Blog

Many have been asking about the current state of the previously gushing BP Oil Well at the Macondo Prospect in the Gulf of Mexico. The following questions have been coming fast and furiously since the well was capped.

Is it still leaking at the wellhead? Has the wellhead been pierced? Are there other wells leaking in the region?

Are there methane seeps in the area around the well? Are there other leaks in the area coming from this well?

Has the well been breached? Is it beyond repair? How deep are the leaks and breaches?

Has the well-casing been compromised? Has the well-bore lost its integrity? Did the methane explosion undermine the foundation of the wellhead?

Why was the cementing plan not executed according to industry SOP’s? Has the pressure (high psi) forced effluent through cracks and fissures in the cement?

Is BP considering a nuclear option?! Are the relief wells about this? If so, what are the potential consequences should BP execute such a plan?

What is the purpose of the upcoming top kill operation by BP, and will it work? What is the likelihood of success of the relief wells?

What are the prospects of this well ever being permanently sealed? Should BP have ever drilled this well in the first place? Why has so much gone wrong with the entire process of drilling, and then capping this seemingly untamable oil gusher?

For the first time we have received a pictorial rendition of what may have occurred over the several stages of developing the Macondo Prospect oil well. Full credit goes to BK Lim for publishing these revealing diagrams on alternative news websites. It is quite consistent with reports and assessments that we have received over the past three and a half months since the sinking of the Deepwater Horizon.

Again, we express our deepest gratitude to BK Lim for these diagrammatic portrayals of the well gone bad at the Macondo Prospect.

Dr. Tom Termotto, BCIM
National Coordinator
Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference (International Citizens’ Initiative)
Tallahassee, FL
OilSpillSolution@comcast.net
http://oilspillsolutionsnow.org/
SKYPE: Gulf_Advocate

Diagrammatic Illustration of BP’s Deepwater Horizon Blowout

By BK Lim

http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/07/30/4781973-why-is-bps-macondo-blowout-so-disastrous-beyond-patch-up-


















All diagrams created by BK LIM

******************************************************************************************

Questions from Gordon; Answers from BK Lim

My answers will be short as you can find the relevant sections on the link provided.

A well was drilled by BP and abandoned, [is there or was there a rig over the hole?]
Yes for a well to be drilled, a semi-submersible rig had to be positioned over the location, within tolerance limit of say 1 to 5% of the depth to the seabed.

BP moved to another location and drilled a second hole. The rig blew up on April 20th, and started a huge leak.
See summary at http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/09/01/5024700-which-well-are-they-killing
BP drilled the official well A on 3Feb and abandoned it 10 days later on 13 Feb due to the drilling pipe stuck at the bottom of the well at about 5000 ft The last 1000 ft had not been cased yet thus making it possible for the Formation (rocks and soil in simple terms) to collapse into the hole. .

Since BP could not continue, BP went to drill at Well B without informing MMS. That is a violation of the law.
BP started drilling at Well B probably from 17 Feb onwards.
Again they had numerous problems – Hell Hole, but still struggled on (pressured by BP) till 13,100 ft where they “damn nearly blew the well”. Had no choice but to move to a new location. This time they were given permission to “side track” or drill from the same seabed location but the well-bore redirected at an angle away from the problem section. Did BP do that? No they moved to a new location without official permission again. This is again in violation of the law.

BP started drilling on the 3rd (unapproved seabed location) from 16 March 2010 until the 20 April when the blowout occurred. – one day before Tony Hawyard disposed of his shares 223,288 shares.
Their formal application for the new (third hole) was only applied 4 days before the 20th April blowout. The application was also immediately approved in retrospect one month after BP had already started drilling.

BP fixed the hole that started leaking on April 20th. The fix was in August.
BP did not fix the 3rd hole that blew up on 20th April which reached down to reservoir. The problems appeared to big for a quick fix. So they moved the fallen BOP to Well A which was also leaking. Then they pretended that was the well they drilled all the time. All information on the 3rd hole had been blacked out. This is the reason why there are so much oil in the water. So BP used a lot more Corexit than necessary to disperse and hide the real spill on the third open and damaged well (S20BC).

The first hole blew open and has been also leaking since April 20th, but it is uncapped.
By the first hole, I take it you mean Well A. Yes it was probably leaking already in Feb since it had not been properly capped when BP abandoned it on 13 FEb. The 3rd hole remains uncapped because there is no way to cap a badly damaged well in a blown crater.

