There is no valid analogy between the Gulf spill and Apollo 13
I am honored to present this guest post by Apollo 17 astronaut and geologist Dr. H. Harrison Schmitt – Anthony
President Obama’s Administration and its supportive media repeatedly say our 1970 Apollo 13 experience is analogous to the effort to contain and cap the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Not hardly!
The rescue of Astronauts Jim Lovell, Fred Haise and Jack Swigert, after an oxygen tank explosion on their spacecraft, illustrates how complex technical accidents should be handled, in contrast to the Gulf fiasco. Nothing in the government’s response to the blowout and explosion on the Deepwater Horizon and its aftermath bears any resemblance to the response to the Apollo 13 situation by the National Aeronautic and Space Administration and its Mission Control team at the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston.
“Failure was not an option” for Gene Kranz and his Apollo 13 flight controllers and engineers. In contrast, failure clearly has been an option for President Obama and those claiming to have been on top of this situation “from day one” in his White House and in the Departments of Interior, Energy and Homeland Security. With no single, competent, courageous and knowledgeable leader in charge of a comparably competent, courageous and knowledgeable team as we had with Apollo 13, the Administration has been doomed to failure from the start. The President, without any experience in real-world management of anything, much less a crisis, has no idea how to deal with a situation as technically complex as the Gulf oil spill.
Whatever may be the culpability of British Petroleum and its federal regulators in causing and dealing with the accident, it has been left to BP engineers and managers and to Gulf State officials to respond as best they can in a regulatory environment that is politically charged, incompetent, fearful and hesitant.
Absolutely no reason exists to assume that any part of the Federal Government has engineering expertise comparable to the petroleum industry that can be applied to this or any future energy-related crisis. Certainly, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, and Energy Secretary Steven Chu have no more experience in these matters than does the President.
Salazar’s empty threat to “push BP out of the way” has no basis as a realistic option and best illustrates the floundering of the Obama Administration. Indeed, from “day one,” the expertise of the entire U.S. and British drilling and production industry should have been mobilized to combat this spill, with a single experienced engineering manager in charge. It still is not too late to start doing it right.
A more appropriate analogy from the Apollo era would be the recovery from the tragic fire during a pre-launch test on January 27, 1967, that took the lives of astronauts Gus Grissom, Ed White and Roger Chaffee. The Apollo 204 fire occurred in the clearly recognized crisis atmosphere of the Cold War, in which America raced to demonstrate to the world the superiority of freedom over the Communist oppression of the Soviet Union. The Deepwater Horizon explosion took place in the equally apparent crisis of America’s dependence on sources of oil from foreign nations governed or intimidated by our enemies or economic competitors. There, however, the validity of the 204 fire analogy ceases.
The NASA’s response to the 204 fire was to rapidly implement its previously well-formulated, objective investigation of its causes, both technical and managerial. Managerial responsibilities were identified, and George Low and his engineering team made appropriate changes without a prolonged exercise in finger pointing or the delays of another Presidential, buck-passing “commission.” NASA of that day moved forward and even accelerated the Apollo effort to its successful conclusion. Apollo 8’s Frank Borman, Jim Lovell and Bill Anders orbited the Moon less than two years after the 204 fire. Seven months after that, on July 20, 1969, Apollo 11’s Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin, with Mike Collins in orbit overhead, landed on the Moon.
The lessons from the 204 fire were applied and we moved on. In contrast, President Obama’s and his Administration’s otherwise rambling response to the Deepwater Horizon explosion has been to stop offshore oil exploration by the United States. How misguided and, indeed, how either ignorant or devious can our President be!?
President Obama has shown repeatedly that the best interests of the American people are a lower priority than his ideological goal of changing America from what it has been, to some mystical, socialist utopia with a renewable-energy-based standard of living equivalent to that of the late 1800s. As if the Administration could not make its ineffective, disjointed response to the Deepwater Horizon accident any worse, it did not even use previously established sea surface burn-off and dispersant procedures to minimize the effects of the spill.
