Simmons Says Nuclear Device Only Option to Stop Oil Leak: Video

[CLANG]

Run time: 05:43 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb2u4_QSblo   Posted on YouTube: June 15, 2010 By YouTube Member: Bloomberg Views on YouTube: 903   Posted on DU: June 16, 2010 By DU Member: CLANG Views on DU: 1603

 

[Poll_Blind]

1. Any solution that involves nuking ourselves is not a solution.

I watched the piece, I sort of understand where the guy is going with this and what is angle is. What my main problem is, aside from the fact that it's uh a nuke, is that this is at best a hypothetical fix for a specific hypothetical situation/environment.

You nuke it and that fucks up and there isn't enough money in all the banks of the world to actually fix the problem that could create. Or, as CliffordDU put it in another thread (with only a little hyperbole, IMO): "Worldkiller."

No, no, no.

PB

[CLANG]

2. It's a world killer if we do nothing also.

At some point they will have to decide if they want a world killer or a potential world killer. If the relief wells fail, and knowledgeable people think the chances are high that they will fail, then those will be our choices.

[Poll_Blind]

4. If a "nuke shot" doesn't work perfectly, we could never hope to keep up with....

....the resulting problems. We at least have some hope in the current situation although it's arguable that there may be damage and erosion deeper down which may make both the current and speculative solutions and the nuclear solution ultimately pointless.

Nobody knows. It's a dire situation. In a dire situation there is always the "crap shoot"/"Hail Mary" choice. When we're talking about a dire situation of this magnitude, taking the "Hail Mary" option cannot be seriously looked at until all other choices and options have been exhausted.

I mean, we can jump to solutions like this but we do so at nearly the greatest peril imaginable.

PB

[CLANG]

5. Well if you pick the do nothing approach - end of the world certainty

Faced with that prospect, I will take the nuke any day.

[Poll_Blind]

6. You're confused if you think the current situation, as terrible as it is, means the end of the world

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that because I think each of our choices, or the choices we don't wish to take, are related to and stem from those differences. I didn't understand that aspect of your viewpoint until you enunciated it just now.

PB

[CLANG]

10. Apparently you don't do much research into this or you'd

realize how wrong you are. Oh well, it's just a matter of time before this all becomes evident to all.

[Poll_Blind]

11. Maybe I am wrong. n/t

PB

[CLANG]

12. Don't think I'm not hoping to hell that I'm wrong!

[sasquuatch55]

22. He is a moron! The bedrock is too fragile in that area. You think it's bad now; drop a

nuke!

[99th_Monkey]

3. 2 commercials later

... i finally got to see the video. seriously are these commercials necessary?

[chill_wind]

7. Well that was disturbing... in a very matter of fact sort of way. n/t

[davidinalameda]

8. who is this crack head

I don't want to watch the video

[CLANG]

9. I'll make a note of that...

[lutherj]

13. Every time Simmons speaks about this he is confusing.

Simmons is asserting that 1) there is an enormous fire a few miles from the riser, and 2) BP can't find the original well bore because of the heat of the fire. He is also asserting that there has been some kind of report coming from Woods Hole, or one was created using data supplied by Woods Hole, but apparently when meeting with the Secretary of Energy and several other research scientists working on the gulf leak, no one had heard of it.

I haven't heard anything about an enormous fire several miles from the riser. Seems to me it would be difficult to keep that a secret. Moreover, BP must know where the original bore hole is, since it would presumably require GPS coordinates to have flown to the oil rig before it went down. If the riser we're seeing in the videos isn't the original bore hole, what is it? And why would Simmons be privy to this information, and not the Secretary of Energy?

If Simmons knows something that's being withheld from the public he should publish it in clear terms.

[Crowman1979]

14. Apparently that dumbass never saw what happened with so-called peaceful nuke programs in the 60's.

And the pollution problems that resulted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T97xMNtITTY

[CLANG]

15. They will do it in such a way that almost all, if not all, radiation

will be encased under the seabed.

[Pharaoh]

17. What would George do!

[AsahinaKimi]

16. Radio~active tarballs... Flaming Tsunami ..

Then again...with all that radiation, we might re~create GODZILLA...

[Tutankhamun]

21. Or the smog monster.

[JDPriestly]

18. Did he say something about the cement casing being faulty?

Is this another Halliburton attack on the country? Thom Hartmann likens BP to a bank. The other companies actually did the work. Is Thom Hartmann wrong? This video raises more questions than it answers. Simmons assumes a lot of things that have not been generally agreed to. Doesn't mean he is wrong, but the video is too short. It does not give Simmons the time to establish the validity of the premises on which he is relying. I would need to hear a discussion between Simmons and some experts with opinions that differ from his to be able to assess the value of his statements.

[breadandwine]

19. The Russians have sealed wells with nukes ----

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ojCbqfRRr8&NR=1


Here's the flip side of that ----

A Crack In The World ---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHtZ6Ixeqvs&feature=player_embedded#!


If the well is not sealed the oil spreads to Europe and around the world, killing the plant life in much of the ocean, which is the primary source for our planet's oxygen. If the well is not sealed, all human life and all animal life on earth may be doomed.

[Pharaoh]

20. Wow! Isn't it Ironic

That we need to get news from Russia these days???? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: