<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Stay up to the minute with the Deepwater Horizon Response</title>
	<atom:link href="http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/</link>
	<description>Official Blog of the U.S.  Coast Guard</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 15:04:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Kloeber PE</title>
		<link>http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/#comment-3041</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Kloeber PE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 22:43:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/?p=6512#comment-3041</guid>
		<description>AWhen is the President going to get someone in charge let someone get something done?

Every time the one in charge says &quot;we&quot; are attempting such-and-such, or &quot;we&quot; have collected so much oil -- it&#039;s obvious that &quot;we&quot; are attempting to imply that &quot;we&quot; the US, or US military, are in control and directing operations or selecting the solution .... which you or the govt are not in any position to do.  

Give it up.  Be honest that there&#039;s a SERIOUS legal problem with &quot;you&quot; ordering anything to be done, lest BP can later claim that it would have done something differently and therefore the US shares culpability for (insert whichever option here) not working s planned or causing more environmental damage.

With this latest estimate of oil flow, you should be replaced IMMEDIATELY.  Any lay person with a slide rule could estimate the flow was way more that you stated publicly several times.  ANY person with any common sense could tell the flow estimates were way to conservative once the riser was cut.  And to GO ALONG with BP&#039;s statement that the flow wold increase 20% -- SHAME on you.  Again, anyone with common sense could estimate the the flow would increase way more if a restriction like that kink was removed from the line.

To publicly announce that TWO out of FOUR open vents being open on the LMRP cap was why BP could not collect all oil exiting the LMRP, was simply a lie.  The &quot;excess&quot; oil was clearly billowing out around the BOTTOM of the cap -- not the vents on the top. In comparison, closing two more vents would be a pittance, compared to the volume coming out below the riser cap.   The cap seal, and riser to the surface was not designed to accommodate the volume of oil and exit pressure - at least be honest with the American people, if BP cannot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AWhen is the President going to get someone in charge let someone get something done?</p>
<p>Every time the one in charge says &#8220;we&#8221; are attempting such-and-such, or &#8220;we&#8221; have collected so much oil &#8212; it&#8217;s obvious that &#8220;we&#8221; are attempting to imply that &#8220;we&#8221; the US, or US military, are in control and directing operations or selecting the solution &#8230;. which you or the govt are not in any position to do.  </p>
<p>Give it up.  Be honest that there&#8217;s a SERIOUS legal problem with &#8220;you&#8221; ordering anything to be done, lest BP can later claim that it would have done something differently and therefore the US shares culpability for (insert whichever option here) not working s planned or causing more environmental damage.</p>
<p>With this latest estimate of oil flow, you should be replaced IMMEDIATELY.  Any lay person with a slide rule could estimate the flow was way more that you stated publicly several times.  ANY person with any common sense could tell the flow estimates were way to conservative once the riser was cut.  And to GO ALONG with BP&#8217;s statement that the flow wold increase 20% &#8212; SHAME on you.  Again, anyone with common sense could estimate the the flow would increase way more if a restriction like that kink was removed from the line.</p>
<p>To publicly announce that TWO out of FOUR open vents being open on the LMRP cap was why BP could not collect all oil exiting the LMRP, was simply a lie.  The &#8220;excess&#8221; oil was clearly billowing out around the BOTTOM of the cap &#8212; not the vents on the top. In comparison, closing two more vents would be a pittance, compared to the volume coming out below the riser cap.   The cap seal, and riser to the surface was not designed to accommodate the volume of oil and exit pressure &#8211; at least be honest with the American people, if BP cannot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john</title>
		<link>http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/#comment-3037</link>
		<dc:creator>john</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 18:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/?p=6512#comment-3037</guid>
		<description>USCG shgould be in DoD.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>USCG shgould be in DoD.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael S. Eye Sr.</title>
		<link>http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/#comment-3032</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Eye Sr.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 04:36:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/?p=6512#comment-3032</guid>
		<description>I am a welder by trade (retired). I have stoped many a steam leak. The same process may help the oil leak. An encapulation configered to the shape of the outside of the flanges where the oil is leaking out with a pipe and valve welded to it needs to be fabricated. The bottom part is bolt on to seal around the flanges. While installing leave the valve open to allow to flow. After installation just close the valve. 

Where the cut pipe is leaking oil, go further down and crimp the uncut pipe several times this should slow it down considerably.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a welder by trade (retired). I have stoped many a steam leak. The same process may help the oil leak. An encapulation configered to the shape of the outside of the flanges where the oil is leaking out with a pipe and valve welded to it needs to be fabricated. The bottom part is bolt on to seal around the flanges. While installing leave the valve open to allow to flow. After installation just close the valve. </p>
<p>Where the cut pipe is leaking oil, go further down and crimp the uncut pipe several times this should slow it down considerably.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: W Mark Hersey</title>
		<link>http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/#comment-3028</link>
		<dc:creator>W Mark Hersey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:59:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/?p=6512#comment-3028</guid>
		<description>Using a procedure similar angioplasty, an industrial balloon could be inserted hundreds of feet into the leaking wellhead. After inflation, concrete could be poured into the pipe thus sealing the well or significantly reducing the flow of oil.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Using a procedure similar angioplasty, an industrial balloon could be inserted hundreds of feet into the leaking wellhead. After inflation, concrete could be poured into the pipe thus sealing the well or significantly reducing the flow of oil.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: R. Light</title>
		<link>http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/#comment-3027</link>
		<dc:creator>R. Light</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:16:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/?p=6512#comment-3027</guid>
		<description>I know its too simple of a suggestion but why can&#039;t a barge be scuttled, sink it over the top and fortify it with boulders and other material until the relief pipes are in place.  It doesn&#039;t seem like it could leak any worse than what we are seeing now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know its too simple of a suggestion but why can&#8217;t a barge be scuttled, sink it over the top and fortify it with boulders and other material until the relief pipes are in place.  It doesn&#8217;t seem like it could leak any worse than what we are seeing now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tatek Gebreyesus</title>
		<link>http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/#comment-3025</link>
		<dc:creator>Tatek Gebreyesus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:56:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/?p=6512#comment-3025</guid>
		<description>If this has been proposed, as most probably it has, forgive me for taking your precious time. 

