nuclear-news

Nuclear option for Gulf Oil Spill – potential for catastrophe

DEEP OIL WELL DRILLING ALWAYS BRINGS INCREASED LEVEL OF RADIOACTIVITY

BP NUCLEAR OPTION Spells Mega-Disaster For Gulf Of Mexico, thepeoplesvoice.org, Dr. Tom Termotto, 24 July 2010, National Coordinator Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference (International Citizens’ Initiative) There has been much speculation lately about a nuclear device being planned for closing in the BP Macondo Well in the Gulf of Mexico. The consequences of exercising this option go well beyond killing the Gulf of Mexico; there would be far-reaching and profound ramifications for the oceans of the world. There are many risks associated with this option that must be considered. Let’s review some of these before BP finishes the relief wells, which are allegedly being utilized for the strategic placement and detonation of a nuclear device.

DEEP OIL WELL DRILLING ALWAYS BRINGS INCREASED LEVEL OF RADIOACTIVITY

The radioactive levels of the hydrocarbon brew that has been flowing for over 90 days into the Gulf is already cause for alarm. The deeper the well, the greater the likelihood that the oil and gas effluent will have greater concentrations of radioactive components, particularly radium, thorium and uranium………It is quite significant to point out that even the American Petroleum Institute (API) has designed elaborate protocols for workers in the Oil & Gas Industry who are exposed to Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM). The API readily acknowledges the existence of elevated levels of radium in virtually any geological formation that contains oil and gas, and yet their website fails to mention uranium and thorium concentrations. This omission is quite curious and begs for a more thorough explanation of the radioactive dimensions associated with the entire industry……….

The real issue here is that, due to the deep source of these hydrocarbons (18,000 to 30,000 feet deep Macondo Prospect) the oil and gas effluent that has already poured into the Gulf possesses a discernible radioactive hazard. If a nuclear device was detonated to close off the well, many things could go wrong in the process that could actually worsen the current scenario. We could be left with a predicament that would contribute significantly to the already excessive radioactive burden throughout the Gulf. How so?

First of all, the only precedents we have for the nuclear option are those put forth by Russia. According to Komsomoloskaya Pravda, “the Soviets deployed specially designed nuclear explosions to extinguish well fires on at least five separate occasions”. However, the context was completely different than the one in the Gulf. The Gulf Macondo Well is not on land, nor is it a gas fire. It is also 5000 feet under water, and then another 18,000+ feet deep into the earth’s crust. To draw a parallel between the two scenarios doesn’t get more apples and oranges. Oil gushers under 5000 feet of water does not compare with natural gas fires on land.

Therefore, the danger in this alternative is twofold. In the aftermath of a nuclear explosion, the oil volcano could be transformed into a super-volcano spewing more mantle-generated radioactive hydrocarbons into the water. Secondarily, if the radioactivity associated with the detonation is allowed to escape due to an unsealed well, or worse, a larger opening in the earth that has received the radioactive fallout from a subterranean explosion, then we have a true doomsday scenario in the making.

THE MISSISSIPPI CANYON AND WHAT A SEISMIC OR NUCLEAR EVENT COULD TRIGGER………..We already know that the sub-seafloor geology of the Mississippi Canyon has been profoundly and fundamentally altered by decades of oil and gas drilling and extraction operations. We also know that the Gulf of Mexico has entered a period of higher than normal seismological activity, as evidenced by the higher incidence of undersea earthquakes in the Gulf.

BP NUCLEAR OPTION Spells Mega-Disaster For Gulf Of Mexico

July 25, 2010 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | safety, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear wastes, radioactive, reactors, uranium