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.
Breaking news:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100602/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama
Interesting times indeed….
@JamesG
“Once again the Conservatives can’t make up their mind whether they want a take-charge government or a get-out-of the-way government. It must be funny not knowing what your ideology actually is. ” [snip the rest as it is uninteresting in rational discussion]
I don’t claim to be all knowing about all things conservative, but this is a point I think should be addressed and thought out.
We need both less and more regulation. We need less complexity, and more fairness. We need regulation that isn’t written or heavily influenced by the regulatee as occurs in some cases. Housing crisis is an example of a regulatory failure. Regulations, already in place, were not enforced! We expect to solve this with new financial powers? You already had the power to stop it and you didn’t… Just blindly throwing more regulation at stuff, IE “red tape”, or providing more power to government/bureaucracies is a poor solution. You could make a strong case that some regulations are ignored intentionally (this goes for both R and D) to provides excuses to grab more power.
We do need new regulation, but it needs to be simplified, streamlined, fair, and then ENFORCED. Remove the cruft, and implement it.
Well said, Dr. Schmitt.
I remember that Friday night when 204 had the fire on Launch Complex 34. I was working next door on Launch Complex 37 for the next Lunar Module launch. The next 18 months was a depressing time for all of us working on LM Apollo. But it was an inspiration to see NASA, the astronauts, and all the subcontractors pull together and slowly but surely overcome the 204 disaster. We all strongly believed that nothing – NOTHING – would stand in the way of the ultimate goal of putting a man on the moon and bringing him safely back to Earth as President Kennedy had foretold.
Now, if we could only get Obama and his Z-Team out of the way, maybe BP can get down to business and fix the Deepwater Horizon mess.
BrandonM and JamesG,
At this point it hardly matters. There is going to be a reckoning, like it or not.
Dave McK says:
His speech is analogous to a cheering the The Androgynous Docking Mechanism.
That’s what politics brought to the space science table for discussion.
Senator Schmitt isn’t going to do diddly about any oil except exploit a crisis for his benefit like every politician in history nobody sees fit to learn anything from.
The real problem is people like Senator Schmitt who offer hope and change which is institutionally impossible to deliver. There’s your mother of all frauds, of which the climate franchise is but a small part. Deeper than one can find the true believers who pay to externalize all personal responsibility so they can righteously blame some stranger for their daily personal abdication from a basic task of human existence: judgement. The buck stopped with you. You gave it up. You lose.
Senators weep crocodile tears and cash their paychecks. Even the credibility of science itself can be in doubt but never them.
Have you read his bio? Dr. Schmitt is no longer a Senator in New Mexico.
A little bit OT, but regarding stopping the flow.
After the first Gulf war when Saddam had torched all the wells in his retreat there were obviously a bunch of free flowing well heads that were also on fire. If I remember correctly they used shaped charges to assist with putting out the well head fires. Does anybody remember if the charge was used to close off the well, or was it simply to snuff out the fire by removing all the oxygen feeding the fire?
Thanks, Charlie K
For a discussion with contributions by people who work in that sort of area – take a look at http://www.theoildrum.com/
The freezing idea won’t work, as the pressure would erode the ice as it was being formed. The pressure is already eroding the steel…
Clamping off the pipe beyond the BOP won’t work as it is not designed to take that sort of pressure drop. It works well enough as a conduit, but as a “dead end”, it would just split. That’s why BP wanted to block up the flow within the BOP which *can* take the pressure.
As for the “crisis management” beyond the well – it may well be that Obama wanted to “take control” because he thought it was just about over, and all he had to do was waltz in, take the credit, then waltz out.
Having a hard problem that is actually a real hard problem and not just being made hard by other people is rare, but always catches politicians out.
Charlie K says:
June 2, 2010 at 2:12 pm
A little bit OT, but regarding stopping the flow.
After the first Gulf war when Saddam had torched all the wells in his retreat there were obviously a bunch of free flowing well heads that were also on fire. If I remember correctly they used shaped charges to assist with putting out the well head fires. Does anybody remember if the charge was used to close off the well, or was it simply to snuff out the fire by removing all the oxygen feeding the fire?
Thanks, Charlie K
The shaped charges were used to cut off the damaged well heads. It was to improve the chances of the “non-shaped” charges working in knocking the flame away from the fuel.
If the damaged well heads were left, they could have sheltered a “pocket” of fire which would have re-ignited the gusher.
Anu says:
June 2, 2010 at 9:23 am
‘I wonder when Pemex (Mexico), Petrobras (Brazil) and Cupet (Cuba) are going to have their big deepwater drilling accidents ?’
Pemex already have – and it was much worse than the current one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ixtoc_I_oil_spill
Government will never really solve any problems be they healthcare, financial or environmental because the one and only goal of politicians is to be re-elected. Re-election takes money. Money is obtained by doing favors for constituents. Laws are therefore passed to benefit financial supporters and create methods of extorting more money from various industries or groups. Politicians can keep the money left over when they “retire” or are thrown out. Supporters get many times thier money back in favors. Follow the money. Those that created the financial debacle are in DC and in charge of fixing the “problem”. No one other than Bernie Madoff has gone to jail and he should get a medal for stealing money from many of the most destructive “progressives” in the country, using a simple ponzi sheme at that! LBJ’s buddy, Billy Saul Estes, did it back in the 50’s with tanks of water and soy been oil floating on top, a little more creative than the simple ponzi trick. Today the thieves get Whitehouse staff jobs. We need to change the rules of how Washington operates or we will continue in a downward spiral.
Schmidt doesn’t know what he is talking about. The government is still issuing drilling permits.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/ybenjamin/detail?entry_id=64868
Perhaps an easy-to-cast expression, but, do you understand how stock prices work/why an equity market exists? I could see a problem IF they had a stock offering before the market being offered to pay these expenses, but, I don’t think we are at that point yet.
Please, correct me if I am wrong.
.
.
Elizabeth says:
June 2, 2010 at 8:46 am
Whilst I don’t know if this is actually practical, it seems one of the more sensible suggestions. One problem I can see with this option is that in the short term, it may lead to an increase in the per day emissions. This would be a hard pill for many to swallow.
DaveE.
Been to the BP.com website recently? No?
Are you aware of the LMRP? No?
Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) Cap:
http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9033657&contentId=7062491
Having actually _watched_ some of their activities the last few days, they are on the road to implementation of this plan, albeit with a few glitches here and there (I think there were other issues with the diamond wire saw, but don’t expect to hear that in media).
Suffice it also so say, do not believe all you hear from the mediots on this issue. Nine times out of ten they are talking through their hats, and generally several ‘acts’ back in the play after having watched in real time the deap-sea ROV work the issue at depth …
.
@ur momisugly Jim who said: “Schmidt doesn’t know what he is talking about. The government is still issuing drilling permits.”
Schmidt did not mention permits. The article you referenced says the government stopped all drilling in waters deeper than 500 feet, permits not withstanding. It only affects wells not yet in the completion stage, about 33 rigs in total. http://tinyurl.com/2g7nfxp
Lemme guess: Another conspiracy?
Any evidence – any transcribed phone calls, photocopies of memorandum, Xeroxes of interoffice directives, MOU (memorandums of understanding) between these organizations or members in these organizations, any meeting notes, minutes?
None?
None whatsoever?
Hmmm … what are we to conclude to such a dearth of hard, factual evidence of this world-wide collusion to ‘take over the world’?
.
Where?
Just above the point where the diamond rope saw is attempting a cut (in preparation for the LMRP – see post above for details)?
They only have about two feet of undamaged ‘pipe’ above the BOP to work with judging from what I have seen …
(Has no one else watched the underwater activities bp has streaming from their website?)
.
I liked the idea of sprinkling the floating oil with sand, and had the thought “kitty-litter”. Many use it in their own garages, why not! It’s mostly clay anyway.
I’m only an outsider, but it seems there was an emergency contingency plan to collect and burn off, but while watching a TV commentary when it was asked why the plan wasn’t put into action, the person being interviewed stated that the Obama administration was hung up on authorising this “it was considered but not used because and environmental study had not been completed – i.e. the club of Rome didn’t burn because someone didn’t think to string the fiddle.!!
I think I agree with GaryW, environmental study in the face of an emergency!! That’s what happens to governments so full of departmental spin artists, that real honest decision making based upon realities, is lost in the we can’ts, how can we justify, but we already said, rather than, what have we got, get it moving and we will worry about that later!! (Hell he could always have blamed a previous administration,) after the event spinmeisters are a dime a dozen to explain those sorts of things.
No, they were well and truly hoist on their own petard of environmental lily whites, so while saving the planet, they cause misery and environmental damage that could have been prevented had the emergency plan been put into action. I wonder if BP will cite this in mitigation of extended damages for a clean up that could have been avoided IF the emergency plan had urgently deployed!
Hmmnn bringing in an Attorney General to jump into the fray with criminal prosecutions, looks more and more like a government protecting its frozen incompetence, with a legal blitzkrieg – but it also might “backfire” on them in these days of open debate!!
Your government, you deal with it.
How long before Obama uses this as another excuse to raise taxes?
Oops – he’s faster that I am. He wants to raise taxes on all oil companies to “fund research in clean energy.” Right, make those evil oil companies charge more for their evil product. Wait a minute, I’m paying for that evil product. Isn’t this a tax on me?
One problem I can see with crimping is the malleability of the pipe. I may just as likely crack as seal the leak.
Anyone thinking that the stock market has anything to do with the value of a company is mistaken. A companys value is dictated solely by its assets, the stock market price indicates the price the company could be sold on for, nothing more.
DaveE.
He wouldn’t let them put the burn off plan into action. Maybe He won’t let them do the obvious things to cap the leak. Maybe He is not through using this crisis to His benefit?
Jim,
I could’ve sworn the Lower Marine Riser Package was the technical military term for, um, …
This blog is rated PG, isn’t it.
I’d love to know just how involved the administration was with the BP efforts during this time. This is the first I’ve heard about them putting the kibosh on the burn off. That’s not a holdover from the Bush years — that is directly in Obama’s lap.