[Shade]

Actually, there was a failsafe valve on the pipe. It just, well, failed...

[StarSlayer]

[evil overlord]LET THE OCEANS BURN!![/evil overlord]

[Mongoose]

I know next to nothing about the intricacies of undersea oil exploration, but the more I think about it, the more I'm wondering why the powers that be just can't do the equivalent of dropping a really friggin' heavy cap on the leaking structure.  Even if it doesn't contain the leak entirely, you'd figure that it'd be better than nothing for the moment.

[Klaustrophobia]

something large enough to "cap off" an oil tanker is going to be a tad hard to come by, if i'm understanding your idea correctly.

[Mongoose]

Huh...someone apparently had the same idea.

A stopgap plan -- putting a chamber over the well area and sending the oil to a ship -- is unproven at that depth and could take four weeks before it's ready.

Sounds like a long shot that'll take too long to prevent immediate harm, but at least it's something.

[Shade]

It's not a tanker though, it's a pipe leading down into an undersea oil pocket. So the source of the oil is very localized.

[FUBAR-BDHR]

Well as Shade said the emergency shutoff failed.  Originally it was thought to only be leaking 1000 barrels a day from 2 smaller shutoffs.  2 or 3 days ago it was discovered the main also failed to seal and the leak is 5000 barrels a day. 

While the initial fire idea worked the spill is just too big and now too close to shore to be a viable option and the weather is a factor as well.   Can't have a big burning oil slick and poisonous gas cloud coming on shore instead of an oil slick. 

One thing I can't believe no one has mentioned.  As far as I know nothing like this has ever happened (at least not to this magnitude).  Rig explodes (several explosions), fail safes fail to activate.  All of this just a short time after plans for new off shore drilling being approved announced.  Can you say potential sabotage?   

[redsniper]

potential sabotage?

It's possible, but let's not forget that plain and simply, **** happens.

[Klaustrophobia]

fossil fuels explode rather easily, i wouldn't jump to sabotage.  i'm not the least bit surprised the "failsafes" failed, cuz it.... well, blew up.  you can't design for that without a containment structure.  the failsafes are for things like failed valves.

[Mika]

As far as I know, oil industry is not very keen on upgrading their stuff. That rig might have been thirty+ years old. Maybe this is the incident that forces them to think otherwise.

What happened to that Chinese freighter at the Great Barrier Reef?

[Shade]

Can you say potential sabotage?

Had it been in shallower water, it might have been possible - though very unlikely. But with some of the sabotage having to have taken place at a depth of 1500m? Nah. Only governments and major research institutions have the means to do any kind of work that deep, and none of those would have a motive.

Personally I'd lean towards assuming that buying parts from the lowest bidder and having them maintained by the cheapest contractor might have something to do with it.

[ssmit132]

What happened to that Chinese freighter at the Great Barrier Reef?

I think it was a navigational error.

[Wolfy]

Don't they have some failsafe for this?

A remote-control valve at the seabed or something?

There is, they tried to activate it. It hasn't worked yet but they're still trying to activate it (as well as what seems like 100 other plans)

Maybe use a nuke to evaporate/burn the oil from the surface of the sea, if it's too hard to ignite otherwise. Might lead to some problems with pesky fallout, but hey, such is life.

That, or use white phosphorus. Lots of it. In other words firebomb the **** out of that oil stain.

Nukes? firebombs? You're an American aren't you?

[General Battuta]

Maybe use a nuke to evaporate/burn the oil from the surface of the sea, if it's too hard to ignite otherwise. Might lead to some problems with pesky fallout, but hey, such is life.

That, or use white phosphorus. Lots of it. In other words firebomb the **** out of that oil stain.

Nukes? firebombs? You're an American aren't you?

Nope.

[Herra Tohtori]

Maybe use a nuke to evaporate/burn the oil from the surface of the sea, if it's too hard to ignite otherwise. Might lead to some problems with pesky fallout, but hey, such is life.

That, or use white phosphorus. Lots of it. In other words firebomb the **** out of that oil stain.

Nukes? firebombs? You're an American aren't you?

Actually, no, I am Finnish citizen.

I was merely attempting to find a constructive use for all those tools of destruction.

If collecting the oil is unfeasible or not possible fast enough with given resources, let us get rid of the oil.

If igniting the oil is hard, let us firebomb it, aka use something as catalyst to maintain the fires so that the oil itself burns away along with the phosphorus. Negatives: incendiary chemical traces and combustion chemicals could be almost or just as bad for the environment.

If igniting the oil is impossible, let us vaporize it with medium altitude nuclear warheads. Negatives: Fallout, collateral damage, only possible far enough out in the open ocean and logistically difficult to arrange...

[Nuke]

two pages and no source, tisk tisk. its a conspiracy i tell you!

[MP-Ryan]

potential sabotage?

It's possible, but let's not forget that plain and simply, **** happens.

Oil well blow-outs are extremely common, and very hard to cap.  There's one in Turkey that's been burning for 40 years and still hasn't been successfully capped.  It doesn't have to be an explanation like cheap parts, faulty installation, or anything like that - oil wells blow-out all the time, and most keep going for weeks or months before they can be capped.  We had a nasty one here in Alberta earlier this year that was on fire for weeks (intentionally, mind you - most blow-outs are caused by pressure and don't always ignite naturally).

Part of the reason the fail-safe failed was because of the immense pressure involved - simply waiting for the water pressure to overcome the oil pressure probably won't work - it could be decades, depending on the size and depth of the deposit.  Best proposal I read so far was the funneling idea, which can at least contain the slick to a smaller area of open water and allow the skimmers to take off the bulk of it.  Incendiary devices can deal with the worst of the dense PAHs when they're boomed off, but there are a lot that won't necessarily burn into harmless by-products.

[BloodEagle]

Couldn't they just plant explosives near the leak, and seal the damned thing?

[FUBAR-BDHR]

I think the problem with that is you would just break off the pipe resulting in a leak that is even harder to cap. 

[MP-Ryan]

Couldn't they just plant explosives near the leak, and seal the damned thing?

Consider the pressures required to spit 5000 barrels of oil (225 000 gallons, or ~1 000 000 litres) through a six-inch hole in the ocean floor where the water pressure is roughly 1.51x10^7 Newtons/m².  Now answer your own question =)