Why couldn't they blow the BP oil leak shut using explosives?

John,

There's a couple of reasons that, when combined, make this an unlikely approach.

First off is the competing pressures... you've got the downward force of over 2,000 psi because of the depth. This means that the oil coming out of the well is coming out at greater than ambient pressure (the oil plume is shooting, not oozing), which is (mostly) an upward force. This would mean that an explosion would not be able to be directed- force would move outward from the explosion area in a curved path, instead of directionally- and here's why that would be important.

The substrate is made of 'soft' stone- limestone and other porous material, layered with other rock types- not uniformly dense, and not of a single nature.

Now, the the oil is trapped in the rock's crevices and pockets in a giant oval-or-round overall shape profile. The wellheads are scattered around the top half of this area, spread over miles- the wellheads don't need to be in the main area of the pocket of oil, as the available oil isn't accessible from any one place- it takes multiple well sites to get at this pool of oil.

With all this variability in the substrate around the wellhead, coupled with the enormous upward-and-downward pressure, a couple of things could happen if you were to set off an explosion in the well. The force of any explosion would mostly be directed upward, of course, from the ambient pressure within the wellhead. This could be counteracted by shaping any charge to explode mostly downward, but the pressure gradient of an downward facing explosion would be a physics problem- there would be a resultant vector to the directionality of the pressure wave- it would act in a curve, for the most part. This would result in an expansion of the well diameter in the vicinity of the explosion in a V shape. Since the substrate is porous, it would be unlikely that the explosion would have the intended consequences, and there is no way to optimize the results. The gamble involved is why blowing the well shut is low on the list of options.

Hope this helps.

An explosion could do one or more things. It could ignite a fire, it could leave a broken or split pipe which would need to be repaired anyway. An explosios could do more harm than good.

The use of bladders (baloons or bags as we called them) would be pumped with air so they would block the flow of the pipe. The broken part of the pipe would need to be cut cleanly at a point where there is good strong pipe without flaw.

When the pipe is fitted with a cap, or a valve with a short piece and a reducer for the small pipe to go topside to a waiting ship, the valve could ve opened or shut upon demand. The bags, or bladders, would be removed through the screw holes in the pipe upstream from the new fitting and be replaced by screw plugs. The pipe would be as good as could be for future usage.

This idea was transmitted to BP, Senator Harry Reid and the United States Coast Guard. I believe it is better than stopping up the pipe alltogether. My way will allow a controlled flow of the gas and oil.

I also like the centrifugal idea to separate the oil from the seawater so it may be retrieved and used as it was intended. It is only when these two things are done that we can start the clean-up in areas not wanted with the oil.

Thinking approximately this extra, I do not feel the "explosion" suggestion could paintings. So how approximately this: The oil reservoir is placed approximately 18,000 underneath the seabed. The good casing is 22" in diameter and has most likely began to fail and leak into the encompassing formations underneath the 450 ton BOP (Blow-out Preventer) sitting at the seafloor on best of the leaking good. There is a cement plug (almost always failed) 18,000 ft down on the backside of the good earlier than it faucets into the oil reservoir. Couldn't they drill an willing good into the prevailing good a couple of 10s of ft underneath the prevailing BOP then reline the prevailing 22" good with a brand new 18" liner all of the means all the way down to the backside of the leaking good, then installed a brand new backside plug to seal the reservoir?

I'm sure that idea would work that if you could get the explosive package down far enough the hole, then detonating it. This would cause the hole to collapse on itself, permanently sealing it. But I don't think BP wants to do this for they would lose their permit on the site for good. I think their main goal right now it trying to save the site than to stop the leak.

Maybe they were afraid that it would open the hole further or something. Some times they could use a nuke but I think that would leave radiation in the surrounding area and cause more damage then the oil spill. to be honest I have no idea, I'm just throwing stuff out there.

BP still hope they can stop the leak so they can reconnect and get the oil. It they blow it that i. They won't get another drill permit. It's all about $$$$$$ They don't live here so they don't care.

Isnt oil rumoured to be flammable or something ? Im sure I read that somewhere.