In addition, it has inexcusably delayed approving and assisting in Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal’s request to protect the state’s shores and wildlife habitats, by building offshore sand barriers – as unnecessary as having to make that request should have been. And this is the government that Congress and the President want to run healthcare, immigration, banking, carbon emissions, auto manufacturing, and everything else in American life?
The geologists, engineers, and on-site managers responsible for the Deepwater Horizon drilling effort understood that drilling to an oil reservoir through 13,000 of rock in 5000 feet of seawater would be very difficult. They knew that their geophysically defined target, typical of Gulf petroleum reservoirs, would be a complex mix of crude oil, natural gas and brine, contained in porous and permeable rock. Because of the rock and water depth, the reservoir also would be under very high pressure. In this situation, a reliable blowout preventer, a crimping device installed on the pipe near the floor of the sea, would be essential to reduce the risk of both a spill and potential explosion on the Deepwater Horizon.
Current information indicates that BP installed a defective blowout preventer and did not have a deep-water, robotically emplaced crimping technique as a backup to the blowout preventer. Essential to the prevention of future accidents will be an objective, complete technical and managerial investigation of why a geological and engineering situation of known risks spun out of control. The primary question is, will such an investigation be possible in the politically charged, adversarial “boot on the neck” atmosphere created by President Obama and his team? Imagine if such an atmosphere had surrounded the 204 fire investigation and recovery.
Responsibility for the Deepwater Horizon accident ultimately lies with the chaotic regulatory environment for petroleum exploration created over recent decades by the Congress, courts, Department of the Interior and environmental pressure groups. Will we learn anything about regulatory overkill from this tragic loss of eleven lives, extensive environmental damage, and disruption of business and employment in the Gulf?
Elimination of access to most on-shore and near-shore oil production prospects has driven American exploration away from more easily discoverable and producible resources – and into the much more dangerous and technically challenging deep waters of the seas and oceans. Even then, drilling and production accidents are exceedingly rare, in spite of the geological, engineering and weather-related difficulties that explorers and producers face as a consequence of these misguided restrictions.
Long-term, history reminds us that naturally and accidentally released oil in the oceans disappears due to bacterial action. Remember that the fuel oil which blackened the world’s beaches as a result of World War II ship destruction disappeared after only a few years, and ocean life survived. The Gulf oil spill will not be this Nation’s most serious environmental crisis: World War II tops it by orders of magnitude in more than just this respect.
If America and freedom are to survive indefinitely, the next Congress must begin to restore sanity and intelligence to national energy policy. Until economically competitive alternatives become fully feasible, fossil fuels will remain the mainstay of our economy. Our dependence on unstable foreign sources of oil has become one of our greatest national security vulnerabilities, and only domestic production can solve it in the next 50 years.
The 2010 elections thus become a critical starting point to bring rational, constitutional, America-first thinking back into the Federal Government.
______________
Harrison H. Schmitt is a former United States Senator from New Mexico, as well as a geologist and former Apollo Astronaut. He currently is an aerospace and private enterprise consultant and a member of the new Committee of Correspondence.
Sponsored IT training links:
We offer best quality 70-680 dumps for 646-205 and 642-813 exam with 100% success guarantee.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well Said Mr Schmitt!
I’m appalled the US government dosn’t seem to be doing its job which should be gathering resources to mitigate the damage and enabling the engineers to work the problem. I think leaning on BP is a mistake becasue its forcing BP to use its own internal resources which are basically experts in oil wells but not experts in that environment. The Government could have flown in or organised a few marine engineers to look at the problem from a different direction and consult.
I recall from John Cravens memoirs he wrote of a similar experience in the 70’s (much shallower water) where the oil engineers saw a well and oilfield that had to be capped and he and other marine engineers saw it as a liquid segregation issue (they wound up just staking out several hundred square yards of seabed with non-permeable fabric with a tap in the middle and just captured the leaking il and pumped it into a tanker)
May the green-red alliance die off once and for all so we can get back to a world of progress, liberty and scientific endeavor.
How big is the oil spill. Check out this google maps mashup I found which allows you to place the oil spill over a specific location.
