bitsmasherpress@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 14:36:50 -0600
[This is a follow-up to earlier items on the book by Earl Boebert and
James Blossom (RISKS-29.80), at my request. PGN]
It's always a tense situation when you release a complex technical analysis
like our Deepwater Horizon book, one that I am familiar with from the many
National Academies studies I've been on: Is somebody going to appear from
nowhere and invalidate one of your main conclusions? The book came out in
October and so far the answer is, "not yet, anyway." Reviews have been
sparse but good, and our informal working group has been joined by readers,
including the person who ran the simulations for the Chemical Safety Board
report. As a result of his work, the group thinks we have a plausible theory
for what failed down in the well. We'll be writing this up and adding it to
the website soon. It suggests an answer to the last outstanding question,
but doesn't invalidate any of the conclusions in the book.