Increase In Leaning BOP By Up To 1.5 Degress Appears To Confirm BP Gulf Oil Spill BOP Is Falling Over (Update 5)
Posted by Alexander Higgins - June 28, 2010 at 11:46 pm - Permalink - Source via Alexander Higgins Blog
I originally wrote that the subsea bullseye measurements taken on June 10th indicated that the BP Gulf Oil Spill BOP was leaning 3 degrees.
Just to be clear, the post above shows that the BOP appears to be leaning about 11 degrees on camera, but the original reading subsea bullseye indicate a lean of a little under 3 degrees was confirmed by the manufacturer of the subsea bullseye which is included in an update on that post.
Since then there has been a great deal of speculation that the lean of the BOP could mean the that BOP is falling over.
That speculation went viral and even made mainstream media news reports.
But the speculation couldn’t be confirmed because there where no past reading to compare the lean to.
Now there is.
The latest bullseye readings taken show that tilt of the leaning oil well has increased by up to 1.5 degrees and appears to confirm that the BP Gulf Oil Spill BOP is indeed falling over.
Bottom Bullseye Readings Show Change Of ~.75 degree
Left shows June 10th Reading of over ~2.5 degrees and right (Posted June 18th by unknown) shows lean of little less than ~2 degrees- About ~.75 degree change
Middle Bullseye Readings Show Change of ~1.5 Degrees
Left taken June 15th shows lean of ~1.25 degrees and right taken June 28th shows lean of ~2.75 degrees a change of about 1.5 degrees
June 28th Subsea Bullseye Reading Shows Lean of over 4 degrees
Today a reader of my blog posted a clear video of an updated bullseye reading.
June 28th Bullseye Reading Shows Increase In BOP Lean To Over 4 Degrees
Video Of the June 28th Bullseye Reading
This indicates the BOP is falling over as speculated in widespread rumors on the internet.
In fact the BOP lean has increased by approximately 1.5 degrees since the June 15th subsea bullseye reading.
Tuesday, June 29th 2010
NOLA.com has reported that BP has confirmed the BOP is in fact leaning.
Oil Spill containment efforts could be putting strain on damaged well
Meanwhile, observers monitoring the video feeds from the robotic vehicles working on the sea floor have noticed BP measuring a tilt in the 40-ton blowout preventer stack with a level and a device called an inclinometer.
Odone, the BP spokesman, confirmed that his company has been monitoring the lean of the blowout preventer, which BP believes began tilting when the Deepwater Horizon rig sank and the riser pipe got bent. “That is tilting and has been tilting since the rig went down,” Odone said. “We believe that it was caused by the collapse of the riser.”
Since the confirmation from BP that BOP is leaning the unanswered questions have been how much did the initial collapse cause the BOP to lean and is the lean increasing?
The first question still remains unanswered but we now have confirmation of a change in the lean by up to 1.5 degrees.
That does not however provide absolute proof that the BOP will fall over entirely but it shows that it is indeed falling over.
Some have commented that the Bullseyes are mounted on swivel joints which tend to swing several degrees.
To me however, it makes no sense to me that BP would install a level on such a joint that could swing a few degrees knowing that the BOP was leaning and that the limit of the bullseye level was only up to 5 degrees.
It would also not make sense for BP to come back later to clean it and then measure the level again knowing the measurement would not provide an accurate measurement to any degree of certainty.
June 29th, 2010 6:55 PM
Addressing the FlexJoint Issue
I initially incorrectly assumed that the difference between the top bullseye level could be compared to the middle bullseye level to give an accurate measurement of the lean of the BOP.
My assumption was incorrect because I assumed that the top bullseye was mounted to the top of the Flex Joint which it appears to be due to an optical illusion caused from lack of depth perception on the ROV screens.
The optical illusion gives the appearance that the top bullseye is mounted directly to the top of the flex joint when it is in fact mounted to the side of the pipe on the bottom of the riser adapter coming out of the top of the Flex Joint.
The mistaken assumption still does not refute the lean of the BOP itself has changed which is evidenced by the difference in lean of the BOP measured on the bottom bullseye and is also evidenced by the change in the lean of the BOP measured by the middle bullseye.
It does mean that the top and middle bullseye can not be compared to one another to measure the a change in title in the BOP.
My mistaken assumption was corrected as follows.
A comment, caught up in the spam filter pointed to a diagram of the BOP.
Diagram of the Top of the BOP
From that that diagram and this angle of the cleaning of the top bullseye as well as the diagram below posted online, I assumed that the diagram below correctly pointed to the mounting location of the bullseye.
Cleaning of Top Bullseye For June 28th Lean Measurement
INCORRECT Diagram of Subsea Bullseye Mounting Locations – Top and Middle Locations – Posted elsewhere online
Diagram courtesy of aethervox – Note original diagram did not have correction
Based on that information I rebutted comments stating that since the top bullseye was mounted on the flex joint where it could swivel it could not be used to measure the tilt of the BOP by comparing it to the middle bullseye.
My rebuttal was based on the following basis with data collection from the FlexJoint manufacturer.
Clearly as the comment indicated that the bullesye is indeed attached to a flex joint.
However, it still appears that intuition would lead one to assume that BP would not attach a level to the flex joint where it would provide inaccurate measurements is correct. What the other comments fail to indicate is that the Flex Joint Casing itself, which is attached to the top of BOP, does not swivel but allows the riser adapter coming out of the the Flex Joint to swivel.