Click here for the mashup: http://sabolscience.blogspot.com
I wasn’t aware our government has had any response, nor anything constructive to offer. It is insulting for this administration to compare this spill to Apollo 13. It is too late to save the crew of the rig.
I’d say this administration in particular and our government in general is the problem with this Gulf Oil Gusher (it isn’t a “spill” and it certainly is bigger than a “leak”). Perhaps the reason they’re stirring up the jurisprudence pot is to divert attention from themselves; a good offense is the best defense. As far as leadership ability, I’m seriously skeptical the top people in the administration have any inkling of what to do about this whole mess. They’re Chicago Pols, for crying out loud! Note how they’re willing to take credit when it appears a solution is at hand, but distance themselves from the whole mess when one isn’t.
Wow, good post and comments.
If BP is being sued now, instead of letting the company continue with never before tried plans to stop the leak, why should they?
They know a lawsuit is inevitable for their unsupervised decisions to save money by rushing and changing to cheaper products for drilling.
From day one, an area containment plan should be in place that would contain the area and concentrate the oil by lowering area containment pipes that stack(8′,10′). And drive guide wires into the rock for stablization for the long stack it would become. That amount of psi at that depth is unfeasible to expect a quick fix.
That is a mighty fine article… It is correct and pretty much covers everything I think on the subject….. Especially the part where he says Oil companies are being forced to drill in the most technological and difficult areas where the Eco fascists have driven them to…. and hope they fail….
Well I hope this failure illustrates just how idiotic and dangerous is the repressive regulation derived from the mindset of what are essentially ecological Luddites.
I had the good fortune some years ago to meet and listen to Harrison Schmitt talk at a Mars Society meeting at Sydney University. While at the time I was most interested in his input on joint design of gas pressurized space suits, I do recall his comments regarding returning to the Moon. Sen. Schmitt expressed the view that mining the lunar regolith for Helium 3 was ample reason for continuing exploration of the Moon. Harrison Schmitt believes H3 offers the promise of clean and affordable fusion power. President Obama on the other hand feels that gutting the US space program and leaving the Moon to India and China is a fabulous idea. I would trust Harrison Schmitt over the teleprompter reader in chief any day.
And they say “there in lies the rub”.
A former very large offshore incident was investigated and found the that the main cause was this very ideologue
Why were they drilling for oil in such adverse circumstances to begin with, when there are lots of known reserves and sources in less unforgiving environments? Oh, I forgot. The Democrats have put those sources off limits. ANWR, oil shale, off-shore. No, these are taken out of play, to satisfy the environmental movement. So that pushes development into harsher environments, where the risk of catastrophic failure rises catastrophically. Then, when the risk plays out, even that gets taken out of play. The environmental movement will not be satisfied until all oil exploration and development is taken out of play.
Ron Cram says:
June 1, 2010 at 10:36 pm
The current administration does not get cut any slack on this, because it stands squarely for the proposition that the government is capable of solving all problems, whereas free enterprise is simply the source of numerous public and social ills. Moreover, it is fair turnabout and karma for all the flack Bush got over Katrina. I agree there may not be much that the .gov can do here, but they still own this disaster because of their arrogance and hubris.
E.M.Smith says:
June 2, 2010 at 12:35 am
IMHO, you want this thing fixed? Hand it over to Exxon, Standard Oil, Petrobras, Transocean, maybe even Diamond Offshore and tell them they have a free hand.
Best idea yet. Plus drilling to suck the reservoir dry to relieve the pressure. To make this more politically acceptable, dedicate the $$$ from all the oil that will be produced draining the sucker dry to state coffers for cleanup. Keep the money out of the fed.gov’s hands, as they will just use it for something unworthy.
My crazy solution is to lower a pipe of sufficient diameter to reduce the pressure to a manageable pressure at the surface, with an inverted “U” end that spills directly into a tanker (think aerator pipe in a fish tank). Stock overland oil pipe could probably be used if the diameter was large enough.