The second hole could not be fixed until the first hole vented so much material that the pressure dropped.
The 2nd hole (Well B) had been plugged (although not to specifications) and probably was not leaking But I cannot be sure. BP had not given out much data on this.
I suspect the relief wells were mean to kill the open gusher (3rd hole, S20BC) but BP is now hesitating even though Relief Well C is less than 5 ft from the gushing well. BP had hoped that the gushing well had depleted itself by 3 months but apparent by hesitating, I suspect the oil is still gushing as strongly as ever. It would have been too dangerous to attempt a bottom kill at the moment.

The second hole is still venting and BP will not admit it exists, nor fix it, nor can it fix it.
By the second hole – I take it to mean the 3rd well (S20BC) – yes it is still venting judging from all information at hand (which is not much). Of course BP will not admit to this since it will mean the end of BP as we know it due to the potential civil and criminal lawsuits. If we cannot cap it maybe we should be looking at alternatives – like bleeding the reservoir using multiple wells drilled from safe (away from gas saturated weak sub-formation – GWSF) GWSF hazards. It is possible but may not be economical. It is the only way to keep the oil from spreading into the fragile upper formation and destroying the gulf over time.

The Gulf is doomed.
No there is still hope. But we must act fast. The healing can only begin when the lying stops. Otherwise all the recovery efforts will be just shadow play while the real problems lay hidden.

I hope I have explain clearly enough. Please pass this simple message around if we are going to save the GULF. Thanks.

Rgds
BK LIM

*************************************************************************************
*************************************************************************************
*************************************************************************************

Which well are they “killing”?

by BK Lim, Geohazards Specialist

(1 Sept 2010, hydrocomgeo@gmail.com).

Some of the most critical details of the disastrous Deepwater Horizon (DWH) blowout on 20 April 2010 were never made public. We are told that only one well location was drilled when in fact BP drilled at 3 wells at 3 different seabed locations. In fact the 20 April blowout was the last of several serious near-misses and the blowout location was actually 714ft north of Well A location. Despite its importance, there were no public media reports of a second underground explosion 2 days after the initial blowout on 20 April 2010 burst into flames onboard the Deepwater Horizon.

Four and a half months is a very long time to permanently kill what was initially reported as a “small leak in a very big ocean”. We were first told that it would take 3 months to drill the two relief wells (C and D)? We were told that the Relief wells were the surest way to kill the wild gushing well. Well, mid-August had come and gone by without the promised permanent kill by the Relief wells.

Months had been spent discussing all the intricate details of killing the zombie well in so many ways, from Top Kill to Bottom Kill to Static Kill to Relief Kill that it was almost killing me instead of the zombie well. Has it occurred to them, the zombie Well A could not be killed because it was the wrong well?

What if the capped Well A was drilled only to slightly over 5000ft bml? It would easily explain why Well A could only be cemented to 5000ft. It could explain how 40% of the 500 barrels of cement went into the formation. It could explain why only 3000 ft of drilling rod was in the well and not 18,000ft. It could explain why Well A had to be abandoned on 13th Feb due to 3000ft of drilling rod reportedly jammed at the bottom of Well A. It could explain the mystery of BP’s attempts to kill the zombie well that refused to lay dead.

See figure 114.1 on the depths of the 3 wells drilled in correct perspective. Please click on the diagram to enlarge it.


*******************************************************************************************************
*******************************************************************************************************

Compelling Evidence Points To A Different Well Being Capped

What would the world say, if the Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico that gushed for 87 days, is not the same well location which BP identified to the world as the Gusher Of All Time?

BK Lim is a geohazards specialist who has dissected the entire “Macondo prospect gushing wells scenario” with penetrating forensic analysis and well-honed investigative techniques. He has broken down so many facets of this apparent deception that one is left with only one conclusion.

When a foreign, multinational corporation perpetrates a deception in the marketplace, it is usually considered business as usual and life goes on without so much as a bleep on the radar screen.

If the US Federal Government, and especially the current Administration which has enabled so much of what has gone wrong in the Gulf, was an accomplice in such a deception, then we have a problem. And, therefore, our friends in DC, and particularly BP will then have a HUGE problem!

We certainly have a problem that rises to a much higher level than a bunch of bungling burglars in a hotel complex known as Watergate, don’t we?!

