Boat/Ship engines/cooling system.

"hls" > wrote in
:

>
> "chuckcar" > wrote in message
> ...
>> wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> BP and Shell has had some problems before concerning offshore oil
>>> rigs in the North Sea.BP and Shell and who knows which other oil
>>> company/companies?
>>>
>> There are rigs off Newfoundland now (it's called Hybernia) - made
>> by the exact same company that made the failed one in the Gulf
>> and a professor at Memorial University (in St. Johns) is adamant
>> that these things *will* happen over and over unless proper safety
>> measures are taken. We have the same problem up here because we
>> have our own version of Scrub in a minority Govt. up here and no
>> opposition with any attachments whatsoever.
>>
>> At one point our federal Government bought out The Canadian divisions
>> of BP and Fina here and formed a national run oil company to keep the
>> industry in check. The majority of voting shares is now no longer in
>> Government hands due to the other party getting in since then.
>>
>
> University professors are notorious for such pronouncements.
>
Well, they *do* have 5 years education of such that other people don't.
That what an authority is by definition.

> What does he want them to do, exactly? It is easy to say that
> safety measures are inadequate after the fact.
>
Redundancy obviously.

Several facts. Exon Valdez and multiple platform accidents show this to
be true.

> Most major oil companies have their pick of PhDs. Sometimes they
> actually listen to them. (And sometimes not)
>
Take your pick:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundlan...spill-503.html

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundlan...tions-430.html

http://www.globalmaritimes.com/world...680/story.html

Three biologists and one with several degrees.

http://play.psych.mun.ca/~mont/

http://www.mun.ca/serg/faculty&grads.html

Can't find a cv for the third, but his name and Memorial University will
get it.

The only person who seems to be saying it *can't* happen is the conservative
premier. Hardly surprising.

--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

"hls" > wrote in
:

>
> "chuckcar" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "hls" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Four people from my home State were on that offshore oil rig when
>>>> it exploded.They haven't been found, they won't be found.
>>>> I don't know if that oil/sluge can damage Boat/Ship engines or not
>>>> if it gets into the water cooling passages.I assume if too much of
>>>> it builds up in there it can/will cause the engine(s) to
>>>> overheat.Gummy sticky stuff.
>>>> cuhulin
>>>
>>> The primary death sentence was the initial blowout explosion.
>>> The platform, IIUC, has sunk. There will be, AFAIK, no survivors
>>> that have not already been identified.
>>>
>>> Now, the investigators will try to find out what really happened.
>>>
>>> I have worked offshore a lot. In my experience, we were trained to
>>> do the best we could with safety procedures. But some incidents can
>>> negate any safety procedure you can imagine.
>>>
>> Like having no backup for the pipe breaking at the sea floor for
>> example. You're dead wrong there, quite probably due to company
>> misinformation, but still wrong.
>>
>
> Let's find out what happened before we come to conclusions.
>
They *know* what happened to the pipe. That's why they can't turn the
oil off. As far as the stupidity that lead to the actual pipe breaking,
that's another matter and beside the point.

--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

"hls" > wrote in
:

>
> "Tegger" > wrote in message
>>
>> I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying that trouble seems to follow
>> some companies around more closely than others. That's not an
>> industry characteristic, but one specific to particular companies.
>
>> Tegger
>
> While I dont challenge what you say, the earlier BP I knew was a
> leader in safety, techniques, research. They (once upon a time) paid
> a lot of attention to quality programs in all areas. If they have
> slacked off, (which could be the case) it is a shame.
>
> When Sir John stepped down, things may have gone a bit queer.
>



You may be interested in this editorial in today's Wall Street Journal:
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704342604575222472358019534.html>

Excerpt:
"According to the National Academy of Sciences--which in 2002
completed the third version of its "Oil in the Sea" report--only 1%
of oil discharges in North Americas are related to petroleum
extraction. Some 62% of oil in U.S. waters is due to natural
seepage from the ocean floor, putting 47 million gallons of
crude oil into North American water every year. The Gulf leak
is estimated to have leaked between two million and
three million gallons in two weeks."


--
Tegger

Ther's mo The WSJ is essentially taking BP's side, telling readers to
wait for more information before condemning BP.

--
Tegger

"chuckcar" > wrote in message
> The only person who seems to be saying it *can't* happen is the
> conservative
> premier. Hardly surprising.
>

Any time you drill in deep water, things can happen.
The technology is pretty well developed, but there is never a guarantee
that something cant go wrong.

Maybe when we find out exactly what happened in this case, practical
engineers and university boffins can improve the technology.

As insinuated, the company is responsible for the development,implementation
and improvement of safety routines. The individual worker is responsible
for
understanding and using those routines.

As in jet airliner travel, one broken part, one human error, or one act of
God can blow you apart.

"Tegger" > wrote in message
...
> Ther's mo The WSJ is essentially taking BP's side, telling readers to
> wait for more information before condemning BP.
>
> --
> Tegger

That is my point of view too.

"chuckcar" > wrote in message
...
> "hls" > wrote in

>>
>> Let's find out what happened before we come to conclusions.
>>
> They *know* what happened to the pipe. That's why they can't turn the
> oil off. As far as the stupidity that lead to the actual pipe breaking,
> that's another matter and beside the point.

*******
No, it wont be beside the point when demands for damages start mounting,
and lawsuits really get hot.

Right now, they need to control the oil, I agree. And they are working
on it.

Viewing stupidity in hindsight is a well known human foible.

"hls" > wrote in
:
>
> "chuckcar" > wrote in message
>> The only person who seems to be saying it *can't* happen is the
>> conservative
>> premier. Hardly surprising.
>>
>
> Any time you drill in deep water, things can happen.
> The technology is pretty well developed, but there is never a
> guarantee that something cant go wrong.
>
> Maybe when we find out exactly what happened in this case, practical
> engineers and university boffins can improve the technology.
>
> As insinuated, the company is responsible for the
> development,implementation and improvement of safety routines. The
> individual worker is responsible for
> understanding and using those routines.
>
> As in jet airliner travel, one broken part, one human error, or one
> act of God can blow you apart.
>
Nonsence. Planes *have* redundancy due to regulation of them. If the
engines stop working, the plane glides and a competent pilot can land
it. Any time there's a crash there's a long properly run investigation
and changes are made that stop it from being repeated. That's *exactly*
why it *is* safe and why oil rigs aren't.

--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

"hls" > wrote in
:

>
> "chuckcar" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "hls" > wrote in
>
>>>
>>> Let's find out what happened before we come to conclusions.
>>>
>> They *know* what happened to the pipe. That's why they can't turn the
>> oil off. As far as the stupidity that lead to the actual pipe
>> breaking, that's another matter and beside the point.
>
> *******
> No, it wont be beside the point when demands for damages start
> mounting, and lawsuits really get hot.
>
They never prove anything about cause. Only about who's greedy and has
the most time and money to waste on lawyers.

> Right now, they need to control the oil, I agree. And they are
> working on it.
>
> Viewing stupidity in hindsight is a well known human foible.
>
Hardly. It's how things don't repeat themselves. Those that don't learn
from history are condemmed to repeat it. Those that don't learn history
are incompetent.


--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

I was reading that some of those big Ship engines have Intercoolers and
Aftercoolers, and some other things I don't understand about.Heck, I
don't know much about those big engines.But, if those big engines are
picking up some oily/sludgy water in the engine cooling water intakes, I
don't think that can be good for the engines water cooling
galleries.Perhaps wouldn't affect the Intercoolers and Aftercoolers, but
what do I know?
Those engines do cost a Lot of money though.
cuhulin