Sunday, May 2, 2010
Spectacular Pictures of drill rig burning and sinking
Watt's Up With That has a great set of pictures posted here:
The existential beauty of off shore wind farms.
This morning's NH public radio had a lady advocate waxing eloquent about the beauties of the Narragansett bay wind farm. "If only BP had been putting in wind rather than drilling for oil." Now that Teddy Kennedy is gone from the scene, some federal department OK'd the Cape Wind project, which had been held up for years by a Kennedy led group objecting to the unsightliness of it all.
The advocate failed to mention to cost per kilowatt hour for wind generated electricity, and the 2.3 cent a kilowatt hour subsidy for wind plants. The Cape Wind project will be 500 kilowatts, about one half the output of a real power plant, and only when the wind is blowing hard.
Not did she discuss what happens when the wind stops blowing, which it does frequently. I have sailed Narragansett bay and can attest to weary hours spent waiting for a wind.
In actual fact, the power companies have to build a real power plant to back up every wind plant to keep the customer's lights on during a calm. That's expensive.
So expensive that us rate payers expect another rate increase when and if Cape Wind ever goes on line.
The advocate failed to mention to cost per kilowatt hour for wind generated electricity, and the 2.3 cent a kilowatt hour subsidy for wind plants. The Cape Wind project will be 500 kilowatts, about one half the output of a real power plant, and only when the wind is blowing hard.
Not did she discuss what happens when the wind stops blowing, which it does frequently. I have sailed Narragansett bay and can attest to weary hours spent waiting for a wind.
In actual fact, the power companies have to build a real power plant to back up every wind plant to keep the customer's lights on during a calm. That's expensive.
So expensive that us rate payers expect another rate increase when and if Cape Wind ever goes on line.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Blow out Preventers and the BP spill
There is not much published on the web about these gadgets. They were invented in the 1920's and they ended the "gusher". You must have seen a picture of black oil spurting up higher than the top of the drill rig. The movie "Giant" with Jimmy Dean as oil wildcatter Jett Rink had a great gusher scene, black goop falling like rain.
The blowout preventer is a VERY strong valve that sits on the top of the well and shuts off the oil flow. Just how they work, above ground or underwater, was not made clear. It is implied, (but not outright stated) that they work by squeezing the steel drill pipe shut. Presumably this requires a power source (hydraulic? electric? compressed air? explosives? ) to work the pipe crushing ram. Also presumably activating the blow out preventer is an emergency measure since it damages the drill pipe, requiring replacement of the section of pipe the preventer squeezed flat. Also, presumably, the blow out preventer only succeeds in shutting off the oil flow when the drill pipe remains more or less intact.
Questions for BP. How was the blow out preventer powered one mile under water? Did the power come down from the floating platform that exploded and sank? How was the signal to actuate the preventer carried down under water? Was there any redundancy in case water got into the wiring or a pipe sprang a leak? Was the actuation automatic, like a fire alarm? Or was it the duty of the watch officer to flip a switch in the control room? What sort of protections against accidental actuation of the blow out preventer were there? What was the name of the watch officer responsible? Did this individual survive the fire and explosion that sank the platform?
More questions. Can the preventer be actuated by a submarine? What equipment does the sub need to carry? If the power supply is sunk, or run down (batteries, or compressed air tanks) can the sub recharge it? Is there a backup actuater such as a big hand crank? If so, can a sub work it?
And more questions. Who sold the blow out preventer? Was it new or used? Is that model rated strong enough to handle a well that deep? Who inspected the blowout preventer before it was installed one mile under water? What are the inspection requirements? Cracks? Leaks? Fully charged batteries or air tanks? functional control circuits? Are there any inspection requirements once the blow out preventer is under water? If so, did BP carry them out?
These are all questions that educated and experienced news men would ask. Unfortunately newsies these days are neither educated nor experienced.