Let’s get busy, shall we, and start holding the Obama Administration accountable for their part in the greatest manmade environmental catastrophe, and coverup, in American history.

If we allow this moment to pass without an appropriate response, future generations will rightfully label us as the nation who failed humankind … as well as the planet, Herself.

Dr. Tom Termotto
Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference
Tallahassee, FL
OilSpillSolution@comcast.net

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The diagrammatic illustration that says it all.

by BK Lim

Within 4 days of publishing this article, Why is-BP’s Macondo Blowout so disastrous and Beyond Patch-up with this diagrammatic illustration, visits to my column shot up by almost 20,000%.

This diagram which had been pasted all over the world had been ridiculed as total nonsense, comical, garbage and many other terms which I will not post here.

Please judge for yourself the accuracy of this qualitative model and the predictions that had since proven to be true with recent events.

The label “Well Location” intentionally left out the alphabet “A” as it was intended to be the well that was actually drilled which forensic analyses of the seabed debris determined to be 720 ft NNW of Well A. This mysterious “well that never was” (referred to as “S20BC”) is still being ignored publicly by the Authorities, BP and all those involved in the cover-up to continue duping the American public and world at large. This damaged S20BC well is the real gusher and the vertical conduit draining oil and gas out of the giant reservoir at 18,300 ft below mud line; not the bogus capped Well A.

Well A was drilled down to 5000 ft or thereof. It had to be abandoned on 13 Feb 2010 due to a broken drilling rod string which was jammed in the well. One must ask why a drill string of steel pipes could be jammed inside the well bore. Recently we hear BP admitting the possibility of formation collapse. And how could the formation collapse into the well bore without pressurized fluid forcing debris and jamming the drilling rods in the open section of the well?

So my independent geological model was right. Dr Bea was right. Matt Simmons was right. So did millions all over the world who did not fall for the Bogus Press releases and the blatant acts of Mass Deception.

Well A could not be the well that blew up on 20 April 2010. At 5000 ft bml, the base of Well A is still 13,000 ft above the reservoir. Well A was already leaking hydrocarbon migrating through the faults, GWSF zone and the pervious flanks of the Dome or whatever vertical structural deformities. Well B was drilled to 13,100 ft.

The mysterious “well that never was” (S20BC) reached the targeted reservoir at 18,300 ft bml. It was this well that blew on 20 April 2010. This well had to stay hidden to hide the many dark secrets of the Macondo well. Credit must be given to the determined few who against all odds and the myriad of half truths, distorted facts and Bogus Press information, persevered to bring to the world the truth.

Drilling at Well B and S20BC only made a precarious geological situation worse, by acting as vertical conduits to the shallower 176 ft thick gas-charged siltstone bed discovered by the Texaco Rigel Well in 1999 and BP’s targeted giant reservoir at 18,000 ft bml.

As long been suspected, Well A was deviously capped to mesmerize the world into a hypnotic trance, diverted from the real environmental disaster. A 5000 ft deep Well A would explain the many unexplainable inconsistencies and mysterious evidence that are surfacing now in killing the zombie well that refused to lay dead.

This geological illustration that says it all was independently created on 25 July 2010 based on limited publicly available information, thousands of miles from the crime scene. It explains the need for so many cover-ups. And if these cover-ups are any indication of BP’s misconduct, integrity and credibility, we should be worried about Another Deepwater Production Platform in the Gulf called Thunderhorse at Prospect 778/822.

by BK Lim

http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2010/08/29/4994064-the-diagrammatic-illustration-that-says-it-all

*************************************************************************************

Commentary provided by the Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference as follows:

Houston, We Have A HUGE Problem ! ! !
(BP America is headquartered in Houston, TX)

Evidence Points To A Different Well Being Capped

What would the world say, if the Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico that gushed for 87 days, is not the same well location which BP identified to the world as the Gusher Of All Time?

BK Lim is a geohazards specialist who has dissected the entire “Macondo prospect gushing wells scenario” with the forensic analysis and investigative powers of Sherlock Holmes. He has broken down so many facets of this apparent deception that one is left with only one conclusion.

When a foreign, multinational corporation perpetrates a deception in the marketplace, it is usually considered business as usual and life goes on without so much as a bleep on the radar screen.

If the US Federal Government, and especially the current Administration which has enabled so much of what has gone wrong in the Gulf, was a party to such a deception, then we have a problem.

