You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #14: Let me help you out oh you with the broken fingers [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-30-10 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
14. Let me help you out oh you with the broken fingers
While I'm vehemently against using any nukes in the Gulf, and have been clear about that, I take exception to the smug manner with which you belittle other DUers without even bothering to do a little research.

You're free to dislike the use of nuclear weaponry but you're not free to create your own facts.

The following is an excerpt from a 1996 DOE report titled: "The Soviet Program for Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Explosions" from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

You are foolish to so vehmently dismiss facts, without researching them because they don't suit your agenda, and mock those who did. I pray your broken fingers heal soon so you can do your own fact-checking instead of challenging others to waste their time so they can spoon feed you. This report isn't even hard to find. A quick search at the Department of Energy brings it right up.

excerpts from articles)

3. Extinguishing Runaway Gas Well Fires

Shortly after the Soviet PNE Program was established, an urgent industrial problem was brought to the leaders of the program - could a underground nuclear explosion be used to put out a gas well fire that had been raging for some 3 years (See Section B.2, Appendix 2)?

Urtabulak - On December 1, 1963, while drilling gas Well No. 11 in the Urtabulak gas field in Southern Uzbekistan, about 80 km southeast of Bukhara, control of the well was lost at a depth of 2450 m. This resulted in the loss of over 12 million m3 of gas per day through an 8 inch casing, enough gas to supply the needs of a large city such as St. Petersburg. Formation pressures were about 270-300 atmospheres. Over the next three years, many attempts were made using a variety of techniques to cap the well at the surface or to reduce the flow and extinguish the flames. However, since the bottom 1000 m of the casing had not yet been cemented, such attempts led to diversion of the gas into nearby wells and to serious personnel safety problems because of the high H2S content of the gas. Underground attempts were hampered by the fact that the location of the lower portion of the hole had notbeen logged at the time control was lost. Finally, in the fall of 1966 it was decided attempt closing the well with the use a nuclear explosive. It was believed that a nuclear explosion would squeeze closed anyhole located within 25-50 m of the explosion, depending on the yield. Two 44.5 cm(13.5 in) diameter slant wells, Holes No. lc and 2c, were drilled simultaneously. They were aimed to come as close as possible to Hole No. 11 at a depth of about 1500 m in the middle of a 200 m thick clay zone. This depth was considered sufficient to contain the 300-atmosphere pressure in the gas formation below. A number of acoustic and electromagnetic techniques were used to estimate the distance between Hole No 11 and inclined explosive emplacement hole at 1450 m. The final estimate for the closest distance between Hole No. 11 and Hole No. lc was 35 m 10 m.

Page 34

The location for the explosive in Hole lc was cooled to bring it down to a temperature the explosive could withstand. A special 30 kt nuclear explosive developed by the Arzamas nuclear weapons laboratory for this event emplaced in Hole lc and stemmed. It was detonated on Sept. 30, 1966. Twenty-three seconds later the flame went out and the well was sealed.

Pamuk A few months after the closure of the Urtabulak No. 11 hole, control was lost of another high pressure well in a similar nearby field, Hole No. 2-R in the Pamuk gas field. In this case, drilling had progressed to a depth of 2748 m before the gas-containing horizon was encountered and gas pressures were significantly higher than at Urtabulak (580 atm.). A month and a half after the runaway well started, it blocked itself at a depth of 800-1000. Remedial work was done in the well and appeared to have resolved the problem when, four months later, gas started coming to the surface through other holes and through the ground itself. After several unsuccessful attempts to seal the well by hydraulic fracturing from a slant-drilled well, it was decided to again use a nuclear explosive to pinch off the runaway well. A new inclined hole, No. 10-N, was drilled to intersect Hole 2-R in the middle of a salt formation that overlay the gas producing formation. Measurements after it had been drilled indicated that the minimum separation distance at a depth of 2440 m was 30 5 m. This time a special explosive developed by die Chelyabinsk nuclear weapons laboratory was used that had been designed and tested to withstand the high pressures and temperatures in excess of 100 C expected in the emplacement hole. It also was designed to be only 24 cm in diameter and about 2 m long to facilitate its use in conventional gas and oil field holes. Its yield was 47 kt. The explosive was inserted into Hole 10-N and detonated on May 21, 1968 at a depth of 2440 m. Because of the large amount of gas that had infiltrated the overlying strata during the preceding two years, the flow continued for seven days before it finally died out and the seal was complete. The second "success" gave Soviet scientists great confidence in the use of this new technique for rapidly and effectively controlling runaway gas and oil wells.