A drill rig platform could assemble it length by length as it lowered it . If the weight is too great, buoyancy tanks can be attached and lowered with it. There is no need for a tight joint where it goes over the casing spewing oil, pressure is equalized to seabed pressure of 2500psi by the size of the pipe.
I still pump water from a 180 foot “dry” well that the experts said was impossible 30 years ago, with just two unequal pipes in the bore.
I suppose the real tradgedy is that an excellent and objective scientific forum such as this is being transformed into a political campaigning site with all the political biase and baggage such a change includes.
The administration’s threats of criminal prosecution cannot possibly help the situation. Place yourself in the position of a senior engineer trying to stop an ongoing disaster while a lawyer is going through your personal documents and e-mails trying to find something to screw you with. Not exactly conducive to clear and rational thought.
Anthony, I think this is a wonderful site, and I read it daily. I have learned huge amounts about climate science, physics and more from the site, and I thank you for that.
Something I appreciate about this site is that you stay away from politics – until recently. Harrison Schmitt is clearly a great man, and much of what he says in this article is right on the money. But when he launches into a clearly partisan attack on Obama such as “President Obama has shown repeatedly that the best interests of the American people are a lower priority than his ideological goal of changing America from what it has been, to some mystical, socialist utopia with a renewable-energy-based standard of living equivalent to that of the late 1800s”, then to my mind he loses credibility, and your site suffers as a result.
This essay encompasses a very important topic, and covers it mostly very well, but when you allow politics into it, you open yourself to much criticism and consequent undermining of your otherwise excellent science. The best arguments against CAGW come from science, not politics.
MalcolmR
Anyone know where to get info on the proposed sand barriers? The creation of “hard barriers” can do more harm than good. Wave energy “reflects” off of barriers – maintaining significant power to create enhanced erosion- (as can the modification of natural currents.)
My concern has been the political need to be seen as doing something- anything. Burning, skimming, booms and dispersants all have important roles. However more aggressive techniques that include invasive wetland cleanup techniques and possibly barriers can do more harm than the oil- we need to remember that.
I think in both arenas, private and public, there are incentives, or maybe blinders, about your job that can hit you in the butt when things go wrong. Both kinds of industries are not prepared to handle things when things go wrong (who is?) and so a certain amount of shell shock sets in before things can get fixed. Maybe it is because of the overt effort to build a “can do” attitude, and especially so when risks are high, as is the case for both NASA and off-shore deep water drilling. Then when accidents do happen, regardless of the cause, a scramble of starts and stops commences. If the thing gets fixed, those involved tend to look back on it as a successful end to a tragic accident and backfill their memories with all kinds of positive feelings. It is human nature to do so.
I think that the main difference between the two response events is that the early try and try again response to A13 was not trotted out on prime time. We were not privy to any of the false starts, wrangling and shouting that went on, and I am sure it did. To paint NASA’s response to its tragedy as a smooth running string of responses may be wishful thinking.
Might this editorial have been made because it brings up a difficult time that someone tried to connect to the present? People don’t like their memories connected up like that. It is as if someone is trying to steal something from them.
If they have now cut off the bent pipe could a smaller pipe be slid some way down inside the main and used to pump mud?
Rather than trying to fight the entire force of the leak you would just need to overcome the pressure in the smaller pipe initially.
Thank you, Dr. Schmitt, for your thoughts, and you are correct; there is a fundamental difference between Apollo 13 and the current oil spill. The difference is that between engineers and politicians. Engineers are solution oriented. Politicians are power oriented. We are all so programed by school, media and popular culture that it is difficult to understand that high level politicians do not make decisions based on a desire to resolve a problem or to even to do good for their fellow citizens. National politicians — and in a similar way, corporate CEOs — are motivated to gain power. Period. They do this by punishing those who deny them power and by rewarding those who facilitate their power. (“You’re doing a heck of a job, Brownie!”)