In fact the swivel/flext joint itself is a solid forged cast of metal that is bolted to the LMRP and does not swivel.
Here is a cut out of the the flex joint showing it is one solid piece.
That image was taken from the oilstates.com Flexjoint.pdf which states:
The FlexJoint is composed of a large-diameter spherical elastromeric element inside of a forged housing (meaning it is a solid piece of metal), with customer-specified end connectors. When installed at the top and/or bottom terminations of a riser system, the FlexJoint allows for large angular deflections (of the riser – not the BOP or the FlexJoint) and accommodates all loads and motion even during severe storms.
To understand what is meant by the “elastromeric element inside of a forged housing” we refere to diagram of the inner workings of the FlexJoint below clearly shows the elastrometric element inside of the flex joint, marked orange, which allows the riser connector to swivel.
Responding to another comment that said read the specs, I replied “The specs read:”
Elastor Element: In addition to accommodating angular displacement, the elastomer element assembly retains interal pressures and tensions and transfers to both compressive loads in the elastomer layers. Angular movement is accomplished trough pure shear which is distrubuted in each elastomer layer. Shear and compressions stresses in each elastomer bonded layer are distrubuted by the steel reinforcement.
Again referring to the diagram above the Elastor element is located inside of the housing and allows the shaft inside of the FlexJoint to move, not the FlexJoint housing itself which is where the Bullseye is mounted.
The solid casing is forged metal and does not tilt to any degree except in the case that the BOP it is bolted on to tilts.
This invalidates the argument that the bullseye level can naturally be off a few degrees because it is on a flex joint.
Anyone familiar with the inner workings of this particular FlexJoint knows it allows the shaft or riser connector to move inside of the casing.
This clearly means that it is the riser adapter coming out of the top of the flex joint is free to swivel several degrees and not the flex joint itself.
Again this is a solid casing. The lean allowed for the riser comes from the elastromeric element inside of the casing which is designed to allow the riser shaft to move.
This graphic is reported to show the relative distance of the two bullseyes being measured.
Picture capture by aethervoxWhen BP installed the bullseyes about a month ago it is most likely that bullseyes had the same exact tilt of zero degrees at that time and is unlikely that there measurements where different by 1.5 degrees when first installed.
It was then verified that the flex joint does allow for tilt as as explained above which is consistent with my rebuttal with the bullseye mounted as shown below and is further explained by the following.
Flex Joint Movement Diagrams
Flex Joint Movement Locations and Top Bullseye on the Leaning BOP
However as stated previously the mounting location of the top bullseye that I assumed was wrong in the above “incorrect diagram” meaning that my assumption that the top and middle bullseyes measurements could be compared to one another for a gauge of BOP tilt was incorrect.
In fact, the correct mounting location for the top bullseye is shown in this picture.
Top of BOP with Bullseye Location Marked Screen Shot
That gives us an updated diagram of the mounting locations of the Top and Middle Bullseyes
Top of BOP with Bullseye Location Marked Screen Shot
This means that the top bullseye can indeed deviate from the middle bullseye up to some maximum range between 10 to 20 degrees.
However the Bottom and Middle Bullseye comparisons above indeed do show a change in the tilt of the BOP.
215 
5200
Wall Street Banks Secretly Build The World's Largest Private Army
Chris Martenson: "We Are About To Have Another 2008-Style Crisis"
MSM Blackout On NDAA Being Blocked As Unconsitutional
Headlines
Hundreds Of Flight Attendants Fall Ill With Hair Falling Out
Official List Of Words Feds Monitor On Social Networking Sites
Occupy Protestor Loses Eye After Police Stun Grenade Peaceful Crowd
UN Ambassador: "No Exaggeration - Fate Of The World Depends On Fukushima Reactor 4” 
Feds Buying Up All Surplus Ammo, Ordering Stores To Cease Sales?
MK Ultra 2012 - Cops Caught Mass Drugging Teens And Dropping Them At Occupy Minnesota
Flesh Eating Disease In Cocaine Found In New York, Los Angeles - Cocaine Supply Of Entire Nation May...
Explosions Destroy Saudi Oil Pipeline, Sends Oil Prices Soaring
Your logic is impeccable. Thanks!!
V65magman on June 28, 2010 – 7:13pm
“That bullseye is on the top of the swivel joint at the top of the BOP. The swivel joint can tilt several degrees without a problem. You are not seeing the lean of the BOP itself.”
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6667#comments_top
??? Which is it? thanks!
According to monkeyfister these levels where installed a month ago to measure the tilt of the BOP.
While there maybe a swivel joint here, it appears that joint is for the pipe coming out of the top of the BOP and not the BOP itself.
It appears that the level is attached to the BOP and not the swivel joint.
It would also make no sense to me that BP would install a level on such a joint that could swing a few degrees knowing there was a lean on the blowout preventer and that the limit of the level was only up to 5 degrees.
It would also not make sense for BP to come back later to clean it and then measure it knowing the measurement would not provide an accurate measurement to any degree of certainty.
However, I am no expert and this is just my opinion but neither is an an anonymous commenter at the The Oil Drum.
Monkeyfister is an expert however and you can tell from his post that he feels that this is a little more significant than being something as normal as just a swivel joint that would naturally be off a few degrees anyway.
Further more this is a five degree model which make even less sense that BP would install it on a joint that that could swing so much knowing the well was leaning to such an incline as 3 degrees back on the 10th.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by izabels, Alexander Higgins. Alexander Higgins said: Increase In Leaning BOP By Up To 1.5 Degress Confirms BP Gulf Oil Spill BOP Is Falling Over http://bit.ly/b2C4IX [...]
[...] confrims what I thought I could see yesterday in the cams that the BOP is indeed falling over http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/201…l-bop-falling/ __________________ "why are you wearing that stupid human [...]
What is the critcal point ? At what point will the bop topple , as far as the degree of leaning implies ?
My take on the lean is taken from reading material on the web stating that the BOP is resting on the well pipe at sea bottom, not on the seas bottom so the full weight of this 430 thousand lb. BOP is resting on a pipe that is deteriorating from the contaminates in the oil and many speculate that the pipe may have worn down to as much as half the thickness as the beginning of this blowout. This would weaken the support and I believe they put cables on it to help support it a few weeks back to stabilize after it moved a bit. The continued wear of the oil and heat and contaminates will allow the supporting pipe to fail altogether at some point with oil gushing from under the BOP and it will no longer be were the flow is coming from in videos but the under piping and soon enough it will be eaten away and only the earth itself will be the source of the oil and gases flowing as it will open more quickly to the rate of flow.
You realize that you are comparing two different bullseyes don't you?
The bullseye shown in the June 28 video is on the top, right under the LMRP.
The bullseye shown in the June 10 video is the middle bullseye – says so right in the blog post.
Just thought I'd point that out.
Yes I do. But I can only assume that there where installed at level.
And a reading on any measures the lean of the entire system, much as if you measured the plumb of a pipe in the middle or at the top.
I forgot to mention that there's a flex joint in between the two bullseyes.
You wrote: "This indicates the BOP is falling over as speculated in widespread rumors on the internet." What…..?????
Even if this was true, which it isn't, the increased lean of a degree is an indicator of increased lean of 1 degree. NOT an indicator that the BOP is falling over… helpful to keep speculation within some bounds, I think.
The previous comment ("you realize that you are comparing two different bullseyes don’t you?") looks right to me. I'll bet you a Krugerrand that the BOP doesn't fall over in the next year (excepting explosion or erupting volcano, or some BP blunder where they knock it over by themselves)
Keep up the generally good work, alex!
To a layman like my self… if you have something leaning and over a period of time that lean is increasing then the object is considered to be falling.
Now granted, that does not provided absolute proof that the BOP will fall entirely but an increased lean does indicate that the BOP is falling.
This is no ordinary well. Remember, this was not just a blowout. The entire drilling platform sank while still connected to the well pipe. This resulted in severe damage to the pipe down hole.
I hope that I am wrong but I do not believe that this well will ever stop flowing…ever. Our best hope is to capture as much as we are able and to find ways to increase the capture rate while limiting damage to the environment.
Hopefully we will be able to capture 99% or more of the oil and we will have a disaster that is able to be managed.
If anyone is holding out hope that the flow of oil will be stopped then you are probably going to be in for some disappointment. All is not lost though.
Alexander-
I have been harvesting images from the BP live feeds and have enhanced some that I would like to share in general and especially re the BOP tilt. I have, e.g. crisp, closeup images of fingerprints on the bullseye which provides a killer hi-res scale. There is so much more, e.g. hundreds of hours of video captures. There is much to do, pls. email me so that I can send you some tasty images. I have also been harvesting bottom images of misc. upwelling … although I had depths and headings, I didn't have the x-y … You are brilliant. Pls.contact me. Phil … PS- my website has languished, I am on images full time …
[...] Increase In Leaning BOP By Up To 1.5 Degress Appears To Confirm BP Gulf Oil Spill BOP Is Falling Ove…. Share and [...]
What is the white fluid or gas being blown into the oil stream from a rusty pipe? Just curious. And what is the general opinion on here of the potential of constructing a manifold over the wellhead large enough to capture the oil and run it in pipe along the sea bed to the coast for storage? If it is large enough, would it prevent a lot of the back pressure causing the sea bed leaks, or is the whole thing to compromised at this point?
Scott,
I certainly don't know a whole lot but I am a pretty darn good guesser.
So…I think, based on what I have read recently, that what you are saying is already being considered.
To answer your question as to whether it will work or not…I think that it certainly can. Obviously some forthought will need to go into planning for seismic events that could cause a "rupture" in the pipe line.
If properly designed ( i.e. 3 times the venting than currently deemed necessary ) I think that we could have a good solution. Of course I thought of this long ago and have been eating popcorn and watching while they do whatever it is they are doing.
Let's just all be happy that they did not attempt to seal the well with a Nuclear device like many have wanted because we all know that would not have worked. Right!
From the Oil Drum:
“That bullseye is on the top of the swivel joint at the top of the BOP. The swivel joint can tilt several degrees without a problem. You are not seeing the lean of the BOP itself.”
Alexander Higgins replied:
“While there maybe a swivel joint here, it appears that joint is for the pipe coming out of the top of the BOP and not the BOP itself.
“It appears that the level is attached to the BOP and not the swivel joint.”