The blowout preventer is a VERY strong valve that sits on the top of the well and shuts off the oil flow. Just how they work, above ground or underwater, was not made clear. It is implied, (but not outright stated) that they work by squeezing the steel drill pipe shut. Presumably this requires a power source (hydraulic? electric? compressed air? explosives? ) to work the pipe crushing ram. Also presumably activating the blow out preventer is an emergency measure since it damages the drill pipe, requiring replacement of the section of pipe the preventer squeezed flat. Also, presumably, the blow out preventer only succeeds in shutting off the oil flow when the drill pipe remains more or less intact.
Questions for BP. How was the blow out preventer powered one mile under water? Did the power come down from the floating platform that exploded and sank? How was the signal to actuate the preventer carried down under water? Was there any redundancy in case water got into the wiring or a pipe sprang a leak? Was the actuation automatic, like a fire alarm? Or was it the duty of the watch officer to flip a switch in the control room? What sort of protections against accidental actuation of the blow out preventer were there? What was the name of the watch officer responsible? Did this individual survive the fire and explosion that sank the platform?
More questions. Can the preventer be actuated by a submarine? What equipment does the sub need to carry? If the power supply is sunk, or run down (batteries, or compressed air tanks) can the sub recharge it? Is there a backup actuater such as a big hand crank? If so, can a sub work it?
And more questions. Who sold the blow out preventer? Was it new or used? Is that model rated strong enough to handle a well that deep? Who inspected the blowout preventer before it was installed one mile under water? What are the inspection requirements? Cracks? Leaks? Fully charged batteries or air tanks? functional control circuits? Are there any inspection requirements once the blow out preventer is under water? If so, did BP carry them out?
These are all questions that educated and experienced news men would ask. Unfortunately newsies these days are neither educated nor experienced.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Bad month for the energy industry
Between the coal mine explosion in West VA and the oil rig fire and explosion in the Gulf, the TV newsies had had non stop disaster coverage. Unfortunately the press coverage has skipped over the little matter of what went wrong, and pressed on to the usual "isn't this terrible" voice over on video of the disaster scenes.
So far the newsies have not discovered any real evidence of wrong doing at the coal mine. No public disclosure of failure to make required inspections, install the required safety gear, or ignoring alarms. Not that any of this might not have happened, it just that the TV news hasn't reported it.
The oil rig disaster happened under charter to BP, an accident prone operation. BP is so Beyond Petroleum that they let the Alaska pipeline rust out and spring a leak, allowed a major explosion and fire at a Texas refinery, and now it looks like they bear some responsibility for a blowout as bad as Santa Barbara. Santa Barabara happened back in the 1960's and was so bad that California has banned off shore drilling ever since.
For those that remember Santa Barbara, may remember a lot of talk about "blowout preventers", and lack of same on the Santa Barbara well. According to TV news, the gulf well has a 450 ton blowout preventer installed on the sea floor. It isn't working, the oil is pouring out of the damaged well. There has been no coverage of why, of how blowout preventers work, of the possibility of shutting off the oil flow by remote control from the surface or by submarine. This reflects the basic ignorance of newsies. They don't know nothing.
So far the newsies have not discovered any real evidence of wrong doing at the coal mine. No public disclosure of failure to make required inspections, install the required safety gear, or ignoring alarms. Not that any of this might not have happened, it just that the TV news hasn't reported it.
The oil rig disaster happened under charter to BP, an accident prone operation. BP is so Beyond Petroleum that they let the Alaska pipeline rust out and spring a leak, allowed a major explosion and fire at a Texas refinery, and now it looks like they bear some responsibility for a blowout as bad as Santa Barbara. Santa Barabara happened back in the 1960's and was so bad that California has banned off shore drilling ever since.
For those that remember Santa Barbara, may remember a lot of talk about "blowout preventers", and lack of same on the Santa Barbara well. According to TV news, the gulf well has a 450 ton blowout preventer installed on the sea floor. It isn't working, the oil is pouring out of the damaged well. There has been no coverage of why, of how blowout preventers work, of the possibility of shutting off the oil flow by remote control from the surface or by submarine. This reflects the basic ignorance of newsies. They don't know nothing.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
So what did Arizona pass?
Some TV people claim the new Arizona law allows the cops to question anyone about their citizen ship. Other TV people claim the law only allows the cops to ask about citizen ship AFTER they make an arrest for other reasons. They can't both be right, some of them are are misleading the public. I wonder which one it is.
