Don't worry folks, tar balls aren't all that bad. They used to wash up on shore all the time at the New Jersey beaches when I spent all my summers there in the mid 80s

6/4/2010 9:45:30 AM

Quote :

"Some people are seriously advocating using a nuclear weapon on it now. "

the Russians have used low yield nukes several times in situations like this.

6/4/2010 10:16:17 AM

Why don't they just drink the oil spill's milkshake?

6/4/2010 10:34:08 AM

Quote :

" the Russians have used low yield nukes several times in situations like this. "

they used them to stop fires on above ground wells, not stop gushing oil a mile under water

6/4/2010 10:41:31 AM

I think I'm gonna have to rent that move this weekend.

6/4/2010 10:41:44 AM

What's worse than an oil spill? A radioactive oil spill.

6/4/2010 10:50:41 AM

More like awesomer.

6/4/2010 10:58:34 AM

Here's what I was talking about...

In Light Of BP’s Failures, Russian ‘Nuclear Option’ For Stopping Leak Gaining Traction
http://www.mediaite.com/online/in-light-of-bps-failures-russian-nuclear-option-for-stopping-leak-gaining-traction/

Quote :

"The plan first appeared in the context of BP’s oil leak in Russian newspaper Komsomoloskaya Pravda, where writer Vladimir Nagowski noted that Russia and, previously, the Soviet Union, had dug a hole deep and large enough for a small plutonium bomb near the oil well and detonated it underground, making the hole collapse on itself and stopping the leak (Gawker dug up an instructional video of the plan). Yes, there is an Armageddon reference in his piece. He also notes that nuclear “plugs,” sometimes three times as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb, had been used five times successfully, with only one failure in 1972 that “mysteriously” left a mushroom cloud where the gusher was supposed to be."

Oh my.

6/4/2010 11:57:46 AM

I would worry that we could stop the earth's core from rotating if we tried this.

6/4/2010 12:57:15 PM

Quote :

"they used them to stop fires on above ground wells, not stop gushing oil a mile under water"

what difference would that make to the nuclear weapon?

I posed this question earlier in the thread with no response. I dont know if this solution is viable or not, but I am curious about it.

6/4/2010 5:43:43 PM

i'd think the detonation characteristics would be substantially different. i'm also not sure i understand why they'd think this would work, if the original premise is for the hole created by the nuclear blast is meant to cave in on itself underwater.

to show my own ignorance, has there been any significant underwater nuclear testing using the sort of yields that would conceivably be used here?

6/4/2010 5:48:04 PM

Nuclear anti-submarine rocket

6/4/2010 7:23:00 PM

I'm for it. Holy shit this is awesome.

6/7/2010 12:51:56 AM

That's the first I've read of the Russian "nuclear option".

That is amazingly stereotypical of them... but I mean that in the best possible way. Who better than Russia to look at an oil leak and want to solve the problem by nuking the shit out of it...

6/7/2010 12:55:51 AM

i don’t see them EVER trying that here, but what do they do about the fallout? Doesn’t that irradiate their oceans...

6/7/2010 1:21:10 AM

I don't understand why we don't employ this method

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/bp-oil-spill-cleanup-costs-060410

Actually, I do know. It would probably bankrupt the company.

6/7/2010 6:58:30 AM

^

Quote :

"bankrupt the company."

As long as they completely finished and paid for the clean-up, (and paid for everything else,) I'd see no problem with their subsequent bankruptcy.
In fact, that would be very fitting.
Fuck BP.

6/7/2010 7:46:07 AM

Quote :

"i don’t see them EVER trying that here, but what do they do about the fallout? Doesn’t that irradiate their oceans.."

good question. seems like the question would be, is whatever fallout better or worse for the environment than the oil itself?

6/7/2010 11:40:22 AM

Quote :

"i don’t see them EVER trying that here, but what do they do about the fallout? Doesn’t that irradiate their oceans..."

whatever fallout would remain would be diluted by the ocean into harmless amounts.

6/7/2010 11:51:53 AM

Quote :

"whatever fallout would remain would be diluted by the ocean into harmless amounts."

-TKE-Teg

Quote :

""The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume.""

- Tony Hayward, http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/may/13/bp-boss-admits-mistakes-gulf-oil-spill

[Edited on June 7, 2010 at 12:48 PM. Reason : .]

6/7/2010 12:47:50 PM

oh shit The Gulf of Mexico is an ocean?

6/7/2010 1:03:34 PM