No, it’s mounted on the pipe fittings, just above the swivel joint. The image from June 10 was from the bottom or middle of the BOP. I don’t seem to be able to post URLs or images to your blog, so I’ll tell you where you can see the mounting. Go to Monkeyfister’s blog, (monkeyfister.blogspot.com). The last series of pictures with the scrub brushes shows how it’s mounted.
Your story falls apart in another way, too. You claimed that it was tilted by 11 degrees on June 7, but only 2 1/2 degrees on June 10. According to that, it’s not falling down, it’s falling up! If you look at the video, you can see that the vehicle is rocking back and forth, and at times the BOP even appears to be tilted in the other direction! The bullseye levels, however, are steady.
Alex,
Could you take a look at this oil drum post by “passaloutre” and tell us what you think? He describes in some detail a similar deepwater 20,000
ft. deep blownout well and how Shell killed it. This well was not far from the DWH well. They had a blowout at 4500′ but managed to kill the well
deep with ultra heavy cement. This is the first time I’ve read an encouraging take on the relief wells. This makes me think there’s some real hope for this situation…
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6667#comment-663875
Ok, here’s exactly how and why the oil is ending up in the rain. Read.
Jim Clark
ExxonMobil Research and
Engineering
From :
Presentation to NRC Committee on
Understanding Oil Spill Dispersants: Efficacy and Effects
March 15, 2004
COREXIT 9500 was formulated in 1992 Specifically for weathered oils, it has the same surfactants as COREXIT 9527, also the same primary ingredient,
” Contains Over 60% Surfactants Plus Ethylene Glycol Monobutyl Ether (Butoxy Ethanol) ”
” At the Interface the Surfactants Reduce the Surface Tension Allowing the Oil to Enter the Water as Tiny Droplets Which are Degraded by Natural Bacteria. ”
” Contains Over 60% Surfactants Plus Ethylene GlycolMonobutyl Ether (Butoxy Ethanol) ”
” Not Designed for Direct Application to Shorelines– COREXIT 9580 Beach Cleaner Developed for That Application ”
” Not Very Effective on Weathered or Heavy Oils
” Since Heavy Oil is Involved in Over Half the Spills, This Has Limited Consideration of Dispersants in Many Cases. ”
………..also, the surfactant,
Sodium bis(2-ethylhexyl) sulfosuccinate
..is what’s called a ” nano-particle “….it’s the same type of chemical used to create scratch-n-sniff stickers. It works by a process called Micelle Molecular Encapsulation.
A micelle (pronounced /maɪˈsɛl/ or /maɪˈsiːl/, plural micelles, micella, or micellae) is an aggregate of surfactant molecules dispersed in a liquid colloid. I have a graphic on my site showing exactly how it works. It shows exactly how the oil is encapsulated inside of a droplet.
Combined with the fact that it takes 1-2 days, according to Exxon, to start breaking down in the environment….and the fact that lower density water at the surface of the G.o.M. means very fast evaporation rates, salt water is actually denser the lower you go in the water, that’s why it evaporates from the surface so fast.
I also have the salinity densities for all depths in the G.o.M.
You people cannot continue to kid yourself about this stuff ending up in the rain. ….
http://mentaljudo.blogspot.com/
Alex, everybody, ….keep up the good fight.
-Isaac
@Scott, the white fluid is Corexit. It's the chemical dispersant being used to kill the ecosystem, I mean help with the oil spill cleanup efforts.
Sodium bis(2-ethylhexyl) sulfosuccinate forms droplets in the size range of :
-20 to 30 microns
Water evaporation happens in the range of
-15 to 50 microns
The process is actually called Reverse Micelle Encapsulation, ….when it breaks down in UV light…it releases it’s contents. If our clouds and storm systems are charged from different solar particles,…. electrochemical processes are sped up…normally, …and we’ve been having massive particle bombardments lately..anything over 1000pfu ( P.article F.lux U.nits ), is considered dangerous.
A few recent storms for example :
-
2010 Jun 03 0506 UTC
Electron 2MeV Flux: 19666 pfu
-
2010 Jun 02 0512 UTC
2MeV Flux: 20865 pfu
-
2010 Jun 04 1156 UTC
2MeV Flux: 18234 pfu
You can obtain your own information on solar activities direct from this NOAA organization.
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/alerts/index.html
Good grief! They're still spewing that stuff into the Gulf? That is just one more false impression the mainstream media is delivering — that the Corexit ended with the earlier air drops. I wonder if anyone is considering the long term damage that months on end of Coretix is doing? Talk about a leadership vacuum. This gets more nightmarish by the hour.
Great job with the flex joint research Alex. The 'baffle 'em with BS' crowd on TOD were sure piling it on…and it showed.
It looks like one of the best (if not only) ways to get any real justice from this mess is through blogs like yours. The freakin' govt. sure isn't up to the task.
Thanks for all you're doing.
Ron, before you write anymore condescending remarks, check this out:
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6644#comments_top
alexhiggins732 on June 29, 2010 – 4:31pm
2am EST Do you know where your nemesis is?
Never seen the CNN webcam look so frightening. The PSI has not receded. The sparks that had been intermittenly discernable have now become a roaring brazier. This billowing explosion looks more and more like an outright volcanic eruption, with the oil as an ancillary effect, or as molten lava.
Nearly the whole burning bush is yellow in flames. Is this the same pix they show in primetime viewing hours? Dont think so…
Folks, we are in big friggin TROUBLE here.
