Russian sub 'could stop oil leak'

[G_j]

Source: BBC

Russian sub 'could stop oil leak'

Friday, 9 July 2010 01:42 UK

Science reporter, BBC News, Lake Baikal

Russian-owned submersibles would be able to cap the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, the captain of one of the vessels has said.

The skipper was speaking as two of the subs - which can dive to 6,000m - started a campaign of exploration at the bottom of Lake Baikal in Siberia.

He added that there was still time for the subs to help BP with the disaster.

The subs are searching for gas hydrates - a potential alternative fuel source - on the bed of Baikal.

Yevgenii Chernyaev told BBC News that the problem had to be addressed at the highest level.


Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10564798.stm

[Ian David]

1. Right. From the same people who suggested using a nuke.

Then again, maybe they DO have something they can use.

[Hawkowl]

2. I'd give Tinkerbell a shot

If Tinkerbell showed up and announced she could plug it with magic fairy dust, it certainly couldn't be any worse than BP's efforts! (The nuke idea was a bad one)

[Robb]

5. I'm with you.

...as long as they don't bring a nuke, I can't imagine making it any worse.

[oldhippydude]

10. anybody remember Howard Hughes

If i remember right, Hughes Industries had an arrangement with the C.I.A. there was a ship called "glomar explorer" ... it all came out during the Church Committee hearings, in the mid 70's... the contract ship actually recovered a Russian submarine if I remember right... lets not write that stuff off as fantasy.. of course getting a russian sub from landlocked lake Baikal may prove problematic

[bigmonkey]

23. Yup, remember that.

There was a NOVA on PBS about it. The CIA also used Mechanix Illustrated to spread the propaganda story that it (the Explorer) was to be used to scrape up manganese nodules from the sea floor. Wonderful business opportunity, very innovative, and a complete lie. So much for the credibility of that magazine.

[bigmonkey]

26. Well, I might be wrong about the magazine in question.

I thought it was either Popular Mechanics or Mechanix Illustrated, but I might be wrong.

[The Croquist]

25. LOL the Glomar Explorer!!!

In about 1973 or 1974 I read about this in the National Enquirer (my grandmother used to read it). The story was that the brilliant but eccentric Howard Hughes was going to make a fortune recovering manganese nodules from the ocean floor. Being 16 or 17 I swallowed it hook line and sinker.

In truth it was trying to raise the K-129 which it partially succeeded in doing.

[Proletariatprincess]

3. For goodness sake, let them try it...NOW!

I just hope that the brain dead cold warrior mentality wouldn't prevent allowing the Russians from helping in the Gulf disaster.
Oh course, if it does work and the submarine is successful, it may embarrass some American exceptionalist. Can't have that, can we? :sarcasm:

[femmocrat]

4. Go for it. The Russians are coming!

The Russians are coming!

[Brother Buzz]

7. Emergency! Everybody to get from street!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOZuLD1u_K4

[slackmaster]

20. EET EEZ A RUSSIAN INWENSHUN!

[CLANG]

29. You spelled Wushin wong.

[Uncle Joe]

6. Kicked and recommended.

The subs have started their third season of exploration at Lake Baikal

Thanks for the thread, G_j.

[cliffordu]

8. They could fly that bad boy in within 5 days....

support equipment,. all of it.

If they're lying leave them on the bottom with a gaggle of BP execs.

[Uncle Joe]

13. According to the column, there are two of them and they operate as a pair, and these are two of the

best four submersibles in the world.

The subs have discovered reserves of gas hydrates on the bottom of the lake.

"Our subs are unique. There are two of them and they can submerge and work simultaneously. Also, they are powerful enough to work with any other additional equipment.

"There are only four vessels in the world that can go down to 6,000m - the Mirs, French Nautile and Japanese Shinkai. The Mirs are known to be the best, and we have a very experienced team of specialists," he said.

But Mr Chernyaev added that such an operation would have a chance of succeeding only if BP or the US government asked the Russian government to join efforts to stop the leak.

