Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: The Biggest Bomb on Earth
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:41:36 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.


I contend that the note below by Joe Vialls is total bullshit.
Moreover, I contend that Claire Gilbert is well aware of this.

To prove it, I cahllenge Claire to put her money where her mouth is.
Let's say $5,000.  The bet is on if we bomb Iraq again.  We'll let the
net decide who wins.

By the way, Claire, mind telling us what's prevented the gas from
evaporating and dissipating?  And why none of the other fires set it
off? 

I'll also bet $100 against anyone who is interested that Claire won't
take me up on this.

In article <1466601721@igc.org> cgilbert@igc.org (Claire Gilbert) writes:
>
>The following article concerning Kuwait oil lakes will appear in
>_Blazing Tattles_, Vol. 1, Issue 12, July 1992.  _Blazing Tattles_
>judges that the implications for the environment override the
>political overtones.  With notes it is 3 pages.
>
>                    THE BIGGEST BOMB ON EARTH
>                          by Joe Vialls
>
>     Despite strong protests from a multitude of countries
>including Egypt and Syria, the Bush Administration is still
>considering further 'military' action against Iraq.  The last U.S.
>excursion up the Persian Gulf resulted in the destruction of major
>oil fields, and the deaths of 70,000 innocent women and children. 
>If the Bush Administration has a second go and accidentally drops
>a stray napalm pod on northern Kuwait, it could trigger an
>explosion that would make a 50 megaton 'nuke' look like a
>firecracker casually thrown on the fourth of July.
>     When the firefighters returned from Kuwait last November, they
>forgot to tell the world about the large number of high pressure
>wells that were still spewing crude oil and gas onto the ravaged
>landscape.  They also forgot to explain how oilmen were to cap high
>pressure wells that would eventually be awash in huge lakes of
>crude oil bubbling with explosive gas.
>     Under normal circumstances in the west oilmen always stop the
>oil flow before putting out the fire.  In the case of almost every
>blowout that has not ignited spontaneously in the past, fires have
>been deliberately lit to burn off the oil and gas -- keeping it
>clear of the well control crews while they stopped the oil flow. 
>In Kuwait, though, the reverse technique was used for reasons that
>have not yet been made clear.
>     A week after the Emir of Kuwait threw the switch that stopped
>the last fire, the British New Scientist sounded a delicate warning
>about non burning gushers, and commented on oil lakes:
>     "In the northern oilfield, many small lakes have run together
>to form rivers that stretch for many kilometers."
>     One of those small lakes is known to be about a meter deep and
>measures 8 by 5 kilometers.  It sounds quite small and shallow
>until figures are fed into a computer, revealing a volume in excess
>of 230 million barrels of crude oil.  Like other small lakes and
>rivers that surround it, the crude oil can hold up to about 25%
>gas.  Exactly the same sort of gas the reduced the North Sea Piper
>Alpha drilling platform to a twisted, charred mass of steel in
>second.
>     As the Bush Administration girds itself for another onslaught
>on Iraq, the increasing ambient air temperatures in the Middle East
>ensure the silent release of an ever increasing amount of gas from
>the lakes to the atmosphere, steadily forming a gas cloud of truly
>mammoth proportions.
>     Things will get a wee bit risky when U.S. fighter-bombers
>streak across the area, on the way from the Gulf to kill a few more
>thousand women and children.
>     If a single fighter-bomber flies through the edge of that gas
>cloud with its afterburners glowing white-hot, or if a nervous
>pilot clicks the wrong switch and releases napalm pods into the
>lake, we have all the ingredients for the world's biggest bomb.  To
>even begin to comprehend the magnitude of what might happen at that
>precise point in time, it is necessary to understand how the
>American FAE (Fuel Air Explosive) weapon works, for the general
>principle is exactly the same.
>
>                    The Poor Man's Atom Bomb
>
>     The FAE's used by the U.S. military in Kuwait and Iraq during
>the conflict were so large that no known bomber could lift them. 
>Instead, each fat 15,000 pound monster was shoved out of a C130
>transport plane.
>     Each FAE is filled with a mixture of liquefied gas and
>stabilizing chemical, in the middle of which is a rather special
>small package.
>     After leaving its C130 transport plane, the FAE falls under a
>drag parachute before bursting open at a predetermined altitude,
>releasing the liquid gas which immediately evaporates into a gas
>cloud, "stabilized" by the toxic chemical component, with the
>intent of achieving a "gas in air" content of about 5%.
>     While this is happening, the special package is slowly falling
>through the cloud itself, under its own parachute.  The instant its
>internal gas sensor detects that the gas/air ratio is just right,
>it closes a circuit that fires a white hot incendiary mounted
>directly beneath.
>     In a millisecond, the cloud explodes with sufficient force to
>reduce stone buildings to dust over an area of some 2 to 3
>kilometers.  Further out from the blast, oxygen is torn from the
>atmosphere so fast to feed the explosion, all humans in range have
>their lungs ripped out through their mouths instantly.
>     The Bush Administration and the Pentagon probably nicknamed
>the FAE "The Poor Man's Atom Bomb" in a deliberate attempt to
>mislead the public.  Such rhetoric is confusing.  By comparison
>with the 15,000 lb. FAE, a low-yield tactical nuclear shell fired
>from a 155mm howitzer is a little more than a damp squib.
>
>                        The Rumaila Bomb
>
>     The main oil field in the north of Kuwait is called "Rumaila,"
>a huge underground reservoir that crosses the border with Iraq. 
>Until U.S. air power destroyed its surface facilities, Rumaila was
>the primary Iraqi oil producing field.
>     Unlike the low pressure field around the Burgan Complex, that
>environmental groups such as Greenpeace were allowed to visit on
>carefully escorted "tourist trips," access to Rumaila has been
>denied to all.  The reason was that while Burgan was blowing at an
>impressive 600 p.s.i., Rumaila left it for dead with oil and gas
>pressure more than ten times higher, at up to 11,000 p.s.i.  Had
>Greenpeace been allowed to view the area, it might have felt
>compelled to make very strong comments about the devastation.
>     It is within this top security area that the oil lakes have
>formed, partly because of the awesome pressure - and thus oil and
>gas outputs - feeding them continually with more volume.
>     Beyond any doubt, Rumaila is a potential giant FAE with powers
>that disturb many physicists.  Bearing in mind that the big U.S.
>FAE contain a mere 15,000 pounds of liquid gas, it is impossible to
>estimate the overall explosive potential of the gas cloud covering
>a huge 230 million barrel oil lake during peak summer temperatures.
>     I spoke to several physicists who initially plugged
>approximate figures into their computers, went a sick shade of gray
>and then tried again.  None were prepared to be quoted by name and
>the only comment I can repeat was from one physicists who, turning
>from his computer screen wide eyes, drew in a long deep breath.
>     "Shit!" was all he said.
>     Off the record estimate of possible blast damage ranged from
>massive local devastation, to an explosion of such force that the
>bang would be heard, and possibly felt, from Tel Aviv to Karachi. 
>Whichever it might be, this is not time for the Bush Administration
>to be fooling around in the area, with young navy "Top Gun" pilots
>toting vast quantities of "hot" munitions around on their multiple
>wing pylons.
>
>NOTES:
>1.  While the above material by Mr. Vialls is copyrighted, he and
>_Blazing Tattles_ have granted permission for the article to be
>reproduced in full by anyone in the U.S. provided the context is
>not altered in any way.  Mr. Vialls is a journalist in Perth,
>Australia.
>
>2.  The following news article describes U.S.-Britain burning Iraqi
>farms through the use of aerial bombings recently:
>     "In a move which will add to the already tense relations
>between Iraq and the U.N. Security Council, the Iraqi mission here
>is demanding compensation from the United States and Britain for
>damages caused by the aerial bombing of agricultural fields in
>northern Iraq.  and to prove the allegations were not mere
>propaganda, Samir al-Nima, the Iraqi Charge d'Affaires showed
>dramatic video footage friday of U.S. F-16s and British Jaguars
>flying low over farmland dropping flares.
>     "...The footage showed planes flying at tree-top level leaving
>a trail of fire in what seemed to be a wheat field.  Farmers were 
>shown dousing the flames and some of them, according to al-Nima,
>were badly burnt.
>     "In all, there have been 31 sorties in the Mosul area since
>May 27 by U.S.. and British warplanes. some 11,000 acres have been
>destroyed, and 7,700 tonnes of wheat has been set ablaze, al-Nima
>said.
>     "When Iraq first made the allegations, the U.S. State
>Department denied it. but two days later on Jun. 20, the Pentagon
>admitted that one plane had dropped flares due to pilot error.
>However, the low flying sorties over iraqi wheat fields have
>continued, the last being two days ago, al-Nima said.
>     "Iraq has asked for a special meeting of the U.N. Security
>Council to discuss the issue and has offered to show the film as
>proof.  'Unfortunately we have not got a reply to our request so
>far,' al-Nima said."  (From:  "United Nations: Iraq demands
>compensation from U.S., Britain," New York, July 10, Inter-Press
>Service.)
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>BLAZING TATTLES                 +            Phone: (305)429-9469
>Internet:cgilbert@igc.org       +                 EcoNet:cgilbert
>Bitnet:cgilbert%igc.org@stanford+ UUCP:uunet!pyramid!cdp!cgilbert
>-----------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
Newsgroups: sci.environment