My assumptions: No one yet knows if the oil is coming from the pipe alone or from the pipe plus the annulus. All the propositions are done with the current well condition and geographic location in mind

Direction: We have to seek a solution that takes into account the worst case scenario. The cement job has been compromised, oil is leaking both from the annulus and the pipe

Long term solution: Releif wells are the correct solution.

Short Term solution: DO NOT TRY TO PLUG THE WELL, instead guide the flow of the oil to a tanker, then to a storage unti until the releif wells are in place.

What is the best way to guide the flow of oil: The best way to guide the flow of oil is (in my opinion) the one that has been tried but abandoned. Put the dome back into the ocean. If needed fill it up with antifreeze or a chemical with better anti-freezing properties (Our Chemists can help us here) then lower it on top of the well.

good luck and God bless

tatek</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If this has been proposed, as most probably it has, forgive me for taking your precious time. </p>
<p>My assumptions: No one yet knows if the oil is coming from the pipe alone or from the pipe plus the annulus. All the propositions are done with the current well condition and geographic location in mind</p>
<p>Direction: We have to seek a solution that takes into account the worst case scenario. The cement job has been compromised, oil is leaking both from the annulus and the pipe</p>
<p>Long term solution: Releif wells are the correct solution.</p>
<p>Short Term solution: DO NOT TRY TO PLUG THE WELL, instead guide the flow of the oil to a tanker, then to a storage unti until the releif wells are in place.</p>
<p>What is the best way to guide the flow of oil: The best way to guide the flow of oil is (in my opinion) the one that has been tried but abandoned. Put the dome back into the ocean. If needed fill it up with antifreeze or a chemical with better anti-freezing properties (Our Chemists can help us here) then lower it on top of the well.</p>
<p>good luck and God bless</p>
<p>tatek</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lendwood O. Wesby</title>
		<link>http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/#comment-3022</link>
		<dc:creator>Lendwood O. Wesby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:05:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/?p=6512#comment-3022</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s it in a nutshell!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s it in a nutshell!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lendwood O. Wesby</title>
		<link>http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2010/06/stay-up-to-the-minute-with-the-deepwater-horizon-response/#comment-3021</link>
		<dc:creator>Lendwood O. Wesby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:02:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/?p=6512#comment-3021</guid>
		<description>RE: Oil Spill Containment

Registered with FBO but find process a bit cumbersome. Suggestion is for immediate containment of flow from ruptured pipe. Understand latest effort partially successful. Propose as yet undesigned hinged clamp and high pressure hose attachment to fit over existing fitting.
Suggest clamp to be sectional so as to assess feasiblity in process.
High pressure internal tubing system to seal joints as activated and
measured pumping action to match flow rate as clamp is engaged. Extraction hose should be mounted to uppermost section of clamp. Recall that rubber hoses are not necessarily granted to stand too much
pressure but could provide acceptable relief temporarily. Should be possible to design system to fit over that already engaged. Such a system should be adjustable. Would not advise less than two sections.
One to secure clamp. Nor more necessarily than three to assess feasibility of process and desired results. Should be possible to produce this idea at minimal cost comparitively. Suggest advise of metalurgist and production engineers for technical requirements and most practical application. Present idea appears to be a precourser to
this but falls short of your desires. This idea should dramatically reduce leakage while allowing you to better direct efforts. Also suggest better placement of deepsea crameras! Hope this will help as I
imagine if you choose to try. Should also reduce pressures of time element!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RE: Oil Spill Containment</p>
<p>Registered with FBO but find process a bit cumbersome. Suggestion is for immediate containment of flow from ruptured pipe. Understand latest effort partially successful. Propose as yet undesigned hinged clamp and high pressure hose attachment to fit over existing fitting.<br />
Suggest clamp to be sectional so as to assess feasiblity in process.<br />
High pressure internal tubing system to seal joints as activated and<br />
measured pumping action to match flow rate as clamp is engaged. Extraction hose should be mounted to uppermost section of clamp. Recall that rubber hoses are not necessarily granted to stand too much<br />
pressure but could provide acceptable relief temporarily. Should be possible to design system to fit over that already engaged. Such a system should be adjustable. Would not advise less than two sections.<br />
One to secure clamp. Nor more necessarily than three to assess feasibility of process and desired results. Should be possible to produce this idea at minimal cost comparitively. Suggest advise of metalurgist and production engineers for technical requirements and most practical application. Present idea appears to be a precourser to<br />
this but falls short of your desires. This idea should dramatically reduce leakage while allowing you to better direct efforts. Also suggest better placement of deepsea crameras! Hope this will help as I<br />
imagine if you choose to try. Should also reduce pressures of time element!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

