term "shill" to be more invective thrown at someone or a group that has the temerity to disagree; often will a propery cited factual disagreement. The people who use the term "shill" appear to believe that their truth is the sole truth; that nothing else but their truth can possibly be right. To these people, anybody who disagrees with them are, by definition, part of the dark forces.

I give many (but not all) the benefit of the doubt and think they are true believers and not just snake oil salesmen. They believe so strongly or are so angry anyone who disagrees must be a BP shill; if one disagrees, then they must be supporting BP. Classical mis-step in logic.

In the few months I've been here, nobody that I can recall has a very high opinion of BP. The oil-field professional here have some of the lowest opinions for the most part.

However, there is too much expertise and well-informed thinkers here to tolerate hokum. When someone calls it out, we hear "BP shill" in return.

Why do you, me or anybody else have a "right" to any information concerning this well? We have become accustomed to receiving information and/or evidence on cases/investigations concerning anything and everything whether it be Paris Hilton, murder cases, industrial accidents or airplane crashes. All it leads to is unsupported BS and speculation.


BP has been the ONE competent, honest, ethical actor in this whole sorry mess. First the Haliburton cement job failed, then the Transocean rig crew failed to detect/stop the well kick, then the Transocean owned maintained operated BOP failed to either disconnect the riser or contain the blowback... Despite being surrounded by incompetent unethical obstructing Govt drones and demagogue Dems, BP has heroically and stoically worked 24/7 to fix this accident. Good for BP.


In all the hundreds of hours of ROV video, how many rocks have you seen? I guess there are rocks all over the place down there and they are all leaking oil, but BP has manipulated the video feeds to make sure we never see them. They slipped up just this one time thinking that the public is too stupid to know how to record an XML feed, but we got 'em! Yeah!!

That's a burnt and cracked piece of metal. It leaks more when the ROV thrusters blow on it. Look, I know different people react to traumatic situations in all kinds of different ways. Many times I've been close to 'breaking point' and had to just turn everything off and cry like a little girl. But seriously, is inventing fantasies an effective method for dealing with this?


I know you think you comment of these quotes out of context means something to you but, for the life of me, I can't figure it out.

It would help if you made your comment directly.

Can't figure it out? You said: In the few months I've been here, nobody that I can recall has a very high opinion of BP.

I gave examples. Let's call it a draw. You and I see things differently.

Let's call it a draw.

I didn't think this was an adversarial conversation so wasn't keeping scope to begin with.

Amerman's comment I can give you but I think I see the point he was making. Amerman isn't a very active poster here.

On the two others, I really do fail to see how they are endorsements of BP.

If these are the best endorsements of BP on TOD after all of the traffic here, I think you made my point for me; BP doesn't have a lot of friends here and there isn't a lot of support for them.

Somewhere back in two old postings of last month I think, I said, in summary, "Sue the sh*t out of them and hang the bastards," in so many words. I also said I don't literally require their head on a pike. Nobody has to die to satisfy my sense of justice or for punishment. Within the limits of our system, I firmly believe the guilty parties will get justice; if not fully in the courtroom, certainly in the marketplace (share price, treasure, market share, etc.) The guilty parties will pay big time. It will take BP decades to recover from this.

I’m also enough of an optimist to think the industry will come out of this better and safer, with better equipment and process.

However, I don't believe "that the enemy of my enemy is my friend." If someone comes here and pushes hokum and bunk, and it is within my very limited scope of knowledge to do so, I'm going to call them out not matter how much their screwy ideas castigate BP. That doesn't mean I'm putting BP on my Christmas card list or weaken on my position of “hang the bastards.”

At this point, is there any personal information I or any of your other 'enemies' here could provide that would convince you? Anything we give you could be faked, if you're that paranoid. The funny thing is, who you think I am and who I really am are such polar opposites I seriously laugh out loud sometimes. I'm a disabled former auto mechanic, for god's sake. I don't have any internet access other than from my home, and if there is anything from my IP address logged by TOD that doesn't jive with that for every single comment I have posted, they are hereby granted permission to publicly disclose that information - but wait - TOD ITSELF is a BP shill! ho noes! We're surrounded!! ROFL

Ridiculous claims deserve ridicule. What you seem to forget is that the ridicule you think is coming from 'BP shills to hide the truth' is also the ridicule you'd get if your claims were ridiculous.

