Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Slick Barack's Oil Spill | White Lies | IXTOC I

History Lesson: Sedco 135F - IXTOC I

Compiled by: Larry Walker, Jr.

So if the Gulf Oil Blowout is going to take 3 to 10 month's to cap, then why lie? I'm tired of the lies. If it took Red Adair nearly 10 month's to cap IXTOC I, why would Obama think his disaster could be resolved in a few weeks? The only way that's going to happen is through the use of military ordinance to blow the well, creating an underwater seismic event. Any thing short of this is wishful thinking.

In the IXTOC I accident the U.S. had two months to prepare the coast with booms and still failed to prevent a disaster. The Obama administration has wasted a month already. The IXTOC I dumped 3.5 million barrels into the Gulf making it the worst oil disaster ever, until now. Obama could blow the well, but he won't. Obama could do more for the Gulf States, but he won't. All Obama knows how to do is run his mouth (with a teleprompter), tell white lies, and make us think everything is F.I.N.E. Those who fail to learn from history are destined to repeat it. Deja Vu...



In 1979, the Sedco 135F was drilling the IXTOC I well for PEMEX, the state-owned Mexican petroleum company when the well suffered a blowout. The well had been drilled to 3657m with the 9-5/8" casing set at 3627m. Reports then state that mud circulation was lost (mud is, in essence, a densely weighted drilling fluid used to lubricate the drill bit, clean the drilled rock from the hole and provide a column of hydrostatic pressure to prevent influxes) so the decision was made to pull the drill string and plug the well. Without the hydrostatic pressure of the mud column, oil and gas were able to flow unrestricted to the surface, which is what happened as the crew were working on the lower part of the drillstring. The BOP was closed on the pipe but could not cut the thicker drill collars, allowing oil and gas to flow to surface where it ignited and engulfed the Sedco 135F in flames. The rig collapsed and sank onto the wellhead area on the seabed, littering the seabed with large debris such as the rig's derrick and 3000m of pipe.

The well was initially flowing at a rate of 30,000 barrels per day (1 barrel = 42 US gallons = 159 litres), which was reduced to around 10,000 bpd by attempts to plug the well. Two relief wells were drilled to relieve pressure and the well was eventually killed nine months later on 23 March 1980. Due to the massive contamination caused by the spill from the blowout (by 12 June, the oil slick measured 180km by 80km), nearly 500 aerial missions were flown, spraying dispersants over the water. Prevailing winds caused extensive damage along the US coast with the Texas coast suffering the greatest. The IXTOC I accident was the biggest single spill ever, with an estimated 3.5 million barrels of oil released.


In the next nine months, experts and divers including Red Adair were brought in to contain and cap the oil well.[6] Approximately an average of ten thousand to thirty thousand barrels per day were discharged into the Gulf until it was finally capped on 23 March 1980, nearly 10 months later.[7] Prevailing currents carried the oil towards the Texas coastline. The US government had two months to prepare booms to protect major inlets. Eventually, in the US, 162 miles (261 km) of beaches and 1421 birds were affected by 3,000,000 barrels (480,000 m3) of oil.[7] Pemex spent $100 million to clean up the spill and avoided paying compensation by asserting sovereign immunity.[8]

The oil slick surrounded Rancho Nuevo, in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas, which is one of the few nesting sites for Kemp's Ridley sea turtles. Thousands of baby sea turtles were airlifted to a clean portion of the Gulf of Mexico to help save the rare species.




Office of Response and Restoration: IXTOC I

The Royal Society of Canada: Report on Science Issues Related to Oil and Gas Activities

1. Encyclopaedia of New Zealand
2. NOAA Photo Library
3. New Hope, PA
4. ORR Incidents Gallery
Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Gulf Oil Spill and Obama: "It's 3:00 AM!"

By: Larry Walker, Jr.

If it were up to me, I would focus on stopping the source of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The Obama Administration is all fired up about investigating the 'cause' of the leak. BP is all giddy about siphoning off a third of the amount of oil still gushing into the gulf. Congress is all wound up about having endless hours of meetings and testimony about who (since the government is effectively broke) is going to pay for the damage. Meanwhile, the hemorrhage continues.

Why not stop the source of the leak first, then focus on the massive cleanup? Decision makers make decisions and then stand by them. An 'organizer-in-chief' like Obama can only excogitate ways to extort money out of BP.

Obama is going to get to the bottom of how this happened and his administration is going to look for a neck to place its boot on. Yeah, right. Sounds like the work of a community organizer, not a president. A real president would focus on stopping the flow and then cleaning up the damage.

Meanwhile, BP has figured out how to make money by syphoning off some of that crude. Why not syphon off as much as you can while you're drilling that relief well? For BP it's about recouping some of the losses, not really about stopping the leak.

And Congress? Congress can't even take the time to read a bill before they vote on it. What is Congress going to do to stop a real crisis? Nothing. Passing Obamacare was some kind of National emergency, but the destruction of the Gulf Coast is not a big deal.

If a water main breaks in my front yard, the solution is not to point fingers, run my mouth, or to see how much water I can syphon off. The solution is to stop the leak.

How do you stop a mile deep oil gusher? Explosives. You blow it up.

What technology might the Federal Government have in its vast arsenal capable of sealing the breach?

