Nuke The Well 1000 Feet Below the Sea-bed

We know that underground nuclear explosions do NOT produce radioactivity at the surface, so, Obama should have ordered a well drilled next to the gushering well, to be drilled down 1000 feet. It took BP, using the Transocean's Deepwater Horizon oil drilling rig about two months to drill 15,000 feet below the seabed. It could have taken a few weeks to drill down 1000 feet.

Once they've drilled a parallel well 1000 feet down, they should place a nuclear warhead 1000 feet down below the sea-floor surface, fill the drill pipe with mud and explode the warhead.

An explosion 1000 feet below the seafloor would be a subterranean one that would not reach the sea floor or the ocean-- no radiation release. It would close the well but still be over two miles from the oil reserve 14,000 feet or more further down. The problem is, it would probably eliminate the Macondo oil field as a viable target for drilling.

It's easy to say what is risky and there's no doubt that it's risky to use a nuke. But doing nothing and waiting for an iffy solution that will take months and allow massive volumes of oil continuing to destroy not just the gulf but possibly the Atlantic, the gulf stream and who knows how many ecosystems, endangered species and hundreds of thousands or millions of people's jobs and ways of life-- ... that's not risky. That's certain damage. We don't know how much, but so far, the estimates from BP and the ethically impaired government agencies have been so lowball, so inadequate that we don't even know the true worst case scenarios.

The problem is, Obama should have done it after a few days. He should have had enough information to decide that BP didn't have a clue and didn't have the ability to ddeal with the problem We're still depending upon BP to try another experiment. We can't afford to wait. The price is too great.

I said Obama should do this a few days after the "event" started. I gave him a week, max, to decide, and felt that if he didn't by then, he'd have failed as a leader. One month later, with, realistically no progress yet and only an untested theory as a hope two months from now in sight, I believe my assessment was correct. The idea of using a nuke needs to be on the table and widely discussed. I may be wrong, but at least we need to be thoroughly exploring the idea with scientists speaking about the pluses and minuses out on the table.

Underground nuclear testingrefers to test detonations of nuclear weapons that are performed underground. When the device being tested is buried at sufficient depth, the explosion may be contained, with no release of radioactive materials to the atmosphere.

Plumbbob Rainier was detonated at 899ft underground on 19 September 1957.^[17]The 1.7 kt explosion was the first to be entirely contained underground, producing no fallout.^[20]The test took place in a 1,600^[21] 2,000ft^[22]horizontal tunnel in the shape of a hook.^[22]The hook "was designed so explosive force will seal off the non-curved portion of tunnel nearest the detonation before gases and fission fragments can be vented around the curve of the tunnel's hook."^[22]This test would become the prototype for larger, more powerful tests.^[20]Rainier was announced in advance, so that seismic stations could attempt to record a signal.^[23]Analysis of samples collected after the test enabled scientists to develop an understanding of underground explosions that "persists essentially unaltered today."^[23]The information would later provide a basis for subsequent decisions to agree to the Limited Test Ban Treaty.^[23]