The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966 • Hacker News Board

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#11

Post by sliverstorm » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 9:57 PM UTC

frontline wrote: post #6

unclebunkers wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We quickly realized that bacteria have evolved to eat oil, so it wasn't quite as big of an environmental disaster as first expected. I would not expect radiation to improve the situation at all.

i suggest you investigate the side effects of corexit that have emerged since the incident

Corexit is a dispersant, not a bacteria that eats oil.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#12

Post by Florin_Andrei » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 9:58 PM UTC

zincoontrin wrote: post #7

Putting out a gas fire with a nuclear explosion... what can go wrong?

The fire is the least of your worries there.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#13

Post by andreasvc » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 10:06 PM UTC

sliverstorm wrote: post #11

frontline wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i suggest you investigate the side effects of corexit that have emerged since the incident

Corexit is a dispersant, not a bacteria that eats oil.

The comment you're replying to is arguing that corexit is harmful.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#14

Post by jfb » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 10:06 PM UTC

This puts me mind of Herzog's fantastic documentary, Lessons Of Darkness [1], about the crews putting out the oil well fires in Kuwait. Also, the Door To Hell [2] in Turkmenistan.

[1] http://www.fandor.com/films/lessons_of_darkness

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door_to_Hell

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#15

Post by aganders3 » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 10:06 PM UTC

The US proposed many peaceful uses of nuclear explosives, mostly in the 60s. The catchall term for these proposals was "Project Plowshare" or "Operation Plowshare" [0].

> And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more - Isaiah 2:3-5

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plowshare

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#16

Post by wavefunction » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 10:10 PM UTC

unclebunkers wrote: post #5

legohead wrote: post #2

They've also used them to stop underwater oil leaks. If we had done that with the last BP spill things would have been solved a lot quicker!

We quickly realized that bacteria have evolved to eat oil, so it wasn't quite as big of an environmental disaster as first expected. I would not expect radiation to improve the situation at all.

>>so it wasn't quite as big of an environmental disaster as first expected

True, it didn't wipe out ALL life in the gulf. Hurray!

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#17

Post by sliverstorm » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 10:11 PM UTC

andreasvc wrote: post #13

sliverstorm wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corexit is a dispersant, not a bacteria that eats oil.

The comment you're replying to is arguing that corexit is harmful.

Obviously, but what does that comment have to do with anything? So corexit is harmful. My gp was talking about nuclear explosions and bacteria, not corexit.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#18

Post by ChuckMcM » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 10:14 PM UTC

frontline wrote: post #6

unclebunkers wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We quickly realized that bacteria have evolved to eat oil, so it wasn't quite as big of an environmental disaster as first expected. I would not expect radiation to improve the situation at all.

i suggest you investigate the side effects of corexit that have emerged since the incident

I note that the FDA didn't find a problem with food safety (http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/RecallsOutbreaksEmergencie...) the Wikipedia page references an unreliable Vice/MotherJones article. Not finding much on its side effects from research though. Do you have some additional pointers?

these guys http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=24108904 suggest that it doesn't help the bacteria work, but doesn't suggest any enhanced toxicity.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#19

Post by baddox » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 10:30 PM UTC

sliverstorm wrote: post #9

zincoontrin wrote: post #7

Putting out a gas fire with a nuclear explosion... what can go wrong?

Well, it's got the word "nuclear" in it, so obviously doomsday is the only possible result.

I know some nuclear families that are disasters waiting to happen.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#20

Post by sillysaurus3 » Wed, Oct 01, 2014, 10:33 PM UTC

BrandonMarc wrote: post #3

... as well as once in 1968, twice in 1972, and once in 1981. 0.o The USSR had a whole program to investigate peaceful nuclear explosions (PNEs), called Nuclear Explosions for the National Economy. [1] Sadly, some of these experiments went rather wrong, unexpectedly releasing lots of radioactive nasty near populated areas. The US also did this sort of thing from 1961 to 1973, and the program was cancelled in '77. [2]…

Here's a timelapse of every nuclear explosion since 1945. It really puts into perspective just how many nukes have gone off for purposes other than to kill people. It's amazing that only two were used for violence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY

According to the video, people have detonated 2053 nukes, and America has the dubious distinction of having detonated over 1000.