We certainly have a problem that rises to a much higher level than a bunch of bungling burglars in a hotel complex known as Watergate, don’t we?!

Let’s get busy, shall we, and start holding the Obama Administration accountable for their part in the greatest manmade environmental catastrophe, and coverup, in American history.

If we allow this moment to pass without an appropriate response, future generations will rightfully label us as the nation who failed humankind … as well as the planet, Herself.

Dr. Tom Termotto
Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference
Tallahassee, FL
OilSpillSolution@comcast.net

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The diagrammatic illustration that says it all.

by BK Lim

Within 4 days of publishing this article, Why is-BP’s Macondo Blowout so disastrous and Beyond Patch-up with this diagrammatic illustration, visits to my column shot up by almost 20,000%.

This diagram which had been pasted all over the world had been ridiculed as total nonsense, comical, garbage and many other terms which I will not post here.

Please judge for yourself the accuracy of this qualitative model and the predictions that had since proven to be true with recent events.

The label “Well Location” intentionally left out the alphabet “A” as it was intended to be the well that was actually drilled which forensic analyses of the seabed debris determined to be 720 ft NNW of Well A. This mysterious “well that never was” (referred to as “S20BC”) is still being ignored publicly by the Authorities, BP and all those involved in the cover-up to continue duping the American public and world at large. This damaged S20BC well is the real gusher and the vertical conduit draining oil and gas out of the giant reservoir at 18,300 ft below mud line; not the bogus capped Well A.

Well A was drilled down to 5000 ft or thereof. It had to be abandoned on 13 Feb 2010 due to a broken drilling rod string which was jammed in the well. One must ask why a drill string of steel pipes could be jammed inside the well bore. Recently we hear BP admitting the possibility of formation collapse. And how could the formation collapse into the well bore without pressurized fluid forcing debris and jamming the drilling rods in the open section of the well?

So my independent geological model was right. Dr Bea was right. Matt Simmons was right. So did millions all over the world who did not fall for the Bogus Press releases and the blatant acts of Mass Deception.

Well A could not be the well that blew up on 20 April 2010. At 5000 ft bml, the base of Well A is still 13,000 ft above the reservoir. Well A was already leaking hydrocarbon migrating through the faults, GWSF zone and the pervious flanks of the Dome or whatever vertical structural deformities. Well B was drilled to 13,100 ft.

The mysterious “well that never was” (S20BC) reached the targeted reservoir at 18,300 ft bml. It was this well that blew on 20 April 2010. This well had to stay hidden to hide the many dark secrets of the Macondo well. Credit must be given to the determined few who against all odds and the myriad of half truths, distorted facts and Bogus Press information, persevered to bring to the world the truth.

Drilling at Well B and S20BC only made a precarious geological situation worse, by acting as vertical conduits to the shallower 176 ft thick gas-charged siltstone bed discovered by the Texaco Rigel Well in 1999 and BP’s targeted giant reservoir at 18,000 ft bml.

As long been suspected, Well A was deviously capped to mesmerize the world into a hypnotic trance, diverted from the real environmental disaster. A 5000 ft deep Well A would explain the many unexplainable inconsistencies and mysterious evidence that are surfacing now in killing the zombie well that refused to lay dead.

This geological illustration that says it all was independently created on 25 July 2010 based on limited publicly available information, thousands of miles from the crime scene. It explains the need for so many cover-ups and why the Macondo prospect was originally called Thunder Horse. We had awakened the dragon from beneath the deep.
God help us all.

by BK Lim

*************************************************************************************
*************************************************************************************
*************************************************************************************

The Art of Mass Deception – Part 1 Ballistic Analysis of DWH & Riser wreck.

By BK Lim

Figure 3a

Figure 3b

Figure 3c

Figure 3d

Figure 3

Figure 2a

14 August 2010

Coincidence is the word we often use when we want to hide the truth. The oil spill disaster has more than its fair share of coincidences. Matt Simmons’s death 4 days ago, is a great loss to all of us seeking the truth. In one of his final interviews, Matt Simmons said, “It was painful as can be… to be the only person in the industry that was willing to speak out.” This article is dedicated to him, all those (animals included) killed and those continuing to suffer from this mega disaster.