"Crater and Fakel" - Some four years later, two more opportunities arose infor the use of nuclear explosions to extinguish runaway gas well fires. The first,code-named "Crater," was in the Mayskii gas field about 30 km southeast of the city of Mary in Central Asia. Control of the gas well was lost on May 11, 1970 and about 700,000 m3 of gas was lost per day. The producing horizon in this field was at the 3000m level. No details have been made public about this application except that on Apr.11, 1972 a 14 kt explosion at a depth of 1720 m in an argillite formation was used to successfully seal the runaway well. Later in 1972, on July 7 another runaway gas well, in the Ukraine, about 20 km north of the city of Krasnograd and 65 km southwest of Karkov was sealed with a nuclear explosion. The runaway well was in the Krestishche gas formation at a depth of over 3000 m. No additional information has been made available except that for this event, named "Fakel," a 3.8 kt explosion at a depth of 2483 m in a salt formation

Page 35

was used. The small yield would indicate that the location of the runaway well was well known and the explosive emplacement hole was drilled to be very close to it at shot depth."Pyrite" - The last attempt to use this application occurred in 1981, on a runaway well in the Kumzhinskiy gas deposit in the northern coast of European Russia near the mouth of the Pechora River, SO km north of the city of Nar'yan Mar. Control of the well was lost on Nov. 28, 1980 and it was losing about 1600,000 m3 of gasper day. On May 5, 1981, a 37.6 kt nuclear explosion code-named "Pyrite" was detonated at a depth of 1511 m in a sandstone-clay formation near the runaway well. However, the nuclear explosion did not seal the well, perhaps because of poor data on the position of the runaway well. No additional details have been published on the results of the nuclear attempt or of subsequent efforts to close the well by other means. In these attempts to extinguish runaway gas wells, MinAtom reports that all were completely contained and no radioactivity above background levels was detected at the surface of the ground during post-shot surveys. Underground Cavities for Storage of Gas Condensate Building on their experience with creating the two cavities in salt at Azgir in1966 and 1968, Soviet scientists began to consider possible use of such cavities within the industrial sectors for underground storage. In the late 60s contacts were established with specialists at the Ministries of Oil, Gas, Chemistry and Oil Refining to assess their future requirements for underground storage and their interest in exploring the use of nuclear explosions to help meet those needs. The greatest interest was found in the Oil Production Ministry and plans were quickly developed for a program to develop this application (See Section B.4, Appendix 2).The experience at Azgir with the "Halite" A-l and A-2 explosions clearly identified two of the most significant technical issues that had to be dealt with: isolation of the cavity from access to any source of water through fractures, cracks or the emplacement or other holes near the cavity; and finding a depth that would be great enough to contain the required explosive yield without exacerbating problems of cavity stability against collapse or compression by the lithostatic pressure. Any leakage of water into the cavity, as occurred in both the early cavities at Azgir, could quickly lead to leaching of the radioactivity trapped in the recongealed salt lens at the bottom the cavity and contamination of any product stored in the cavity. Project "Magistral'" - The first experiment- specifically directed at the use of underground nuclear explosion cavities for storage. Project "Magistral'", was carried out in the Sovkhoz gas deposit about 70 km northeast of Orenburg, and 100 km south of die first oil stimulation project at the "Butane" site (See Fig. 5).9189 Op. Qt, Ref. 13, p. 50-1.90 Op. Qt, Ref. 13, p. 151.91 Although all sources state that Project "Magistral'" was the first nuclear explosion directed at the development of underground storage technology, all MinAtom lists carry an event code-named "Tavda" on Oct 10,1967 as the first storage explosion. This explosion had a yield of only 0.3 kt and was at a depth of 172 meters.

There's more. Lots more but I wouldn't want to tax you.

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC