¿Ha llegado ya el fin del petróleo barato?

pilinguinReReloaded dijo:

Entonces debían referirse a la Fabada Litoral, que orate soy...

Si la válvula soportaba 20,000 psi y reventó la lógica nos dice que el petróleo salía a :

1) una presión superior,

2) una presión inferior,

3) no dice nada de la presión a la que salía el petróleo, pero mucho de la Fabada Litoral.​

La evidencia no puede ser cierta, la lógica no funciona contra el Peak Oil. Es imposible que los picoleros estén equivocados, por tanto la única actitud racional es cerrarse en banda y negar los hechos.

Hacer clic para expandir...

After the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion on April 20, 2010, the blowout preventer should have activated itself automatically to avoid an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Underwater robots were used to manually activate the mechanism's switch, to no avail. As of May 2010 it is unknown why it failed.[4] Chief surveyor John David Forsyth of the American Bureau of Shipping testified in hearings before the Joint Investigation[5] of the Minerals Management Service and the U.S. Coast Guard investigating the causes of the explosion that his agency last inspected the rig's failed blowout preventer in 2005.[6] BP representatives suggested that the preventer could have suffered a hydraulic leak.[7] X-ray imaging of the preventer conducted on May 12 and May 13, 2010 showed that the preventer's internal valves were partially closed and were restricting the flow of oil. Whether the valves closed automatically during the explosion or were shut manually by remotely operated vehicle work is unknown.[7]
The permit for the Macondo Prospect by the Minerals Management Service in 2009 did not require redundant acoustic actuation means.[8] Inasmuch as the BOPs could not be closed successfully by underwater manipulation, pending results of a complete investigation it is uncertain whether this omission was a factor in the blowout.
Documents discussed during congressional hearings June 17, 2010, suggested that a battery in the device's control pod was flat and that the rig's owner, tras*ocean, may have "modified" Cameron's equipment for the Macondo site which increased the risk of BOP failure, in spite of warnings from their contractor to that effect. Another hypothesis is that the BOP may have been positioned at a junction in the drilling pipe, giving its shears a larger thickness of material to cut through.[9]

Hacer clic para expandir...

pilinguinReReloaded dijo:

Cuando unos "expertos" declaran que "no saben" la causa de que la valvula no cerrase están dando no-explicaciones y me dan licencia para que yo mismo interprete los datos.

Me extraña que alguien que se las da de exigente como tú se conforme con tales evasivas.

Obviamente a BP le conviene que se crea que la válvula se rompió "por casualidad" y minimizar sus incompetencias y sus responsabilidades.

En este foro los "ejpertos" tiene un estátus muy bajo, especialmente los que están a sueldo de una empresa a la que pueden perjudicar con sus declaraciones.

Hacer clic para expandir...