Confused Vegetation
Right after Leaf Day, we get a winter storm warning this morning. Snow started in earnest a couple of hours ago. We have two inches down and it's still coming down heavily. Dunno what the trees think of this.
Follow up. We have thirteen inches down as of 7:15 this morning and it's still snowing. This is as heavy a snowfall as we have had all winter. Winter storm warning is in effect until 4 PM
Follow up. We have thirteen inches down as of 7:15 this morning and it's still snowing. This is as heavy a snowfall as we have had all winter. Winter storm warning is in effect until 4 PM
Big Pharma Roast
CSpan had some government bureaucrats patting them selves on the back for fining drug maker Astro-Zenica billions of dollars. Astro-Zenica's crime? Marketing drugs for "off label" uses. Terrible crime that. Normally I'm as ready as the next guy to roast a drug company. They charge ridiculous prices, waste enormous sums on marketing, and haven't developed much in the way of new pills lately.
But marketing drugs "off label" is pretty harmless. A new drug (call it Wondermycin) is taken to the FDA and after much time, mountains of paperwork, and probably some under the table payoffs, the drug is approved for sale. The approval reads something like this. "Drug Wondermycin is approved for treatment of this, that and the other disease". Those are the "on-label" uses.
Later on it is discovered that Wondermycin is also good against a couple of other diseases. (Off-label uses) Word gets out to the medical community and doctors begin the prescribe Wondermycin for those other diseases. "Word gets out" means the Wondermycin salesmen tell the doctors about the "off label" uses.
This infuriates the FDA. FDA feels that the drug makers should submit more mountains of paperwork, run more expensive clinical trials, and grovel before the desks of FDA bureaucrats in order to obtain a new approval listing the additional uses. Naturally, the drug companies, after the terrible beating they took getting Wondermycin approved in the first place, are unenthusiastic about going back to get beaten up a second time.
In actual fact, off label uses are carefully controlled. The doctors, for ever looking over their shoulders for a malpractice lawyer hiding in the hallway trash can, are not about to write a prescription for off label use unless said off label use is super safe. No doctor with two brain cells firing is going to risk a malpractice suit by causing harm to a patient. The doctors all know that should a patient suffer so much as a hangnail after taking a drug for an off label use, they will get sued down to their socks.
So, FDA and the bureaucrats are fining Astro-Zenica for promoting off label use, even though off label use isn't going to hurt anyone. This is bending the cost curve UP, and doing it just to make the FDA bureaucrats feel all warm and fuzzy.
But marketing drugs "off label" is pretty harmless. A new drug (call it Wondermycin) is taken to the FDA and after much time, mountains of paperwork, and probably some under the table payoffs, the drug is approved for sale. The approval reads something like this. "Drug Wondermycin is approved for treatment of this, that and the other disease". Those are the "on-label" uses.
Later on it is discovered that Wondermycin is also good against a couple of other diseases. (Off-label uses) Word gets out to the medical community and doctors begin the prescribe Wondermycin for those other diseases. "Word gets out" means the Wondermycin salesmen tell the doctors about the "off label" uses.
This infuriates the FDA. FDA feels that the drug makers should submit more mountains of paperwork, run more expensive clinical trials, and grovel before the desks of FDA bureaucrats in order to obtain a new approval listing the additional uses. Naturally, the drug companies, after the terrible beating they took getting Wondermycin approved in the first place, are unenthusiastic about going back to get beaten up a second time.
In actual fact, off label uses are carefully controlled. The doctors, for ever looking over their shoulders for a malpractice lawyer hiding in the hallway trash can, are not about to write a prescription for off label use unless said off label use is super safe. No doctor with two brain cells firing is going to risk a malpractice suit by causing harm to a patient. The doctors all know that should a patient suffer so much as a hangnail after taking a drug for an off label use, they will get sued down to their socks.
So, FDA and the bureaucrats are fining Astro-Zenica for promoting off label use, even though off label use isn't going to hurt anyone. This is bending the cost curve UP, and doing it just to make the FDA bureaucrats feel all warm and fuzzy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)