No one is surprised when they see a report of an Olympic contender who gets up at 4:00am and practices for three hours before sunrise, who only eats foods that will help him create muscle, who spends every available moment working to win in his sport. We expect that from Olymic sportsmen, and that is what it takes to compete at that level. Why on earth should we be surprised to find that politicians and CEOs who have risen to the political equivalent of the Olympics, see the world in any other way than as part of their rise to power? They are extraordinarily good at appearing to care, at saying that they can make things better, at convincing you that they will be good for you — but winning approval is the actual sport that they are competing at!
The current oil spill recovery attempts are being managed by people whose primary skill is in gaining your trust. That is the only real requirement for being hired in their job. Don’t expect solutions to real world problems from them. Solutions are not part of their skill set. Expect to see awards and commendations for those who help consolidate power, punishment for those who do not. Stopping the oil spill and cleaning up will have no effect on who gets raises and promotions.
On a related note, see this video on using bacteria for bioremediation.
Well let’s face it; Harrison Schmitt, Gene Kranz, Jim Lovell etc etc, all of those leaders in the Apollo era; getting men to the Moon and back with on board computers with the power of a Blackberry–maybe, were men of character and valor. The Barry O. crew are incompetent muppets — or worse. God help us.
RACookPE1978
Great post on the forces involved. Had the blow-out preventer not partially worked, the flow would have most likely been on the order of 50-70,000 bpd.
As has been pointed out, 10% of the drill string consists of thick-walled joints, joints that have to support about 1-6,000 tons (the weight of the drill string + drilling mud). This is the probable cause of the failure of the BOP. The shears couldn’t force shut through the joint and the pressure within the joint.
Clearly there needs to be a testing environment for such conditions. I’m not even sure the US Navy or it’s contractors has a means to test equipment to these pressures. I’m willing to bet that the Oil Industry will fund development of a testing facility now. I’m equally sure that no such proposal will come from the mouths of any of the politicians, unless they think they can make some points.
It’s not an accident that for 20 years the industry has worked deeper into the Gulf with a great safety record, even during massive hurricanes. I’ll refrain from commenting on BP, as it’s an amalgam of multiple companies, and it would be unfair to tar all employees of BP with the same brush. They are definitely not all culpable in this disaster. One can’t say that about the management.
Just my contribution FWIW.
An interesting insight and a thorough analysis of technical and political issues. Thanks to Dr. Schmitt for this interesting article.
Yes, it is a good article. And it is right that responsibility “ultimately lies with the chaotic regulatory environment for petroleum exploration.” And, government will always screw things up. This is not different than the financial crisis – responsibility ultimately lies with government there too.
As far as Obama doing something, Steve Sailer said it best, IMHO. In answer to what Obama should do about the oil spill, he said in his blog “Personally, I think he should put on fins, a diving mask, and a snorkel and swim out and see if he can fix it.” Come on, people, is there anyone who has more knowledge about how to go about “fixing it” than BP? Think about it – isn’t it obvious that BP wants it “fixed”?
Comments here run all the way from idiotic to thoughtful. From “dropping boulders on it” to the description of the problem by RACookPE1978 who gave us a good idea about the difficulty of the problem.
There are questions that need to be asked. Should we be drilling in 5000 feet of water? (That seems to be the obvious one, at least.) This has the possibility of being a real game-changer, doesn’t it? We can be mad as hell and demand that our politicians play the blame game – they are, at least, really good at that – but are we really going back to business as usual after this?
Thanks, Anthony.
Dr. Schmitt’s analogy to Apollo 204 is right on the money. He nails the science, engineering and politics of the Macondo blowout & spill better than any one else has so far.
I predict our delay in space will be temporary.
I worked on Apollo, specifically the ALSEP program and specifically the CPLEE experiment package. Met several astronauts and did some testing at the Houston Crystal Lake facility. It was the experience of a lifetime. There is nothing that compares.
Space will be back in America’s history, before you know it.
THE SOLUTION BY THE “ABSURD”:
When we do not find any possible solution to solve a particular problem, it comes in our help the “solution by the absurd”.
Let´s see it:
Problem: BP tried to put a box on the oil spill, in order to pump the oil up but it got filled with ice.
Solution: Fill it on purpose, with something pumpable, like rubber balls for example.