Nuke that slick
Underwater nuclear test, 1958.
As BP prepares to lower a four-story, 70-ton dome over the oil gusher under the Gulf of Mexico, the Russians — the world’s biggest oil producers — have some advice for their American counterparts: nuke it.
Komsomoloskaya Pravda, the best-selling Russian daily, reports that in Soviet times such leaks were plugged with controlled nuclear blasts underground. The idea is simple, KP writes: “the underground explosion moves the rock, presses on it, and, in essence, squeezes the well’s channel.”
Yes! It’s so simple, in fact, that the Soviet Union, a major oil exporter, used this method five times to deal with petrocalamities. The first happened in Uzbekistan, on September 30, 1966 with a blast 1.5 times the strength of the Hiroshima bomb and at a depth of 1.5 kilometers. KP also notes that subterranean nuclear blasts were used as much as 169 times in the Soviet Union to accomplish fairly mundane tasks like creating underground storage spaces for gas or building canals.
Loading...
These kinds of surgical strikes to shut off underground leaks, however, were carried out only five times, with the last one occuring in 1979. And there was only one misfire, near Kharkov, Ukraine, where a nuclear blast was unable to stanch a gas leak.
Happily, with a track record like that, “the chances of failure in the Gulf of Mexico are 20%,” KP writes. “The Americans could certainly risk it.”
via KP.ru, and the inimitable Kevin O’Flynn of The Moscow Times
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
I suspect that BP know that but they don’t want to because that would mean losing the well. All their effort is aimed at finding a fix that would let them exploit the well.
[...] when he wrote about the possibility of using a nuclear bomb on the well in the WP but he quoted the success of the Russians in doing this, and as I have noted in an earlier post, so maybe all that brainpower is focusing on [...]
[...] Nuke that Slick [...]
[...] when he wrote about the possibility of using a nuclear bomb on the well in the WP but he quoted the success of the Russians in doing this, and as I have noted in an earlier post, so maybe all that brainpower is focusing on [...]
The US has already used underground nukes to try to boost gas flow.
There was an attempt at Rulison in 1969 and another in 1973.
http://ludb.clui.org/ex/i/CO3129/
The Russians don’t have a monopoly on the wacky use of nukes.
[...] when he wrote about the possibility of using a nuclear bomb on the well in the WP but he quoted the success of the Russians in doing this, and as I have noted in an earlier post, so maybe all that brainpower is focusing on [...]
[...] when he wrote about the possibility of using a nuclear bomb on the well in the WP but he quoted the success of the Russians in doing this, and as I have noted in an earlier post, so maybe all that brainpower is focusing on [...]
Nuking is no longer necessary what with the creation of the bunkerbuster bomb used in Afganistan; this bomb will do the trick, as has been explained by a pro I watched but can no longer remember his name….
[...] five times. Their method? They nuked the well. The Russians are advising we do the same. “the chances of failure in the Gulf of Mexico are 20%,” We probably wouldn’t even need a nuke, just a high-powered explosive. But doing so would make [...]
[...] [...]
[...] http://trueslant.com/juliaioffe/2010/05/04/nuke-that-slick/ [...]
[...] sounds simple enough, in theory;"the underground explosion moves the rock, presses on it, and, in essence, squeezes the well's chann… A sign of the times, this technique already has its own Youtube video which has garnered nearly [...]
[...] used this method five times to deal with petrocalamities,” added Moscow reporter Julia Ioffe, writing for True/Slant. “The first happened in Uzbekistan, on September 30, 1966 with a blast 1.5 times the strength [...]
[...] all available resources STOP THE BP OIL FLOOD!" – We assume they mean any means, excepting a tactical nuke. NoDef hopes to see giant puppets of heretofore unknown politicians and business folk and [...]
[...] Nuke that slick [...]
[...] (2) True Slant: “Nuke That Slick” (May 2, 2010) http://trueslant.com/juliaioffe/2010/05/04/nuke-that-slick/ [...]
yeah, bomb the leak to hell, teach it some democracy!
[...] Nuke the well head. Nuke that slick – Julia Ioffe – The Moscow Diaries – True/Slant [...]
[...] the best way to kill this thing is to stick a small nuke in there and bury the well under rubble. Supposedly it's been done in Russia, and by the middle of the coming week, it will be all over cable news, as pundits press The White [...]