Despite BP’s numerous delay tactics, improprieties, inconsistencies and contradictions; the mainstream media, BP’s paid Bogus Press and “Oilmen Expert” bloggers never commented on the obvious flaws in BP’s rendition of the mega disaster. But the same Devil’s Advocates were so quick to bark and maul on articles or postings that disputed BP’s version of events. It was painful indeed to read these biased blogs hammering and mauling Matt Simmons’s character, professionalism and sanity, just because he had disputed BP’s claims and version of events. Many of Matt Simmons’s accounts have since been vindicated by recent whistleblowers’ accounts, evidence of previously undetected oil spill and gas seeps, and health hazards due to extensive usage of Corexit.

BP’s attempts to spin the disaster into an art form through the mass media and paid advertisement are all part of BP’s Charade. The failing Static Kill on the “wrongly” capped well (Macondo A) is just one of the “broken steps”. The return of BP Zombie Well by Fintan Dunne aptly described the multiple failures in trying to kill the wild well. Is there more to it? Did BP drill one or two wells? Apparently the wells were drilled outside their approved period of exploration. Despite what it seems Well B was not drilled at its proposed location. Instead after plugging well A, DWH drilled on an unreported location which blew on 20th April 2010. Were regulations contravened?

This article is the first of several series which will present evidence of mass deception for public discussion. Without doubt, underhand tactics and adulterated data would be used to discredit me and my articles as they had done to Matt Simmons. Bloggers would be employed to disseminate distorted facts and to confuse the general public, under the guise of technical discussions. Do not be intimidated by technical jargons meant to confuse, for the truth is always simple and logical. Judge what I have presented here for its true academic values and not from any political or vested perspective. There are no hidden motives in my series of articles other than to educate, disseminate the truth and point out the obvious flaws in the accounts of the disaster. My expertise in the field of geohazards geophysics is given here on a pro-bono basis as part of my contribution to speak up for Mother Earth so that we need not live in constant fear of another mega man-made disaster.

1 Was the wrong well capped?
As the list of things that do not add up, continues to grow longer and longer, it is becoming more obvious the cover-ups are as elaborate and extensive as the disaster itself. One has to wonder why would there be a need for such a colossal cover-up. The truth then must be more devastating than the disaster itself. It is always easier to tell the truth as the truth will not contradict any facts that are revealed over time. The bigger the lie the more elaborate is the effort needed to cover it. But all deception no matter how perfectly planned cannot cover all tracks. After all, Man proposes but God Disposes.

The starting point of contention has to be Well A (E 1,202,803.88, N 10,431,617.00) which was supposed to be the seabed location drilled when the disastrous blowout occurred on 20th April 2010. Is it a mere coincidence Well A is located outside the blowout circle drawn to connect the major debris from DWH? The source of any unconstrained explosion will always lie close to the “epicenter” of the blowout. While it is possible to have a skewed ellipsoid (as in explosions from directional charges), the debris field will be similarly skewed and not be a symmetrical circle. See figure 1 of DWH blowout CSI which was reproduced from the Macondo ROV Map Ver 1.0 compiled by Fintan Dunne on 9th Aug 2010. Tuttlet must be commended for compiling the original map showing the ROVs’ position in early August.

It is only logical that DWH would be drilling directly above the well’s seabed location within tolerance limits of a couple of percentage error. DWH being the “state of the art” drilling rig, was definitely capable of maintaining dynamic position accurate to 50ft or 1% of water depth. For all practical purposes, 3% or 150 ft would be the position tolerance limit at that depth. It is therefore intriguing that Well A should be more than 520ft SSE of DWH’s surface location. If this was true, then DWH was drilling with the riser string at an angle of almost 6º. Given the dynamic positioning capability of DWH, there should be no reason for DWH’s surface location to be so far away from well A; if indeed the seabed location was Well A when the blowout occurred on 20th April 2010.

2 Did Well A blow out on 20th April 2010?
BP in their press conferences gave the impression that the riser string was largely intact and still connected to the BOP on top of Well A’s well-head, albeit badly twisted and bent. The figures at 7a to 7e (DWH blowout CSI) by Al Jazeera illustrate the simplistic but illogical rendition of how DWH could have sunk to the present wreck position on the seabed with 3 leaks on the punctured riser.