I would to God that someone in the Federal Government or Military would have the stones to seal the well and stop playing games. Cap the @&%# well head.

Has the well been capped yet?

You got a better solution?

[Note: The use of nukes may not be necessary. Conventional explosives may suffice.]

Food for thought:

Nuclear Option for Oil Spill? - Video - FoxNews.com

Operation Wigwam - 2,000 ft. underwater nuke

Could nuclear bomb be answer for huge leak at US Gulf coast?

Nuclear depth bomb - Cap The Gulf Disaster

Monday, May 3, 2010

The Progressive Slide to 2020 | GDP vs. Debt

2020 GDP vs. National Debt

By: Larry Walker, Jr.

The question of the day is what will the USA's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) need grow to by the year 2020 in order to keep pace with the Progressive's ruinous spending? And based on the answer to that, at what annual rate should our economy be growing?

If we add the CBO’s 2010 to 2020 projected estimate of the president's budget deficit to the current national debt of $12,948.7 billion (as of 4/30/2010), then the National Debt will total $23,170.0 billion by the year 2020.

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

As of the end of the 1st quarter of 2010, based on the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA's) latest preliminary estimate, GDP is averaging $14,601.4 billion annually.

click to enlarge

Depending upon the rate of growth of our economy over the next 11 years, our National Debt will exceed GDP, sooner or later. We know that even the Progressive's say that our National Debt is unsustainable, but the question is just how unsustainable? If we take a look back to the days when our debt was sustainable and the economy was growing at roughly 5% per year with low unemployment, for example 2003, we will discover that our Debt to GDP ratio was 60.9%.

Scenario #1, below, determines the rate of growth necessary in order for GDP to match our projected debt by the year 2020. Scenario #2 determines the rate of growth needed in order to return to the 2003 debt-to-GDP ratio of 60.9%. Finally, Scenario #3 reveals what the debt-to-GDP ratio will be by 2020 if GDP maintains its current pace.

click to enlarge

Scenario #1 – The road to nowhere

GDP must grow from $14,601.4 to $23,170.0 billion in order to equal the National Debt by 2020. In other words, GDP must maintain an average sustained growth rate of 5.3% per year for the next 11 years, in order to achieve a Debt to GDP ratio of 100%. This represents 'the road to nowhere'. Although, per the BEA, GDP grew at a rate of 3.2% in the first quarter of 2010, as you can see, this will not be enough to reach the destructive Progressive goal of a 100% debt-to-GDP ratio.

Scenario #2 – The way back to 2003

In order to return to the more prosperous 2003 Debt-to-GDP ratio of 60.9%, GDP must grow at a sustained annual rate of 14.1% for the next 11 years. In order to achieve such a rate of growth, our economy would have to grow at the pace of an emerging market, a feat which is clearly impossible for an industrialized nation. This is precisely why the president's debt commission has stated publicly that, we will never grow our way out of this 'man-made disaster'.

Scenario #3 – The Hellenistic toboggan slide

If GDP maintains its present annual growth rate of 3.2%, then by the year 2020 our debt-to-GDP ratio will reach 117.4%. Welcome to the Progressive Utopia. Welcome to the Republic of Greece.


The end of the Progressive trail leads to Greece. What you are seeing in Greece today is precisely where Progressive ideology will take us. Prepare for riots, violence, chaos, class warfare, and national bailouts. If that's what you want, then support Barack Obama, and his Progressive entourage, and vehemently defend all of their policies. But, if this is not where you want to be in 2020, then identify and support true fiscal conservatives. Join with independents and moderates, and let's elect responsible mainstream leaders who will lead us out of the wilderness, through sound fiscal policy, and free-enterprise solutions. It's time to put the Progressives in their place: prison.






click to enlarge

click to enlarge

Saturday, May 1, 2010

Bail and Fail | Obama's Bank Rescue Sham

On Friday, April 30th, the FDIC reported 7 additional bank closings including three banks in Puerto Rico. It's ironic that Congress passed a bill asking Puerto Rico if it wants statehood on the same day.

This brings the total number of bank failures under Obama to 204. The total number of bank failures in April was 23, and the year-to-date figure is 64. You can thank left-wing Progressives like Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and some on the right for the continued destruction and consolidation which is happening in the banking sector. I am now projecting that 195 banks will fail this year.

Meanwhile, approximately $370 billion of the $700 billion TARP fund sits on the sidelines, while troubled assets remain on many bank's balance sheets dragging them under. Wasn't that money supposed to be used to get rid of toxic assets? Well, if Progressives are going to sit idly by and watch banks fail, then they need to give us back our $370 billion. The other $330 billion appears to be a total loss. Obama and his Progressive entourage should claim it, cut their (our) losses, and prepare for defeat at the polls.

Remember that these are the same Progressives who hate banks and corporations and who will stop at nothing in their efforts to destroy our free enterprise system and turn America into a state run socialist utopia. They must be defeated.

click to enlarge

Below is a list of the 23 banks that failed in April of 2010.

click to enlarge

Below is a comprehensive listing of the 204 banks that have failed since Obama took the reigns. There were 25 bank failures in 2008, and 3 in 2007 making the total for the present crisis 232. In contrast, during the S&L Crisis of the 1980's and 1990's there were 747 S&L failures at a total cost of $160.1 billion.

click to enlarge

Source: http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html