web analytics
Your Independent Alternative!

BP: $100 Million Reward to Plug the Leak

“Houston, hey Houston – We really, really, really have a problem.”

In the latest report, Wednesday, June 23, 2010, BP is no longer containing any gushing oil.

But why not, we must ask? According to Admiral Allen, something (possibly a remote submersible) bumped the containment cap on the riser slightly dislodging it. And, after serious discussion they determined that it was best to remove the cap. But, once they have a handle on the cause, it will be reattached.


This reminds me of the story of the little boy who knocks over the vase. When asked, “Who did this?” He replies, “I wasn’t even in the room.”

I’m not an expert but I’ll tell you what happened. After being yelled at, the BP containment team decided to close more vents to increase its statistical gathering of oil. The pressure nearly blew the cap off. It is that simple.


But does it really matter? I say no. The amount of oil gathered each day was merely a fraction of what was spewing into the Gulf of Mexico. Even in the past two days, containment was faltering.

HERE ARE TWO SIMPLE QUESTIONS: "Who can permanently plug this hole?" AND "When can they get it done?"


A reward of $100 million dollars should be presented to the first individual or group that plugs this leak. It should be tax free money and covered by BP. BP Board members and its immediate family members are not eligible to win. Offer void when the well runs dry.

Maybe it’s time to call Brit, Sir Richard Branson. He gets things done.

6 Responses »

  1. Good suggestion, but there's a problem in that the pipe leading up to the blowout preventer is considered fragile. This point was recently made by Prof. Steve Wereley, who disclosed that BP was seriously underestimating (misrepresenting) the flow rate. BP said it was 5,000 barrels a day; the flow rate team (put together by the government) gave a figure of 30-55 K a day (revised upward to 35-60 K after the riser was cut.) The flow rate remains unchanged, per Wereley, because the cap causes no back pressure on the blow out preventer. Thus, while BP has been capturing some oil, upwards of 30K a day is still gushing into the Gulf, even with the cap on. You adroitly point out the pressure that would be caused by closing the vents. The big risk of creating back pressure, by closing the vents, is the stress it would point on the blowout preventer. They fear that it could break it off the pipe. This could bring out the worst case scenario envisioned by BP - that is, 100 K barrels a day. (BP disingenuously said they'd never take off the blowout preventer. That's not the issue. The issue is whether back pressure could cause the blow out preventer to break off the pipe.) If the pipe broke below the preventer, the oil could come up in hundreds of places out of the seabed. (Wereley also disclosed that BP said the the top kill method would not work if the flow rate was over 10 K barrels a day. They knew, then, that it wouldn't work when they did it. It was (my words) a pure PR stunt.

  2. They could film this and make it into a movie. Box office receipts would pay for restitution.

  3. I guess the government and BP believe that "We can't handle the truth!" Now NOAA says that they cannot find any floating oil plumes. Hmmm. I guess the dispersants got rid of them.

  4. Its actually quite easy, we use this technology when building bridges, we just need to think larger.
    Can we build 1.5 km forms?
    cement in a foundation, build a cement silo, not sure how thick it needs to be but we have scientists and physicists that that can figure that out.
    Its time to act.
    All the great ideas wont work, lets get back to basics.

  5. I cannot believe this is not over. I was speaking to my friend the other evening and he said his golfing buddies blame the Unions. They said the oil workers unions have control and are unwilling to part with it. The worst part of this entire disastrous exercise is that one day people will evaluate everyones response. They will probably come to the conclusion that if we had done "X" the flow of oil could have been stopped in week number two.