Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military From: FQV@PSUVM.PSU.EDU (jim bowers) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: No options in the oilfields but chemical warfare? Message-ID: <1990Oct1.022110.3193@cbnews.att.com> Date: 1 Oct 90 02:21:10 GMT References: <1990Sep28.014351.13736@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military-request@att.att.com Organization: Penn State University Lines: 20 Approved: military@att.att.com From: jim bowers In article <1990Sep28.014351.13736@cbnews.att.com>, HARPER%ccvax.ucd.ie@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU says: >Last weekend Hussein was reported by the Iraqi news agency as having >stated that in the event of an attack several oilfields would be destroyed. You really cannot destroy an oilfield. Crude oil is widely dispersed in an underground reservoir of permeable rock or sand and you have to pump the stuff out. You can't blow it up, even with an underground nuclear explosion (actually this would probably increase the yield of the reservoir) and there is nothing anyone can do to prevent someone from pumping out the full potiential of the reservoir. You can destroy the infrastructure (pumping wells, storage and pipelines) but these are relatively cheap compared to the vast billions underground.