[jberryhill]

9. Good golly... they are looking for fuel in the largest freshwater body in the world?

Emergency efforts aside, Lake Baikal is the last place on earth that any sane people should even THINK of underwater mining.

[PJPhreak]

11. Hate to be a party pooper but,

just what could they do? Put a cork in it?

if they attempt a "Top Kill" again it will really blowout,thas why they were told to stop the Top Kill the first time,There is horrible damage in the wellbore not just at the bottom of the well.

If they tried to "Plug" it oil would come up from all over the place down there,making it impossible to stop.

Those relief wells are the best way to stop the gusher.

I Know,it Sux. I truly wish there was a better and faster way,Yes if only...

[On the Road]

43. I Take Their Claims with a Grain of Salt

but those submersibles do look a lot bigger than the ones BP is using. A lot of it's a question of scale -- the same methods that failed before would have been successful with a larger-scale approach. The intense pressures of the leak have defeated the normal methods and they need to go bigger.

Having said that, the thought of tapping hydrates at the bottom of Lake Baikul is kind of scary. Are they pressurized deposits like the hydrates formed in the Gulf spill, or are they just solified because of the temperatures and just lying on the lake bed?

[PJPhreak]

44. This is not bp's claim....

But the consensus over at The Oil Drum...A website/Message Board centering on Peak Oil and its consequences.

This is the consensus of all the folk that dig Stupidly Deep Holes in the Planet,from Geologists,Drillers,Toolpushers,Roughnecks,Engineers,Professors at The Colo School of Mines,Berkeley,UCLA,UVM,Cornell and others.

If it was just Bullshitting Polluters saying this I would agree with you,
But a lot of folk at The Oil Drum are VERY knowledgeable about this.

They think BP,as one Drill Rig Manager put it "Fuckered This One Up,Big Time"

[Turborama]

12. How, though?

OK, it can go really deep, but what would they actually do?

[Uncle Joe]

16. These are "manned" submersibles and as such I believe inherently easier

to manipulate needed equipment than trying to do so remotely from almost a mile above the location.

As the column states, they would require intricate knowledge of the details to build any "special attachments" for the subs in order to stop the gusher.

I don't know for certain whether this could/would succeed but I believe they should have been brought on board early in the process.

The Russians have their strengths and we have ours, apparently one of their's; is manned submersibles.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

18. "trying to do so remotely from almost a mile above the location."

The remotely-operated vehicles are actually controlled by operators in a room in Houston, a few hundred miles away. Whatever else one thinks of BP, the engineers and technicians operating the ROVs are highly skilled workers.

Video: BP's ROV command center

[Uncle Joe]

22. No doubt they are highly skilled workers but the location is almost a mile below the surface of the

ocean and by nature that kind of operation must be more complex; introducing variables that don't exist with a closer "hands on" approach from a manned submersible and visa versa.

I'm not suggesting the manned sub to be the only approach but it seems to me they could have been and would have been optimally working together better in concert, "two hands are better than one," especially if one of them is literally on the scene.

[sgsmith]

34. If you watch that clip

the operators are based on ships at the wild well. BP has a command center (aka Hive) in Houston, but the actual operators are at sea.

[Owl]

14. How would these subs stop the leak? What can they do that the robots can't?

The article gives no clues on any of this.

[alfredo]

21. tourniquet

[Lone_Star_Dem]

15. So they can get down to it. What are they going to do once they're there?

From reading the article they don't appear to have a plan on how to stop it. They're just saying they can go down that deep. The problem to me seems to be, being in a sub next to the wellhead doesn't do anything to miraculously plug the well. It's still under too much pressure for then to contain by known methods.

[Indianademocrat91]

17. Just another way to bring Socialism into our country

Damn you Obama!!!!!!! :eyes:

[CLANG]

19. No way they can stop the leak with 2 subs.

I'd really LOVE to hear their plan (if they have one). Just some old cold warriors trying to embarrass the old thorn in their side.