Hi Figi,
I really didn’t mean to demean Alex..it’s just that it struck me that based on all the stuff i’ve read from some of the pretty smart folks at Oil Drum I came to a conclusion that the inclinometers are are telling contradicting stories based on who is basing their observations on which instruments. There’s so much white noise on the subject that it becomes a “who knows?” kind of thing for me. I think i’ll hold off on anymore gut reactions to the posts that bother me.. Alex is a right on guy.. he has alot of courage to engage this thing the way he does… and I’ve learned much from his posts. For the most part they are very good… just didn’t care for this one. I’m not an oil expert.. actually a musician with some engineering background which qualifies me for
what…? You can search my name and listen to some good acoustic guitar for a change of pace.. I’m just petrified by the progression of this event and the suffering to come. I search these sites to get a better understanding of this off the charts earth changing thing that BP has put on us through their wanton neglect, arrogance, incompetence. I just hope for an outcome we can accept… given the cards stacked against us.
and in the meantime, back in Washington D.C…
June 29, 2010
Travel Regulations Frustrate Congressmen Wanting To Look Into Gulf Of Mexico Oil Spill.
From NOLA.com
House members who had planned to travel to Louisiana next week for a tour and meetings on the Gulf of Mexico Gulf spill being organized by Rep.Steve Scalise won’t be able to tap their member accounts to cover the costs, the Republican congressman said he was told Tuesday.
“House Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi has the ability to approve this trip, but she’s decided to deny (payment for) this site visit,” Scalise said.
Pelosi’s office referred all questions to the House Administration Committee.
Scalise said he had 10 members who wanted to make the one-day visit, including one Democrat, Mississippi Rep. Gene Taylor. He said some are now considering using personal funds to make the trip.
California Rep. Dan Lungren, the top Republican on the House Administration Committee, said barring “some extraordinary reason to prohibit this trip,” which he said hasn’t been communicated to anybody on the Republican side, “this is an unacceptable departure from past practices.”
Scalise is one of the most outspoken critics of the Obama administration’s response to the BP oil spill.
Higgins, nice try, but in the diagram you just added you've got the bullseye mounted on the wrong part. And thanks for posting a diagram and a photo that prove my point, on The Oil Drum forum.
You're also comparing two different bubble levels. That doesn't cut it. Sorry, but you've got virtually all the facts wrong.
What point are you proving? That I posted a corrected diagram on The Oil Drum before I posted it here? That I have already acknowledged the diagram has the arrow for the bullseye pointing to the wrong piece?
There is also comparison of the same bullseyes – middle and bottom – in addition to the original comparison of middle to top – which both indicate a change in tilt.
Vanilla Mozilla;
This is hardly the time to provoke a duel of egos or to toss sneering remarks when everyone is scrambling to get to the truth on matters
that (ultimately) involve life & death. As we know, all that transpires during this crisis & every last word written, is part of the historical record including our conduct, be it gentlemanly or not and our actions, be they heroic or not.
Higgins will be remembered for his contribution here. Few others are willing or able to do the same.
Grrrrr….I am getting irritated…, Another Yahoo investors board chemist trying to make me look stupid….yeah, ok…….I just want you all to see how oil company employees try to obfuscate the truth I bring to the Wall Street investors message board….Funny how I can look them up with a packet route trace….and zoom in on them with geo-IP location..oil refineries…Port Charles for one….Conocophillips Company (138.32.32.166)….lol….morons.
———————————————–
After my original post about reverse micelle encapsulation…..IE ” dispersants ” I got some ” professionals ” responding….
29-Jun-10 09:51 pm
” Isaac is a loon who believes he understands technical details. In reality he doesn’t.
Two examples of the simplistic things he has posted that are simply wrong.
1) Increasing salinity decreases boiling point of water. Even housewives/cooks/etc hundreds of years ago knew you could add salt to water (increasing salinity) to raise the cooking temperature.
2) Just here he claimed that lowering density increases evaporation. While this appears to be true in cases of homologs chemicals, it is a result not a cause. E.g. heavier (more dense) aliphatic hydrocarbons do have higher boiling points, but it is not because they are more dense. Water is more dense than them (until you get to the extremely heavy ones, called resid in HCs) but it has a lower boiling point. I can literally find you oil that in fact can not be boiled (though it could be very slowly evaporated) that is lighter than water. ”
_______________
My response :
” No…under pressure….salinity lowers the boiling point….you have been misreading what I post on my blog…..the higher the pressure and the higher the salinity….
In addition…you do not know the valence of the proprietary surfactant…..nobody does…except the Company that makes it.
Do you know the valence number of the particular
Sodium bis(2-ethylhexyl) sulfosuccinate they are using….?
If you do, spill the beans.
In chemistry, valence, also known as valency or valency number, is a measure of the number of chemical bonds formed by the atoms of a given element. ”
—————-
Mr. chemist’s reply
” nope, I don’t know the particular valence. But I likely could work it out. Been a few years since I did anything like that. But I also know that (as you note) valence involes chemical bonding and reactions. What a surfactant is doing is not a chemical reaction. It is more of a hydrogen bonding issue which is independent of chemical bonding. They are different things. ”
————–
My last 2 replies to this clown :
” The fact remains, that the ingredients in COREXIT 9500 are what they are, …and the proprietary formulation of this salt is secret.