[...] poprosil by je již dávno o vzájemnou hospodářskou výpomoc a bylo by instantně po problému! Sovětský způsob je velice prostý: “Unikající ropu lze snadno zastavit prostou jadernou explozí”, [...]
[...] stopped five and and disasters with nukes. [...]
[...] the best way to kill this thing is to stick a small nuke in there and bury the well under rubble. Supposedly it’s been done in Russia, and by the middle of the coming week, it will be all over cable news, as pundits press The White [...]
[...] the US detonate a small nuclear bomb to seal the oil beneath the sea. Komsomoloskaya Pravda argued in an editorial that Russia had successfully used nuclear weapons to seal oil spills on five occasions in the [...]
[...] I'm not alone here, kids. [...]
[...] Back on May 4: [...]
[...] True Slant | Nuke that slick [...]
For remote uninhabited areas (like the nuclear testing grounds in Russia), nuke-that-slick may be an option but should not be encouraged. A serious environmental and ecological assessment will definitely be required if nuke-that-slick has to be applied in Gulf coast. A political assessment will also be necessary. When all other methods have been tried without success, may nuke-that-slick be finally the last option, but I still hope that it will not be used. When the clathrates are disturbed, I hope they will not produce a non-stopped positive feedback in creating more methane, in turn more carbon dioxide, above the ocean (our atmosphere) by nuke-that-slick, casting a real show “Land Before Time”.
[...] That’s right. Nuke the Gulf: [...]
[...] earlier this month suggested the US detonate a small nuclear bomb to seal the oil beneath the sea. Komsomoloskaya Pravda argued that Russia had successfully used nuclear weapons to seal oil spills on five occasions in the [...]
Joe Frino
I believe we may not have an option here!! We may not be able to wait another 2 months for BP to finish
another well. AND what happens IF THAT DOES NOT WORK!! Also BP is saying it will be done by August . What if it takes longer?? We should not automatically say no to using a nuclear blast. In addition what you are saying is the US should not use this method because
other nations can use this has an excuse. So, we have to be held hostage by what other nations might say or do ??? Even if the nuclear
option might be the only thing that works? Let’s think this out some more before we back ourselves into a corner and be sorry for the next 100 years
Hi Joe Frino,
In response to another comment. See in context »My apology for having not expressing my point clear enough. I did not say we should absolutely not nuke that well. I said we should do assessments (ecological, environmental, and political) first if we have to nuke that slick. Those assessments may take more than 2 months. One of the risks of nuking is that the location of the Gulf Coast is too close to densely populated states. Another risk is the disturbances that could be created to the clathrates (which may cause release of methane, and in turn, more carbon dioxide, in positive feedback to our environment). Thank you.
[...] Posted by wacahootaman Nuke the well head. Nuke that slick – Julia Ioffe – The Moscow Diaries – True/Slant I don't think we should trust any of these nitwits with a nuclear device. Besides, I don't [...]
[...] the US detonate a small nuclear bomb to seal the oil beneath the sea. Komsomoloskaya Pravda argued in an editorial that Russia had successfully used nuclear weapons to seal oil spills on five occasions in the [...]
listening to c-span during an oil-leak topic call-in, a metal fabricator offered high hopes for ‘explosive welding’ as an solution. of course, he didn’t know how effective the plan would be at 5 thousand feet. Also, CNN has been featuring spill clean-up ideas and a great one that was performed on a small scale was dehydrated sphagnum peat moss used as an oil sponge. Wow!!
I do not want to really use a nuke if something else like a blockbuster bomb would work or a clean smaller type of tactical nuke?
Anyway, I should have been clearer also, I was directing my comment to Cris Allison who said we can’t use a nuke. Anyway, we are running out of time. The enviormental damage this is causing as we debate this puts this under a crisis management decision. What are our options, what is the highest percentage probability of an action to STOP THIS. Some of the options may not be plesent but we have to act. The best minds should be on this now making the decisions. Oh, well, in 2 months should not even be in the picture !!
[...] the US detonate a small nuclear bomb to seal the oil beneath the sea. Komsomoloskaya Pravda argued in an editorialthat Russia had successfully used nuclear weapons to seal oil spills on five occasions in the [...]
[...] gained recent buzz. I’m referring to the remarkable amount of interest in dynamiting or even nuking the oil gusher shut. To be sure, the nuclear option would qualify as a bold maneuver with a high [...]