[Uncle Joe]

24. I don't believe the Russians need do anything to further our embarrassment, it's already there.

As for their plan, that could only be brought about if they were part of the process, however they obviously offer an element which the U.S. and BP don't have, that being deepwater manned submersibles, and with a catastrophe like this, I see no reason not to use every possible resource.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

27. This really is just posturing there's no offer of help. Actually they said they're too busy

Baikal group rejects role for Russian mini-subs in BP oil spill

The Russian Mir submersibles are unlikely to be able to help BP tackle the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, a spokesperson for the Fund for the Protection of Lake Baikal said on Monday.

Izvestia daily reported on Monday that BP's management had asked Anatoly Sagalevich of Russia's Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, which owns the mini-submarines, for assistance in eliminating the oil spill's consequences in the Gulf of Mexico.

The fund official said the Mirs had a busy schedule and the equipment for the Baikal expedition had already been sent to the east Siberian city of Irkutsk. The technical staff will soon head to the Irkutsk Region.

"So, the Mir submersibles are unlikely to take part in the elimination of the oil spill's consequences in the Gulf of Mexico," the spokesperson said.

http://en.rian.ru/Environment/20100607/159332694.html

[Uncle Joe]

30. The last sentence on your link, states they would need their government's permission

to undertake such an operation, the statement about the submersibles being too busy is natural cover coming from a society adapted to getting permission from above.

From the OP.

Yevgenii Chernyaev told BBC News that the problem had to be addressed at the highest level.

Anatoly Sagalevich of Russia's Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, which owns the vessels, said that he had an informal conversation with a BP representative asking if Mirs would be able to help stop the leak.

But he said there was no official request and no real discussions about the matter.

Mr Chernyaev said that his team had held numerous discussions about the oil spill in the Gulf and the Russians would be ready to come to the rescue - but only if everything was done properly.

But Mr Chernyaev added that such an operation would have a chance of succeeding only if BP or the US government asked the Russian government to join efforts to stop the leak.

"It should all be decided on the government level. Asking Sagalevich to simply bring the Mirs over is nonsense. Even though we're able to go to much greater depths than where the damaged well is located, we wouldn't be able to do much on our own.

"And we would not refuse to help, even though for us it would be very complicated, especially right now, when we're already working on Baikal. But it doesn't look like anyone seriously wants our help," he added.

[CLANG]

28. I'm not arguing that - I'm just saying they couldn't stop it.

Can anyone give any plausible technique they would employ?

[Uncle Joe]

31. According to the OP, at some level BP must have thought they could help.

Anatoly Sagalevich of Russia's Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, which owns the vessels, said that he had an informal conversation with a BP representative asking if Mirs would be able to help stop the leak.

But he said there was no official request and no real discussions about the matter.

A BP spokesman told BBC News that the company had not had any formal contact with the Russians.

It all depends on who initiated these "informal" conversations, if it was BP, then BP must have thought there was a possibility of constructive help from the Russians' manned submersibles, if it was the Russians; they must believe they could and/or would help as well.

As I posted up thread, I don't believe the manned endeavor should have been the sole answer, but it could have greatly aided the remote approach.

[CLANG]

35. The OP implied that they could STOP the LEAK!

They can't. /eom

[Uncle Joe]

36. How do you know?

Apparently they were never given a chance.

[CLANG]

41. I know because it's impossible! JMO - No I don't have a link

[Turborama]

37. It doesn't just imply, it categorically states in the title that it "'could stop oil leak'"

That's why I asked upthread, "how?".

[G_j]

38. "the captain of one of the vessels has said."

that is where it came from.

[Turborama]

39. "Russian-owned submersibles would be able to cap the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico"

The point is that the captain didn't say how the vessels "would" or "could stop oil leak". And there's nothing in the rest of article which backs up the headline using his assertion, either.

[CLANG]

42. JMO. I can't see how they could plug the hole other than the relief wells.

[GeorgeGist]

32. Put a cork in it?

[GeorgeGist]

33. Put a cork in it?

[SunnySong]

40. Well they are awfully good at sinking to the bottom...

:evilgrin: