Monday, August 9, 2010

Skandi Neptune Positioned Closer To Well Site B, Not A

OK, here it is. BP caught again lying, this time in real time by me, not in old ROV footage. Marine offers real time tracking of Skandi Neptune, the mothership of the ROVs that whose footage has caused this whole controversy. BP's spokesmouth Sheila Williams personally wrote me that BP only ever received permission from the government to drill at the proposed Well A site, and never received permission to do anything at the Well B coordinates. Why then is Skandi Neptune positioned closer to Well A than Well B? In fact, they would have to go past site B to even get to site A.

Here is the current location of Skandi Neptune, captured from the web site linked to above, as of 12:53AM CDT on 9 August 2010:

Note the longitude number, that's the one we'll be paying attention to since it is reported in higher resolution.

Here is the latitude-longitude location of BP's Well A, where everything is happening according to Ms. Williams, from the document filed with MMS:

Since the satellite tracking on the Marine Traffic web site gives the coordinates in decimal while BP's Plan gives them in degrees-minutes-seconds format a simple conversion is required. The result is the following:

Therefore Well A is positioned at 88.365928 degrees of longitude. Now let's look at BP's filed document for where Well B was to be drilled (remember, this one supposedly does not exist):

Converting Well B's location yields this result:

Very simple, no? So let us review the situation. According to Ms. Williams:

BP ‘s exploration plans for Mississippi Canyon, Block 252, references two possible well locations -- well location "A" and well location "B." But BP eventually sought and received approval to drill only one well -- a well at the "A" location referenced in the exploration plan. This one well is now known as the MC252 (or Macondo) exploratory well. The Transocean Marianas rig started drilling the MC252 exploratory well in October 2009. The Marianas rig was subsequently damaged by Hurricane Ida, so in February 2009 the Transocean Deepwater Horizon was brought in to finish the well.

Skandi Neptune is sitting at 88.36972 degrees. Well A is at 88.365928. Well B, which of course does not exist, even though it does, is at 88.366828. What does this mean, these are just three numbers, right? This means that Skandi Neptune is sitting close to Well B, which is not supposed to exist, than to Well A. But wait, there's more. I could understand if the vessel were situated between the two sites, even though BP says that Well B is not there. But it's not -- Skandi Neptune is farther away from A, the older already capped well that they're showing us on TV. And furthermore, it is on the other side of Well B -- they would have to move back across B's location to start getting closer to site A.

For those of you who have trouble visualizing things like this I drew a really cheap-looking diagram of what we are talking about. Open this link in a new tab to get it full size, because you can't see the small text in the width of the column in this blog format. Here's a preview where you can get the gist of it:

You can clearly see that Skandi Neptune is farther away from Well A than it is from site B, at which location BP allege no work was ever done. And the ship is on the opposite side to site B than A is. Why is this? If no well were ever drilled at B, if no equipment were installed, if Deepwater Horizon never was in the water above B, and if the B well were not indeed the one that exploded, as I have theorized here for you all, why is the ship closer to and on the other of Well B, when BP say everything that they're doing always has and does involve Well A?

I don't know, you tell me, all three of my friends who read my musings, and the five anonymous commenting people. Simple investigative work which I have performed over the last five days has proven the following:

1) BP is showing us Well A when their permission from the government to work at site A ended in July of 2009. They only had permission to drill a well at site B in 2010, which I allege they started doing using Deepwater Horizon on April 15 of this year.

2) BP was caught, accidentally, by a national, English-language Russian television showing two different wells spewing oil. Those two sites match up precisely with the coordinates of Wells A and B. Well A is the one on 99.9999% of the cable news shows and on Youtube -- this video, on which I based my earlier blog post about the dual, spewing wells shows that.

3) Now I have caught BP with the Skandi Neptune closer to Well B and on the opposite side to Well A's position.

Why is the ship on the other side? I believe the answer may be this screen, well known to me, the Live Feeds section of BP's Spill Response web site:

At any given time between one third and one half of the 14 ROVs that are supposed to have their feeds publicly available at all times, under government orders, are offline or showing garbled, unintelligible video. And it's usually the same sub's feeds that we can never see. Almost always the same pattern of ones that BP let us see and then the others that are always black screens or scrambled signals.

Why are BP, the company which was supposedly so cheap that they didn't want to pay for a $500,000 advanced blowout prevention system, paying untold thousands of dollars a day for ROVs that never show any pictures? I would like to wax conspiratorial as is my bent, and postulate that they are getting their money's worth from these other, publicly-offline ROVs. I would like to suggest that perhaps they are using these other vehicles to monitor and perhaps even actually attempt to fix Well B, which is the one I think blew Deepwater Horizon up, the Well which BP and Ms. Williams deny exists.

Why else would Skandi Neptune be sitting closer to it than Well A. I fully admit I am curious as to why the ship is not sitting in the middle of the two wells, as that would seem to maximize access to both sites, but in any case, if BP had only ever worked at A and are now supposedly only working A, why situate the ship closer to B, with site B in-between the vessel and Well A? I don't know, maybe the ROVs' tethers are all long enough that BP could have the Neptune miles away from both. But the location of the ship in relation to both wells certainly is curious to me. And suspicious, just like everything else involved in this nightmare of a disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.

Please feel free to leave comments, positive and negative. I want to get to the bottom of this whole thing, and if crimes have been committed, bring those responsible to justice. There are only five Gulf Coast states directly affected by the oil spill, but if BP are committing fraud, they are defrauding every American, because all of us will have our tax dollars used to pay for part of the mess that BP will have refused to clean up. They're already trying to shuck and jive their way out of paying the residents, they just fired 10,000 relief workers since "the well is capped," "no more oil is leaking" and "76% of the oil has magically vanished."

We know where the oil went -- BP disappeared it beneath the waves with Corexit. Now that evidence is mounting that they are lying to the American people and probably even to the government, since they control every camera, I think it's time to open a discussion in the media about BP disappearing as a company licensed to operate in our waters.

I realize that the two wells are not far apart, so maybe this doesn't matter in the large scheme of thing. It simply makes sense to me that if I were running things down there I would park Skandi Neptune right on top of site A and leave it there. The ROVs probably do have enough extra tether so that this doesn't matter. It's just that the whole BP disaster response has been curious, suspicious and ineffectual. That is, until their carbon tax died in the Congress and then, suddenly, miraculously, the cap was shown to be put in place on Well A. And now all the oil's gone and everything is just fine. So if Skandi Neptune is closer to Well B, why worry about it?


  1. Great post Banksterbuster !

    It seems BP are covering up the extent of the disaster ! This is really like a new Chernobyl, but perhaps worse ? Everything in the surrounding areas will be killed.

    I've been following this disaster at your blog through's links.

    Keep up the good work !


    1. The grand old BP well will never be the same again.