- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Enviromental Battleship
Posted on 5/28/10 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 5/28/10 at 3:03 pm
$100mil too spendy for the '90s, $200mil now seems cheap...
They drew up a plan and a prototype for a 275ft by 217ft, 33-storey-high vessel that could be deployed to a spill site within 18 hours, encircle the slick with 20ft-high booms as used in the turbulent North Sea, sweep and clean 20,000 barrels of oil every 24 hours via three circular sweepers 40ft in diameter, return the water to the sea and transfer the salvaged crude to barges moored alongside.
The prototype model, housed in the gymnasium of the former New Iberia school where Mr Schellstede has his offices, resembles a semi-submersible oil rig, like the offshore fire ships that have been deployed in the North Sea since the 1980s.
The detailed prospectus for the so-called Sea Clean project, a copy of which he provided to the Financial Times, was presented to some 300 government officials, industry leaders and the press at a meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, in 1990.
It was also presented to congressmen in Washington, including Al Gore – then a senator – with whom Mr Schellstede had a two-hour meeting. “I don’t think I ever got over to him what was wrong – that it was a deepwater problem. Deepwater was just starting. I looked for government support to propose it to the oil companies. I told them, ‘We’ve a got a different frontier here. It’s a different ball game and we need other tools.’ ”
Exxon and other oil companies expressed enthusiasm for the project but turned it down on cost grounds, according to Mr Schellstede, and because it addressed a problem they did not believe existed.
“They concluded it was a wonderful design but they couldn’t invest $100m in it. They might have been right. We went a long time without any problems.”
more
more from the designing company
1. Semisubmersible, propeller-driven pods are used to support an above water platform, permitting stability and maneuverability in rough seas.
2. Self-propelelled allowing maneuvering close to sources of spilled waste.
3. Permits skimming from smooth or rough seas and processing of spilled material within environmental guidelines.
4. Engineered to segregate waste into six categories: oil, wood, rubber, plastic, cam waste, and soil (including rocks, sand and clay)
5. Safely houses a cleanup crew of more than 200, including operating from an on-board command post containing testing laboratories and satellite communication facilities for teleconferences and remote monitoring.
They drew up a plan and a prototype for a 275ft by 217ft, 33-storey-high vessel that could be deployed to a spill site within 18 hours, encircle the slick with 20ft-high booms as used in the turbulent North Sea, sweep and clean 20,000 barrels of oil every 24 hours via three circular sweepers 40ft in diameter, return the water to the sea and transfer the salvaged crude to barges moored alongside.
The prototype model, housed in the gymnasium of the former New Iberia school where Mr Schellstede has his offices, resembles a semi-submersible oil rig, like the offshore fire ships that have been deployed in the North Sea since the 1980s.
The detailed prospectus for the so-called Sea Clean project, a copy of which he provided to the Financial Times, was presented to some 300 government officials, industry leaders and the press at a meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, in 1990.
It was also presented to congressmen in Washington, including Al Gore – then a senator – with whom Mr Schellstede had a two-hour meeting. “I don’t think I ever got over to him what was wrong – that it was a deepwater problem. Deepwater was just starting. I looked for government support to propose it to the oil companies. I told them, ‘We’ve a got a different frontier here. It’s a different ball game and we need other tools.’ ”
Exxon and other oil companies expressed enthusiasm for the project but turned it down on cost grounds, according to Mr Schellstede, and because it addressed a problem they did not believe existed.
“They concluded it was a wonderful design but they couldn’t invest $100m in it. They might have been right. We went a long time without any problems.”
more
more from the designing company
1. Semisubmersible, propeller-driven pods are used to support an above water platform, permitting stability and maneuverability in rough seas.
2. Self-propelelled allowing maneuvering close to sources of spilled waste.
3. Permits skimming from smooth or rough seas and processing of spilled material within environmental guidelines.
4. Engineered to segregate waste into six categories: oil, wood, rubber, plastic, cam waste, and soil (including rocks, sand and clay)
5. Safely houses a cleanup crew of more than 200, including operating from an on-board command post containing testing laboratories and satellite communication facilities for teleconferences and remote monitoring.
2
Posted on 5/28/10 at 3:06 pm to blueslover
well i sure am glad that the next poor pricks that this happens to will prolly have a fleet of these fricking boats
Posted on 5/28/10 at 3:10 pm to YatTigah
If you were a stockholder in a company, would you vote to spend $100 million on a boat that may, or may not ever be used. I wouldn't.
Posted on 5/28/10 at 3:19 pm to guttata
When this is all said and done with that would have saved BP over a billion dollars. Give or take several million.
Posted on 5/28/10 at 3:22 pm to BROffshoreTigerFan
doubt it.
Posted on 5/28/10 at 4:37 pm to guttata
Does oil from more than a mile down actual rise to the same place on the surface of the ocean? Seems like you would a ton of turbulence that would disperse the oil across a large area before ever reaching the surface.
Posted on 5/28/10 at 4:42 pm to C
It's Toyota all over again. Don't spend any money on fixing or preparing for a problem, just take the hit when it happens and deal with it then.
Posted on 5/28/10 at 4:50 pm to blueslover
quote:
It was also presented to congressmen in Washington, including Al Gore – then a senator – with whom Mr Schellstede had a two-hour meeting. “I don’t think I ever got over to him what was wrong
I think at the time Gore was creating and building the Internet and then later was worried how much heat was going to burn up his tulips to worry about something like this.
Posted on 5/29/10 at 3:58 pm to guttata
quote:
f you were a stockholder in a company, would you vote to spend $100 million on a boat that may, or may not ever be used. I wouldn't.
basic risk management, everything is based on what may or may not happen. How do you think those same stockholders feel now? $100M is nothing compared to what they're losing
Posted on 5/29/10 at 6:15 pm to BROffshoreTigerFan
quote:
When this is all said and done with that would have saved BP over a billion dollars.
A billion dollars, my arse.
This problem will cost over $20 billion, if it cost a nickle.
The Valdez cost Exxon $3.5 billion in 1989 dollars ($6.3 billion with adjusted inflation). The Horizon spill will certainly exceed the Valdez many times over.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News