[...] Oh — latest worst-case-scenario estimate on when the leak might be stopped is … Christmas, which would mean a gusher that “would wipe out marine life deep at sea near the leak and elsewhere in the Gulf, and along hundreds of miles of coastline” and possibly even change the chemistry of the water in the area. Ain’t no way Obama and the Democrats are going to let this drag on until Election Day, so the only question is what sort of desperate measure they’ll resort to in case BP decides that Christmas is indeed the likely endpoint. Exit question: Dude, is it time? [...]
[...] I personally would have ordered a nice, controlled nuclear explosion to contain the situation. Russia has used this in past with an 80% success rate- they know a thing or two about containing oil rig leaks. They’ve done so 5 times in the past. [...]
[...] offer advice on how to stop oil leak, how they've done it before Nuke that slick – Julia Ioffe – The Moscow Diaries – True/Slant A few articles like this are out there, just offered one. I offered up this idea last week and it [...]
[...] (2) True Slant: “Nuke That Slick” (May 2, 2010) http://trueslant.com/juliaioffe/2010/05/04/nuke-that-slick/ [...]
[...] the oil slick to seal it? Would this work? Nuke that slick – Julia Ioffe – The Moscow Diaries – True/Slant Could this method still work in the Gulf if there is more mud than solid rock? Is it even being [...]
[...] [...]
I believe they do not want to plug this hole. They want the oil! They want the flow to keep coming and capture it if they can. (STOP IT? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? THIS IS A GOLD MINE!) They have paid alot to produce it. They want to use this well in my opinion, not shut it off. If they wanted it shut off they would nuke it in a heartbeat. Let’s see, what excuse we can use today that American people will fall for? How about this one? It would send a precedence to stop this disaster as soon as it starts by nuking it. Great idea! Let’s use it. I think we make our own rules in our country today and tomorrow. What we do today we don’t have to do tomorrow if we don’t want to. In my opinion, The so called small people on the coast will never be paid the total cost they will have to bare. Bp in the end will draw from this well, and the impacts will be brushed away. The end of the spill and the disaster it caused will go on for years yet the end of the payment will be in site for bp and the powers they pay off. (After all they were exempt and they already paid more than the law required.) I think we are watching a publicity stunt. I say get your money while you can because you’re well will dry up but bp’s will not. Unless you nuke it.
[...] negligence that allowed all of the safety measures to be bypassed. But, we could always follow the Russian Method of Capping Oil Wells. __________________ MazdaSPEED3 2009 – Mica Black Mods: Nothing worth Note, Stock To view links [...]
[...] Julia Ioffe of The Moscow Diaries comes word that when the Soviet Union was faced with offshore oil well leaks, more than once they [...]
When the BP oil disaster erupted, I suggested this would be an excellent way to solve the problem. Friends and acquaintances alike looked at me like I had lost my mind. What would really happen if a nuke was detonated directly over the leaking well would be that the heat of the blast would turn the sand overlying the well to glass, effectively sealing the well off. Voila! Problem solved. But I told the same friends and acquaintances that no one in Washington, D.C. had the cajones to do it. If Obama had ordered it, other country’s leaders would have lambasted him and he would have folded like a cheap suit. Bush wouldn’t have done it either. Why can’t we get a President who will do the right thing no matter what others think? We need a President like Harry Truman, who will do what is best and, if someone complains, tell them the old Soviet advice “Too bad, comrade”(the polite expression-a guy I worked for in the Air Force had a much more profane way of saying this).
[...] of mexico, proposing that they follow the Soviet example and nuke the leaking well head – Nuke that slick. As BP prepares to lower a four-story, 70-ton dome over the oil gusher under the Gulf of Mexico, [...]
[...] of mexico, proposing that they follow the Soviet example and nuke the leaking well head – Nuke that slick. As BP prepares to lower a four-story, 70-ton dome over the oil gusher under the Gulf of Mexico, [...]
[...] of mexico, proposing that they follow the Soviet example and nuke the leaking well head – Nuke that slick. As BP prepares to lower a four-story, 70-ton dome over the oil gusher under the Gulf of Mexico, [...]
[...] of mexico, proposing that they follow the Soviet example and nuke the leaking well head – Nuke that slick. As BP prepares to lower a four-story, 70-ton dome over the oil gusher under the Gulf of Mexico, [...]