Uh-oh, that last quoted comment wasn't a very good choice, at least not for those of us who remember the follow-up.

I remember it well. It was an egregious and successful smear. He tried the same thing recently (unsuccessfully) posting pictures of antifreeze hoses, when the matter at hand was CK lines having been disconnected. But you know as well as I that factual debate is not a problem. It's personal attacks and ridicule.

Personal attack is a sore point with me after last night's "kill yourself" viciousness, which was removed by the mods.

There has been an enormous amount of superb technical information, honest observations, and thoughtful debate about Macondo in these threads. The drama of Macondo is almost over, thank goodness. In a matter of days or weeks, our speculation and curiosity will be concluded when the well is abandoned and the City of Ships and their crews released to their respective home ports.

It's a tense time, waiting to discover whether BP's planned recovery of the capping stack and BOP will succeed. Personally, I doubt it will. I would like to be wrong about that.

If it's the last thing on earth that happens,it is my belief that either BP or someone else will recover those items.

I remember it well. It was an egregious and successful smear.


If there are 'shills' here for BP, are there also shills for competitors, environmental groups looking for funding, residents looking for compensation, stock investors hoping to muddy the water for trading advantage, civil servants puffing up the performance of their particular department?

Yes. Two or three times I disclosed Oct BP puts @ 20. I also use my real name. If you think I muddied something for trading advantage, say so please, so this can proceed to a discussion of fact. When I'm shown to be wrong, I'm willing to concede and retract. That's not what paid provacateurs do. They're never wrong because their whole game is slurs and mockery.

Sorry Avon, I wasn't picking on you.

Just seems to me that if there can be shills for BP, then there can be shills for every possible group or interest.

Which means that every post can be dismissed as lies and spin?? None can be an honest opinion??

Once you say something, it's out there, particularly regarding "investments."
You can retract all you want, but what you said is still out there.
You can't unring the bell, as you obviously understand.

All one needs to do is view all of your posts to see and perceive any given poster's constant equivocating and, ah-hem, hedging.

[There's a reason they're called hedge funds.]

anyone who disagrees must be a BP shill

I've been on the purported "shill" side of this dynamic myself in a totally different context, in which a particular group was being unfairly and inaccurately criticized on a Web forum. When I stood up for the group and pointed out factual and logical problems with the criticisms, or even suggested a reasonable alternate interpretation of the facts at hand, I was accused of being on the group's payroll. (As with some who take a similar role here vis-a-vis BP, I had plenty of criticisms of the group myself.)

The mindset of people determined to demonize is very strange. To avoid cognitive dissonance, they have to neutralize, in their own minds at least, anything that calls their demonizing in question, anything at all positive about whatever it is they're criticizing. If they can't refute the other side with facts and logic, the only weapon they have is the "shill" accusation.

people determined to demonize is very strange


Seems to be intertwined with an anger and polarization ("if you're not with me, you're against me").

Maybe we need to climb up on DEB's couch and work through this.

Dupe deleted.

Personal attack, invective, sarcasm, hyperbole, ridicule without responding to issues.

pig, what you and a few others here are alleging about bp & its shills really doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

TOD is well-known, widely read and has been cited a number of times in popular media. Opportunity, means & motive notwithstanding, for bp shills to intentionally invade TOD with posts in an attempt to dismiss 'everything on this board at The Oil Drum' would find its way back to a host of legal and USG groups, thereby increasing bp's (criminal) liability. Regardless of what you believe, they are not that stupid or evil.

Hi, Coop. You are certainly correct about their professional staff. But BP also employs a variety of other contractors and advisors. They in turn hire subcontractors.

Not even BP is dumb enough to try something like this. (I just completed a class that teaches what to do and what not to do in terms of PR during a crisis and BP has gone a checked off every box on the 'Don't do this' list) Nobody is going to be able to keep something like this a secret. A disgruntled employee will leak the information. Somebody brags to his girlfriend. An investigative reporter digs into tax returns. There are scores of ways for conspiracies to get uncovered.

And the thing is - paid shills won't work anyway in a forum where what somebody says can be compared with the expierence of other people in the same industry. In fact you can tell when some BS shows up because of the number of 'insiders' who point the flaws.

DougR's credibility came from the fact that he made his posting here. KO on MSNBC didn't cite GLP where the post originated, he cited TOD.

KO or his staff did a terrible job of vetting the story before it ran (btw, not the first time MSNBC pulled a boned-headed play). The fact that the posting first ran at GLP would have made DougR's story toxic and untouchable on its face in any on the mainstream credible media. For it to come out after MSNBC put the story on the air made it doubly toxic to any other media.

This is one of those red-faced moments managing editors have nightmares about, "Did we check the story out enough before going with it?" I'm actually very surprised that FoxNews didn't lead with MSNBC's slip within the week considering the on-going feud with KO.

DougR shot his own credibility here; he didn't need others to do it for him.

A study by a German military think tank has analyzed how "peak oil" might change the global economy. The internal draft document -- leaked on the Internet -- shows for the first time how carefully the German government has considered a potential energy crisis.


It warns of shifts in the global balance of power, of the formation of new relationships based on interdependency, of a decline in importance of the western industrial nations, of the "total collapse of the markets" and of serious political and economic crises.

The study, whose authenticity was confirmed to SPIEGEL ONLINE by sources in government circles, was not meant for publication. The document is said to be in draft stage and to consist solely of scientific opinion, which has not yet been edited by the Defense Ministry and other government bodies.


A word of caution: I have read stuff put out by military 'think tanks' and learned to regard about 70% of the stuff as totally worthless. I learned to prefer the stuff produced by independents on the public market because you can go back and look up what they wrote 10 years ago and see if they were right.

The product 'think tanks' put out is designed to get attention (dramatic conclusions are better) so that their name is remembered the next time somebody wants something studied. Don't think that it is only the news media that produces articles with the title: "XYZ - is _Your Family_ at risk?"

The relationship with the Soviet Union Russia, in particular, is of fundamental importance for German access to oil and gas, the study says. "For Germany, this involves a balancing act between stable and privileged relations with the Soviet Union Russia and the sensitivities of (Germany's) eastern neighbors." In other words, Germany, if it wants to guarantee its own energy security, should be accommodating in relation to Moscow's foreign policy objectives, even if it means risking damage to its relations with Poland and other Eastern European states.
Peak oil would also have profound consequences for Berlin's posture toward the Middle East, according to the study. "A readjustment of Germany's Middle East policy … in favor of more intensive relations with producer countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, which have the largest conventional oil reserves in the region, might put a strain on German-Jewish Israeli relations, depending on the intensity of the policy change," the authors write.
When contacted by SPIEGEL ONLINE, the Foreign Defense Ministry declined to comment on the study.

From the article. I changed a few things with strikes and I wondered if this could have been from 1938. I hope folks are not offended, but I thought it would fit. For the record, I know the Germans are peaceful, valuable allies now.

There have been no conspiracy theory posts in this thread. But there has been several posts dismissing anything contrary to BP's talking points as conspiracy theory talk. This is nothing more than a useful diversion, if you really think every thing is ok then why the hell do you keep reading these threads?

These are the reasons why a lot of people remain skeptical about the situation: BP has had inconsistent talking points, changed their plans, a track record of failures, conflicts of interest, lack of transparency, lack of cooperation with the government & independent researchers etc. Thad Allen publicly admonished BP for failing to monitor seafloor anomalies, there are still anomalies occuring down there- and you want to discredit anyone who is reluctant to accept BP's talking points as a conspiracy theory? Give me a break.

BP's $93 million spent on advertising after Gulf oil spill is questioned

In the heart of spill country 5 posts, all in support of BP. Mine was one. Folks are easing up on BP around here. Especially since Feinberg took over the $$$.

The real conspiracy theory:

Tony Hayward is a scientologist.
The North Koreans torpedoed the well.
BP only sells warm beer.
Crab People.

Here is the answer on those conspiracies.
1. No, we proved Hayward is not a scientist, at least not first. He is an accountant first and foremost.
2. The North Koreans have built a manpad for foreign export. It is similar to the Stingers that were deployed in Afghanistan years ago, with upgrades such as argon cooling. The terror network now has some of these but cannot use them, especially on commercial planes for fear of angering the Koreans. Once the first one is fired, no more will be bought. The US will remove that capability.
3. BP only sells cold beer. All BP events I went to where alcohol was provided it was cold or at the proper temperature.
4. The crabs are just starting to come back. I will eat some soon and post any transformations.

We need more action. I hope we have positive events soon.

For a very short time, there was a poster on the gCaptain forum that was on one of the ships AT the MC252 site, though someone quickly plugged that leak.

anywho, just curious, and i'm pretty clueless when it comes to mobile internet access - Is there high-speed internet access on rigs and ships for employee use? which i'd hope would then be networked wirelessly.? Or do peeps have to use individual cellular data plans? And how far offshore can you get a cellular signal? Thanks.


Can't talk for the GOM, but these days most if not all rigs workers have internet access. From my experience these are always channelled through the company's network. Individual cell connection, if you are close enough to the beach to pick them up, are normally not allowed. The claim is interference with operational frequencies and potential explosion with wire line tools.

These maybe be legitimate reasons but I am sure the fact the company can maintain some sort of control over the information being sent from the rig to shore helps them to justify the controls. Companies get very paranoid about information especially during exploration drilling.

The company networks also usually have very strong filtering software, so during our time offshore we do not have our minds corrupted by looking at a few naked ladies.

To more directly answer you question, everyone has email access, but a lot of social networking sites are filtered, some places even filter TOD. Disgusting!!

Don't know what's available on the rigs, but I do know you can get access devices for laptops that will work just about anywhere. Not cheap, but these aren't minimum wage workers. There was a guy a while back using his laptop to communicate from some place in a jungle where there was absolutely nothing else.

If there is access on the rigs, I'd be afraid the IT folks would be watching everything said. But that's what SSL and proxies are for - heh.

Edit: Ha. I cross-posted with Tool.

Interesting caption on Mill 36

Time to pick your seat around the "moon pool" on the Q4000. That's 19 cameras to watch now! We will have to get organised in monitoring teams for the big event. What's the waves like; any start times yet for the Be-Bop-A-Lula main event?

The waves in the moon pool don't look nearly as ugly as they did a few hours ago. (Yes, I stay up until all hours watching that stuff). Maybe something will actually happen soon. I've also seen a lot of what looks like prep activity by the ROVs.

Edit to add: I assume the pipe in the foreground is the DP that has the lifting tool, right? And the gauge on their first cam marked WOB - 280,000 lbs - would that be the weight of the string as it hangs in the water?

Someone wasn't wearing their hard hat this morning....


Tell you what, if you expedite the removal of the BOP, I will make this picture disappear forever.

That's why TO policy is not use photos of incident scenes, you may incorporate unwanted information.

Heh. In the mining industry, this would be sufficient to get that fellow a nice fine from MSHA and/or the state inspectors.

Slightly amusing hard hat story: last January on a barge rig in S La a very young roustabout was unloading a pallet and kept taking his hard hat off. My company man walked over and told him to put it on. A half hour later we walked back by and he had his HH laying on the deck again. Coman said one warning was enough and he was going to put him on the next boat out. Asked him to let me handle it: I went over, picked up the HH and tossed it over the side onto a barge below. It was a good toss but hit a beam and bounced into the bayou. The kid just looked at me. I said next time I was going to throw him into the bayou. Needless to say he kept his HH on after that. I'll run anyone off for being dangerous but being young and foolish shouldn't cost your job if it can be avoided. I saw this approach almost 35 years ago while working offshore with another newbie geologist. He set his HH on the dining room table. The head cook came over and said that was impolite and set the HH on the floor. Next day this geologist did it again. Cook came over, didn't say a word, took the HH and open the hatch and tossed it into the GOM. Obviously made an impression on me. Waited for almost 35 years to do it to someone.

You couldn't slap the grin off my face for the rest of that day.

Up to 90% of oysters dead in DMR’s reef sample


He said he had a negative feeling about the upcoming oyster season when DMR officials dredged for oysters and pulled up catches with about 80 to 90 percent of the oysters dead.

“It’s bad news for the oyster fishermen,” Nguyen said.

Scott Gordon, director of the DMR shellfish bureau, said there have been more oyster mortalities this year, but he doesn’t know whether it can be attributed to the BP oil spill.

Read more: http://www.sunherald.com/2010/09/01/2446838/dmr-gulf-sample-shows-abundance.html#ixzz0yNF8DG2r


Personal note: This is where my fiancee oystered up until the season closed at the end of April. They were getting their bag limit of 20 every day.