Molar mass, symbol M, is the mass of one mole of a substance (chemical element or chemical compound). It is a physical property which is characteristic of each pure substance.
Until we all know what the molar weight is, none of us will truly know how long it takes to degrade.
The weight of a substance that will combine with or replace one mole of hydrogen or one-half mole of oxygen. The equivalent weight is equal to the atomic weight divided by the valence. ”
#2
-this was removed by Yahoo censors…..lol
First of all *ssmunch, let’s rip that BS up right here in front of everybody.
The effectiveness of this proprietary salt is in fact, determined by what’s know as the :
Hydrophilic/Lipophilic Balance or ” HLB ”
The typical dispersant zone for 9500 is at surface level.
The lower you go, the less effective it is.
It is also made for surface application in droplet form.
Read the fcking PDF
Sour HI-E oil is untreatable with any dispersant after 6 hours.
You have no clue what the actual truth is concerning these chemical I am referring to,in terms of the actual molar weight, or the valence…so you talk out of your *ss…. and you also have the audacity to insult me ?
Also don’t tell me you can approximate what the valence is…that is BS….chemistry is an exact science….you cannot approximate a single outcome…..because you don’t have a set of numbers to do any ” calculations.
Put some pie in your hole
Self-copulate
Do both
I don’t care
Don’t get them confused though….approximation can be deadly.
Here’s a little more about how molecules are effected in the ionoshere>
Ultraviolet (UV), X-Ray and shorter wavelengths of solar radiation are ionizing, since photons at these frequencies contain sufficient energy to dislodge an electron from a neutral gas atom or molecule upon absorption. In this process the light electron obtains a high velocity so that the temperature of the created electronic gas is much higher (of the order of thousand K) than the one of ions and neutrals. The reverse process to Ionization is recombination, in which a free electron is “captured” by a positive ion, occurs spontaneously. This causes the emission of a photon carrying away the energy produced upon recombination. As gas density increases at lower altitudes, the recombination process prevails, since the gas molecules and ions are closer together. The balance between these two processes determines the quantity of ionization present.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionosphere
In addition, …..
Micelles composed of ionic surfactants have an electrostatic attraction to the ions that surround them in solution, the latter known as counterions. Although the closest counterions partially mask a charged micelle (by up to 90%), the effects of micelle charge affect the structure of the surrounding solvent at appreciable distances from the micelle. Ionic micelles influence many properties of the mixture, including its electrical conductivity. Adding salts to a colloid containing micelles can decrease the strength of electrostatic interactions and lead to the formation of larger ionic micelles. This is more accurately seen from the point of view of an effective change in hydration of the system.
What this means, is that as the chemicals contact salt, they start to form….salt is the catalyst in the reaction.
The electrostatic potential stored in salty seawater, is what starts the reaction, however….the more salt that is introduced into the system….the bigger the micro-encapsulations can get…
” Emulsion polymerization is a type of radical polymerization that usually starts with an emulsion incorporating water, monomer, and surfactant. The most common type of emulsion polymerization is an oil-in-water emulsion, in which droplets of monomer (the oil) are emulsified (with surfactants) in a continuous phase of water. Water-soluble polymers, such as certain polyvinyl alcohols or hydroxyethyl celluloses, can also be used to act as emulsifiers/stabilizers. The name “emulsion polymerization” is a misnomer that arises from a historical misconception. Rather than occurring in emulsion droplets, polymerization takes place in the latex particles that form spontaneously in the first few minutes of the process. ”
* High molecular weight polymers can be made at fast polymerization rates. By contrast, in bulk and solution free radical polymerization, there is a tradeoff between molecular weight and polymerization rate.
* The continuous water phase is an excellent conductor of heat and allows the heat to be removed from the system, allowing many reaction methods to increase their rate.
* Since polymer molecules are contained within the particles, viscosity remains close to that of water and is not dependent on molecular weight.
* The final product can be used as is and does not generally need to be altered or processed.
Disadvantages of emulsion polymerization include:
* Surfactants and other polymerization adjuvants remain in the polymer or are difficult to remove
* For dry (isolated) polymers, water removal is an energy-intensive process
* Emulsion polymerizations are usually designed to operate at high conversion of monomer to polymer. This can result in significant chain transfer to polymer.
* Can not be used for condensation, ionic or Ziegler-Natta polymerization, although some exceptions are known.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulsion_polymerization
You have expelled enough hot air to suck yourself through your own *sshole like a flagellating flesh torus, my friend.
A stinky muscle doughnut..
I didn’t even think it was possible.
Congrats.
————
They cannot lie….we will find the truth.
Critical mass of peer review.
The world is watching…..
Mak:
I don't know if I explained that well enough. A picture of a bullseye level taken on June 10 shows that the BOP is tilted by 2.5 degrees. Another picture taken on June 28 shows a second level at the top of the BOP that is tilted by 4 degrees, so Alexander thinks the BOP has fallen over by 1.5 degrees since then. What he didn't know at the time (and I'm not sure he accepts it even yet) is that there's a flexible joint between those two levels, that can swivel to accommodate whatever is connected to it. There is NO doubt about this. BP now affirms that the BOP is indeed not falling over.
Ordinarily I wouldn't get worked up about Alexander not knowing about the flexible joint. I could have made the same mistake. However, the same, I believe incorrect, arguments have been pushed all over the Internet, and it's needlessly scaring a lot of people. Hope you understand now.