Doubts that the capped well (Well A) may not be the actual well that blew on 20th April, is further fueled by the early video footage available to public in May. The videos showed oil gushing out of a partially buried, severed casing with several broken debris obviously associated with a catastrophic event. The oil gush seems to be flowing out of a sub-horizontal pipe (casing?) which apparently dips into the seabed within an “unnatural” seabed crater. This location referred to as S20BC, is approximately (estimated from the scatter plots of ROV coordinates) 720 ft NNW of Well A and just 120ft NW of DWH’s surface location. The water depth of 4960-4970 ft is consistent with the depth shown on the bathymetric chart. Figure 3 shows the charted location of these images presented in figures 3a -3d. Water depth at Well A is generally more than 4990 ft.

This is strange as in all past blowout investigations, the primary focus of attention should be the blown-out well (Well A?) and not any one of the three “secondary leaks” on the riser. Why the intense activities focusing on S20BC (supposedly the most serious of the 3 leaks on the riser) instead of Well A? Does action speak louder than words? Could S20BC be the real blowout well but misled as just a “secondary” leak on the riser? Another piece of Mass Deception?

Video footage of the faulty BOP on top of Well A was only widely available to the public from June onwards. In a video dated 4 June 2010, an apparent “Dispersant Ops” Rov showed the BOP at 61.8 ft above seabed level, at 221.5 ft WNW of Well A location. Figure 3d confirmed our suspicion that the BOP had been “busily travelling” around instead of being Static at Well A as we had been led to believe.

Stranger still, why does the partially buried, severed casing (at S20BC) with gushing oil and gas appear to resemble more of a broken well-head casing than a twisted or flattened riser? Why would the ROV video show the oil to be flowing from north to south? If the oil and gas were to flow from Well A to S20BC in the north through the “riser”, the flow direction should be south to north. This confirms that Well A could not be the source of the leaking oil and gas.

It was crucial to keep this key discrepancy secret initially to avoid adulteration of the ROV data. As expected, the recent video footage appears to have unreliable coordinates or had missing information; eg sudden jumps of several hundred feet in ROV position. While “jumps” in navigation or position can be due to a variety of instrumental errors or data lapses, it is more difficult to explain jumps that seem to converge to Well A location. Is this another evidence of “tampering with the data”?

3 The mystery of the Twisted Riser wreck standing 1500 ft above seabed
Figure 2 (DWH blowout CSI) illustrates that it would not be possible for the DWH wreck to have landed just 1,100 ft from Well A if the riser string was largely intact with the base attached to the BOP (BP’s official version).

Even if the riser string were to detach from DWH as it was sinking, the wrecks (both DWH and riser) would continue their motion northwards. By the time the riser string had tilted to 12.5º from the vertical, the burning DWH would be already 1082 ft from Well A and it would have sunk by 118 ft. It is also possible that DWH could have fallen apart much earlier at 6º tilt angle. In which case, the centre of the fallout circle would be very close to the observed surface location of DWH but the WDH wreck would have to sink by 27 ft. Thus while the WDH wreck could still land at the observed seabed location, the unbroken long riser string would not be so twisted and definitely not bent backwards at such an acute angle. It is only logical for a free-falling rigid string (anchored at the base to the BOP) to fall straight through the water column; thus ruling out such pronounced bending.

It is almost impossible to explain how the riser could have bent backwards at such an acute angle and landed at a standing position 1500 ft above the seabed, with the lower end of the riser still attached to the BOP. Either the mainstream media were totally misled or NOAA debris chart as shown in figure 2a is totally inaccurate. Surely the Press could not have been so meek, not to question the improbability of the twisted riser standing 1500 ft above the seafloor without breaking. Obviously BP was given a lot of leeway to cover its own charade with a “No Tough Questions” policy. This is BP’s Art of Mass Deception in action.

Even if the burning DWH had sunk with the riser string broken at the lower section, the swing momentum of any inclined rigid steel string would have propelled DWH towards its anchor point. NOAA debris chart is the documented evidence of physical laws governing the dynamics of DWH sinking. There is no way DWH’s wreck could have landed at its present seabed location 720ft away if DWH’s riser (steel) string was anchored to Well A.

The most likely anchor location of DWH’s riser string is S20BC. Figures 8a-8h show the likely sequence in the sinking of DWH following the blowout on 20th April 2010. The blowout was so powerful its upward thrust probably broke the lower 1/5 of the riser. The BOP with the broken riser tilted and fell to the seafloor bending the upper section of the well casing. Whether the BOP was later cut and removed from the well-head or whether it broke off from the well-head by the blowout, is open to question? This can be confirmed by unadulterated ROV operation reports.

