View previous topic :: View next topic |
Nuke it? |
Yes |
|
35% |
[ 7 ] |
No |
|
65% |
[ 13 ] |
|
Total Votes : 20 |
|
Author |
Message |
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Matthew R. Simmons was interviewed on the Financial Sense Newshour about the spill. He calls it the greatest ecological catastrophe in human history. He isn't one for hyperbole, though he might be talking his alt-energy book.
He argues that there is another, much larger leak a short distance from the one we're hearing about:
http://www.financialsense.com/fsn/main.php
(scroll down to see MRS's interview - it is quite informative)
Ok, the OP's question. Simmons argues that the bomb option is possible. Apparently the Russians have done it.
If it will close it, do it. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
My first thought was, "Why not try with conventional explosives instead?" The author suggests this that at the end of his article. I'd rather that possibility were fully considered by experts before turning to a nuclear weapon. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
moosehead

Joined: 05 May 2007
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Captain Corea

Joined: 28 Feb 2005 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
I really don't think that mixing nuclear waste with crude oil would be a good idea. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009 Location: Pennsylvania
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Are you people seriously considering this?
Somehow I don't think busting out the Enola Gay is the environmental solution of choice. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
kotakji
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
While its generally a good thing that nuclear weapons have a strong stigma attached to them, it does result in the general populace thinking that the radiation effects of a nuke are far more terrible than in reality. The vast majority of dangerous radiation exposure comes from immediate burst exposure. Besides for the plan to work, I believe the nuke has to be buried underneath the seabed.
The real problem with a nuclear solution that I've heard is that there is a chance (perhaps small) that it might just crack the whole thing open and make it worse. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009 Location: Pennsylvania
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nuclear gamma rays + oil = sludge monster.
The following scenario has been prepared by top national security security analysts.
Following the unsuccessful use of a nuclear charge to seal the oil, a sludge monster has been causing havoc among crews attempting to seal the well. For nearly two weeks crews have been unable to approach the well for fear being attacked.
Desperate, the National Geological Society has hired the expertise of Mystery Inc. to discover the source of and banish the monster. A specially outfitted ship was sent to the site of the leaking well for the expedition.
Utilizing various tactical shenanigans, retro seventies music themed chase scenes through various doors throughout the decks, and at least one absurdly large sandwich, the gang was able to capture the nuclear sludge monster.
The creature was realized to be a hoax! Indeed, it was a man in a suit! And it was none other than Tony Hayward, CEO of BP.
Taken into custody by federal agents, Hayward was quoted as saying, "I'd have gotten away with it, too, were it not for those meddling kids and their stupid dog!"
Story time is over now. Shoo. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
moosehead

Joined: 05 May 2007
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
we're all doomed, face it  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
pkang0202

Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nuke it.
Just don't eat any of the dead fish that float to the surface. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You'll be hardpressed to convince anyone that radiation won't enter the food chain. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Koveras wrote: |
You'll be hardpressed to convince anyone that radiation won't enter the food chain. |
Simmons suggests a bomb. Not necessarily a nuke. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
kinerry
Joined: 01 Jun 2009
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The only surefire solution is relief drilling, which is very likely going to be the end result.
This is what happened the last time...this happened in 1979
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHmhxpQEGPo |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Captain Corea

Joined: 28 Feb 2005 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
.38 Special wrote: |
Nuclear gamma rays + oil = sludge monster. |
Don't make me put on my CC tights.
 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Jandar

Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nuke the Whales! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|