That is not an illogical conclusion to make… while there are possible explanations to why that logic could be wrong.
Yes, there is no doubt there is a flexjoint and I do accept that there is a flex joint in between the bullseyes. In fact its well documented within the post.
Clealry you can see the same being that the FlexJoint update was added at 9:23 AM and our comment is timestamped at 5:13PM.
BP also affirms there are no methane plumes, there are no oil plumes, that corexit is non-toxic, they are not interfering with the media, and that it is impossible for the drill pipe to have exploded and shot back up the BOP and many other things which we know are lies.
Furthermore, you also fail to mention the comparison of the Bottom Bullseye to Bottom Bullseye and Middle Bullseye to Middle Bullseye which both show a lean of ~.75 degrees and ~1.5 degrees respectively, both of which you know about especially since you where kind enough yourself to post the discrepancy in the bottom bullseye on the TOD here: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6644#comment-664703.
Check the Viking Posieden feed. BOP rocking.
This is no duel of egos. I’m grateful to him for making available some video feeds and screen shots, and for being diligent in assembling information. I’m just pointing out, however, that when it comes to interpretation, at least on this narrow subject, he seems to have gotten it just about 100% wrong. I’ll spare him the indignity of describing it here, but if you want to see more, seek out the discussion on the Oil Drum. (But please note that it’s an expert forum. If in doubt, it’s best not to comment.)
I’ve been very critical of certain aspects of BP’s mitigation efforts. Nevertheless, scaring people with wild stories doesn’t help.
I’m just pointing out that if you’re looking for the truth, as you say, be discriminating. Learn to recognize signs of sensationalism and bias.
Here are some of the titles from this blog (and yes, I selected them), posted without comment:
BP and Government Misleading Public About Safety Of Florida Beaches
BP’s Lies About Methane And Oil Plumes Exposed
BP Exec Caught Lying? BP Media Blackout Confirmed By WSDU TV.
Interview With Fintan Dunne Discussing Sea Floor Leaks, Blown Well Casing, And Possible Need To Use A Nuke To Cap Well [and shows movie title shot: "Crack in the World"]
Coincidence, a sign from above, or is BP praying to God that LMRP works to cap Gulf oil spill?
6840 suggestions BP ignores while letting Gulf oil spill leak until August
WTF BP- BP starts pumping top kill mud without showing the public – BP SUCKS!!
BP and Administration Lies, Deceit, and Coverup in the Gulf – by Stephen Lendman
Coverup: More misinformation from NOAA about Gulf Oil Spill
Report: White House Covers Up Gulf Oil Spill Plume Between Florida Keys and Cuba
Is Government Lying About Origin Of Florida Keys Tarballs?
Quantum teleportation achieved over ten miles of free space
SkyTruth: Possible Second Leaking Rig Found In Gulf Oil Spill Satellite Images
Alexander Higgins Theory of Everything
100% wrong! Sorry.. have to disagree and please do see the oil drum. Unlike sensationalists, who pull random fantasy out of thin air I write about the logical conclusions of the facts as I understand them, which at times may be wrong and I will stand corrected when that occurs, for example with where the top bullseye is mounted.
And I love the posts you reference as examples of sensationalism.
BP and Government Misleading Public About Safety Of Florida Beaches – Taken directly from the Florida public – There words not mine… and those being affected in Florida and LA right now agree.
BP’s Lies About Methane And Oil Plumes Exposed – No sensationalism there. Cold hard truth. Well documented in the media BP has lied about both – Yet the a study they participated in reveals otherwise
BP Exec Caught Lying? BP Media Blackout Confirmed By WSDU TV. Ditto
Interview With Fintan Dunne Discussing Sea Floor Leaks, Blown Well Casing, And Possible Need To Use A Nuke To Cap Well [and shows movie title shot: "Crack in the World"] Well you can’t judge a book by its cover. Nukes are hot topic being discussed and I discuss why it is not an option. Blown well casing is an established fact. Ditto on seafloor leaks, although NOAA says the 7 plus they have found by the well are “natural”
Coincidence, a sign from above, or is BP praying to God that LMRP works to cap Gulf oil spill? Mention god because a cross appears on the ROV and that’s sensationalism. I won’t discuss the religious aspects.
6840 suggestions BP ignores while letting Gulf oil spill leak until August Echoing the same as reported by the Main Stream Media just from another angle
WTF BP- BP starts pumping top kill mud without showing the public – BP SUCKS!! Yeah… That wasn’t cool.
BP and Administration Lies, Deceit, and Coverup in the Gulf – by Stephen Lendman Repost from another author.
Coverup: More misinformation from NOAA about Gulf Oil Spill Plenty of misinformation from NOAA going around. If you think that’s sensationlist (even though its based on fact) wait until you get a load of the current post I am working on.
Report: White House Covers Up Gulf Oil Spill Plume Between Florida Keys and Cuba Yep. Sensationalism there. Especially when we now know that the plume was found by USF and BP refused to give them an oil sample to confirm the plume
Is Government Lying About Origin Of Florida Keys Tarballs? Well, we have satellite data from two sources (Roffs and SkyTruth), aerial photos, and reports from USF who tested and found oil in the Keys…. so draw your own conclusion
Quantum teleportation achieved over ten miles of free space Absolute scientific fact. Google it
SkyTruth: Possible Second Leaking Rig Found In Gulf Oil Spill Satellite Images Yep that was proven to…
Alexander Higgins Theory of Everything Having my own theory of every thing attributes to sensationalism? I think everyone should have their own world view and hypothesis on how the universe works.
Vanilla Mozilla,
Thank you for your reply. Our collective, and hopefully civil, conclusions are up against an
unprecedented challenge to our rights of freedom of information. We may not yet know in full how critically the American Experiment is at risk during this time. Be us all not only patriots but brothers.
Truly disturbing and horrifying video….
http://bpoilslick.blogspot.com/2010/06/dolphins-and-whale-basted-in-bp-oil.html
God help us all!
[...] News 06/29/10 US accepts international assistance for Gulf spill 06/29/10 Increase In Leaning BOP By Up To 1.5 Degress Appears To Confirm BP Gulf Oil Spill BOP Is Falling Ove… 06/29/10 Cleanup ships idled as storms rattle Gulf region 06/29/10 Above [...]
Saw this on http://www.examiner.com of Los Angeles linked by Steve Quayle website under the report of 6/30 titled “Panic brews on Gulf coast under suspicions of oil spill media blackout of threats to public safety”.
The BOP is leaning “10 to 12 degrees,”
according to Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen. And the existence of a ‘gas bubble’ under the well field has been confirmed.
[...] Read more… [...]
[...] 0 Increase In Leaning BOP By Up To 1.5 Degress Appears To Confirm BP Gulf Oil Spill BOP Is Falling Ove… [...]
[...] gushing out, and the poison is still being sprayed. The blowout preventer is widely believed to be on the verge of collapse, and relief wells might be facing an impossible task, depending on what is left of BP’s [...]
[...] Nochmal zum Neigungswinkel: http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2010/06/28/increase-leaning-bop-15-degress-confirms-bp-gulf-oil-spi… [...]
[...] fordert Geheimdienstinformationen ROV films oil leak coming from rock cracks on seafloor. Increase In Leaning BOP By Up To 1.5 Degress Appears To Confirm BP Gulf Oil Spill BOP Is Falling Ove… Ölpest im Golf von Mexiko und die Auswirkungen auf die ganze Welt! Ölpest im Golf von Mexiko [...]
volcanic eruption … Yep !
If an Methane explosion anomaly doesn't kill many of us the Methane gases will kill most of us as they surface from deep waters.. just as it killed 95% of life millions when Methane came out after impact of years ago meteor crater in Yucatan / Gulf ! Anyone left will have to deal with all the other ills/mutants of the oil for centuries !
Been a great run folks !
To xdrfox, whoever you are;
Thanks for the chortle, "Been a great run folks".
As for the typos, forget it. By now, if anyone on the internet gets their feathers all ruffled over them (nevermind not figuring them out)…well, daggummit, fergit the whole dang thing!
I noticed over the weekend that BP has been installing hydraulic rams to correct the angle created by the lean in the BOP so that the Top Hat will have a better fit.
1.5 degrees of deflection is a very small amount and it would not seem that this would be something that would need correction on a non-hard plumbed fitting that simply rests on the cut riser.
The rams are clearly there to change the attitude of the flex joint. They are resting on the top of the flex joint, using the bolts around the perimeter as a brace.
There could be a couple of reasons for doing this: 1) There is not enough weight to get the flex joint to operate as it was designed to do since the riser pipe has been cut. 2) The flex joint is not rotating as it was designed to do because it has additional resistance from additional pipe inside it, such as pipe forced up through it during the explosion. 3) The lean is getting larger and they are having to “help” the flex joint overcome it’s normal operating parameters caused by the lean if it is actually getting larger.
Just some thoughts. And a point of encouragement. Most of us are not oil industry experts, but we have a ton of experience in other areas of life that can shed some light on the problems being faced by the leak. Keep up the good work, listen to dissent (it appears you have), and be a forum that helps us all understand a little better what is going on.
Mak wrote, "'The BOP is leaning “10 to 12 degrees,'".
OK, here's a quiz to see if you have learned anything from this Webpage and the comments. Be sure to post your answers.
1. How far was the blowout preventer leaning on June 28?
A: 2.5 to 2.75 degrees
B: 3.9 degrees
C: 30 degrees
2. How far was the blowout preventer leaning on June 10?
A: 2 1/2 degrees
B: 3.9 degrees
C: 30 degrees
How far was the BOP leaning on June 15th?
Higgins writes: "How far was the BOP leaning on June 15th?"
Good point. I can add that to the quiz. Here are the options:
A. 1.5 degrees
B. 3.9 degrees
C. Darned if I know. It looks like a different bullseye.
D. 10 or 12 degrees, which Mak thinks
E: 11 degrees (from your headline)
F. up to about 15% and worse by the day (also from your blog)
Don’t misquote
E:11 degrees (from your headline) (if sea floor is level)
F: June 16th 10:40PM – there is a rumor that people over at the oil drum are saying it now looks like the lean has increased up to about 15% and it is getting worse by the day (also from your blog)
[...] http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2010/06/28/increase-leaning-bop-15-degress-confirms-bp-gulf-oil-spi… [...]
Has the BOP fallen over yet?
Yes, Alexander Higgins, how far has the BOP fallen over now? 45 degrees? 72 degrees? Maybe 90 degrees?
Alexander, like many on the Net, you are full of shit.
Yes, really. So happens.