BP probably removed the BOP with the bent riser and installed it on Well A several weeks after the 20th April blowout. It was only after the BOP installation on Well A, were video footage of the leaking BOP released for public consumption. Irrespective of the BOP’s “travel paths or transit points”, Well A could not have been the well location drilled by DWH when the 20th April blowout occurred. Period!

by BK LIm

******************************************************************************************************

******************************************************************************************************

******************************************************************************************************

Diagrams of the Sinking of the Deepwater Horizon (Macondo Prospect) Proposed by BK Lim

BK Lim has done it again. He presents here an alarming analysis of the events prior to and after the sinking of the Deepwater Horizon on top of the Macondo Prospect in the Gulf of Mexico. We very much appreciate this great revelatory work by BK Lim.

As always, we leave it to our readership to continue to ferret out the real story behind this Crime and Coverup of the Millennium. Our challenge, clearly, is that BP and the US Federal Government have locked down the crime scene known as the Gulf of Mexico with extraordinary police powers. How so? The US appointed BP, a foreign, multi-national corporation, as the lead entity in a unified command structure which was created as the official and legal response to the BP Gulf Oil Spill. Therefore, BP was empowered by our government to effectively enforce martial law in US territorial waters in the wake of BP’s perpetration (with US Federal Government aid and assistance) of an unprecedented series of crimes. Can it get any more bizarre and kafkaesque than this?! We certainly hope not.

What has really gone on here?!

In fact, the US Federal Government, a full-blown accomplice, has enabled BP – the perpetrator of a Crime against Humanity, a Crime against the Planet, a Crime against a Nation (USA), a Crime against a Major Body of Water – to completely control its own crime scene. What we have, therefore, are psychopaths giving powers to criminally insane sociopaths, which both permit and encourage the criminals to tell (and in many cases order) the innumerable victims of these many crimes, how to cleanup the criminal’s own crime scene.

Many of us have seen the movie, ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST. We are now witnessing what can occur when the craziest among the crazies are running the asylum.
Many have also seen the movie AVATAR and now understand that Planet Earth has become Pandora. That most of us who live here are the Na’vi. And that oil and gas are the unobtanium that is being stolen from Mother Earth, which is putting Her at great risk.

Very few truly understand that, where it concerns the continuation of the HYDROCARBON FUEL PARADIGM, the fate of humankind now lies precariously in the balance. That’s correct – the future of the planet is in jeopardy where it concerns GAIA’s ability to maintain a necessary biosphere that is fit for human life to live and prosper. We already know that the quality of life all over this once beautiful orb has deteriorated beyond thresholds which will ensure the premature death for millions of inhabitants. As it will also promote an exponential proliferation of disease and illness, epidemics and syndromes, debility and ailments of every kind throughout the global population.

While there is no disputing that we have chosen this path collectively, it does not mean we cannot change our course. In fact, WE MUST CHANGE OUR COURSE. And WE MUST DO IT SOON. By thoughtfully transitioning away from this inherently destructive energy platform, and over to some of the clean and green energy sources and technologies which have been suppressed for decades.

Do we get it yet?! We certainly hope and pray that we have made ourselves perfectly clear in this regard. And we invite everyone to join this “cause of the millennium” —> Let’s SAVE THE PLANET by HEALING MOTHER EARTH.

All of what follows is the work of BK Lim. Any permission to post or publish should be sought from him directly.

http://bklim.newsvine.com/

Dr. Tom Termotto, BCIM
National Coordinator
Gulf Oil Spill Remediation Conference (International Citizens’ Initiative)

Tallahassee, FL
OilSpillSolution@comcast.net
http://oilspillsolutionsnow.org/
SKYPE: Gulf_Advocate










Click on the links below to view enlarged diagrams of those above:

DWH Blowout CSI – How it happenned (dragged) 1

DWH Blowout CSI – How it happenned (dragged) 2

DWH Blowout CSI – How it happenned (dragged) 3

DWH Blowout CSI – How it happenned (dragged) 4

DWH Blowout CSI – How it happenned (dragged) 5

DWH Blowout CSI – How it happenned (dragged) 6

DWH Blowout CSI – How it happenned (dragged) 7

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>