Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on May 30, 2010
Matt Simmons Tells Bloomberg Only Way To Contain Oil Leak Is With Small Nuclear Bomb
n his May 28th interview with Bloomberg’s Mark Crumpton and Lori Rothman, Matt Simmons of energy investment bank Simmons & Company, provides some stunning revelations on what is really occurring in the Gulf of Mexico, and proposes that the only effective way to contain the leak is to relieve BP, bring in the military, and do what the Russians have done on comparable occasions, namely explode nuclear weapons within the wellbore. Simmons knows what he is talking about. As Jim Bianco points out: “Matt Simmons gained fame with his book 2005 Twilight in the Desert where he claimed that the Saudis were overstating their oil output because they hit “peak oil.” Right or wrong Simmons claimed the price of oil was going to skyrocket and three years after the book’s release the crude oil hit $147/Barrel. In January 2009 the WSJ called Simmons one of the five most important voices in the oil industry. Simmons has been wrong in the past and his views are non-conventional and often correct. Simmons is also highly connected within the oil industry so he knows who to talk to verify his claims.” In addition to his radical solution, Simmons also points out that “Top Kill” is a sideshow and the real problem is 5 to 7 miles away, where a second fissure is “releasing a plume the size of Delaware and Maryland combined.” If Simmons is indeed right, and the only recourse left to Obama is to nuke the seabed, the repercussions for his already shaky political situation will be tremendous.
5 Comments on "Matt Simmons Tells Bloomberg Only Way To Contain Oil Leak Is With Small Nuclear Bomb"
Edpeak on Sun, 30th May 2010 11:19 am
This is what Matt Simmons said in a 2003 interview, about the natural gas crisis, when asked what the solution is:
“I don’t think there is one… The solution is to pray. Pray for mild weather and a mild winter. Pray for no hurricanes and to stop the erosion of natural gas supplies. Under the best of circumstances, if all prayers are answered there will be no crisis for maybe two years. After that it’s a certainty.”
That was in summer 2003. Under the b est of circumstances, the US would avoid a crisis until 2005, and “after that, it’s a certainty” He was talking about things like industrial shut down just so there’s enough electricity to keep people from overheating from not enough power to run A/Cs.
Don’t get me wrong: Simmons is smart and his analysis of the risks of peak oil, question marks about Saudi production and potential, among other things, one would do well to listen to. He’s also shared some important thoughts on this BP disaster. That’s the positive side of the coin about Matt Simmons, and deserves mention and consideration and praise.
Just keep in mind that there’s another side of the coin, which he showed in that interview (and I say this despite thinking that natural gas peak in North American is an entirely real problem; what he was predicting was much more extreme). That side of him is his tendency to, sometimes, grab everyone’s attention (not deliberately but by his nature) by his style and language for the most extreme scenarios. Maybe part of him would love to see a nuclear bomb, more excitement, but even if that’s not the case, the 2003 interview shows his sometimes making the most extreme predictions and being off by, so far, 5 years and counting past his “best case” scenario. But coming right after the “Black Thursday” blackout, people listened.
Same here, it’s easier to predict nothing will work except a nuclear bomb. If you’re wrong, and something less than nuclear works, most will forget about your prediction. If you end up being right, you’ll say “aha, told ya” and crank up even more extreme predictions. This is not to defend BP or suggest that “top kill” had a high chance of working. It did not have a high chance of working. But saying nothing, at all, will work except nuclear” is something else.
Again, re-read the above quote from 2003 (and google for the full interview) to know about the grains of salt you need when listening to him. Using nuclear bombs in a situation where there was any, ANY way at all to end the leak otherwise, risks political and environmental disasters each of which is huge and together would be potentially doubly hugely damaging. Am I the only one who remembers this 2003 interview?
hoangkybactien on Sun, 30th May 2010 2:08 pm
Sound fairly.
Am I the only one who remembers this 2003 interview? No, you’re not!
I,too, do recall reading that interview sometimes ago on the Internet, perhaps in 2005? when the news of his new book “twilight in the desert, the coming Saudi oil shock, and the world economy” (something like that) was going to be published near the end of that year (?).
A small nuclear bomb to shut the well is way too much. Sound more like a joke than a solution. And I believe it won’t work either. Who can garrantee that the lower portion of the casing/pipe deep down inside the rock formation will be melted closed.
I have a wild suggestion: BP should open the door and invite any engineer who thinks he/she has a solution worth trying come in for few hours of consultation and pay them fairly. There are a lot of smart people out there who could have a good solution. Just give them a chance and an incentive to try.:-)
KenZ300 on Sun, 30th May 2010 10:13 pm
OMG — What a disaster.
Environmental and economic disaster
It is time to move with purpose to alternative fuels. We need to transition and move away from oil for a variety of reasons.
1. PEAK OIL — demand will exceed supply in a few years driving up prices for all.
2. Environmental — we need to protect our environment not destroy it.
3. Security — we need to quit sending money for oil to countries that want to do us harm.
4. Jobs — Lets produce jobs at home in an alternative energy industry
5. Family budgets and the national economy will be strained further by higher and higher oil prices. Will high oil prices push family transportation budgets to the breaking point?
hoangkybactien on Mon, 31st May 2010 5:41 am
It’s not that very hard of a sacrifice to implement that 5-point program! It’s feasible and necessary.
But it has been extremely hard to find real leaders who have the gut and conscience to carry it out!
And it seems finding another Hope diamond may be a lot easier than finding such a good leader!
Perhaps, America needs another Gandhi to save her from sliding down the Olduvai Cliff! ):-(
aga & georgie on Mon, 31st May 2010 7:27 pm
Let´s make a homepage to collect better ideas from engineers!
My idea is to make a steel construct. This construction must be filled with sea water, let down, positioned over the hole, is to be dropped over the oil hole, then filled with concrete. Ol first spits out of hole in the middle, then construction needs to be fixed on the bottom of the sea. Then fixations have to be used for seaground. Design should be like circle with pyramide over it. Fixations neede, est. 200- or more pieces, 20m longitude with screw item. High strenght steel, tensile 1000 N/mm². Radius from Pyramide needs to be 50m ad min, 4 parts to be screwed together as alternative. Now loking for people to count, if this knocks 2000 tons pressure out !!! We have to do something against stupid managers and politicians… There should be a reward for the company with the first solution!!! Let´s talk about some 100 Mio of Dollars as reward. That is my idea. Who wants to start it up now????